alwyn2d Posted March 15, 2010 Share Posted March 15, 2010 (edited) Is the AF getting the Harvest Hawk package like the USMC for their C-130s? It would be an added plus for the airlift fleet and bring more fight to the enemy. Tac Air isn't needed as much when the largest enemy vehicle is a Toyota 4x4 in Afgan. Let the C-130s drop the Candy and see who picks it up. If it's the bad guys, fire them up. Perhaps the CoS being an old AC-130 guy will find the funding. How much would one F-35 cost anyway? Bet you can get 5 Harvest Hawk packages for the price of one F-35. Are there any AF C-130 crews that would like to pickup that additional mission? Better than flying a RPV in getting kills. Edited March 16, 2010 by alwyn2d Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest CharlieDontSurf Posted March 15, 2010 Share Posted March 15, 2010 Is the AF getting the Harvest Hawk package like the USMC for their C-130s? It would be an added plus for the airlift fleet and bring more fight to the enemy. Tac Air isn't needed as much when the largest enemy vehicle is a Toyota 4x4 in Afgan. Let the C-130s drop the Candy and see who picks it up. If it's the bad guys, fire them up. Perhaps the CoS being an old AC-130 guy will find the funding. How much would one F-35 cost anyway? Bet you can get 5 Harvest Hawk packages for the price of one F-35. Are there any AF C-130 crews that would like to pickup that additional mission? Better than flying a RPV and getting kills. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_MC-130#MC-130W_Combat_Spear many threads on this discussion... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spoo Posted March 15, 2010 Share Posted March 15, 2010 Perhaps the CoS being an old AC-130 guy will find the funding. How much would one F-35 cost anyway? Bet you can get 5 Harvest Hawk packages for the price of one F-35. Are there any AF C-130 crews that would like to pickup that additional mission? Better than flying a RPV and getting kills. For the record, the CSAF is not an old Gunship guy. He's a Talon guy, not that there's anything wrong with that... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark1 Posted March 16, 2010 Share Posted March 16, 2010 Is the AF getting the Harvest Hawk package like the USMC for their C-130s? It would be an added plus for the airlift fleet and bring more fight to the enemy. Tac Air isn't needed as much when the largest enemy vehicle is a Toyota 4x4 in Afgan. Let the C-130s drop the Candy and see who picks it up. If it's the bad guys, fire them up. Perhaps the CoS being an old AC-130 guy will find the funding. How much would one F-35 cost anyway? Bet you can get 5 Harvest Hawk packages for the price of one F-35. Are there any AF C-130 crews that would like to pickup that additional mission? Better than flying a RPV and getting kills. Sweet Jesus, no. Dragon Spear implementation is bad enough, we don't need every AMC aircraft/crew out there strapping on guns and going to town so that they can "bring more to the fight". Gunship guys don't do night low level terrain following threat penetration airdrop for a reason. The same logic works the other way around as well. Schwartz was at one time qualified in gunships although I wouldn't classify him as an "old gunship guy". He was also qualified in the YMC-130. You don't see that every day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dead Last Posted March 16, 2010 Share Posted March 16, 2010 Sweet Jesus, no. Dragon Spear implementation is bad enough, we don't need every AMC aircraft/crew out there strapping on guns and going to town so that they can "bring more to the fight". Gunship guys don't do night low level terrain following threat penetration airdrop for a reason. The same logic works the other way around as well. Schwartz was at one time qualified in gunships although I wouldn't classify him as an "old gunship guy". He was also qualified in the YMC-130. You don't see that every day. What does that mean? I know what DS is... I am curious to know what you meant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
backseatdriver Posted March 16, 2010 Share Posted March 16, 2010 Is the AF getting the Harvest Hawk package like the USMC for their C-130s? It would be an added plus for the airlift fleet and bring more fight to the enemy. Are there any AF C-130 crews that would like to pickup that additional mission? Better than flying a RPV and getting kills. No, no, no, no. CAS is not just an extra mission set that can be thrown on a community or crew (as proven by the majority of airlift METLs getting dropped from the MC-130W). We shouldn't give guys who don't have a shred of experience a gun to shoot in close proximity to friendlies simply because they want to "get in the fight." You are awarded no points and may God have mercy on your soul. Besides, the AC-130J will be along soon enough. Please lock and delete this thread before somebody at AFSOC HQ sees it and gets another stupid idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
backseatdriver Posted March 16, 2010 Share Posted March 16, 2010 (edited) What does that mean? I know what DS is... I am curious to know what you meant. He means it was a horrible idea to create a plane without a niche and then give it to guys who don't know the first thing about the mission set. Every SOF aircraft was always created after a niche had presented itself. DS is a failure to fill a niche that DOES exist, but that DS DOES NOT fit. Round peg, square hole. The concept that led to DS was the AC-27 (okay - AC-XX). That aircraft had a niche it was going to fill - one that is still out there. When Congress (Murtha) squashed it, AFSOC decided it had gone too far to just kill the "Gunship Lite" program, so something had to be built. Enter the Dragon...Spear. Now we find ourselves trying to figure out exactly what this plane will do: who will it support? What mission sets will it do? WTF is "Battlefield Overwatch"? etc, etc. Let's complicate the problem even further - we're going to take a squadron full of guys who have lived and breathed the airlift, low-level, airdrop, HAR missions...and give them weapons and throw in CAS for good measure. Bad idea. We're going to PCS a MINIMUM number of guys with Gunship/CAS experience into the squadron - but we're going to do it after the concept and initial TTPs are developed and the plane is well on its way to fielding. Worse idea. We're going to deploy this thing without a clear sense of its purpose or employment concept. Worst idea. This was all the initial plan. Thankfully along the line, the roll has been slowed a little bit. METLs have been whittled down, and effective (as possible) training has been instituted for the crews. However - the niche the aircraft fills is still elusive - which I feel is a crucial piece of the puzzle for a SOF aircraft. The issue is two-fold - the way the aircraft came about and was/is being implemented, and the way it was dropped in the lap of airlift guys. It's the equivalent of the Talon 3 being delivered to the 16th SOS along with a couple IPs and INs with the guidance of "figure it out". Only in that instance you're probably only going to kill yourself, not a friendly ground party. Don't get me wrong - I'm bashing the conception and implementation of the DS program - not the guys in the program. The dudes standing up the DS program are solid guys who are working hard to digest the shit sandwich they've been served. I hope and pray they will be successful on their first deployment - if not it reflects on all of us in the AC-130 community as much as them. I am however strongly against the way the program was developed and fielded. AFSOC went about this the worst way possible - hopefully the 73rd will be able to successfully polish the turd. Edited March 16, 2010 by backseatdriver Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alwyn2d Posted March 16, 2010 Author Share Posted March 16, 2010 Backseatdriver Well it looks like the USMC will bring this concept to the fight for their KC-130J crews because they are in the position to know the risk in not taking the risk in supporting their INFANTRYMAN with additional airborne firepower. Perhaps the AF can learn from the USMC for a change. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
backseatdriver Posted March 16, 2010 Share Posted March 16, 2010 Backseatdriver Well it looks like the USMC will bring this concept to the fight for their KC-130J crews because they are in the position to know the risk in not taking the risk in supporting their INFANTRYMAN with additional airborne firepower. Perhaps the AF can learn from the USMC for a change. The difference being they filled the HARVEST HAWK program with guys with CAS experience. Multiple pilots from air-to-ground platforms, some FAC(A)s, have been in the program from the beginning to ensure it's done RIGHT. I agree the AF can learn a thing or two from that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alwyn2d Posted March 16, 2010 Author Share Posted March 16, 2010 The difference being they filled the HARVEST HAWK program with guys with CAS experience. Multiple pilots from air-to-ground platforms, some FAC(A)s, have been in the program from the beginning to ensure it's done RIGHT. I agree the AF can learn a thing or two from that. Since the AF is reducing the fighter fleet by at least 250 airframes over the next several years, I think we found our CAS experience. Either the C-130 mini gunship or a RPV. What would be your choice? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spoo Posted March 16, 2010 Share Posted March 16, 2010 The difference being they filled the HARVEST HAWK program with guys with CAS experience. Multiple pilots from air-to-ground platforms, some FAC(A)s, have been in the program from the beginning to ensure it's done RIGHT. I agree the AF can learn a thing or two from that. Shizack. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StoleIt Posted March 17, 2010 Share Posted March 17, 2010 Since the AF is reducing the fighter fleet by at least 250 airframes over the next several years, I think we found our CAS experience. Either the C-130 mini gunship or a RPV. What would be your choice? Yea all those former F-15C drivers that lost their jets have tons of CAS experience to pass around... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alwyn2d Posted March 17, 2010 Author Share Posted March 17, 2010 (edited) Yea all those former F-15C drivers that lost their jets have tons of CAS experience to pass around... Let the F-15C stay in the clouds. But, there are quite a few F-16s heading to the bone yard. Wonder if they would rather be station at Creech in a trailer or in the cockpit of a HC-130W? Time will tell. Edited March 17, 2010 by alwyn2d Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dead Last Posted March 17, 2010 Share Posted March 17, 2010 Let the F-15C stay in the clouds. But, there are quite a few F-16s heading to the bone yard. Wonder if they would rather be station at Creech in a trailer or in the cockpit of a HC-130W? Time will tell. MC-130W, not HC... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
backseatdriver Posted March 17, 2010 Share Posted March 17, 2010 (edited) Let the F-15C stay in the clouds. But, there are quite a few F-16s heading to the bone yard. Wonder if they would rather be station at Creech in a trailer or in the cockpit of a HC-130W? Time will tell. What is it you do again alwyn2d? Edited March 17, 2010 by backseatdriver Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alwyn2d Posted March 17, 2010 Author Share Posted March 17, 2010 Obviously hitting the H key instead of the M key by mistake. Shame on me. I stand corrected. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest CharlieDontSurf Posted March 17, 2010 Share Posted March 17, 2010 16 guys flying an AFSOC herc...you're funny. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 17, 2010 Share Posted March 17, 2010 He means it was a horrible idea to create a plane without a niche and then give it to guys who don't know the first thing about the mission set. Those are the exact words that rang through the hallways at Nellis when they started giving CAS tasking to bomber guys during the ME phase. The response was always the same "Yabbut, the B-52s saved the day at Khe Sanh!" (not sure why the BUFFs always want to claim all the credit for that, as if there were no other CAS sorties flown during that siege). History repeats, assets are in short supply, CAS is sexy, adding missions makes you "more viable" in the budgeting process...all factors in the recipe to make this happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arg Posted March 17, 2010 Share Posted March 17, 2010 "Ready, Fire, Aim" has been AFSOC's process for DS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tac airlifter Posted March 17, 2010 Share Posted March 17, 2010 Those are the exact words that rang through the hallways at Nellis when they started giving CAS tasking to bomber guys during the ME phase. The response was always the same "Yabbut, the B-52s saved the day at Khe Sanh!" (not sure why the BUFFs always want to claim all the credit for that, as if there were no other CAS sorties flown during that siege). History repeats, assets are in short supply, CAS is sexy, adding missions makes you "more viable" in the budgeting process...all factors in the recipe to make this happen. Didn't -52 dudes bring a lot to the CAS fight during the opening days of OEF? I know some ground guys who wish the -52 still did CAS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 17, 2010 Share Posted March 17, 2010 Didn't -52 dudes bring a lot to the CAS fight during the opening days of OEF? I know some ground guys who wish the -52 still did CAS. Yes. In many cases they were the only aircraft the USAF could have on station (very early on in OEF) so it was a damn good thing they were available and there was such a thing as a JDAM. The CAS they provided was reactive, simply plugging coordinates into a weapon based on a radio call from a JTAC. Sometimes those coordinates were close to friendly positions. Mostly not. Lots of bombs on caves and ratlines, equivalent to a suspected truck park in Vietnam. It was not eyes on proactive CAS. There was no force multiplying SA added to the guys on the ground. There was no ending a fight before it started based on hitting what was behind the next ridgeline, beyond LOS od the JTAC. There was a significant fear factor related to presence. Holding at/above the contrail alt during the day sent a message. Lots of reasons we didn't do this as well as we could have, none of it the fault of the bomber guys and not for discussion here. Lessons relearned which will likely be relearned again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tac airlifter Posted March 17, 2010 Share Posted March 17, 2010 Lessons relearned which will likely be relearned again. That's an interesting insight, and it is sad to see lessons learned and forgotten time and again. I realize what they (B-52's) did was not equivalent to a dynamic type 2 or 3 CAS with TIC, but from the ground perspective all the dudes I know were very glad to have the overhead despite the limitations. That being said, do you think the -52's should have kept that skill set or do you think that was just extraordinary measures for extraordinary circumstances? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 17, 2010 Share Posted March 17, 2010 That being said, do you think the -52's should have kept that skill set or do you think that was just extraordinary measures for extraordinary circumstances? Not sure what you mean by "skill set" but I think it is a good idea for everyone to always be ready to add whatever they can to the fight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tac airlifter Posted March 17, 2010 Share Posted March 17, 2010 Not sure what you mean by "skill set" but I think it is a good idea for everyone to always be ready to add whatever they can to the fight. By skill set I mean being tasked to do the same mission now. My understanding is that -52's are no longer qualified to drop ordnance via the 9-line for CAS due to a renewed focus on the nuclear mission. Consequently, if 9-11 were to happen again tomorrow and the nation needed to support ground teams to a geographically isolated location with assets that can hold for long durations... could we do it? I know there are assets I haven't worked with but I also know the -52's DID do this mission when called upon, did it well enough to earn kudos from the teams, but are currently not doing it with no plans to practice in the future. If I'm wrong and CAS support is a skill that -52 crews maintain, then this discussion is moot and I'll stand corrected. Sure, everyone should always be prepared to put as much into the fight as possible. That is the point of the thread-- should aircraft not packing heat start doing so? I don't know what is best, I just think we're at a point where in the mind of the AF adding one capability takes away from another. Add CAS to -52's take away nuke readiness (big blue's opinion, not mine), add CAS to the W (DS) take away LL AD, etc. So I'm curious with your experience, do you think more assets that could be CAS players (not dedicated experts like you guys, just able to employ iron) would help or get in the way? I'm sure there would be examples of both, but on the whole, do you think we need more guys able to orbit and drop? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HerkDerka Posted March 18, 2010 Share Posted March 18, 2010 Tac Air isn't needed as much when the largest enemy vehicle is a Toyota 4x4 in Afgan. Are you retarded or just trolling? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now