USAF Finally found a way to get rid of the A-10

[Lawman]

Well this whole discussion proves why the Marines feel the need to have their own Air Force. If I were them, I wouldn’t trust the other services to help me whatsoever. I’ve said otherwise in the past, but now I get it. Trust no one.

The Marines and the Army are not the same CAS customers.

One service is divesting it’s self of tube artillery, armor, and basic at anything that delivers a weapon at range with precision that isn’t either a Hellfire missile or GMLRs fired off a truck (that they have limited numbers of).

The other is less interested in CAS than it is in shaping operations. And before anybody points at the last 20 years of stupid as an example of how much the Army needs CAS, we could provide the effects desired from a Drone or persistent light weight Bronco style aircraft in Afghanistan and meet 90% of the mission requirements. For the other 10% a small slice of a wider population of advanced aircraft are more than capable of meeting the SOF raid requirement.

The Army isn’t investing in M1299 or rapidly increasing capes in fires munitions for no reason. And it’s not so we can better provide immediate close fires, it’s so we can cause a mass casualty event two phase lines deeper than the point of advance while a reinforced Armor Division punches into the enemy support zone with concentrated application of mobile protected firepower.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Majestik Møøse]

7 hours ago, Danger41 said:

Not to make this an ACSC discussion, but if we base our nation’s war fighting strategy around a littoral force dependent on Close Air Support, we deserve to lose a big war.

I love the Marines as much as the next guy, but I also believe in a lot of various Air Power theorists that think CAS is a poor use of it*. And the Marines have tried pulling their own Air Force move back in Desert Storm and got smacked down hard for it. Everyone also seems to neglect the prerequisite that CAS assumes localized air superiority. That happens by USAF and USN fighters clearing the air picture, working with ground based fires (not to mention NKE) to do SEAD, tankers to support it all, support assets to F2T2, and more. That’s just to allow every Marine a rifleman F-35 pilots to drop GBU-12’s to support their fellow Marine (who is probably an F-35 ground FAC…which I love). It has been 70 years since an American on the ground has been killed by an enemy airplane. Hopefully that helps with trust but probably not. 
 

Sorry for the word vomit but it irks me when people accuse the USAF of not caring about CAS. What I’ve seen AF dudes (in a wide variety of platforms) do to support guys on the ground is crazy. That was also in very permissive environments with close tankers/bases. If we are chopping ATO sorties to CAS in a China scenario, it’s a poor use of resources IMO. 
 

*Easily the most satisfying missions of my life were doing CAS and supporting ground units via JTAC. 

The people that do CAS care about CAS, there’s zero doubt there. Do the visible or invisible hands of acquisition, budgeting, and rhetoric care about CAS? I just don’t see it. Leadership only talks about the first day of a peer conflict. CAS barely makes it into LFEs. Green Flag is an afterthought. The POGO paper referenced earlier.

So you’re saying that USAF and Navy air actions are required to win enough control of the air to be able to move ground forces in (totally agree), but then say that chopping ATO sorties to CAS afterwards is a poor use of resources? Unfortunately I think you’ve hit the nail on the head: everyone actually agrees with that, which is why the services with CAS requirements aren’t going to make forces available for the Air Component to send them 800 miles downrange or crossrange to their FLOT just to service 1% of the day’s JIPTL. Not to mention you might not get the jets back afterwards.

Would you as a Marine 1-Star let your meager amount of F-35s and Hornets be chopped to an AOC process that’s 6000 miles away, disconnected, and working on perpetually old information for where the FLOT even is? I would recommend absolutely not to, because the AOC will burn them up either mechanically or via attrition on not-CAS to satisfy their (understandable and required) objectives, leaving you with not enough air support later. The same goes for your organic airlift and AR capacity; be very cautious about giving that away for other components’ tasking.

So scoping out more: when the Air Force said years ago that they would always provide CAS for the Army and Marines, I can see a very logical reason for those other services to be wary of that. Not because of the lack of commitment from Hogs, JTACs, MQ-9s and everyone else doing CAS (because they’re clearly committing their life to getting it done), but because of a perceived lack of commitment at the institutional level.

[Majestik Møøse]

6 hours ago, Lawman said:

The Marines and the Army are not the same CAS customers.

One service is divesting it’s self of tube artillery, armor, and basic at anything that delivers a weapon at range with precision that isn’t either a Hellfire missile or GMLRs fired off a truck (that they have limited numbers of).

The other is less interested in CAS than it is in shaping operations. And before anybody points at the last 20 years of stupid as an example of how much the Army needs CAS, we could provide the effects desired from a Drone or persistent light weight Bronco style aircraft in Afghanistan and meet 90% of the mission requirements. For the other 10% a small slice of a wider population of advanced aircraft are more than capable of meeting the SOF raid requirement.

The Army isn’t investing in M1299 or rapidly increasing capes in fires munitions for no reason. And it’s not so we can better provide immediate close fires, it’s so we can cause a mass casualty event two phase lines deeper than the point of advance while a reinforced Armor Division punches into the enemy support zone with concentrated application of mobile protected firepower.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

So less entrenched, more punching requires less CAS? 

[Lawman]

So less entrenched, more punching requires less CAS? 

One service is showing up to a combined arms fight with all three elements of the combat arms fight. The other very much isn’t and is making a commitment to engage in that fight with support from air assets. The entire Active Duty Marine Corps has 24 total HIMARs. The conventional Army had that many between 1st and 2nd SBCT at JBLM alone. The services are not congruent, even in names of unit types.

The Army fight will be shaped around the Division as the maneuver element of action with the Armored Division of the engaged Corps being the vanguard of its advance. That hasn’t been the case for 20 years as we went to a BCT model doing wide area security. The bleeding edge capes of CAS will be far less important than effective AI or, what has largely just been assumed and forgotten about, Air Superiority for that units success.


The guys at schoolhouses like to quote the famous “855 rounds of HE 155 to kill a tank company….” They need to understand it’s not 1982 anymore and update their thinking. There are shells in our M109s that will do just that in a single battery 6. More importantly the ground force organic firepower equation has changed from the Fulda scenario. Weapons like Javelin didn’t exist when that method of Air Land Battle CAS was modeled. The ground force even in light infantry or SBCT is capable of holding in the defense to a far greater degree, provided the Air can hobble THIER combined arms capability (IE take out their artillery/Fires/C2). That isn’t in the close engagement, it’s 4-40Km deep from the FLOT, and it’s protected by semi to fully autonomous IADS elements and directed by drones. We are far more likely to have a condition resulting in loss because we let the drone target a key element of the formation and had Red fires/aviation cause mass casualties in an assembly area than we are having to lean on organic fires because CAS wasn’t as available or plentiful as we have grown accustomed to.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Bigred]

The irony is I’ve read on this board the lamentations of the AF not preparing for the next fight. For as much as they eat crayons, the Marines are pretty brilliant in their force development, last time I checked heavy artillery doesn’t float, and armor floats even less. 
 

Considerijg the AOR of a potential conflict, they need highly mobile forces supported from the air with a relatively mobile IDF capability. It would appear they are doing just that. 
 

And yes, they Marines are wary of air support from the other branches. It’s just their culture. 

[brabus]

18 hours ago, di1630 said:

I don’t want to be anywhere near a MCO CAS environment in the F-35. I’ll happily stand-off and enable the jets that have the weaponry and survivability to get up close.

I’m confused man, you have experience in both jets (right?), but then you say something completely nonsensical like this. Unless you’re using a 1980s definition of “MCO”, then carry on. If we actually did CAS in a modern “MCO” none of the 3rd/4th gen or RW would be very survivable, and they’d be pretty ineffective. This does not mean 5th gen should be flying CAS lines, it means we shouldn’t be flying CAS at all. Degrade the IADS to a point the other platforms are survivable, then we start doing CAS. Saying we’re going to do CAS in and around modern, functional IADS is a lie and one is delusional if they think it’s going to happen.

 

16 hours ago, VMFA187 said:

I'd prefer to have GBU-54 capability,

It does have this capability now (timeline is laughable, I get it). But also we shouldn’t have wasted a second or cent on integrating this weapon on 5th gen, but here we are…

BREAK….

To address CAS culture - someone needs to carry it for when OEF 69 pops up and Danger gets arrested for streaking in the Pentagon. But, it’s ignorant to think CAS is impossible or “over” just because there’s not a huge focus on it. A great example is F-16 block 50s not flying a single CAS training sortie until a multi-month, pre-deployment spin up. Guys can’t spell CAS at the beginning. Fast forward and the squadron comes home with thousands of weapons employed, tons of lives saved, no frats, CC intent met x 6900, etc. Am I comparing to the A-10 or AC-130, no, but can guys spin back up and do great work for the bros on the ground and the CCs in the JOC, yes. Don’t put the pussy on a pedestal.

Edited July 6, 2023 by brabus

[VMFA187]

2 hours ago, brabus said:

It does have this capability now (timeline is laughable, I get it). But also we shouldn’t have wasted a second or cent on integrating this weapon on 5th gen, but here we are…

BREAK….

To address CAS culture - someone needs to carry it for when OEF 69 pops up and Danger gets arrested for streaking in the Pentagon. But, it’s ignorant to think CAS is impossible or “over” just because there’s not a huge focus on it. A great example is F-16 block 50s not flying a single CAS training sortie until a multi-month, pre-deployment spin up. Guys can’t spell CAS at the beginning. Fast forward and the squadron comes home with thousands of weapons employed, tons of lives saved, no frats, CC intent met x 6900, etc. Am I comparing to the A-10 or AC-130, no, but can guys spin back up and do great work for the bros on the ground and the CCs in the JOC, yes. Don’t put the pussy on a pedestal.

Dude, I agree. CAS in a permissive environment is pretty easy - If you follow the 12 steps you will be successful and should be generally within a couple seconds of your TOT in the F-35. I routinely see FRS/FTU students inside of 5" by their second event and it's unheard of to get a release without a cleared hot with the only exception I've seen of having a GBU-32 simo with -2 calling in zone with no clearance. 

Far from air to air where it takes a lot of experience to remain effective. 

[Majestik Møøse]

2 hours ago, brabus said:

I’m confused man, you have experience in both jets (right?), but then you say something completely nonsensical like this. Unless you’re using a 1980s definition of “MCO”, then carry on. If we actually did CAS in a modern “MCO” none of the 3rd/4th gen or RW would be very survivable, and they’d be pretty ineffective. This does not mean 5th gen should be flying CAS lines, it means we shouldn’t be flying CAS at all. Degrade the IADS to a point the other platforms are survivable, then we start doing CAS. Saying we’re going to do CAS in and around modern, functional IADS is a lie and one is delusional if they think it’s going to happen.

 

It does have this capability now (timeline is laughable, I get it). But also we shouldn’t have wasted a second or cent on integrating this weapon on 5th gen, but here we are…

BREAK….

To address CAS culture - someone needs to carry it for when OEF 69 pops up and Danger gets arrested for streaking in the Pentagon. But, it’s ignorant to think CAS is impossible or “over” just because there’s not a huge focus on it. A great example is F-16 block 50s not flying a single CAS training sortie until a multi-month, pre-deployment spin up. Guys can’t spell CAS at the beginning. Fast forward and the squadron comes home with thousands of weapons employed, tons of lives saved, no frats, CC intent met x 6900, etc. Am I comparing to the A-10 or AC-130, no, but can guys spin back up and do great work for the bros on the ground and the CCs in the JOC, yes. Don’t put the pussy on a pedestal.

Most Dangerous War vs Most Likely War. I think the problem is that the most dangerous war will also include the most likely war.

[Lawman]

Most Dangerous War vs Most Likely War. I think the problem is that the most dangerous war will also include the most likely war.

Being less effective at the most likely war and losing it results in more S-head people in S-hole places continuing to do S-actions.

Being less effective and losing the most dangerous one results in us either picking through the ashes for our daily meal or celebrating Glorious Leader’s birthday.

I know which one I’d call higher stakes.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[hindsight2020]

On 7/4/2023 at 10:32 PM, Danger41 said:

some strike cell that thinks cleaning out the bays of strategic bombers on dirt farmers is the greatest thing ever,

Oof, you just dug up the memory of the years I spent notching ancestor worship of those who resemble the remark. And the DFCs they got for repaving empty valleys from low-earth orbit.

As I've said... Tumon Bay was my Vietnam. I returned with honor, mostly. 😄 

Edited July 7, 2023 by hindsight2020

[brabus]

21 hours ago, Majestik Møøse said:

Most Dangerous War vs Most Likely War. I think the problem is that the most dangerous war will also include the most likely war.

What Lawman said. Also the most likely (in your opinion, and not shared by decision makers and many high functioning tacticians in our military) is not a difficult training or capes spin up. The most dangerous (your opinion, and what the aforementioned people consider more likely) is not something you can just spin up training, production of capes, etc. on. 

[Majestik Møøse]

Yes of course it takes a lot of work to prepare to fight China, thanks for that insight Brabus. Train/equip as if it’s likely? Sure. Is it actually likely? No, and I already have a nice bottle of whiskey bet placed on an over/under date.

[brabus]

I don’t think you’re informed as well as you think you are. I’m not guaranteeing anything by any means, but there’s plenty of good, objective reasons to put CAS at the bottom of the priority list right now. TACPs don’t even give a shit about CAS anymore (e.g. low priority), that should tell you something. 

[ClearedHot]

On 7/4/2023 at 5:54 PM, nsplayr said:

I feel like you’re maybe jumping to conclusions…moot!

 

You do realize Slife wants to take ALL the guns off the AC-130...and make the PSP a roll on roll off so the MC community can provide "fratricide"...I mean CAS.

[nsplayr]

52 minutes ago, ClearedHot said:

You do realize Slife wants to take ALL the guns off the AC-130...and make the PSP a roll on roll off so the MC community can provide "fratricide"...I mean CAS.

Yea well…that guy sucks, as we all know! I am astounded how he’s continued to fail up so very, very high. 

Edited July 7, 2023 by nsplayr

[Lawman]

Yes of course it takes a lot of work to prepare to fight China, thanks for that insight Brabus. Train/equip as if it’s likely? Sure. Is it actually likely? No, and I already have a nice bottle of whiskey bet placed on an over/under date.

It only stays unlikely in a game of balanced deterrence where the CCP looks across the water toward that Island they think is theirs and that Sea they believe is their beach, and then pause to remember that isn’t a given.

Being equipped and capable of fighting is critical to them coming out of that pause with a changed mind. If they look out into that same environment to see a US military equipped and trained to fight real good in sub Saharan Africa or Southcom but not to take their A2AD and D2SOE, brush it aside, and cripple their infrastructure and military capacity they won’t feel that way anymore.

We can teach an F35 to do CAS. We can’t teach AT-6 or some other Coincentric acquisitions platform like MRAP to do an effective multi domain LSCO fight. I mean we could try… but we will get some pretty predictable results.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[arg]

2 hours ago, ClearedHot said:

.......make the PSP a roll on roll off....

Wait, what year is it? 

Deja Vu all over again

[Majestik Møøse]

1 hour ago, Lawman said:

It only stays unlikely in a game of balanced deterrence where the CCP looks across the water toward that Island they think is theirs and that Sea they believe is their beach, and then pause to remember that isn’t a given.

Being equipped and capable of fighting is critical to them coming out of that pause with a changed mind. If they look out into that same environment to see a US military equipped and trained to fight real good in sub Saharan Africa or Southcom but not to take their A2AD and D2SOE, brush it aside, and cripple their infrastructure and military capacity they won’t feel that way anymore.

We can teach an F35 to do CAS. We can’t teach AT-6 or some other Coincentric acquisitions platform like MRAP to do an effective multi domain LSCO fight. I mean we could try… but we will get some pretty predictable results.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Agree, deterrence. I’m not sure if anyone in this thread is arguing that.

[di1630]

Dude, I agree. CAS in a permissive environment is pretty easy - If you follow the 12 steps you will be successful and should be generally within a couple seconds of your TOT in the F-35. I routinely see FRS/FTU students inside of 5" by their second event and it's unheard of to get a release without a cleared hot with the only exception I've seen of having a GBU-32 simo with -2 calling in zone with no clearance. 
Far from air to air where it takes a lot of experience to remain effective. 

If you lower your standards and scenario threat expectations enough, you can make CAS super easy. Which I’ve witnessed as it went from MCO to COIN style focus over 2 decades.

If you make A/A super challenging where you are outnumbered and are always out of missiles, well I’ve seen that too.

Imagine how easy DCA would be if we did it like we did CAS to mirror the sandbox.

“Hey we’ll fly as a 2 ship and if a bad jet crosses the line we’ll shoot it down. Threat today is a heavily laden SU-24 with a gun”

This isn’t an argument to do more CAS. I solidly support deleting it from the USAF F-35 mission set to focus on high end A/A and SEAD.

Let’s just not BS ourselves and say we care or are good at it.






Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

[MT near]

Again...let's retire every platform except the F-35. 

[Lawman]

Agree, deterrence. I’m not sure if anyone in this thread is arguing that.

I’d say the same congressional zombies that have done things like hobbled the Raptor buy to <200 planes that have spent the last two decades screaming at people with stars on their shoulders at the mere suggestion of retiring the A-10 are doing exactly that.


It is truly insulting as a guy in a green uniform to have somebody comfortably sitting in Congress and accuse another service tasked with a collection of missions that they “don’t care about the ground force.” Then after making their loud popular point they simultaneously cut back on the assets that deliver air supremacy I need to actually prevent a mass casualty event, or sign off on retiring our MTI capability, or don’t force a mass infusion in the collection tools critical to execute effective mission planning….

CAS is an effect. If a JDAm/Griffen/SDB II/etc is coming off a plane the ground force won’t care in the end what that plane (or robot) it is. They want timely application at the point of friction to maximize maneuver. That is all. Some of the most effective and timely CAS that I have relied on to change the outcome of the S show was delivered by a non pointy nosed aircraft. A damn Cessna could be doing it, just get it on target.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[dream big]

7 hours ago, nsplayr said:

Yea well…that guy sucks, as we all know! I am astounded how he’s continued to fail up so very, very high. 

Rumor is soon to be VCSAF! 

[McJay Pilot]

10 hours ago, ClearedHot said:

You do realize Slife wants to take ALL the guns off the AC-130...and make the PSP a roll on roll off so the MC community can provide "fratricide"...I mean CAS.

Im gonna go with that was just a realistic expectation and not a dig on the MC community at large.
 

We've been down this road before with the Combat Wombat and I think you’d be 100% correct that forcing an MDS to “specialize” in two distinctly different mission sets is asking for disaster. However comma there could be some benefits with a common platform. Have dedicated gunship squadrons with associated ranges stateside whose crews could go forward quickly to meet up with pre-staged equipment from overseas MC units? Might be some goodness there.
 

That being said, much like the ACE debacle it would probably executed in the dumbest way possible.

[Clark Griswold]

Intelligent discussion on CAS but needs a bit of airplane vaporware porn:

Could a stealth makeover save the A-10? How to drag the Warthog into the future - Sandboxx

Rodrigo Avella - A14-B Night Wolf

Artist has a couple of versions of his A-14 successor to the Hog but methinks the version sans the cannon is closer to what a modern attack platform would be unless a direct fire weapon could have stealth treatment / covering till needed to deliver freedom

One more thing, change intakes to add screens like F-117 to hide fans

Edited July 9, 2023 by Clark Griswold

[skibum]

What's that bubble-thing on the front do?