"Marine F-35s Ready for Action in Middle East" Topic
5 Posts
All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.
Please remember not to make new product announcements on the forum. Our advertisers pay for the privilege of making such announcements.
For more information, see the TMP FAQ.
Back to the Ultramodern Warfare (2014-present) Message Board
Areas of InterestModern
Featured Hobby News Article
Featured Recent Link
Featured Ruleset
Featured Showcase Article
Featured Workbench Article Hundvig  is not a real big fan of pre-painted minis, and he positively despises randomly-packed "collectable" ones - so why is he writing this article?
Featured Book Review
Featured Movie Review
|
Please sign in to your membership account, or, if you are not yet a member, please sign up for your free membership account.
 Editor in Chief Bill  | 12 Sep 2018 11:41 a.m. PST |
The Marine Corps' F-35B Lightning II Joint Strike Fighters are the only ship-based fixed-wing aircraft in the Middle East right now, and service leaders say the new jets are ready to handle any fight in Syria, Iraq or Afghanistan they may be tasked with… link |
| Thresher01 | 12 Sep 2018 1:48 p.m. PST |
That is bad news, given their 2017 operational readiness rates, and major issues. Hope they've worked some of them out since then, but depending upon them for air cover seems to be rather dangerous, with only a 14% full operational readiness rate just last year. |
| Andrew Walters | 12 Sep 2018 4:28 p.m. PST |
That's probably why they're over there, to prove their ready. Even if they only fly a few missions they can announce that they're ready 14% is still more than 0%. Plus, they probably have worked out some of the problems. They wouldn't risk a black eye, they probably know what they're doing. |
| Thresher01 | 13 Sep 2018 1:31 a.m. PST |
I hope so, but with numbers like that, I'm not so sure. Seems to me to be more driven to prove they're working, than based upon readiness. With numbers like that, it means you can put two birds in the air out of a whole squadron, which is pretty dismal. Plus, why let enemies try to practice targeting them with long-wave radar? Best to keep them at home, until they are really needed, in my personal opinion. |
| Dn Jackson | 13 Sep 2018 8:51 a.m. PST |
First, I'm guessing they don't release actual operational readiness numbers. Second, I too would assume that the military isn't going to send aircraft into action that aren't ready. Finally: "Best to keep them at home, until they are really needed, in my personal opinion." This is an old conundrum. Do we use new equipment in a low level war? If so, we risk our opponents finding out what our stuff can do. If we don't, when something serious happens we send untried equipment into combat. I say send them in. I'm reminded of the SB2 Dauntless. Prior to the US entering WWII we only held wargames and training exercises in good weather. The first time Navy pilots flew the Dauntless against the Japanese in less than ideal conditions, the windscreens fogged up. So they had to fly with the cockpit open in order to see where they were going when they started their attack runs. |
|
