It's already been shown on TV.

At least the Marines get the doctrine right.

And for the bonus round who can tell me who is responsible for the joint publication governing CAS? You guessed it, the USMC. The branch that gets it right. But wait there is more. Behind door number two we have the Airforce buttfucking an Army 11B with a rolled up copy of JP 3-09.3. Behind door number three we have an Army General on the phone telling his boss how well things are going behind door number two. Behind door number four is an Airforce General (pilot of course) discussing how to get more money for the F35 with Representative corrupt fuck face.

Pull out prop aircraft in the next war, IMHO it's gonna be China, their economy is about to take a shit and they're getting mighty aggressive, and you're doing nothing but getting good people killed.

We don't have the ideal perfect solution now. And we're not going to ever. In some way, we are going to be continually shoehorning. Now, I agree, using a strategic bomber for CAS is pretty fucking stupid. Personally I'd like to see them use something we already have, but considering all the whiz bang shit we have now, I can't think of a platform. And I'm all for telling the Army to do it themselves if it's easy.

There was a Pope or Youngstown bird that had a MANPAD blow through the #3 or #4 engine. Happened 2006 or 2007 timeframe. And again, we had numerous activations, locks, and emissions. These things don't just happen. Had two of them near miss not long after that, and several reported launches that must have malfunctioned, and LAIRCM took care of some too.

No, I'm telling him that sticking arguably the most important people for flight ops on the front lines where they're going to get killed is a stupid idea. Maintenance guys aren't like infantry. You don't just get to go to the MXS store and buy a bunch more guys. Lose two guys from the same job, and you might have just lost the entirety of your expertise in one field. It boils down to: Why fight the M1 Abrams when I can just shoot the guys that keep them running?

Just because he's a field grade officer doesn't mean he is incapable of dumb ideas. The military is chock full of field grade officers coming up with fucking stupid ideas, and they've got a shitpile of other fuckwit officers who have bobble heads that are empty and just nod because they can't wait for their stupid pet project idea to get traction.

Example: Which field grade officer came up with the policy that Air Force people must wear camouflage uniforms with a reflector belt at all times in war zones? That is known as a stupid idea. Sitting at Baghdad less than 200 meters from the fence wearing a reflector belt in an area with zero cover isn't an idea any guy on the line came up with. Especially to make it an institutional policy.

That's 200 meters within the fence.

One the same base you were wearing a swimsuit and flip flops in your time off.  

If there's a sniper threat, we need to move the aircraft and the maintainers - the idea that a glowbelt makes them easier to target is funny, but ridiculous.

Who had time off?

So how many times did you take fire?



 

Afghanistan? Mortar and rocket fire was about twice a day or week depending on how many wild hairs were up asses.

Iraq, four or five.

It's mighty difficult to get close to Bagram, but I think the fuckers were aiming those mortars at us at night because we stuck out like a sore thumb, and the rockets would shit chunks on our conex about nightly. I was there when the hadjis tried to sneak over the wire only to find they'd broken into the Marines. Oops.

Oh, sorry, "take fire" as in shot at directly, as in with rifle fire from 200 meters away, not indiscriminate IDF.



 

No idea. Probably none. Both bases are defended well and inshallah being what it is, aiming is fo suckas.

Is that reason to stick reflector belts on people you're sending to a FOB to take care of nifty short range prop aircraft? That's exactly what several people in this thread are talking about, and Air Force rules say, nighttime or flight line work: Reflector Belt. You're not insinuating that I should disobey orders from field grade officers, are you?

So basically, the biggest risk is getting run over in the dark, but you're trying to make it sound like the hajji carlos hathcock is waiting to  take shots at people like you "sitting at Baghdad less than 200 meters from the fence"?
 

Interesting how the USAF only wants to fight the big wars but everyone else has to fight all the wars.

And it's interesting how many here from the army presume to know the sentiments of both the USAF as a whole, and it's individual members.

Everyone I worked with had a deep, personal investment in the safety of the "customer" and the success of their mission.  Please leave the inter-service rivalry crap for Army-Navy football games.

Is the USAF working with the Army to improve their CAS situation?

To paraphrase an earlier comment, basically everything that is being used today was approved and paid for decades ago. So, is there anyone with any influence looking at the deficiencies that have been experienced so that the next generations of warfighters get better CAS?

Why is everyone arguing with this guy over how it should had been?

He is just telling you how it is/was.

Everyone wants to tell him how it should be.  (Scrap the F-35, build new A-10's and broncos and tow them around on giant treadmills to launch with a logistics convoy).

Can we let the guy tell us the reality of the situation, or are we all so egotistical we need to solve inter service problems by creating more of them, while making a Santa Claus wish list of how it should be fought.

Are they trying to slander you via association for that B-1 incident?

The Air Force and it's people continue to talk of acquiring aircraft meant for small wars as a distraction from preparation for a war with a peer or near peer.

Slander? Are you fucking serious?

You tell me. I never went to one of those big bases without seeing people of all services lollygagging around like they were on vacation.  They, inevitably, were complaining about glow belts while wearing physical fitness uniforms or what not - and hanging out at the Green Beans.

Also, somehow, on our small little FOB, we operated, armed, fueled, and maintained three species of helicopter without anyone complaining they needed to be somewhere with a Green Beans.

Not particularly.   I'm curious as to why this guy thinks everyone crawled out to give him shit.  That probably wasn't the best word choice.

And how many peers or near peers do we have? If we fought them, would those wars be nuclear?

Just like we fought Russia in Vietnam, we are going to fight China in Africa.

Why not in SEA? And if it is in Africa, wouldn't we need extended range, extended loiter time aircraft? Any lessons to be learned from the Selous Scouts?

Is this your next/latest article submission or an abstract from your killed war college paper?

1.  I never said R/W CCA never commits fratricide...see practically above.  I doubt you would want to compare CAS on friendly versus CCA on friendly stats.  IME, never even came close to one with CCA and the ones I heard about were due to violating doctrinal rule #1 above:  find friendlies before shooting anything.

2.  As to incorrect statement?  I made several.

Fundamental problem:  they (USAF) is using the wrong platform (F/W) to conduct CAS.

Add to that a lengthy (days) and cumbersome request/approval process and it's essentially worthless unless you are one of the lucky ones who actually can plan for and receive it.

Quote History

Quoted:

PERIOD

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:

Quoted:]
CAS delivers ordnance to a grid...period

Seriously?  Do you know what a target talk on is?

PERIOD

Of course I do, but do you think a guy at a couple hundred feet going a couple hundred (or way more) knots actually sees the 3-man PKM team lying in the ditch?

On the other hand, I've seen Apaches and Kiowas practically stop at treetop level (smart, no, risky, yes; just sayin') in order to obtain target fidelity (i.e. find the 3 guys in the ditch).

Seriously, back at ya.

No.
that was internal distribution that went no where.
Maybe in my next job and I can get the idea forward.

At least I think I understand where the AF is coming from; they protect their equities.  The Army's stupidity is a mystery to me.
Which is why I must go to the wretched hive of scum and villany, to discover what I clearly don't understand.

I bet you the steak dinner of your choice the ultimate answer will be with someone or a group of someones with .civ in his email.

Be careful, for when you stare into the abyss, the abyss stares into you.

Boyd fascinates me and serves as both an inspiration and cautionary tale.

He effected huge change, mostly with the Army and the Marines, that saved lives on future battlefields.

He also ignored his family, who hated him, had a mediocre career and died an early death.

Connor: How far are we going to take this, Da?
Il Duce: The question is not how far. The question is do you posess the constitution, the depth of faith, to go as far as is needed?

Having been a recipient of friendly fire on two separate occasions, I can tell you they were some of the worst military experiences I ever had.

A moisture-rich mortar charge was the cause of the 1st one, along with us being under the trajectory of 81mm tubes into an adjacent valley in Korea in 1996.

Incompetence and failure of leaders to do their adjacent unit coordinations led to the 2nd incident in OIF1 in early 2003.

Miraculously, nobody was killed in either of the events.  The 81mm mortar round was an HEDP, so it penetrated the ground within feet of my Scout Platoon, but detonated well into the ground, sending a "thud" and puff of smoke from its entrance hole as the only evidence of not being a dud or practice round.

The 2nd event involved vehicle-mounted .50 BMG gracing us with their continued bursts in the open desert, tracers flying by my face.  I knew I was going to die then, and there was nothing I could do about it.  After hitting the deck, I got on my ICOM and demanded the Company Commander to get ahold of that unit to our right, and tell them to cease fire.

He told me to get off the channel.  He was also the one who failed to do his AUC's (Adjacent Unit Coordinations) with them. He and the 1SG later ridiculed me for reacting in such a manner, since I took my Squad and hunkered down in a small bunker we found afterwards. I didn't care about anything but my soldier's lives at that point, and had zero confidence in the Company Command to get anything right.

If I was in charge, they would have been summarily flogged, then executed in front of the Battalion for incompetence and gross negligence.

Sounds like an article submission to me...

The greatest CAS aircraft of all time:



Just how much would it cost today to build a modernized version of the A-1 Skyraider or something very similar? The A-1 was unbeatable in terms of range, loiter time and payload. It was also slow and maneuverable, very good assets for a CAS aircraft. It could get down in the weeds with the troops and deliver highly accurate fire on the enemy exactly where the ground commander needed it. They could observe and eyeball things that pilots in fast movers simply can't spot or keep in sight.

The Super Tucano is an alright aircraft I suppose, and it is one of the few off the shelf products you could immediately put into service. It would certainly be better than nothing and provide our forces with a capability they currently lack. But should we ever go forth with producing a dedicated prop driven CAS aircraft, I would hope we spring for something with a bit more teeth. The A-29 Super Tucano is pretty weak in terms of payload. Two .50 cal machine guns with 200 rounds each and 5 hardpoints for other ordnance is pretty weak armament compared to what the A-1 was capable of delivering. It was armed with four 20mm cannons and had 5 hardpoints under each wing! The thing could carry double or triple the payload of a Super Tucano. And it could remain on station for hours. Ground troops in Vietnam absolutely loved the support they received from A-1 skyraiders.

Either way, whether it is the Super Tucano or something purpose built to match the capabilities of the old A-1, a prop driven CAS aircraft for low intensity conflicts seems like a critically needed item. I hope the Air Force at some point fields at least two or three combat wings outfitted with such aircraft. Considering such an aircraft could be built for probably around $10 million (give or take a bit), I don't think it would be hard at all to find funding for provided the will was there.

And another thing I have an issue with is the reliance on precision munitions. Such weapons certainly have their place. But it seems that since the beginning of the GWOT, we have relied almost EXCLUSIVELY on such weapons, even for CAS. Just as a B-1B for CAS is overkill, I think it also overkill to be dropping $20k per JDAMS on a couple of Taliban with a donkey on the side of a ridge somewhere in Afghanistan. Precision munitions are expensive. If you have a dedicated prop driven CAS aircraft like an A-1 or a Super Tucano, it would seem plain old dumb guided ordnance like the Mk. 81 (250 lb) or Mk. 82 (500 lb) would be sufficiently accurate enough to get the job done in many cases, as would 20mm cannon fire, 2.75" rockets, cluster bombs or whatever name we're currently using for napalm, given the low and slow method of delivery. And it would also seem that in many cases, such ordnance would actually be more flexible and responsive for a TIC situation as compared to GPS guided munitions dropped from high flying jet platforms. If I correctly understand the way they are employed, air crews are provided with a grid coordinates and then the crew inputs that info into the weapons system prior to launch. While allowing for accurate strikes, it seems this is also a rather time consuming process. Wouldn't it often be better if you had a slow moving prop plane coming in at 500 feet with the ground commander simply telling the pilot to strafe the fuck out of the area 50 meters north of his marking smoke? Or perhaps the ground commander simply advises the pilot to plaster the area his machine gunners are marking with orange tracers? Such guidance is simple, immediate and plenty accurate if you are down in the weeds with the guys needing the support. In this regard, it seems CAS has regressed from the days of the Vietnam War.

It would seem there is a dire need for a prop driven CAS platform, crewed by pilots trained exclusively for this mission, and armed with a variety of precision and dumb ordnance that provides the sort of flexibility to conduct the mission. A B-1B flying up in the stratosphere with a load of 2,000 lb JDAMs is certainly a formidable weapons system. But couldn't the same mission be performed better by a guy cruising along slowly at 500 feet with 20mm guns and a load of 250 lb Mk 81s? Pilots well versed in such missions, flying an aircraft built for that specific mission, have the ability to effectively place ordnance on the enemy within meters of friendly positions at the precise time and location where it is needed. The way our unconventional foes fight, they are often so close to our guys that a 2000 lb JDAM can't be employed because the friendly forces would be inside the blast radius. For situations like these, a slow moving prop plane that has the ability to get low enough to actually be able to visually ID things the ground commander is pointing out could mean the difference between living and dying. And with extended loiter time, such an aircraft/pilot combination would serve as an excellent FAC platform to guide other CAS platforms or the fast movers onto targets long after their own weapons load has been expended.

As I've stated before, the Puzzle Palace isn't the place to fight the battle that you are wanting to initiate.  The spirit of Boyd and the culture that fostered him have been snuffed out in that building by the DoD/Joint monster.  Service specific problems or interservice relations...aint no body got time for that!  

You want to effect the change you seek, go to Maxwell and get on board with the LeMay Center for Doctrine Development:

http://www.au.af.mil/au/lemay/main.htm

I've had to brief their current commander.  Sharp guy and receptive to new ideas.  Jousting windmills in DC won't get change done.  Change the doctrine, change the rules of the game, and you'll get the change you want.

As good as the A-1 was, it had its faults.  For modern times I'd rather have the Piper Enforcer.

http://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_fighters/p51_14.html

Those look cool as hell, but one thing about the A1 is they are frikkin huge, and can be utilized in a variety or roles, and are really modular in what they can do it seems.
I myself have a boner for the Counter-Invader.



 

There's are lots of good reasons nobody flies taildraggers any more.  

We lost almost as many pilots in training during WWII as we did in combat.

Oh, so every F/W attack is a 500' / 500 knot ingress to pop bomb on co-ordinates?  Ever heard of a sensor to visual attack?  Apparently not.

The obsession people have with weapons capacity is upsetting.

We have TONS of ways to kill people. We're covered on that. The other aspects of the ideal CAS platform are the parts we want improved. Like we've said a bunch before, a light, unarmored helicopter with a single .50, a handful of rockets, and one dude hanging out the window slinging hate from a carbine is the best current air support we have. Apaches have some pretty sweet weapons capabilities too. If you can improve upon that at all, it'd be awesome. Five hardpoints and twin .50s is more than enough. Ideal? No. Better than what we have, though.

Honestly, if you need more than what a pair of Super Tucanos can provide, you're in some serious shit, and we can bring other aircraft in to play smash-a-grid, using the Super Tucanos now as FACs. We would still have F-16s and F-15s playing flying expensive artillery. Or we could use actual artillery.  

Integration (and thus communication) is the actual important part. The Skyraider was certainly a decent platform for that, but not the be-all-end-all.


As far as PGMs, yes, they're pretty sweet. Unguided weapons have their place too. Like you said, sometimes it's A, sometimes it's B. I'd rather they just use whatever munition is the best suited for the job. A JDAM on a couple Taliban fighters might seem expensive, but if those Taliban kill an American, that's way more expensive. Not only in the "lives are priceless, sons and daughters dying" sense, but in the actual dollar amounts. It's about a million dollars cost for one KIA.

Of course.  We don't have advanced sensors like litening, sniper, lantirn, that allow us to find targets with thermal and IR sensors, either.  In fact, non-traditional ISR is a term that does not actually exist.

I've seen historical pics of the ground crew lying on top of the wing serving as ground guides.  I know crew chiefs/Mx guys who'd kill/do immoral things to do that!

The USAF didn't even want to buy a turboprop trainer, let alone a combat aircraft.

The Army needs to own this LAAR project.

DC gets me my JQO.
I'm going to need that, too.
CAS is a small issue in the grand scheme of all that is screwed up.  

Snip for easier read:



If there ever was a website worse than AKO/DTS it would have to be that JQ self nominating one.  I have the JPME level II, but they won't give me joint credit for my time in Iraq in 2006 with the Army/DCMA.

CAS is indeed a small issue in the grand scheme, that's why it could be corrected.  It was field grades in the 80's who implemented changes in CAS between TRADOC and TAC.  Its small enough that GO's will let those underneath them come up with a solution.  If you try to tackle a grand problem, there's bound to be lots of SES/GO roadblocks who exist to prevent progress.  Hell, that's probably a joint office itself - the JOPP (Joint Office of Preventing Progress).

You have to remember in the end, its not about the money;  but it is all about the money.  The various services' job at their service headquarters is to ensure funding (survival).  The best plan in the world will not happen if you cannot get someone to pay for it.

Why yes, of course they are, and that's exactly what I said.  A couple hundred feet and a couple hundred knots...sounds like 500/500 to me.

Another ARFCOM literalist injecting absolutism into the conversation.

Sensor to visual, aaah, yes.  The problem is, the F/W guys definition of target is different than that of most ground guys in a TIC.  Want to take out a hilltop, building?  That's what CAS is for.  As stated, want to kill the 3 guys hiding in the ditch 500m to your front, that's CCA.

Oh, look I invoked GIANT RED LETTERS...not even Sylvan got that treatment.

Yeah, well.... This has turned into a circle jerk.

I'll continue to answer any serious CAS questions in the .mil thread.  This is just making everyone look like assholes (self included).  

Out.