A new CAS platform?

[Jackonicko]

There's plainly overstretch in the FJ force, and its clear that there's a shortfall in Close Air Support capabilities.

The Harriers are plainly over-stretched. With aircraft going through upgrade, sending one extra jet caused Cottesmore's pips to squeak.

They have no gun.

The Jaguars are on the way out - and with no capacity at St Athan and with no support contracts, cannot be kept in service.

They have inadequate payload/range and poor hot & high characteristics.

The GR4's availability is barely sufficient to meet existing commitments.

On another thread Flt Lt Spry said:

"Air-to-ground gunnery? Why not use the mighty F3?
I'm sure those guys would appreciate some Op experience?!"

Ho ho, I thought. Nice one! But apparently he wasn't joking.

I wonder whether any of our resident F3 blokes are going to put aside their customary modesty and step up and tell us how brilliant Treble One already are at strafe, having been practising it at Tain during Exercise Flying Rhino, controlled by FACs ...... and with Neptune Warrior coming up?

I wonder whether any of the 'host of ongoing UORs' are aimed at providing F3 with Recce Lite and PW/EPW?

I wonder whether we'll go to the expense of developing a really impressive capability (as we did with F3 SEAD) only for some demarcation obsessed senior officer to veto its operational use?

Or has someone seen sense, and realised that retaining two squadrons of low-houred F3s would spread GR4 hours better, giving the GR4 a sporting chance of getting to its extended OSD?

[Jobza Guddun]

Basic thought:-

Why not put a certain number of JRP-equipped F3s at Al Udeid to do what is shortening the GR4 lifespan? High-fatigue low-houred F3's would surely be better used in that profile, especially with its slightly higher fuel load, than mid-fatigue high-houred GR4s, and would the lack of PW capability really be that much of an issue? Perhaps a small Diamond Fleet of F3's might help the GR4 see out 2020+ in a less expensive way than is coming, i.e another major upgrade?

Thoughts anyone, genuinely interested in a hypothetical discussion.

Jobza

[HEDP]

Or why not put some money across to Apache and let them have the backing to extend the good work that they are already able to do in theatre bridging the gaps in the CAS capability? Proven record and ability, more funding required!

Regards

HEDP

[diginagain]

Whilst I have no desire to enter into a slanging match about the undoubted skill and determination of the Harrier operators, what I'd like to know is this;

If the GR7 is perceived to be vulnerable to small-arms fire from AK74/RPD/RPK as used by the Taliban, how would it have survived over the North German Plain against GSFG armed with AK74/RPD/RPK, the operational theatre for which both it and its previous manifestation were designed?

If, as I suspect, TPTB have known about such vulnerability, have we been misleading ourselves about the capability of the Harrier, which on introduction to service was hailed as just the thing for Close Air Support?

Just to bring my post back to a suitable level for Pprune, if this debate identifies a suitable candidate for a future CAS platform, can I assume that we will have a willy-waving contest about which Service will operate it?

[South Bound]

Cough cough, splutter, splutter

'Overstretch in the FJ Force'????????

I know you mean that there is a CAS capability deficit, but please don't try and tell the battlefield helo mob that the FJ personnel are overstretched!;)

(Harriers excluded, obviously, but they are only really moderately quick...:ok: )

[Mead Pusher]

Surely the future CAS platform has already been identified - the JCA/JSF/WhAever They're calling It Now (WATkIN)?

It is due to replace the Harrier, after all!

[XV277]

Is the fast jet the right tool for CAS,or are we relearning the lessons of Vietnam that gave birth to the A-10 and Su-25 in the first place ?- i.e. what's needed is slower, heavily armed and armoured aircraft that can put a lot of things that go bang on target, and loiter until they are needed.
Or the original USMC operational plan for the Harrier - fast turnaround from FOBs so that again lots more things that go bang are put on target?

[Safeware]

Predator B anyone?

sw

[VuctoredThrest]

The Harrier has got a gun - its called the Sea Harrier!!

[BluntedAtBirth]

If the GR7 is perceived to be vulnerable to small-arms fire from AK74/RPD/RPK as used by the Taliban, how would it have survived over the North German Plain against GSFG armed with AK74/RPD/RPK, the operational theatre for which both it and its previous manifestation were designed?

Because these days we expect people to survive multiple missions on multiple operational tours. Back in the days of the 3rd Shock Army etc etc we expected hideous loss rates, but this seemed more acceptable given that the whole of Europe didn't have much of a life expectancy over 3 days...

Regards

Blunted

[Flap62]

Diginagain,

The Harriers suitability for CAS was provided, not by its survivability, but by it's ability to operate from close to the battlefield and therefore generate high sortie rates. No-one ever pretended that operating at low level in-close was anything other than an extremely hostile environment. The only measure of protection from small arms and hand-helds was provided by 500kts and 100ft. This was augmented in the GR7 by the ability to do it at night.

You will have noticed by the way the A10 is employed that even it will not loiter at low levels in a high threat environment and we have certainly learnt that Apache, for all its capabilities, is vulnerable to a farmer with a muzzle loader.

[diginagain]

Flaps62

Thanks for the clarification. So we've happily gone along with the fast(ish), low-level, quick turnaround concept for operations against a heavily armed opposition for 30 years and now suddenly it isn't suitable against small-arms equipped militia?

[Flap62]

For 30 years it was all we had! Now, the perfect solution might be a platform with 100s of different sub-munitions that can stay on station for hour after hour at medium to high level with tailored deliveries being guided by laser/tv/gps. We didn't have the technologies to support that then and that solution is not sustainable in all threat environments but it would be ideal in Afg. As in all these things we have to compromise and, lets face it, most of the platforms we have now (including Typhoon) were designed for an environment that was hostile from 0ft all the way up.
The Harrier could do that job as well as most and makes a pretty damn good job of the medium level role where it doesn't have any air-air threat to worry about.

[XV277]

! Now, the perfect solution might be a platform with 100s of different sub-munitions that can stay on station for hour after hour at medium to high level with tailored deliveries being guided by laser/tv/gps. We didn't have the technologies to support that then and that solution is not sustainable in all threat environments but it would be ideal in Afg.


Sounds like a job for the B-52 - or the Nimrod?

[Jackonicko]

Stap me! I thought I over-simplified......

"......the fast(ish), low-level, quick turnaround concept for operations against a heavily armed opposition for 30 years and now suddenly it isn't suitable against small-arms equipped militia?"

Surely the point about low level in C Europe in the Cold War is that:

1) The air threat and sophisticated SAM threat made low level SAFER than medium level, surely? With no air- and double-digit SAM threat, medium altitude offers sanctuary, and low level becomes RELATIVELY more dangerous.

2) We had bigger force structures, and the conventional elements were not expected to sustain ops for long - blunting an enemy offensive enough to give pause for thought, buying thinking time before escalation,etc. But expected to operate for days, not months, and thus able to sustain higher loss rates.

3) In a real war, acceptable loss rates are determined logically, by the military itself, and the public trust the military to know best. In limited and peace-keeping ops the attitude of the public to seeing the C-17s off-loading coffins is critical, acceptable loss rates are effectively determined by the politicians and the voters, and a much lower level of losses is deemed acceptable.

One of the most interesting aspects of the major's e-mail was his comment about R&R and leave hampering his ability to conduct operations. Because the politicians are desparate to portray current ops in Afghanistan and Iraq as relatively low intensity 'peace-keeping' and reconstruction efforts, we don't have a "wartime attitude" to things like R&R and leave, nor to getting adequate force levels.

[Gainesy]

the original USMC operational plan for the Harrier

Nope, the ops concept was developed by the RAF and adopted by the Maureens.

[diginagain]

Sorry, Jackonicko, for looking at the issue from the perspective of one who shared that low-level sanctuary, whilst doing what one could to blunt the SA-9/13 capability from my perspex 'bathtub'.
:)

[Chimbu chuckles]

Why is it that the Defence Industry and the big bosses in the various services are always looking at more and more high tech solutions and yet the wars we end up fighting mostly don't need it?

The UK MOD are spending squillions on Typhoon, Nuc subs with ICBM and on etc when they have yet to actually fight an enemy that is significantly more technologocally advanced than the Viet Cong/NVA.

On the other thread there is umteen pages discussing the rights and wrongs of a complaint from Army Officer under DAILY ATTACK from a bunch of sandle wearing tribesmen with AK47/RPG and sod all else and all that is provided in the way of CAS is a lightweight jet with rocket pods.

I wonder what that Major would give for 3 squadrons of radial engined Skyraiders with their 4 20mm cannons and 8000lbs of other CAS ordinance they were famous for carrying and delivering with spine chilling accuracy...and a loiter time stretching to 8+ hrs.

I am half joking of course...although a Skyraider would be better than a Harrier in this case...I bet the Major and his peers would actually be overjoyed. You're fighting a desert version of the Viet Cong with cold war weapons...any wonder you are taking a kicking.

The US can be slated for much but they seem to always have the more or less right tool for the job and even when the tool aint quite perfect they make up for it by having lots of tools.

The UK/EU (Australia is no different) seem to always be planning and equiping for war against an incredible high tech foe when there just aint any high tech foes around. The high tech, stealthy, pointy things might be a shedload of fun but they rarely get used for their design purpose but more often a pressed into the breach because nothing better is available.

If I was the head occifer in charge of talking to Blair about such things I would be telling him to get on the phone to his mate and order up 5 squadrons of A10 or we pull out of Afghansitan and he can fight it himself.

The Major's primarly responsibility is to his men and the mission...not to worry about the sensibilities of his senior officers or their political leaders...and even less of the protocol of communications.

[RileyDove]

It would be helpful if one of our NATO Allies had a squadron of Frogfoots siting idle which could be deployed to help in the battle!

[Jackonicko]

Macedonia have four idle Frogfeet.....

Wonder what happened to the Czech ones?

[ORAC]

Sofia (Bulgaria), Sept 26. (AP): (http://www.hindu.com/thehindu/holnus/003200609260314.htm)Bulgaria should increase its military presence in Afghanistan, Defence Minister Veselin Bliznakov said on Monday, but added no decision had been made yet. "Given the complicated situation there, which has become even more complicated in the past weeks and months ... it is extremely necessary that all countries boost their participation,'' Bliznakov told reporters. "We should take a very serious approach and fulfill our commitments as a (NATO) member.''

Bulgarian Air Force (http://www.aeroflight.co.uk/waf/bulgaria/types/su25.htm) Currently 31 single seat and 4 trainer Su-25 operational......


:E :E

[ORAC]

As opposed to the way we are presently providing support in combat zone, exactly...... :hmm:

[orca]

My personal opinion is that we trudge from year to year knowing that our kit is deficient but not actually doing anything meaningful about it. Take the Harrier as an example, great cockpit, some great weapons. But we never bought it a decent pod, and gave up on the cannon.

We have this mentality that some pieces of kit are icing on the cake - when actually they're the difference between the whole thing being great, or not worth bothering with. We also seem to take a completely misplaced pride when we get a bit of kit 'fitted for but not with'. We all know that procurement takes an age, so having the capability on ice, to be ordered at the rush is no comfort at all.

What we really need is the ability to say "No" to our lords and masters when they ask us to go to locations for which we don't have the correct equipment. We shouldn't have to rely on Urgent Requirements to get kit we should have anyway.

In answer to the original question, i personally think that we have a very good CAS asset in the Harrier, but it needs a decent pod, and (arguably) a cannon. I think that these investments would make more sense than using the F3 in the role. I think that the F3 would actually be ideally suited to a SCAR type role, toting Alarm, ASRAAM and AMRAAM, plus a cannon, it would make a very competent 'bookshelf' for what would appear to be very little outlay.

[RileyDove]

Nice and easy then ! Please Bulgaria send 'X' number of your finest SU-25's and some crews to Afghanistan and we will provide the fuel,bombs/shells and the B&B !

In your own time carry on !

[glum]

Surely what the Good Army chaps really want is 10,000 more troops armed to the teeth with big guns and a huge stack of ammo. They don't need CAS then do they? Just some nice transport helicopters to get them close to the kill zone and re-supply when required.


Maybe I'm being dense, (I'm a lifelong truckie) but with no airbourne threat, surely there is no real need for air support if we outnumber and outgun the ground forces we're fighting?

And aren't several thousand soldiers cheaper than a Typhoon?

[RileyDove]

Back in the thirties we used to use various Hawkers in those parts of the world to subdue the hordes. Unfortunately you can throw any number of soldiers into Afghanistan but it's still a large country and they know it like the
back of their hands. It probably mirrors the Russian approach but CAS is the only option if you do not wish to loose large numbers of troops.

[SASless]

Glum,

It costs far fewer lives to merely find the bad guys at a distance and call in LOTS and LOTS of heavy things that go BOOM! There is no getting away from the need for brave men with rifles to close with and destroy the enemy but it sures makes their job much, much easier and safer if you weed out as many as you can before the Infantry get to rifle range of the Oppos.

I prefer the concept of spending Artillery, Bombs, Rockets, Missiles, and Bullets rather than lives, thank you.

[Brian Abraham]

I wonder if there is a place in the brush fires that you guys are currently engaged in a place for some machinery of old in the form of the Flying Dump Truck aka Spad aka A1 Skyraider. 4X20mm cannon, 8,000lb of ordnance, 15 hardpoints, time on station, bullet proof (almost) radial engine, not as vulnerable as a helo. Naturally need to be fitted with modern systems for delivery of guided weapons. Buy a squadron for the price of one jet. Not quite the cache of a jet for the driver though, though once you've been introduced to operating a radial you would have no other form of locomotion in mind. :) I pose the question with some measure of seriousness.

[phil gollin]

Sounds like a job for the B-52 - or the Nimrod?

Precisely.

Why all the wanting to get down to small arms level ?

Stick a Nimrod up nice an high and use the technology

[ORAC]

Stick a Nimrod up nice an high and use the technology And do what, drop sonobuoys, torpedoes or liferafts on them? :hmm:

Pending the purchase of JASSM and a modification for a suitable targeting system, I am not sure what the Nimrod could do, and it wouldn´t answer the case where guns/rockets are needed rather than bombs.

If that type of platform were the solution I am sure the USAF have B-52s on station we could use.

[LateArmLive]

Before we all start designing our great new CAS ac, we should probably remember that all this has kicked off over the comments from ONE pissed off Para about an engagement that happened over a month ago. Up until then I had heard nothing but praise for the work that JFH had been carrying out supporting the troops on the ground. During my time in the Stan I have met many Dutch, US, Canadian, Brit, Australian and other troops who have come over to meet the Harrier pilots where they work in KAF to express their gratitude for what they've done. This is often a very humbling experience as putting a face to the voice you were speaking to on the radio not long ago when they were in harms way, possibly losing colleagues, really brings home to you just what a hellish situation it is on the ground out there.
This is not to say that we are perfect every time. There are times pilots "cannot identify the target" (as the Major said), but sometimes the talk-ons are poor, often the targets are people hiding behind rocks in a desert full of rocks etc etc. But the pilots WILL NOT DROP unless they are certain they have identified the target. This can obviously lead to frustration on the parts of the guys on the ground, but we're limited by ROE and nobody wants to commit fratricide.
Rather than provide a new aircraft out there, how about fitting a decent targeting pod to the jet? As anyone who has worked with TIALD knows, picking out small targets without pinpoint co-ords can be next to impossible. Bring on Litening 3!

[Smudger552]

A couple of AC130s should do the trick.....evil bastards they are!!:E

[brickhistory]

A couple of AC130s should do the trick.....evil bastards they are!!:E

http://i30.photobucket.com/albums/c342/beauhistory/AC-130U/k.jpg

http://i30.photobucket.com/albums/c342/beauhistory/AC-130U/g.jpg

http://i30.photobucket.com/albums/c342/beauhistory/AC-130U/d.jpg

http://i30.photobucket.com/albums/c342/beauhistory/AC-130U/c.jpg

[charliegolf]

That little bunk starboard side above the gun can't be very comfy!

CG

[Skunkerama]

What aircraft are almost all current aircrew familiar with?

Tucano.

http://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/super_tucano/images/ALXSuperTucano_5.jpg

ALX LIGHT ATTACK AIRCRAFT

In 1995, Embraer was awarded a contract to develop a variant of the Super Tucano, known as the ALX or Light Attack Aircraft, for the Brazilian Air Force (FAB), optimised for the environmental conditions of the Brazilian Amazon. The ALX is capable of operating day and night missions from remote bases and unpaved runways with minimal ground support. The first production aircraft was completed in 1999.
In August 2001, the Brazilian Air Force awarded Embraer a contract for 76 ALX aircraft, with options for a further 23. Fifty one of these aircraft will be two-seater versions, designated AT-29, which will enter service at the Natal Air Force Base to replace the AT-26 Xavante advanced jet trainers, which are approaching the end of their operational lives. The remaining 25 aircraft will be the single-seat A-29 version. One of the main missions of the aircraft will be border patrol under the Sistema de Vigilancia da Amazonia (SIVAM) programme. The first aircraft was delivered in December 2003 and final delivery is scheduled for 2006.



WEAPONS
The aircraft is fitted with two central mission computers. The integrated weapon system includes software for weapon aiming, weapon management, mission planning and mission rehearsal. On-board recording is used for post mission analysis. The aircraft has five hardpoints for carrying weapons, and is capable of carrying a maximum external load of 1,500kg. The aircraft is armed with two wing mounted 12.7 mm machine guns with a rate of fire of 1,100 rounds per minute and is capable of carrying general purpose bombs and guided air-to-air and air-to-ground missiles. Brazilian AF aircraft will be armed with the MAA-1 Piranha short-range infrared guided air-to-air missile from Orbita.
The two seat AT-29 is fitted with a forward-looking infrared AN/AAQ-22 SAFIRE turret on the underside of the fuselage. The SAFIRE thermal imaging system supplied by FLIR Systems is for targeting, navigation and target tracking. The system allows the aircraft to carry out night surveillance and attack missions.

[ORAC]

is capable of carrying a maximum external load of 1,500kg Not exactly enough for a flexible outload is it... := :=

[LateArmLive]

Not great without a laser designator pod either. Even slower than an A10 as well, and I wouldn't want to be in AK range of the bad guys in an aircraft that's put together as shoddily as our Tucano is!

[orca]

Then again - our Tucanos are so badly made that they probably wouldn't notice a few 7.62 holes...

[BootFlap]

Late Arm Live,

we obviously know each other! I am happy to go 'shotgun' if your are in the wheel! Rumours of AT Pod abound...............