Jump to content

CSAR to AFSOC? What do the customers think?


SCRIMP

Recommended Posts

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?

Link to comment
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.

Link to comment
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.......

Link to comment
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?

Link to comment
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. 

Link to comment
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
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gotta comment on this first: oh yes, that absolutely MONSTER ops tempo that the CV-22s have. Lest we forget that the gunships have been less than 1:1 for over a year now.

If you treat the rescue mission like it is supposed to be (niche, special operation) then it belongs in AFSOC. If you want to advertise them as a group of dudes who are sidelined and won’t offer them true freedom to maneuver, leave it in ACC. I have never thought, as an AFSOC guy, that I would ever be picked up by an AF -60 during a CSAR event if that means anything. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/12/2017 at 3:19 AM, ClearedHot said:

... or Lt Devon Jones.

Side note:  I knew Boots from the airshow circuit.  Made Captain... but got fired around 3-4 years ago while commander of NAF El Centro.  

In any case, don't ask him.  He didn't like discussing the shootdown.  

As an additional curious side note, my tablemate from UPT was the guy that flew cover over Boots and engaged the enemy.  He earned the Air Force Cross doing it.  Well deserved for a very good guy.  

 

Edited by HuggyU2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gotta comment on this first: oh yes, that absolutely MONSTER ops tempo that the CV-22s have. Lest we forget that the gunships have been less than 1:1 for over a year now.
If you treat the rescue mission like it is supposed to be (niche, special operation) then it belongs in AFSOC. If you want to advertise them as a group of dudes who are sidelined and won’t offer them true freedom to maneuver, leave it in ACC. I have never thought, as an AFSOC guy, that I would ever be picked up by an AF -60 during a CSAR event if that means anything. 

Part of the problem with your statement is defining ‘who is jack’. ACC rescue is rarely in position to execute a SOF CSAR because they are holding alert for the CAF.

I do agree that ACC holds the reigns far to tight. Freedom of maneuver would be great but it comes down to defining the mission. You can’t have a niche mission that isn’t defined as you just end up being good at nothing because you prepare for everything.

It would be great if someone would just make a decision...until then I will just continue to look for ARC/ANG jobs. Anyone have any openings (sts)?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, SCRIMP said:

Part of the problem with your statement is defining ‘who is jack’. ACC rescue is rarely in position to execute a SOF CSAR because they are holding alert for the CAF.

Or even if CAF assets are in position, JSOAC keeps primacy for the CV-22s make the pickup. Reference the hullabaloo the JSOAC guys raised after the HSC bros made the pickup of the King Air crew outside of Erbil.

The bottom line is whether AFSOC will dedicate specific aircraft and crews solely for PR alert IAW CFACC guidance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Breckey said:

The bottom line is whether AFSOC will dedicate specific aircraft and crews solely for PR alert IAW CFACC guidance.

AFSOC will do what it’s told, but “let’s have these high speed assets sit and wait for something to happen” is antithetical to the mentality of the command and will create operational friction.  I don’t think rescue belongs in AFSOC, but I do think AFSOC will earnestly try making it work if ordered.

 It is noteworthy what another poster mentioned: I’ve never briefed my CSAR pickup would be a -60 from ACC.  It’s usually been another SOF asset who was nearby as our primary pick-up plan.  And I’ve never thought an RMC qualified HC would be value added for coordinating pick-up over a DRACO or even contract ISR.  So it’s going to be weird to work alongside SOF rescue who won’t rescue SOF.  Copy they’re sitting alert for CFACC as ordered, but the awkwardness will be present for every mission brief and every excercise, until eventually the debate about whether they belong in AFSOC re-emerges.  

So, might as well leave them be in ACC.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This has less to do with CSAR than with the iron AFSOC wants I think.  AFSOC doesn't really seem to want to do anything with helicopters anymore, CSAR or otherwise.  They've proven that with 53s and the 6th SOS.  AFSOC wants HC-130Js and more CV-22s. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This has less to do with CSAR than with the iron AFSOC wants I think.  AFSOC doesn't really seem to want to do anything with helicopters anymore, CSAR or otherwise.  They've proven that with 53s and the 6th SOS.  AFSOC wants HC-130Js and more CV-22s. 


Not the first time I've heard this. Question for those in the know:

Did AFSOC not purchase enough MC-130J or are what they ordered not rolling off the line fast enough at the expense of their advertised fixed wing infil/exfil cape?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Champ Kind said:

 


Not the first time I've heard this. Question for those in the know:

Did AFSOC not purchase enough MC-130J or are what they ordered not rolling off the line fast enough at the expense of their advertised fixed wing infil/exfil cape?

 

We need the bodies more than the iron, but really both. Growth requires resources, Cannon's existence encourages attrition. The line and mod schedule is sporty and active. NDAA18 appears to fund more iron.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, HuggyU2 said:

Side note:  I knew Boots from the airshow circuit.  Made Captain... but got fired around 3-4 years ago while commander of NAF El Centro.  

In any case, don't ask him.  He didn't like discussing the shootdown.  

As an additional curious side note, my tablemate from UPT was the guy that flew cover over Boots and engaged the enemy.  He earned the Air Force Cross doing it.  Well deserved for a very good guy.  

 

PJ was your tablemate...damn you ARE old...Like me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, JQuintana said:

This has less to do with CSAR than with the iron AFSOC wants I think.  AFSOC doesn't really seem to want to do anything with helicopters anymore, CSAR or otherwise.  They've proven that with 53s and the 6th SOS.  AFSOC wants HC-130Js and more CV-22s. 

Huh...Are you new?  When Gen Brown was the SOCOM/CC he basically forced AFSOC to divest all helos, besides the 53's were TIRED. 

To understand the CV-22 you have to understand SOCOM and AFSOC were born because of the failure at Desert One and a helicopter even today can not execute that mission in one period of darkness but the CV can.

I was never a CV lover...in fact I hated, it killed two very good friends...then I flew it...then I commanded it in combat.  It is a game changer that has had its hands tied by a manning shortfall driven by decisions from above.  Is it perfect, nope, but on the battlefield today it IS the platform of choice of the high end users. 

I've heard the internal discussions about CSAR at AFSOC and not a single word of stealing assets or $...just how can we do this better.  Sadly the CSAR O-6's will never listen because they have Stockhom Syndrome and still believe their ACC puppet masters will do the right thing.

 

  • Like 2
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, tac airlifter said:

 It is noteworthy what another poster mentioned: I’ve never briefed my CSAR pickup would be a -60 from ACC.

I've sat alert for SOF.  And awkwardness had nothing to do with going back to ACC.  

That CAF 60s aren't primary for SOF dudes is a doctrine thing.  Each component is responsible for fulfilling it's own PR needs. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Breckey said:

Maybe this is just the Stockholm talking but when the COAs that are briefed for the AFSOC transition include curtailing the HH-60W order and increasing the CV-22 order it seems a lot like stealing assets.

Again it was about accomplishing the mission not stealing $ for CV-22's.  It takes a LONG time to go deep in a 60...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've heard talk of this a bunch in  around the squadron for the last month or so. Dudes are worried about cutting the CRH order down for more 22s. To be honest, the 60W isn't really the right tool. It won't be much faster than our current helicopter. Its like buying a 2002 crown victoria because your 1985 crown vic is too old, slow, and its probably been in a wreck. Both options aren't great, but man, you just really like the crown vic...and want a CD player.  If they end up buying more CVs, ok. We'll find a way to make them work for CSAR like we've made a 1980s blackhawk work.  CSAR is so far behind the curve when it comes to our iron we may as well skip a generation and go straight to helping the Army with it's FVL platforms. 

All the fighter bro's i've talked to like us being there and the mission is absolutely a necessity, but HHQ has consistently put CSAR on the back burner. 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/20/2017 at 5:42 AM, ClearedHot said:

Sadly the CSAR O-6's will never listen because they have Stockhom Syndrome and still believe their ACC puppet masters will do the right thing.

 

SHACK. 

On 10/20/2017 at 11:05 PM, ClearedHot said:

Again it was about accomplishing the mission not stealing $ for CV-22's.  It takes a LONG time to go deep in a 60...

AGAIN, SHACK. Bottom line, this decision should boil down to one question and that is what is the best way to accomplish mission of CSAR? As a -60 dude, it pains me to agree with you about aircraft capes, but you're absolutely correct with regard to the V-22. Additionally, the way AFSOC does business with regard to force structuring will be a plus in the long term (in the near term it will suck for the dudes that are currently on the fast track though...sorry bros). Overall, I'm hoping for the AFSCOC transition to occur.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
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...