banner
banner

28 Mar 2024, 19:56 [ UTC - 5; DST ]


Concorde Battery (banner)



Reply to topic  [ 182 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 13  Next
Username Protected Message
 Post subject: POGO Says: USAF Brass Cooked the Books to Ground the Warthog
PostPosted: 15 Feb 2015, 10:59 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 12/22/07
Posts: 12813
Post Likes: +13206
Company: Cogswell Cogs, LLC
Location: KPTK (SE Michigan)
Aircraft: C205
http://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/at-wha ... 1685239179

_________________
Life is a DiY project.


Top

 Post subject: Re: POGO Says: USAF Brass Cooked the Books to Ground the War
PostPosted: 15 Feb 2015, 13:59 
Online


 Profile




Joined: 11/07/09
Posts: 1346
Post Likes: +772
Location: North Florida
...informative article on the Actual friendly fire casualty rates associated with the various aircraft..AF also "cooked the books" not too long ago with the intent to diminish the A-10's role when they published data regarding the number of CAS missions each of their aircraft flew--primarily doing so by "redefining" what constitutes a close air support mission...

...hard not to agree with the conclusions reached in this referenced article re the AF Brass intimidating its members and threatening them that it would be treason to discuss the A-10's capabilities with Congress (allegedly-still under investigation):
"Intimidating pilots to not share critical information with Congress about a key weapon system that takes and saves lives on the battlefield is wildly closer to treasonous than the opposite"

...and latest on the A-10 Actual effectiveness--they have been redeployed to Europe to bolster NATO's capabilities against pro-Russian separatists that are on the move...hard to make this up--all happening at the same time the AF Brass continues to hold that the A-10 is an antiquated "Cold War" platform...

...the article raises an even larger question of course--even by AF standards, at what point in time do their shenanigans reach a tipping point? ...well, at least our ground troops have the support of key members in Congress--esp. on the Senate Armed Forces Committee--and can hope for the best as the fight continues....


Last edited on 15 Feb 2015, 14:42, edited 1 time in total.

Top

 Post subject: Re: POGO Says: USAF Brass Cooked the Books to Ground the War
PostPosted: 15 Feb 2015, 14:12 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 08/28/11
Posts: 1711
Post Likes: +1701
Company: N/A - Retired
Location: Southern AZ / South Carolina
WHAT! Military procurement decisions politically motivated? I'm shocked, shocked I tell you.


Top

 Post subject: Re: POGO Says: USAF Brass Cooked the Books to Ground the War
PostPosted: 15 Feb 2015, 14:24 
Online


 Profile




Joined: 11/07/09
Posts: 1346
Post Likes: +772
Location: North Florida
Username Protected wrote:
WHAT! Military procurement decisions politically motivated? I'm shocked, shocked I tell you.


that's clever...but, any comments on the merits of the AF's justifications to dump the A-10?


Top

 Post subject: Re: POGO Says: USAF Brass Cooked the Books to Ground the War
PostPosted: 15 Feb 2015, 15:18 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 08/28/11
Posts: 1711
Post Likes: +1701
Company: N/A - Retired
Location: Southern AZ / South Carolina
Username Protected wrote:
WHAT! Military procurement decisions politically motivated? I'm shocked, shocked I tell you.


that's clever...but, any comments on the merits of the AF's justifications to dump the A-10?


Not really and sorry if my glib comment offended. The merits of the A-10 have been hashed and rehashed both here and elsewhere. It's disappointing to see such a capable CAS aircraft go away. The grunts love it. No one wants to be on the receiving end of the GAU-8. However,this is a reprise of the arguments floated when the Spad (AD/A-1) was retired without a CAS replacement and for that matter for any number of capable weapons systems in my lifetime. I'm not a fan of the ever diminishing number of CV battle groups, but sensible arguments can be made on both sides and the reality is that there is a finite pot of cash in any FY.
But my point, if there was one, is that so long as our Constitution provides for civilian control of the military, budgetary and appropriations decisions will be made at the top end of the pentagon, in the Congress and by the President. And usually for a myriad of reasons having nothing to do with the capabilities of any particular weapons system.

Fact of life:Right or wrong, CAS isn't sexy and generally seems to drift toward the bottom of the priority list.

Top

 Post subject: Re: POGO Says: USAF Brass Cooked the Books to Ground the War
PostPosted: 15 Feb 2015, 16:19 
Online


 Profile




Joined: 11/07/09
Posts: 1346
Post Likes: +772
Location: North Florida
...and there we have it...in our various discussions on the A-10 finally a candid (mostly) assessment by a member of the military aviation community (non-Army) from Gordy:

"Fact of life:Right or wrong, CAS isn't sexy and generally seems to drift toward the bottom of the priority list."

...tough sell though to the loved ones of our ground troops that have/or will perish due to CAS not being "sexy" and being on the "bottom" of the priority list

...and assuming, arguendo, that this assessment as to the A-10 is correct in relation to the AF's "priorities"--then this is the argument that the AF should be making (but isn't) before Congress to dump the A-10...then the decision could be reached by Congress with full knowledge and transparency...

...but really the "priority list" position is just another old (and deceptive) argument...to contextualize the argument into "priorities" obscures the fact that CAS is a "Mission" that it has a duty to accomplish...a "Mission" indeed that the AF has consistently fought to maintain (with its associated procurement dollars)...and in fighting to keep the CAS Mission the AF has a well documented history of making (and then reneging on) "commitments" to deter the Army from obtaining fixed wing aircraft and/or substantial assignment of the CAS role...


Top

 Post subject: Re: POGO Says: USAF Brass Cooked the Books to Ground the War
PostPosted: 15 Feb 2015, 16:59 
Offline


 Profile




Joined: 02/23/14
Posts: 1580
Post Likes: +1283
Location: KCOU
Aircraft: PA-28 / C-182
Are these the same people who say "We will not lie, steal, or cheat. Nor tolerate amount us anyone who does."?

_________________
John Chancellor
PPL ASEL, AGI, IGI
In memory of the victims of the Dictatorship


Last edited on 16 Feb 2015, 22:43, edited 1 time in total.

Top

 Post subject: Re: POGO Says: USAF Brass Cooked the Books to Ground the War
PostPosted: 16 Feb 2015, 20:44 
Offline


 Profile




Joined: 03/11/08
Posts: 475
Post Likes: +182
Aircraft: PA28-161
Just a random thought here but how is it that the Marines don't ask for a comparable CAS aircraft? I don't think the Harrier fulfills a role comparable to the A-10 as an anti-tank weapon. God knows they can wring every last gasp out of obsolescent hardware (I remember being told once a Marine finds a piece of equipment that works, like the old M-1 Garrand, that you had to pry it out of his cold dead fingers) and yet they seem to have bought into the modern, supersonic aviation suite.

Just to stir the pot a bit more, I was told by an ex-Army armor officer, who participated in the CAS testing at Ft. Irwin that led to the A-10 procurement, that he lobbied to keep the A-7 as a more survivable platform in a Warsaw Pact AAA/SAM environment.


Top

 Post subject: Re: POGO Says: USAF Brass Cooked the Books to Ground the War
PostPosted: 16 Feb 2015, 23:29 
Online


 Profile




Joined: 11/07/09
Posts: 1346
Post Likes: +772
Location: North Florida
...I believe the A-7 was more of an Air interdiction aircraft designed to attack ground targets deeper into enemy territory--and although could perform CAS missions imo was not as well suited for CAS as the A-10...the benefit of the A-10 in the CAS role (in addition to its obvious superior flight characteristics [it can actually assist those on the ground to shape the battle] and weapons capabilities [primarily its gun and amount of rounds] for CAS compared to the A-7 (and all the current fast movers as well) lies in its durability/toughness and systems' redundancy which makes if far more survivable than the fast movers if hit by enemy ground fire

...designed during the Cold War to fight in a high intensity conflict the A-10's countermeasures (and tactics) against enemy air defense weapons are sound--and have been and can continue to be enhanced/improved for future conflicts...again, the AF is overplaying its hand in its current zeal to dump the A-10 when it maintains the A-10 is too vulnerable for the modern and future battlefields (and its not exactly clear on their methodology as to how they are defining the modern or future battlefields)...in any event, the A-10 has performed better than expected in this area in recent combat...

...finally, the A-7 comparison raises another point--especially in the context of AF's "priorities" discussed earlier in this thread...in a high intensity conflict the A-7 would have likely been tasked anyway with interdiction missions deep into enemy territory to attack "high priority" ground targets (and perhaps in some instances rightfully so) and would not have been readily available for CAS missions...and of course in a high intensity conflict today the Infantry "gets it"-intuitively, that the fast movers will be fighting for air superiority/parity and assigned to higher priority/evolving ground targets other than CAS, and as a result with not be readily available for CAS...not to mention that in peace time the CAS mission for the fast movers will not be as high of a training priority as their other missions...that's one of the reasons the A-10 is loved by the ground troops as it is designed primarily for the CAS role...


Top

 Post subject: Re: POGO Says: USAF Brass Cooked the Books to Ground the War
PostPosted: 17 Feb 2015, 14:48 
Offline


 Profile




Joined: 03/11/08
Posts: 475
Post Likes: +182
Aircraft: PA28-161
Very well reasoned and articulated response to the A-7 question, Donald, but how about the Marines? Why do we not hear them clamoring for an A-10-like CAS platform?


Top

 Post subject: Re: POGO Says: USAF Brass Cooked the Books to Ground the War
PostPosted: 17 Feb 2015, 18:13 
Online


 Profile




Joined: 11/07/09
Posts: 1346
Post Likes: +772
Location: North Florida
...on the Marine Corps Aviation Steve I believe their Infantry would prefer the A-10 for most CAS missions, but one of the Marine's primary requirements is that their aircraft be deployable from carriers given the amphibious nature of their assignments of course...that would be doable I guess with the A-10 like anything else the military might set its mind to--but not sure how practical that would be...

...and, although the Marines have also been receiving A-10 CAS support during our recent conflicts--based on friendships with Marine Infantry Officers thru the years it has been my observation they were generally satisfied with their aviation support derived primarily from Harriers, fast movers, and attack helicopters (although it was also a given those platforms were not as effective in the CAS role compared to the A-10)...and that a large part of Marine Aviation's CAS effectiveness is a result of a very close integration between air and ground assets-as well as the Marine Corps pilot's cultural which tends to lend itself to a closer bond with the grunts than you might see for example in the AF (outside of the A-10 pilot community)...generally speaking of course...

...for those interested in the A-10's history--there is a good/brief PBS video with an interview of one of the A-10's primary designers discussing what went into the making of the A-10 (linked below)...also, immediately below on the same page is another PBS video briefly covering the merits of both sides of the A-10 retention...in this video is a discussion from the former AF Chief who attempts (in remarkably unconvincing fashion) to explain that "technology" will save the day to make the F-35 as CAS capable as the A-10...on the other side of the debate you will hear from former A-10 pilots and Infantry--to include Marines--that have been on the ground that think otherwise...

:popcorn:

PBS: "How the A-10 became the most survivable plane ever built"

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/updates/10- ... teristics/


Top

 Post subject: Re: POGO Says: USAF Brass Cooked the Books to Ground the War
PostPosted: 18 Feb 2015, 15:16 
Offline


 Profile




Joined: 03/11/08
Posts: 475
Post Likes: +182
Aircraft: PA28-161
I gotta admit, it all sounds eerily familiar to the USN A-7 vs F-18 arguments of the mid 1970s which we've dissected here before.


Top

 Post subject: Re: POGO Says: USAF Brass Cooked the Books to Ground the War
PostPosted: 18 Feb 2015, 15:18 
Online


User avatar
 WWW  Profile




Joined: 06/25/10
Posts: 13096
Post Likes: +19121
Company: Keybilly Adventures
Location: FD51
Aircraft: P35, GC1B
Username Protected wrote:
Very well reasoned and articulated response to the A-7 question, Donald, but how about the Marines? Why do we not hear them clamoring for an A-10-like CAS platform?


Because you can't put an A-10 on their boats. They are married to the archaic notion that their ARG/MEU is going to kick the door down somewhere without two or three real aircraft carriers supporting them. And, boats cost more than planes, so... clamoring for the A-10 would be tantamount to admitting their misguided strategy... strategy that is central to the purchase of the absurdly expensive F-35B... and that purchase is used to justify the even more absurdly expensive Marine boats.

_________________
“Fear is the Mind-Killer”


Top

 Post subject: Re: POGO Says: USAF Brass Cooked the Books to Ground the War
PostPosted: 19 Feb 2015, 14:28 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 12/10/09
Posts: 299
Post Likes: +43
Location: TN and KY
All interesting, but Defense funding at current and soon to be drastic cut levels are reality.

Global issues are criminality problems after-all, as we are told. If the USAF can't afford to sustain the aircraft they have, which ones get moth-balled? Glad I don't have to decide.

In my world the Army did away with the Aeroscout platform. I'd have never agreed to that. Stuff has to go and the experienced people go with it.


Top

 Post subject: Re: POGO Says: USAF Brass Cooked the Books to Ground the War
PostPosted: 19 Feb 2015, 18:34 
Online


 Profile




Joined: 11/07/09
Posts: 1346
Post Likes: +772
Location: North Florida
...the A-10's history shows the arguments to retain it are beyond a rehash of those made to keep the Skyraider or the A-7....the A-10 is unique as it was designed primarily for CAS--after the Pentagon concluded that aircraft being utilized for CAS (in secondary roles) were sub-optimal (and that included combat analysis of Skyraider, A-7, and fast movers' missions)....from this premise the A-10 was developed--with the AF being brought along as a "reluctant dance partner"...

...it's deceptive when Hagel stated the A-10 was "originally designed to kill tanks on the Cold War battlefield"...true, that during development it was modified for the evolving armor threat; however, the original intent of the A-10 was for a CAS role (generally)--not to defend against the Warsaw Pact...it's deceptive when the AF testified before Congress that current aircraft (and the F-35) are an "adequate" replacement to the A-10--deceptive in that the public wouldn't equate "adequate" with an unnecessary future loss of life of ground personnel...and, it's certainly untrue when the AF in other venues claimed the F-35 can replace "all" of the A-10's capabilities...

...despite the AF's assurances otherwise--we've learned from recent combat the Warthog is unique in its capabilities...just as the designers envisioned--there have been missions with restricted maneuver space and limited ceilings/visibility where only the A-10 could (or attempted to) effectively operate...and missions (danger close--some within 20 meters) where guns was the only practical weapon that could have been used--and that given the intensity/duration of some of the fights the A-10 (with its high basic load of ammo) is the only aircraft that would have been effective in those instances...

...as to funding: this is always an issue...but in the context of the AF's overall assigned missions--if reduced funding is the valid justification to dump the A-10 then why all the obfuscation, cooked books, threatening junior officers with gag orders (allegedly)? ...problem is also that the AF has such a poor track record on CAS issues--in particular on the A-10--that they have lost credibility...


Top

Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic  [ 182 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 13  Next




You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  

Terms of Service | Forum FAQ | Contact Us

BeechTalk, LLC is the quintessential Beechcraft Owners & Pilots Group providing a forum for the discussion of technical, practical, and entertaining issues relating to all Beech aircraft. These include the Bonanza (both V-tail and straight-tail models), Baron, Debonair, Duke, Twin Bonanza, King Air, Sierra, Skipper, Sport, Sundowner, Musketeer, Travel Air, Starship, Queen Air, BeechJet, and Premier lines of airplanes, turboprops, and turbojets.

BeechTalk, LLC is not affiliated or endorsed by the Beechcraft Corporation, its subsidiaries, or affiliates. Beechcraft™, King Air™, and Travel Air™ are the registered trademarks of the Beechcraft Corporation.

Copyright© BeechTalk, LLC 2007-2024

.CiESVer2.jpg.
.centex-85x50.jpg.
.AAI.jpg.
.kingairacademy-85x100.png.
.shortnnumbers-85x100.png.
.daytona.jpg.
.saint-85x50.jpg.
.midwest2.jpg.
.dbm.jpg.
.Wingman 85x50.png.
.gallagher_85x50.jpg.
.Genesys_85x50.jpg.
.planelogix-85x100-2015-04-15.jpg.
.Wentworth_85x100.JPG.
.blackwell-85x50.png.
.wilco-85x100.png.
.wat-85x50.jpg.
.geebee-85x50.jpg.
.aviationdesigndouble.jpg.
.pdi-85x50.jpg.
.blackhawk-85x100-2019-09-25.jpg.
.tempest.jpg.
.sierratrax-85x50.png.
.ssv-85x50-2023-12-17.jpg.
.avfab-85x50-2018-12-04.png.
.Rocky-Mountain-Turbine-85x100.jpg.
.Marsh.jpg.
.MountainAirframe.jpg.
.chairmanaviation-85x50.jpg.
.ABS-85x100.jpg.
.camguard.jpg.
.stanmusikame-85x50.jpg.
.headsetsetc_Small_85x50.jpg.
.temple-85x100-2015-02-23.jpg.
.SCA.jpg.
.bullardaviation-85x50-2.jpg.
.avionwealth-85x50.png.
.cav-85x50.jpg.
.Foreflight_85x50_color.png.
.traceaviation-85x150.png.
.pure-medical-85x150.png.
.boomerang-85x50-2023-12-17.png.
.kingairnation-85x50.png.
.bpt-85x50-2019-07-27.jpg.
.ei-85x150.jpg.
.lucysaviation-85x50.png.
.jandsaviation-85x50.jpg.
.jetacq-85x50.jpg.
.airmart-85x150.png.
.aeroled-85x50-2022-12-06.jpg.
.one-mile-up-85x100.png.
.concorde.jpg.
.tat-85x100.png.
.kadex-85x50.jpg.
.aircraftferry-85x50.jpg.
.Latitude.jpg.
.aircraftassociates-85x50.png.