Forum: Air Power

So I look at all this debacle with the F-35 and its multi service requirements and it got me thinking. Why do we need so many branches of armed forces? Hear me out on this, I know its a bit out there.

What role does the USAF provide that the Navy doesn't? Airlift and Heavy Bomber. THATS IT! All Navy planes can fly out of land bases, only C-130s can fly from a carrier deck.

It goes beyond just that though, the Marines use nearly every piece of machinery that the army does with the exception of the Apache and maybe some Art pieces and strykers, but they have their own systems they use to fill those rolls. If we rolled up our armed forces into a structure where only ground-pounders where Marines and all else were technically Navy, would it be so bad? No longer would different services be battling each other over requirements to achieve their goals, because there would only be one service. Change the names and training programs of the different training bases, transfer ranks across, and POOF!

A decade later you have a Navy that now gets a HUGE boost in funding as (using arbitrary types here) Rhino, Grizzly, and Lightning II are the only tactical air assets that need funding, no need for Hawg, Viper, Eagle, Beagle, Raptor, other Lightning funding. Economies of scale would ACTUALLY go up as 400 more Rhinos would be needed to replace the F-15 family. This would be financial cause to invest in tech from the International Roadmap.

Isn't this where DoD is trying to go anyway? Why else would they FORCE all three air services to use the "same" equipment? Shouldn't the first clue of this been when the USN F-4 Phantom II ended up being used by USN, USMC, USAF, RAF, RN, and several NATO/friendly countries? Does that operator lineup sound familiar? Obviously as far as air power goes, if you build the Navy a GREAT fighter, everyone else will use it.

Think about it, then tear it apart! I think the idea has merit but certainly deserves scrutiny.

F-16.net Sponsor

Well they why not get task specific. Give everything that goes in the air to the Air Force (hey you just got a new assignment to the USS "insert carrier here") all the stuff regarding boats to the navy (ok done) and all the ground pounding front line stuff to the Army (sorry USMC)

An eventual evolution in that general direction has indeed be talked about for decades. I would personally think in the near-term the concept of jointness will be accelerated out of economic convenience. Back in early 2000s, I was advocating a joint UAV/UAS command, where all military UAV would be under one procurement strategy and single structure.

As far as Rhinos replacing all F-15C-E??? I'm not quite sure about that. Maybe a common F/A-XX airframe replacing all F-15E and Rhino by 2030??

Quite honestly, I think there would be more fertile potential for making such a 'joint-tactical-command' today if an ST-21 type airframe were still in production. That would seem to be an asset that could cover any current USAF multi-role requirement, as well as NAVY. Unfortunately, I don't think the Rhino can cover it regardless of it's very good naval strike fighter capacity today.

As far as the USMC go, keep the ground infantry separate. There is no comparison to what USMC train for and provide in an rapid mobilization and infantry capacity, compared to grunt Army. Spec ops areas could be better consolidated no doubt.

Regarding dedicating ground pounding to Marines?? I'd personally vote for expanding attack helo force structure in addition to adding an Amphib capable Super Tucano-type force structure. Fast jet force structure should be consolidated under two branches in the near-term: USAF and USN... potentially rolled into a joint command sometime down the road. imho (I know I'll make enemies even suggesting these opinions) Salute

As if I didn't already just putting this out there.

Scrap the army, make the paras marines to provide a combined versatile "fireforce" and turn tanks, attack helos, the whole nine yards over to the national guard. Turn the air force into a strategic force, they can handle strategic airlift and bombers. Tactical aviation becomes the sole responsibility of the navy with perhaps the marines providing manpower to a dedicated cas-sqn on every carrier to make sure cas remains a priority.

geogen wrote:

An eventual evolution in that general direction has indeed be talked about for decades. I would personally think in the near-term the concept of jointness will be accelerated out of economic convenience. Back in early 2000s, I was advocating a joint UAV/UAS command, where all military UAV would be under one procurement strategy and single structure.

As far as Rhinos replacing all F-15C-E??? I'm not quite sure about that. Maybe a common F/A-XX airframe replacing all F-15E and Rhino by 2030??

Quite honestly, I think there would be more fertile potential for making such a 'joint-tactical-command' today if an ST-21 type airframe were still in production. That would seem to be an asset that could cover any current USAF multi-role requirement, as well as NAVY. Unfortunately, I don't think the Rhino can cover it regardless of it's very good naval strike fighter capacity today.

As far as the USMC go, keep the ground infantry separate. There is no comparison to what USMC train for and provide in an rapid mobilization and infantry capacity, compared to grunt Army. Spec ops areas could be better consolidated no doubt.

Regarding dedicating ground pounding to Marines?? I'd personally vote for expanding attack helo force structure in addition to adding an Amphib capable Super Tucano-type force structure. Fast jet force structure should be consolidated under two branches in the near-term: USAF and USN... potentially rolled into a joint command sometime down the road. imho (I know I'll make enemies even suggesting these opinions) Salute

I have thought a lot about stuff like this and agree on just about everything you said.

In a perfect world, I would envision 2 main branches: Expeditionary and Homeland Defense/National Guard. The Expeditionary Force would be the US Navy and USMC, and would also include all foreign deployed air assets. The strength of the USMC would be increased dramatically, as it would replace the Army, and all its fixed wing air assets would go to the USN.
The National Guard would be, well, the National Guard, a reservist based force for disaster relief and security, as well as fast mobilization for a nightmarish attack on the US mainland. It would also include what's left of the USAF/ANG, and would be composed of high performance A2A fighters/interceptors, like the F-22 and future F/A-XX, for the whole Norad mission, along with the Bone/Spirit fleet for strategic bombing.
Eventually, the USEF (US Expeditionary Force) would operate only carrier capable and STOVL aircraft, for flexibility and cost effectiveness, while the USNG/Former USAF/Army would have a smallish number of stealthy air superiority fighters and stealthy bombers.
The vast majority of active duty grunts would be in the USEF, both forward deployed in the Gator Navy and in the US/abroad. The soldiers of the USNG would be almost 100% reservist based, although with huge numbers and good benefits to boost recruits, maybe linked to the Boy Scouts haha... Anyway, my pointless thoughts. Interesting thread.

I am glad to see that my idea has sparked some good discussion.

noah, you really nailed what was going on in my head, I just couldn't really get it out there.

Forum: Air Power

Combined Force