Explain the Navy-Marine Corps Tactical Air Integration Plan to me.

A: The Navy intends to reduce it's purchase of F-35Cs by deploying more
Marine Corps strike fighter squadrons on board big deck carriers.

B: The USMC plans to buy zero F-35Cs.

Does A + B mean that the next USN big deck carrier will have a ski ramp?
;-)

-HJC

"Henry J Cobb" wrote in message
...
A: The Navy intends to reduce it's purchase of F-35Cs by deploying more
Marine Corps strike fighter squadrons on board big deck carriers.

B: The USMC plans to buy zero F-35Cs.

Does A + B mean that the next USN big deck carrier will have a ski ramp?
;-)

-HJC

No why should they have ramps. They Navy doesn't have ramps on the Amphibs
when the Marines deploy the Harriers on them. The F-35B's deployed on the
carrier would most likely be used as air to ground attack aircraft with the
Navy F-35C's doing the air to air/ fleet protection mission. Besides they
may still put some kind of catapult launch system on the F-35B (bridle ?).

Diamond Jim wrote:
"Henry J Cobb" wrote in message
...

A: The Navy intends to reduce it's purchase of F-35Cs by deploying more
Marine Corps strike fighter squadrons on board big deck carriers.

B: The USMC plans to buy zero F-35Cs.

Does A + B mean that the next USN big deck carrier will have a ski ramp?

No why should they have ramps. They Navy doesn't have ramps on the Amphibs
when the Marines deploy the Harriers on them. The F-35B's deployed on the
carrier would most likely be used as air to ground attack aircraft with the
Navy F-35C's doing the air to air/ fleet protection mission. Besides they
may still put some kind of catapult launch system on the F-35B (bridle ?).

The Gators are mainly helicopter carriers with a reduced (i.e.
TAIP-sized, around 10 planes) Harrier squadron. They need flightdeck
space more than range.

Wouldn't a ramp cause problems for V-22 takeoffs?

-HJC

Henry J Cobb wrote:

Diamond Jim wrote:
"Henry J Cobb" wrote in message
...

A: The Navy intends to reduce it's purchase of F-35Cs by deploying more
Marine Corps strike fighter squadrons on board big deck carriers.

B: The USMC plans to buy zero F-35Cs.

Does A + B mean that the next USN big deck carrier will have a ski ramp?

No why should they have ramps. They Navy doesn't have ramps on the Amphibs
when the Marines deploy the Harriers on them. The F-35B's deployed on the
carrier would most likely be used as air to ground attack aircraft with the
Navy F-35C's doing the air to air/ fleet protection mission. Besides they
may still put some kind of catapult launch system on the F-35B (bridle ?).

The Gators are mainly helicopter carriers with a reduced (i.e.
TAIP-sized, around 10 planes) Harrier squadron. They need flightdeck
space more than range.

Wouldn't a ramp cause problems for V-22 takeoffs?

Assuming a V-22 STO instead of a VTO it might, depending on where the V-22 began
its t/o run, the length of same,the ramp height/angle and the V-22's climb slope.
Of course, it's possible that the V-22 has enough proprotor clearance at 60 or 70
degrees that it could use a ski jump with no problem -- E-2s were successfully
tested off low-angle (2.1deg. IIRR) ski jumps. Whether the proprotors are
designed to take the rapidly changing vertical acceleration as they transit the
ramp, I couldn't say.

Guy

Diamond Jim wrote:

No why should they have ramps. They Navy doesn't have ramps on the Amphibs
when the Marines deploy the Harriers on them. The F-35B's deployed on the
carrier would most likely be used as air to ground attack aircraft with the
Navy F-35C's doing the air to air/ fleet protection mission. Besides they
may still put some kind of catapult launch system on the F-35B (bridle ?).

I cannot agree with the opinion that F-35C is going to be the
air-to-air aircraft, and F-35B air-to-ground aircraft. Right, Marine
squadrons are better specialized in CAS for their troops on the ground,
but this is also the the mission usually performed by Navy aircraft
nowadays (though sometimes called in a bit different way).

After the Cold War ended, and considering the fact most attack aircraft
of nowadays are strikefighters, the need for air-to-air seems to be
decreasing. Also such a division like you told about would deny current
TACAIR integration concept of mission-commonality.

Kind regards,
Jacek

wrote in message
ups.com...

Diamond Jim wrote:

No why should they have ramps. They Navy doesn't have ramps on the
Amphibs
when the Marines deploy the Harriers on them. The F-35B's deployed on
the
carrier would most likely be used as air to ground attack aircraft with
the
Navy F-35C's doing the air to air/ fleet protection mission. Besides
they
may still put some kind of catapult launch system on the F-35B (bridle
?).

I cannot agree with the opinion that F-35C is going to be the
air-to-air aircraft, and F-35B air-to-ground aircraft. Right, Marine
squadrons are better specialized in CAS for their troops on the ground,
but this is also the the mission usually performed by Navy aircraft
nowadays (though sometimes called in a bit different way).

After the Cold War ended, and considering the fact most attack aircraft
of nowadays are strikefighters, the need for air-to-air seems to be
decreasing. Also such a division like you told about would deny current
TACAIR integration concept of mission-commonality.

Kind regards,
Jacek


Oh really! When did the need for a CAP over the fleet disappear? Don't you
still need a BARCAP to protect the attack aircraft, no matter how unlikely
opposition from air to air is? Just because an aircraft such as the F-35 can
perform both missions, doesn't mean that it can do both at the same time,
with 100% effectiveness. If the aggressor can make you jettison all or part
of your bomb load, why that defeats the attack doesn't it?

Remember such pearls of wisdom from the past as these and many others;

Lord Cardigan the Russian battery at the end of the valley is the object of
attack. The reply of Lord Cardigan was, "Very good, sir." To the Light
Brigade he then gave the word of command, "The Brigade will advance."

General Custer said "Leave the gatlin guns with the supply wagons; they are
just slowing us down".

OK lads. Over the top and lets go get them Turks! (Gallipoli)

Well if the radios are out because of static, send the warning to Pearl
Harbor by Western Union.

We don't need guns on fighters; missiles will do the job now.

"The foam coming off the tanks isn't a problem for the shuttle".

OK, you've got a point here! The air threat for the fleet is not very
significant now (practically no threat from Iraq and Afghanistan's air
forces), but that could change instantly with every encounter with
North Korea, Iran or China.

But still I think that saying F-35C is going to be a pure fighter and
F-35B only a striker sounds like a big exaggeration to me.

Best regards,
Jacek


Diamond Jim wrote:

Oh really! When did the need for a CAP over the fleet disappear? Don't you
still need a BARCAP to protect the attack aircraft, no matter how unlikely
opposition from air to air is? Just because an aircraft such as the F-35 can
perform both missions, doesn't mean that it can do both at the same time,
with 100% effectiveness. If the aggressor can make you jettison all or part
of your bomb load, why that defeats the attack doesn't it?

Remember such pearls of wisdom from the past as these and many others;

Lord Cardigan the Russian battery at the end of the valley is the object of
attack. The reply of Lord Cardigan was, "Very good, sir." To the Light
Brigade he then gave the word of command, "The Brigade will advance."

General Custer said "Leave the gatlin guns with the supply wagons; they are
just slowing us down".

OK lads. Over the top and lets go get them Turks! (Gallipoli)

Well if the radios are out because of static, send the warning to Pearl
Harbor by Western Union.

We don't need guns on fighters; missiles will do the job now.

"The foam coming off the tanks isn't a problem for the shuttle".

Henry J Cobb wrote:
A: The Navy intends to reduce it's purchase of F-35Cs by deploying more
Marine Corps strike fighter squadrons on board big deck carriers.

IIRC, the TAIP came about prior to any firm numbers of F-35 purchases.
In fact, for better or worse, the TAIP is currently be executed -- long
before the first production F-35 enters either the USN or USMC.

Second, the USMC F-35s are to replace AV-8Bs; and those VSTOL birds
haven't deployed aboard Navy big decks since the A mondel did, once,
back in 1976-77 aboard FDR ...

B: The USMC plans to buy zero F-35Cs.

So? That means, what? That the USMC is going to keep their F/A-18s is
what it means ...

Does A + B mean that the next USN big deck carrier will have a ski ramp?
;-)

Nope.

Mike Weeks wrote:
Henry J Cobb wrote:
B: The USMC plans to buy zero F-35Cs.

So? That means, what? That the USMC is going to keep their F/A-18s is
what it means ...

Forever?

This looks like a plan for a breakup, not a merger to me.

The USMC F/A-18s will serve their last few years on the big decks and
then not be replaced there by another Marine aircraft, ever.

-HJC

Henry J Cobb wrote:
Mike Weeks wrote:
Henry J Cobb wrote:
B: The USMC plans to buy zero F-35Cs.

So? That means, what? That the USMC is going to keep their F/A-18s is
what it means ...

Forever?

Who stated anything about "forever"? Nothing is "forever".

This looks like a plan for a breakup, not a merger to me.

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 ...

The USMC F/A-18s will serve their last few years on the big decks and
then not be replaced there by another Marine aircraft, ever.

No, the USMC F/A-18s will serve both aboard the big decks, and ashore
-- as currently is being done.

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.