Quick question.
Have you heard of Expeditionary Air Fields? Its a little enterprise that the Marine Corps can setup on any flat piece of ground (and with our Combat Engineers we can "develop" any piece of land into a flat piece of ground) that allows fixed wing aircraft up to (and I've seen it) a C-17 land?
Well we have it. Its real. And the only thing we need to do is to make it truly expeditionary, use it in planning and operations...and get the Wing away from established airfields.
Description via NAVAIR.
Description:Expeditionary Airfields (EAF) allow military aircraft to launch and land in any flat terrain, making it an in-disposable commodity for our armed forces and NATO allies.The system needs to be ruggidized.
EAF is a shore-based, aviation support system that permits rapid deployment and recovery of aircraft within range of ground forces. Although an EAF can be as basic as a grass landing zone to support helicopter operations, the installation of one or more EAF subsystems adds versatility and/or durability to the site. EAF equipment provides not only mobile matting, but also arresting gear and lighting for “runway” guidance.
Introduction of aircraft like the MV-22 Osprey and the ongoing testing of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, keep the EAF team continually evolving its equipment and methods to provide fleet Marine forces with flexible, practical and advanced systems. The proven success of joint service operations involving the deployment of U.S., NATO, and other allied nation aircraft, guarantees the presence of EAF systems in future combat operations.
EAF products:AM-2 matting and accessories
Light and extreme lightweight matting
M-31 expeditionary arresting gear
Airfield lighting and terminal guidance
Minimum operating strip lighting system
Maintenance shelters
Airfield design
Airfield communication system
The Military Police need to drop the Law Enforcement Battalion nonsense and become the subject matter experts at Air Field security.
We need to start using it.
Long story short. We have the answer to forward deploying Super/Ultra Hornets near our forces to provide close, around the clock air support.
Here is another expeditionary systems(you know too finish that airport):
ReplyDeleteConcrete Canvas Shelters:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LBHVKFCoYFc
Concrete Cloth Military Applications:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CRF965uZI1Q
Utilis Military Tents(Would so tie these to the sides of AAVs):
Deletehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mAdR1bcTGms
I've personally "slammed mat" in 29 Palms and at Bogue Field, this is a capability the USMC maintains, and has even updated over the last ten years. New arresting gear, new lighting, etc. But that matting uses a lot of cube.
ReplyDeleteWe built them in Iraq and Afghanistan, but eventually you get concrete down and the matting is mostly used for FOBs/FARPs or a/c parking areas. The problem is they need too much maintenance over time-the earth shifts and the matting needs to be pulled up so the ground can be re-graded. If you go past a month or two, you are going to need to get on the hardball. The whole point is that it is a temporary field that can be picked up and moved as the offensive advances.
totally agree but i see two battles emerging with the controversy over the F-35. first one is forward air bases. we don't advertise the capability and people seem to think that we're not able to do it. and second which is a variation of the first is over the utility of STOVL. if the F-35 didn't cost as much i wouldn't feel the need to respond to the critics that are right about the F-35 but wrong about the utility of STOVL.
DeleteWell, this is interesting because one of the major arguments for the Marine F-35B is that after a "Pearl Harbor" by China, our runways, etc. in the Pacific would have been targeted and STOVL would be required while the Marines held until re-enforced. If a make-shift airfield with arresting gear can be setup in short order, that goes along way to addressing that concern.
ReplyDeleteHow long does it take to set one up with arresting gear?
Answered my own question. A basic configuration takes 2 to 3 weeks from ship to operational. That would be too long to respond in that scenario. And that is only for helos.
Deletehttp://www.cassholdings.com/AM2.htm
i don't know. like john says they have a "permanent" EAF at 29 palms that units use when they deploy for ITX, but i've only seen the airfield bubbas working on it. never seen them tear it down and build it all again.
Deletethe point with the Rand study wasn't just that the airfields were vulnerable but that the aircraft stationed there would be destroyed on the ground. additionally you're beating me to my follow on punch.
i was going to propose an Air/Sea/Rapid Response Ground battle plan. the idea would be to team the 82nd and other light US Army units to fly in to an EAF after the USMC had seized enough ground to make it workable and then have paratroopers or an air assault unit leap ahead in conjunction with Marine forces.
i guess i'm trying to develop some type of theory for the USMC and US Army to work together in the Pacifc while taking into account that the US Army is air deployable more than by sea.
Now that you've laid out what you're thinking:
ReplyDeleteSlamming mat is manpower intensive and takes time and massive logistics trains. I can't even imagine trying to do it in a non-permissive environment, enemy arty would make a mess of it fast. You can probably get down a 96 X 96 pad for a VSTOL or helo in 24-48 hours, depending on manpower available. F-18s can land on a short field with the arresting gear, but there are no cats on a EAF, so if you want a non STOL a/c to take back off, you're looking at 1500-3000' depending on loadout. Two to three weeks to build that field-by then we've probably seized something more useful.
You must have the 1500-3000 foot runway even for a STOVL aircraft. The vertical takeoff is either publicity stunt or you need to move a single aircraft a very short distance. A F-35B cannot take off vertically with any ordinance and only about a quarter load of fuel and that is in good weather.
DeleteIf it is 100 degrees and 100 percent humidity in the Phillipines a F-35B might not be able to vertically take off at all and vertical landings might be more of a fall than a controlled descent.
i think the link Chris referred to was talking about transport time. it might take two weeks to build...i just don't know. but if we can make something that can handle STOVL fighters i'm at least halfway to making the concept a bit more appealing. additionally while i don't doubt you when you say its manpower intensive, we can make use of help from the USAF Red Horse bubbas and Army Engineers to either make rudimentary fields for landing on whatever flat surface we can make doable.
ReplyDeleteWhat this underlines for me is that we have ALREADY capabilities to forward deploy regular fighters jets in relative austere condition so when I hear F35B is the only solution, it is the ONLY solution that costs billions and pays LMT a lot of money and is sexy PR for politicians. How much would it cost to pay for more ground capabilities like this? I bet for the price a just a few F35B, we could have this down as a science, set it up in a matter of days,maybe even hours and not just launch F35Bs but regular fighters and cargoes but giving grunts some more gear like that isn't sexy or doesn't put most of Washington on the payroll, so that's why our forces aren't going to get it. There are ALWAYS more options, just not the ones LMT likes....
ReplyDeleteIf you are within artillery range that might take out your austere airfield, I don't see why it can't take out your F35Bs....just saying.
The airfield at Chu Lai was originally a SATS (Short Airfield for Tactical Support). The 3rd MEB landed 5/5/65. The first A-4 landed 6/1/65. Combat mission the same day. 4 weeks on soft sand! Hopefully times have improved in the last 48 years.
ReplyDeletehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chu_Lai_Air_Base
Video of construction and operation
http://vimeo.com/10196438
i'm gonna look at that vid and may be post it. great info as always. appreciate it.
Deletealso Sol, we have LAAD for airfield security, dont they call themselves the "grunts of the wing" or some nonsense like that.
DeleteOr just secure suitable roads and fly Gripens off of them ;)
ReplyDeleteAccording to SAAB itself, to use a SAAB Gripen you'd need at least 2000-feet runways for take off and landing.
DeleteStraight roads to match that without close-in trees, telegraph-poles etc. may be hard to find and ready to target.
However, the LHD flight-deck is just under 800-feet, acceptable for F-35B and AV-8.
This is definitely a capability we need to have in the mix along with seizing airfield mission that the 82nd Airborne and 75th Rangers regularly train to perform. I completely agree that the Super Hornets should be staged as close to the fight as possible. And being able to put an airfield on an otherwise unimproved island in the middle of nowhere is key to winning in an "air/sea battle." Although I would like to see the Army allowed fixed wing ground attack craft of our own since the Air Force doesn't seem to want that role any more.
ReplyDeleteWait, so an expeditionary airfield has it's out built in arresting gear?
ReplyDeleteVery cool.
Look up M-31 arresting gear. Trailer mounted and staked in. Awesome. The old M-21 gear had to be installed in concrete.
DeleteHere' an interview on the EAF installed in Afghanistan, gives plenty of background info and pics. I know the CWO they interviewed, he is THE authority on the subject.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.sldinfo.com/the-expeditionary-airfield-capability-a-core-usmc-competence-for-global-operations-2/
This is the 2nd MAW order on EAF capabilities. To save you from finding it, notional length for fast movers is 4800', and 3840 for VSTOL.
http://www.2ndmaw.marines.mil/Portals/7/WingAdjutant/Orders/WgO%2013800.2H.pdf
LHD flight-deck length is just under 800-feet. Apparently quite suitable for AV-8 and F-35B.
ReplyDeleteAnd to just refuel to get back to LHD to rearm/re-pilot, all of the much shorter LSD/LPD flight-decks are plumbed to refuel.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDelete