CSAF Considers A-10 COIN Squadron

[M2]

CSAF Considers A-10 COIN Squadron

US Air Force ( USAF) Chief of Staff General Michael Moseley has told Jane's he is considering the creation of a new counterinsurgency (COIN) squadron of A-10A Thunderbolt II aircraft for the Air Force Special Operations Command (AFSOC).

Gen Moseley said he is mulling the possibility of putting a squadron of A-10A close-support aircraft inside AFSOC to serve the Special Operations Command, which has the lead engagement role in the US-declared global war on terrorism.

"There’s a variety of counterinsurgency aircraft and other things out there that we've been looking at that would facilitate AFSOC’s partnership with the Special Operations Command," Gen Moseley told Jane's on 12 July.

"I've even asked: is it reasonable to put a squadron or so of A-10s into Special Operations Command?"

The A-10 is widely used to provide close air support to coalition and friendly forces in Iraq and Afghanistan. However, it can be used against all ground targets including armoured platforms.

Gen Moseley's interest in a new A-10 COIN squadron follows recent reports of a new AFSOC proposal for an "irregular warfare" wing. Possible aircraft being floated to fill a strike role in the wing have ranged from a modified air-to-ground Beechcraft AT-6B to an Embraer Tucano or Super Tucano.

However, Gen Moseley cautioned that he is not yet fully committed to the idea of a COIN air unit but is considering it because he believes the USAF needs to be able to meet the "full spectrum of threats" from COIN to state-on-state conflict.

"I don't know if I'm wedded to [the COIN unit] so much as I would like to know the pluses and minuses," said Gen Moseley.

The A-10 Thunderbolt II aircraft--known informally as the Warthog--may offer some key advantages if Gen Moseley decides to establish the COIN squadron. The A-10 was specifically designed to be highly survivable in close air support missions. It is highly maneuvrable at low air speeds and altitudes, boasts a long loiter time and also a titanium cockpit and redundant flight controls.

If established, the A-10 COIN squadron would be the first dedicated strike aircraft unit for COIN since the Douglas A-1 Skyraider: a propeller-driven ground-support aircraft used in the Vietnam War. The aircraft made a name for itself carrying large bomb loads, absorbing heavy fire and demonstrating prolonged endurance — traits similar to those possessed by the A-10.

"We fought all the way through Southeast Asia with A-1s living in the special operations world," noted Gen Moseley.

(Source)

[Guest HercengTN]

I am surprised this has not been discussed till now. My .02 cents, it's a great idea.

[M2]

It has, but not at this level...

Cheers! M2

[Guest]

that would be awesome

[Whitman]

It has, but not at this level...

Cheers! M2

Any chance of AFSOC guys going to fly the COIN A-10 since it would be in their MAJCOM?

[HerkDerka]

Seriously, what's the benefit of moving some Hogs over AFSOC? Hogs already support spec ops and kill insurgents. Where is the need for a change of ownership?

HD

[HerkDerka]

Any chance of AFSOC guys going to fly the COIN A-10 since it would be in their MAJCOM?

Take a pilot out of an AC/MC-130 or a chopper and send them to IFF and Hog FTU? I doubt it.

HD

[X-Citerbox]

Seriously, what's the benefit of moving some Hogs over AFSOC? Hogs already support spec ops and kill insurgents. Where is the need for a change of ownership?

HD

The need for a change of ownership could be, because AFSOC has been allotted more funding / money than ACC, and could afford such a squadron without negatively affecting the F22 budget, my two cents.

[Guest Rainman A-10]

Any chance of AFSOC guys going to fly the COIN A-10 since it would be in their MAJCOM?

NFW.

[Guest Rainman A-10]

Seriously, what's the benefit of moving some Hogs over AFSOC? Hogs already support spec ops and kill insurgents. Where is the need for a change of ownership?

There are several very legitimate reasons that cannot be dicussed here.

The training requirements for an A-10 unit (ops and mx) dedicated to SOF support would have some very specific training requirements that cannot be met if they remain in ACC.

[LJ Driver]

NFW.

Of course the AF wouldn't retrain dudes to fly the A-10 when I'm pretty sure there are a plethora of ACC A-10 pilots that would be chomping at the bit to get into that unit if it was created. Especially considering that they probably wouldn't be doing one tour and then moving on to a UAV!

[HerkDerka]

There are several very legitimate reasons that cannot be dicussed here.

Copy.

So, in your opinion, is this something that needs to happen?

HD

Edited July 25, 2007 by HerkDerka

[HuggyU2]

Halleluiah!!! Reopen the A-10 production line!!!

... that would be chomping at the bit ...

The phrase is "champing at the bit": I was corrected by a good friend on this very matter about 2 months ago.

But whether it is "champing" or "chomping", I'd be doing both.

Edited July 25, 2007 by Huggyu2

[Guest Rainman A-10]

Copy.So, in your opinion, is this something that needs to happen?HD

Very sensitive topic but the simple answer is yes.

Of course the AF wouldn't retrain dudes to fly the A-10 when I'm pretty sure there are a plethora of ACC A-10 pilots that would be chomping at the bit to get into that unit if it was created. Especially considering that they probably wouldn't be doing one tour and then moving on to a UAV!

There would be no promises that they would be immune to a UAV assignment. In fact, I would say they would be more likely to get shacked with one.

[Guest Rainman A-10]

But whether it is "champing" or "chomping", I'd be doing both.

Many would. There is a certain "cool guy club" attribute to this kind of work.

However, there are very few who would be qualified for the initial cadre. After that, I would imagine a slow trickle of hand picked pilots.

I've said it before and I'll say it again, this kinid of flying is not like the standard A-10 mission tasking. Lots of guys think that because they did some training on their local ranges with "SOF" guys that they know what SOF support is all about. There would also be a significant TDY/deployment schedule for these pilots.

There will be a significant learning curve for the SOF world when it comes to using A-10 assets properly. I foresee a very rocky start unless they find an A-10 pilot, O-6 or above, who has direct experience with the SOF support mission, has an established relationship with the members of the SOF community and has an unblemished reputation in the A-10 community. I can count those guys on one hand.

BL: It sounds good but it will be difficult to implement and easy to screw up.

[HerkDerka]

However, there are very few who would be qualified for the initial cadre. After that, I would imagine a slow trickle of hand picked pilots.

Standard AFSOC.

I've said it before and I'll say it again, this kinid of flying is not like the standard A-10 mission tasking. Lots of guys think that because they did some training on their local ranges with "SOF" guys that they know what SOF support is all about. There would also be a significant TDY/deployment schedule for these pilots.

There will be a significant learning curve for the SOF world when it comes to using A-10 assets properly.

Agree on all points. Like you said before, you've got to have your shit wired when supporting SOF.

HD

[Guest SATCOM]

Each and every CCT supports this possibility, and have discussed it for decades....

[LJ Driver]

Very sensitive topic but the simple answer is yes.There would be no promises that they would be immune to a UAV assignment. In fact, I would say they would be more likely to get shacked with one.

Disagree. The very fact that these cats would likely be hand-picked from the ACC community tell me right away that they wouldn't be doing much else. It would be too specialized a unit to do it another way.

[Guest Rainman A-10]

Disagree. The very fact that these cats would likely be hand-picked from the ACC community tell me right away that they wouldn't be doing much else. It would be too specialized a unit to do it another way.

I think you're wrong. It's not like these guys are untouchable or irreplaceable. You have to make room for new guys. AFSOC would be stupid to not use their own pilots to fly their UAVs that are already familiar with the overall mission.

[Vetter]

I'm probably way off base here and I may stupid...but just trying to think outside the box...

Why not dual qual dudes in an aircraft and a UAV? With how things are these days, it seems that all the shooters are becoming synergistic. Why not add UAV detachments to fighter squadrons, AC-130 squadrons and the new COIN squadrons? I think the tactics of each could be merged and I think if I were a pilot getting shot at relying on intel from a UAV, I'd get a warm fuzzy knowing my current, qualified bro back at base is in control of the UAV providing top cover.

Realize, I am ignorant of how things work in a fighter squadron...is having a guy dual qualified unrealistic?

[HerkDerka]

it seems that all the shooters are becoming synergistic.

Somebody promote this guy to the Air Staff...stat!

HD

[MD]

This is the exact reason the USAF should've purchased the Piper PA-48 Enforcer.

[Guest monkeypoo]

If this new sqdn comes through, will the AF be pulling the additional A-10s out of the boneyard?

I wonder if they'll be doing some FAC-A stuff. Sounds like a great mission.

[Guest Rainman A-10]

If this new sqdn comes through, will the AF be pulling the additional A-10s out of the boneyard?

Highly unlikely.

I wonder if they'll be doing some FAC-A stuff.

Every A-10 squadron already does "FAC-A stuff."

[JarheadBoom]

This is the exact reason the USAF should've purchased the Piper PA-48 Enforcer.

Googled it and did some light reading... niice. 10 hardpoints, cheap to operate, same basic engine as the CH-47 Chinook helo.

BUT, the Mustang had plenty of problems with torque roll. The PA-48 has roughly double the HP, but the vertical stab/rudder looks unchanged from the Mustang - bet that sucker would be a handful on a go-around.