Marine Aviation Plan 2015

Variants for different customers or mission profiles
  • Author
  • Message
Offline

mrigdon

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 403
  • Joined: 04 Feb 2015, 22:03

Unread post27 Aug 2015, 19:59

I don't know the source of the original slides in this post (the author doesn't link to it), but there are cutaway diagrams of the in-air refueling system, as well as some figures for amount of fuel carried, amount that can be delivered. It's referring to a Navy version, but should be applicable to the Marine Osprey as well.

http://warfaretech.blogspot.com/2014/12/v-22-texaco-according-to-marine-corps.html

The 'pocket carrier' notion didn't come out of nowhere. The Kearsarge basically functioned as a pocket carrier during Libyan operations, sending Harriers on strike missions against armored columns and air defenses. That doesn't mean you dump the big deck carriers (you really can't replace them), but over the last ten to fifteen years the Marines have been called on to do a lot of things that weren't a part of their 'traditional' mission. So long as civilians control the military in America, it seems that will continue to be the case.
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 24792
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post27 Aug 2015, 20:18

'mrigdon' perhaps if you read more on this forum (searched on keywords probably) you will find that - yes - we do know stuff here. What your posts show is that you are learning about things already posted here when that info became available. I note your first URL refers only to the USMC tanker (not USN as you say except the graphic says 'Navy'). The graphics are on this forum already and usually they are from BOING PR PDFs about the Osprey in USMC service and some of the graphics are repeated in SLDinfo presentations about same. Similarly KEARSARGE is mentioned at the time of the Libyan Conflict and afterwards for around 30 instances including the BOLD ALLIGATOR exercise when some sixteen AV-8Bs were onboard in 2012

viewtopic.php?f=58&t=15969&p=218825&hilit=Kearsarge#p218825

16 F-35Bs and Osprey tankers mentioned here in 'Realising the F-35B Potential' thread:

viewtopic.php?f=61&t=27490&p=295724&hilit=Osprey+Tanker#p295724

USN NOT developing tankers yet according to this: viewtopic.php?f=61&t=26629&p=290779&hilit=Osprey+Tanker#p290779

Some variant V-22 graphics: http://www.slideshare.net/robbinlaird/v22-update

Boing/USMC V-22 info: http://www.boeing.com/ospreynews/2011/i ... debook.pdf (3.6Mb)
A4G Skyhawk: www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ & www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/videos?view_as=subscriber
Offline
User avatar

XanderCrews

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 6450
  • Joined: 16 Oct 2012, 19:42

Unread post27 Aug 2015, 22:06

geogen wrote:
mrigdon wrote:
spazsinbad wrote: will perhaps defray the B/S here that seems to suggest a USMC LHA (not forgetting the other 'sea base ships') will somehow be attempting to be a CVN equivalent. Sure the 'LHA + others with it' may require the support of a CVN and other combatant USN ships but that far fetched 'CVN equivalent' scenario is likely best left to the USN


Hey, didn't you post that diagram of an LHA with 23 F-35Bs embarked? :wink:

The Marines are obviously working on Ospreys as tankers, however... If you can get four Ospreys and 18 F-35Bs on the deck, you can provide nearly the same punch as a future F-35C squadron during that brief period when the F-35B will be the only JSF at sea. Sail alongside a CVN and you give the task force a fifth gen strike component..


When will MV-22 be in-flight tanking F-35B at sea? Before F-35C is IOC?? Not sure about that.

Also, a single MV-22 'buddy-tanker' concept would probably more realistically tank only 2 F-35B at best, via extra 5-6k lb of gas each? So perhaps mix: 10x F-35B + 5 MV-22 tankers + S-60/drone MHQ?

Probably (LHA) wouldn't sail beside a CVN either -- just not fast enough... and with respect to 'next-gen' strike (Naval aviation)... one would probably go with JSOW/JSOW-ER, which means SH and eventual F-35C and of course, UCAV.


utter cluelessness^
Choose Crews
Offline
User avatar

XanderCrews

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 6450
  • Joined: 16 Oct 2012, 19:42

Unread post27 Aug 2015, 22:08

geogen wrote:Spazs... I was replying for the most part to 'Jessmo' who was actually arguing such hypothetical requirements (i.e., MV-22 escort and LHD tacair decks).


And you completely cocked it up with ignorance. you have no knowledge, experience, or authority in any these subjects that you repeatedly comment on despite the fact that others with all of the above and real world comparative knowledge tell you that you are full of crap, yet you persist in a condition known as "diarrhea of the lip" where sh*t just keeps pouring out.


geogen wrote:With all due respect... If Marines are merely tasking an MV-22 escort requirement for LHD ops, it could probably better come from a modified A-29 Super Tucano. A reserve Super T detachment could be on standby on the 2nd LHD too, armed with Brimstone II/Spear III, etc to get the job done better than an IOC F-35B, if needed.

If Marines are requiring Air Superiority in a major conflict before conducting an air-assault... then there would likely be a required joint operation involving the best USAF Tacair can provide.



You really have no idea what the hell you are talking about.

please go.
Choose Crews
Offline

bring_it_on

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 977
  • Joined: 30 Apr 2014, 14:32

Unread post27 Aug 2015, 22:26

Navy, Marines and More .. Its long so you guys may want to grab a beer or two...

Offline

jessmo111

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 706
  • Joined: 16 Jul 2015, 02:49

Unread post28 Aug 2015, 05:32

Spaz, enlighten me. Im an ignorant wretch, and I admit it.
How does Geo plan on landing a Super Tacano on a wasp?
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 24792
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post28 Aug 2015, 05:59

Please - just forget you ever saw such text here - otherwise you can search the forum for 'Tucano' and see what you find.
A4G Skyhawk: www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ & www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/videos?view_as=subscriber
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 24792
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post28 Aug 2015, 20:43

Earlier 'mrigdon' was curious: viewtopic.php?f=61&t=26629&p=300148&hilit=curiosity#p300148
Meanwhile... viewtopic.php?f=57&t=20547&p=234404&hilit=equipped+refueling+drogue#p234404
Air Force Aerial Refueling Methods: Flying Boom versus Hose-and-Drogue
05 Jun 2006 CRS Report for Congress

"Summary
Decisions on the composition of the Air Force aerial refueling fleet were made decades ago, when the primary mission was to refuel long-range strategic bombers. Modifications have been made to many of these tanker aircraft (KC-135s and KC-10s) to make them more effective in refueling fighter aircraft. This report, which will be updated, examines the balance between two different refueling methods in today’s refuelling fleet — “flying boom” and “hose-and-drogue.”...

...A single flying boom can transfer fuel at approximately 6,000 lbs per minute. A single hose-and-drogue can transfer between 1,500 and 2,000 lbs of fuel per minute. Unlike bombers and other large aircraft, however, fighter aircraft cannot accept fuel at the boom’s maximum rate. (Today’s fighter aircraft can accept fuel at 1,000 to 3,000 lbs per minute whether from the boom or from the hose-and-drogue.) Thus, the flying boom’s primary advantage over the hose-and-drogue system is lost when refueling fighter aircraft....

...Finally, it is argued, tankers with flying booms are in some ways more flexible than tankers with hose-and-drogue refueling. A tanker with a flying boom can be converted in the field to accommodate probe-equipped aircraft, if necessary. Hose-and-drogue tankers cannot be converted to accommodate aircraft with boom receptacles. To
accommodate fighter aircraft, tankers with flying booms can reduce the speed at which they dispense fuel. Tankers with hose-and-drogue refueling cannot increase the speed at which they dispense fuel to accommodate bombers and other large aircraft." [One may well ask: "How many 'large' aircraft use dem hoseydrogues?]

Source: http://fas.org/sgp/crs/weapons/RL32910.pdf (0.7Mb)
A4G Skyhawk: www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ & www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/videos?view_as=subscriber
Offline
User avatar

popcorn

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 7722
  • Joined: 24 Sep 2008, 08:55

Unread post02 Sep 2015, 15:58

Marines may have a new aerial robot taxi by decade's end.

https://youtu.be/V4T5krYgWHM
http://www.marinecorpstimes.com/story/m ... nfigurable Embedded System, a futuristic-looking unmanned helicopter with twin turbine-style fans known as ARES, from the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency.
Logistics officials said one or both platforms could make an appearance in a training exercise as Marines test new ways to transport gear from ship to shore.
With the ARES, Marines could send 3,000 pounds of gear in a single flight without having to task a massive CH-53E heavy-lift helicopter, saving fuel and manpower, said Roy Truba, deputy head for the logistics strategy and vision sections at Headquarters Marine Corps.
It allows units to get the gear they need to the field without tasking a crew since the platform be controlled from a tablet.
“That CH-53 can be used for something else, for assault support or something, because you don’t want a 53 hauling only 3,000 pounds … and you certainly don’t want to send 10,000 pounds to a unit that can’t handle 10,000 pounds,” Truba said.
Both the AACUS and ARES are still experimental platforms. But following more testing, Truba said the Corps plans to move forward with a prototype in 2016 that could deploy with a Marine expeditionary unit in three or four years.
"When a fifth-generation fighter meets a fourth-generation fighter—the [latter] dies,”
CSAF Gen. Mark Welsh
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 24792
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post02 Sep 2015, 16:07

An interesting quote from the above article:
"...New possibilities with F-35
The newly operational joint strike fighter has been touted as a catalyst to transform Marine aviation. But the platform may also yield an unexpected benefit for logisticians, officials said.

Because the aircraft requires less maintenance equipment than older planes, it will free up space aboard ships that is typically devoted to Marine aviation logistics support...."
A4G Skyhawk: www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ & www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/videos?view_as=subscriber
Offline
User avatar

popcorn

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 7722
  • Joined: 24 Sep 2008, 08:55

Unread post02 Sep 2015, 17:02

Obviously a key lesson learned from testing aboard the USS Wasp. Applies as well to quickly deploying to and operating and relocating from austere locations. The smaller the logistics tail, the more nimble the whole traveling circus.
"When a fifth-generation fighter meets a fourth-generation fighter—the [latter] dies,”
CSAF Gen. Mark Welsh
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 24792
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post15 Sep 2015, 07:03

Does this USAF Euro strategy look familiar? USMC DSO Distributed STOVL Operations
Russians ‘Closed The Gap’ For A2/AD: Air Force Gen. Gorenc
14 Sep 2015 Sydney J. Freedberg Jr.

"...A medium-term solution is stealth aircraft: Russian missiles can’t kill what their radars can’t see. (The Navy, less sure of stealth, prefers to jam enemy radars). Two squadrons of the new F-35A will arrive at Lakenheath air base in England, but that doesn’t happen until 2020, and they won’t be equipped to strike ground targets for some years after that. Stealthy F-22s have already done their first deployment to Europe to do training and test whether local airbases could support them. The F-22s are back in the US now, but Gorenc emphasized he could get them back if needed.

But the vast majority of US and allied air forces are conventional “Fourth Generation” aircraft that show up on radar just fine. Their survival depends not on technology but on training.

“We’re going to have to extend the training that we do to allow for access into areas that are very well defended,” Gorenc said. “We’re going to have to develop TTPs [tactics, techniques, and procedures] and continue to develop requirements [for new technologies that allow us to address that modern long-range SAM array.”

Tactics and training are critical for protecting NATO’s own bases as well. Some Cold War-era bases have hardened hangers, but Gorenc’s focus is less on fortifying a few big bases to resist bombardment than on shuffling aircraft among many small ones to avoid bombardment. Recent training missions by F-15s and A-10s in 23 countries were essentially “micro-deployments,” he said, with small groups of aircraft moving from one airfield to another in for short visits.

That’s good practice for a wartime tactic: fly aircraft, ground crews, and support equipment into a bare-bones air base, conduct a quick operation, then move out before Russian bombers or missiles retaliate. Gorenc wants to further expand the number of NATO bases the Russians have to worry about through an initiative called “Rapid-X”, which would move combat aircraft in and out of unimproved airfields with minimal facilities. The goal, he said, is “to generate combat power just at the right time, just in the right place.”

To meet the new threat, said Gorenc, “it’s pretty clear we’re going to have go back and start exercising some of the same stuff we used to do in the Cold War.”"

Source: http://breakingdefense.com/2015/09/russ ... en-gorenc/
A4G Skyhawk: www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ & www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/videos?view_as=subscriber
Offline

quicksilver

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3142
  • Joined: 16 Feb 2011, 01:30

Unread post15 Sep 2015, 07:18

"Two squadrons of the new F-35A will arrive at Lakenheath air base in England, but that doesn’t happen until 2020, and they won’t be equipped to strike ground targets for some years after that."

What planet is Sydney living on? F-35As that arrive in Lakenheath in 2020 will be 1K/2K JDAM and SDB-capable and have the full 3F EW/EA capability.
Offline

geogen

Banned

  • Posts: 3123
  • Joined: 11 Mar 2008, 15:28
  • Location: 45 km offshore, New England

Unread post15 Sep 2015, 08:10

quicksilver wrote:"Two squadrons of the new F-35A will arrive at Lakenheath air base in England, but that doesn’t happen until 2020, and they won’t be equipped to strike ground targets for some years after that."

What planet is Sydney living on? F-35As that arrive in Lakenheath in 2020 will be 1K/2K JDAM and SDB-capable and have the full 3F EW/EA capability.


Interesting planning... will these 2 squadrons join the 2 F-15E squadrons and 1 F-15C sqn?? That would be quite a substantial deployment, no? Hopefully F-35A won't be replacing the F-15E squadrons, given their nearly half range and lessor weapons capacity/options. That would be quite a capability gap if they replaced the F-15E/C structure in Europe in 2020.
The Super-Viper has not yet begun to concede.
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 24792
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post27 Sep 2015, 11:57

Seein' as how there is a bunch of ARF stuff in this thread - here's more...
"Cdr Brick Wilson piloting F-35B BF-04 during air-refuelling testing with an F/A-18F Super Hornet on August 31 [2015]. Michael Jackson/Lockheed Martin" Air International OCTOBER 2015 Vol.89 No.4
Attachments
F-35BdirtyARFsuperHornet31aug2015.jpg
A4G Skyhawk: www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ & www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/videos?view_as=subscriber
PreviousNext

Return to F-35 Variants and Missions

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests