AF Light Air Support Aircraft

[busdriver]

You guys realize there's nothing inherently SOF about a plane right?

[Lawman]

You guys realize there's nothing inherently SOF about a plane right?

No but if you're talking about doing integrated training with supported customers SF/Rangers are the guys to lean on, because your average BCT may do 1 Calfex a year and in that the JAAT is about the only time they care if fixed wing shows up.

Those are largely a waste of time depending on rangisms present at whatever particular base causing them to be extremely scripted and often times not reflect realistic scenarios.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[busdriver]

I'm way out of the loop, but my impression is there isn't a shortage of requests for the AF to come play.  More like fending off the wastes of time is the problem.

In any event, you're right about ranges.  Proximity to a good backyard range and airspace is far more important than proximity to any Army unit.

[Sprkt69]

2 hours ago, busdriver said:

I'm way out of the loop, but my impression is there isn't a shortage of requests for the AF to come play.  More like fending off the wastes of time is the problem.

In any event, you're right about ranges.  Proximity to a good backyard range and airspace is far more important than proximity to any Army unit.

If you are trying to work with Army training(NTC/JRTC), they tend to write fixed wing out of their script anyways

[Lawman]

If you are trying to work with Army training(NTC/JRTC), they tend to write fixed wing out of their script anyways

For the most part every unit will request you, because it's easy to hit copy/paste/send.

Nobody is actually expecting you to show up. If you do it's a huge bonus for that ALO to look good for the Bde Commander, but I've seen tons of Calfex's that were deemed successful without the Air ever actually being there. It just becomes a JTAC on a radio pretending to be Hawg.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[di1630]

I heard old retired dudes are being hired in civilian status to fly A-29s at Moody. Anyone know how they fit in?


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

[Tank]

10 hours ago, Clark Griswold said:

Agree that Duke Field is a good location but faces problems with range saturation.  Even with that factor, being at the hub of all things AFSOC is a must for LAAR.

As to Moody, if there is no space there then I would propose Maxwell or an Active Associate unit across town with the AL ANG at KMGM.  Could go either way (sts) for Moody ranges to the east or south for Eglin ranges and as the AL ANG is likely to get the F-35, a unique opportunity to train with a 5th gen asset on a regular basis.

If LAAR can get out of the chute, a good geographical distribution for valid and political/parochial reasons could help the program fend off efforts to kill it when other programs inevitably go over budget and turn cannibal.

I think we mostly consider LAAR in support of SOF ground forces but there has to be role/mission for training with conventional Army/USMC units, what would be an ideal base(s) for training with "Big Army" or USMC?

"What would be an ideal base(s) for training with "Big Army" or USMC?"

 

Moody, Pope, Seymour, Shaw, Peterson, DM, McCord, Beale, Hill, Lackland

[Lawman]

"What would be an ideal base(s) for training with "Big Army" or USMC?"

Moody, Pope, Seymour, Shaw, Peterson, DM, McCord, Beale, Hill, Lackland

I'd go Fairchild before McChord.

Put you on the right side of the mountains to get to Yakima during 8 months of the year, by plane or car.

Love my house at JBLM but god did we find a way to make the field so close yet so far.

[VMFA187]

Why don't you guys come down to Miramar? We have plenty of ramp space...

[Inertia17]

7 hours ago, VMFA187 said:

Why don't you guys come down to Miramar? We have plenty of ramp space...

Now that is an assignment you wouldn't have trouble filling.

[Clark Griswold]

10 hours ago, Tank said:

"What would be an ideal base(s) for training with "Big Army" or USMC?"

Moody, Pope, Seymour, Shaw, Peterson, DM, McCord, Beale, Hill, Lackland

Concur.

 

[Tumbleweed]

21 hours ago, busdriver said:

You guys realize there's nothing inherently SOF about a plane right?

It depends.

[busdriver]

Your name fits

[ClearedHot]

On 4/24/2017 at 11:01 PM, busdriver said:

You guys realize there's nothing inherently SOF about a plane right?

It is not about the plane it is about the mission and I believe the rationale in the AFSOC case is FID.  Dusting off the Marine Corps Small War Manual, something about training partner nations to provide for their own defense.  I see the logic, but AFSOC is feeling the pilot manning pinch like everyone else and I can't see how they are going to find pilots for this "new" project.

Now if they want old washed up guys to come back on contract and fly it

[tac airlifter]

1 hour ago, ClearedHot said:

 AFSOC is feeling the pilot manning pinch like everyone else and I can't see how they are going to find pilots for this "new" project.

I get it, but as an AFSOC pilot wasting my time on a useless staff I hate hearing this.  We have plenty of pilots, we just aren't employing them correctly which ironically is driving more of them to leave, thus worsening the "pilot manning pinch" which is entirely self-inflicted.  If the USAF said "we need pilots who can and want to fly light attack airplanes; volunteers who meet xxxx criteria will be released from less important jobs" they'd have plenty of volunteers, and my guess is the machine would keep humming along just fine.  That bloated staff manning is prioritized above a genuine combat need is further proof current leadership is incapable of fixing the retention problem. 

[ClearedHot]

What bloated staff?  Are you on a deployed staff?

Last I heard the rated staff manning was sub 75% and the AFSOC rated staff was anything but bloated.

[Clark Griswold]

7 hours ago, ClearedHot said:

It is not about the plane it is about the mission and I believe the rationale in the AFSOC case is FID.  Dusting off the Marine Corps Small War Manual, something about training partner nations to provide for their own defense.  I see the logic, but AFSOC is feeling the pilot manning pinch like everyone else and I can't see how they are going to find pilots for this "new" project.

Now if they want old washed up guys to come back on contract and fly it

They want contract A-29 IPs in SA, TX...

https://www.jobs.net/jobs/dyncorp/en-us/job/United-States/Instructor-Pilot-A-29-Super-Tuscano-Fighter/J3F2DH652PRCT05GG12/

[tac airlifter]

1 hour ago, ClearedHot said:

What bloated staff?  Are you on a deployed staff?

Last I heard the rated staff manning was sub 75% and the AFSOC rated staff was anything but bloated.

I'm neither deployed nor at AFSOC staff.  It's bloated.  As you know, staff experiences vary.  Mine may be anomalous.  But I've been at a major HQ for a year and have yet to see any rated person used for their rated expertise.  I know the plural of anecdote is not data, but it's hard to hear statements like yours about how AFSOC is hurting for pilots.   We need an audit, especially of joint billets.

sorry for the thread drift.  

Edited April 28, 2017 by tac airlifter

[BashiChuni]

light attack would persuade me to stick around at the end of my commitment and i think others would do the same

[Day Man]

6 hours ago, Clark Griswold said:

They want contract A-29 IPs in SA, TX...

https://www.jobs.net/jobs/dyncorp/en-us/job/United-States/Instructor-Pilot-A-29-Super-Tuscano-Fighter/J3F2DH652PRCT05GG12/

The hell is a Super Tuscano?

[busdriver]

13 hours ago, ClearedHot said:

It is not about the plane it is about the mission

Which was my, apparently very poorly made, point.  I get the desire/logic of a light attack aircraft for AvFID, but the talk about putting them all over the place to be close to US SOF units seems completely at odds to the way the AvFID mission is currently organized.  Not to mention the outright discussion of AFSOC being the right MAJCOM for the aircraft, irrespective of the mission.

 

[Clark Griswold]

The hell is a Super Tuscano?

A typo



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[SurelySerious]

The hell is a Super Tuscano?

[Clark Griswold]

28 minutes ago, busdriver said:

Which was my, apparently very poorly made, point.  I get the desire/logic of a light attack aircraft for AvFID, but the talk about putting them all over the place to be close to US SOF units seems completely at odds to the way the AvFID mission is currently organized.  Not to mention the outright discussion of AFSOC being the right MAJCOM for the aircraft, irrespective of the mission.

There's a logic to geographic distribution beyond the AvFID focused bases.

AFSOC might not be the only place to put them, ACC could get a contingent of the buy.   They have a common baseline configuration but each MAJCOM could add their pods & mods as they see fit.

ACC could focus on light strike, tactical ISR, FAC-A in conventional operations once the threat is suppressed and AFSOC has the advise and train mission along with SOF support.

Edited April 29, 2017 by Clark Griswold

[HU&W]

1 hour ago, Day Man said:

The hell is a Super Tuscano?

Super Tuscans are an unofficial category of Tuscan wines, not recognized within the Italian wine classification system. Although an extraordinary amount of wines claim to be “the first Super Tuscan,” most would agree that this credit belongs to Sassicaia, the brainchild of marchese Mario Incisa della Rocchetta, who planted Cabernet Sauvignon at his Tenuta San Guido estate in Bolgheri back in 1944.