AF Light Air Support Aircraft

[FLEA]

26 minutes ago, viper154 said:

RPA is a great asset. Not to specifically answer your JTAC question, but to address why the light attack won’t be drone. 
 

Manning-the RPA enterprise can’t fill that bill. They are doing everything they can to improve manning in their current posturing. Cross training the entire U-28 community would tax the system to much. Long run, it could be be done, but it would take a large amount of assets. The 18x community is trying to become a pure 18x community with minimal 11s, so it would go against that long term plan. 
 

 Hardware-satcom delay makes comms a ass pain, especially with troops on the ground. The KU delay also makes flying at low levels, as well as the “aggressive” maneuvering for gun/rockets pretty much impossible to do safely for both ground guys and the aircraft. Lastly is the requirement for austere ops. You need a ground team to land the 9 at the airfield/farp point, this takes significant time/security  to set up. Also the several million dollar camera is on the front of the aircraft real close to the ground. It’s a recipe for disaster landing on anything not paved and maintained. There are some additional considerations but this is not the appropriate medium for that discussion. 
 

I’ve flown both manned and unmanned ISR aircraft, each are both great at what they do, and have made serious TTP improvements in the last decade. Both also have their respective weaknesses. Can a drone fill these low block CAS mission sets in the future? Probably, but those technology gains aren’t going to happen in the timeline laid out by SOCOM. 

100% agree with everything you said. 

That said, I think the -9 provides an excellent fusion platform for the light attack aircraft if the LAAF is capable of tapping it's sensors. 

[BashiChuni]

8 hours ago, FLEA said:

Just curious, can you articulate why you think this or why? I've been in CAS stacks manned and unmanned, albeit without weapons manned. Also worked in several MPCs for major SOF air operations. Regardless, I never felt the JTACs cared so much as long as the people there did their jobs. I'm not buying the "skin in the game" argument because it's weightless. 

Tac Air nailed it. From my experience I’d say it was the LOS comm w the GFC and my ability to look out the window which added the biggest benefit. 
 

lost link is a big detractor. Jamming. Etc. 

RPA icing restrictions can hamper a lot as well

but I’d take a MQ-9 in the stack over a two ship of anything. 

Edited May 8, 2020 by BashiChuni

[Tank]

1 hour ago, BashiChuni said:

but I’d take a MQ-9 in the stack over a two ship of anything. 

 

[Danger41]

Time now and with our (SOF) RPA partners, I’d agree with Bashi on that. Not the case 9 years ago, but where the MQ-9 RPA community is at now is very impressive. I don’t mean to exclude the ACC MQ-9’s, just not as habitual of a relationship.

On the ground force topic, it does depend but I’m not going to argue because you both have good points (I’m personally more with Lawman but you both have good points).

One thing that blew my mind was talking with certain JTAC/FSO’s is that they know which squadrons are in theater and adjust their game plans accordingly. We were developing a CoF one time and the guy said that “we won’t have the *certain state ANG A-10’s* doing this next week when the *other state ANG A-10’s* leave”. When I asked why it was because “they’re assholes”. That really drove the value of relationships home.

[BashiChuni]

11 hours ago, Tank said:

 

serious. SOF MQ-9s are the heat. I can get their feed instantly. talk to them on the redline. MIRC them. que them instantly to my SPI. and they have 18 hours play time. and highly accurate weapons. some of the shit i've seen that community do is insane. insane.

[Tank]

Looks like Mag Aerospace and Orbital ATK are now in the mix...
 

https://www.foxnews.com/tech/us-special-operations-arms-surveillance-aircraft-for-precision-attack

[Cooter]

3 hours ago, Tank said:

Looks like Mag Aerospace and Orbital ATK are now in the mix...
 

https://www.foxnews.com/tech/us-special-operations-arms-surveillance-aircraft-for-precision-attack

Having worked with both companies and flown the AC-208 for a while this is pretty interesting. Lack of pressurization is a factor depending on where you operate. I would say 8x -114s or 28x APKWS would be extreme, would cut way into fuel. We were putting 14x unguided on with three guys and could only do about 1400 lbs of gas, still about 3 hours play time but APKWS are about 10 lbs heavier. Mission system would need a complete overhaul too, it’s killing people with DOS.  

If they take a multi platform approach I could definitely see a -208 at the low end. Cheap, simple and flexible. Problem with APKWS is lack of hard target Cape unless you throw a penetrator on there (Never used it but willing to try!). Will be interesting to see where this goes. 
 

Cooter

[Gh0stR1d3r]

https://www.airforcemag.com/congress-questions-need-for-new-armed-overwatch-planes-for-socom/

 

And here's how the project dies, strangled in beurocratic red tape

[mcbush]

On 5/28/2019 at 10:57 PM, mcbush said:

Honestly I don’t even know why you guys take the time to discuss this. We’re not any closer to fielding a new airframe than we were 10 years and 1400 posts ago.

The Air Force will never make the intelligent move to acquire a light attack platform. 

Another year down, and we’re further than ever from dedicated light attack.

For the optimists out there... see you next year.

[nsplayr]

https://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/politics/505757-the-growing-need-for-a-modern-aircraft-platform-for-special

[Clark Griswold]

From the article:

it’s time to build a platform that meets the needs of our SOF operators from scratch. New aircraft with the right tools to provide just what the operator needs on the ground, wherever they find themselves. If we don’t do it now, we will have to react aggressively later to meet the need and likely come up with something less capable and more expensive.

Buy the Scorpion.

[viper154]

On 7/4/2020 at 9:06 AM, Clark Griswold said:

From the article:

it’s time to build a platform that meets the needs of our SOF operators from scratch. New aircraft with the right tools to provide just what the operator needs on the ground, wherever they find themselves. If we don’t do it now, we will have to react aggressively later to meet the need and likely come up with something less capable and more expensive.

Buy the Scorpion.

What is the Scorpions dirt/short field ability? The powers that be want a aircraft that can land on on a short dirt strip, grab some gas/munitions and go. TOLD would have to be in the PC-12/C-208 range for it to be a player. From some info I got it seems this is a primary factor/requirement to the powers that be. Who knows if this project is ever going to actually happen, but I’m guessing if it does it’s going to be a prop. 

[Clark Griswold]

What is the Scorpions dirt/short field ability? The powers that be want a aircraft that can land on on a short dirt strip, grab some gas/munitions and go. TOLD would have to be in the PC-12/C-208 range for it to be a player. From some info I got it seems this is a primary factor/requirement to the powers that be. Who knows if this project is ever going to actually happen, but I’m guessing if it does it’s going to be a prop. 

Not sure, I have not seen the requirements but that would check with the interest expressed in the Air Tractor

Not sure if Scorpion has rough field capes, doubt it but I think there’s room for more than one type of light attack
Scorpion geared towards Hybrid Warfare where conventional military capes are used intermixed with SOF & Stability Ops, a likely prop based platform used in austere, SOF focused ops


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Day Man]

i doubt underwing turbofan engines on a plane that short are dirt/rough-field capable...

[Clark Griswold]

i doubt underwing turbofan engines on a plane that short are dirt/rough-field capable...

Yeah but it can be done, MiG 29 has intake doors and upper intake louvres and Scorpion to my knowledge is not offered with that or other devices that can block/prevent FOD but it’s still in development and the design is inherently flexible

Protecting the balls (gigitty) is not a problem as they are retractable and the wing is high with the fat fuselage blocking FOD from impacting the stores during to/land

This is the right plane for the mission as it was designed from the gear up for this mission, if the AF will get behind this concept they will get a great aircraft that provides the support a door kicker wants


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Tank]

Bronco II...

[Hawg15]

6 hours ago, viper154 said:

What is the Scorpions dirt/short field ability? The powers that be want a aircraft that can land on on a short dirt strip, grab some gas/munitions and go. TOLD would have to be in the PC-12/C-208 range for it to be a player. From some info I got it seems this is a primary factor/requirement to the powers that be. Who knows if this project is ever going to actually happen, but I’m guessing if it does it’s going to be a prop. 

IMO that is what kills the light attack altogether if short, unprepared runways is a necessity. The impact of just hardpoints alone on performance is significant, it’s a huge impact when adding bombs and different sorts of pods. The drag hurts even more than the weight. Even jets that have tons of power compared to the hawg feel the struggle when they are heavy and it’s hot on takeoffs. You either will require something that’s in the realm of an actual fighter to get off the ground with some 38s, or sacrifice having a payload that makes you relevant. And if we are talking two engine aircraft that will have SERC requirements here then you can just forget about it. 
 

It sounds like they need a helicopter, not fixed wing. If all they want is apkws duct tape that shit onto some U-28s. 

[Clark Griswold]

Bronco II...

Yeah but....

I prattle on this thread as there is a need as I see it for a manned platform that essentially brings the capes of 4th gen pointy nose without the cost or need for AR for a decent vul time - Bronco 2 and the other t-props are good but limited in speed, range and altitude along with potential for growth, except Bronco 2 as it has an adaptive structure for different mission loads

This is the A-7 of our time, an unsexy but very innovative no nonsense attack design we are unfortunately resisting


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[tac airlifter]

1 hour ago, Tank said:

Bronco II...

Lacks required FAA certifications.  Although technically still in the running for AO the unofficial word is they’ll be DQ.  Also, it sucks.

[Clark Griswold]

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[SPAWNmaster]

American punched out of a supertucano today. Huge props to the Afghan Air Force prosecuting a successful SAR. Was half expecting to hear Pave Hawks. 
 

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/34694/american-pilot-reportedly-ejects-from-afghan-air-force-a-29-light-attack-plane

[Guest PeggyDriver46]

Rolling into a canyon with 50 cals blazing on an A29 sounds like an an aviators wet dream. 

How do you get that job?

[Breckey]

1 hour ago, SPAWNmaster said:

American punched out of a supertucano today. Huge props to the Afghan Air Force prosecuting a successful SAR. Was half expecting to hear Pave Hawks. 
 

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/34694/american-pilot-reportedly-ejects-from-afghan-air-force-a-29-light-attack-plane

The 83 ERQS are only PJs now. They ride on Army CH-47s.

[Clark Griswold]

16 hours ago, LoveDumpster said:

Rolling into a canyon with 50 cals blazing on an A29 sounds like an an aviators wet dream. 

How do you get that job?

https://clearedjobs.net/job/instructor-pilot-a-29-super-tuscano-fighter-san-antonio-texas-477430

 

[SurelySerious]

Clark, just watched a show on the Smithsonian Channel about the OV-10 and their role in Iraq 2015 using APKWS. I know it’s not Scorpion, but good stuff.