It’s all about money. Squadrons, air wings, BGs are now SGs…. All justified in the message that we still have more capability. Simple question, how can four Burke class DDGs have more missiles in their magazines than two Aegis class cruisers, and four Burke’s and a couple of FFGs? Or how can 48 F/A-18s do more than 24 F-14s, 12 A-6s, 24 F/A-18Cs and 4- 5 EA-s6s. Answer is they can’t.

Here’s the problem they, our Navy leaders, don’t like to talk about. The fallacy of building fewer multi-mission ships, when you lose one for whatever reason, you lose ALL their capability. Hence, you become risk averse because the SG can ill afford to lose one of the ships. That affects strategy and tactics.

Marc Liebman

https://www.facebook.com/marcliebmanauthor/

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC_sDoFQM5wupNaCeGIvKL1g

From: Terry McKearney <terry.mckearney@therangergroup.com>
Date: Friday, July 24, 2026 at 11:04 AM
To: Brian Miller <brianjmiller1977@gmail.com>, Mike Brattland <mgbrattland@gerlecreek.com>
Cc: HeloBubbas <helobubbas@helobubbas.com>
Subject: [Helobubbas] Re: Why Carrier Air Wings Need a Sixth HSC Helicopter

A SWO’s-eye view: sure; you can never have enough helos so add a sixth.

The personnel impact discussion was lost on me, of course, although I get the gist: more opportunities to qualify for career milestones. It’s not unreasonable to look at such issues in the discussion; every community does it. The surface guys are enthused about the LSM because it will (supposedly) add LCDR commands. (Not a good enough reason for supporting that turkey of a ship.)

I was a bit surprised that the plane guard helo can wander off up to 40 miles and do logistics things while on duty. Not what I remember from my days of chasing the “bird farm.”

WARNING - EXTERNAL EMAIL
This Email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

From: Brian Miller <brianjmiller1977@gmail.com>
Date: Friday, July 24, 2026 at 06:21
To: "Michael G. Brattland" <mgbrattland@gerlecreek.com>
Cc: HeloBubbas <helobubbas@helobubbas.com>
Subject: [Helobubbas] Re: Why Carrier Air Wings Need a Sixth HSC Helicopter

In my opinion, the HSC world made a terrible strategic business decision when it put all its eggs in the CSAR basket. Despite being a disgruntled LAMPS guy, the community went forward with an excellent understanding of how to sell the capabilities of the Romeo to the air wing while HSC clung to VERTREP and CSAR. One of those missions was soon outsourced to Evergreen; the other was locked up by the AF, Army, and Marines. At no time during my deployments and later CENTCOM planning conferences was a Navy CSAR package ever even mentioned.

At the time a lot of big choices had to get made, HSC seemed content with plane guard and they structured themselves accordingly. The community has found a way to make itself a valid point defense asset, but HSM does the same job from the same flight deck.

On Fri, Jul 24, 2026 at 12:25 AM Michael G. Brattland <mgbrattland@gerlecreek.com> wrote:

https://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/2026/july/why-carrier-air-wings-need-sixth-hsc-helicopter

MGBrattland Sent via the Samsung Galaxy S23 5G, an AT&T 5G smartphone

_______________________________________________
Helobubbas mailing list -- helobubbas@helobubbas.com
To unsubscribe send an email to helobubbas-leave@helobubbas.com

_______________________________________________ Helobubbas mailing list -- helobubbas@helobubbas.com To unsubscribe send an email to helobubbas-leave@helobubbas.com