I can't remember anything else being used. The only camo that was prior to that was that which was of the WW2 design, to the best of my knowledge.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Yeah, the Marines have always gotten the shaft when it comes to funding and equipment. As a USAF guy myself, I'm well aware of the historical problems associated with the services that are considered "spin offs" of another service. Had the USAF stayed the US Army Air Corps, I'm sure we would be having the same issues with funding and equipment. The real difference is that if the Marines managed to break away from the Navy, there was a strong contingent out there that would claim they didn't do anything that couldn't be done by the Army (which is wrong).
I get the pride thing. There is an element of pride in knowing that if you look at a randomly selected group of military members, you can pick out the Marines because of their uniforms and know who to talk to when you need to get it done. The same applies to the USAF uniform, except I despise the ABU. It's clearly a garrison uniform for office work and maybe maintenance, and not a combat uniform- which is why it was abandoned in theater in favor of the Multicam uniforms.
IMO, there is a lot of gross inefficiency in the various acquisition programs. I've got friends working the UAV/RPA programs. Not a day goes by where he's not tearing his hair out because of the refusal to work together. The Air Force, Army, Marines, and Navy all want predator UAVs for themselves. But they all want to use them differently, and then one wants to use a different engine, while another wants to develop a new engine that beats the other three, but nobody wants to share or use what the guy has because it wouldn't be "home grown" anymore. Another example is the whole F-35 program. At some point, there needs to be some authority over how equipment gets developed and deployed that reduces all the BS that's going on. The whole uniform issue is just another part of that problem.
It's a fair point, and one that's been made before by several people. The issue really just comes down to employment of those assets. The Army, Marines, Navy, and Air Force (well...mainly the Air Force) all think very differently on how to best utilize air power. The whole reason that the Army Air Corps was split away into its own service was that the ground-oriented Army generals just did not comprehend what the strategic use of air power could offer them. I had this very discussion a few weeks ago with a bunch of Army captains who just didn't think of air power beyond CAS, medivac, and ISR. If the guy in charge of the whole "US Armed Forces" thinks that way, then it is very likely that funding for programs like strategic assets, satellites, and long range bombing would be lost.
Likewise, the Army and Marine corps methodology and doctrine are very different. This creates variability, and even competition, in how ground power is employed. This is a good thing.
Anyway, IMO, the current structure is fine. The services are responsible for their own training and equipping, and then the assets are assigned to a unified combatant command in the AOR. Basically, we fight just like you described. What I want to see on the acquisition side of things are more unified "centers of excellence" that are responsible for developing and supplying equipment that works across the services, rather than each service trying to develop its own version of the same widget.
they are losing nukes
Which was the sole reason for making them a separate entity. The third leg of the MAD strategy.
Not really. Under SAC the Airforce had the Silos and the Bombers. Navy Had the Subs.
I don't care who is on station, as long as they have some JDAMs and want to get down. I wouldn't be here if it wasn't for a pilot that I'll never get to thank. If you have ever used them, you know what I'm talking about.
Everybody loves to hate on the ascot-wearing types....until they are in contact and want air support.
A high school friend of mine is an infantry officer in the 10th Mountain; he told me that during his year un A'Stan "I preferred fighting with my radio instead of my M4" and about how a Hog, Mud Hen, Viper or even Reaper saved his platoon's ass on more than one occasion.
Besides...if you ask most any Air Force pilot (transport, tanker, bomber or even air supremacy types)
they'll tell you their job is to support the folks on the ground.
As for the A10, I met a former Marine F18 pilot that was guard bummin' in A-10s and his words to me were "The Chair Force is too fuckin' good for this plane, it belongs with the Corps." And frankly, I'm surprised AF generals would't be happy to see them go if it got them got a couple more JSFs...
The Air Force was formed in 1947, long before the Titan I went in the "tubes" in 1959. Until then it was pretty much "Bomber's Only" in the SIOP for the Air Force. In reality, the "Third Leg" of MAD wasn't in place until 1959-1960.
Gotcha. I read your post to mean that each branch had a nuclear deterent as a leg of the MAD Triad.
I'm sure you have some great stories about those days ...
You mean about the days of standing by with a Wrecker, Ambulance, Mechanics, and armed guards while a certain "convoy" traveled through your area of Germany?
Or did you want to hear about the M-388 "Davy Crocket" itself? The nuke that could only reach out 2 klicks and maybe even eliminate it's own firing crew. I rotated stateside on year before the last units equipped with it were deactivated.