Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

Irish_Dem

(81,922 posts)

28. I know, it boggles the mind. Means no landing strips where they are going.

Reply to pecosbob (Reply #15)

Mon Dec 20, 2021, 02:57 PM

Dec 2021

My Dad flew C-130s among other planes during the VN war.
These are big mother airplanes.

This means the AF wants to move huge amounts of personnel and equipment, but land in the water. That means where they are going, no landing strips.

I think it is a threat to the Chinese. We can take over your bases in the South China Sea.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

39 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Air Force Wants to Move Fast on Boat Plane for Special Operators [View all] Sherman A1 Dec 2021 OP

Doesn't the navy probably already have this kind of plane? Irish_Dem Dec 2021 #1

Not of which I'm aware Sherman A1 Dec 2021 #2

So the AF is building new planes the Navy retired a long time ago? Irish_Dem Dec 2021 #3

Situations have changed (apparently), according to the link: Auggie Dec 2021 #4

I'm surprised this info is not classified. Irish_Dem Dec 2021 #9

Better in some instances than helicopters, I guess ... Auggie Dec 2021 #31

Much much better than helicopters for the missions they are describing. Irish_Dem Dec 2021 #32

A warning -- excellent thought! Auggie Dec 2021 #34

Special ops stuff should be classified. So why the public announcement. Irish_Dem Dec 2021 #37

Different missions hack89 Dec 2021 #21

The Navy doesn't use seaplanes for special ops? Irish_Dem Dec 2021 #33

The US military has no seaplanes at all hack89 Dec 2021 #35

Jebus. Had no idea. Irish_Dem Dec 2021 #38

The AF is doing the right thing then. Irish_Dem Dec 2021 #39

This message was self-deleted by its author Chin music Dec 2021 #5

Aren't amphibious operations the job of the Navy and it's Marine Corps? Eugene Dec 2021 #6

Right that is the shocker. Irish_Dem Dec 2021 #10

This is for spec ops - the AF operates all spec op fixed winged planes hack89 Dec 2021 #23

Ummm, the Navy had Seaplanes up through the 60's. And Hydrofoils even now. haele Dec 2021 #7

The C-130 is one hell of a big plane. Don't see how it can land on water? Irish_Dem Dec 2021 #11

Sounds like they got sold the idea of a disposable pontoon platform attachment. haele Dec 2021 #13

You are blowing my mind. Irish_Dem Dec 2021 #14

20 years in the Navy, 20 years supporting. haele Dec 2021 #16

Yes this is special ops. Irish_Dem Dec 2021 #24

It would be a perfect special operations plane for use in the South China sea hack89 Dec 2021 #18

Yes it is going to be a very flexible and multi purpose aircraft. Irish_Dem Dec 2021 #25

There were large four engine seaplanes in widespread use in WWII hack89 Dec 2021 #17

Wow never saw this before. Cool. Irish_Dem Dec 2021 #26

What about helicopters DarwinsRetriever Dec 2021 #8

For the jobs this is going to do, helicopters won't work at all. Irish_Dem Dec 2021 #12

The distances involved in the South China sea are large hack89 Dec 2021 #19

I say go big or go home! Hassin Bin Sober Dec 2021 #27

I would pay money to see that. nt hack89 Dec 2021 #30

Can you do air refueling with helicopters? Irish_Dem Dec 2021 #36

Not enough range Abnredleg Dec 2021 #20

RYFKM...a C-130 retrofitted as a seaplane? pecosbob Dec 2021 #15

I know, it boggles the mind. Means no landing strips where they are going. Irish_Dem Dec 2021 #28

how can we afford this when we are too broke to even offer a child tax credit? Takket Dec 2021 #22

Money is no object when it comes to military boondoggles. Irish_Dem Dec 2021 #29