why no raf gunships
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Temporarily missing from the Joe Louis Arena
Posts: 2,131
Received 27 Likes
on
16 Posts
Considering we don't even have guns on our standard CAS aircraft it'd be a bit much to expect the budget to stretch to an aircraft that is really good at what it does, as long as the otherside don't have weapons much more dangerous than AK47s and sharpened fruit to blatt away at it with.
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: RAF Lincolnshire
Posts: 83
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hmmm,
no disrespect to the GR4 mates however, even with a cannon lacking, the GR9 is a far better CAS platform & the guys are far more swept up on CAS than the Tonka mates.
Not a knock at the Tonka fleet, just how it is!
no disrespect to the GR4 mates however, even with a cannon lacking, the GR9 is a far better CAS platform & the guys are far more swept up on CAS than the Tonka mates.
Not a knock at the Tonka fleet, just how it is!
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Some-r-set
Posts: 163
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Unit Cost:
AC-130H, $132.4 million;
AC-130U, $190 million (fiscal 2001 constant dollars)
AC-130H, $132.4 million;
AC-130U, $190 million (fiscal 2001 constant dollars)
The only problem with using the AC-130 is that it can only, under USAF SOPs, be used at night-
Soon after eliminating the target designated by the Marines, a lone Iraqi hoisted an SA-7 "Grail" manportable surface-to-air missile to his shoulder. In the dawn of the early morning light, the form of the large AC-130 slowly became visible in the skies over Khafji. The decision to remain behind to support the Marines cost the pilots and crew of Spirit 03 their best defensive weapon - darkness. The Iraqi pointed the weapon at the aircraft, and fired. The missile found its target and at 0635 hours the aircraft sent out a "mayday" distress call and then crashed into the waters of the Persian Gulf. All 14 crewmembers were killed
Would be fanatastic if we had them though.
Wrote my BANDAR essay on the very subject when at Cranners. The Black Watch Major who was just back from Flaujia (?) in Iraq 04 and then on the OS Staff, couldn't agree more.
The initial cost is quite high, but then the savings on weapon systems over the term is huge. Compare the cost of a Stormshadow or Brimstone with that of a 105mm shell from the rear of the AC130. The targeting software uses apparently, the most complex from of computer code in any aircraft in flight.
They are hugely accurate. The 20mm Vulcan has now been replaced with another 40mm cannon as far as I'm aware.
Saw one in Hurlbert, Florida once, where the captain told me the tail moves some 13ft due to the recoil of the howitzer being fired!
The loiter time is much greater than any fast jet and they can stay on tgt for hours. They are the only kite that is allowed to self-FAC, although I have heard of UK troops flying on them when they are supporting certain UK focused ops!
The initial cost is quite high, but then the savings on weapon systems over the term is huge. Compare the cost of a Stormshadow or Brimstone with that of a 105mm shell from the rear of the AC130. The targeting software uses apparently, the most complex from of computer code in any aircraft in flight.
They are hugely accurate. The 20mm Vulcan has now been replaced with another 40mm cannon as far as I'm aware.
Saw one in Hurlbert, Florida once, where the captain told me the tail moves some 13ft due to the recoil of the howitzer being fired!
The loiter time is much greater than any fast jet and they can stay on tgt for hours. They are the only kite that is allowed to self-FAC, although I have heard of UK troops flying on them when they are supporting certain UK focused ops!
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Some-r-set
Posts: 163
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've read its the pilots are the ones who actually fire the guns, they have screens mounted near the controls.
UPGRADES are planned for the AC-130U & H, would make it hell-a-scary, espescially with Vyper strike.
UPGRADES are planned for the AC-130U & H, would make it hell-a-scary, espescially with Vyper strike.
Our troops arent actually lacking, on 2 occassions in Iraq we had an AC 130 in support of our ops and made fine use of it too. They took their fire commands from the targeting MR2. So, if the mission requires that sort of support, the boys will get it, just ask through the proper channels.
Telling the crew to switch the guns off took a bit longer than it should have but thats life
Telling the crew to switch the guns off took a bit longer than it should have but thats life
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Bury St Edmunds.
Age: 60
Posts: 196
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Underground....
Ask the nice supporter of Raith Rovers, yes the one that resides in Downing Street for some of the money that the taxpayer is having to pay for another Treasury c0ckup. The one concerning rebuilding/refurbishing London Underground. The burden of risk was to be taken on board by the Contractor, Matrix I think it was called, a consortium of large building contractors/Civil Engineers. At least that was the Treasuries plan. Well, it was untill things went badly haywire and Matrix walked away to cut their losses. Wonder if they found the ground to hard to dig into....probably some of that Northern Rock
. Result, Matrix pays 300 Mil, taxpayer contributes 1.7 Bil. Now isn't that fair
.An over simplification of the story I guess but you can see the point that I'm trying to make. How many 130 gun-ships would that buy? Also maybe another C17 etc etc etc......
Join Date: May 2001
Location: uk
Posts: 215
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, with a statement this well informed we should be able to put this to bed...
Considering we don't even have guns on our standard CAS aircraft it'd be a bit much to expect the budget to stretch to an aircraft that is really good at what it does, as long as the otherside don't have weapons much more dangerous than AK47s and sharpened fruit to blatt away at it with.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Lincs
Posts: 453
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Current AC-130 variants are unaffordable as they are based on the 'classic' C-130 airframe and we couldn't afford to pay for the development costs of an 'AC-130J'.
What we should be looking to do more of is ro-ro installations of mission kit on aircraft such as the C-130J or King Air. An 'AC-130 lite' fitted into the back of a J with sensors fitted in removable doors or in converted fuel tanks on the under wing hard points (yes I know our Js don't carry tanks but I believe that the hard points are still there) could potentially bea viable system at a much lower costs. We don't need the big 105 for the majority of the time.
I acknowledge however that the Herc boys are already very heavily tasked. Alternatively, stick it in the back of a platform such as a King Air. Other missions such as various ISTAR disciplines or EA could also be developed in this way at a much lower cost than would be expected for a full up system.
Regards,
MM
What we should be looking to do more of is ro-ro installations of mission kit on aircraft such as the C-130J or King Air. An 'AC-130 lite' fitted into the back of a J with sensors fitted in removable doors or in converted fuel tanks on the under wing hard points (yes I know our Js don't carry tanks but I believe that the hard points are still there) could potentially bea viable system at a much lower costs. We don't need the big 105 for the majority of the time.
I acknowledge however that the Herc boys are already very heavily tasked. Alternatively, stick it in the back of a platform such as a King Air. Other missions such as various ISTAR disciplines or EA could also be developed in this way at a much lower cost than would be expected for a full up system.
Regards,
MM
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Scotland
Posts: 99
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dream on boys and girls. They can't even give the MR2 a laser designator never mind some ordnance that would save having a squadron of CAS aircraft at Kandahar. When up against the Taleban who needs complex fast jets. What you need is linger time and a fast sensor to shooter time. XV230 excepting we (MR2) could be there for 7 hours with a payload that would embarrass the average fast jet, and we could self designate given a small amount of cash. I personally have said this to many an Air Rank but it seems to fall on deaf ears.
Lets face it we are a Fast Jet Air Force after all.
Even if we have fallen below the majic 40 000!!!
Pissed again.
But still making some sense
Lets face it we are a Fast Jet Air Force after all.
Even if we have fallen below the majic 40 000!!!
Pissed again.
But still making some sense
The AC-130 is very good at doing one thing: nocturnal close air support, to which it brings the best persistence (aircraft endurance and a deep magazine), accuracy and discrimination you can find, Other things it either can't do safely or (reconnaissance for instance) are more cheaply done by other systems like UAVs. It's therefore only affordable by a very large AF.
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: RAF Lincolnshire
Posts: 83
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Foghorn
The GR9 guys are getting more experience with the events on the ground, with a wider range of challenges, than the GR4 folk are dealing with over in Iraq. Don't take this as a swing towards the Tonka guys, I have utmost respect for anyone who is willing to place his or pink body into harms way on a regular basis. It is however, a fact that we are dropping more warheads in Afghan.
From my experience of seeing the guys on Fast Mover etc, the GR9 is better at CAS. The airframe was designed with CAS in mind (Russian tanks charging towards W.Germany) from the start, as opposed to the Tonka which is being forced to change with the times and adapt into different roles.
Today's major theatres are both a tad warm & as we all know, the GR4 does not like being hot, high and heavy (if only they had included the Typhoon engines in the upgrade, as originally planned). Surely those conditions make it much harder for a GR4 to stay over a TIC, at a safe height & speed, whilst remaining effective than they do for a GR9? I appreciate that they would probably get there faster.
Should the GR4s relieve the GR9s on Herrick, they will no doubt do a great job within the limits of an airframe. Two sets of eyes looking down would certainly be a bonus.
I believe that sensor to shooter time is about the same for both jets. Didn't the Jag have the edge on that?
IMHO, experience counts for a great deal and I don't think that there are many communities, that are more experienced and current in CAS than JFH (RAF with a hint of Navy
).
Stay safe, regardless of what or who you fly in!
From my experience of seeing the guys on Fast Mover etc, the GR9 is better at CAS. The airframe was designed with CAS in mind (Russian tanks charging towards W.Germany) from the start, as opposed to the Tonka which is being forced to change with the times and adapt into different roles.
Today's major theatres are both a tad warm & as we all know, the GR4 does not like being hot, high and heavy (if only they had included the Typhoon engines in the upgrade, as originally planned). Surely those conditions make it much harder for a GR4 to stay over a TIC, at a safe height & speed, whilst remaining effective than they do for a GR9? I appreciate that they would probably get there faster.
Should the GR4s relieve the GR9s on Herrick, they will no doubt do a great job within the limits of an airframe. Two sets of eyes looking down would certainly be a bonus.
I believe that sensor to shooter time is about the same for both jets. Didn't the Jag have the edge on that?
IMHO, experience counts for a great deal and I don't think that there are many communities, that are more experienced and current in CAS than JFH (RAF with a hint of Navy
).Stay safe, regardless of what or who you fly in!
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Scotland
Posts: 99
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Me thinks you all protest too much. I have first hand experience of the delays in getting CAS onto a target in Afghanistan. We find them, it then takes at least 1 hr to get CAS onto the scene and then we are lucky if they can find the same target. Give us SDB and an LD and we could be self sufficient. Sensor to shooter loop is what it is all about these days...
Yes we still need fast jet in the right circumstances, I don't argue that. What is needed is a platform that can mark the target and take it out when required, within seconds of being given the clearance from the ground not 1 hour...
I await the inevitable barrage of fast jet protest...
Yes we still need fast jet in the right circumstances, I don't argue that. What is needed is a platform that can mark the target and take it out when required, within seconds of being given the clearance from the ground not 1 hour...
I await the inevitable barrage of fast jet protest...
Nav Attacking
You will get no lambasting for me, having been there doing the job in the MR2 with a support AC 130, reaction time was whatever the AC needed to cock his weapons.
The bottom line, you have to be on station for a long time and no FJ is going to do that without tanker support, which as we all know is extremely limited.
Just give the MR2 some guided weapons on the wing hardpoints like the P3 and the problems resolved - although a big gun would be nice.
You will get no lambasting for me, having been there doing the job in the MR2 with a support AC 130, reaction time was whatever the AC needed to cock his weapons.
The bottom line, you have to be on station for a long time and no FJ is going to do that without tanker support, which as we all know is extremely limited.
Just give the MR2 some guided weapons on the wing hardpoints like the P3 and the problems resolved - although a big gun would be nice.