Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
BCM
User Panel

Posted: 7/14/2012 8:20:47 AM EDT
http://www.dodbuzz.com/2012/07/11/spartan-gets-gunship-variant-usaf-wont-receive/

FARNBOROUGH, England — The U.S. Air Force needs gunships. The wings of their AC-130s are literally falling off from the strain of ten years of deployments to Afghanistan and Iraq.







It just so happens Alenia Aermacchi unveiled a gunship version to the C-27 Monday here at the Farnborough International Airshow. Air Force leaders, however, chose to cancel the C-27 program this year after deciding the cargo aircraft was a luxury they could no longer afford in light of the defense budget cuts.

Alenia teamed up with ATK to outfit the MC-27J Spartan with a palletized 30 mm GAU-23 cannon and later a command and control pallet for intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance missions. Neither capabilities are ground breaking. What sets it apart is the flexibility. Airman can load and unload the pallets carrying the guns in four hours or less.


U.S. airmen already fire the GAU-23 Bushmaster Automatic Cannon from the AC-130W. The Air Force converted 12 MC-130s into the AC-130W to stem the shortage of gunships in its fleet. The GAU-23 is a dual feed system that can carry 500 rounds. The cannon is capable of firing 200 rounds per minute, but the pilot typically fires one round at a time or five round bursts for accuracy sake. The GAU-23 on the AC-130W is not palletized and therefore cannot be easily unloaded from the aircraft for separate missions.
Link Posted: 7/14/2012 8:21:31 AM EDT
[#1]
I want one.
 
Link Posted: 7/14/2012 8:22:34 AM EDT
[#2]



Quoted:




U.S. airmen already fire the GAU-23 Bushmaster Automatic Cannon from the AC-130W. The Air Force converted 12 MC-130s into the AC-130W to stem the shortage of gunships in its fleet. The GAU-23 is a dual feed system that can carry 500 rounds. The cannon is capable of firing 200 rounds per minute, but the pilot typically fires one round at a time or five round bursts for accuracy sake. The GAU-23 on the AC-130W is not palletized and therefore cannot be easily unloaded from the aircraft for separate missions.


I thought the Air Force canned the 30mms on its AC-130s after attempting to replace the 40mms with them?



 
Link Posted: 7/14/2012 8:42:34 AM EDT
[#3]
C-27 isn't anywhere near the aircraft a C130 is.  You might as well be comparing a Cessna 150 to a Beechcraft King Air.

And how about this?
C-27s grounded after flight control failures
The U.S. Air Force has grounded its fleet of C-27J cargo planes after an aircraft experienced a mechanical failure in part of its flight controls during a training sortie last week.

Air Force officials at the plane’s program office in Ohio ordered the grounding following the July 3 incident, which it is calling a “flight control problem,” according to a written statement provided by an Air Force spokeswoman. The Air Force has ordered an investigation into the incident.
Link Posted: 7/14/2012 8:48:47 AM EDT
[#4]
Quoted:
C-27 isn't anywhere near the aircraft a C130 is.  You might as well be comparing a Cessna 150 to a Beechcraft King Air.

And how about this?
C-27s grounded after flight control failures
The U.S. Air Force has grounded its fleet of C-27J cargo planes after an aircraft experienced a mechanical failure in part of its flight controls during a training sortie last week.

Air Force officials at the plane’s program office in Ohio ordered the grounding following the July 3 incident, which it is calling a “flight control problem,” according to a written statement provided by an Air Force spokeswoman. The Air Force has ordered an investigation into the incident.


This ... and in so many ways.  C-130 > C-27 ... and its Italian anyway.  It will always be in the shop.
Link Posted: 7/14/2012 8:49:44 AM EDT
[#5]
Couldn't the same pallet system be rolled onto a C-130 in the same way?
Link Posted: 7/14/2012 8:51:16 AM EDT
[#6]
While the AC-27 may not be as "good" as a AC-130 it beats nothing,or a AC-130 grounded due to wing spar cracks. Unforturnate as it is the U.S. military is going to have to do with either less or smaller or a combonation of the two as we have/are buring up assets in the GWOT.

Off topic rant for whats it worth we could be blowing-up Afghani mud huts with A-7 pulled out of D-M. I drive pass them quite often, that would save the go-fasters from using up their airframe hours.
Link Posted: 7/14/2012 8:56:11 AM EDT
[#7]
I'll probably get bashed for say it, but oh well. I think these assets need to be much more available to Regular Army units who spend alot more time outside the wire than the SOCOM units that they fall under.



IIRC, 130 Gunships have always been the domain of Special Operations.

Link Posted: 7/14/2012 8:57:22 AM EDT
[#8]
Looks like a mini-Herc.

What is that attack plane built, if i recall, in South America?  Single engine turboprop.
Link Posted: 7/14/2012 8:57:24 AM EDT
[#9]
Link Posted: 7/14/2012 8:58:33 AM EDT
[#10]



Quoted:


Looks like a mini-Herc.



What is that attack plane built, if i recall, in South America?  Simple engine turboprop.


The Super Tucano. Pretty cool aircraft. The Air Force was going to buy some to support counter-insurgency operations. Then they decided they wanted more F-35s to fight the Soviet Union instead.



 
Link Posted: 7/14/2012 8:58:37 AM EDT
[#11]
Quoted:
I'll probably get bashed for say it, but oh well. I think these assets need to be much more available to Regular Army units who spend alot more time outside the wire than the SOCOM units that they fall under.

IIRC, 130 Gunships have always been the domain of Special Operations.


Since they belong to SOCOM it kind of stands to reason that they would spend most of their time with them.  Frankly a Cessna Caravan like the Iraqis fly would be good over a patrol.
Link Posted: 7/14/2012 9:00:19 AM EDT
[#12]



Quoted:


Looks like a mini-Herc.



What is that attack plane built, if i recall, in South America?  Simple engine turboprop.


Super Tucano.

 
Link Posted: 7/14/2012 9:00:39 AM EDT
[#13]
Or we quit pussy footing around the politics and let the Buffs/Bones do what they were designed to do.

Bombers playing CAS

Flatten the mountains and to hell with what everyone thinks of us.
Link Posted: 7/14/2012 9:01:10 AM EDT
[#14]
No 105mm howitzer.
Link Posted: 7/14/2012 9:03:26 AM EDT
[#15]



Quoted:



Quoted:

I'll probably get bashed for say it, but oh well. I think these assets need to be much more available to Regular Army units who spend alot more time outside the wire than the SOCOM units that they fall under.



IIRC, 130 Gunships have always been the domain of Special Operations.





Since they belong to SOCOM it kind of stands to reason that they would spend most of their time with them.  Frankly a Cessna Caravan like the Iraqis fly would be good over a patrol.


Yes, they pay for them. I am trying to figure out why the Chiefs don't think how this would be more useful to the regular Army though.



meh.



 
Link Posted: 7/14/2012 9:04:07 AM EDT
[#16]
Quoted:
Or we quit pussy footing around the politics and let the Buffs/Bones do what they were designed to do.

Bombers playing CAS

Flatten the mountains and to hell with what everyone thinks of us.


Well aren't you an enlightened one.

What did these mountains do to you?

Quoted:
No 105mm howitzer.


When you have artillery that can range the target you are a lot less likely to need it.
Link Posted: 7/14/2012 9:07:15 AM EDT
[#17]
Looks like an italian copy of a CASA 235

.
Link Posted: 7/14/2012 9:07:57 AM EDT
[#18]
Quoted:
Or we quit pussy footing around the politics and let the Buffs/Bones do what they were designed to do.

Bombers playing CAS

Flatten the mountains and to hell with what everyone thinks of us.


Thank God!  I though I was the only one.
Link Posted: 7/14/2012 9:09:28 AM EDT
[#19]
Why is it such a fucked up process to get the guys some damn air support, it seems like every other week we have a thread about how some new CAS  plane would be awesome but they aren't going to implement it or they cant make up their minds on what to do. Seriously how many different airframes did the US put out in WW2, I know the tech is more advanced for newer aircraft, but for Christ sakes you don't need a fucking F-22 to shoot or bomb the shit out of assholes on the ground.

If I've got it all wrong please educate me, I'm just guessing here, from the outside looking in it looks like the people who decide what gets bought are acting like little spoiled brats
Link Posted: 7/14/2012 9:12:21 AM EDT
[#20]



Quoted:


Or we quit pussy footing around the politics and let the Buffs/Bones do what they were designed to do.



Bombers playing CAS



Flatten the mountains and to hell with what everyone thinks of us.


Nukes have a hard enough time leveling mountains, how are you going to level mountains with conventional bombs?



Places like Iwo Jima, we pounded the shit out of the beach head and mountain with some of the biggest and most powerful guns ever made. And it still ended up being a major meat grinder for the Marines.



 
Link Posted: 7/14/2012 9:13:26 AM EDT
[#21]



Quoted:





Quoted:

Or we quit pussy footing around the politics and let the Buffs/Bones do what they were designed to do.



Bombers playing CAS



Flatten the mountains and to hell with what everyone thinks of us.


Nukes have a hard enough time leveling mountains, how are you going to level mountains with conventional bombs?

 


I don't know, but I think we should try.



 
Link Posted: 7/14/2012 9:13:27 AM EDT
[#22]



Quoted:


Why is it such a fucked up process to get the guys some damn air support, it seems like every other week we have a thread about how some new CAS  plane would be awesome but they aren't going to implement it or they cant make up their minds on what to do. Seriously how many different airframes did the US put out in WW2, I know the tech is more advanced for newer aircraft, but for Christ sakes you don't need a fucking F-22 to shoot or bomb the shit out of assholes on the ground.



If I've got it all wrong please educate me, I'm just guessing here, from the outside looking in it looks like the people who decide what gets bought are acting like little spoiled brats


The Air Force is run by fighter pilots, that's why.



 
Link Posted: 7/14/2012 9:13:59 AM EDT
[#23]
When you have coordinate seeking munitions you can hit the target.  You don't have to blow everything up.

Just saying...
Link Posted: 7/14/2012 9:18:05 AM EDT
[#24]
AFSOC always seems to find a way to get what they want.  I don't think Alenia wasted their time with this.
Link Posted: 7/14/2012 9:20:52 AM EDT
[#25]
Quoted:
Off topic rant for whats it worth we could be blowing-up Afghani mud huts with A-7 pulled out of D-M. I drive pass them quite often, that would save the go-fasters from using up their airframe hours.


Except that at the end of the A-7's life they were suffering from wing spar cracking that was expensive to fix.
The cracks were so bad in the Navy that the only missions that wing limited A-7's could perform were CAP tanking and dedicated fuel waste missions.


 

Link Posted: 7/14/2012 9:22:51 AM EDT
[#26]
A single 30mm cannon? Weak. A fucking Apache offers far more firepower than that. And we have a shitload of those already.
Link Posted: 7/14/2012 9:23:39 AM EDT
[#27]
All aircraft have issues.
This one must not have been that bad as the plane is not in a smoking hole in the ground.  

Quoted:
C-27 isn't anywhere near the aircraft a C130 is.  You might as well be comparing a Cessna 150 to a Beechcraft King Air.

And how about this?
C-27s grounded after flight control failures
The U.S. Air Force has grounded its fleet of C-27J cargo planes after an aircraft experienced a mechanical failure in part of its flight controls during a training sortie last week.

Air Force officials at the plane’s program office in Ohio ordered the grounding following the July 3 incident, which it is calling a “flight control problem,” according to a written statement provided by an Air Force spokeswoman. The Air Force has ordered an investigation into the incident.


Link Posted: 7/14/2012 9:24:14 AM EDT
[#28]
Quoted:
Couldn't the same pallet system be rolled onto a C-130 in the same way?


Then it would be a USMC C-130 gunship.  

Link Posted: 7/14/2012 9:24:26 AM EDT
[#29]
Bone 1-2 checking in, 84 GBU-38s, sniper pod, and 16to hours of play time.

Yeah Bone can you put one bomb on this hut over here?

Link Posted: 7/14/2012 9:27:03 AM EDT
[#30]



Quoted:

When you have coordinate seeking munitions you can hit the target.  You don't have to blow everything up.

Just saying...

You military folks can (and please do) tell me if I'm being stupid, but I think it would be cool to have plenty of 'birds in the air' (for observation, if nothing else) that can at least immediately identify the enemy, and relay back those coordinates that you mention. Then, ideally, those guided munitions ('smart' artillery/mortar rounds?) could be on target within pretty short order, hopefully. I say hopefully, as I have no idea how long it takes your typical mortar/artillery round to reach the target (let's say attacking a COP, a fair old distance from the FOB, or wherever the rounds are departing).




Is this sort of ability currently available (accurate rounds on target within 1 or 2 minutes), or is it something that you guys are still working on?


I wonder about this, as I have seen numerous posts from people that are unhappy with airborne CAS, and how it often turns up late to the party, and by that point the insurgents have fled.


Please illuminate my tiny, fragile little mind.



 
Link Posted: 7/14/2012 9:31:17 AM EDT
[#31]
Quoted:
Bone 1-2 checking in, 84 GBU-38s, sniper pod, and 16to hours of play time.

Yeah Bone can you put one bomb on this hut over here?


A B1 costs about $62,500 an hour to fly.  A Super Tucano is about $2,500 an hour.
Link Posted: 7/14/2012 9:31:26 AM EDT
[#32]
This all goes back to the Caribou. The shit will never ever die. The USAF is the most spoiled bunch of whiny cry babies I ever saw in my life.
Link Posted: 7/14/2012 9:31:58 AM EDT
[#33]
Quoted:
A single 30mm cannon? Weak. A fucking Apache offers far more firepower than that. And we have a shitload of those already.


Seriously?  What's the playtime for an Apache in high/hot conditions?
Link Posted: 7/14/2012 9:33:28 AM EDT
[#34]
Quoted:
You military folks can (and please do) tell me if I'm being stupid, but I think it would be cool to have plenty of 'birds in the air' (for observation, if nothing else) that can at least immediately identify the enemy, and relay back those coordinates that you mention. Then, ideally, those guided munitions ('smart' artillery/mortar rounds?) could be on target within pretty short order, hopefully. I say hopefully, as I have no idea how long it takes your typical mortar/artillery round to reach the target (let's say attacking a COP, a fair old distance from the FOB, or wherever the rounds are departing).

Is this sort of ability currently available (accurate rounds on target within 1 or 2 minutes), or is it something that you guys are still working on?


If you have a digital link between an FO (including an aircraft) and a HIMARS battery that is ready to shoot, you can have round on target in about two minutes (or less) plus time of flight.
Link Posted: 7/14/2012 9:33:40 AM EDT
[#35]
The technology is there yes.  Add in the requests for clearance and the bad guys have ate lunch taken a nap packed up and left before a round/bomb/missle hits
Link Posted: 7/14/2012 9:35:16 AM EDT
[#36]
Bone has enough firepower payload to make the Greek God's weep with envy.





But there are much cheaper ways to provide air support in places like Afghanistan without a sophisticated ADA network. That can also bring down the pain.



I sorta like the idea though with COPs all over with 1 or 2 105s or 155s to have interlocking fires almost on any square foot of terrain in Afghanistan so you can get fire support right then and there, and not wait for a bird to show up. But oh no, collateral damage, and all that.




 
Link Posted: 7/14/2012 9:35:31 AM EDT
[#37]
By the looks of this, the AC will have dual use Cargo/Gunship capability which may be attractive.
Link Posted: 7/14/2012 9:36:08 AM EDT
[#38]
That's pretty genius. ISR in the plane can locate the bad guys, then they can go handle it themself. Add a high powered ball camera and this would be a very, very capable airplane. They could follow a patrol, doing threat warning, watching for bad guys, and blowing them up if they got too close to the friendlies. So many possibilities... The Air Force should pick up a few of these.
Link Posted: 7/14/2012 9:51:09 AM EDT
[#39]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Couldn't the same pallet system be rolled onto a C-130 in the same way?


Then it would be a USMC C-130 gunship.  



I really like their Harvest Hawk.  Let's see we already have a plane that's going to be in the area, may as well strap a couple missles on the side and let it do support if it's not busy tanking at the moment.
Link Posted: 7/14/2012 9:52:25 AM EDT
[#40]
Quoted:
This all goes back to the Caribou. The shit will never ever die. The USAF is the most spoiled bunch of whiny cry babies I ever saw in my life.


How quickly can you paint a house with that broad brush?
Link Posted: 7/14/2012 9:54:25 AM EDT
[#41]
Quoted:

Quoted:
Quoted:
I'll probably get bashed for say it, but oh well. I think these assets need to be much more available to Regular Army units who spend alot more time outside the wire than the SOCOM units that they fall under.

IIRC, 130 Gunships have always been the domain of Special Operations.


Since they belong to SOCOM it kind of stands to reason that they would spend most of their time with them.  Frankly a Cessna Caravan like the Iraqis fly would be good over a patrol.

Yes, they pay for them. I am trying to figure out why the Chiefs don't think how this would be more useful to the regular Army though.

meh.
 


It's been my experience that regular army units tend to use ACs as flying artillery I stead of an integrated ISR/CAS platform. Also the pinpoint nature of SOF missions is a better fit for an orbiting, side firing aircraft than a conventional type of mission that could span a much larger area.


Link Posted: 7/14/2012 10:05:48 AM EDT
[#42]
This seems pretty weak, 200rpm of 30mm, compared to a Vietnam-war ac47 with 12,000rpm of 7.62.  Sure, there's modern sensors and all, but the 30mm plus a m134 or two seems more useful.
Link Posted: 7/14/2012 10:08:54 AM EDT
[#43]



Quoted:


Why is it such a fucked up process to get the guys some damn air support, it seems like every other week we have a thread about how some new CAS  plane would be awesome but they aren't going to implement it or they cant make up their minds on what to do. Seriously how many different airframes did the US put out in WW2, I know the tech is more advanced for newer aircraft, but for Christ sakes you don't need a fucking F-22 to shoot or bomb the shit out of assholes on the ground.



If I've got it all wrong please educate me, I'm just guessing here, from the outside looking in it looks like the people who decide what gets bought are acting like little spoiled brats


Fighter Jock Mafia.

 


Link Posted: 7/14/2012 10:11:25 AM EDT
[#44]
Quoted:
I'll probably get bashed for say it, but oh well. I think these assets need to be much more available to Regular Army units who spend alot more time outside the wire than the SOCOM units that they fall under.

IIRC, 130 Gunships have always been the domain of Special Operations.


I got to work with one once. It was the raddest 48 hours of my life.
Link Posted: 7/14/2012 10:14:43 AM EDT
[#45]
Has anyone activated the Sylvan Signal yet?

I am embarrassed as fuck at what the AF did to the Army with the C-27 program, among other things, and I'm a Zoomie!
Link Posted: 7/14/2012 10:17:27 AM EDT
[#46]
Quoted:
Quoted:

Quoted:
Quoted:
I'll probably get bashed for say it, but oh well. I think these assets need to be much more available to Regular Army units who spend alot more time outside the wire than the SOCOM units that they fall under.

IIRC, 130 Gunships have always been the domain of Special Operations.


Since they belong to SOCOM it kind of stands to reason that they would spend most of their time with them.  Frankly a Cessna Caravan like the Iraqis fly would be good over a patrol.

Yes, they pay for them. I am trying to figure out why the Chiefs don't think how this would be more useful to the regular Army though.

meh.
 


It's been my experience that regular army units tend to use ACs as flying artillery I stead of an integrated ISR/CAS platform. Also the pinpoint nature of SOF missions is a better fit for an orbiting, side firing aircraft than a conventional type of mission that could span a much larger area.




That would be because af assets act as flying artillery and don't talk to army pukes.  
Non socom assets work so rarely with acs why would they know the difference?
We had over 100 acs in vietnam, for reference.

Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile
Link Posted: 7/14/2012 10:22:29 AM EDT
[#47]
Link Posted: 7/14/2012 10:24:52 AM EDT
[#48]



Quoted:


Bring back the Sandy's!


Is that you Virgil Cole?

 
Link Posted: 7/14/2012 10:46:09 AM EDT
[#49]



Quoted:


Has anyone activated the Sylvan Signal yet?



Didn't take long. This issue really pisses the Colonel off.



 
Close Join Our Mail List to Stay Up To Date! Win a FREE Membership!

Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!

You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.


By signing up you agree to our User Agreement. *Must have a registered ARFCOM account to win.
Top Top