It's the Zoomies versus the Squids, the United States Air Force versus the US Navy, two of
the most powerful- if not the most powerful forces on earth, in a head-to-head matchup
to determine just which branch is the best at their primary purpose: killing bad guys
and breaking their stuff.
For the sake of this thought exercise, we're going to ignore the normal realities of warfare
and focus solely on firepower and assets.
After all, in a realistic war scenario the US Navy could do something the US Air Force
could never do: blockade ports and stop the shipments of supplies.
So we're going to be pitting man and machine in a straight up deathmatch, and find out
which of the two services comes out on top.
Despite their close partnership with the US Navy, for this fight the Marines are out-
sorry sailors, but you're fighting this one on your own.
Likewise, US Army forces which typically help provide ground security for Air Force assets
are also out, leaving the Zoomies to fend for themselves.
Most of this war will naturally happen in the air, though without the support of their
sister services, the US Air Force does have one advantage that the Navy doesn't- the ability
to deploy a moderate ground force against Navy targets.
The Navy after all isn't just about ships, there's a long link of resupply, repair and
resupply centers that are vital for keeping America's fleets out at sea.
US Air Force Security Forces personnel are traditionally speaking, military police no
different than their counterparts in the other branches.
However, during the Vietnam War, the Air Force realized that it couldn't always rely on the
other services for protection of its air fields in hostile territory, and quickly established
a training program to convert their military police personnel into a small, but competent
infantry force.
Today, Security Forces personnel are all trained in air base defense, and receive qualification
training with heavy squad weapons such as the .50 caliber machine gun and the Mark-19
automatic grenade launcher.
Some of these personnel are even qualified for air assault operations.
Numbers are hard to pin down, but there's an estimated 25,000 US Air Force Security
Forces personnel currently on active duty, giving the Air Force a sizable ground assault
element that the Navy can't match.
While US Navy Masters-at-Arms are trained in protecting ships and shore installations,
their focus and training isn't as exhaustive in ground combat roles as Air Force Security
Forces personnel.
With the focus shifting from protecting air fields from unsophisticated terror and insurgent
threats, to a potential showdown against regular Chinese or Russian infantry units, US Air
Force Security Forces personnel have recently begun a program to seriously upgrade their
standards, training, and equipment to meet these near-peer competitor threats.
The stated goal of the US Air Force is to produce a force comparable to US Army light
infantry, powerful enough to repel a coordinated attack from near-peer competitors.
This means new tools such as anti-tank and anti-air man portable weapon systems and fire
support platforms such as mortars, as well as a stronger emphasis on assault and defense
operations.
On the ground, it's clear that the Air Force has a serious advantage, being able to deploy
a sizable force to seize vital US Navy ground installations and repel any assaults against
its facilities, but the primary combatants in this showdown are going to be aircraft
and ships, so how do they measure up and what can they add to this fight?
The first step in this battle between the services will be in establishing air superiority,
as the primary armament of both services are going to be its aircraft.
In the Navy's corner we have the F/A-18 Superhornet, an aircraft developed to counter advances
in Soviet fighter design.
Turns out, the Navy completely overcompensated and created one of the most formidable fighter
aircraft ever built.
Responding to the Navy's Superhornet threat is going to be the F-15 Strike Eagle, another
development created in response to the advancements made in Soviet fighter design.
Both aircraft come from the same manufacturer, meaning they share many of the same strengths,
making this a difficult matchup to determine.
The F-15 is an air superiority fighter, but it is primarily geared for a ground-attack
role.
The Hornet is instead a jack-of-all-trades, doing everything from air superiority to suppression
of enemy air defenses, recon, and even aerial refueling.
That versatility gives the Navy greater flexibility, and makes sense for a service which has limited
space on its aircraft carriers- the better buy for your money is the aircraft that can
do multiple things well, rather than a single specialized task.
But, in this fight, which is better?
The F-15 is powered by dual Pratt & Whitney F100 turbofan engines producing twenty nine
thousand pounds of thrust at full afterburner, versus the Hornet's General Electric F414
engines putting out twenty two thousand pounds of thrust at full afterburner.
This gives the F15 a whopping speed advantage of 700 miles an hour, with the F15 clocking
in at 1,875 mph (3018 kph), versus the F18 at 1,190 mph (1915 kph).
F-15s are going to get to the fight first, every time, and if they get in trouble, they'll
easily outrun any pursuing F18s, leaving them in the dust.
By comparison, F18s trying to flee from the Air Force’s Strike Eagles, are going to
wind up getting splashed.
The Eagle also has a greater fuel and weapons capacity than the Hornet, with the F15 carrying
up to 23,000 pounds of fuel and weapons versus the F18's 17,759.
More fuel and more missiles means the Air Force's fighter can stay in the fight longer,
and shoot more- and gives the F15 nearly double the range of the Navy's F18.
However, the Navy's f18 can carry the AGM-88 High-speed Anti-radiation missile, giving
it a robust capability in destroying enemy ground and even airborne radar, while the
F-15 cannot.
Conversely, the F-15 can carry the GBU-28 bunker buster bomb, while the F-18 can't.
The F-18 is slightly more agile than the F-15 however, which would give it the advantage
in close-quarters dogfighting, although as many enemy combatants around the world have
found out, the F-15 is an absolutely terrifying dogfighter itself.
Targeting and tracking systems on both aircraft are nearly identical, given that both aircraft
operate for the same country.
When it comes to long range detection, the APG-82 radar has greater capabilities than
the APG-79 radar used by the Hornet, though just how much greater capabilities is a mystery
as the data is a closely guarded secret.
What's clear is that Air Force Strike Eagles will get to the fight first, see their targets
first, and fire first, putting the Navy's Superhornet at a disadvantage.
However, the F-18 is equipped with infrared search and tracking capabilities, giving it
a chance to take on stealth aircraft at close range.
With 769 Hornets versus the Air Force's 454 Eagles, the numbers advantage may seem to
be in favor of the Navy- except the 769 Hornets the Navy possesses represents the entirety
of its air-attack and air superiority forces.
By comparison, the US Air Force can call on an additional 1,017 F-16 Fighting Falcons,
and 229 operational F-35 Lightnings.
The Navy's own F-35s only number at 21, and are currently still only used for training.
However, the absolute silver-bullet in the sky for the Air Force, is its fleet of F-22
Raptors, numbering at 186.
While low in number, the Raptor is without comparison the world's most advanced air superiority
fighter, featuring a radar cross section the size of a marble.
Its armament may be limited as it's forced to carry its weapons internally, but its powerful
radar allows it to detect enemy aircraft and engage them at beyond visual range.
While the Air Force initially wanted a fleet of almost a thousand of these incredible aircraft,
the extreme pricetag upwards of $220 million dollars per aircraft, as well as a lack of
a realistic threat to face off against by any other nation, shelved the original production
run and limited it to the number the Air Force currently operates.
Simply put, in an air battle the US Navy is going to come out losing badly.
Not only is it completely dwarfed by the numbers of Air Force air superiority fighters, the
Air Force's F-22 presents a threat that an F-18 pilot is unlikely to survive.
Luckily, the number of these airborne assassins is relatively low.
However, the Navy can call upon support from its large fleet of warships, who thanks to
modern battle networks, can add their firepower to an air battle.
While its fleet of dozens of attack submarines may seem like an odd fish out on this fight,
many of these are capable of taking on land-attack roles thanks to the addition of cruise missiles
to their magazines.
With a range of 1,550 miles (2,500 km), Navy subs could deliver crippling blows to US Air
Force installations- with little if any warning.
Likewise, its fleet of 91 destroyers and 19 corvettes could all strike at Air Force airfields.
A vast inventory of anti-air missiles such as the RIM-174 and the RIM-162 Evolved Sea
Sparrow can project serious anti-aircraft firepower into a fight, leaving US Air Force
planes at risk in any air battle within range of US Navy ships.
The US Air Force is not the primary service for neutralizing an enemy fleet, that task
falls on the US Navy, but it is still very well equipped to deal with hostile vessels.
The AGM-158 JASSM (jassam) and the AGM-86 are both extremely long range stand-off attack
air-launched cruise missiles, packing a thousand pound warhead capable of sinking enemy ships.
The AGM-158C is the latest iteration of these anti-ship missiles, and features greatly improved
technology allowing it to locate, track, and target hostile vessels independently while
ignoring civilian shipping.
These missiles are all low-observable, making them difficult to spot on radar, and are programmed
to fly extremely close to the ocean's surface, which makes them even more difficult to spot
and target by a ship's anti-missile defense systems.
However, none of these weapons are supersonic, as the US is currently coming far behind Russia
and China in developing supersonic weapons.
This means the individual success rate of each missile is dramatically lowered when
pitted up against the Navy's sophisticated anti-missile defense systems, though the AGM-158C
is capable of coordinating with other missiles to conduct swarm attacks, approaching a target
from multiple directions in overwhelming numbers.
Increasingly, this fight is turning bad for the US Navy.
With an air superiority fleet that's less than half the size of the US Air Force, and
with aircraft outmatched technologically by the Air Force, the Navy will never be able
to establish air superiority.
Even more importantly though, the Navy's Hornets will never be able to establish air superiority
at the stand-off attack distances required to stop Air Force bomber aircraft from launching
anti-ship attacks.
While Navy fleet defenses are likely capable of chewing up most of the Air Force's surface-attack
aircraft, the Air Force's ability to attack with long-range precision weapons means their
vulnerable bomber aircraft can target and fire from well outside of the air-defense
envelope of the Navy.
One way the Navy plans on protecting its surface fleets from this threat against a near-peer
competitor such as China or Russia, is to simply establish Combat Air Patrols at greatly
extended ranges, using F-18s in tanker mode, or new tanker drones, to refuel F-18s assigned
to long-range air patrols.
However, no other nation can bring to bear against the US Navy the sheer numbers and
capabilities of the US Air Force, and in a real-world situation, the Navy would always
rely on Air Force help to protect its ships.
Airpower will determine this battle, and the Navy loses in that arena.
While Navy ships would be able to launch attacks against Air Force airfields and ground installations,
they won't last long against coordinated Air Force attacks by fleets of B1 Lancers and
B52s equipped with stand-off long range munitions and protected by fleets of F-16s, F-15s, F-35s,
and F-22s.
Air Force planes would always be able to redeploy to civilian or even improvised air fields,
but Navy fighters will find that their only safe landing site- their aircraft carriers-
will very quickly end up at the bottom of the sea.
With complete and total air superiority, the US Air Force is without a doubt the victor
of this conflict, though in reality, this conclusion is no surprise.
Air power has been the single most important weapon in modern war since World War II, leaving
any foe without suitable air power at the absolute mercy of even an inferior army that
is supported by a competent air force.
However, it's also a matter of different mission sets that sees the Air Force declared a winner.
The US Navy is indeed tasked with air superiority, but its vessels are also designed for a wide
range of different responsibilities from surface warfare to subsurface warfare, and the escort
and deployment of ground combat troops to beaches around the world.
The Air Force however has a far more limited scope of missions- air superiority, recon,
and ground-attack- and its equipment is thus far more capable in these arenas than the
Navy's.
In truth, neither service could win a war without the other, and the two are equal and
vital partners in ensuring the United States military remains the most powerful on earth.
Buuuutttt, squids would totally get their butt kicked by zoomies any day of the week.
Now for how the Navy would fare against a competitor like China go watch “US Navy
must do this to defeat China in a war.”
Or if you're ready for a change of pace, click this other video instead!