This author argues for adoption by the Navy of a Japanese seaplane for search and rescue. But it is much better than that, as the article explores.
Seaplanes would extend the range of many operations at sea:
The author argues the United States should purchase some of Japan's US-2 seaplanes for diplomacy, experience, and comparisons with our design thinking:
Practically, the United States military should take three actions in the near term. First, it should explore the cost of purchasing a relevant number of aircraft from Japan and compare that cost to ongoing development efforts. Second, it should determine — through various methods — the relative efficacy of purchasing aircraft like the US-2 compared to other proposed solutions. Third, the United States should conduct limited exchange programs with the Japan Maritime Self-Defense Force to acquire operational experience in amphibian operations prior to U.S. capabilities coming online. Even if the United States ultimately determines purchasing the US-2 does not make sense for whatever reason, it will still benefit from a better understanding of allied capabilities and amphibious aircraft capabilities writ large.
The Japanese plane has caught the eye of American Special Forces.
The Marines are to deploy around INDOPACOM and establish anti-ship outposts in a shifting kill web. Would flying boats be the better way to deploy, resupply, and redeploy these small units? ...
I still think the destroyer-transport model is good for ship-based deployments.
But maybe the helicopter deployment isn't as good as I first thought because of range and capacity issues. Would amphibious planes be a better way to move small NMESIS teams or any other platoon-based EABs?
My thoughts in Proceedings about the destroyer-transport model.
So yeah, I'm on board exploring this idea in cooperation with our Japanese ally. Who might find a similar use for transport versions of them.
