[sci.military] Carrier Ops in the Gulf

bunge@wam.umd.edu (Robert David Bunge) (04/03/91)

From: Robert David Bunge <bunge@wam.umd.edu>

I'm wondering if anyone out in netland can answer a couple of questions
about aircraft carrier operations in the Gulf during the war.
 
 
1) A recent story on CBS News said the A-6E lost favor during the conflict
because it couldn't carry smart bombs and iron ones it dropped had a high
miss rate.  Is it true the A-6 can't deliver smart weapons?  What was their
status during the war?
 
2) It used to be common practice for a carrier to fly off some of it's S-3
Vikings to Sicily when operating in the central Med..  This relieved deck
space for easier operations of other planes.  Did the carriers in the Gulf
do something similar with their Vikings?  Perhaps basing them out of
Bahrain, UAE or Oman?  Since there wasn't too much of a sub threat in the
Gulf, that would suggest the Vikings mostly did watchdog duty on merchant
ships and other such work.  48 Vikings (four squadrons) in the Gulf is a lot
of surface search.  But:
 
3) I know I've seen pictures of Vikings dropping iron bombs and firing air-to-
surface missiles, so does anybody know if the Vikings flew combat missions? 
I also believe the Viking have a FLIR pod, which makes me wonder if they can
carry smart weapons.  Can they?
 
4) Finally, I never saw an answer to an earlier question about the U.S.S.
Lexington.  Does anybody know for sure that the navy plans to replace it
with another carrier in the near future?  References for this question
would be very nice!
 
Bob Bunge
bunge@wam.umd.edu

swilliam@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Steve Williams) (04/03/91)

From: swilliam@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Steve Williams)

>4) Finally, I never saw an answer to an earlier question about the U.S.S.
>Lexington.  Does anybody know for sure that the navy plans to replace it
>with another carrier in the near future?  References for this question
>would be very nice!

One of the FORRESTAL class carrier may replace USS LEXINGTON in due 
course.  Since USS INDEPENDENCE will replace USS MIDWAY (based in Japan)
in 1991, this means that one of the other three FORRESTAL class carriers 
(USS FORRESTAL, USS SARATOGA, & USS RANGER) may replace the LEXINGTON.

USS FORRESTAL, USS SARATOGA, and USS INDEPENDENCE have already undergone
the SLEP program.  The RANGER is scheduled for SLEP beginning in 1993
and ending in mid-1995. 

Source: Jane's Fighting Ship 1990-91

ab3o+@andrew.cmu.edu (Allan Bourdius) (04/03/91)

From: Allan Bourdius <ab3o+@andrew.cmu.edu>

>2) It used to be common practice for a carrier to fly off some of it's S-3
>Vikings to Sicily when operating in the central Med..  This relieved deck
>space for easier operations of other planes.  Did the carriers in the Gulf
>do something similar with their Vikings?  Perhaps basing them out of
>Bahrain, UAE or Oman?
	[9 lines of quoted text trimmed --CDR]

All S-3A/B's have been equipped with an air-refueling package (according
to one of my instructors, LT Michael P. Pitney, USN, an S-3 NFO) so I
expect the bulk of their duty during DS would have been tanking up the
fighters and bombers for their runs into the beach.  I don't know if
they were based off the carriers or off land.  The S-3 *can* carry
conventional bombs, but has no bombsight.  The only conventional bombs
they carry with any hope of hitting a target are Rockeye cluster
munitions.  They use them if they catch a Soviet SSG/SSGN that is on the
surface and can't submerge until it fires its missiles.  The S-3B can
carry Harpoon, which would suggest that it could carry the SLAM as well.
 
The FLIR pod is a detection system only and has nothing to do with
aiming smart weapons, except giving the pilot/weapons officer the means
of identifying his target in darkness.  S-3's use FLIR mainly to detect
submarines on the surface.  Also, the S-3 is the only USN carrier based
aircraft besides the E-2 and the C-2 that cannot carry Sidewinder AAM's
for self defense.

The USS Lexington is to be replaced by the USS Forrestal sometime within
the next year or two.  This will probably happen when the USS George
Washington (ahead of schedule and under budget!) is commissioned.  The
Forrestal would be redesignated AVT 59.

I hope this answers some of your questions.

-- 
Allan Bourdius [MIDN 3/C (Marine Option)/Brother, Phi Kappa Theta Fraternity]
ab3o+@andrew.cmu.edu or Box 4719, 5125 Margaret Morrison St., Pgh., PA  15213
Anything controversial in this post/mail are my own opinions, got it?!