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. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Explain the Navy-Marine Corps Tactical Air Integration Plan to me.
Mike Weeks napisal(a): Well, since the "merger" has already taken place, then it's possible a "breakup" could be the next step; but only if it's agreed to by the major partner, the USN ... I am glad you said that - I have noticed exactly the same. Look how the story goes round: First both Navy and Marine used F-4 Phantoms, what certainly increased the commonality between the both services. Then Marine did not received F-14s, but some years later both services came into possession of the same single-seat F/A-18 models. Then again USMC refused to upgrade to F/A-18E/F&EA-18G. And now comes the time for F-35B and F-35C, what can make USN and USMC "divided by the JOINT aircraft type". No, the USMC F/A-18s will serve both aboard the big decks, and ashore -- as currently is being done. As far as I know the Marines now are even reducing, as far as they can, their contribution to carrier ops - so different than planned single VMFA for each of ten CVWs in a few years... Down the road, a good number of years from now, you might wish to wonder what will happen to USMC fix-wing air (non-VSTOL) and how that will impact the TAIP -- but given that just about everything now days is written in jello, I might suggest waiting to see how the intro of the F-35 series goes; it might then become more obvious. I think what you suggest is a very good idea. Nobody knows until it happens! Anyhow, F-35 might be braking the boundaries between CV-TOL and STOVL fighter aircraft, like the Russians might have found with their Yak-141 several years ago. Best regards, Jacek Zemlo |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Explain the Navy-Marine Corps Tactical Air Integration Plan to me.
|
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Explain the Navy-Marine Corps Tactical Air Integration Plan to me.
Mike Weeks wrote: This might be "splitting hairs", but from what I can determine, even when the TAIP was announced & introduced, the Marines didn't actually have the assets available. And it's gone downhill from there ... g Even less assets now, when two VMFA(AW) squadrons are expected to be practically gone soon... The Marines got a real break with the withdraw of JFK (and thusly one CVW) from active deployment rotation. For me the status of CVW-17 now seems to be unclear. Maybe it will become a kind of "warehouse of spare Hornet squadrons" for other air wings - with reference to gossips about additional Super Hornet squadrons to compensate the growing shortage of F/A-18C/A+ airframes... Best regards, Jacek |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Explain the Navy-Marine Corps Tactical Air Integration Plan to me.
|
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Explain the Navy-Marine Corps Tactical Air Integration Plan to me.
There's no doubt about if; if one is interested in the subject, it's
not boring!! g Mike wrote: Actually, some things particularly draw my attention: 1) One thing especially nice in the TACAIR Integration Plan is the fact it generates a lot of interesting moves (VFA-81 to CVW-11, VFA-94 to UDP, F/A-18C's seen in VMFA(AW)-332) - with the third Navy squadron to be deactivated still not revealed. 2) I wonder if F/A-18s from squadrons like VMFA-122 or VMFA-212 ever touch the deck of a carrier (the former may gonna deploy with CVW-3 soon, the latter has a chance to merge with CVW-5 assets when they meet at Iwakuni someday). 3) A separate question is which squadrons finally go to Cherry Point, and if another F/A-18C squadron takes place of deactivated VFA-82 at Beaufort. Of course, all that for the moment is a matter of horse-race-like speculations;-) Best regards, Jacek (superhornet at go 2 dot pl) Mike Weeks wrote: wrote: Mike Weeks wrote: This might be "splitting hairs", but from what I can determine, even when the TAIP was announced & introduced, the Marines didn't actually have the assets available. And it's gone downhill from there ... g Even less assets now, when two VMFA(AW) squadrons are expected to be practically gone soon... Actual VMFA(AW) outfits -- flying the D Hornet that is, were not part of TAIP. Of course if that means standard VMFAs will have to fill the resulting gap ... g The Marines got a real break with the withdraw of JFK (and thusly one CVW) from active deployment rotation. For me the status of CVW-17 now seems to be unclear. Maybe it will become a kind of "warehouse of spare Hornet squadrons" for other air wings - with reference to gossips about additional Super Hornet squadrons to compensate the growing shortage of F/A-18C/A+ airframes... Officially, CVW-17 (short squadrons and all) is attached to George Washington. Watch to see how it changes when GW starts to workup seriously for deployment -- then the picture will be clearer. As of now, as I understand it, there's to be no axing of a CVW even when JFK goes away. |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
UAV's and TFR's along the Mexico boarder | John Doe | Piloting | 145 | March 31st 06 06:58 PM |
CRS: V-22 Osprey Tilt-Rotor Aircraft | Mike | Naval Aviation | 0 | October 14th 05 08:14 PM |
Navy helo pilots plan tactical training in multi-phase exercise | Otis Willie | Naval Aviation | 7 | August 23rd 05 10:41 PM |
Lot of noise being made about Purple Hearts | Jack | Military Aviation | 154 | September 8th 04 07:24 PM |
Marine Corps or Navy | [email protected] | Naval Aviation | 33 | October 31st 03 05:31 AM |