Jump to content
SCRIMP

CSAR to AFSOC? What do the customers think?

Recommended Posts

I would suggest putting this through the OODA Loop and cascading effects, as well as sending an ALCON letter starting with the BLUF.  After those wickets the answer will be obvious,


V/R,

Congressman

  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


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

I would disagree with your assessment that AFSOC does not care about "ACC" assets, the minute they become AFSOC assets they will most certainly care as long as the TOA is moved over with them. 

The HC-130J (long overdue), has about 90% commonality with the MC-130J, but the last 10% is all the special sauce that is equally applicable to SOF or CSAR missions, ACC could care less if you get those capabilities which is a terrible shame.  The politics of this potential move are complex and it is not being driven solely by the services or altruism on the part of AFSOC.  The genesis was an effort by OSD to save money, SOF is almost always in the same places (and more), as the conventional folks and they have executed many of the recent CSAR events, why not find some synergy.    The main sticking point form the CSAR rotor types is the deal would almost certainly drive a reduction in the CRH buy, which I personally think is a good thing.  Why in the hell are we buying a 140kt helicopter to conduct long-range CSAR in today's world...seriously?

If I were king for a day I would move CSAR to AFSOC (that comes with some doctrinal changes and direction to SOCOM).  I would put some of the CSAR forces back in the active component (75%-25%).  All 29 HC-130Js (if they get 29, reading the latest NDAA USAF is trying to cut the buy to 26...yeah ACC loves you guys), would be modified to MC-130J configuration (MCTF, SMP, RFCM).  CRH buy would be curtailed to 100ish and 30 CV-22s would be added to AFSOC with at least two CSAR units becoming CV-22 equipped.

I should have been more clear. ACC assets as in pointy nose aircraft doing pointy nose things such as supporting Big Green and not CJSOTF

you just talked about how ACC robs the money pot to pay for other things, how is your plan not doing the same?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, ClearedHot said:

If I were king for a day I would move CSAR to AFSOC (that comes with some doctrinal changes and direction to SOCOM).

My understanding of the force management world tells me that moving something to AFSOC does not automatically and immediately place it under SOCOM's authority (e.g., B-1s are in AFGSC, but aren't directly owned by STRATCOM).  I could be mistaken or have old info, though.

It seems like that would introduce a little bit of complexity that AFSOC would have to deal with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, congressman said:

I would suggest putting this through the OODA Loop and cascading effects, as well as sending an ALCON letter starting with the BLUF.  After those wickets the answer will be obvious,


V/R,

Congressman

You need to leave DC for a week or two.......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...    The main sticking point form the CSAR rotor types is the deal would almost certainly drive a reduction in the CRH buy, which I personally think is a good thing.  Why in the hell are we buying a 140kt helicopter to conduct long-range CSAR in today's environment...


Has the AF considered going in with the Army on their Future Vertical Lift program to get a SOF / CSAR variant V-280 or Raider?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Weezer said:

My understanding of the force management world tells me that moving something to AFSOC does not automatically and immediately place it under SOCOM's authority

I think the point is a half-soc transition like the last time isn't what CH is talking about.  A full on doctrinal shift and acceptance of the mission by SOCOM is really the only way to really "do it right."  That would then allow SOCOM to source across the command as appropriate to fill the joint requirement. 

Moving Rescue over and keeping it in an MFP stovepipe does nothing, it's all or nothing to get any benefit.  But that means exactly what the pointy nosed GOs think it means, at times there may not be dedicated forces on alert for their guys.  It also means that SOCOM would have to buy off on being obligated to sitting alert for the CFACC during some phases of conflict.

Who knows, stranger things have happened. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

AFSOC already advertises a self-CSAR capability, but then pencil-whips the actual training needed to conduct the mission well.  Everyone just sees it as a series of tactical events our assets already accomplish without training for the bigger picture.  Without a doctrinal shift and a large attitude change, the HCs will be doing MC missions within a week of arriving in command, and HH-60s will be helping out the CV-22s from their current crushing ops tempo.  More meat for the grinder.

And if you want funding in AFSOC you would need to start telling people you do ISR or strike.  We put freakin lasers on planes people...not CSAR!

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×