Posted on 01/23/2015 1:19:39 PM PST by E. Pluribus Unum
"The moral is to the physical as three is to one," Napoleon said about the elements of military strength. Two signs that would make Napoleon worry.
First, the background. Two military airplanes are getting a lot of attention: the A-10 "Warthog"—"Honey Badger" would be a better name—a kind of flying tank that has been crucial in "close air support" missions from the first Gulf War onwards; and the F-35 "Lightning II," a still-in-development multi-purpose airplane that has been plagued by technical problems, production delays, and cost overruns.
(Excerpt) Read more at theatlantic.com ...
Only if you change your nom de plume to ‘Wart Hog’
In the Movie Terminator Salvation, the A-10 was the only Airplane they had to use against Skynet.
That’s good enough for me. #:^)
I just don’t know why everyone has got their knickers in a bunch!
I personally like the Warthog. It’s just buttfuggly to the point of being cute!
If flies!! Shoot it a gazzillion times, it still comes home to roost. (OV-10 anyone?)
It carries all sorts of munitions in all kinds of configurations. All you need to do is ask it to do this or that, and the Warthog says: “BOOYA, CAN DO EASY GI!”
It puts the fear of God (not alla) into the hearts of anyone on the receiving end. Especially mudslime MOFOs.
So why in the name of God, is anyone, anywhere, for any reason, busting on this piece of work?
In MHO, the A-10 is nothing less than the Kalashnikov of the skies.
Flame on!
Being brought before Congress is one thing, speaking out in public without authorization is another.
It's bad enough that little old ladies from Pasadena mistake the AF uniform for the USPS blues, or the local transitco bus drivers, and are all the time asking pilots what time is the bus to Glendale, or how long does it take to get a package to Cucamonga.
It just ain't right that a red-blooded American fly-guy should motor around in this funky minivan-plane at 400knts, shooting at stuff on the ground. We signed up for the wild blue yonder, not the tame muddy under, capeesh?
BTW, when the A-10 wheels are up, you can still see them. That ain't right. I guess knocking off the enemy is probably some kind of a worthy objective, but so is protecting our image, dammit! We're going to the big prom in the sky and we'll take the CADILLAC, not the 63 VW Bug, OK? ok?
If it weren't for the 1948 Treaty of Key West, I'd give the damn beast to the Army, since after all, it looks like a truck anyway. And I have no objective to letting some of those Air NG Guard goobers fly it. Hell, about 400knts is as fast as they should be allowed to go under any circumstances.
Just get it off my runway, OK? We are AF fighter jocks and Strategic Nuclear Bomber killers! Need help on the ground? Dial 9-MARINE AIR.
The F-15E’s primary role in Afghanistan is providing close-air support for ground troops.
http://www.af.mil/AboutUs/FactSheets/Display/tabid/224/Article/104499/f-15e-strike-eagle.aspx
Funny...seems like the USAF has no shortage of people lining up to be pilots of F16s and F15s...I guess they’ve adapted to the role?
If so, they’ve adapted quite well I think...
About half way down...start with Chad Balwanz...danger close...even if at 20k feet...I don’t think those guys in that gully cared one way or the other how high those F16s were...
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/gulf/voices/2.html
...You’d think the great success of the Blackbird and Warthog would convince people that engineering the plane for “single-role” is superior than the “multi-role” nonsense.
from wiki
Five United States Special forces operatives, an Afghan Army counterpart, and an interpreter were killed by friendly fire in Southern Zabul Province on June 9, 2014. Whilst on patrol, and coming under heavy Taliban fire, an air-strike was called in and a B-1 Lancer bomber misdirected it's payload killing the seven military pesonnel amongst others.
I do not recall reading about any A10 friendly fire incidences.
I find it incredable that the Air Force would rather use a 300 million dollar nuclear bomber for CAS then a much less expensive and more capable A10. The AF needs a serious leadership shake up .
a. They were small SF team in an isolated spot and
b. Everything else was bad guys.
Crap, a B2 could've handled that mission!
CAS works better than anything else on the battlefield for crushing enemy strong points. Well-directed artillery, particularly a nice solid Regiment or battalion Time on Target works well and is usable day or night - but when it comes to really hard targets there is no substitute for a nice well-trained stack of close-killers with Mk84s and the will to press in close to make sure they hit them, not us.
This is important to us Crunchies because most of the time the enemy is really close to us. Ever watch a firefight at night? Did you see how short those lines of tracers were? In most real combat, there are large groups of us and large groups of them and when we come into contact, it's usually very, very close.
Some long time ago, I was part of a an infantry battalion that had the job of assaulting a pinned Vietcong battalion headquarters. We had two other infantry battalions in blocking positions and this day, they were the anvils, we were the hammer.
At first light, our leading company hit their defenses and was stopped cold with about 60 casualties. The enemy had concrete bunkers, interlocking fire, barbed wire and lots and lots heavy automatic weapons - at least one was a 37mm AA cannon. I was part of the second assault wave. As I lay down in the tall grass about 200m from where we'd found their defensive line I remember watching long lines of grass fall around me as the enemy grazing fire cut them just inches above us. We had pounded them with artillery (I was an artillery observer) but it didn't seem to slow down the intensity and the accuracy of their return fire. We had run into a real rarity - a major hard-core VC unit and they were staying put.
I had resigned myself to what was going to happen next, getting up into that fire and rushing forward into it when two Marine F-4s showed up. After some careful coordination by the FAC, we marked the target using WP mortar rounds and the first F-4 made a slow pass right over the top of me. I remember that the Phantom was so slow that it made that moaning sound they usually make landing (something about airflow over the boundary layer fences, I heard).
That pass was to make sure he saw where we were with our air panels and where they were. The whole enemy treeline lit up with the most muzzle flashes I had ever seen in my whole 13 months in country. Every damn enemy that could shoot was shooting at that F4 and there were hundreds of them!. He pulled away from that first pass and his Dash-2 took exactly the same pass and released six Snake eyes - you could see the fins pop open and they went straight down the center into the middle of all those muzzle flashes. The whole damn treeline erupted! Trees flew through he air, house tops, everything. The lead went in and did exactly the same pass, low and slow and pasted the target perfectly.
We got up and moved in and there was just wreckage and the few survivors were easy meat.
That baby, is CAS!
I do. Look up an Nasiriyah. Apparently Air Force training manuals don't show their pilots what a Marine AAV-7 looks like. Even when they have large American flags painted on their sides.
You don't remember the incident with the Brit armored vehicles where they killed six of our guys - and then refused to even apologize to those kids' parents?
You have a short memory.
“Which group do you think would give more respect and honor to Hog Drivers, Fighter Pilots or grunts in the mud?”
They both do. It is the senior USAF leadership that I am not so sure about. In their hearts they know the Hog is THE jet for the job, but the accountant heart that drives them says no.
“Having been both a grunt in the mud and a ‘hog driver’ (though of a far different type of “hog”, the Sikorsky CH-53 Sea Stallion) I say the grunts have far, far more respect for A-10 Warthog drivers.”
And, as a former ground FAC during Gulf War I and as a former Hog Driver (the real Hog, the A-10), I appreciate it.
“Grunts love anyone who can rain death & destruction from the sky onto their enemy.”
That is true, but only the A-10 can bring down the “Fist of Gawd” when called upon.
Flying low is a great airshow but it has its limitations, like late tgt acquisition, threat envelopes, ability to react and re-aim if necessary. . .besides, CAS means the close application of fire-power under positive control of a JFAC and in close proximity of friendly forces. Note that ‘close’ means where the ordnance lands, not a close flying jet.
Concur.
Okay. . how about this: All jets that carry A/G ordnance can fly CAS.
Better?
“and for all intents and purposes, ALL F15E sorties are CAS...”
No qualifier regarding theater and such.
Not all F-15E sorties are CAS. Daily sorties flown world-wide are about 30/30/30; meaning deep strike missions, A/A missions, CAS training and “other.” Mostly training missions but one must keep the tip of the spear sharp.
Real world missions being flown include CAS but not all are.
Between the two, the A-10, it is the last of the cowboy flying you can find, a real stick-and-rudder man's jet. Not to say the F-15E is not fun and great, after all, what's not to like when strapping on a Cadillac of a jet with five-stages of after-burner and a radar that can work wonders.
All told, however, I enjoyed flying the Hog the most.
And close also means a far smaller CEP, much less chance the bad stuff lands on us or neighbors. Takes big balls. Remember, all of us on the ground are facing death, so having a pilot right there down with us means we have a guy up there willing to face the same crazy danger we are.
Means he’s accurate and he cares enough to take the same risks we are. With Marines, we expect nothing less.
You afraid to take this risks? Maybe there’s an opening with the airlines.
CEP is an issue. For sure.
With the A-10 gun, for example, the mil dispersion is small (smaller than an Apache) and that means accuracy at increased ranges.
Dropping free-fall ordnance is best at lower altitudes, but we don’t drop much of that now. And if do so we must remain fairly high (relatively speaking) because of frag.
Free-fall munitions are actually more accurate with increased dive angle, and for high angle attacks you must fly higher.
For gun attacks and free-fall munitions think flashlight on the ground. . .low angle and the beam spreads out, is elongated CEP, whereas a higher angle delivery means a concentrated beam and more accurate.
We mostly drop JDAMS and SDBs, with some LGBs. Altitude is not a factor for accuracy when delivering those type of ordnance.
“Means he’s accurate and he cares enough to take the same risks we are. With Marines, we expect nothing less.”
Taking a risk just because does not add to the mission. Ever. If you can perform the mission accurately and do so while avoiding threat envelopes, the smart thing is to do so. Kind of like troops on the ground using cover and/or concealment. . .you don’t uncessarily stand-up and whack away. . .you mitigate the odds against you and as long as you can do the mission, hide behind a tree or stay outside small arms range. . .same-same.
No one has earned a MOH flying A/A, but many pilots have while flying the A/G mission. Most aircraft losses in combat are due to AAA, meaning most were flying the A/G (CAS) mission. Most POWS in Vietnam were USAF, flying A/G missions.
“You afraid to take this risks? Maybe there’s an opening with the airlines.”
Insults? Really? C’on. I expect a honorable exchange of viewpoints from a former Marine, not dishonable personal attacks.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.