Peter Kemp wrote in message . ..
On 12 Apr 2004 13:59:03 -0700, (sid) wrote:

(sid) wrote in message . com...
Looks like the need for more than single seat fighters is becoming an
issue again. From the April Seapower:
http://www.navyleague.org/sea_power/apr_04_16.php
"Boeing's Ted Herman, business development manager for the F-18
program, told Sea Power the Super Hornet tanker helps "extend the
legs" of the strike aircraft and does not compromise on aerodynamic
performance.

But the Navy is not entirely content with the Super Hornet as a
tanker. While converted to refuel, the jet is not carrying weapons for
strike missions. Fitzgerald said the Navy would consider a replacement

Here is a realted tidbit in the current AvWeek...
Navy plans to continue dominating the world's oceans despite tight
budgets will require, among other things, strategic aerial tanking
that, in turn, will drive experiments with launching KC-130s from
large-deck aircraft carriers, Rear Adm. Jay M. Cohen, chief of naval
research, says at the annual Navy League convention here. The idea is
to give Navy and Marine aircraft what Cohen terms "overland persistent
tanking."

Some problems with using a KC-130 are....
a. getting them off the deck with a decent load
b. conducting any other ops while the damn thing is on the deck
(you're not going to be striking a Herc into the hangar without a lot
of sawing).

---
Peter Kemp

I'm just passing along what the Admiral had to say...
Since Boeing is so wrapped up with wanting to continue finding uses
for their geriatric aircraft types (767 and 737), they may as well
reopen production of the A-3.