The GAU-8 Wiki page is fascinating, too.
Linkless ammo feed and it recovers its brass.
Posted on 04/16/2014 8:12:40 AM PDT by SandRat
A top Air Force official had one word to describe the proposed cuts threatening to ground the A-10 fleet.
“Heinous.”
Rep. Ron Barber relayed the comments from Gen. Michael Hostage, the commander of the Air Combat Command, shortly after the pair toured Davis-Monthan Air Force Base to discuss the fate of the iconic attack aircraft known as the Warthog.
The commander of the Air Combat Command, Hostage oversees the 355th Fighter Wing at Davis-Monthan which flies more than 80 A-10s.
Barber, flanked by community leaders, asked Hostage to come to Tucson to see the overwhelming community support for the air base and the A-10.
Last week, Barber wrote to Air Force officials asking them to consider reassigning F-16 squadrons from Luke Air Force Base to D-M when squadrons of F-35 Joint Strike Fighters arrive.
After the tour with Hostage, Barber said he is still working with senators and key members in the House for a legislative solution.
Barber continues to blame the budget sequester as the true motivation for mothballing the A-10 fleet.
Former A-10 pilot Martha McSally, one of four Republicans vying to run against Barber this fall, accused the Tucson Democrat is playing political games using soldiers as backdrop as he runs for re-election.
“When it mattered most and he could have had an impact, Congressman Barber flat out ignored the threat to the A-10, denied it was at risk and was asleep at the switch to the point of skipping the committee hearing that shaped this crucial decision,” McSally said.
“Now he’s using active duty military to desperately play politics and cover his tracks. “
Barber has consistently disputed McSally’s assertions over the A-10 to the point of releasing a timeline of various actions he has taken since being elected into office in 2012.
The Tucson Democrat concedes he missed a committee hearing last year, but only to chair a subcommittee hearing on sequestration at the same time as the Air Force posture hearing.
I can just imagine trying to land one on a carrer...lol
I was saying that in the Air Force, Close Air Support has always been looked at with a both “it is our mission, not yours, Army” attitude, while at the same time looking at it with some disdain.
I definitely do not agree with that attitude, but the Air Force will really fight to keep it as a mission, though the Army is more than willing to take it over.
GAU-8 (30mm) gun on the A-10...kills tanks with ease and could do the same thing to a fighter aircraft that entered its field of fire. Fox-8 is a play on the Fox-1 and Fox-2 calls associated with air-to-air missiles
Not sure they could “take their time” if they saw trails rising from the missile field, b/c there were probably in-bounds from the USSR, trying to take out our strategic assets.
SIOP was comprised of many, many moving parts and I don’t think a lot of fighter guys (in particular) understood the complexity and timing of the whole scheme.
As a former aircrew member, I can appreciate your comment about deconfliction. The “big sky, little airplane” theory only goes so far. In the tactical environment (where my platform operated), we worried about ATACMs, fired by MLARS. We always repositioned for those shots, which seemed to come through our altitude block. Of course, at the cruising speed of a C-130, we didn’t move very fast.
Got it.
Thanks for bringing me up-to-speed.
LOL. Yeah, the grass is always greener...
Sure. That’s what you were saying. You bet.
Look, if you want to get ticked off by your interpretation of what you think I meant, well, have at it. Personally, I didn’t think it deserved the drama. And where you got off on some weird Islamic thing I haven’t a clue.
Thanks for posting, not sure I was aware of the shoot down of Spirit 03. Thought I had followed the gulf war pretty closely. Just goes to show.
Used to cringe at the antics of Spectre gun ships over the “trail” in Laos. They flew about two thousand feet lower than we did in their quest for truck kills and a few times got shot up. Brave men.
Candlestick Night FAC NKP Thailand 68-69
“I wasn’t a pilot”
I was. . .and flew the A-10 operationally, as well as the F-15E.
“. . .but did spend a fair amount of time around them. . “
So did I, flew with them in fact.
“. . .and other senior leadership.”
So did I, served in the Pentagon on the AF/A8 and SAF/AQ staffs. Perhaps we ran into each other while working the POM or doing force planning.
Fast, slow, those are not the issue. The issue is a single-mission aircraft (A-10) and shrinking budgets made the Air Force favor multi-mission aircraft. . .like the F-16.
Further, CAS is a mission that was understood by the USAF as essential but secondary to A/A. One must control the sky first before you can really do CAS effectively in today’s battlefield.
Good day.
They tried. . .but they couldn't figure out how to put the tail-hook on backwards to catch the wire when the ship came up behind them. . .bada-bing (slow jet, fast ship. . you get the joke. . .)
“I definitely do not agree with that attitude, but the Air Force will really fight to keep it as a mission, though the Army is more than willing to take it over”
To be clear, the Army already does. . .Apache and Cobra helos, for example.
Or are you talking about fixed-wing CAS? Totally different story and no, the Army would not want to take that on, as fixed wing, even the A-10, requires an airfield and significant logistics and support.
but it makes one heck of an anti - ship weapon with that anti - tank cannon mounted under its nose.
Sure does. . .!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Key_West_Agreement
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pace-Finletter_MOU_1952
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johnson-McConnell_agreement_of_1966
http://m.theredstonerocket.com/military_scene/article_6d0ec1c6-2b78-11e3-a27e-001a4bcf887a.html
The Army’s fixed wing aircraft were placed under a unified command in the early 1980s. In 1983, fixed wing became part of the Aviation and Troop Command in St. Louis. In 1995, the Base Realignment and Closure Commission decided to relocate the Aviation and Troop Command to Redstone Arsenal as part of the Aviation and Missile Command. That move was completed in 1997 and the Program Executive Office for Aviation was established in 2001, with the addition of some fixed wing assets in 2004.
In 2010, it was decided to have all of the Army’s fixed wing assets managed by one entity. In 2011, the Fixed Wing Project Office became the eighth project office within PEO Aviation. Since then, it has grown from 256 aircraft and six contracts to 380 aircraft and 38 contracts. It includes 48 aircraft designs and 11 distinct missions, including transporting personnel, reconnaissance operations and homeland security.
Was referring to fixed-wing CAS.
Army has some fixed-wing intel platforms and other such aircraft, but they are small with small footprint and comparatively small logistics and support needs, and short runway requirements.
Your links refer to internal Army reorganizational efforts with Army assets, not Air Force CAS assets nor assumption of fixed-wing CAS (i.e., A-10).
It gets blurry, because Reaper is being thought of as A-10 “lite”, and may have armament more like an A-10 in its next incarnation. Still piloted by the AF, however.
I truly don’t think the Army would have any problem in making the infrastructure for A-10 operations. In the modern military scale of things, an airfield and its supporting logistics are not that great. Even the Marines would be more than happy to take that burden.
The GAU-8 Wiki page is fascinating, too.
Linkless ammo feed and it recovers its brass.
You bet, yefragetuwrabrumuy.
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.