It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Red Flag 2006-2 @ Nellis AFB

page: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on Aug, 14 2006 @ 08:14 AM

Originally posted by intelgurl
HOWEVER, I can't think of too many of these USAF guys who would be able or even willing to land a fighter jet on the deck of an aircraft carrier.

This, I think is the essence of naval aviation. It seems as if there has been such an overemphasis on the carrier landing, despite the fact landing on a carrier won't happen if you get shot down. Naval aviators will always say the thing that makes them "special" is their ability to land on the carrier, but again, combat is what matters.

The USN fighters are in many cases the US's first strike/force projection when long range bombers are not used - I wouldn't think these guys skills are inferior to their USAF brethren.

Common sense says they have good skills. However, many "in the know," such as former naval aviators and military officers have consistently stated that U.S. Navy skills are quite overstated. In numerous exercises, fighter pilots of countries like Canada and Israel have whiplashed U.S. Navy fighters by wide margins. Only the U.S. Air Force has fared better. There's also other things, such as planning and intelligence. Scott Shuger is quoted as saying that the Navy is notoriously poor at things like planning and intelligence.

I would be interested to know the difference in the average hours of flight time a Navy plot gets compared to a USAF pilot. Anyone know?

I'm not sure about USN and USAF flying hours as of 2006. However, in the 1980s, USN flying hours were only about 160, in comparison to the almost 300 that Canadian pilots got during that decade. Things may have changed.

You also have to look at the training facilities availiable. Correct me if I'm wrong, but NAS Fallon and Nellis AFB are the only real legitimate places for naval aviators to practice combat, because places like Oceana NAS are surrounded by miles and miles of urban/suburban development, and there's real no point in dropping bombs into the Atlantic Ocean. And its not as if the strike fighter squadrons are at Fallon often (only once before a deployment).

[edit on 14-8-2006 by sweatmonicaIdo]

posted on Aug, 14 2006 @ 12:13 PM
One point of clarification I'd like to make:

I have been to a couple of Red Flags and I have not personally seen Navy fighter jets being involved, with one exception, in Red Flag 2005 there were some Navy and Marine F/A-18's at Nellis although I'm not sure of their level of participation.

I also understand that in Red Flag 2000 some Super Hornets participated for about a week - this was an evaluation of the aircraft prior to a large buy and not an official inclusion of the Navy in Red Flag.

Other Navy aircraft participate more frequently, it is not uncommon for Navy EA-6 Prowlers to participate in Red Flag and back in the 2006-1 Red Flag I think I heard that there were EA-18 Growler's participating.

However, this discussion seems to be regarding Navy fighter jet training compared to that of the USAF, so such aircraft, evaluation programs and related personnel are not really relevant.

All in all I think you (sweatmonicaId) have some good valid points.

[edit on 8-14-2006 by intelgurl]

posted on Aug, 14 2006 @ 03:25 PM
Sorry about that, its just that I remember seeing a History Channel documentary called Air Combat: The Ace Factor, in which they talked about the Red Flag exercises. In that particular Red Flag, they flew a lot of Navy F/A-18s and threw in an F-14 here any there.

It was a great documentary, great series. Unfortunately, they don't sell or show it anymore.

posted on Aug, 15 2006 @ 05:16 AM
oh wow those are cool paint jobs for the F15 and F16, how do the agressor teams normally do agianst the blue hats in these exercises? How long do the missions last? Threw out the day and all week long?

new topics

top topics
<< 1   >>

log in