- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: No nukes: Who wins if the Air Force and Navy were to fight each other?
Posted on 7/21/18 at 7:56 pm to northshorebamaman
Posted on 7/21/18 at 7:56 pm to northshorebamaman
That is what I was assuming.
Maybe that’s not possible?
Maybe that’s not possible?
This post was edited on 7/21/18 at 7:57 pm
1
Posted on 7/21/18 at 7:57 pm to weagle99
Possible. Just hasn't been done before.
Posted on 7/21/18 at 8:01 pm to weagle99
The Navy has Carriers and can strike from anywhere.
AF has limited range since they need a land base to refuel/reload,
AF has limited range since they need a land base to refuel/reload,
Posted on 7/21/18 at 8:18 pm to TigerstuckinMS
Man that sub is a bad motherfricker
Posted on 7/21/18 at 8:22 pm to weagle99
quote:
People are acting like the Navy would just stroll through this.
Didn’t say it would be bloodless. But the AF has too much of a stacked deck against them. The literal best they can do is give the Navy a Pyrrhic victory.
quote:
Navy might win but they would cross the finish line severly fricked up. Numerous carriers would be sunk. AF has ICBMs. And many more aircraft.
You already said no nukes. Which is good because the Navy has more and better ones than the AF.
Air Force hasn’t been the front line of nuclear strategic planning in 50 years. For fricks sake, statements like that invalidate the value of other statements.
quote:
What reconnaissance does Navy have in the air to match the AF stealth and satelites?
How much strategic recon does the Navy need? Do they have a map? Those air bases ain’t moving.
You could Tomahawk en masse critical bases with no live data and the Air Force can do little but try to shoot them down inefficiently with planes.
This removes them from offensive operations, and forces the AF commander to have the equivalent of a fleet-in-being to counter the threat, crippling his ability to project power and giving the Navy even more room with which to maneuver.
Also, this is again another bit of you hurting your own credibility. AF doesn’t own intel
Satellites. That is handled by a dedicated division within DoD. But even if they did own them......you seriously think they didn’t get a lot of thought and practice on how to obscure intentions by taking advantage of the small windows of visibility? It’s not like the Soviet’s didn’t have satellites good enough to see something as big as a MBG
Also, you are forgetting the Navy can shoot down these low flying recon satellites.
Posted on 7/21/18 at 8:32 pm to Volvagia
quote:
Also, you are forgetting the Navy can shoot down these low flying recon satellites.
I didn’t even know that because I am a civilian. I rail against the Federal government on the PT board but I must admit that it is incredible that I can just pay my taxes and enjoy protection from the most powerful military the world has ever seen.
I’m sure this will get downvotes too. Thanks for your informed participation.
This post was edited on 7/21/18 at 8:35 pm
Posted on 7/21/18 at 8:35 pm to northshorebamaman
You win. 
This post was edited on 7/21/18 at 8:36 pm
Posted on 7/21/18 at 8:50 pm to BadAgg7
quote:
the navy has more fighters than the air force. moblie platforms to launch from. more missles. more types of missles. the marine corps. naval special warfare.
what kind of question is this?
the air force probably has the more squared away secretaries, cooks and mechanics. pssh. that's about it.
Former Naval Aviator here, and Sir, you are sadly misinformed.
The USAF has anti-ship capable F-15E, B-2, and rotary launch capable B1B's and B52's. Bye-bye aircraft carriers, bye-bye Naval Strike capabilities, bye-bye LHA's, which means bye-bye USMC aircraft and MEU's.
Even if a Strike Package managed to get airborne, F-18's consume fuel like an alcoholic consumes booze. By the way, who refuels Navy aircraft, USAF KC-135'sand KC-10's. And iiifff, you managed to get close to a target, the F-18 is absolutely no match for USAF F-22's, F-16's, and even forty year old F-15's.
It's a glaring deficiency in Naval Aviation. USN carriers cannot get into strike range because of modern Russian and Chinese anti ship missiles. So the strike package has to be refueled with tanker packaged equipped F-18's. Not ideal. Also, naval aviation has been asking for a dedicated air superiority fighter like the F-14, instead they got the overweight navalized boondoggle that is the F-35C.
Posted on 7/21/18 at 9:03 pm to OchoDedos
quote:
By the way, who refuels Navy aircraft, USAF KC-135'sand KC-10's.
What happened to the sixty KC-135 run between the Navy and Marines?
Posted on 7/21/18 at 9:35 pm to OchoDedos
navy doesn't have any missiles?
no subs?
no anti-air capability at all?
no subs?
no anti-air capability at all?
Posted on 7/21/18 at 10:39 pm to Volvagia
quote:
What happened to the sixty KC-135 run between the Navy and Marines?
Huh?
KC-135 is an USAF Active, Reserve, and ANG operation.
The Navy/Corps has a limited C-130 refueling capability compared to the USAF.
Posted on 7/21/18 at 10:46 pm to OchoDedos
We also perform the vast majority of cyberspace warfare for the DOD
The Navy would have no idea where there ships/subs are
The Navy would have no idea where there ships/subs are
Posted on 7/21/18 at 10:50 pm to cubsfan5150
This post was edited on 7/22/18 at 9:29 am
Posted on 7/21/18 at 10:53 pm to Palm Beach Tiger
“The USMC is a separate branch of armed service than the United States Navy. ... The US Marine Corps is still part of the Department of the Navy, but is not part of the US Navy.”
Posted on 7/21/18 at 10:54 pm to OchoDedos
quote:And the Navy has Aegis, ESSM, Phalanx, Tomahawk, and a host of shite.
The USAF has anti-ship capable F-15E, B-2, and rotary launch capable B1B's and B52's. Bye-bye aircraft carriers, bye-bye Naval Strike capabilities, bye-bye LHA's, which means bye-bye USMC aircraft and MEU's.
Plus we have mobile burn-through, specifically designed to shut down electrical systems of incoming aircraft.
So, unless you can manually fly a modern jet aircraft, buh-bye incoming air threats and drones.
The entire Air Force would be expended trying to take down a single Battle Group.
I was a Combat Systems Fire Controlman (AN-SPY 1-D)
The Air Force's greatest advantage would lie in cyber-warfare.
This post was edited on 7/21/18 at 10:57 pm
Posted on 7/21/18 at 10:58 pm to OchoDedos
quote:I thought ESSM counters the knock-off Exocet the Chinese use.
USN carriers cannot get into strike range because of modern Russian and Chinese anti ship missiles.
no?
Or are we not equipping our Carrier groups with them?
This post was edited on 7/21/18 at 10:59 pm
Posted on 7/21/18 at 11:09 pm to Roaad
I heard the Navy is strict!
And if you mess up just a little bit.... you'll be flying a cargo plane full of rubber dogshit out of Hong Kong!
And if you mess up just a little bit.... you'll be flying a cargo plane full of rubber dogshit out of Hong Kong!
Posted on 7/21/18 at 11:10 pm to OchoDedos
quote:
KC-135 is an USAF Active, Reserve, and ANG operation
There is a J varient the USMC uses.
And getting by the stated disability from lack of refueling: while admittingly not ideal, isn’t there a dedicated aerial refueling config of the -18?
So it’s not like it’s completely impossible to give them legs.
Posted on 7/21/18 at 11:12 pm to BayouRat15
quote:
And if you mess up just a little bit.... you'll be flying a cargo plane full of rubber dogshit out of Hong Kong!
That's only if your ego writes checks your body can't cash.
Page 4 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News