Jump to content
Baseops Forums
Fud

AF Light Air Support Aircraft

Recommended Posts

Light Attack in FY20 NDAA Amendments:

https://rules.house.gov/bill/116/hr-2500

Amendment 73 with 6 FL Republican sponsors (A-29s here we come):

Revised Provides U.S. Special Operations Command procurement authority for Light Attack aircraft in support of the Air Force Special Operations Command (AFSOC) Combat Air Advisor (CAA) mission. It also directs the Secretary of the Air Force to obligate, or transfer to USSOCOM, the necessary funds that have been made available for light attack aircraft to procure the required number of aircraft for Air Combat Command’s Air Ground Operations School and AFSOC’s CAA mission

 

They are already talking part Manned ISR divestiture to man it.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
They are already talking part Manned ISR divestiture to man it.
 
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Really?
Divest the U-28 & MC-12?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This also could go under the “What’s Wrong With the Air Force” thread considering LA was supposed to fall under the new Rapid Fielding Acquisition process...  
 
https://www-military-com.cdn.ampproject.org/c/s/www.military.com/daily-news/2019/07/26/air-force-wants-more-money-light-attack-aircraft-effort.html/amp

FFS AFSOC could have had a couple deployable squadrons CMR with the time and money Big Blue has wasted.
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/7/2019 at 5:31 PM, Skitzo said:

 

They are already talking part Manned ISR divestiture to man it.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

On 8/7/2019 at 11:28 PM, Clark Griswold said:


Really?
Divest the U-28 & MC-12?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

So would this mean more manned ISR contracts for the likes of L3, MAG, Dynamic etc.?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, fire4effect said:

So would this mean more manned ISR contracts for the likes of L3, MAG, Dynamic etc.?

Might but contractors don't do certain things so maybe not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://breakingdefense.com/2019/09/house-members-seek-ndaa-language-to-force-light-attack-aircraft-buy/

 

“Phil Clay, a former Navy test pilot for the Imminent Fury/Combat Dragon close air support experiments, says the Air Force should purchase "at least a wing" (20 planes) of the Light-Attack Aircraft for SOCOM and the so-called foreign internal defense (FID) mission to combat insurgencies.”

 

“the so-called foreign internal defense (FID) mission to combat insurgencies.”

WTF...?!?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They should threaten to give them to  Willow Grove, Hancock and Ellington if they want AD big blue to get off their ass.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
They should threaten to give them to  Willow Grove, Hancock and Ellington if they want AD big blue to get off their ass.


RPA units were mentioned to get them.


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
They should threaten to give them to  Willow Grove, Hancock and Ellington if they want AD big blue to get off their ass.

That would be a helluva pimp slap to the AF from Congress but would probably get the message across

Just buy it AF and get it over with


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quick 1 image summary of this thread and the non-AF leadership impetus towards Light Attack

don.gif

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah but keep charging that windmill, you'll win someday, maybe...

- Break Break -

Has the USMC released any requirements for a light attack?  There have been mentions of a partnership with the Marines (and others) if the AF finally got to acquiring Light Attack...

https://www.defensenews.com/smr/federal-budget/2019/03/13/air-force-to-buy-handful-of-light-attack-planes-but-will-a-bigger-program-follow/

https://www.businessinsider.com/senate-gives-marine-corps-100-million-for-cheap-light-attack-aircraft-2018-6

Doubt they would have requirements that different than the AF's but you never know.  I would argue the original LAAR requirements are dated and new ones push to a more capable system (shamelless Scorpion plug) but anything official on what the Marines and other potential partners (Aussies) might want/need in LA?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lol, they're just Rick Rolling us all at this point. Honestly I stopped caring what anyone in Big Blue leadership says about light attack, and I worked on the the project personally in my civilian job and was a big proponent in general.

While a light attack capability as an MWS flown by USAF crews could still do a lot of good around the world, it's a good idea that's peak time was probably about 15 years ago and we're pretty clearly now moving in a different direction as an Air Force.

My BL: RIP Light Attack, we hardly knew ye...

Edited by nsplayr
  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, nsplayr said:

Lol, they're just Rick Rolling us all at this point. Honestly I stopped caring what anyone in Big Blue leadership says about light attack, and I worked on the the project personally in my civilian job and was a big proponent in general.

While a light attack capability as an MWS flown by USAF crews could still do a lot of good around the world,  It's a good idea that's peak time was probably about 15 years ago and we're pretty clearly now moving in a different direction as an Air Force.

My BL: RIP Light Attack, we hardly knew ye...

Maybe but maybe not... never underestimate the AF to finally do the right thing after 15+ years of doing the wrong thing.

The light attack requirement is there  and we should have years ago gotten into the lead on this, the Brazilians want to build one:

https://www.airway1.com/brazilian-company-wants-to-launch-light-attack-aircraft/

https://www.janes.com/article/87662/laad-2019-akaer-presents-conceptual-mosquito-multi-role-aircraft

Akaer_mosquito_01.jpg

Just a bit like the OV-10 but imitation is the most sincere form of flattery.

Light Attack should have segued into Light Fighter ala an F-5 or F-20 that would have been part of a family of compatible systems to deliver modern, relevant airpower effects at a reasonable cost to sell to our Allies and keep in our own portfolio.

Edited by Clark Griswold

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whats intriguing to me is how we had a relatively robust light attack fleet during the cold war, at a time when a conventional war with Russia was the thing we were preparing for, then after the wall fell we got rid of all of our OV-10s, A-4s, A-7s, and half our A-10s and switched our CAS platforms almost exclusively to pointy noses when no near-peer enemies existed.

Then OEF & OIF rolls around and we have a situation where Vipers and Hornets are putting GBUs onto guys with AKs and trucks that cost less than a fin on said bombs. Seems like we went the opposite direction we should've.

  • Like 3
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/26/2019 at 12:20 PM, Sketch said:

Whats intriguing to me is how we had a relatively robust light attack fleet during the cold war, at a time when a conventional war with Russia was the thing we were preparing for, then after the wall fell we got rid of all of our OV-10s, A-4s, A-7s, and half our A-10s and switched our CAS platforms almost exclusively to pointy noses when no near-peer enemies existed.

Then OEF & OIF rolls around and we have a situation where Vipers and Hornets are putting GBUs onto guys with AKs and trucks that cost less than a fin on said bombs. Seems like we went the opposite direction we should've.

Yup.

Mike Pietrucha proposed an anti-dote to this a couple of years ago:

RECLAIMING THE AIR ATTACK MISSION: A RADICAL RETURN TO A PROVEN SUCCESS

Good article and worth a read IMHO.

Light Attack Armed Reconnaissance (manned) is still a requirement but the environment has moved on from the COIN/LIC mission of the early 2000's  and while it may seem counter intuitive (or not depending on cynical you are about the AF) if the requirement(s) were updated to the current/projected operational environment and the solution to said requirement(s) were likely a bit more expensive but more capable, the AF might give it a second look.

When rebels or insurgents have modest conventional military capabilities as is becoming common in Grey Zone conflicts, the requirements are going up and if though it is bitter and frustrating, militarily participating in these conflicts to some capacity is often better/cheaper in the long run.   

In practical terms, a platform with:

Medum Strike, Multiple Sensors, Good Endurance, Good Speed, Good Survivability, Growth capacity and low to modest cost for high utilization over long conflicts. 

Nothing great but a lot of things done pretty good.  This would never be a silver bullet but a platform that will be relevant to a range of conflicts in capabilities delivered, threats it can defeat, reliability it can deliver with care and attention to cost.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




×
×
  • Create New...