Jump to content
Baseops Forums
Sign in to follow this  
xcraftllc

Why Not the B-1 Instead of the A-10?

Recommended Posts

I still want to hear about the rest (most) of the war when stealth has done its job, most IADs are down and troops need CAS, who will operate in that niche where AAA/MP are the threat? Tell me the aircraft designed to operate in a high AAA/MP threat environment. I wonder how the F-35 does against barrage fire?

So we get rid of the programs like F-35... And get nothing in return because canceling the program won't net any quantifiable amount after all the fees and everything else are paid out.

And then we can spend hours talking about how great it will be to have Hawgs fighting the Armor in some rough and nasty brawl ala desert storm.... just as soon as we launch another billion dollars worth of TLAMs and lose another dozen legacy platforms trying to kick down that first 3 day IADS.

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I still want to hear about the rest (most) of the war when stealth has done its job, most IADs are down and troops need CAS, who will operate in that niche where AAA/MP are the threat? Tell me the aircraft designed to operate in a high AAA/MP threat environment. I wonder how the F-35 does against barrage fire?

Anything that can loiter above 20K can deliver effective (granted, not Hawg awesome level) CAS. I want to know how the A-10s that weren't in theater at Day 0 are going to get to staging bases with limited tanker assets. Also, what bases are they going to be based at? The ones near the front will likely be unusable, and the ones far away severely limit time on station. How are they going to survive in an environment where US air dominance is not a given.

Look, the Air Force at large is trying to figure out how to establish and maintain air superiority against a near competitor who will likely not give us six months of planning time the way Saddam did. US air dominance has been a planning assumption for 50+ years... I'm worried that assumption may not be valid any longer. Given both the budget and the threat, I don't see continued investment in a platform that requires air superiority as a good idea. We need platforms that can kick down the door, and I view going from awesome to just effective CAS as the price we have to pay due to budget limitations.

  • Upvote 3
  • Downvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We need platforms that can kick down the door, and I view going from awesome to just effective CAS as the price we have to pay due to budget limitations.

I'll put that on the board as the objective the next time we go to war. Be just good enough for the ground commander. I'm sure they'll dig it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll put that on the board as the objective the next time we go to war. Be just good enough for the ground commander. I'm sure they'll dig it.

Well, he'd be really pissed off if his troops were dying from enemy-generated CAS/interdiction.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll put that on the board as the objective the next time we go to war. Be just good enough for the ground commander. I'm sure they'll dig it.

The ground force commander doesn't understand anything aviation that the BAE cell doesn't feed him through AGI power point and the occasional steaming shit laid in a briefing by what is typically a CW5 with nothing to lose and enough experience nobody questions it.

Seriously I'm saying that as an Army Aviator. Nobody is going to care what is dropping bombs. We care that bombs are being dropped. Just like it was never a question of whether they had 58s or 64s assigned as their time blocked teams despite the shortcomings in sensors, ordnance, and station time with the 58. Nobody is gonna stop the show because the CAS came back as F-16 assigned even though your Assistant S3 specifically put in 30mm forward firing on the CAS request to game the system and get Hawgs. The mission will go on. We did CAS (real no shit non OEF CAS) Before the Hawg, during the Hawg with other airplanes, and will someday do it after the Hawg has been put out to pasture.

Honestly you guys should be jumping at getting into a new airplane like the F-35 before all the "other guys." Build that culture from the ground up day 1 with your experience so that CAS doesn't become problem number 53 to solve later ... Someday... On short notice because we put it off so long learning X, Y, & Z.

Edited by Lawman
  • Upvote 9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I want to know how the A-10s that weren't in theater at Day 0 are going to get to staging bases with limited tanker assets. Also, what bases are they going to be based at? The ones near the front will likely be unusable, and the ones far away severely limit time on station. How are they going to survive in an environment where US air dominance is not a given.

A-10s can land on dirt strips... Edited by Smitty3187

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A-10s can land on dirt strips...

Anything can land on a dirt strip. Once.

Hell, C-130s & C-17s do it all the time. Sometimes the C-17s even do it on purpose!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A-10s can land on dirt strips...

And highways and dry lake beds. Don't think it has been done in a while, however.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A-10s can land on dirt strips...

We did it once before....but it was a while before the next takeoff

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XmZC5uaw69s

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And highways and dry lake beds. Don't think it has been done in a while, however.

Every few months at nellis.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So we get rid of the programs like F-35... And get nothing in return because canceling the program won't net any quantifiable amount after all the fees and everything else are paid out...

The ground force commander doesn't understand anything aviation that the BAE cell doesn't feed him through AGI power point...

Lawman has some seriously valid points here. This is why in my earlier post I said that although I believe the original mission of the JSF program has been a failure, cutting it is a completely different argument. It is seriously all we have now, and the economic fallout of cutting it would be devastating. The R&D process in this country is so broken that it will literally be until WWIII until it's fixed, and we are already facing an airframe lifespan and technology gap in the near future.

It would be nice to think that we could develop and release another alternative in time but we can't, so the F-35 is going to be something we're going to have to learn to love for the time being. The F-4 was kindofva crappy jet too really, but the pilots and commanders learned to live with it and it ended up being a successful program (in a relative sense).

Also like lawman was saying, if you're trying to think about things from the ground force commander's perspective, you need to understand that those guys know absolutely nothing about aviation. Just be glad you're in the Air Force and don't have to be commanded by them!

Edited by xcraftllc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And highways and dry lake beds. Don't think it has been done in a while, however.

Dry lakebeds happens every year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The R&D process is fvcked. We brought on-line the KC-135, B-52, C-130, the Century Series fighters and started the F-4 process all in the 1950s. Didn't Eisenhower say something about the military industrial complex?

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The R&D process is fvcked. We brought on-line the KC-135, B-52, C-130, the Century Series fighters and started the F-4 process all in the 1950s. Didn't Eisenhower say something about the military industrial complex?

All of that was before the McNamara reforms in the 1960s. The process has not changed much since.

Posted from the NEW Baseops.net App!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Funny shit. Who wants to be in the front of the line to fly an overpriced POS that doesnt do anything well at all? The USAF is fucked and anyone who doesnt think so is clueless.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cool. Where?

Posted from the NEW Baseops.net App!

White Sands last year for ANGEL THUNDER.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

WWRD (What Would Rainman Do)

Get fed up and quit?

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Get fed up and quit?

Damn...

post-2836-140012862076_thumb.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cut more planes. Our fleet is the oldest it's ever been. The F-35 is probably a POS, but the answer is to build better planes, not hold on to old ones. Congress is holding on to Hercs and A-10's to save jobs in their states. Nothing is irreplaceable. The only way to get new planes is to get rid of old planes. Look at the number of platforms we fielded between 1945 to 1980 compared to 1980 to present. Technology is supposed to be developing more rapidly, but we're stuck with outdated equipment. It's time to be innovative again. We all should be writing our congressmen and urging them to support cuts to our oldest platforms.

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.

Sign in to follow this  



×
×
  • Create New...