A12 Avengers And USN Air Wings

Hi Ladies and Gents

Am looking for your considered opinions, I was sitting playing Command:Modern Naval Air Operations the other day, and I started wondering about what if the cold war had continued into the 2000s. I know , I know theres lots of hand waving involved in these questions.

I was considering what the USN would have done had the A12 been introduced into service. I was wondering what would a typical make up of a Carrier Air Wing. Would the A6s be replaced 1 for 1 and thus a CAW contain 2 x 10A/C squadrons or would the numbers have been reduced.

What about the Light Attack Squadrons? They were equipped with A7/F18s, the plan I believe was to replace these with the JAST (Which was subsequently rolled into the F35 Program), so again would it be a 1 for 1 replacement.

The F14 fighter squadrons are another case, there was the NATF program to produce a LO naval fighter, so would we have seen a new stealth airframe or given Hughes and Rathyeon were working on super long range AAMS (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AIM-152_AAAM) would it have been more likley that we would have seen the F14 upgraded and solidering on?

I have considered whether the USN would operate, a mixed airwing of stealth and legacy aircraft together or whether they would be more inclned to operate, stealth and non stealth air wings, with stealth wings being employed for example in a WW3 scenario the stealth CAW operating up in the Barents around Murmansk and say the legacy air wings being deployed to the med where IADS are lighter.

Now i have 2 more USAF questions am seeking opinions on, if your still reading...

The USAF was looking at buying around 400, A12s for deep strike operations, presumably to replace the F15E/ F111 , I wondered that would mean by 2000 the USAF would be divesting itself of potentially 15 year old F15Es , would the ANG have taken them, or NATO allies?

Lastly the USNs AIM-152, was there potential for the USAF to be intrested , perhaps in a F22/AIM 152 combo, am thinking for attacking protected high value targets such as A50 mainstays ,or tanker assetts.

Thanks for you thoughts in advance
 
Technology issues aside, look at this sample air wing.

Two squadrons of F-14s, two of F/A-18s (and A-7s before that), one of A-6s, and the support squadrons.

-At absolute most, it's going to be one squadron of A-12s in place of A-6s. Likely smaller squadron sizes given the unavoidable limitations.
-NATFs or Super Tomcats will replace the F-14s.
-A-7s were already being replaced by F/A-18s, so no change there.
 
How much was the cancellation due to the 'end of the Cold War', and how much to the massive overruns and doubts about capability?

I rather suspect that it would have been cancelled anyway, without a much earlier PoD, that led to a more successful project.

Note, too, that the antiradar coating on the B-2 (a design from a similar era) was so vulnerable to rain they couldn't leave the bombers out if it rained.

If the same, or a similar, coating were used on an aircraft carrier - constantly exposed to salt water.... This could be the turkey to end all turkeys in aerospace procurement.
 
When you consider what the USN did after GW1, it would have made more sense to either build new or modernised A6F/G as they were generally operating in very permissive environment. They didn't really need stealth in post Saddam Iraq or Afghanistan just a lot of payload and long loiter times.

The A12 was really a step too far in the 1990's, there are all sort of issues with stealth in particular the coating used and the steps to prepare a stealth aircraft of the period for a mission reduced the sortie rate down to only circa 1 sortie per day.
 
Technology issues aside, look at this sample air wing.

Two squadrons of F-14s, two of F/A-18s (and A-7s before that), one of A-6s, and the support squadrons.

-At absolute most, it's going to be one squadron of A-12s in place of A-6s. Likely smaller squadron sizes given the unavoidable limitations.
-NATFs or Super Tomcats will replace the F-14s.
-A-7s were already being replaced by F/A-18s, so no change there.

Thanks for the info, I was wondering though , wouldnt the F18s be replaced, as I understand it the USN was already looking at a stealth replacement , the reason I say this was that there were the ASTOVL/CALF/A/F/X programs in the late 80s early 90s , So I was under the impression that the USN was already planning for the time when the F18 grew too long in the tooth.

:)
 
When you consider what the USN did after GW1, it would have made more sense to either build new or modernised A6F/G as they were generally operating in very permissive environment. They didn't really need stealth in post Saddam Iraq or Afghanistan just a lot of payload and long loiter times.

I agree the aircraft was probably too far ahead at the time, I was going to mention though, I was working on the assumption that the cold war continued to the present day, therefore the permissive air enviroment would not be guarenteed. :)
 
One of the reasons the US has enjoyed a relatively permissive aerial environment for the last 25 years has been due to the advanced nature of the weapons it had in 1991 in relation to what the Russians had available . Even today the PAK-FA which is often touted as a wonder weapon is still in testing and uncertain to enter squadron service any time soon . The Chinese are a different matter and their production of 5th generation stealth or L/O aircraft is gathering pace . As to the question of carrier airwings .

I could see the F-14 Tomcat either getting the super tomcat development dollars or replaced by a true L/O aircraft along the lines of a navalised F-22 .

The F-18 (C/D) would by the early 2000's be in serious need of replacement and I could still see a good case for the F-18 (E/F/G) being needed and produced .

The A-6 F was a great program from what little I have read and could have worked wonders for the heavy attack squadrons . The large fuel offload capability would also have helped the short legs of the F-18 C/D .

The E-2C/D would have still been their as would the S-3 Viking squadrons .

If you look at the A-12 and envisage it's most useful ability it was not moving mud but rather being able to degrade an air defence network and deliver a Nuke at the same time . If the A-12 was able to carry 2 HARM , 2 AIM 120 and a freefall nuke or SRAM then it was worth the money spent . If it could not carry more then 2 guided bombs (paveway) or 2 dumb bombs it was too expensive for what was needed .

In the same position with no end to the cold war I could see the Tomcat getting rebuilt in early 1990's with better engines , better avionics and possible a missile upgrade as well . The F/A-18 C/D continue on as before until around the year 2000 when they begin to be replaced by the F-18 E/F/G. The A-6E is upgraded to A-6F by rebuilding existing aircraft like what happened with the F-14 . By mid 2000's the first navalised F-22 would be delivered replacing the Tomcat .

Air group late 90's

24 F-14 E (tomcat 21 proposal literally )
24 F/A-18 C/D
20 A-6 F (the 4 to 6 EA-6B included and modernised to same engines and airframe etc )
10 S-3 Viking
6 E-2C
6 Sh-60 with dipping sonar

Air Group early 2000's

12 F-22 N
36 F-18 E/F
12 F-18 G
6 to 8 A-6 F tankers
10 S-3 viking
6 E-2D
6 SH-60R

Air group 2015

24 F-22 N
44 F-18 E/F/G
14 MV-22 ASW version (dipping sonar plus sonobuoys)
6 E-2D

Considering the range improvements the E and F models have over the early legacy Hornets I figure this would be a great and flexible carrier air wing .
 
Not that permissive, the A 6F was intended to carry AMRAAM as a self-defence measure also the replacement of the J52 with F404 would have increased range. Plus it would have had a significantly enhanced DAS and would have been supported by improved EA6 with the ALQ 199 jammer pods.
 
Top