Jason H wrote:

We had, if I recall, a grand total of three no-fly days the entire time we
were in-theatre. For three months, damn near non-stop, we flew planes from
1100 to 0100 or 0200 [...]
EA-6Bs have been forward deployed for a while, I know our Shadowhaks
(VAQ-141) replaced another group of prowlers from the carrier we relieved
(can't remember which one) and the prowlers from the Reagan replaced ours.
Forward-deploying the hornets, though, was new. As far as I know, we're the
only carrier that's done that.

Well, I think about the Marine Hornets stationed at Al Asad then...
They must have had a very similar role like Tomcats and Hornets from
the Boat? Or were they operating in the different area of
responsibility?


KC-10s and KC-135s can hold a hell of a lot more fuel than an S-3 or a KA-18
can. However, the KA-18 (my name, don't know if that's the real name) can
hold a surprising amount of fuel. They look pretty funny with 5 fuel tanks
on them.

The tanker-configured Super Hornets keep the same designation - F/A-18E
or F/A-18F - it is only a matter of 480 USGal. fuel tanks and ARS-301
buddy refueling store attached to the weapon stations.

I remember that some years ago there was an idea for land-based
Navy-owned tankers - for example KC-135s configured with the
hose-and-drogue system. KC-10A with its double refueling system (boom
for USAF a/c, hoses for USN/USMC and other NATO fighters) - being able
to switch between those two systems even in-flight somehow improved the
situation.

I wonder if the Navy's new maritime patrol jet (with a good loitering
time = a lot of fuel onboard) could be useful for that role...

Best regards,
Jacek