A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Naval Aviation
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

start making the ST21, AST21, ASF-14 and A-12 Flying Dorito!



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #11  
Old January 2nd 07, 07:51 PM posted to sci.military.naval,rec.aviation.military.naval,us.military.navy
God's Creator! (TEXT & HTML)
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3
Default New Carriers - Old refurbishments - New Navy Fighters that goFAR - FAST - and HIGH

Ski wrote:
You all seemd to me to have hit the main issues with the USN right now -
somehow the Navy has thrown away its good sense and started chasing courses
of action that will reduce its ability to deal with the world threats in
only from a defensive nature.

(1) New big carriers go fast, protect themselves better, and sustain more
everything but they can't start costing $10 billion plus each

(2) The F/A-18E/F/G has re-written the maintainability and sortie generation
books but it is no more then a more capable A-7 and not even an A-6 and
surely not an F-14 despite the maintenance nightmares.

(3) Since there is not a Naval F-22, hardly can't see the Typhoon working
sensibly, and we do not want to deal with the French for the Rafale (which
is the best Naval fighter around today) - then going back and redesigning a
super-Tomcat is not a bad idea and since now with the F-15E and F-14D we
have the right engines around - go for the digital improved all - electric
Tomcat.

(4) If we drop JSF STOVL and force only one configuration CTOL and then
slide the whole program to include a decade or so development the JSF could
absorb the UCS/UCAV and work to have manned - unmanned variants which makes
more sense and helps preserve the stealth if it works to keep the internal
weapon design (say maybe include something laser by then) - but this alone
could pay for the new Tomcat and a crash program it could be

(5) Now like it or not, the move from battle ship to carrier will have
another shift down the road and that may be sub-surface so the Navy may
really find that under-sea ops will be its big hitters and the whole surface
world may have to look again at what it is and should be.

But whatever it is - the present Navy is not it




Thus Spake: *G* *O* *D* *S* *C* *R* *E* *A* *T* *O* *R*



Has any these "Futuristic Flying Machines" ever been "Battle Tested",
against OTHER nations futuristic and costly Flying Machines... BS?



God's Creator!
(I am Life & Death) 8-)


--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Todays U.S. Holy Oil Wars News:
http://www.antiwar.com
http://icasualties.org/oif/


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Ultralight Club Bylaws - Warning Long Post MrHabilis Home Built 0 June 11th 04 05:07 PM
Mountain flying instruction: McCall, Idaho, Colorado too! [email protected] General Aviation 0 March 26th 04 11:24 PM
FA: WEATHER FLYING: A PRACTICAL BOOK ON FLYING The Ink Company Aviation Marketplace 0 November 5th 03 12:07 AM
the thrill of flying interview is here! Dudley Henriques Piloting 0 October 21st 03 07:41 PM
USAF = US Amphetamine Fools RT Military Aviation 104 September 25th 03 03:17 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:55 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.