Vortex,
Thanks for pointing out we have a finite defence budget. However, if you don't like the MTs HMG assigns, then you need to take it up with them.
All 3 services (even the Army!
) have assets that are not commited to ops. That will be because that capability is not required in that specific op, and because a proportion of those assets are required at home to support the deployment. Likewise, specific capabilities are being developed that may not be needed right now (eg T45, loitering munitions, AWACS upgrades). This is because, thankfully, there are still people in all 3 services who have a longer term view than yourself.
Sadly however, there is a danger that individuals such as yourself erode capabilities that are not
directly related to boots on the ground. I've heard so many Army guys asking why we have Nimrod R1 ('it's a strategic spy in the sky, no use for modern ops'), MR2/MRA4s ('where's the submarine threat?!'), Typhoon ('it has no cannon!'), T45 (see comment re MR2s) etc thereby displaying a quite astounding lack of awareness that these assets are making a very big contribution to what
they do on the ground.
However, I'm interested in your assertion that the Army require more CAS. Having worked in a deployed Army HQ, I was frankly appalled at the lack of Joint awareness that exisited and I believe strongly that serious questions need to be asked about Army staff trg at the ICSC(L) level in particular. This manifested itself in very poor economy of use of air in particular and a failure to consult the other component specialists. In particular, I'd suggest that at least 30% of all land FMV requests were superflous. However, unless things have changed recently, there was NEVER a request for significantly more CAS made to the ACC.
So why do you suggest there is insufficient CAS? At what level has your experience been? JNCO? SNCO? Co command? BG? Bde? Div?
Regards,
MM