[Yo-Yo]

We've been using the B-52 for close air support in Afghanistan.

With a ton of loiter time, a Sniper pod, and a bomb bay full of JDAMs, a B-52 can plink enemy positions all day long.

The B-1B can do the same.

On this day and age, close air support doesn't have to mean laying down gunfire at treetop level.

[WayneS]

But laying down gunfire at treetop level is fun.

;-)

[D Rider]

Loiter time is meaningless, unless you intend to provide it 24/7. That is why forward positioned smaller airframes are used.

[Jeff Chandler]

Yep, with modern munitions, it is no longer necessary to fly at tree-top level to provide CAS. We are using A-10s, B-1s, B-52s, F-15Es, F-16s, and F-18s for close air support.

A-10s comnprise only 20% of CAS.

[Bruce Kurtz]

“With a ton of loiter time, a Sniper pod,…”
Had to look that one up, I was thinking a sniper inside some type of pod. But no it is a pod that has FLIR, HDTV, laser designator, tracker and marker.

[Chainmail]

"On this day and age, close air support doesn't have to mean laying down gunfire at treetop level."

The good old Air Force has been saying that since Billy Mitchell's day and it's not any truer now than it was then. "Close Air Support" is just what the name says and in direct, responsive support of the grunts in contact.

Honestly, the Air Force would use Minuteman IIIs as "CAS" if they could get away with it.

Now, how much better would Normandy had gone if the assault forces had real CAS in direct support?