User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 6/10/2014 11:07:31 PM EST
[#1]
This thread delivers.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/10/2014 11:09:06 PM EST
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
whats the use of having Intercontinental bombers just so you can forward deploy them? oh. wait. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Is a highly centralized FAC process really appropriate in a nation the size of Texas, where are support is flying in from thousands of miles away? whats the use of having Intercontinental bombers just so you can forward deploy them? oh. wait. Give it a rest for a thread eh? You've made a lot of noise, now I want to hear what someone else has to say. Why should I take what you say as gospel anyways? From what I can tell, your aviation knowledge is limited. How can you have a full idea of how things are done on the other side if you don't understand some of the basics? Maybe you are completely right. I'm certainly not even close to saying you aren't. But taking over every thread on the subject and beating it into the ground doesn't give the impression of weighed and careful decisions. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/10/2014 11:11:26 PM EST
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted: This thread delivers. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/10/2014 11:13:17 PM EST
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
This thread does not have 4 day advance planning and a target package to deliver. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
This thread delivers. CCA doesnt need shit 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/10/2014 11:18:30 PM EST
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
CCA doesnt need shit Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
This thread delivers. CCA doesnt need shit Except more firepower than half a squad. E-CAS doesn't require prior coordination either. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/10/2014 11:23:48 PM EST
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Except more firepower than half a squad. E-CAS doesn't require prior coordination either. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
This thread delivers. CCA doesnt need shit Except more firepower than half a squad. E-CAS doesn't require prior coordination either. Really? Who the fuck cares. The main issue rotary wing brings with it is slower speeds, and less loiter. Rotary wing CCA actually has SA, and PID. The targeting and tracking tech is as good or better than fixed wing, and we can actually use the weapons we have. My old ride had no tech, but we are fearless and get in close. The 64E is amazing. Now I am a magical mystery school bus driver. So its whatever at this point. I like watching armchair commandoes. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/11/2014 12:14:04 AM EST
[#7]
If you're so good at that stuff then why did we crash every single Aircraft we flew in DAYZ under your watch?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/11/2014 1:19:50 AM EST
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Hey, like I said. I respect your opinion. Yes, absolutely, dead soldiers are a problem. I'm just suggesting that your opinion isn't going to change a damn thing. So maybe you shouldn't get so amped up. You're very emotional about something OP didn't create and neither of you can change. Such decisions are made way above your pay grade. Doesn't mean you don't have a right to an opinion but getting so wrapped up in it and pointlessly aiming your ire at OP because his opinion (which is equally inconsequential in the long run) is ultimately futile. Do it all you can... put all your effort into it... then step back and analyze what you've accomplished. And don't worry about the nature of the badge and gun I carry nor the authority I've been granted. Trust me, you wouldn't be impressed. But I refuse to drag my position into this just so you can continue your dick measuring contest. I have more respect for my position than to waste it in that way, as tame as my badge may be. Now put your dick away and chill a little. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I respect your opinion but in the grand scheme of things... whoopty-fuckin-doo. Your opinion doesn't matter more because your life is on the line. Sorry but it doesn't work that way. Everybody has a job to do. You do yours, the guy in the chair does his. Nobody's going to do it all and nobody in this thread has the ability to change current policy on CAS. So sitting here bitching at each other over something you really can't do anything about is an exercise in mental masturbation. so dead soldiers aren't a strategic liability? "support" what does that mean, anyway? Having been on the receiving end of Army style support and AF style support, the AF sucks at it. And they do it while costing a fortune. maybe you should GAF as a taxpayer. Gotta ask, what do you do in blue? Hey, like I said. I respect your opinion. Yes, absolutely, dead soldiers are a problem. I'm just suggesting that your opinion isn't going to change a damn thing. So maybe you shouldn't get so amped up. You're very emotional about something OP didn't create and neither of you can change. Such decisions are made way above your pay grade. Doesn't mean you don't have a right to an opinion but getting so wrapped up in it and pointlessly aiming your ire at OP because his opinion (which is equally inconsequential in the long run) is ultimately futile. Do it all you can... put all your effort into it... then step back and analyze what you've accomplished. And don't worry about the nature of the badge and gun I carry nor the authority I've been granted. Trust me, you wouldn't be impressed. But I refuse to drag my position into this just so you can continue your dick measuring contest. I have more respect for my position than to waste it in that way, as tame as my badge may be. Now put your dick away and chill a little. our success in Iraq and Afghanistan is directly attributable to how this nation applies "airpower" so people shouldn't be sucking their own dicks on how awesome they are at "mission accomplishment" when we are going home losers in both fights. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/11/2014 1:25:10 AM EST
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
If the boning they get from big blue was so bad, you'd think that at least one single senior Army officer would bring it up on Capitol hill... Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Clearly the answer is for the AF to give the Marines the A-10 (Or for them to steal it) and then for the Army to hire out Marine CAS.  If anyone is more in the tank for F-35 than the USAF it's the USMC.
If anything, the Corps should deed its Harriers to the Army when F-35B hits FOC. 
If the boning they get from big blue was so bad, you'd think that at least one single senior Army officer would bring it up on Capitol hill... hagenbeck did. cost him his 4th star. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/11/2014 1:28:10 AM EST
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Give it a rest for a thread eh? You've made a lot of noise, now I want to hear what someone else has to say. Why should I take what you say as gospel anyways? From what I can tell, your aviation knowledge is limited. How can you have a full idea of how things are done on the other side if you don't understand some of the basics? Maybe you are completely right. I'm certainly not even close to saying you aren't. But taking over every thread on the subject and beating it into the ground doesn't give the impression of weighed and careful decisions. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Is a highly centralized FAC process really appropriate in a nation the size of Texas, where are support is flying in from thousands of miles away? whats the use of having Intercontinental bombers just so you can forward deploy them? oh. wait. Give it a rest for a thread eh? You've made a lot of noise, now I want to hear what someone else has to say. Why should I take what you say as gospel anyways? From what I can tell, your aviation knowledge is limited. How can you have a full idea of how things are done on the other side if you don't understand some of the basics? Maybe you are completely right. I'm certainly not even close to saying you aren't. But taking over every thread on the subject and beating it into the ground doesn't give the impression of weighed and careful decisions. Hey, I didn't start a call out thread, did I? |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/11/2014 1:53:48 AM EST
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
hagenbeck did. cost him his 4th star. That's one. Curious how the whole Army knows that USAF support sucks (taking those comments at face value) but promotes those who keep quiet and runs out the one GO who spoke up. One link I found on the topic. Have a link to the original Hagenbeck piece in Field Artillery? I'd like to read it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/11/2014 1:56:49 AM EST
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Sounds like that is EXACTLY what is needed. The local commander should have an air component directly tasked to him in order to complete the ground objective. It should start with multiple CALFX at the workup stage. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
In order to meet the CFC's strategy, vision, and intent, you cannot have air power fiefdoms. Sounds like that is EXACTLY what is needed. The local commander should have an air component directly tasked to him in order to complete the ground objective. It should start with multiple CALFX at the workup stage. Exactly right. "air power" shouldn't be considered some mystical voodoo, to be hoarded and bestowed upon or withheld at will. That only makes sense when fighting a peer enemy. When you already have full air superiority, it should be an integral part of the battle. The primary component. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/11/2014 2:01:39 AM EST
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
That's one. Curious how the whole Army knows that USAF support sucks (taking those comments at face value) but promotes those who keep quiet and runs out the one GO who spoke up. One link I found on the topic. Have a link to the original Hagenbeck piece in Field Artillery? I'd like to read it. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
hagenbeck did. cost him his 4th star. That's one. Curious how the whole Army knows that USAF support sucks (taking those comments at face value) but promotes those who keep quiet and runs out the one GO who spoke up. One link I found on the topic. Have a link to the original Hagenbeck piece in Field Artillery? I'd like to read it. No I don't. I got some of the inside baseball on that. Note that superintendent at west point is a bad gig. Look, if you are looking for a defense of the army, I ain't your guy. I'll be the first to admit CAS is a pretty low priority for the AF and should be. My problem is their primary mission is nuclear deterrence, which may be an even lower priority. Thats criminal. Stop worrying about flying and start worrying about nukes. put a missileer as CoSAF, fix your real problems, and maybe let go of some distratacters. The amount of debate on the hill over the A-10 is ridiculous. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/11/2014 4:00:05 AM EST
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
They don't want it. The USMC is going to blow half their budget on the F-35B for the next two decades. ETA: Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Clearly the answer is for the AF to give the Marines the A-10 (Or for them to steal it) and then for the Army to hire out Marine CAS. They don't want it. The USMC is going to blow half their budget on the F-35B for the next two decades. ETA: “There’s no alternative for the United States Marine Corps to the F-35B” - CMC Gen. James Amos Found the problem. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/11/2014 4:13:36 AM EST
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The crazy thing is I know several very good dudes who were lost to bad CAS. The first one happened right before 9/11 to a buddy of mine from SWC/SOMTB. He had been injured in the trauma lanes by a piece of rebar, and when they did the surgery on him, Womack Army Medical Center left some gauze in his knee that caused the tissue to go necrotic, and he had to have it operated on again. This was in the Special Forces Medical Sergeant Course, which he eventually graduated from...an uphill battle in and of itself, let alone sustaining life-threatening post operative injuries. Westberg was a hard soldier, in excellent shape, with a strong resolve and zero tolerance for BS getting in his way. He got assigned to 3rd Group, then deployed to Kuwait, and was killed in that incident. I learned last year that there was a female USAF FAC who was coordinating the USN F/A-18's into the Udairi impact area, and there was some attempt to place blame on the USAF enlisted JTAC on the ground to divert attention from the incompetence of the female FAC in the air. One of my other buddies who was also an 18D was one of the first responders to the scene, coming from another ODA in 3rd Group. He knew Westberg personally from the course, and provided care and evac to survivors. http://image2.findagrave.com/photos250/photos/2007/364/23189908_119915320154.jpg http://www.iupui.edu/~j21099/forms/newspapers/kuwaitbomb.jpe USA Today Article Troy James Westberg, 1971-2001 http://www.iupui.edu/~j21099/forms/newspapers/belowheadline.html The thing that is even more personal in this is that JD was one of our instructors at SOMTB, only to be killed late that year in Afghanistan by the same method.....namely bad CAS: http://www.angelfire.com/nc3/shadowwarriors/jd_harley.jpg I was in CDC on the CVN that launched the F/A-18 when those bombs were dropped at Al Udairi. I pulled the tapes for the investigation. The female FAC(A) -- actually the RIO of the FAC(A) aircraft, was a USN LT, not USAF. Both the FAC(A) and the incident plane were part of CVW-3 onboard Truman, the FAC(A) was an F-14 and the incident plane was an F/A-18. The investigation report clearly puts the blame on the incident pilot, with contributing factors by both the FAC(A) and the GFAC. There's nothing in the report to try put blame on one over the other. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/11/2014 4:58:22 AM EST
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
How did access to RPAs affect your employment of both fixed wing CAS (fast movers) and unmanned CAS? |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/11/2014 5:16:48 AM EST
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I was in CDC on the CVN that launched the F/A-18 when those bombs were dropped at Al Udairi. I pulled the tapes for the investigation. The female FAC(A) -- actually the RIO of the FAC(A) aircraft, was a USN LT, not USAF. Both the FAC(A) and the incident plane were part of CVW-3 onboard Truman, the FAC(A) was an F-14 and the incident plane was an F/A-18. The investigation report clearly puts the blame on the incident pilot, with contributing factors by both the FAC(A) and the GFAC. There's nothing in the report to try put blame on one over the other. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
The crazy thing is I know several very good dudes who were lost to bad CAS. The first one happened right before 9/11 to a buddy of mine from SWC/SOMTB. He had been injured in the trauma lanes by a piece of rebar, and when they did the surgery on him, Womack Army Medical Center left some gauze in his knee that caused the tissue to go necrotic, and he had to have it operated on again. This was in the Special Forces Medical Sergeant Course, which he eventually graduated from...an uphill battle in and of itself, let alone sustaining life-threatening post operative injuries. Westberg was a hard soldier, in excellent shape, with a strong resolve and zero tolerance for BS getting in his way. He got assigned to 3rd Group, then deployed to Kuwait, and was killed in that incident. I learned last year that there was a female USAF FAC who was coordinating the USN F/A-18's into the Udairi impact area, and there was some attempt to place blame on the USAF enlisted JTAC on the ground to divert attention from the incompetence of the female FAC in the air. One of my other buddies who was also an 18D was one of the first responders to the scene, coming from another ODA in 3rd Group. He knew Westberg personally from the course, and provided care and evac to survivors. http://image2.findagrave.com/photos250/photos/2007/364/23189908_119915320154.jpg http://www.iupui.edu/~j21099/forms/newspapers/kuwaitbomb.jpe USA Today Article Troy James Westberg, 1971-2001 http://www.iupui.edu/~j21099/forms/newspapers/belowheadline.html The thing that is even more personal in this is that JD was one of our instructors at SOMTB, only to be killed late that year in Afghanistan by the same method.....namely bad CAS: http://www.angelfire.com/nc3/shadowwarriors/jd_harley.jpg I was in CDC on the CVN that launched the F/A-18 when those bombs were dropped at Al Udairi. I pulled the tapes for the investigation. The female FAC(A) -- actually the RIO of the FAC(A) aircraft, was a USN LT, not USAF. Both the FAC(A) and the incident plane were part of CVW-3 onboard Truman, the FAC(A) was an F-14 and the incident plane was an F/A-18. The investigation report clearly puts the blame on the incident pilot, with contributing factors by both the FAC(A) and the GFAC. There's nothing in the report to try put blame on one over the other. I'm detecting enough passion here to assume your facts won't sway any established opinions. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/11/2014 5:19:35 AM EST
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Ask a guy who has never had OPCON over every single fixed wing close air support asset in an entire theater of war how close air support should be run. Check. With all due respect, Sylvan, about 5 years ago we were in a discussion on CAS, that me and my fellow ALOs wanted to respond to. CC got word of it, and was familiar with you professionally. We were told to not engage in any discussions with you as he believed that 1) you didn't know what you were talking about, and 2) you were too opinionated and limited in your views to make any discussion worthwhile. I don't want to get into it with you here. I'm respectfully asking you to try something new - just for today... stay off the keyboard and just READ for once. You never know. You might actually learn something. If I have to actually use the /ignore feature to eliminate the distraction, I will. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Ask a guy who has never received CAS anything you want to know about CAS. Any virgins want to give some pointers on sex while we are at it? Ask a guy who has never had OPCON over every single fixed wing close air support asset in an entire theater of war how close air support should be run. Check. With all due respect, Sylvan, about 5 years ago we were in a discussion on CAS, that me and my fellow ALOs wanted to respond to. CC got word of it, and was familiar with you professionally. We were told to not engage in any discussions with you as he believed that 1) you didn't know what you were talking about, and 2) you were too opinionated and limited in your views to make any discussion worthwhile. I don't want to get into it with you here. I'm respectfully asking you to try something new - just for today... stay off the keyboard and just READ for once. You never know. You might actually learn something. If I have to actually use the /ignore feature to eliminate the distraction, I will. AND THIS MY FRIENDS IS HOW A PURSE FIGHT STARTS!!!!!  |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/11/2014 5:32:54 AM EST
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Ask a guy who has never received CAS anything you want to know about CAS. Any virgins want to give some pointers on sex while we are at it? Ask a guy who has never had OPCON over every single fixed wing close air support asset in an entire theater of war how close air support should be run. Check. With all due respect, Sylvan, about 5 years ago we were in a discussion on CAS, that me and my fellow ALOs wanted to respond to. CC got word of it, and was familiar with you professionally. We were told to not engage in any discussions with you as he believed that 1) you didn't know what you were talking about, and 2) you were too opinionated and limited in your views to make any discussion worthwhile. I don't want to get into it with you here. I'm respectfully asking you to try something new - just for today... stay off the keyboard and just READ for once. You never know. You might actually learn something. If I have to actually use the /ignore feature to eliminate the distraction, I will. AND THIS MY FRIENDS IS HOW A PURSE FIGHT STARTS!!!!! http://i26.tinypic.com/rii715.gif I wish. 
He ignores me even when I swing my purse. The Air Force is so professional, they order their officers to ignore dissenting opinions on the internet. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/11/2014 8:37:07 AM EST
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I was in CDC on the CVN that launched the F/A-18 when those bombs were dropped at Al Udairi. I pulled the tapes for the investigation. The female FAC(A) -- actually the RIO of the FAC(A) aircraft, was a USN LT, not USAF. Both the FAC(A) and the incident plane were part of CVW-3 onboard Truman, the FAC(A) was an F-14 and the incident plane was an F/A-18. The investigation report clearly puts the blame on the incident pilot, with contributing factors by both the FAC(A) and the GFAC. There's nothing in the report to try put blame on one over the other. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
The crazy thing is I know several very good dudes who were lost to bad CAS. The first one happened right before 9/11 to a buddy of mine from SWC/SOMTB. He had been injured in the trauma lanes by a piece of rebar, and when they did the surgery on him, Womack Army Medical Center left some gauze in his knee that caused the tissue to go necrotic, and he had to have it operated on again. This was in the Special Forces Medical Sergeant Course, which he eventually graduated from...an uphill battle in and of itself, let alone sustaining life-threatening post operative injuries. Westberg was a hard soldier, in excellent shape, with a strong resolve and zero tolerance for BS getting in his way. He got assigned to 3rd Group, then deployed to Kuwait, and was killed in that incident. I learned last year that there was a female USAF FAC who was coordinating the USN F/A-18's into the Udairi impact area, and there was some attempt to place blame on the USAF enlisted JTAC on the ground to divert attention from the incompetence of the female FAC in the air. One of my other buddies who was also an 18D was one of the first responders to the scene, coming from another ODA in 3rd Group. He knew Westberg personally from the course, and provided care and evac to survivors. http://image2.findagrave.com/photos250/photos/2007/364/23189908_119915320154.jpg http://www.iupui.edu/~j21099/forms/newspapers/kuwaitbomb.jpe USA Today Article Troy James Westberg, 1971-2001 http://www.iupui.edu/~j21099/forms/newspapers/belowheadline.html The thing that is even more personal in this is that JD was one of our instructors at SOMTB, only to be killed late that year in Afghanistan by the same method.....namely bad CAS: http://www.angelfire.com/nc3/shadowwarriors/jd_harley.jpg I was in CDC on the CVN that launched the F/A-18 when those bombs were dropped at Al Udairi. I pulled the tapes for the investigation. The female FAC(A) -- actually the RIO of the FAC(A) aircraft, was a USN LT, not USAF. Both the FAC(A) and the incident plane were part of CVW-3 onboard Truman, the FAC(A) was an F-14 and the incident plane was an F/A-18. The investigation report clearly puts the blame on the incident pilot, with contributing factors by both the FAC(A) and the GFAC. There's nothing in the report to try put blame on one over the other. Did three days at OP 10 on Udari in AUG2009. I don't believe in places feeling 'spooky', but that may have been my one exception. We had more bonehead errors committed there than any other spot on the globe for a MEU TACP and RW/FW Squadron who worked together for a year. I couldn't explain it. RIP to those controllers. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/11/2014 11:21:25 AM EST
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Really? Who the fuck cares. The main issue rotary wing brings with it is slower speeds, and less loiter. Rotary wing CCA actually has SA, and PID. The targeting and tracking tech is as good or better than fixed wing, and we can actually use the weapons we have. My old ride had no tech, but we are fearless and get in close. The 64E is amazing. Now I am a magical mystery school bus driver. So its whatever at this point. I like watching armchair commandoes. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
This thread delivers. CCA doesnt need shit Except more firepower than half a squad. E-CAS doesn't require prior coordination either. Really? Who the fuck cares. The main issue rotary wing brings with it is slower speeds, and less loiter. Rotary wing CCA actually has SA, and PID. The targeting and tracking tech is as good or better than fixed wing, and we can actually use the weapons we have. My old ride had no tech, but we are fearless and get in close. The 64E is amazing. Now I am a magical mystery school bus driver. So its whatever at this point. I like watching armchair commandoes. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/11/2014 11:25:00 AM EST
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Ask a guy who has never had OPCON over every single fixed wing close air support asset in an entire theater of war how close air support should be run. Check. With all due respect, Sylvan, about 5 years ago we were in a discussion on CAS, that me and my fellow ALOs wanted to respond to. CC got word of it, and was familiar with you professionally. We were told to not engage in any discussions with you as he believed that 1) you didn't know what you were talking about, and 2) you were too opinionated and limited in your views to make any discussion worthwhile. I don't want to get into it with you here. I'm respectfully asking you to try something new - just for today... stay off the keyboard and just READ for once. You never know. You might actually learn something. If I have to actually use the /ignore feature to eliminate the distraction, I will. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Ask a guy who has never received CAS anything you want to know about CAS. Any virgins want to give some pointers on sex while we are at it? Ask a guy who has never had OPCON over every single fixed wing close air support asset in an entire theater of war how close air support should be run. Check. With all due respect, Sylvan, about 5 years ago we were in a discussion on CAS, that me and my fellow ALOs wanted to respond to. CC got word of it, and was familiar with you professionally. We were told to not engage in any discussions with you as he believed that 1) you didn't know what you were talking about, and 2) you were too opinionated and limited in your views to make any discussion worthwhile. I don't want to get into it with you here. I'm respectfully asking you to try something new - just for today... stay off the keyboard and just READ for once. You never know. You might actually learn something. If I have to actually use the /ignore feature to eliminate the distraction, I will. Every time you post, you remind me of a Soviet-era economist explaining in detail how resources are allocated as efficiently as possible and how anyone who complains just doesn't appreciate the complexities of managing an economy as big as that of the USSR. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/11/2014 11:26:01 AM EST
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Every time you post, you remind me of a Soviet-era economist explaining in detail how resources are allocated as efficiently as possible and how anyone who complains just doesn't appreciate the complexities of managing an economy as big as that of the USSR. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Ask a guy who has never received CAS anything you want to know about CAS. Any virgins want to give some pointers on sex while we are at it? Ask a guy who has never had OPCON over every single fixed wing close air support asset in an entire theater of war how close air support should be run. Check. With all due respect, Sylvan, about 5 years ago we were in a discussion on CAS, that me and my fellow ALOs wanted to respond to. CC got word of it, and was familiar with you professionally. We were told to not engage in any discussions with you as he believed that 1) you didn't know what you were talking about, and 2) you were too opinionated and limited in your views to make any discussion worthwhile. I don't want to get into it with you here. I'm respectfully asking you to try something new - just for today... stay off the keyboard and just READ for once. You never know. You might actually learn something. If I have to actually use the /ignore feature to eliminate the distraction, I will. Every time you post, you remind me of a Soviet-era economist explaining in detail how resources are allocated as efficiently as possible and how anyone who complains just doesn't appreciate the complexities of managing an economy as big as that of the USSR. I lol'd. We are the Soviet Union in too many ways. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/11/2014 11:28:16 AM EST
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I wish.
He ignores me even when I swing my purse. The Air Force is so professional, they order their officers to ignore dissenting opinions on the internet.  http://youtu.be/nRB8Jor8tPsQuote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Ask a guy who has never received CAS anything you want to know about CAS. Any virgins want to give some pointers on sex while we are at it? Ask a guy who has never had OPCON over every single fixed wing close air support asset in an entire theater of war how close air support should be run. Check. With all due respect, Sylvan, about 5 years ago we were in a discussion on CAS, that me and my fellow ALOs wanted to respond to. CC got word of it, and was familiar with you professionally. We were told to not engage in any discussions with you as he believed that 1) you didn't know what you were talking about, and 2) you were too opinionated and limited in your views to make any discussion worthwhile. I don't want to get into it with you here. I'm respectfully asking you to try something new - just for today... stay off the keyboard and just READ for once. You never know. You might actually learn something. If I have to actually use the /ignore feature to eliminate the distraction, I will. AND THIS MY FRIENDS IS HOW A PURSE FIGHT STARTS!!!!! http://i26.tinypic.com/rii715.gif I wish.
He ignores me even when I swing my purse. The Air Force is so professional, they order their officers to ignore dissenting opinions on the internet. http://youtu.be/nRB8Jor8tPsI used to thing the Army was plagued with a lot of senior leader groupthink, until I started working closely with the AF. The Army is a regular debate club compared to the AF. The Army actually exerts effort to convince its field grades to not blindly follow doctrine and regs, but to contribute to their adaptation and evolution. The AF seems to focus its professional development energies on teaching its own people why and how it already has all the answers. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/11/2014 11:29:23 AM EST
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I lol'd. We are the Soviet Union in too many ways. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Ask a guy who has never received CAS anything you want to know about CAS. Any virgins want to give some pointers on sex while we are at it? Ask a guy who has never had OPCON over every single fixed wing close air support asset in an entire theater of war how close air support should be run. Check. With all due respect, Sylvan, about 5 years ago we were in a discussion on CAS, that me and my fellow ALOs wanted to respond to. CC got word of it, and was familiar with you professionally. We were told to not engage in any discussions with you as he believed that 1) you didn't know what you were talking about, and 2) you were too opinionated and limited in your views to make any discussion worthwhile. I don't want to get into it with you here. I'm respectfully asking you to try something new - just for today... stay off the keyboard and just READ for once. You never know. You might actually learn something. If I have to actually use the /ignore feature to eliminate the distraction, I will. Every time you post, you remind me of a Soviet-era economist explaining in detail how resources are allocated as efficiently as possible and how anyone who complains just doesn't appreciate the complexities of managing an economy as big as that of the USSR. I lol'd. We are the Soviet Union in too many ways. centralized warfare is best warfare. we must marshal our limited assets to mass effects at the decisive point to achieve the combatant commander's operational objectives. Now, if you can tell me the decisive point in a counter insurgency, that would be a useful operational concept. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/11/2014 11:38:36 AM EST
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I've actually sat in the chair and had to make the call that, nope... sorry army unit... you don't get CAS for your convoy, even when I've had a bad feeling about it for whatever reason. But you have to keep your priorities in line with strategy. Sometimes those decisions have cost lives, and that sucks, but in the end, it's not about the troops, ti's about mission accomplishment. The guy in the chair exists to support the guy on the ground. Did you forget that? This is a COIN / ground war. This is our war (USA/USMC). The USAF cannot seem to embrace the support role dictated by this type of conflict; why is that? And mission accomplishment? Your mission is to support ground forces. You have no other mission in the CENTCOM theater. When the Taliban starts fielding jet fighters, you can have your own mission. Sit down and color in cadence with us instead of drawing on the walls in the other room to the tune of your own drummer. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/11/2014 11:45:40 AM EST
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Not even I am crazy enough to think that. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Do you think the Kenyan gave the Taliban the secrets to spoof CAS targeting to the in order to release Bergdahl? 5 U.S. servicemen were killed by a misplaced aerial bomb after Bergdahl's release.  |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/11/2014 1:24:35 PM EST
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Every time you post, you remind me of a Soviet-era economist explaining in detail how resources are allocated as efficiently as possible and how anyone who complains just doesn't appreciate the complexities of managing an economy as big as that of the USSR. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Ask a guy who has never received CAS anything you want to know about CAS. Any virgins want to give some pointers on sex while we are at it? Ask a guy who has never had OPCON over every single fixed wing close air support asset in an entire theater of war how close air support should be run. Check. With all due respect, Sylvan, about 5 years ago we were in a discussion on CAS, that me and my fellow ALOs wanted to respond to. CC got word of it, and was familiar with you professionally. We were told to not engage in any discussions with you as he believed that 1) you didn't know what you were talking about, and 2) you were too opinionated and limited in your views to make any discussion worthwhile. I don't want to get into it with you here. I'm respectfully asking you to try something new - just for today... stay off the keyboard and just READ for once. You never know. You might actually learn something. If I have to actually use the /ignore feature to eliminate the distraction, I will. Every time you post, you remind me of a Soviet-era economist explaining in detail how resources are allocated as efficiently as possible and how anyone who complains just doesn't appreciate the complexities of managing an economy as big as that of the USSR. I lol'd too 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/11/2014 2:06:14 PM EST
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The guy in the chair exists to support the guy on the ground. Did you forget that? This is a COIN / ground war. This is our war (USA/USMC). The USAF cannot seem to embrace the support role dictated by this type of conflict; why is that? And mission accomplishment? Your mission is to support ground forces. You have no other mission in the CENTCOM theater. When the Taliban starts fielding jet fighters, you can have your own mission. Sit down and color in cadence with us instead of drawing on the walls in the other room to the tune of your own drummer. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I've actually sat in the chair and had to make the call that, nope... sorry army unit... you don't get CAS for your convoy, even when I've had a bad feeling about it for whatever reason. But you have to keep your priorities in line with strategy. Sometimes those decisions have cost lives, and that sucks, but in the end, it's not about the troops, ti's about mission accomplishment. The guy in the chair exists to support the guy on the ground. Did you forget that? This is a COIN / ground war. This is our war (USA/USMC). The USAF cannot seem to embrace the support role dictated by this type of conflict; why is that? And mission accomplishment? Your mission is to support ground forces. You have no other mission in the CENTCOM theater. When the Taliban starts fielding jet fighters, you can have your own mission. Sit down and color in cadence with us instead of drawing on the walls in the other room to the tune of your own drummer. First- the ASOC does support the guys on the ground, in furtherance of higher echelon objectives. It's a case of 6 teets, 7 pigs. From the perspective of a Joe on the ground or in a Humvee, it's hard to see the bigger picture. Some people get CAS, some people don't. ALL TICS get CAS. You're trying to project some company man callous attitude on me and an entire military service that just isn't there. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/11/2014 2:10:15 PM EST
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
First- the ASOC does support the guys on the ground, in furtherance of higher echelon objectives. It's a case of 6 teets, 7 pigs. From the perspective of a Joe on the ground or in a Humvee, it's hard to see the bigger picture. Some people get CAS, some people don't. ALL TICS get CAS. You're trying to project some company man callous attitude on me and an entire military service that just isn't there. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I've actually sat in the chair and had to make the call that, nope... sorry army unit... you don't get CAS for your convoy, even when I've had a bad feeling about it for whatever reason. But you have to keep your priorities in line with strategy. Sometimes those decisions have cost lives, and that sucks, but in the end, it's not about the troops, ti's about mission accomplishment. The guy in the chair exists to support the guy on the ground. Did you forget that? This is a COIN / ground war. This is our war (USA/USMC). The USAF cannot seem to embrace the support role dictated by this type of conflict; why is that? And mission accomplishment? Your mission is to support ground forces. You have no other mission in the CENTCOM theater. When the Taliban starts fielding jet fighters, you can have your own mission. Sit down and color in cadence with us instead of drawing on the walls in the other room to the tune of your own drummer. First- the ASOC does support the guys on the ground, in furtherance of higher echelon objectives. It's a case of 6 teets, 7 pigs. From the perspective of a Joe on the ground or in a Humvee, it's hard to see the bigger picture. Some people get CAS, some people don't. ALL TICS get CAS. You're trying to project some company man callous attitude on me and an entire military service that just isn't there. maybe more airframes for cheaper would mean more people get CAS and less people die. million dollar sortie with a bomber designed to nuke the ruskies killed 5 of the wrong guys in a completely permissive environment. maybe, just maybe, there is a better way. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/11/2014 2:20:56 PM EST
[#31]
Once you realize that the only reason the USAF exists as an independent service is to prevent aircraft from being used in support of the Army on the ground everything makes sense. And to wage a strategic air war that is absolutely necessary. The only strategic airpower worthy of the name is nuclear.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/11/2014 2:24:20 PM EST
[#32]
You aren't talking to Joe in this thread. You've got IN Field Grade CDRs, JTACs, FOs, FSOs, PLs and pilots, and they pretty much all disagree with you.
Doctrinal CAS may work in MCO but you clearly don't understand COIN/LIC or the other considerations involved. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/11/2014 2:28:10 PM EST
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I was in CDC on the CVN that launched the F/A-18 when those bombs were dropped at Al Udairi. I pulled the tapes for the investigation. The female FAC(A) -- actually the RIO of the FAC(A) aircraft, was a USN LT, not USAF. Both the FAC(A) and the incident plane were part of CVW-3 onboard Truman, the FAC(A) was an F-14 and the incident plane was an F/A-18. The investigation report clearly puts the blame on the incident pilot, with contributing factors by both the FAC(A) and the GFAC. There's nothing in the report to try put blame on one over the other. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
The crazy thing is I know several very good dudes who were lost to bad CAS. The first one happened right before 9/11 to a buddy of mine from SWC/SOMTB. He had been injured in the trauma lanes by a piece of rebar, and when they did the surgery on him, Womack Army Medical Center left some gauze in his knee that caused the tissue to go necrotic, and he had to have it operated on again. This was in the Special Forces Medical Sergeant Course, which he eventually graduated from...an uphill battle in and of itself, let alone sustaining life-threatening post operative injuries. Westberg was a hard soldier, in excellent shape, with a strong resolve and zero tolerance for BS getting in his way. He got assigned to 3rd Group, then deployed to Kuwait, and was killed in that incident. I learned last year that there was a female USAF FAC who was coordinating the USN F/A-18's into the Udairi impact area, and there was some attempt to place blame on the USAF enlisted JTAC on the ground to divert attention from the incompetence of the female FAC in the air. One of my other buddies who was also an 18D was one of the first responders to the scene, coming from another ODA in 3rd Group. He knew Westberg personally from the course, and provided care and evac to survivors. http://image2.findagrave.com/photos250/photos/2007/364/23189908_119915320154.jpg http://www.iupui.edu/~j21099/forms/newspapers/kuwaitbomb.jpe USA Today Article Troy James Westberg, 1971-2001 http://www.iupui.edu/~j21099/forms/newspapers/belowheadline.html The thing that is even more personal in this is that JD was one of our instructors at SOMTB, only to be killed late that year in Afghanistan by the same method.....namely bad CAS: http://www.angelfire.com/nc3/shadowwarriors/jd_harley.jpg I was in CDC on the CVN that launched the F/A-18 when those bombs were dropped at Al Udairi. I pulled the tapes for the investigation. The female FAC(A) -- actually the RIO of the FAC(A) aircraft, was a USN LT, not USAF. Both the FAC(A) and the incident plane were part of CVW-3 onboard Truman, the FAC(A) was an F-14 and the incident plane was an F/A-18. The investigation report clearly puts the blame on the incident pilot, with contributing factors by both the FAC(A) and the GFAC. There's nothing in the report to try put blame on one over the other. Small world, and thanks for clarifying that. That jogs the memory some, as I now recall the story was relayed to me about her as you describe, riding the rear seat of an F-14 acting as the FAC Air. Is it correct that she was vectoring them onto target from the target side? I only got more of the story just last year from a SF retired SGM who was there at the time with 3rd Group. It's been about 12 or 13 years, but the other 18D buddy of mine who was one of the first on scene said something about the gun to target line with the laser designator, and the GBU's couldn't discern target from source due to the angle of the approach. Every CAS mission I've called in, I vectored the pilot off a known and clearly identifiable terrain feature either to our rear right or left, and preferably they would approach from that angle. That way we could bias them so they would see us off one shoulder for sure, not come right over us when making their friendly forces ID and initial run when getting SA of the TGT area. We used certain control measures to indicate our position. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/11/2014 2:33:53 PM EST
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
First- the ASOC does support the guys on the ground, in furtherance of higher echelon objectives. It's a case of 6 teets, 7 pigs. From the perspective of a Joe on the ground or in a Humvee, it's hard to see the bigger picture. Some people get CAS, some people don't. ALL TICS get CAS. You're trying to project some company man callous attitude on me and an entire military service that just isn't there. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I've actually sat in the chair and had to make the call that, nope... sorry army unit... you don't get CAS for your convoy, even when I've had a bad feeling about it for whatever reason. But you have to keep your priorities in line with strategy. Sometimes those decisions have cost lives, and that sucks, but in the end, it's not about the troops, ti's about mission accomplishment. The guy in the chair exists to support the guy on the ground. Did you forget that? This is a COIN / ground war. This is our war (USA/USMC). The USAF cannot seem to embrace the support role dictated by this type of conflict; why is that? And mission accomplishment? Your mission is to support ground forces. You have no other mission in the CENTCOM theater. When the Taliban starts fielding jet fighters, you can have your own mission. Sit down and color in cadence with us instead of drawing on the walls in the other room to the tune of your own drummer. First- the ASOC does support the guys on the ground, in furtherance of higher echelon objectives. It's a case of 6 teets, 7 pigs. From the perspective of a Joe on the ground or in a Humvee, it's hard to see the bigger picture. Some people get CAS, some people don't. ALL TICS get CAS. You're trying to project some company man callous attitude on me and an entire military service that just isn't there. So what exactly is the quantifier for an "official TIC" Because I have definitely experienced TICs without CAS Maybe they weren't official TICS, |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/11/2014 2:38:40 PM EST
[#35]
Quoted:
If I don't know what I am talking about, prove it. A-10 needs to go. Since 2001, no fixed-wing combat aircraft have been lost to enemy fire A-10 shot down by Roland in 2003. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/11/2014 2:44:49 PM EST
[#36]
As a TACP:
How do I beef up my 1972s to not get a section 2 read back? How can I spin it to get the aircraft I want? Can I ever justify a GBU-43/B or other weapon system like a CBU-97? |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/11/2014 2:49:06 PM EST
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So what exactly is the quantifier for an "official TIC" Because I have definitely experienced TICs without CAS Maybe they weren't official TICS, Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I've actually sat in the chair and had to make the call that, nope... sorry army unit... you don't get CAS for your convoy, even when I've had a bad feeling about it for whatever reason. But you have to keep your priorities in line with strategy. Sometimes those decisions have cost lives, and that sucks, but in the end, it's not about the troops, ti's about mission accomplishment. The guy in the chair exists to support the guy on the ground. Did you forget that? This is a COIN / ground war. This is our war (USA/USMC). The USAF cannot seem to embrace the support role dictated by this type of conflict; why is that? And mission accomplishment? Your mission is to support ground forces. You have no other mission in the CENTCOM theater. When the Taliban starts fielding jet fighters, you can have your own mission. Sit down and color in cadence with us instead of drawing on the walls in the other room to the tune of your own drummer. First- the ASOC does support the guys on the ground, in furtherance of higher echelon objectives. It's a case of 6 teets, 7 pigs. From the perspective of a Joe on the ground or in a Humvee, it's hard to see the bigger picture. Some people get CAS, some people don't. ALL TICS get CAS. You're trying to project some company man callous attitude on me and an entire military service that just isn't there. So what exactly is the quantifier for an "official TIC" Because I have definitely experienced TICs without CAS Maybe they weren't official TICS, How far in advance did you schedule them? |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/11/2014 2:52:25 PM EST
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
But you have to remember, it's not all about capabilities on the battlefield. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
How retarded would it be to get rid of the A-10? But you have to remember, it's not all about capabilities on the battlefield. Actually, it is. Or it should be. The system should address the expected and the most dangerous threats which should permit it to satisfactorily address things in the range in between. You concurrently do your engineering to address sustainment so that it is feasible to sustain. To do otherwise is a critical failure in thinking strategically. For how do you achieve the objective without winning on the battlefield? |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/11/2014 3:11:02 PM EST
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
If I don't know what I am talking about, prove it. A-10 needs to go. Since 2001, no fixed-wing combat aircraft have been lost to enemy fire A-10 shot down by Roland in 2003. shit. Can't argue that. I have no idea how I missed that. That it was an A-10 is ironic, however. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/11/2014 3:16:17 PM EST
[#40]
What doctrinal or procedural changes to rectify these issues has 3rd Army/ARCENT/CFLCC submitted?
Which were accepted? Which were rejected? By whom? What changes to Joint Air doctrine has big Army submitted? Which were rejected? By whom? |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/11/2014 3:18:54 PM EST
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
What doctrinal or procedural changes to rectify these issues has 3rd Army/ARCENT/CFLCC submitted? Which were accepted? Which were rejected? By whom? What changes to Joint Air doctrine has big Army submitted? Which were rejected? By whom? you keep asking what army generals are doing. How many times do I have to tell you nothing? Army has 5700 aircraft. AF has the same. Navy/Marines have a few hundred less. Rather than changing doctrine we just buy more shit. I know apportioned C-130s were used in Iraq for 1st CAV for a "trial" period, deemed a success, and then never replicated. why? hell if I know. If I was a 4 star maybe I could fill you in better. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/11/2014 3:22:09 PM EST
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Once you realize that the only reason the USAF exists as an independent service is to prevent aircraft from being used in support of the Army on the ground everything makes sense. And to wage a strategic air war that is absolutely necessary. The only strategic airpower worthy of the name is nuclear. Seems like the truth.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/11/2014 3:23:21 PM EST
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Have any fast movers done gun runs on ground targets at all? 'Cause that would give me blood flow. Just off the top of my head. I know for a fact F-15E's have done gun runs in AFG. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/11/2014 3:27:03 PM EST
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I know for a fact F-15E's have done gun runs in AFG. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Have any fast movers done gun runs on ground targets at all? 'Cause that would give me blood flow. Just off the top of my head. I know for a fact F-15E's have done gun runs in AFG. F16 pilot augered in on a gun run. KIA and DFC. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/11/2014 3:36:10 PM EST
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It depends on what they replace it with. I don't think the 35 would be the best replacement, and so far, I haven't seen anything in the pipeline that has made it far enough to make me think, "Hey, this would work". But you have to remember, it's not all about capabilities on the battlefield. You have to consider the costs associated with sustaining the fleet, the maintenance footprint, and other things like the experience and competence of the community. Right now we have a sizable fleet of A-10 aircraft, and a large community of very experienced aviators, maintainers, and planners. In fact, the single most prolific population of Sandy and FAC-A certified pilots come from the A-10 community. Even if they developed the next, best thing for Close Air Support, you still have to take into account that much of the expertise you had in the existing community gets nearly wiped, and there will be a time spanning years until we get it all back, even with a phased approach. If they're going to do it, do it during peace time. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
How retarded would it be to get rid of the A-10? It depends on what they replace it with. I don't think the 35 would be the best replacement, and so far, I haven't seen anything in the pipeline that has made it far enough to make me think, "Hey, this would work". But you have to remember, it's not all about capabilities on the battlefield. You have to consider the costs associated with sustaining the fleet, the maintenance footprint, and other things like the experience and competence of the community. Right now we have a sizable fleet of A-10 aircraft, and a large community of very experienced aviators, maintainers, and planners. In fact, the single most prolific population of Sandy and FAC-A certified pilots come from the A-10 community. Even if they developed the next, best thing for Close Air Support, you still have to take into account that much of the expertise you had in the existing community gets nearly wiped, and there will be a time spanning years until we get it all back, even with a phased approach. If they're going to do it, do it during peace time. You know, for being in the Armed Forces, that was one of the most risk intolerant things I've heard/read in quite some time. Interesting. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/11/2014 3:38:07 PM EST
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
you keep asking what army generals are doing. How many times do I have to tell you nothing? Army has 5700 aircraft. AF has the same. Navy/Marines have a few hundred less. Rather than changing doctrine we just buy more shit. I know apportioned C-130s were used in Iraq for 1st CAV for a "trial" period, deemed a success, and then never replicated. why? hell if I know. If I was a 4 star maybe I could fill you in better. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
What doctrinal or procedural changes to rectify these issues has 3rd Army/ARCENT/CFLCC submitted? Which were accepted? Which were rejected? By whom? What changes to Joint Air doctrine has big Army submitted? Which were rejected? By whom? you keep asking what army generals are doing. How many times do I have to tell you nothing? Army has 5700 aircraft. AF has the same. Navy/Marines have a few hundred less. Rather than changing doctrine we just buy more shit. I know apportioned C-130s were used in Iraq for 1st CAV for a "trial" period, deemed a success, and then never replicated. why? hell if I know. If I was a 4 star maybe I could fill you in better. That's a staff action. It may get briefed up, but action is happening at the O4/O5 level. Contentious stuff may get briefed up, but 99% is transparent! probably even to O6s. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/11/2014 3:39:15 PM EST
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Here's how the authority chain works (doctrinally and in general practice): Army Fires has the authority for setting the priorities for all mission, based in turn on GFC and CFC priorities and intent. For a Troops in Contact-When a call for fires goes up the JARN (Joint Air Request Net), at any echelon the unit may opt to fulfill the requirement with organic assets (artillery, mortars, rotary wing), or deny the request (in favor of, say, responding with a QRF or air assault). Silence means assent. If no one at a lower echelon takes the requirement, the ASOC (being delegated authority by the CFACC) will task the mission- assign an aircraft. This decision is based on a few factors that are different in every situation. Things to consider: Who is closest? How long will it take for X to get there? (first two questions are not necessarily redundant). How much playtime (gas) does X have? What weapons do they have? Has JTAC requested particular ordinance or targeting capabilities? Based on X's playtime, what tankers are available to conduct an ad hoc AR, and where are they (and how much offload are they capable of)? Can X be extended, if needed? What constraints are place on airspace/weapons/altitude based on terrain or population? What's my backup plan if X falls out or has to go home for some reason? These are just a few of the considerations that go into assigning a CAS asset to a TIC, and this decision is made in seconds using a working knowledge of all the factors considered. For normal ASRs (Air Service Requests), these are generally planned during the ATO planning cycle at the CAOC MAAP Cell, with changes being made well into the ATO day. Changes for the current ATO day are submitted, with Fires assigning a priority, which the ASOC will task in accordance with the priority within the constraints of the current situation. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Do you expect to have CAS in MCO or that those missions will be fired by artillery? Here's how the authority chain works (doctrinally and in general practice): Army Fires has the authority for setting the priorities for all mission, based in turn on GFC and CFC priorities and intent. For a Troops in Contact-When a call for fires goes up the JARN (Joint Air Request Net), at any echelon the unit may opt to fulfill the requirement with organic assets (artillery, mortars, rotary wing), or deny the request (in favor of, say, responding with a QRF or air assault). Silence means assent. If no one at a lower echelon takes the requirement, the ASOC (being delegated authority by the CFACC) will task the mission- assign an aircraft. This decision is based on a few factors that are different in every situation. Things to consider: Who is closest? How long will it take for X to get there? (first two questions are not necessarily redundant). How much playtime (gas) does X have? What weapons do they have? Has JTAC requested particular ordinance or targeting capabilities? Based on X's playtime, what tankers are available to conduct an ad hoc AR, and where are they (and how much offload are they capable of)? Can X be extended, if needed? What constraints are place on airspace/weapons/altitude based on terrain or population? What's my backup plan if X falls out or has to go home for some reason? These are just a few of the considerations that go into assigning a CAS asset to a TIC, and this decision is made in seconds using a working knowledge of all the factors considered. For normal ASRs (Air Service Requests), these are generally planned during the ATO planning cycle at the CAOC MAAP Cell, with changes being made well into the ATO day. Changes for the current ATO day are submitted, with Fires assigning a priority, which the ASOC will task in accordance with the priority within the constraints of the current situation. Reads like a big circle jerk. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/11/2014 3:46:31 PM EST
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
That's a staff action. It may get briefed up, but action is happening at the O4/O5 level. Contentious stuff may get briefed up, but 99% is transparent! probably even to O6s. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
What doctrinal or procedural changes to rectify these issues has 3rd Army/ARCENT/CFLCC submitted? Which were accepted? Which were rejected? By whom? What changes to Joint Air doctrine has big Army submitted? Which were rejected? By whom? you keep asking what army generals are doing. How many times do I have to tell you nothing? Army has 5700 aircraft. AF has the same. Navy/Marines have a few hundred less. Rather than changing doctrine we just buy more shit. I know apportioned C-130s were used in Iraq for 1st CAV for a "trial" period, deemed a success, and then never replicated. why? hell if I know. If I was a 4 star maybe I could fill you in better. That's a staff action. It may get briefed up, but action is happening at the O4/O5 level. Contentious stuff may get briefed up, but 99% is transparent! probably even to O6s. Not to this guy, maybe my next job. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/11/2014 3:50:09 PM EST
[#49]
I hope this thread isn't indicative of a similar disfunction at a much broader level. Kinda scary if it is and certainly interesting to other countries.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/11/2014 3:51:58 PM EST
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I hope this thread isn't indicative of a similar disfunction at a much broader level. Kinda scary if it is and certainly interesting to other countries. You ever read the threads about missile security and readiness? THOSE are scary. |
|
|
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.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
