80s' concept for a CAS F-16
Posted on 08/20/2016 7:42:29 PM PDT by sukhoi-30mki
Even though the USAF has shuttered the 65th AGRS based out of Nellis AFB, its only F-15C/D aggressor squadron, our friends at Combat Aircraft Monthly say a new F-16 unit is slated to be activated at the base.
This new unit will be made up of eight Block 40 F-16C/Ds, with the squadron envisioned to grow to 16 aircraft as the F-35 comes on line and replaces the Viper in front-line units. The F-16s' mission will reportedly be tightly focused on close air support. Combat Aircraft writes:
“The CAS Integration Group’s mission will include high-end training as well as an increased emphasis on tactical level CAS, with experts to integrate fires in joint operations, advancing the joint CAS enterprise and preserving the USAF ‘CAS culture’. Gen ‘Hawk’ Carlisle, commander of ACC said: ‘The changes we’re making at Nellis are an important step in refining our CAS skills through future generations of Airmen so we can continue to provide ground forces with all the advantages air power brings to close combat.’”
This all sounds good and well. But there are a few tells here that indicate this new unit could be forming to help bolster the case for retiring the USAF’s most underappreciated tactical asset—the A-10 Warthog.
“Preserving the USAF CAS Culture” has been a major issue raised in regards to retiring the A-10; you don’t just retire the plane, you also retire the community that supports it. And that community has been laser-focused on providing extremely high-quality close air support under the most challenging conditions for nearly four decades.
Multi-role fast jets and their aircrews have to accomplish many tasks as well as CAS, and although they are capable of the mission—especially when spooled up for it via intensive training before deployment—America’s CAS "brain trust," so to speak, exists within the A-10 community. If it goes by the wayside, all the experience built up over decades of testing tactics in combat environments will slowly decay. This phenomenon is largely referred to as "brain drain" in Pentagon parlance.
With this and the USAF’s dogged determination to quickly retire the A-10 in mind, moving some of that brain trust over to an F-16 unit gives the impression that the Air Force is trying to check off a box on the Warthog’s death warrant.
Thing is, the USAF has long lusted over the idea of replacing the Warthog with Vipers. The force even went so far as to strap a 30mm cannon pod onto the F-16's centerline, load up the jet with new avionics, paint a batch of them green and stand up a constellation of units to focus on CAS tactics and development. (One of these, in fact, was based at Nellis AFB two and a half decades ago.)
The big gun-toting F-16, dubbed the A-16 and the F/A-16 at various points, failed miserably at its job. The vibration from the cannon was far too much for the “electric jet” to withstand, and accuracy was piss-poor. Even with its cutting-edge technology, the attack Viper simply didn’t hold a candle to an aircraft designed from the ground-up for low-level CAS and battlefield interdiction—and to survive taking one or many hits in the process.
The announcement of a USAF F-16 squadron dedicated to CAS also comes as the USAF continues to spastically put forward initiatives to replace the A-10—not with the F-35 as it has tried to justify in the past, but now with a pair of ambiguous new platforms. I predicted the Air Force would do exactly this, and I also maintain that all this is just vaporware.
In fact, even after all the USAF’s bluster about a “two platform solution” over the summer and the salivating media carrying the story as fact, Secretary of the Air Force Deborah James proved it is indeed all talk:
"So far I have read about this in the news. I have not actually seen a proposal on any of this that has come forward to me. So it sure is pre-decisional. It hasn't been decided on,” she said. “Where would we get the money? Not at all clear to me.”
The Secretary, who has been very forthcoming about controversial issues that past USAF brass have traditionally “circled the wagons” around, stated there is no money for any of these plans. Flight hours for aircrews are already in the toilet, and the USAF will not be able to afford the tactical aircraft fleet it currently has by 2021 according to their own numbers. (Interestingly enough, 2021 is the same year the USAF plans to sneakily put the A-10 out to pasture.) And on top of that, the Air Force still has multiple big-ticket items in development, many of which are still fiscally unpredictable (B-21, F-35, etc).
The USAF says it cannot even afford the A-10—which it owns outright and has recently upgraded—today. The A-10 is Air Force's cheapest manned tactical asset to operate. So how is it going to be able to afford to develop, procure, and operate a two-aircraft CAS solution? Simple answer: It can’t, unless it wants to give away some very high-profile programs that have missions far more sexy than CAS. Which it won’t.
Now we have reached the point where it seems as if the USAF is willing to build a little time capsule for CAS expertise by standing up an F-16-equipped mini-squadron at Nellis, as if doing so would give the service access to all the CAS lessons learned in the past. News flash: CAS is what the USAF is doing combat-wise today, every day, against an enemy that shows no signs of fading into the history books. The best aircraft for that mission remains the A-10, and the best place for safekeeping of CAS expertise is within the A-10 community—the same place it has been vested successfully for nearly 40 years.
So next time you read a headline toting the USAF’s grand plans to replace the A-10, rest assured it is just more mental masturbation coming from a flying service in total denial of the fiscal realities that will continue to mount in the coming decade.
80s' concept for a CAS F-16
The Marines live for it.
There are some problems with the idea.
Not sure why they’re asking a Corvette to do the job of a farm tractor.
It took me less then 5 seconds to figure out the author of this article has zero practical experience in CAS. I’m going to guess the closest he’s ever gotten to any kind of combat is an Xbox. To avoid wasting time discussing his warn out strawman arguments, I’ll simply say that if you wanted useful input on whether to purchase an IPhone or a Andriod, you would be wise to ignore the input of someone whose practical experience with a phone was limited to watching someone use a rotary phone in a movie a couple times. That is about the equivalent of the usefulness of this article.
2. The Marines do CAS exceptionally well and are the experts in the CAS mission. With that in mind...what assets do they choose to perform the CAS role?
The AF doesn’t hate CAS. When they try, they turn “CAS” into DAS, and do that passably well. But getting down and dirty dirty with brothers is not a core value with them like it always has been for Marines.
TC
What is the primary goal of a CAS mission?
Which, of course, makes absolutely ZERO sense - the A-10 is STILL, after all these years, the very best at what it does. No other aircraft every designed and built does its job better... NONE.
I find it so ironic that the US Air Force is always crying that it wants the “best tool” for its job... which in their eyes, is always whatever is newest. But the F-35 cant’ hold a handle to the A-10 in effectiveness, in ordinance carried, in sheer firepower. The only “advantage” it has - speed. And in CAS, speed isn’t king.
The idiots are genuinely in charge.
Primary role of CAS is to kill immediate threats to ground troops. Usually in very close proximity where the danger to friendlies where dropping heavy ordnance ( 500- pounders) is very dangerous, and requires great precision (CEP of less than 10 meters).
Marines practice this continuously.
TC
While you probably know this, the author of this article seems to have no idea that the tools used in executing the CAS mission today have evolved way beyond the 1970's, which is when the A-10 was designed. That's why the A-10 now primarily uses exactly the same weapons and sensors that every other fixed wing CAS asset uses to do what you describe. Datalink and targeting pods have made it much easier and faster to drop ordnance well inside a 10m CEP (much more accurate than the GAU-8) from medium altitudes. And it's almost easier to perform CAS at night when you add night vision goggles and IR lasers. Small diameter laser guided bombs and laser guided rockets have a much smaller warhead than traditional 500 pounders and can be guided to their targets by ground troops. And all of it can be done via datalink, which greatly speeds up the process and reduces the error inherent in multiple radio transmissions in a very high stress environment. This isn't theoretical stuff based on untested technology. This is how CAS has been conducted for more than a decade. Of course, all of this is well known to the Marine Corps, who has settled on the F-35 to replace both the AV-8B and F-18 in the fixed wing CAS mission.
Meanwhile, you still have what are becoming increasingly archaic, amuture military pundits spouting off about how CAS needs to be performed by slow moving airborne tanks, flying very low and slow so that their leather helmeted pilots can read the shoulder patches of the targets they have been tasked to destroy. Stupid. That type of CAS was always just about as risky to friendlies as it was to the enemy. The name of the game is to quickly kill the enemy without committing fratricide. Not perform airshows. The Marine Corps knows that and current operators in the Army and Air Force do as well. Morons like the guy who wrote this article should stick to video game reviews. Or maybe stop watching WWII news reels.
“if it ain’t a fast burner, it ain’t $&!^.”
That was pretty much the attitude among fighter pilots back when I was on active duty. Close Air Support needs slower birds that can hang with the groundpounders. I understand there are senior officers now who came up through the A-10 program, but they aren’t anything like a majority. CAS isn’t as sexy. Which is too freaking bad, because what wins wars is still guys with rifles taking the territory from their guys with rifles. It’s a lot easier with air superiority, and damn near impossible without, but fast isn’t appropriate everywhere. I was a photographer doing OTD&E on the A10 in the late 70’s. It’s still my favorite of the more modern jets. F-16’s are an OK bird, but not the best for covering those poor bastards with the rifles.
Old Student
WRM, MSgt, USAF(Ret.)
Having been one of those guys with the rifles, I can attest that the A-10 is the greatest aircraft in the inventory. It's so great that if the USAF finally gets its wish and dumps it, then the Army should immediately snap it up and put them in the Combat Aviation Brigades. Maybe even adapt a UAV version of it flown out of the BDE TOC?
I hear Las Vegas is looking to build a new airport maybe they could take over Nellis. It has two 10,000 ft. runways. IIRC.
Interesting.....
Leftover Navy strike planes. Beside helos it's all they can get.
Pretty hard to argue the Harriar and F-35B were forced on the Marine Corps.
I say reopen the A-10 production lines and make the N/AW version.
Incorporate the new Buck Rodgers crap the air farce weenies want with uprated engines.
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.