schrammerjammer Posted July 5, 2013 Share Posted July 5, 2013 I'm down at training and I heard a rumor that they were going to stand up a gunship unit over in Mildenhall soon/sometime in the near future. Anyone know of any truth to this with any sources? Sorry ahead of time if this has already been covered... I promise I tried searching before I posted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liquid Posted July 5, 2013 Share Posted July 5, 2013 Not true Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tac airlifter Posted July 5, 2013 Share Posted July 5, 2013 Nope. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Left_turn Posted July 5, 2013 Share Posted July 5, 2013 It is on a wish list but unlikely to happen anytime in the next 6-9 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M2 Posted July 5, 2013 Share Posted July 5, 2013 Think about it, the last A-10 squadron in Europe just rolled up their colors; why would Big Blue put a gunship squadron in the UK? That said, dumber things have happened! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nunya Posted July 5, 2013 Share Posted July 5, 2013 Different pots of money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M2 Posted July 5, 2013 Share Posted July 5, 2013 Different pots of money. I'm not talking money, at least not directly. It makes absolutely no sense to put a gunship squadron at Mildenhall... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark1 Posted July 5, 2013 Share Posted July 5, 2013 Think about it, the last A-10 squadron in Europe just rolled up their colors; why would Big Blue put a gunship squadron in the UK? That said, dumber things have happened! There is a persistent operational reason why it would make sense to project the gunship overseas that does not apply to the A-10s...the reason is a valid one, although there would be an arguement to be had as to whether the upsides outweighed the downsides. I don't have any current picture into top brass thinking on the matter, but it was certainly being explored as of a matter of months ago. Whether the desire was born at AFSOC HQ in order to meet supplied objectives, or born at SOCOM and forced on AFSOC would have an impact on the likelyhood that it occurs. However, if it were to happen it's almost certainly going to be AC-Js, and there aren't going to be enough of those to both replace the retiring AC-H tails, and stand up an additional squadron, for a long time coming. If you're currently in training, your decision to either go or not go the gunship route should be made with the assumption that you'll never see the opportunity to put Mildenhall on your ADP while you're a crewdog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nunya Posted July 5, 2013 Share Posted July 5, 2013 (edited) I'm not talking money, at least not directly. It makes absolutely no sense to put a gunship squadron at Mildenhall... There are plenty of reasons why it could make perfect sense. Edited July 5, 2013 by nunya Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nsplayr Posted July 5, 2013 Share Posted July 5, 2013 (edited) Straight from the AFSOC/CC's mouth, his vision is 4 relatively equal-capability Wings (352nd, 353rd, 27th, 1st) within AD AFSOC. "Relatively equal-capability" means MCs, ACs & CVs, STS and manned ISR of some flavor at all 4. Unmanned and mobility-NSAV are obviously also in the picture but he didn't mention sending them to Kadena or Mildenhall. Whether that vision actually happens after being staffed, the money is worked out, and the platforms/people are even capable of supporting it is another matter entirely. Certainly wouldn't plan my career or drop night wish list on it. Take it FWIW based on what Gen. Fiel personally briefed group of us about 80 of us IVO 1 month ago. Edited July 6, 2013 by nsplayr Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skitzo Posted July 6, 2013 Share Posted July 6, 2013 I guess the first step would be getting the 352nd and 353d turned into wings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DirkDiggler Posted July 6, 2013 Share Posted July 6, 2013 I guess the first step would be getting the 352nd and 353d turned into wings. Supposedly this will happen when the overseas groups start to gain additional assets. That being said, I'm not holding my breath. What NSplayer mentioned above was correct as of 1-2 months ago. With the possibility of the sequester continuing for the foreseeable future, AFSOC is not going to continue to be exempt from cuts. There's a lot of COAs flying around command right now as to what's going to happen IRT platforms and locations, nothing is set in stone at the moment. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlyinGrunt Posted July 6, 2013 Share Posted July 6, 2013 What Mark1 and NSplayer said. The biggest obstacle that is in AFSOC's control, sorta, is the absurd training pipelines to crossflow between U, H, and Ws. About 2 years ago, we were told, "nothing in the UK until you fix the TX courses!" Obviously, there are a ton of issues outside of the AFSOC/CC's control, but I'd say the earliest this will happen would be 2018-2020 or so, when you see a substantial number of AC-Js around. However, in that far-future USAF where the entire AD gunship fleet is AC-Js, I'd say this is almost a certainty. I'm about equally sure I won't be AD any more to see it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dupe Posted July 6, 2013 Share Posted July 6, 2013 Look guys... iron doesn't move, especially from CONUS to OCONUS, without congressional approval. The current Chief knows this and the last one paid dearly for it. I think this is DOA. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LJ Driver Posted July 6, 2013 Share Posted July 6, 2013 I'm not talking money, at least not directly. It makes absolutely no sense to put a gunship squadron at Mildenhall... There are many very compelling reasons to put gunships at Mildenhall - one is the fact that it can (does/has) take days to get them that far from Hurlburt in a crisis. That said, I agree that an entire squadron doesn't make much sense. I don't see permanent basing for at least many years, for all the reasons mentioned above. More likely, I see a shorter term solution of some sort of periodic rotation there (and possibly to Kadena as well) that may include 2-3 airplanes and crews with a contingency maintenance det attached. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M2 Posted July 6, 2013 Share Posted July 6, 2013 There are many very compelling reasons to put gunships at Mildenhall - one is the fact that it can (does/has) take days to get them that far from Hurlburt in a crisis. That said, I agree that an entire squadron doesn't make much sense. I don't see permanent basing for at least many years, for all the reasons mentioned above. More likely, I see a shorter term solution of some sort of periodic rotation there (and possibly to Kadena as well) that may include 2-3 airplanes and crews with a contingency maintenance det attached. I agree that is a more likely scenario.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arg Posted July 7, 2013 Share Posted July 7, 2013 There are many very compelling reasons to put gunships at Mildenhall - one is the fact that it can (does/has) take days to get them that far from Hurlburt in a crisis. That said, I agree that an entire squadron doesn't make much sense. I don't see permanent basing for at least many years, for all the reasons mentioned above. More likely, I see a shorter term solution of some sort of periodic rotation there (and possibly to Kadena as well) that may include 2-3 airplanes and crews with a contingency maintenance det attached. Can't happen this way all the time but there have been several nonstop flights from FL. We took an H to Italy in 23.7. Depends on the crisis I guess. One of the justifications to put refueling on the gunships was to get to the fight in hours instead of days. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liquid Posted July 7, 2013 Share Posted July 7, 2013 Rotations, not basing. At least for many years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ClearedHot Posted July 7, 2013 Share Posted July 7, 2013 I'm not talking money, at least not directly. It makes absolutely no sense to put a gunship squadron at Mildenhall... Wow...Really M2? I can think of hundreds of very good reasons...Starting with having the complete SOF air package on the other side of the Atlantic (thereby reducing deployment time), habitually training with partner nation SOF, in a position to easily support three GCC's. Wow...just wow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zrooster99 Posted July 8, 2013 Share Posted July 8, 2013 Wow...Really M2? I can think of hundreds of very good reasons...Starting with having the complete SOF air package on the other side of the Atlantic (thereby reducing deployment time), habitually training with partner nation SOF, in a position to easily support three GCC's. Wow...just wow. 2. Spent the better part of the last year working on how to generate the birds and get them overseas as quickly as possible. Having them forward simplifies the process enmorously. More call, I would submit, as we return to a ~peacetime footing for a quick SOF air response to contingencies than other MDSs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark1 Posted July 8, 2013 Share Posted July 8, 2013 Although congress/brass isn't going to factor it into any sort of decision on the matter, I would also throw out there that aside from mission oriented justification, Mildenhall being a possible AC-J base location would help out the community tremendously. Nobody in AFSOC leadership will acknowledge it (at least not in a public forum...I've been in the presence of several O-6s, an O-7, and one O-8 who would do so in a private capacity), but Cannon AFB has had a significant negative impact on the community. No need to rehash the argument here as it's been had before in other threads, but giving guys an avenue for reprieve from Cannon, if only briefly, might do something to change the mind of future high speed guys considering tracking gunships that would otherwise decide against it because of the land mine that is Cannon AFB. 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