Chris Rawley of Information Dissemination got it half right in his article on "USMC expands CAS capabilities". In the comments section (where some of his assertions are questioned) he makes this statement...
It was a suggestion, not a mix-up. Why not arm the Greyhounds? What other sea-based long dwell armed ISR does the navy currently employ? Land-based armed ISR is fine until host-nation country ABC decides it doesn't want to base platforms flying strike ops into country XYZ.Well he's right to want more carrier based ISR. He's right to want to utilize platforms that we do have for a variety of missions. Where he's wrong is the platform he suggests. The C-2 Greyhound? Really? Seriously?
We had...and have the perfect platform for the emerging threats that we're facing. We simply retired them too soon. Way too soon.
What was that platform?
The S-3 Viking and the ES-3A Shadow. The Viking was capable of carrying out air support (at least as its being done now...at 15000 feet with smart bombs)...anti-surface warfare...it carried harpoons regularly....aerial refueling...it carried buddy tanks and freed up Hornets and Super Hornets for strike and air defense missions...and in its latest and greatest form, it was a capable ISR platform.
Chris was right...he just picked the wrong airplane!
