shrinking USN carrier air wings

Firehorse

Banned Member
1) Do you have a legitimate source for this or are you pulling information out of your butt or picking and choosing like you always do?
2) This isn't 8 years ago and carriers along with the rest of the USN have lower manning levels.
3) I can buy that if you count EVERYONE on watch at the time the aircraft is launched, the flight deck crew, cat crew, the snipes standing various watches, the people in CIC, the bridge ect. There are NOT 800 people needed to run that catapult.
OK, firstly, I still think that, aside from MPA role, aircraft like SeaMasters and Tradewinds could have been "seaplane KC-135s".
Secondly, I had a friend on a CV about 10 years ago and he sent me a news bulletin that mentioned the number 600. From what I remember, only those directly involved in the flight deck, hangar, CAT, and island ops were counted. I didn't save it then but a few days ago contacted PAOs on CV/Ns asking for confirmation on that. I shall reproduce their answers here as soon as they are received.
Of course, now the number may be smaller, but not by much. I will even admit that it can vary from ship to ship, even of the same class!
 

gf0012-aust

Grumpy Old Man
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
OK, firstly, I still think that, aside from MPA role, aircraft like SeaMasters and Tradewinds could have been "seaplane KC-135s".
You don't seem to have learnt anything from your time away about the benefit and subsequent decline of seaplanes.

Show the technical reason as to why they could have been seaplane based KC-135's - esp when loaded mass would have turned them into beluga whales.


Secondly, I had a friend on a CV about 10 years ago and he sent me a news bulletin that mentioned the number 600. From what I remember, only those directly involved in the flight deck, hangar, CAT, and island ops were counted. I didn't save it then but a few days ago contacted PAOs on CV/Ns asking for confirmation on that. I shall reproduce their answers here as soon as they are received.

Again, this is not 1972 or even the 1980's. Manning levels are lower due to efficiencies and automation issues.

Where do you get this information from? It is definitely not from contemp sources.

If you know someone who is part of an active current serving posting and is part of a flight deck crew then get their military email address and PM me, I'll ask them myself through the approp channels. Otherwise, "friends" as reference points are next to useless.

Of course, now the number may be smaller, but not by much. I will even admit that it can vary from ship to ship, even of the same class!
I'd love to know your sources on how ships within a class at the flight deck op level will vary. It's task specific, it's launch specific, it's activity specific.

Start to pause before posting any more rubbish or your time on here will be really short. Your time off was supposed to send a message on your posting style and behaviour, it has apparently not worked.
 

Ths

Banned Member
Why shrinking the carrier wings and not carrier numbers

Shrinking carrier wings means the structure to expand is kept intact, whereas alternatively not building new carriers (or fewer new carriers) might be more economical, but it would take much longer getting up to speed.

Just a thought.
 

Firehorse

Banned Member
Official reply from CVN 76

Below is the reply I got from CVN 76:

RE: question
Sunday, August 24, 2008 9:58 AM
From: "Call, Franklin MCCS" <[email protected]>
To: [deleted]

That number is roughly the same. Yes we have had tremendous advances in technology but it still takes a lot of Sailors to launch jets safely.

Very respectfully,
MCCS(SW/NAC) Spike Call
Graphics Media LCPO
USS Ronald Reagan (CVN 76)
J-dial 5187
Comm (619)545-2466
Cell (619)708-4885
e-mail: [email protected]
sipr: [email protected]

-----Original Message-----
From: [deleted]
Sent: Saturday, August 23, 2008 2:17 PM
To: [email protected]; Call, Franklin MCCS
Subject: question

Hello,
I am a member of a military discussion forum and would like to know how
many total personnel are directly involved throughout the ship in
launching a fixed-wing aircraft off the CVN's deck?
I had a friend on a CV about 10 years ago and he sent me a news bulletin
that mentioned the number 600. Is it the same on your ship? I hope to
hear from you soon! Thanks!
CVN-76 is the newest Nimitz-class carrier, and if "That number is roughly the same", the older CVNs aren't using fewer sailors to handle their airplanes.
Should I get other replies (I sent a few inquiries to different CVNs) I will post them here as well.
And this comes from a retired U.S. Navy admiral:
With increasing range of anti-ship missiles, our carrier airwings need a long- range stealth attack capability, both manned and unmanned.
http://washingtontimes.com/news/2008/aug/24/chinas-one-world/
It remains to be seen if the overall numbers of AWs will change if his wishes come true!
 
Last edited:
Top