Tactical need for the F-35B?

[Dupe]

I'm pretty sure the F-35 was not designed for day 30 permissive airspace. Our 4th gen jets work just fine for that. But this gets back to the question I asked previously. The AF has put too many eggs in the F-35 basket to let it get dropped now, but I don't see the Marines needing the real capes of the F-35 in a stand alone MEF. Instead, something like the AT-6 with some JATO seems like it would be a fairly good fit. We as a military need to stop thinking that we can make a single $200M+ tool that will fix every problem.

I see it the opposite. I think we could fill the mission of the F-35 by a mix of more F-22s, increased 4th gen capabilities, and a sprinkle of some UCAVs and advanced munitions here or there....and we would have that capability sooner and cheaper than when the F-35 gets fully capable. At the same time, if the USMC believes they still need STOVL, then the F-35 is really the only option on the table for them at this point. Throw in some foreign partners that absolutely need the STOVL capability as well, and you have a program that will not be able to divorce itself from STOVL.

Sure, the Air Force has invested alot at this point. However, its not too late to escape. The most significant costs of any aircraft operation are the operations costs and not the development or acquisitions costs. We could quit this circus now and still save money.

[contraildash]

We have 237 years of operating off of ships

222. Mind the 15 year gap.

/historicalballbustin'

[Guest]

10 Nov 1775. Every Marine knows that date.

[Bullet]

The Marine Corps will always have it's own TACAIR

Why?

Two word answer: Guadal Canal

[Guest]

Not sure if serious.

And it is one word.

[Bullet]

I stand by part one, so yes, I'm serious.

I stand corrected on part two, so yes, I made a dumb mistake there...

For further clarification, I'm just stating the logic the Marine Corp has used as its justification for its own TACAIR force since WWII. Not saying I agree with their logic, however...

Edited November 22, 2012 by Bullet

[Bobby]

Two word answer: Guadal Canal

Almost as significant as the battle of Mid Way...

[contraildash]

10 Nov 1775. Every Marine knows that date.

They sure do. Just pointing out that they were disbanded in 1783 and not re-established until 1798. Navy had a similar gap at the same time and the Army had some quasi-militia thing going on as well. The USCG, started as the Revenue Cutter Service back in 1790, has the longest continuous service of our armed forces.

/historicalquibbling

[Bullet]

Eloquently stated. But the Marines message is simply more blunt, and much stronger, especially when they keep stating it to Congress: "If we don't get XXXX, Marines die."

Too bad we have spent the past decades as a service trying to come up with an identity and corporate message to match, rather than focusing on the obvious truth: "If the AF doesn't get XXXX, Marines will also die. So will a lot of the Army's soldiers."

Edited November 22, 2012 by Bullet

[f16wolfpack]

Eloquently stated. But the Marines message is simply more blunt, and much stronger, especially when they keep stating it to Congress: "If we don't get XXXX, Marines die."

Too bad we have spent the past decades as a service trying to come up with an identity and corporate message to match, rather than focusing on the obvious truth: "If the AF doesn't get XXXX, Marines will also die. So will a lot of the Army's soldiers."

We would rather sit back and be reactive. That's what we do best.

[Guest]

We would rather sit back and be reactive. That's what we do best.

Roger that. Lead turns are for pussies!

[Danger41]

10 Nov 1775. Every Marine knows that date.

Good night, Chesty. Wherever you are.

Aside: I wonder how many people know the AF birthday without going to Google.

[FallingOsh]

7 December 1941

Edited November 22, 2012 by FallingOsh

[f16wolfpack]

7 December 1941

Yep. That was the date we learned somebody else's "Air Force" was better than ours. Unfortunately, it took a few years to catch back up. Like I said, we would rather sit back and be reactive. That's what we do best.

Edited November 23, 2012 by f16wolfpack

[SocialD]

Aside: I wonder how many people know the AF birthday without going to Google.

You don't want to know the answer to that question. Hell, half the Air Force probably can't even name the jets based at their duty station.

[Slander]

You don't want to know the answer to that question. Hell, half the Air Force probably can't even name the jets based at their duty station.

Fact. In my first week and last week at a dependents restricted base in Korea I was asked by junior NCOs if I flew F-18s or F-14s. It was a nice bookend to my 18 months there.

[Bobby]

Fact. In my first week and last week at a dependents restricted base in Korea I was asked by junior NCOs if I flew F-18s or F-14s. It was a nice bookend to my 18 months there.

I am not a bit surprised...

[Guest]

Fact. In my first week and last week at a dependents restricted base in Korea I was asked by junior NCOs if I flew F-18s or F-14s. It was a nice bookend to my 18 months there.

But did they ask you if you knew Pocheon town and Dongducheon town?

[BB Stacker]

The F-35 is absolutely intended for day 30 permissive airspace ops (complete with external stores). Look at the fighter roadmap. By the 2040 timeframe the plan is to be flying whatever Raptors we still have left, some Golden Eagles and Mud Hens that will be held together with chewing gum and duct tape, and a whole shitload of F-35s. The only option under the plan for a permissive airspace bomb truck is going to be the F-35. I'm not saying that's what I think is actually going to happen, but that's the plan.

Regarding the MAGTF (no second A), putting on my joint hat...I think a couple clarifying points are in order. First, the MAGTF isn't a set unit; it's explicitly intended to be scaleable and tailorable to meet the combatant commander's needs. So what this means is that the MAGTF can vary in size from a 2,000 person MEU all the way up to a 30,000 person MEF, and the exact type/size of units will vary depending on what the COCOM needs the MAGTF to do, but it will always have the same basic four group structure that enables self contained independent operations: command group, ground combat element, air combat element, and logistics element. Second, remember that the Marines are the nation's 911 force. They've been used (unwisely, IMHO) as a second land army over the past decade, but even during that time they were also still doing more typical Marine stuff like NEO and providing a rapid response presence in various hot spots around the world. This use as a 911 force that requires being able to rapidly respond to a wide variety of possible events is why the MAGTF structure is so different from a typical Army force. Having a self contained forward deployed unit that is capable of doing anything from launching a punitive amphibious raid to conducting NEO to providing humanitarian aid to providing a deterrent presence, all without any additional augmentation from outside forces, is worth its weight in gold planning wise. The key words there are "forward deployed." Yes, an ESG travels at 20 knots, but let's be honest outside of the 82nd the Army travels at the same 20 knots when deploying anywhere in force, and as opposed to a self contained forward deployed MEU that is probably already within a day or two steaming time of the crisis, the Army is going to have to deploy forces from multiple locations that are weeks of travel time away. Unless of course the Army forces were already forward deployed, but if we're going to talk money and efficiency I'm pretty sure that having a couple of MEUs embarked in strategic locations around the world is going to be more efficient than permanently maintaining forward deployed heavy Army forces.

Drilling down to why the MAGTF needs self contained fixed wing aviation support, since the MAGTF (especially at the MEU level) is intended to be relatively light and flexible, they tend to be pretty lean when it comes to fires support. The flexibility of fixed wing CAS (compared to artillery or mortars) is intended to make up for this lack of fires. As far as all the other uses of fixed wing aviation support, I'm not going to defend them because I don't agree with them as a requirement. Like I've said before, if a MAGTF finds itself in a situation where it needs OCA/DCA or AI there will either be USAF or USN assets around to perform those missions. It is entirely possible that a MAGTF could find itself in a situation where the level of threat does not require deployment of outside assets for air support but that may still require that CAS to make up for lack of fires, which is why I would argue that self contained fixed wing CAS is essential to the MAGTF concept (but the ability for it to carry out anything more than CAS is not.)

[Guest]

Where in the ACSC wall of text do you explain why they need, as you put it, "self contained fixed wing CAS?"

OBTW, brevity is cool for me since my kids taught me this Internet trick for what to do if I have a question... http://bit.ly/WFOM3R

[Swanee]

I

Where in the ACSC wall of text do you explain why they need, as you put it, "self contained fixed wing CAS?"

OBTW, brevity is cool for me since my kids taught me this Internet trick for what to do if I have a question... http://bit.ly/WFOM3R

Because no one else is going to provide it for us. You aren't going to get a det of AF dudes flying around the world to provide it for us, that is going to be much more expensive than having a det on the boat. The CSG is vastly more expensive than the ESG, and sometimes we don't need the entire CVW. Because Operational Maneuver from the Sea still exists, and some places don't allow quick access for AF types because of overflight rules. Because it's a bigger show of force when that MEU sitting off of your coast can launch a strike and hit anywhere/anyone in your country, and then land a bunch of Marines ready to go- all before anyone else could get there.

Serious question: Why don't we need it?

Edited November 23, 2012 by Swanee

[BB Stacker]

Here ya go:

Drilling down to why the MAGTF needs self contained fixed wing aviation support, since the MAGTF (especially at the MEU level) is intended to be relatively light and flexible, they tend to be pretty lean when it comes to fires support. The flexibility of fixed wing CAS (compared to artillery or mortars) is intended to make up for this lack of fires. As far as all the other uses of fixed wing aviation support, I'm not going to defend them because I don't agree with them as a requirement. Like I've said before, if a MAGTF finds itself in a situation where it needs OCA/DCA or AI there will either be USAF or USN assets around to perform those missions. It is entirely possible that a MAGTF could find itself in a situation where the level of threat does not require deployment of outside assets for air support but that may still require that CAS to make up for lack of fires, which is why I would argue that self contained fixed wing CAS is essential to the MAGTF concept (but the ability for it to carry out anything more than CAS is not.)

So they need fixed wing CAS as a substitute for ground based fires support (which they don't have in force because they're light/lean), and it needs to be organic because it's entirely possible that there could be a situation where the MAGTF needs CAS to support ground operations but there isn't enough of a threat to require the deployment of a CSG or of USAF assets.

[Guest]

Yeah, there are so many places that are just impossible for USAF CAS assets to support Marines because that shit is just springing up at a moments notice with absolutely no warning whatsoever.

C'mon man.

[BB Stacker]

FWIW I'm an AF officer, not a Marine.

We don't need the MAGTF because there isn't anywhere in the world, nor any current or future threat that we would send only a MAGTF in response.

In the last 10 years of conflict where have we sent only a MAGTF? Why in any future conflict would we send only a MAGTF? Ignoring their 20+ knot cruise speed and their self admitted limited firepower.

In Kosovo, Desert Storm, Vietnam, and Korea where have we sent only a MAGTF?

You're looking at it from the wrong perspective. The MAGTF (specifically at the MEU level, embarked on an ESG) has been used on its own all the time over the past 20 years (and before that) for operations short of full blown war, for everything from deterrent presence (the firepower an ESG possesses with a self contained MEU is much more of a deterrent than some Army prepo ships filled with stockpiled tanks and trucks bobbing about) to stuff that involves actual real world employment, like NEO. Which is why self contained CAS is important, because the U.S. military is not going to deploy an entire CSG or a squadron of A-10s to provide support for a MEU conducting NEO in a country like, say, Liberia, but having some fixed wing CAS in the on site commander's pocket is a nice safety net in case things start going sideways for the forces on the ground.

I've never advocated for the F-35B (I was the guy posting pictures of Broncos on the Boxer), all I've advocated for is that the idea of the MAGTF in principle is sound (even I have quibbles with what they think they need to be capable of WRT the air element). Without the MAGTF concept, you might as well disband the entire Marine Corps because without it they would become just a smaller second land army with different uniforms that ride around on boats sometimes. You can argue that the MAGTF doesn't need fixed wing aviation, but there is no way in hell the USMC will or should get away from the entire idea of a scaleable tailorable unit that possesses integrated ground combat, air support, and logistics support capabilities.

[tac airlifter]

The MAGTF (specifically at the MEU level, embarked on an ESG) has been used on its own all the time over the past 20 years (and before that) for operations short of full blown war, for everything from deterrent presence (the firepower an ESG possesses with a self contained MEU is much more of a deterrent than some Army prepo ships filled with stockpiled tanks and trucks bobbing about) to stuff that involves actual real world employment, like NEO.

Please educate me, which historical NEO did the marines require organic FW CAS because the AF was unwilling or unable to provide outselves? When has the MAGTF actually been used completely by itself and required the full spectrum of its capability? I'm not being a dick, I really don't know. If that has happened, school me.