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

Are they phasing out the S-3 too?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old January 25th 05, 12:57 AM
Prowlus
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Are they phasing out the S-3 too?

Is the S-3 Viking going to be retired? According to this article here
they want to axe it asap

http://www.wtok.com/news/headlines/1204527.html

Wouldn't this make the F-18 the only fast jet asset the navy can field
until the f-35 becomes available? Thank god theres no "F/C-18" .
Whatever happened to the navy that field 4 different types of strike
aircraft per deployment?
  #2  
Old January 25th 05, 01:40 AM
Thomas Schoene
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Prowlus wrote:
Is the S-3 Viking going to be retired?


Yes. This was announced years ago. IIRC, as soon as there are two
squadrons of Super Hornets in each carrier airwing, the Vikings are gone.

According to this article here
they want to axe it asap

http://www.wtok.com/news/headlines/1204527.html

Wouldn't this make the F-18 the only fast jet asset the navy can field
until the f-35 becomes available?


Well, most people would not consider the Hornet and Super Hornet to be the
same type, so make that two fast jets.

Thank god theres no "F/C-18" .
Whatever happened to the navy that field 4 different types of strike
aircraft per deployment?


The last time a single carrier had four types of tactical aircraft (i.e.,
fighter or attack types) was probably the 1970s. For the 1980s, it was
usually F-14s, A-6s, and either A-7s or F/A-18Cs. Since the mid-1990s, it's
been just F-14s and F/A-18Cs. Over the next few years, it's going to
become F/A-18Cs and F/A-18Es and Fs. When the Joint Strike Fighter hits the
fleet, the air wings' tactical component will be F/A-18E/Fs and F-35s.

--
Tom Schoene Replace "invalid" with "net" to e-mail
"Our country, right or wrong. When right, to be kept right, when
wrong to be put right." - Senator Carl Schurz, 1872




  #3  
Old January 25th 05, 02:30 AM
MICHAEL OLEARY
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Does your question imply that the S-3 was fast?
-Moe
"Thomas Schoene" wrote in message
ink.net...
Prowlus wrote:
Is the S-3 Viking going to be retired?


Yes. This was announced years ago. IIRC, as soon as there are two
squadrons of Super Hornets in each carrier airwing, the Vikings are gone.

According to this article here
they want to axe it asap

http://www.wtok.com/news/headlines/1204527.html

Wouldn't this make the F-18 the only fast jet asset the navy can field
until the f-35 becomes available?


Well, most people would not consider the Hornet and Super Hornet to be the
same type, so make that two fast jets.

Thank god theres no "F/C-18" .
Whatever happened to the navy that field 4 different types of strike
aircraft per deployment?


The last time a single carrier had four types of tactical aircraft (i.e.,
fighter or attack types) was probably the 1970s. For the 1980s, it was
usually F-14s, A-6s, and either A-7s or F/A-18Cs. Since the mid-1990s,
it's been just F-14s and F/A-18Cs. Over the next few years, it's going
to become F/A-18Cs and F/A-18Es and Fs. When the Joint Strike Fighter
hits the fleet, the air wings' tactical component will be F/A-18E/Fs and
F-35s.

--
Tom Schoene Replace "invalid" with "net" to e-mail
"Our country, right or wrong. When right, to be kept right, when
wrong to be put right." - Senator Carl Schurz, 1872






  #4  
Old January 25th 05, 03:51 AM
Tiger
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Prowlus wrote:

Is the S-3 Viking going to be retired? According to this article here
they want to axe it asap

http://www.wtok.com/news/headlines/1204527.html

Wouldn't this make the F-18 the only fast jet asset the navy can field
until the f-35 becomes available? Thank god theres no "F/C-18" .
Whatever happened to the navy that field 4 different types of strike
aircraft per deployment?


Don't you know The F/A 18 is the Swiss Army Knife of Naval Aviation.
Even has a toothpick! ;-)

  #6  
Old January 27th 05, 09:33 PM
Jeroen Wenting
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Andrew C. Toppan" wrote in message
...
On 24 Jan 2005 15:57:21 -0800, (Prowlus) wrote:

Is the S-3 Viking going to be retired?


Yes. This has been known for years.

with of course no replacement, leaving the carrier force wide open to
submarine attack...



  #7  
Old January 27th 05, 10:23 PM
Michael Wise
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article ,
"Jeroen Wenting" wrote:


Is the S-3 Viking going to be retired?


Yes. This has been known for years.

with of course no replacement, leaving the carrier force wide open to
submarine attack...



I think the HS squadrons might take issue with that statement. ; )


--Mike
  #8  
Old January 27th 05, 11:36 PM
Andrew C. Toppan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Thu, 27 Jan 2005 21:33:26 +0100, "Jeroen Wenting"
wrote:

with of course no replacement, leaving the carrier force wide open to
submarine attack...


(1) S-3s do NOT do anti-submarine warfare at all.This mission was
eliminated some years ago.

(2) Carriers embark SH-60Fs (later MH-60Rs) and are escorted by FFGs,
DDGs, CGs, and SSNs, all of which are excellent ASW platforms. They
are not "wide open".

--
Andrew Toppan --- --- "I speak only for myself"
"Haze Gray & Underway" - Naval History, DANFS, World Navies Today,
Photo Features, Military FAQs, and more -
http://www.hazegray.org/


  #9  
Old January 28th 05, 07:07 AM
Joe Delphi
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


with of course no replacement, leaving the carrier force wide open to
submarine attack...



What submarines? Most of the ex-Soviet Union's subs are rusting away at
their docks. The submarines from other countries are diesel and noisy and
therefore not all that much of a threat.


JD


  #10  
Old January 28th 05, 01:16 PM
Vaughn
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Joe Delphi" wrote in message
ink.net...


The submarines from other countries are diesel and noisy and
therefore not all that much of a threat.


Yes, but when they shut down those diesels and lurk, they get very quiet
indeed! Their small size makes them even harder to find. The last I heard, the
US Navy considers conventional submarines to be a significant threat.

Vaughn




 




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


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:52 PM.


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