AF Light Air Support Aircraft

[Lawman]

Copy all - classic debate who should call the plays, the QB or the coach(es)

Small Wars has a good article on this: https://smallwarsjournal.com/blog/journal/docs-temp/559-zweibelson.pdf

Question for advocates of Army owned fixed wing attack, would you be willing to give up something to get it if budgets are flat going forward?



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I’ll give you all the conventional Cyber for no trade at all.

For F sake can we make that part of space force already? Having people promoted to leadership in that MOS while they are being compared against their peers for how fast they run and what their rifle qual was is insane.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[pilot]

5 minutes ago, Lawman said:

 

Oh bullshit man

You know what direct Apache Support lines look like so don’t go misrepresenting in. Flying “Silver line” in Afghanistan.... ok go Support Dragon brigade for 2 hours for “named operation” Thunder Road... which was NAI recon of the same road every day. Well done Dragon S3 for making that a named operation... Ok they got theirs for the day. Now head 40 miles west of current location, refuel and conduct “counter IDF” over Shank/Dalke. Hey wow look we are supporting multiple brigades... you can’t actually shoot anything but maybe your presence will make them not go set their IDF. (Nope). And if you’re really lucky they will let you do ground postured QRF for the remainder of your gun line at BAF so you can maybe get a plate while you sit.

Or you can get dedicated QRF line for a location that has no mission and then the CG can turn off countless named operations in vicinity Al Asad because part of their min Force is rotary wing fires.


Yeah man, we really got that stuff figured out.

Again, I spent more than a decade and several deployments seeing how well we understood airspace. You’re nuts if we think we understand enough to even integrate with the rest of the Air battle space to suddenly go employing a 10k altitude 300 knot platform without being a risk to ourselves and everybody else in that airspace. When a CAB doesn’t even have an LNO at the CAOC it cannot be anything but reactive and restricted to the little set aside boxes they carve out for you to play in. That is not how you can even remotely try to employ this type of platform.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Ahh yes. The C-12s and other army ISR guys keep crashing into the other services flying at the same altitudes in the AO. So now your argument as to why the army shouldn't get it is that army pilots can't deconflict airspace. Copy. Seems like a dumb reason to make a giant inter-service acquisition decision like that.

Edited December 15, 2019 by pilot

[pilot]

9 minutes ago, SurelySerious said:

My lack of knowledge or SA in having called in CASEVAC 9 lines when brigade commanders couldn’t share? Yeah, ok. 

I'm sure there's a few details in there you're leaving out, so I can't really respond. Maybe include where you were (on the ground in a firefight?), what kind of unit, what kind of battlespace, what kind of on call medevac that existed in the AO, what kind of air assets existed there/nearr there, what the medevac status in the AO was, etc. would be useful in that kind of discussion. I am highly suspect of a report with no detail accusing an army O-6 of denying use of a casevac/medevac asset with injured/dying troops just because he didn't want to share. 

[Lawman]

Ahh yes. The C-12s and other army ISR guys keep crashing into the other services flying at the same altitudes in the AO. So now your argument as to why the army shouldn't get it is that army pilots can't deconflict airspace. Copy. Seems like a dumb reason to make a giant inter-service acquisition decision like that.

 No you’re talking direct Battlalion echelon attack supporting Brigade operations. None of that is de conflicted the way Divisional/theatre ISR plans are. I’ve got Army C-12 guys across the hall. You know what they don’t do? Coordinate via the CAB here.

 

You know what an aviation brigade sends to an attack battalion as far as airspace coordination? Not a damn thing except maybe it’s hot walls if you’re lucky. You know who does go get that information? The Battalion Tacops guy. The one warrant that figured out how to load the file on the AMPS because the F if some Captain in the plans or FUOPS cell has any idea what they are even looking at.

 

I spent too many days cleaning up 7th IDs G3 Air disaster of and being told by both 1-2 and 2-2 SBCTs “we don’t have an ALO so just figure it out,” to watch you lecture us all on how great the Army is at integrating the battle space.

 

And don’t think you can tell us this is an “Army takes care of its people” argument. I spent more than a few hundred hours flying counter IDF over places like Warrior or Sharana that never took any only so we could have those poor bastards at FOB Boris get to keep their heads down. Brigade commanders don’t share low density assets any better than the Air Force apportionment. In fact after watching the main effort brigade steal all our organic shadows for their ISR collection plan it’s pretty obvious they don’t give a damn about what’s outside their AO. Because we stopped supporting a lot of units just so they could have a few more TVs worth of TOC Porn.

 

 

 

Not that any of the work of the CAB would really matter in this case, since the specific idea is using these in support of clandestine ops in austere locations (IE USASOAC). So paint the bitches black and lets stand up 5-160 already...

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

 

[Clark Griswold]

I’ll give you all the conventional Cyber for no trade at all.

For F sake can we make that part of space force already? Having people promoted to leadership in that MOS while they are being compared against their peers for how fast they run and what their rifle qual was is insane.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Sold

Just buy it AF


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[pilot]

13 minutes ago, Clark Griswold said:

Copy all - classic penny packets debate

 

Small Wars has a good article on this: https://smallwarsjournal.com/blog/journal/docs-temp/559-zweibelson.pdf

 

Question for advocates of Army owned fixed wing attack, would you be willing to give up something to get it if budgets are flat going forward?

 

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

 

Army space? Granted I don't know what they do, but I have a friend who switched from being an armor officer to army space. Seems more fitting for the Air Force. Perhaps there's something I don't know about it relating to the army though.

But frankly, budgets being flat shouldn't be a consideration. It's all about prioritizing needs across the services. Do we need 3 models of the F35? F15X? Bone-R? KC46? other F/B/KC/C/HH/MH etc airframes? SLEPs? Pilot bonuses? Lots of stuff in the Air Force needs or will need replacing. Does the navy need a new carrier(s) or other boats? Army has its own needs...both ground and air related stuff. I think light attack needs to be identified as a need (or not) and prioritized against other acquisition programs before a "what are you willing to give up" debate ensues, and from what budget it comes, and at what cost for other items. That, I don't have answers for, as it isn't as simple as "what are you willing to give up."

[pilot]

9 minutes ago, Lawman said:

 

No you’re talking direct Battlalion echelon attack supporting Brigade operations. None of that is de conflicted the way Divisional/theatre ISR plans are.

 

You know what an aviation brigade sends to an attack battalion as far as airspace coordination? Not a damn thing except maybe it’s hot walls if you’re lucky. You know who does go get that information? The Battalion Tacops guy. The one warrant that figured out how to load the file on the AMPS because the F if some Captain in the plans or FUOPS cell has any idea what they are even looking at.

 

I spent too many days cleaning up 7th IDs G3 Air disaster of and being told by both 1-2 and 2-2 SBCTs “we don’t have an ALO so just figure it out,” to watch you lecture us all on how great the Army is at integrating the battle space.

 

And don’t think you can tell us this is an “Army takes care of its people” argument. I spent more than a few hundred hours flying counter IDF over places like Warrior or Sharana that never took any only so we could have those poor bastards at FOB Boris get to keep their heads down. Brigade commanders don’t share low density assets any better than the Air Force apportionment. In fact after watching the main effort brigade steal all our organic shadows for their ISR collection plan it’s pretty obvious they don’t give a damn about what’s outside their AO. Because we stopped supporting a lot of units just so they could have a few more TVs worth of TOC Porn.

 

Not that any of the work of the CAB would really matter in this case, since the specific idea is using these in support of clandestine ops in austere locations (IE USASOAC). So paint the bitches black and lets stand up 5-160 already...

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

I agree with some of this. I flew plenty of stupid missions that just counted toward providing block hours of support, regardless of how effective it was. But at least we were in the AO and could easily be retasked when SHTF. Basically served as flying QRF and looking out for our own targets of opportunity. I wasted many months flying around looking at dirt logging hours.

Regarding FW coordination, I don't think it would be quite the disaster you make it out to be. It can be coordinated just like other army/AF/USN FW. The need for RW to be as integrated to the rest of the airspace above 1500' is just not really there. When there are 100+ RW flights a day in an AO, all of which are 1500' and below typically, there isn't a whole lot of coordinating that needs to be done. If there were light attack assets loitering 10k'-20k', they'd have to coordinate block altitudes and be more involved, obviously. That isn't an impossibility just because army RW attack doesn't operate that way now. It's a different animal and would be trained and executed accordingly. 

And regarding the SOF vs conventional use, again that comes down to the mission/need (if any) that is determined. Do conventional forces need that support? If so, it wouldn't be SOF centric. It got pushed that way because big AF didn't seem to want a big (or any) fleet of those things. Big AF's focus is on 5th gen stuff and a different threat (the next war, near peer, etc) and not iraq/afgh type conflicts. But light attack has been discussed as a potential to be used in a larger more conventional CAS role, not just with SOF. I'm not convinced it is needed (for any missions, SOF missions, or conventional CAS). But I'm also not convinced it's not needed, depending on the current/future conflicts. I'm also not convinced one service would manage it better than the other. There are pros and cons. I'm just making the argument for the army getting it since the AF doesn't seem to want to and has been sitting on the decision for years. 

[Breckey]

3 hours ago, Lawman said:

But hey, you got Apaches staged at location X ready to respond to anything within 60 minutes.... if they ever actually get approval to launch (which we didn’t... even when we had a DART outside the wire).

Was this just a few weeks ago? It was a great MISREP to read for our guys to get their "combat save"

[Clark Griswold]

4 hours ago, pilot said:

Army space? Granted I don't know what they do, but I have a friend who switched from being an armor officer to army space. Seems more fitting for the Air Force. Perhaps there's something I don't know about it relating to the army though.

But frankly, budgets being flat shouldn't be a consideration. It's all about prioritizing needs across the services. Do we need 3 models of the F35? F15X? Bone-R? KC46? other F/B/KC/C/HH/MH etc airframes? SLEPs? Pilot bonuses? Lots of stuff in the Air Force needs or will need replacing. Does the navy need a new carrier(s) or other boats? Army has its own needs...both ground and air related stuff. I think light attack needs to be identified as a need (or not) and prioritized against other acquisition programs before a "what are you willing to give up" debate ensues, and from what budget it comes, and at what cost for other items. That, I don't have answers for, as it isn't as simple as "what are you willing to give up."

Roger that, I agree philosophically requirements identification/definition should be independent of resource consideration but practically you have to consider them simultaneously or you wind up with white elephants.

I phrased that question wrong I think and refining the idea behind it I think it more accurate to ask "If we buy/develop this/that system because we believe it serves the missions we believe we should be focused on, does it displace, replace any existing systems or is it complimentary?  If complimentary, how do we resource it?"

Just buy it AF

This thread needs some airplane porn

[pilot]

1 hour ago, Clark Griswold said:

Roger that, I agree philosophically requirements identification/definition should be independent of resource consideration but practically you have to consider them simultaneously or you wind up with white elephants.

I phrased that question wrong I think and refining the idea behind it I think it more accurate to ask "If we buy/develop this/that system because we believe it serves the missions we believe we should be focused on, does it displace, replace any existing systems or is it complimentary?  If complimentary, how do we resource it?"

Just buy it AF

This thread needs some airplane porn

In this particular case, if a need for it is identified, it would be complimentary to existing capes. It fits between existing capes (A-10 and AH-64/MH-60 DAP/AH-6) but doesn't replace them. Where does the money come from? I don't know...but I do know there is some fat that can be trimmed from the defense budget somewhere. It's not like we are an efficient organization. We waste a ton of money...I bet we could pay for 1,000 of those things with one year's worth of DoD fraud, waste, and abuse. And I bet we could have bought a nice fleet of these with the pallets of cash we sent to Iran. But just for shits and giggles I'd say take something away from the Navy because Navy sucks. Maybe don't buy them a new boat or something else expensive coming down the pike. Or if it has to be flying related, take away VTOL 5th gen jets because that is a stupid combination of capes (but give marines some of they navy's jets to make navy feel the burn and not the marines, because they are cool). Most of that is tongue in cheek...the real answer of what would be cut is for people far above the pay grade of anyone posting on here. 

[jazzdude]

Here's a small portion of my army aviation experience coordinating with an aviation TF:

-Yes, you have to get dip clearances to cross a country's border
-Yes, you have to comply with the FCG lead time
-No, your dip clearance takes as long as everyone else's
-No, there is no deconfliction altitude here-you need to be on the ATO given the environment you are flying in
-Who the hell flies through charted prohibited and restricted areas without permission?
-No, you won't get a C-17 CHOP'd to your operation. Tell us what you need to move and when you need it to move, and multiple units can share airlift so everyone's mission is supported.

While army aviation may be tactically great (I'll defer to Lawman on this since I have no firsthand experience), institutionally they don't really understand (or maybe just don't care about) the bigger air picture or how to really think about air assets at the operational level. It's all just flying trucks in their eyes. Hell, based on what I've seen they don't like to share anything with other units. It would take a major culture change within the army for them to appropriately employ light attack aircraft and share the airspace with the rest of the joint aircraft.

"How do you spell 'joint?' A-R-M-Y..."

[brabus]

6 hours ago, jazzdude said:

institutionally they don't really understand (or maybe just don't care about) the bigger air picture or how to really think about air assets at the operational level.

Agreed. I’ve worked with great Army bros who get it at about the O-3/E-6 level and below. Get above their level and you hit mostly full retard land with zero comprehension of how to manage and use air effectively, efficiently, and safely. It’s like watching children with no SA bicker and attempt to assert dominance over others, all while ignoring any and all inputs from the adults who actually have SA. The Army needs a large cultural shift to employ weaponized fixed wing effectively, efficiently, and perhaps even safely (but I think the last one isn’t much of a hump for them to get past).

FWIW from my outsider perspective, this is all a much smaller issue in SOF (minus the 160th issues mentioned above...yep, that was nice).

 

 

Edited December 16, 2019 by brabus

[Sprkt69]

15 hours ago, brabus said:

Agreed. I’ve worked with great Army bros who get it at about the O-3/E-6 level and below. Get above their level and you hit mostly full retard land with zero comprehension of how to manage and use air effectively, efficiently, and safely. It’s like watching children with no SA bicker and attempt to assert dominance over others, all while ignoring any and all inputs from the adults who actually have SA. The Army needs a large cultural shift to employ weaponized fixed wing effectively, efficiently, and perhaps even safely (but I think the last one isn’t much of a hump for them to get past).

FWIW from my outsider perspective, this is all a much smaller issue in SOF (minus the 160th issues mentioned above...yep, that was nice).

 

 

It’s the best of what’s left in the Army. All that “school” makes them super smart as they would inform me of how air operations should work. And yes, I’ve had the opportunity to work at the Regiment/Brigade and Corps level. 

[Clark Griswold]

On 12/15/2019 at 10:05 PM, pilot said:

In this particular case, if a need for it is identified, it would be complimentary to existing capes. It fits between existing capes (A-10 and AH-64/MH-60 DAP/AH-6) but doesn't replace them. Where does the money come from? I don't know...but I do know there is some fat that can be trimmed from the defense budget somewhere. It's not like we are an efficient organization. We waste a ton of money...I bet we could pay for 1,000 of those things with one year's worth of DoD fraud, waste, and abuse. And I bet we could have bought a nice fleet of these with the pallets of cash we sent to Iran. But just for shits and giggles I'd say take something away from the Navy because Navy sucks. Maybe don't buy them a new boat or something else expensive coming down the pike. Or if it has to be flying related, take away VTOL 5th gen jets because that is a stupid combination of capes (but give marines some of they navy's jets to make navy feel the burn and not the marines, because they are cool). Most of that is tongue in cheek...the real answer of what would be cut is for people far above the pay grade of anyone posting on here. 

Agreed but likely someone would have to get voted off the island for this to happen to keep inside of existing budgets.  I've advocated for about a 5% reduction in the size of teen fighter fleets retiring the oldest/brokest jets to pay for acquisition, training and logistics to acquire a light attack capability, if the Army got serious about acquiring LAAR, probably the easiest way to sell it to Congress would be a similar devil's bargain. 

Not advocating for that just my cynical opinion.

As to capes being complimentary to existing platforms maybe but going forward I think we're at a different place now geo-politically / operational environment wise.  A need is there for a Light Attack aircraft but really we need an Attack Aircraft that is more than the single engine turbos offered now and less than the multi-role 4th gens now.  

A platform to provide less expensive observation & light kinetics in a completely uncontested air environment from relatively short ranges as part of a long term stabilization / COIN mission is not where the fight is likely to be for a modern/relevant light to welterweight manned attack platform.  

Just pontifications on BO but building a manned attack platform with enough kinematics and defensive systems to allow unescorted missions in potentially moderate threat environments (Syria with active but not openly hostile as of yet SAMs and Russian fighters active being a good example) and enough range/endurance that AR is not required for a typical mission along with unique capabilities (BLOS, DE weapon, etc...) is where the enduring fight in the Arc of Instability is going.

Modest combat load, good speed/survivability, excellent range/endurance.  Open Mission Architecture.  Bring jet capes at turbo prices.

[Lawman]

Was this just a few weeks ago? It was a great MISREP to read for our guys to get their "combat save"

If you’re referring to the festivities at BAF, that was for different reasons (gate guards literally locking down ECPs even to people briefed to cross them.


But yes I’ve had permission to launch denied while I sat blades turning during IDF and told to remain level 1. So it’s too dangerous to fly because mortars/rockets, but no too dangerous to sit in a running aircraft while we receive that fire with a dude outside completely exposed to launch us.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Breckey]

If you’re referring to the festivities at BAF, that was for different reasons (gate guards literally locking down ECPs even to people briefed to cross them.


But yes I’ve had permission to launch denied while I sat blades turning during IDF and told to remain level 1. So it’s too dangerous to fly because mortars/rockets, but no too dangerous to sit in a running aircraft while we receive that fire with a dude outside completely exposed to launch us.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No this was at Al Asad.

[Lawman]

No this was at Al Asad.

Ah, couldn’t give you specifics on here, but as to say the level of micromanagement on what the AWT line is doing in Iraq is pretty insane.

We were constantly banging against it when I was there.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[SFG]

On December 16, 2019 at 1:03 AM, jazzdude said:

institutionally they don't really understand (or maybe just don't care about) the bigger air picture or how to really think about air assets at the operational level. It's all just flying trucks in their eyes. Hell, based on what I've seen they don't like to share anything with other units. It would take a major culture change within the army for them to appropriately employ light attack aircraft and share the airspace with the rest of the joint aircraft.

"How do you spell 'joint?' A-R-M-Y..."

 

On December 16, 2019 at 7:18 AM, brabus said:

Agreed. I’ve worked with great Army bros who get it at about the O-3/E-6 level and below. Get above their level and you hit mostly full retard land with zero comprehension of how to manage and use air effectively, efficiently, and safely. It’s like watching children with no SA bicker and attempt to assert dominance over others, all while ignoring any and all inputs from the adults who actually have SA.

 

On December 16, 2019 at 10:47 PM, Sprkt69 said:

It’s the best of what’s left in the Army. All that “school” makes them super smart as they would inform me of how air operations should work. And yes, I’ve had the opportunity to work at the Regiment/Brigade and Corps level. 

 

I just had an "amazing" experience in line with these comments... very discouraging.  A 3-star briefing 2-stars down to O-4s, almost entirely an Army crowd (99%).  Disparaged the other services throughout his time at the podium, was really proud of his PhD on 15th century Germanic tribes (or something like that), and his "way forward" was entirely Army-centric.  Many laughs from the crowd in his favor, at our expense.  He acted as if the Army owned MDO, space, and cyber.  The way he railed against the Navy and the Air Force made me think he'd never deployed a day in his life... and yet he is a key decision-maker and strategic planner.  I can't say more due to OPSEC, but if this is how you spell joint, then we're screwed.

[Lawman]

  I just had an "amazing" experience in line with these comments... very discouraging.  A 3-star briefing 2-stars down to O-4s, almost entirely an Army crowd (99%).  Disparaged the other services throughout his time at the podium, was really proud of his PhD on 15th century Germanic tribes (or something like that), and his "way forward" was entirely Army-centric.  Many laughs from the crowd in his favor, at our expense.  He acted as if the Army owned MDO, space, and cyber.  The way he railed against the Navy and the Air Force made me think he'd never deployed a day in his life... and yet he is a key decision-maker and strategic planner.  I can't say more due to OPSEC, but if this is how you spell joint, then we're screwed. 

 

 The simple fact is too many of our doctrinal lessons have been lost on an entire generation who is now at the reigns of leadership.

 

Brigade Commanders grew up in the era of TOC Porn, unending lines of support, bus schedule designed mobility, and conops instead of 5 para orders.

 

Now those same captains/Majors are wearing Eagles or Stars calling out their sister services for “not supporting us” because the reality is in a non GWOT war, you won’t always get whatever you want and if you aren’t the main effort that’s exactly what is supposed to happen. In fairness though the don’t understand Army stuff like the fact that surge is a temporary situation that requires repayment on the back end. Hence dumb stuff like blanket extensions to duty day, priority target lists and NAIs that don’t function as they should, etc.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

 

[SFG]

1 hour ago, Lawman said:

Brigade Commanders grew up in the era of TOC Porn, unending lines of support, bus schedule designed mobility, and conops instead of 5 para orders.

That sounds remarkably like his “way forward.”

[Lawman]

That sounds remarkably like his “way forward.”

It was outstanding being in Iraq when we stood back up with all the “that’s not how it used to be” issues we created ourselves.

Logistics... oh just put those parts on the rotator.... What do you mean there is no rotator?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Clark Griswold]

SOCOM wants 75:

https://www.airforcemag.com/socom-announces-plans-to-buy-75-armed-overwatch-planes/

[alwyn2d]

The Army is pushing the envelope. They want light fixed wing attack aircraft and they are TIRED of the USAF in not making up it's mind in providing that mission. Hell, they would also like the A-10s as well if the USAF doesn't want them. I forgot, the AF doesn't want the A-10s.

Edited February 10, 2020 by alwyn2d

[Clark Griswold]

The Army is pushing the envelope. They want light fixed wing attack aircraft and they are TIRED of the USAF in not making up it's mind in providing that mission. Hell, they would also like the A-10s as well if the USAF doesn't want them. I forgot, the AF doesn't want the A-10s.

They may want it but like the AF they want it only if getting it was in addition to having what they already have, same as the AF.
If Congress authorized X billions in addition to the total obligation for light attack planes, people and stuff this would have happened already, it’s just that’s not the case. They want the services to trade inside of their program to fund this.
I can only armchair General this from an AF perspective but divesting 5-10% of the oldest/brokest 4th gen fleet seems the only viable COA if the AF ever gets serious about acquisition.
Not sure what the Army would be willing to trade in capability to get this new capability.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[AFsock]

Looks like Big Blue gave up on Light Attack-

https://www.defensenews.com/smr/federal-budget/2020/02/10/sorry-sierra-nevada-corp-and-textron-the-us-air-force-isnt-buying-light-attack-planes/