(08-02-2020, 11:30 AM)flsprtsgod Wrote:

(08-02-2020, 10:59 AM)mikesez Wrote: I guess we disagree about that.  Why those three hubs? Aren't France, Israel and the UK capable of watching over the Mediterranean? Isn't Japan capable of watching over their area? Isn't the Arabian sea / Persian gulf really narrow? Isn't it easy to cover the whole of it from airstrips in Qatar? 
And why didn't Malacca straits make the list?

If you want to know go ask the Future Navy Force task force, I simply answered your question. The US 6th Fleet is headquartered in Naples and covers the Med and Atlantic. The 5th Fleet is in Bahrain and covers the Persian Gulf to the Indian Ocean. The 7th Fleet is in Japan and covers the Western Pacific. The rest of our carriers are US-based out of San Diego and Virginia. Of course, if you spent your Google time looking at the location and disposition of the US Fleets you might answer your own questions as to why those locations are significant.

Like others here, you are confusing what is with what should be.
What do you think should be?
wouldn't you agree that the top brass in the Navy is biased towards having more stuff, rather than less? Wouldn't you agree that the lobbyists they listen to want to build more ships, not less ships?

---

(08-02-2020, 11:33 AM)homebiscuit Wrote:

(08-02-2020, 11:20 AM)Lucky2Last Wrote: ...and we've moved on to reducing the amount of C5's. Pretty sure the Air Force is trying to expand that number. Those planes are instrumental in troop and equipment transport. 

I was on a C5 that cracked mid flight. I've been afraid to fly ever since. I mean, I still fly... it just comes with anxiety.

C-5s are being phased out and have been for a while. The AF calls them FREDs: Fu, er, Freaking Ridiculous Economic Disasters. While they can hold a lot, they also break a lot. C-17s are taking their place, which are wonderful aircraft that fly with a joystick.

Good. That all sounds sensible. notice I'm not the one who brought up the C5 in this thread...

---