Attack designation versus fighter

[Guest Husky04]

I've been searching and can't seem to get a good answer as to why the A-10 is called a fighter. The best answer I got so far was that it handles more like a fighter. Someone also told me it had air-to-air kills versus Iraqi helos before the Eagles got any kills.

Talking with old crusty Navy dudes, they were proud to be called 'Attack' pilots versus fighter pilots. Even though the A-6, A-4, A-7, were all tactical jets, they identified themselves as attack pilots first and the fighter guys were all the F-types. I never saw an old retired colonel more offended than when I made the mistake of even implying that the Hog wasn't a fighter, but an attack platform (meaning in my limited research that A/G was it's specialty).

So I'm just curious why A-10 guys insist on being called fighter guys when they have a much cooler mission (A/G vs A/A) IMHO anyways. Yeah, I've heard the story about carrying A/A missiles just in case, but I would think that if the A-10 has to use it that someone else is seriously slacking in their job.

Similiarly, do AC-130 dudes consider themselves attack pilots? I've seen the gunships categorized as 'Tac Airlift' on AFPC, and I know if I was flying gunships I would be pissed to be lumped in with airlift when bad guys are eating the business end of my 105mm.

Flame away at the FNG.

[Mambo]

I've been searching and can't seem to get a good answer as to why the A-10 is called a fighter. The best answer I got so far was that it handles more like a fighter. Someone also told me it had air-to-air kills versus Iraqi helos before the Eagles got any kills.

The first Eagle kill was on the first night about 10 minutes into the war. The Iraqi helo getting shwacked by a Hog happened February 6.

[Guest alfakilo]

Let's not confuse how the USN and the USAF approach tactical flying. The 'attack' term is far more institutionalized in the culture of naval aviation than it is in the USAF.

That's not to say that Hog drivers have ever downplayed the term...in fact, it's a proud and vibrant part of our vocabulary.

I see it as essentially a cultural question...USAF tactical pilots tend to see tactical aircraft as 'fighters'...everything else is a bomber, tanker, or transport. Back in the day, even recce birds such as the RF-4 were thought of as 'fighters'. We may have jokingly referred to those folks as 'recce pukes', but that was in-house chain-pulling more than anything else.

I flew the F-4, F-104, and the A-10. I think of them all as fighters. They all had a gun, they all carried bombs and missiles, they all demanded a guts-ball attitude. They were fighters regardless of what mission tasking they might have been assigned.

Now...those guys that flew F-102s and F-106s...well, they were interceptor pilots...and everybody knows they needed to wear Depends anytime they got below 40,000'.

[Guest Rainman A-10]

The USAF doesn't refer to A-10 pilots as ATTACK pilots nor does it refer to "A" designated aircraft aircraft (like the A-10 and F/a-22) as ATTACK aircraft.

I don't know why, it's just not the done thing. I do know, however, that it just doesn't matter.

I have never been offended when someone askes the stupid question about the A-10 not being a fighter. Whenever someone tried to tell me that I wasn't a fighter pilot or the A-10 wasn't a "real fighter" I always just laughed. That rarely happened and when it did it was usually some drunken B-1 guy with a chip on his shoulder on patch night. I never understood why it mattered to someone else if the USAF called A-10 guys fighter pilots or if they called A-10s fighters.

Personally, I considered being called an ATTACK pilot a compliment. Unfortunately, it didn't happen very often and it never happened from someone else in the USAF except other A-10 guys (who are typically quite proud to be ATTACK pilots).

I've never had another USAF fighter pilot give me shit about the A-10 not being a fighter aside from an MQT LT LGPOS pilot...who happened to sound off in the MPC in front of three LGPOS patch wearers who knocked him down so hard I thought he was going to cry. Oh yeah, there was one other time when I watched an F-15 Lt give shit to an A-10 Lt shit in the club. I thought the young A-10 kid was doing just fine on his own (he was just looking at the F-15 guy and laughing) and then the F-15 FS/CC jumped in and roared "Are you seriously giving this Hog Driver shit? He has single handedly killed more people than our entire wing! (ref Desert Storm)" 'Nuff said.

Quite frankly, I could've cared less what someone called or thought of the jet. I know what it did when I was wearing it around the sky and that's all that mattered. I'll play my position and you play yours and we'll get to the end zone and score as a team.

The F-117, F-105, E/F/B-111, F-100, A-7 are a couple more examples of jets with "attack" missions that were called fighters by the USAF.

In the end, it only matters what you do. It doesn't matter what you're called. Not one bit.

You are doing it for the wrong reason if it does matter to you what you're called, no matter what you do for a living.

[Beaver]

In the end, it only matters what you do. It doesn't matter what you're called. Not one bit.

That's why no Viper dude on here has ever gotten pissy at the "LGPOS" references. Who gives a shit?

[Guest Husky04]

Thanks all. I didn't put much importance in the name thing, but I was just curious. I just hope to fly anything that gets to bring some pain to the bad guys one day..... or fly anything at all. This board is great.

[Guest Rainman A-10]

That's why no Viper dude on here has ever gotten pissy at the "LGPOS" references. Who gives a shit?

Shack. If anyone knows how to take shit from everyone and their brother it's the LGPOS guys.

Will they take it from a Hog or Mudhen or Albino guy? Yep....and they'll give it back.

Will they take it from a shoe clerk? Nope.

Why the disparity? Well, we all know that when the shit hits the fan and metal is flying all over the place we will all be out there depending on each other. Meanwhile the kickers of box, eaters of paste and cobblers of shoe will be back at base X eating their fourth Hagen Daas and hitting the rack.

FWIW, I have seen a LGPOS guy totally lose his mind about people using that euphemism. He was Dutch and it was a Red Flag mass debrief and he just went bananas. The USAF LGPOS guys tried to talk him down and he just got angrier. Next thing you know there were 85 pilots laughing at the guy (the USAF Viper guys laughing the loudest) while he turned purple.

It was awesome. I'll never forget it. No one present at the time will ever forget it either. What a dumbass.

[Guest LtLoad]

"...the kickers of box, eaters of paste, and cobblers of shoe..."

Ha! Thats got me rolling. I'm going to have to remember that one.

[ClearedHot]

I get the "you are just a C-130 pilot"...or "you fly trash haulers"...I could truly give a rat's a$$ what people say or think. Keep lining up bad guys for me to schwack and you can call my 155,000lb Gunpig whatever the hell you want.

[Guest proudpapa]

Some at the top would get rid of both the F and the A designations (and I guess even "E" and "R"...they'd like an "I-xx" maybe):

Air Force ISR Chief Foresees Downplaying 'F' in F-22, F-35 (Posted: Friday, June 22, 2007)

[Aerospace Daily & Defense Report, 06/22/2007, page 02]

Michael Bruno

Lt. Gen. David Deptula, Air Force deputy chief of staff for intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR), is looking to take the "F" out of the F-22 Raptor and the planned F-35 Joint Strike Fighter and to recast the aircraft as much for their ISR capabilities, he told defense reporters June 21 in Washington.

"The F-22, the F-35 - they're not 'Fs,'" he told the Defense Writers Group. "I'd like to [take] what we term today 'nontraditional ISR' and turn it into traditional ISR."

Deptula predicts a "normalization" of fighter-based ISR missions while sensor and targeting pods, now loaded onto fighters for counter-improvised explosive device and other missions in Iraq and elsewhere, will become a "regular" part of the air fleet's makeup.

Deptula said he is looking for an "effective" balance of fighters as "shooters" and "sensors" and acknowledged that it entails a "different mindset" from historic air-dominance roles such as dogfighting, electronic jamming, ground strike and close-air support missions. The changes mean Air Force officials may have to rethink everything from how pilots are trained to how and where fighters are deployed and how many are purchased.

"How do we extract the capability that is resident in these aircraft," he said. The dual emphases, shooting and sensing, could even help make the case for more aircraft than currently planned for production, he acknowledged.

The Air Force has been working on how it might justify production of the Raptor beyond the 183 aircraft already in the budget to a total nearer the service's oft-stated requirement for 381. With deployments across the Pacific Ocean this year, the Raptor is beginning to demonstrate unique electronic surveillance, electronic warfare and air-to-air and cruise missile defense capabilities. The JSF, meanwhile, is supposed to feature a suite of next-generation sensor and electronic systems.

This month, Air Force officials finished reorganizing the Air Intelligence Agency at Lackland Air Force Base, Texas, under the Air Combat Command as the new Air Force ISR Agency under Deptula (DAILY, May 21). Gen. T. Michael Moseley, Air Force chief of staff, called the realignment a key element in transforming the approach the Air Force is taking to ISR organization.

"ISR has never been more important during our 60 years as an independent service," Moseley said a month ago when the reorganization was announced.

The Air Force ISR makeover will help the service treat intelligence as an Air Force-wide enterprise, coordinate and integrate ISR capabilities and provide them to joint combatant commanders and the intelligence community. The move also could help promote Air Force officers back into top joint staff and combatant commander positions, Deptula told reporters.

Deptula is leading to conclusion three ISR working groups that are examining Air Force ISR capabilities, personnel and organization. After taking stock, Deptula told reporters he will assign "integrators" to help better coordinate acquisition, operation and other elements of the service. Program officials will remain in charge of their acquisitions, he maintained.

[Ill Destructor]

Lt. Gen. David Deptula, Air Force deputy chief of staff for intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR), is looking to take the "F" out of the F-22 Raptor and the planned F-35 Joint Strike Fighter and to recast the aircraft as much for their ISR capabilities, he told defense reporters June 21 in Washington.

Ha. Good luck with that one, sir!

[HerkDerka]

Ugh.

HD

[Murph]

I get the "you are just a C-130 pilot"...or "you fly trash haulers"...I could truly give a rat's a$$ what people say or think. Keep lining up bad guys for me to schwack and you can call my 155,000lb Gunpig whatever the hell you want.

Quoted for awesomeness.

[Guest Ghost63]

Indeed. I loved life in those days in the gunpig...and now I'm going to love life in the Eagle, flying "no mission" and whatever else the new kids want to tell me about it.

I enjoy nothing more than taking (sts) shit and giving it back out among those who do. Just like the other dudes said. But if you're a services puke who's only concern is if its hip hop or country night at the base x rec center or a "combat carpenter" (swear to Got, I've seen it), then don't waste your time. It's comical at best to listen to those who won't hand out labels.

[Guest Rainman A-10]

Indeed. I loved life in those days in the gunpig...and now I'm going to love life in the Eagle, flying "no mission" and whatever else the new kids want to tell me about it.

Huh?

[Guest Boom]

Huh?

He was an Enlisted flyer on the gunpig. He's now in UPT.

[Guest Ghost63]

He was an Enlisted flyer on the gunpig. He's now in UPT.

Winner! Gunner for 9 years, and have caught major sh!t for putting Eagles first and getting them.

[Guest Rainman A-10]

Winner! Gunner for 9 years, and have caught major sh!t for putting Eagles first and getting them.

Interesting, especially in light of your own comments about not having a mission in the F-15.

Hopefully you don't really feel that way since mission is the only thing that really matters. I'm guessing you have some reason you want to fly F-15s other than that's what someone said you should fly or you think they look cool. I'm not sure how the Eagle community is going to accept a guy your age as they are not typically known as being the warmest greeters of people outside the normal flow.

The only thing that matters is that you are flying the mission you feel called to fly.

FWIW, I wouldn't say the F-15s have no mission. I'm sure they have one. They must....right?

[Guest alfakilo]

Indeed. I loved life in those days in the gunpig...and now I'm going to love life in the Eagle, flying "no mission" and whatever else the new kids want to tell me about it.

I enjoy nothing more than taking (sts) shit and giving it back out among those who do.

Perhaps I'm reading the wrong tone into your posts...but if I'm right, you may have a rude awakening when you get into the operational fighter world.

True, we do give each other a fair amount of ribbing in a fighter squadron...but the right to fire away rests on one having something other than blanks in one's clue bag.

As a FNG, your clue bag will be empty...and will remain so for some time. My guess is that most will find your previous experience to be very acceptable...but your acceptance among Eagle drivers as a squadron pilot will rest on more than just having a wise ass mouth.

[Mambo]

I took it to mean that the new kids were telling him that the Eagle has no mission because there is no A/A threats in the current conflict and that he should have picked something else, maybe back to Gunships.

[Guest alfakilo]

Maybe I don't understand the use of the term 'new kid'.

While he may be older than his UPT classmates, he's still a FNG in the eyes of everyone else. He'll get a pat on the back for his enlisted time, but it won't make him first among equals.

[CrateOfThunder]

He was simply saying that he loved flying in the gunpig, understood the camaraderie and joking between airframes, and didn't give a shlt about what any SNAPs thought about it. Now he is going to the Eagle, looking forward to kicking a$$ and doesn't care that people not in the know claim it has "no mission". Gunner is a great dude and will be a great asset to the Eagle community!

[Guest Ghost63]

Thanks bro, didn't catch this one soon enough.

alfakilo and Rainman...see Mambo's post, he seems to have gotten it. The "no mission" bit was in quotations for a reason. Also, I'm pretty sure I have a decent grasp on where an FNG's place is in a squadron. I've been the FNG in a community that would probably rival just about anyone's as far as letting you know where you stand, and when you're (not) allowed to speak, and now I will be again. I know I started with everyone else in learning to fly the airplane, and it will be the same in IFF and RTU. I think the experience has some advantages, but most are intangibles in this world. So I make the corn, clean the bar, and drink most of the weed at roll call with all the other Lt's. I picked Eagles because I love the mission they have and train for, and that's what I want to do. And the term "new kids" would be to my esteemed, but also FNG recent UPT grads fresh outta ROTC/Academy/OTS.

Lastly, I don't expect anything special for spending the last 5 years fighting the war - but having to defend the fact is pretty fvcked up, fighter dude or not. Guess I'm lucky the MWS guys here see it differently.

Edited June 26, 2007 by Ghost63

[Guest alfakilo]

I know I started with everyone else in learning to fly the airplane, and it will be the same in IFF and RTU....I picked Eagles because I love the mission they have and train for, and that's what I want to do. And the term "new kids" would be to my esteemed, but also FNG recent UPT grads fresh outta ROTC/Academy/OTS.

I have to admit I'm not up to speed on the UPT to operational unit transition goes these days...so it's not clear to me what your status is right now. Are you still in UPT?

If so, up till now, all you've had to learn is how to take off and land with minimal airwork. In the fighter world, it's assumed that a pilot can take off and land...your work is done out in the area. It's work that not everyone gets a handle on regardless of their UPT position. It's a large pie to try to eat...take comfort in that the A2A guys only get served a half piece.

Lastly, I don't expect anything special for spending the last 5 years fighting the war - but having to defend the fact is pretty fvcked up, fighter dude or not. Guess I'm lucky the MWS guys here see it differently.

You are still coming across as if you have a chip on your shoulder. If someone has implied that you have to defend your enlisted time, I haven't seen it. Don't take that with you into the squadron...it won't work. You'll find that nobody gives a rats about what you did before...they only want to see what you can do now.

My advice is that you downplay your enlisted background...not that you would be hiding anything, but in this instance, less is more.

One last piece of advice...

When you first get into the squadron, don't ask how long it takes to upgrade to FL.

[Guest Rainman A-10]

You are still coming across as if you have a chip on your shoulder. If someone has implied that you have to defend your enlisted time, I haven't seen it. Don't take that with you into the squadron...it won't work. You'll find that nobody gives a rats about what you did before...they only want to see what you can do now.

My advice is that you downplay your enlisted background...not that you would be hiding anything, but in this instance, less is more.

One last piece of advice...

When you first get into the squadron, don't ask how long it takes to upgrade to FL.

AK is in the house.

Craniums up to the SNAPs...you can argue your points but please do not run this guy out of here. He taught my mentors how to wipe their asses. He has the cred, has flown lots of airplanes and will hand it out old school. He will only give you the truth, which you may not want to hear. He won't "demand respect" but he also won't stick around if people act like little kids. Don't run him off.

Sorry to speak for you AK, just glad to see you found your way in here and I know how lucky the young guys are to have your wisdom.

Ghost, AK is spot on here. You do sound like you have a chip and you also sound like you are bragging up your ability to know more than your fellow FNGs. You have the potential to alienate the new guys and the old guys at the same time. Blow off AK's advice at your own peril.

I got some great advice when I was moving from helos to Hogs. An old schooler (like AK) told me "Son, flying choppers is a lot like jerkin' off...it's a lot of fun while your doing it but no one wants to hear you talk about it afterwards."

Technique only.