Article

2005-05-09 China-Japan-Koreas

B-2 bombers, F-15E fighters in Guam, Aegis ships in Japan

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Ebbick Chiger5013 2005-05-09 00:50|| || Front Page|| [11125 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 F15E dont have range to strike NK with a sizeable military load from Guam.

Posted by Hupomoque Spoluter7949 2005-05-09 10:16|| 2005-05-09 10:16|| Front Page Top

#2 But we do have facilities on Okinawa, no? They will have to do. ;)

Posted by Bomb-a-rama 2005-05-09 10:22|| 2005-05-09 10:22|| Front Page Top

#3 I don't think the Aegis changes are really significant. We've been planning on replacing the cruisers with the DD's all along. Heck the new Aegis DD's are nearly the size of some cruisers to begin with.

Now, if we only had battleships.

Posted by Chuck Simmins">Chuck Simmins 2005-05-09 10:26|| http://blog.simmins.org]">[http://blog.simmins.org] 2005-05-09 10:26|| Front Page Top

#4 HS7949, re: range -

The fighter presence is supported by the New York Air National Guard`s 107th Air Refueling Wing, which means the fighters can extend their combat activities through aerial refueling rolling in over a wide range of the Korean Peninsula.

Posted by too true 2005-05-09 10:29|| 2005-05-09 10:29|| Front Page Top

#5 If you air refuel the F-15 then it can go all the way to China if need be. The limitation becomes the pilot and not the aircraft. The fact that the F-15E is deployed would indicate that a ground attack. Perhaps we are going to stop the Norks nuke test before it starts?

Posted by Cyber Sarge 2005-05-09 10:34|| 2005-05-09 10:34|| Front Page Top

#6 Or give a warning not to try to act while we do something in Iran, perhaps?

Or most likely of all, be prepared for any of these scenarios.

Posted by too true 2005-05-09 10:37|| 2005-05-09 10:37|| Front Page Top

#7 won't be unarmed, unescorted, P3's next air confrontation with China, I bet

Posted by Frank G">Frank G 2005-05-09 10:53|| 2005-05-09 10:53|| Front Page Top

#8 Since the Aegis ships are planned to be part of the first (or second) tier of the missile defense shield, two questions need to be asked. The first is, are the anti-missiles in Alaska fully operational? And second, are the airborne laser 747's operationally deployed?

Posted by Anonymoose 2005-05-09 13:50|| 2005-05-09 13:50|| Front Page Top

#9 The Vincennes was commissioned in 1985. Why are we retiring it so early? I thought we were supposed to get 30 years or so per ship.

Posted by Steve White">Steve White 2005-05-09 15:13|| 2005-05-09 15:13|| Front Page Top

#10 Steve, I think it won't take all the mods in radar and missles. It's 1970's tech where the DD's are a decade or more advanced.

The cruisers were intended to escort a carrier across the Atlantic in the face of Soviet air attacks.

Posted by Chuck Simmins">Chuck Simmins 2005-05-09 15:32|| http://blog.simmins.org]">[http://blog.simmins.org] 2005-05-09 15:32|| Front Page Top

#11 My guess is because the oldest members of the Ticonderoga class don't have the Vertical Launch System and the navy didn't want to spend the money to retrofit it in.

Posted by ed 2005-05-09 15:32|| 2005-05-09 15:32|| Front Page Top

23:48 Sherry
23:46 DMFD
23:25 Dar
23:07 3dc
23:04 CrazyFool
23:03 muck4doo
22:57 Angie Schultz
22:49 Glenmore
22:47 Frank G
22:36 3dc
22:32 mom
22:30 mom
22:29 SC88
22:18 crazyhorse
22:08 Pappy
22:01 mojo
21:55 Seafarious
21:45 Barbara Skolaut
21:17 trailing wife
21:16 Frank G
21:13 trailing wife
21:11 .com
21:11 Mike Kozlowski
21:09 Cyber Sarge