AF Light Air Support Aircraft

Danger41 · August 17, 2017

4 hours ago, ClearedHot said:

Sort of...

A pilot and a CSO. One of whom is a patch.

Lawman · August 17, 2017

No doubt but considering the desired objectives/requirements of the LAE I think it is an outside chance at best. It's a good concept and has successful operational use but for a potential USAF LAAR, IMO this how the current line up stacks up:
1 - Scorpion
2 - AT-6B
3 - A-29B
4 - AT-802L

You know I spent 6 months with 2 other AF pilots trying to convince the leadership in the Phil AF that the Air Tractor was the quantifiable better in every catagory that mattered aircraft for their turboprop CAS program. That was in addition to the guys that had been there before us trying to convince them of the same thing.

They were hung up on Tacano. And their aversion to the AT came back to the same problem, it wasn't sexy looking and it had the name Tractor.

I wonder how much of that same stupidity is coloring our guys opinion of it for the trials.

BashiChuni · August 17, 2017

I don't know anything about the AT can you elaborate why it's superior?

Lawman · August 17, 2017

I don't know anything about the AT can you elaborate why it's superior?

Range with usable load, loiter time, ruggedness to austere field usage, etc.

If the point of this whole scenrio was:

1. Display minimal show that the US is in town.

2. Money is tight, do this on the cheap.

3. You need minimal footprint for logistics because where you are going is far more forward than a Bagram or Balad.

4. Have an aircraft you could train the locals to fly while you do mission and support with FMS.

For the partner nation it was a question of how do we support operations against targets in a pacific scenario but it works to our what a mole coin game too.

How do I take an airfield that can barely be called that in the middle of craptasistan and put enough planes there so as to provide these CAG guys with 3 strike lines on the ATO a night which plane is best suited?" The AT just killed the A-29 and AT-6 when the numbers stacked for comparison. Particularly for persistence with a pod and a useful amount of variable mission packages at ranges away from the MX hub. We were war gaming it against the other 2 options and it just killed them. Scorpion changes the equation a bit because with the added speed maybe you can support from a bigger hub, but if you go look at some of the crazy high side stuff going on in the fight in OIR, getting in the dirt is an expectation you can't get away from. Hell even at Al Asad or Erbil yeah the concrete is well poured, but who is to say there is enough lift in the theatre to support you better than if you were living in the dirt. Africa/PACOM/SouthCOM would be the same kind of problem.

We need an aircraft that can be comfortably used in wars we aren't trying to be full might of the US. We've grown entirely too comfortable with the idea there's always a C-17 ring route, you will always live in a CHU, and sustainment is a given because 19 KBR convoys come in and out a day. Take a look at Q-West right now and tell me that logistics and sustainability wouldn't be a primary planning factor for putting a light weight CAS plane over Tal Afar or the Western Syria-Iraq border over speed, sexiness, 2x 34s instead of 4x 114s.

Clark Griswold · August 18, 2017

On 8/16/2017 at 9:08 PM, Lawman said:

You know I spent 6 months with 2 other AF pilots trying to convince the leadership in the Phil AF that the Air Tractor was the quantifiable better in every catagory that mattered aircraft for their turboprop CAS program. That was in addition to the guys that had been there before us trying to convince them of the same thing.

They were hung up on Tacano. And their aversion to the AT came back to the same problem, it wasn't sexy looking and it had the name Tractor.

I wonder how much of that same stupidity is coloring our guys opinion of it for the trials.

Will not question or quibble with your assessment of the choices but ultimately it is about getting them (and us) an aircraft appropriate for COIN / LIC. Even if it is not the best system we think out of the possible choices, it is first about just getting one on the ramp / dirt strip and supporting door kickers.

If the A-29 is what they have their heart set on no matter what and they can afford it, maintain it and use it effectively, so be it. Now if we are paying for their aircraft thru a partnership program, totally different story but if it is their dime, give them your sound professional opinion but let them go their route and get into the business of effectively / efficiently delivering air power for COIN / LIC.

As to your valid if just a bit gruff point of whether it is stupidity affecting the assessment of LAE, I will say it is a bit apples to oranges. Most if not all of the operations / missions a USAF LAAR would execute would not be from an austere FOB / FARP. Likely it would be from a MOB with support and tied by VDL to an ITC / C2 element, rightly or wrongly, as I think that is just mainly the way the AF rolls.

A LAAR for an ally of lesser means / different ROE may not be the right LAAR for the USAF just given the way it operates (fairly risk averse).

On 8/16/2017 at 10:47 PM, Lawman said:

Range with usable load, loiter time, ruggedness to austere field usage, etc.

If the point of this whole scenrio was:

1. Display minimal show that the US is in town.

2. Money is tight, do this on the cheap.

3. You need minimal footprint for logistics because where you are going is far more forward than a Bagram or Balad.

4. Have an aircraft you could train the locals to fly while you do mission and support with FMS.

For the partner nation it was a question of how do we support operations against targets in a pacific scenario but it works to our what a mole coin game too.

How do I take an airfield that can barely be called that in the middle of craptasistan and put enough planes there so as to provide these CAG guys with 3 strike lines on the ATO a night which plane is best suited?" The AT just killed the A-29 and AT-6 when the numbers stacked for comparison. Particularly for persistence with a pod and a useful amount of variable mission packages at ranges away from the MX hub. We were war gaming it against the other 2 options and it just killed them. Scorpion changes the equation a bit because with the added speed maybe you can support from a bigger hub, but if you go look at some of the crazy high side stuff going on in the fight in OIR, getting in the dirt is an expectation you can't get away from. Hell even at Al Asad or Erbil yeah the concrete is well poured, but who is to say there is enough lift in the theatre to support you better than if you were living in the dirt. Africa/PACOM/SouthCOM would be the same kind of problem.

We need an aircraft that can be comfortably used in wars we aren't trying to be full might of the US. We've grown entirely too comfortable with the idea there's always a C-17 ring route, you will always live in a CHU, and sustainment is a given because 19 KBR convoys come in and out a day. Take a look at Q-West right now and tell me that logistics and sustainability wouldn't be a primary planning factor for putting a light weight CAS plane over Tal Afar or the Western Syria-Iraq border over speed, sexiness, 2x 34s instead of 4x 114s.

Valid points but I would contend we (the USAF and CAA community) need to bisect the LAAR concept into two programs, their LAAR and ours.

We can have both with our purchase of their LAAR likely to be only for an FTU and our LAAR in greater numbers, say a schoolhouse at Duke with 15 OA-8s and 100 Scorpions / AT-6s / A-29s over 6 Wings in the ARC.

Not sneering at the OA-8 but the GOs can only think so far out of the container, for the USAF LAAR, it will have to be something closer to what they are used to or have now.

FourFans · August 21, 2017

On Friday, August 18, 2017 at 7:09 AM, Clark Griswold said:

Most if not all of the operations / missions a USAF LAAR would execute would not be from an austere FOB / FARP. Likely it would be from a MOB with support and tied by VDL to an ITC / C2 element, rightly or wrongly, as I think that is just mainly the way the AF rolls.

Have you seen ops in Africa? What you're referring to is how we used to roll...specifically in A-stan and in hi-vis theaters. That's not how we roll in conflicts that the US media doesn't see or care about. If it makes it to CNN, there will be an F-16, F-22, or F-35 (heaven help us) dropping ordinance.

Iraq, Syria, and A-stan are catalysts, not the intended theaters. At least that's how I hope the LAAR concept is being developed.

Ok...so it's all REALLY a program to get rid of the A-10, but hopefully there is also a sincere purpose and mission for the airframe we're pursuing.

...or perhaps I'm just an idealist who refuses to quit...

Clark Griswold · August 22, 2017

21 hours ago, FourFans130 said:

Have you seen ops in Africa? What you're referring to is how we used to roll...specifically in A-stan and in hi-vis theaters. That's not how we roll in conflicts that the US media doesn't see or care about. If it makes it to CNN, there will be an F-16, F-22, or F-35 (heaven help us) dropping ordinance.

Iraq, Syria, and A-stan are catalysts, not the intended theaters. At least that's how I hope the LAAR concept is being developed.

Ok...so it's all REALLY a program to get rid of the A-10, but hopefully there is also a sincere purpose and mission for the airframe we're pursuing.

...or perhaps I'm just an idealist who refuses to quit...

Valid point but just my two cents, for long term overt assist or pacify missions, we'll probably operate from MOBs (could be smaller than we're accustomed to in Iraq/Afghanistan).

We can have both, the OA-8 was sold to Kenya for about 15 mil a copy and that was not a large buy (around 12 aircraft I think) so if the USAF came along and wanted a split buy of LAARs, getting enough OA-8s to get some benefit of the economies of scale and get a higher end LAAR, I think we could do it without breaking the bank. The argument then would be for an AT-6 or A-29 for engine commonality but really what we need are high and low mix. A strategy to prosecute a "high" end LAAR fight and a "low" end LAAR fight.

Speed, range and growth capability for the high end LAAR.

Ruggedness, endurance and value for the low end LAAR.

Edited August 22, 2017 by Clark Griswold

BashiChuni · August 22, 2017

high/low end fights are way overrated IMO

any "high" end fight won't be high end after a few days.

what we need is for the AF to shit or get off the pot...get something and get it out there...it's not that complex.

but if there's an organization that can screw something as simple as light attack up...it's the USAF

Edited August 22, 2017 by BashiChuni

Clark Griswold · August 24, 2017

On 8/21/2017 at 11:39 PM, BashiChuni said:

any "high" end fight won't be high end after a few days.

By "high" end conflict suitable for a high end LAAR I mean a medium intensity COIN / IW scenario - fighting irregular forces with sporadic conventional military capabilities that threaten fixed wing assets operating low. This would also be an asset also for a Grey Zone conflict where other ambivalent to cooly hostile military forces are also operating necessitating a platform that could self-defend and egress quickly if needed.

Syria being a good example of this but Iraq and Afghanistan also have a need for a what a high end LAAR can bring: jet speeds (400+ KTAS) and mission altitudes (20K+ AGL) for solid on-station times (4+ hours) with sensors & weapons in one asset at sustainable costs.

Edited August 24, 2017 by Clark Griswold

Clark Griswold · September 18, 2017

Thread bump.

Article is from 2016 but looks like the Scorpion might get an Air to Air capable radar and used in ASDOT (UK aggressor): Scorpion Selected for ASDOT Proposal

The article mentions the Thales RDY-3 multi-mode radar, does any know or can say (if OPSEC / Non-Disclosure allows) if the Scorpion in the USAF AFE is military radar equipped?

Link to the Thales page on the RDY.

MooseAg03 · September 28, 2017

Looks like they are going to test the A-29 and AT-6 operationally. Doesn't look like the Scorpion made the final cut.

https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/aviation/a28413/the-air-force-is-sending-its-mini-attack-plane-competition-to-war/

nsplayr · September 29, 2017

One of the results of OA-X/LAE is the combat fly-off between A-29 and AT-6. Not sure what exactly we need to test here based on A-29 flying previously under Imminent Fury and the OV-10's work during Combat Dragon but I digress...

Another result very likely will be a light ISR expirament, based in no small part on the Air Force's very positive view of the Scorpion's performance and potential during LAE: https://www.defensenews.com/digital-show-dailies/air-force-association/2017/09/21/light-isr-the-air-forces-next-experiment/

Clark Griswold · September 30, 2017

Not to be negative but how much more testing/experimenting do we need to do?

It just appears to be the same rope a dope then delay then nada.

Imminent Fury, Combat Dragon, Afghani Air Force A-29 ops with the A-29, Columbian AF ops with the A-29, AT-802 use by XE, etc... how much more data do we need?

YoungnDumb · September 30, 2017

Gotta keep feeding the military industrial complex, remember the DoD is really just a jobs program anymore, how useful or how much we need a piece of equipment is directly proportional to how much money it wastes in the process

Clark Griswold · October 1, 2017

On 9/30/2017 at 10:32 AM, YoungnDumb said:

Gotta keep feeding the military industrial complex, remember the DoD is really just a jobs program anymore, how useful or how much we need a piece of equipment is directly proportional to how much money it wastes in the process

Maybe but either way the time to sh*t or get off the pot is well past.

The inability to get an aircraft for this mission is a symptom of the larger problem, the lack of desire/interest/recognition by the DoD/Congress that if the US is going to continue to prosecute COIN/LIC & FID/Stability/Advise & Assist missions then we probably need a new UCC from the parts of the existing ones to plan/advocate/execute these missions.

I am thinking that if this is ever going to happen, a Joint Force capable of effectively and sustainably executing these missions, it is going to take a new construct, formal commitments from the existing branches and resources reprogrammed (if required) from existing capabilities.

nsplayr · November 17, 2017

https://theaviationist.com/2017/11/16/we-have-flown-in-textrons-scorpion-jet-heres-what-we-have-learned/

Good new write-up of the Scorpion.

matmacwc · November 18, 2017

There is a plan to stand up the Tucano at DM, it was good to go but just put on hold by ACC, they were even talking about their first deployment. They want dudes dual qual in A-10/F-16 and the A-29 which is pretty cool.

Edited November 18, 2017 by matmacwc

ClearedHot · November 18, 2017

3 hours ago, matmacwc said:

There is a plan to stand up the Tucano at DM, it was good to go but just put on hold by ACC, they were even talking about their first deployment. They want dudes dual qual in A-10/F-16 and the A-29 which is pretty cool.

Not smart...why buy a foreign built airplane when there are far better options. I sure hope we never fall out of favor with Brazil and they turn of the supply train.

Champ Kind · November 18, 2017

Not smart...why buy a foreign built airplane when there are far better options. I sure hope we never fall out of favor with Brazil and they turn of the supply train.

Isn't Pilatus (PC-12/U-28) a Swiss company?

Clark Griswold · November 19, 2017

16 hours ago, ClearedHot said:

Not smart...why buy a foreign built airplane when there are far better options. I sure hope we never fall out of favor with Brazil and they turn of the supply train.

Or just buy the best airplane

If the AF can’t figure out that the Scorpion is the best overall system for this mission and going forward into the future with its built on flexibility and growth potential; then it probably should not have the LAAR mission

Edited November 19, 2017 by Clark Griswold
grammar fixes

Day Man · November 19, 2017

On 11/16/2017 at 6:41 PM, nsplayr said:

https://theaviationist.com/2017/11/16/we-have-flown-in-textrons-scorpion-jet-heres-what-we-have-learned/

Good new write-up of the Scorpion.

Good article but that website is infuriating

Breckey · November 19, 2017

You don't like the Flightradar24 plots of our ISR or NSAV aircraft?

ClearedHot · November 19, 2017

11 hours ago, Champ Kind said:

Isn't Pilatus (PC-12/U-28) a Swiss company?

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.

Clark Griswold · November 19, 2017

Just to stir the discussion:

Sukhoi Su-80 with a proposed (not sure if actually fielded Su-80PT (patrol/transport) ) variant for the Russian/Kazakhstan Border Guards and a few others, looks like it would be ideal with some mods for COIN / LIC:

Su-80.JPG?width=1080