From: wwo@vax5.cit.cornell.edu (Thomas Schoene)
Subject: Re: Carrier Fighters (was: is the A-10 going bye-bye?)
Organization: Cornell University
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 14:32:20 GMT


From wwo@vax5.cit.cornell.edu (Thomas Schoene)

In article <BuBL67.FMG@lawday.DaytonOH.NCR.COM>,
dpe@inel.gov (Don Palmrose) writes: 
>> While in the topic of aircraft going away, here is a little tidbit I'd like
>> confirmed (or not confirmed):  I heard the Navy was going to standardize on
>> F/A-18s for the carriers.  This would mean the F-14 *and* A-6 would go away.
[material deleted for brevity]
> 
> I hope that I have the two programs straight, but if not, let me appologize
> early, so no flames please....
> 
> Anyway, here is my understanding of the situation:
> 
> With the demise of the US Navy's AX (?) program (the advance tactical bomber
> based on stealth technology), there will not be a replacement aircraft for the 
> venerable A-6.  All A-6's are coming up on their end of life due to the
> buildup of stress in the airframes making them more and more dangerous to 
> fly.  Whether the ATF (advance tactical fighter) will meet the same fate is
> not known.  If this program is cut due to budget or does not meet its time
> commitments, then there will not be a replacement for the F-14 when their
> airframes reach their limit.  So basically, the naval air community is in
> great dissarray over its future direction due to this clear danger for not
> having a modern fighter or bomber at the end of this century.
> 
> The F/A-18 is the only aircraft in production today that can fill the fighter
> or bomber roles.  Thus, there is some discussion on this plane holding the
> Navy over until new fighter/bombers can be developed within the evolving
> budget framework of the last half of the 1990's.
> 
> The Navy will also start loosing their E-2 Hawkeyes and there is no 
> replacement plane for this either.  The Navy may well become dependent on Air
> Force ACWS (?) planes for an air-borne warning system or hope that the Ageis 
> system is as good as the magazine ads say for the detection of low flyers 
> that, in the past, the air-borne radars were better at seeing.
As I understand it the A-X program is indeed still underway but is being
delayed to free up money for the F/A-18E/F program.  Some people in Congress
are suggesting that the Navy can do without the medium bomber and want to
cancel the A-X but it is still going for now.  [BTW a contract has just been
issued for additional composite wings for the A-6s so they should be around for
a while yet]
The Naval ATF is still desired but will be deferred for a long time (perhaps
into the next century.
The F-14D production line has either closed or will close in the next few
months and the Navy will have to soldier on with old F-14A and B for some time.
Finally the Navy has been selling the F/A-18E/F as a simple modification of the
eariler types but several reviewers expect it to take much more time and money
than the Navy is claiming and some doubt that the Navy can pack enough extra
fuel to compensate for the extra weight.

Personally I think the E/F is a stopgap that may not enter service much ahead
of the final types and should be abandoned in favor of accellerating the A-X to
get a top notch medium bomber.  The F-14 still seems up to the task of air
superiority over most likely opponents but the A-6's are reraching the limits
of their airframe life pretty fast and the design is really obsolete.  When
moneyllows the NATF should go forward.

-- 
Tom Schoene
wwo@cornella.cit.cornell.edu  -or- wwo@vax5.cit.cornell.edu
-------------------------------------------------------------------
"Whenever you're holding all the cards why does everyone else turn
out to be playing chess?"

Newsgroups: sci.military