AF Light Air Support Aircraft

[Clark Griswold]

1 hour ago, Day Man said:

Definitely inspired by

There’s 0.69% chance of acquiring that airframe but a successor to the MC-12, U-28, RC-26, RC-12, etc all based on the Emb-120/Saab 340/Beech 1900 platform is the right mix for a 1-2-3 punch to delivering Persistent Stare - ISR/Light Strike.

New platform manned ISR + LAAR

Couple that with an all Reaper ER fleet and you can whack a mole more effectively

Edited November 19, 2017 by Clark Griswold

[di1630]

Just read we used F-22’s to bomb poppy processing facilities in Afghanistan...I’d say we could do better at this problem.

[nunya]

1 hour ago, di1630 said:

Just read we used F-22’s to bomb poppy processing facilities in Afghanistan...I’d say we could do better at this problem.

Facilities?  You mean the roof of some mud hut?

[Clark Griswold]

8 hours ago, di1630 said:

Just read we used F-22’s to bomb poppy processing facilities in Afghanistan...I’d say we could do better at this problem.

Yup

The economic exchange factor between belligerents is always relevant, even more so in COIN / LIC.

If we plan to keep running these marathons, we need a sustainability plan as much as we need an exit plan as these things will likely run 15-20 years to kill, build and suppress the enemy long enough to "win". 

 

[ned1]

Yup
The economic exchange factor between belligerents is always relevant, even more so in COIN / LIC.
If we plan to keep running these marathons, we need a sustainability plan as much as we need an exit plan as these things will likely run 15-20 years to kill, build and suppress the enemy long enough to "win". 
 

There's far too much money to be made by the defense industry to just stop using the most expensive means available to attack our enemies. The expense is seen as an advantage by them, not a problem. It's why these wars have persisted for 16 years and will never end. Destruction of surplus also ensures the taxpaying population never gets too comfortable to start questioning why there is no exit strategy.

[ATIS]

On November 19, 2017 at 6:09 AM, ClearedHot said:

Yup, also mainly a civilian plane so a bit harder to turn of the parts train because of a political issue.  The U-28 community has some of the most dedicated Americans I've ever met, but I think most of them would acknowledge they need a better plane to accomplish their mission (faster, can lift more, RANGE).  Interestingly, Scorpion would be an incredible fit as a replacement.

Sprint speed to on-station, nice to have.  Would have to come without impact to on-station time.

Twin Engine, would be very welcome.....can't say enough good things about the PT6 and the maint folks that kept them turning.  It's hard to believe that some of the original tails are still going (I remember when 419 showed up on the ramp day 1). 

I would rather have endurance on station, in a tube like a King Air-ish situation.... where I can be 1) running things pre-infil to post-exfil or 2)  long term find/follow/fix, with a good assortment of radios/sensors/displays and a crew that can handle them/transfer tasking in between.  Two seat Scorpion/AT-6/(insert sexy LSA product here) would complement that, but not replace (IMO). 

Of course this is based off of my experience flying with the initial first/second (and some third) groups of U-28 guys/gals driving my Navy ass around (and some other NSA assets).  ISR is an art, and I made an attempt to Bob Ross the shit out of it.  Having the proper workspace to practice the art is important.   I would drop my civi job in a heartbeat/drag my balls through broken glass to go out and do it again. 

ATIS

Edited November 23, 2017 by ATIS
Spelling idiot

[Clark Griswold]

https://warontherocks.com/2017/11/false-promise-oa-x/

Don't agree with the author's premise but valid critiques are raised, worth a read.

[Lawman]

https://warontherocks.com/2017/11/false-promise-oa-x/ Don't agree with the author's premise but valid critiques are raised, worth a read.

 

 

If they can put Army Rotary Wing in the airspace, they can put a low tech CAS solution in the airspace. And we did....been there, got the T-shirt. Put CAP and SEAD in the air and tell the people that might make things complicated “go ahead bro... we love proving just how good AMRAAM and HARM are.”

 

The authors point reads like an advertisement for more 5th gen solutions to A-10/U-28/Predator problems. We don’t all need to be contingency capable for the knock down fight with the Russians. There was a reason for the Hi-Low mix, and this makes it out like we will completely ignore the Hi part of the equation which when you look at how we supported Raptor and Lightning while wholesale abandoning stuff the 4.5 gen fighters need like the loss of Raven, Weasel, etc we did exactly the opposite.

 

[Clark Griswold]

9 hours ago, Lawman said:

The authors point reads like an advertisement for more 5th gen solutions to A-10/U-28/Predator problems. We don’t all need to be contingency capable for the knock down fight with the Russians.

Amen brother

I am struggling to understand the institutional resistance to a variety of solutions to the missions we face.  Not every problem is a nail.

Some of the problems he laid out (range, speed for survivability, adaptability / updateability, etc.) are all addressed by the Scorpion (shameless plug) and way exceed its competitors.

It amazes me the obliviousness of the AF for how many of its problems with modernization, support, etc... are caused by the gold plated white elephants we keep buying and asking for but this is a service that will rationalize anything...

[Lawman]

Amen brother
I am struggling to understand the institutional resistance to a variety of solutions to the missions we face.  Not every problem is a nail.
Some of the problems he laid out (range, speed for survivability, adaptability / updateability, etc.) are all addressed by the Scorpion (shameless plug) and way exceed its competitors.
It amazes me the obliviousness of the AF for how many of its problems with modernization, support, etc... are caused by the gold plated white elephants we keep buying and asking for but this is a service that will rationalize anything...

It’s like if we fully adopt that scenario... ok fine. The tankers and support aircraft (River Joint/Jstars/Etc) have to be LO capable like... yesterday.

After all we need them for the scenario of no air superiority and a swath of Red Air that somehow doesn’t have to deal with Blue Air and just gets a free pass at the soft underbelly of the stack.

[Clark Griswold]

22 hours ago, Lawman said:

It’s like if we fully adopt that scenario... ok fine. The tankers and support aircraft (River Joint/Jstars/Etc) have to be LO capable like... yesterday.
After all we need them for the scenario of no air superiority and a swath of Red Air that somehow doesn’t have to deal with Blue Air and just gets a free pass at the soft underbelly of the stack.

 

Yup - everybody needs to be 5th gen / LO in the truly contested environment if you want to have sustained ISR, precision strike, etc... to implement complex ROEs.  Inherently impractical for a host of reasons and not necessary.  If it is that kind of fight, there's not time for the 2 hour mud hut watch while it is debated on whether to strike or not.

The Saudis maybe the first one to take it to a non-permissive environment and test it's ability to operate their:

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/15757/saudi-arabia-puts-textrons-scorpion-light-attack-jet-through-the-paces

Article says they could possibly be looking at the Yak-130, an apples to oranges comparison IMO.  

The endurance and design (integrated sensor stations, open architecture, mission bay, etc..) of Scorpion just make it unique among ISR / Light Strike, as cheesy as it is, game changing is true to say.

Another article from The Drive, USMC wants some light strike aircraft partnered with its F-5 aggressor program:

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/8837/marines-want-more-second-hand-f-5-aggressors-and-a-light-attack-aircraft

[Clark Griswold]

Another article on OA-X: https://warontherocks.com/2017/11/oa-x-strikes-back-eight-myths-light-attack/

Don't agree with Myth 5 but more grist for the mill...

[ATIS]

https://www.defenseone.com/business/2017/11/could-new-cessna-find-its-way-battlefield/142844/?utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=EBB 11.29.2017&utm_term=Editorial - Early Bird Brief

Wonder what the flight profile data/numbers look like. Guessing somewhere in the King Air/U-28/Caravan ballpark.

Cheers

ATIS

[tac airlifter]

Good article, but an update to their info: Afghans, like the Iraqis, are doing more than cargo with their 208s in the near future.

[Clark Griswold]

PI went ahead and put a ring on it @Lawman

https://alert5.com/2017/12/01/philippine-air-force-orders-six-a-29s/

 

[Lawman]

On 11/30/2017 at 5:22 PM, Clark Griswold said:

PI went ahead and put a ring on it @Lawman

https://alert5.com/2017/12/01/philippine-air-force-orders-six-a-29s/

 

That writing was in the wall 4 years ago when you could walk around the headquarters of the Strike Wing and they already had posters of it in Phil colors up on the wall. 

[Clark Griswold]

Scorpion testing Agile Pod

https://www.dvidshub.net/image/4061719/afrls-agilepod-shows-isr-versatility-during-scorpion-fit-test

[Hermey]

Another interesting perspective. I know there are a lot of MC-12 turned UPT instructor (T-6/T-38) about to start over in wide body ISR (and not happy about it, virtually guaranteeing they will punch at first opportunity....a large portion will be able to 7-day opt out of it I think). Not to mention most of them have experience standing up a squadron from nothing. I’d expect nothing less from AFPC, zero concern for career desires of these guys....Pilot crisis will get worse before getting better, but that’s a different thread.

https://warontherocks.com/2018/01/an-unconventional-proposal-for-bringing-the-oa-x-to-life/

[Standby]

5 hours ago, Hermey said:

 

https://warontherocks.com/2018/01/an-unconventional-proposal-for-bringing-the-oa-x-to-life/

“Are you serious? That sounds like a duffel blog article.” - My wife. 

[BashiChuni]

21 minutes ago, Standby said:

“Are you serious? That sounds like a duffel blog article.” - My wife. 

my thoughts as well

[Clark Griswold]

Alright let's stir the pot once more...

So only at the moments of track select and assignment night are we deeming guys qualified to operate aircraft that employ weapons?

At no other points in their careers are they to be considered / selected for a new track that could involve that?

There are some exceptions to those above rhetorical questions but as a rule the AF does that, I would say that needs to change.

I can see some issues with the idea that the author proposed but the overall idea, looking to a community with experience in supporting ground forces to help populate a new weapons system oriented to that is not that far fetched. 

Not saying there would not be standards to be met as dudes from a non-fighter/attack/bomber background would have to meet but they should not be by policy shut out (effectively) from ever having opportunities for cross-flowing into these missions / systems. 

Edited January 16, 2018 by Clark Griswold

[di1630]

Alright let's stir the pot once more...
So only at the moments of track select and assignment night are we deeming guys qualified to operate aircraft that employ weapons?
At no other points in their careers are they to be considered / selected for a new track that could involve that?
There are some exceptions to those above rhetorical questions but as a rule the AF does that, I would say that needs to change.
I can see some issues with the idea that the author proposed but the overall idea, looking to a community with experience in supporting ground forces to help populate a new weapons system oriented to that is not that far fetched. 
Not saying there would not be standards to be met as dudes from a non-fighter/attack/bomber background would have to meet but they should not be by policy shut out (effectively) from ever having opportunities for cross-flowing into these missions / systems. 

I’ve met some great pilots who escaped their UPT fate by going ANG so I know that many capable pilots are in heavies/ISR etc who would do just fine in fighters.

One guy I met was a bomber to RPA to UPT to ANG F-16 and he was doing just fine.

Back in the late 90s a bunch of c-130 types switched to F-15C’s and Hogs etc.

I also know helo to f-15e/f-18

[tac airlifter]

I agree Clark.  The authors overall point was that USAF self-imposed limitations, some might say outdated and arbitrary limitations, on how to utilize their pilot force is an obstacle to mission success.  On that point I agree; I fully expect AFSOC to acquire OA-X if the CAF does and it would be dumb not to use U-28/AC-130 folks for initial cadre.  That cadre would be valuable, assuming they were good in their SOF platform, because of their experience not the trainer they flew in UPT.  We put way to much emphasis on track select.  Prepare to be triggered T-38 students & FAIPs: you still don't know shit about fighting! 

That said, the author failed to convince me on his more specific recommendations.  Good conversation starter, and good on him for publishing his thoughts.

[MooseAg03]

Plenty of us from heavies obtained weapons qualifications in RPAs, proving that when the Air Force is desperate they will do what they have to. However, we were treated as red headed step children for a few years until the 11F experience left the squadron. OA-X is another reason for the push to increase production, because anyone left that the Air Force may want to entice into that platform will be long gone before it’s actually fielded. That’s the problem with viewing ex MC-12 guys as a pool of experience, all the ex MC-12 guys I know have taken their experience to Delta.

[Clark Griswold]

54 minutes ago, MooseAg03 said:

Plenty of us from heavies obtained weapons qualifications in RPAs, proving that when the Air Force is desperate they will do what they have to. However, we were treated as red headed step children for a few years until the 11F experience left the squadron. OA-X is another reason for the push to increase production, because anyone left that the Air Force may want to entice into that platform will be long gone before it’s actually fielded. That’s the problem with viewing ex MC-12 guys as a pool of experience, all the ex MC-12 guys I know have taken their experience to Delta.

Yup. 

The MC-12 alumni may not be the deep well on AD the author believes but there are some likely still on AD who would volunteer and do well in an OA-X program, some in the ARC now who would take an MPA tour (3 yrs or so) and other pilots / navs / csos who would volunteer.  It's an all of the above COA to man this quickly if the AF procures OA-X.

OA-X meets a valid operational need, builds a strategic pool of officers and aircrew with direct experience in tactical / kinetic operations and is but one of several things to do for the AF to re-blue itself to an operationally focused force.