Tinian and Peleliu Airfields Reactivated

biku324

biku324

Gold Supporter
Joined
Jan 27, 2011
Messages
7,067
Reaction score
16,027
Location
NM - Land of Enchantment
Last edited:
Register to hide this ad
This follows the expansion of facilities on Guam along with getting new sites in the Philippines. And U.S. forces have had joint training with Australian forces. Japan is also involved in this buildup.

Putting it simply, the U.S. is committed to putting some hurt on China if the time comes.
 
Last edited:
My Seabee dad served on Saipan and Tinian. 92nd NCB. He helped build the atomic bomb pits amongst his many tasks. Glad to see the airfield put back to use for the smaller aircraft. While some talk about flying B-52s from Tinian, the 8500-foot runways would be a severe limitation, and room for extension is near non-existent.
 
Last edited:
Problem is, Peleliu isn't out of range of China these days.

A buddy of mine long ago was a B52 crew chief. They flew the 'Nam missions from somewhere much further away. Don't recall where, but lots & lots of blue water around. Besides length of runway, The Buffs need a lot thicker runway than a B29.
 
My father, then a USMC 2nd Lt and Japanese language interpreter, fought on Peleliu, now one of the islands of Palau, the world's fourth smallest nation and a tourist spot renowned for its diving.

I visited Palau in 1988, traveling from Tokyo via Guam with my then GF, now wife. She's Japanese. We stayed in a nice resort, enjoying a leisurely week of sun, sea and cocktails. Beautiful place with the clearest ocean water I've ever seen.

When I told my father where I'd been he was astounded that I had visited the place as a tourist. He said what he remembered was a godforsaken hellscape, so barren and ripped up with exposed coral that his boots were destroyed in a week.

My father later wrote in his memoirs that over a quarter of a century after the battle, in the early 1970s, after he had retired, he knew a guy whose uncle was the famous Chesty Puller, then a colonel and commander of the 1st Marine Regiment on Peleliu. The guy mentioned to his uncle that my dad had been with him on the island. "Ah," said Puller. "Peleliu. A rough one."
 
Last edited:
It might take some engineering....

SMSgt said:
My Seabee dad served on Saipan and Tinian. 92nd NCB. He helped build the atomic bomb pits amongst his many tasks. Glad to see the airfield put back to use for the smaller aircraft. While some talk about flying B-52s from Tinian, the 8500-foot runways would be a severe limitation, and room for extension is near non-existent.
Click to expand...

...but I'm sure they could extend the existing or build new runways if necessary. They are bound to need some upgrading anyway.

And a note. The Pacific and the Middle East are looking pretty volatile.
 
Last edited:
This kind of thing could be really beneficial. Way back when I attended a NATO school that taught some classes about the theory of deterrence. They taught there were two basic types. The first one, the more familiar one, is called deterrence by retribution. To wit: "If you do this, we will do this to you, and it will really hurt you. The price you pay will be much too great for what you might gain." The nuclear deterrence of MAD is a good example. The second type is more subtle, but can be much better. It is called deterrence by dissuasion. That means you set up conditions on the ground that convey to the enemy his plan will fail to meet its objectives. In other words, there's no point in him attacking, because what you have done makes it so much harder for him to succeed. Hopefully, bloodshed may even be avoided. Most experts think China might well want to de-fang America in the Pacific a little to make it harder to counter an invasion or blockade of Taiwan. This type of spreading out and upgrading bases could well work as dissuasion deterrence.
 
Last edited:
rwsmith said:
...but I'm sure they could extend the existing or build new runways if necessary. They are bound to need some upgrading anyway.

And a note. The Pacific and the Middle East are looking pretty volatile.
Click to expand...

If you look at the north airfield on Tinian, the old WWII runways already extend to the ocean on either end. The ocean bottom drops off very quickly beyond the beaches, like Marianas Trench deep. All B-52 bases generally have runways of 12,000-13,000 feet in length. The runways on Guam are 10,500-11,000 feet long, but then they're about five hundred feet above the ocean at the end of the runway, not a few feet above the water like Tinian. A Buff can certainly takeoff in a shorter distance, but not with full fuel and weapons. It would take a whole lot of filling in to extend the Tinian runways. The runways are laid out E-W direction for prevailing winds. The only option for "new" runways would be to make them more N-S. But they are clearing and upgrading the old ones.
 
Last edited:
SMSgt said:
My Seabee dad served on Saipan and Tinian. 92nd NCB. He helped build the atomic bomb pits amongst his many tasks. Glad to see the airfield put back to use for the smaller aircraft. While some talk about flying B-52s from Tinian, the 8500-foot runways would be a severe limitation, and room for extension is near non-existent.
Click to expand...

I wonder how the re-engined B-52 would do on a runway of that length. Also, are they making the runways deep enough to take a B-52, or worse, the B-1B. The Bone is well known as a runway breaker. 8500 feet sounds like plenty for F-15s and the new B-21.
 
  • Like
Reactions: A10
Just a thought. Everyone seems to be talking about
airplanes, bombers. What about missiles? Many more
launch pad sites? Shorter flight response than from continental
U.S. Also as submarine bases less accessible to foes.
 
Last edited:
LVSteve said:
I wonder how the re-engined B-52 would do on a runway of that length. Also, are they making the runways deep enough to take a B-52, or worse, the B-1B. The Bone is well known as a runway breaker. 8500 feet sounds like plenty for F-15s and the new B-21.
Click to expand...

There isn't a real power/performance increase with the new "J" engines. The advantages lie primarily in them being "smokeless" and much more fuel efficient. The engines are also claimed to have a much longer overhaul time, possibly longer than the lifespan of the bomber. So less maintenance costs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

PALADIN85020
The true story of the first A-bomb dropped...
Replies
7
Views
1K
sw282
sw282
PALADIN85020
Operation DOWNFALL - the invasion that was never launched.
3 4 5
Replies
87
Views
60K
Greyman50
Greyman50
semperfi71
April 1, 1945 Okinawa
Replies
4
Views
2K
semperfi71
semperfi71

Latest posts

Back
Top