blueangel

I was wondering what the difference between the United States Air Force and the United States Navy is when it comes to flying. Thanks.

FHHuber

The Air Force pilots always tries to put thier planes down on the ground. Nice long runways that don't move.

The Navy pilots have to learn to put thier planes down on a rocking, rolling, moving SHORT runway. A carrier landing is one of the highest precision maneuvers you can atempt with a supersonic fighter.

If given a choice... I'd fly with the Navy pilot EVERY time.

dr_wogz

My Feedback: (3)

Don't forget navigating, and 'thinking fast' when 'ditch time' arises! navy pilots win every time!

Anywhere on the ocean looks the same as where you are, and supposed to be. Land is easier, and you have land marks! Ditchin in the sea is a little more.. troubling, as it's hard to walk anywhere or find shelter.

Raptor3DPilot

My Feedback: (3)

My vote goes out to the USAF! The F-15 Strike Eagle dominates the skies and with the F-22 on it's way.........air superiority will belong to the USAF. True.....it does take alot of skills to land on a moving object (not to mention a whole lot of guts)....but when it comes time to drop that 2000lb bomb directly on it's target.....it doesn't matter how you can land.......just skills and the right aircraft to do it!

FHHuber

When the USAF and the US Navy both have the same plane. (the "JSF") You'll see for sure... the Navy pilots win. They didn't name the school "Top Gun" because of an ego trip.

In an air-air fight between the F-14 and the F-15... bet on the F-14. Then there's the F-18 which beats the F-14 hands down for dogfighting.

Tattooold

Every year we either have the Thunderbirds or the Blue Angels at the annual Base air show. Navy wins going away. Picture taken from my old apartment

blueangel

I am for the Navy all the way. Landing is the most important part of flying. It is also the hardest. Landing on something 500 feet long and moving is not easy at all. The Navy also has the F-14 air dominance fighter. Your life depends on how you land and dropping bombs is mostly computerized nowadays.

starfox

I would pick the Air Force any time. The navy has to land and a moving runway and if they have to ditch it would be most likely be in the ocean with the sharks and the Air Force has a longer runway.

FHHuber

That catapault launch is no milk run either... 0 to 140 mph in 120 ft. and they shoot them off at up to a rate of one plane every 90 sec on a single catapault. (from empty sky to hornets nest in under 3 min when 4 "cats" are running at once.)

jack01

My Feedback: (3)

It takes both. The Air Force has the long range bombers and cargo aircraft that are needed to support a war. They must also have the fighter capability to protect those larger aircraft. At the same time, you need naval support for the mobility. In some situations, the ocean is the only place to take off and land, so you need a carrier. I agree that the landing on a carrier requires much more skill and prescision than a landing on a conventional runway. I'm friends with a retired Thunderbird pilot. He flew the number 5 F-4. I would fly with him any time, any where. I also have had the opportunity to meet a few Navy pilots, and I would also fly with them any time, any where.

Al Stein

As far as differences between Air Force and Navy flying -- I supported both and the things I could see easily from the outside is that the Navy guy were spending a lot more time under wartime rules of flight (i.e. less safety margin in their operations), spending longer times away from home, and sustaining more casualties during peacetime.

As far as planes go, I'm Air Force so I'd like to say we have the best, but best depends on what you're planning to use it for -- and the Air Force flyer does not have the sae mission as the Navy flyer. The most visible thing is always air superiority so it's the easiest thing to hang a value on, but the Air Force has no dedicated air superiority aircraft. The Eagle was a kicki-but airplane that got a lot of mileage out of applying what was formerly just theory, but in its current form it's a multi-mission platform, still heck-aciously impressive in the air superiority role, but not the top dog. Think about a single weapons platform capable of simulataneously identifying, tracking, prioritizing, and neutralizing multiple targets while hundreds of miles away and still able to do one-on-one combat manuevering -- that's superiority and you have to go with the Navy's systems for that.

blueangel

That is exactly the Navy has, a single weapons platform capable of simulataneously identifying, tracking, prioritizing, and neutralizing multiple targets while hundreds of miles away and still able to do one-on-one combat manuevering. The F-14 Tomcat. Too bad they stopped production. That was a great plane and still is.