bLetters to the Editor

We welcome your opinion on public issues, in either of two ways. You can submit a letter to the editor for possible publication in the printed edition. Include your name, address and daytime phone number. Writers are limited to one published letter every month, with preference given to shorter letters. Submissions may be edited or condensed. The other way is to comment on the published letters in this blog, bLetters to the Editor. In this online forum, you can comment as much as you want by using the comment box at the end of each entry.

Online: Use this form

By e-mail: letters@pilotonline.com

By mail: Letters to the editor - P.O. Box 449 - Norfolk, VA 23501-0449

By fax: (757) 446-2051

Category: Readers' Opinions

Obsolete OLF

Jun 08

7:33 AM

'Navy OLF: The regional view' letter, June 1:The four local mayors who authored the article demonstrated a shortsighted view of the Navy. The military has a long history of equipping itself to fight the last war and missing the opportunity to rearm and develop new ways of winning. Carrier aviation is on a downslide. Fifteen years ago, there were six different aircraft types with various missions; today, there are three; tomorrow only two. Carriers and air wings have become too expensive and too narrow in mission (strike warfare only) to be of real use in the emerging world-security environment. The future calls for an end to carrier aviation and a rise in unmanned capability from smaller blue-water capable vessels. Weapons systems have a life cycle just like humans do. By the time the Navy works out a deal to build an outlying landing field, the need for pilot training will have diminished, if not been eliminated. The answer is not to ask citizens to continue to support the Navy because it provides economic benefits. Local leaders should be asking hard questions and ensuring that the locals can live with and support future changes in Navy weapons systems.

Walter Hudson

Virginia Beach

View 5 comment(s) Link to post

Well johnbo

Submitted by Ira Tateu on Fri, 06/13/2008 at 10:51 am.

"The fields needed for the OLF are very necessary and the NIMBY people better hope our carrier pilots will continue to protect their right to protest.alive."

You right. Keep up your fight to keep those jets in Va. In fact, you should be protesting the developement around Fentress right now. Go get 'em boy.

More OLF

Submitted by alfarkas on Thu, 06/12/2008 at 10:50 pm.

Walter came up with a whole new angle on the OLF arguement. It all comes down to noise, the F/A -18s make too much noise and they take more airspace to make it.
It's practice. That's all. Call it whatever. It's practice. Figure out a way to practice not over the largest city in the state, and none of this would even be a thought.
I've lived in Virginia Beach since 1986. When Oceana had F-4s, A-6s, and F-14s the jets did not fly west of Lynnhaven Mall. Now the F/A -18s continuously fly over Bow Creek golf course and as far west as Rosemont Road, sometimes up to 14 hours a day. (Today they ended early, 9:35pm)
It's practice. There has to be a better way. BRAC said it best: "...the future of naval aviation is not NAS Oceana..."
It's practice.
No one will ever accept the OLF due to THE NOISE. Who in their right mind would gladly accept this encroachment for up to 14 hours a day like we now endure since the arrivals of the F/A-18s?

Obsolete?

Submitted by Carolyn R on Thu, 06/12/2008 at 9:27 pm.

I believe weapons and methods will change and improve as time goes on. Until that happens, the carriers, the jets, and the OLFs are needed and we need to maintain them to the highest degree.

Armchair expert

Submitted by warrenb73163 on Thu, 06/12/2008 at 8:23 am.

The writer is wasting his time and talent in Virginia Beach. He may belong at the highest levels of the Pentagon and congress, or the president’s advisory team where he can best advise the experts.

To say that the carrier is obsolete may be like saying that the rifleman is obsolete. We should not expect all future wars to be in the form now taking place in Iraq, Afghanistan. We have enemies with modern militaries such as China, N. Korea, Russia. It may be that the carrier is a mighty weapon keeping them from becoming too emboldened.

One of the few expenses called for by the Constitution is national defense. Weakening our national defense to spend more on social programs is not a good idea. Social issues can be satisfied by the individual; a common defense cannot be achieved individually.

Today, we are great because we are mighty. Let’s stay that way. Let’s stick with the Constitution. It has worked for more than 230 years.

Walter

Submitted by johnbo on Thu, 06/12/2008 at 7:58 am.

Where have you come up with this mess at, if you look back into history is is not the military who fails it is the civilian oversite which continuely cuts the military to bare essentuals after any prolonged conflict.After WW I we cut back on the military because it wasn't supposed to be needed and what happened oh yes it was WW II and we were woahfully under prepared. Again after WW II we die the same thing and again after korea and vietnam. During the Carter yrs the Navy didn't even have enough money to get the ships away from the pier to train the sailors or pilots and we fell behind again. Only after President Reagan built the military back up to where it was needed did the threats deminish. No the time has not passed from Carrier aviation it is still needed to project our national interest when called on by the President, this can't be accomplished by any other branch of the military. The fields needed for the OLF are very necessary and the NIMBY people better hope our carrier pilots will continue to protect their right to protest.alive.