rickair7777

Well if they lose that, it's only a matter of time before they become MBCTs...Maritime Brigade Combat Teams.

UAL T38 Phlyer

About a month ago, Congress was looking intently at the Marine Corps F-35. It was behind schedule and over-budget. A flight demo was scheduled (think it was at Pax River) to show that "all was well."

My bet:

The Super Committee is looking for ways to trim various Federal budgets. Suppposedly, roughly 25% of the mil budget could be cut.

I think the F-35 is almost dead in the water. If the Marine version gets cut, the remaining Navy and Air Force prices will go up. This will cause their respective orders to be reduced, further driving up the cost.

The Marines need something to support the CAS fight, and they want to have maritime beach-landing capability---that's what makes the Marines distinctive from the Army. VTOL is important to them---hence the Marine version of the F-35.

I think the Marines see the writing on the wall and are hedging their bets. If the F-35 is cut, they'll need to hang on to the Harriers they have---and more. They wouldn't cut F-18Ds if it came down to that, worn-out or not....they would need to keep every airframe available.

Same goes for the Air Force and the T-38 replacement. Lockheed and Aeramachi have some really cool proposals---but they cost $30 million an airframe.

Since the T-38 costs about $3500 an hour to fly, and each airframe flies about 3-400 hours a year, one could fly the T-38s for 25 years to equal the cost of the new trainer (which is supposed to reduce costs by saving fuel). False economy.

I think the DoD is in for some lean times reminiscent of the Carter era for at least 10 years.

Grumble

Shack. Aside from the A-10 and F-15E, there isn't a better CAS platform than a lot 30+ rhino. Give both seats JHMCS and hang a LITNING pod on it, you've got a great platform (albeit rocket/LMAV limited). It's here, it's now. Oh and let's not forget APG-79.

When have the Marines ever acuatlly used the Harrier from a forward expeditionary point, in true VSTOL? One bomb and 20 minutes of gas do not a CAS platform make.

USMCFLYR

OIF proved that the Harriers were going to stay right there with the 8,000' runways and Air Force chow hall

You were a heretic to say it while still in, but now that I am a proud former Marine I can say that I think not buying -F models was a huge mistake - at present. The further the F-35B moves to the right we'll see just how long the USMC digs it's heels into the dirt.

USMCFLYR

BDGERJMN

Whisper says it much more eloquently than I could have:

Hovering at a precipice - August 2010 - Armed Forces Journal - Military Strategy, Global Defense Strategy

BDGERJMN

So what you're reallly saying is the USMC is purposely making themselves a less combat ready or effective fighting force for the sake of proving a point, and a questionable one at that?

It frustrates me to no end...heck our Marine FRS instructors permanently assigned to VFA-106 couldn't even fly the Rhino for a time because of the pride factor. "We're not buying it, so you can't and shall not fly it" Little did the General know that for years our Navy FRS instructors at VFA-106 were putting more Marine Hornet pilots in the fleet than VMFAT-101 and VFA-125 combined and were doing so with 2-3 Marine IPs assigned at any one time. Thankfully the USMC got smart and assigned more IPs to 106 in recent years, this way I don't have to explain to a young CAT I Marine RP why the Navy's SFWT syllabus is 10 times better than the Marine ACTI/WTI or whatever syllabus they have in place that in many cases doesn't even get a dude a section lead qual walking out the door of his/her fleet squadron. End rant!

USMCFLYR

It seems like every FRS likes to claim (except -101) that they produce more fleet pilots than the others. Before this time you mention -106, they had made a decision to not assign anymore Marine IPs to -106.

In the days of 'Marines shall not fly the Super' - were they?
For years the MATG Marines at -125 were flying the Supers at -122 and it even became a small issue.

I use to say (under my breath) that I'd bet a months pay that you will see -F models in the Corps. I still think so.

USMCFLYR

BDGERJMN

Gump, we did the science project back in 06-07 before we merged C/D and E/F operations at 106. It was one of the questions being asked from above and may have been part of the rationale for big Navy convincing USMC that they needed to pony up some bodies to 106, we were pretty undermanned given our output requirements at the time. You know how that ebbs and flows, but the numbers were pretty staggering if you compared our output of Marine CAT I's to the fleet given our Marine IP representation in comparison to 101. Apples and oranges in some respects as 101 is and will always be a slave to the MAG in terms of people and jets I suspect.

The Marine IPs/IWSOs flying the Rhino was only an issue for a short time, it just blew my mind, and every Marine at Oceana, that their leadership was squashing that program, it was quite comical.

btw, I agree with your assessment of F's in the MAG, its only a matter of time and someone with a suit and tie in DC will query the risk/reward of buying used up Harriers when Boeing is still building new jets at home that in my best guess are fare more capable, oh wait they can't hover!

thegoblin

However you look at this situation, there's a big cost associated with VTOL/STOVL aircraft.

Some 2002 numbers to compare.




More reading here The Pulitzer Prizes | Far From Battlefield, Marines Lose One-Third of Harrier Fleet

hossfly96

for the COIN fight is a helicopter with a pilot that knows how to shoot and ain't afraid to get in close....Fly Army