Navy Struggles With 'Fighter Gap'

Dan wrote:
Andrew Swallow wrote:
BlackBeard wrote:
On Apr 7, 10:25 pm, Andrew Swallow wrote:
Ray O'Hara wrote:
wrote in message
...

See:
http://defensenews.com/story.php?i=3466832&c=FEA&s=CVS
What should the Navy do? Buy more F/A-18's? Speed up JSF
procurement?
Or something else?
gap vs who?
Try the Chinese attack submarines.

Andrew Swallow

I must admit I am lost here. How does one find relevance between the
OP subject and Attack Subs?

BB

Know thy enemy. Do not fall into the trap of preparing to
fight the last war but not the next one.

The planes and submarines are enemies. The Chinese attack
submarines are being built to sink US aircraft carriers. See
previous posts on sci.military.naval. There may be sufficient
submarines to make a gap through the escort ships.

Since aircraft carriers do not have large guns and torpedoes have a
longer range than depth charges the carrier will have to rely on
its aircraft for defence. So what ever aircraft are purchased for
the ship will need the ability to find and/or sink submarines.

So as well as top gun vs top gun the US Navy needs to do top gun
vs bottom gun.

Andrew Swallow

All very interesting, but what has that interesting trivia to do with
fighter gaps?

Dan

Everything - your fighters have the wrong armaments and sensors.

Andrew Swallow