Westie,

The simple answer is there is a role for the Drones, B-1, F-16, F-15, A-10, AC-130, AH-64, and OH-58 and even the B-52 as well as organic Mortars and Big Bore Artillery.

If our brilliant military leadership and not so brilliant political leaders have limited the resources available to the Troops on the Ground to the extent they do not have full access to all of those choices then something is very wrong about that.

The War is not over until the last Ground Troop is safely on a large passenger airplane leaving the Area of Operations. Assuring their safety by overwhelming Fire Support should be maintained until that point.

The way things seem to be going in Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan, Yemen, Nigeria, Mali, and Somalia, perhaps we might want to just declare Victory in the War on Terrorism and re-deploy our Forces to the Mexican Border.

We have had it proven to us repeatedly in the past month that even Three Year old Kids can enter the country illegally. What is to stop a determined Islamist Terrorist from doing the same thing?

We owe so much to our wonderfully incompetent President don't we?

Bob

I truly understand your point. Problem is there isn't going to be a CAS specialist around 24/7. This especially so with certain types of ground ops.

I hate to sound like Rummy and say you go to war with the Air Force you have, not the one you want, but there's a reality to it that can't be denied.

There's advantages as well to the Bone doing CAS. Some far flung op in the dark continent, NEO or actionable info that puts boots on the ground in short order, the bone is overhead with no traditional AF CAS to be seen.

At this point we don't know that the same outcome would have differed with the A-10/other

Anyone who knows what happened in this situation will appreciate that the same could have happened to an A10, F16, GR4, or any other aircraft in Afghanistan with the same type of weapons. It's nothing to do with the type, more to do with the actions.

Respectfully disagree.

Ten years ago, its shortcomings as such a platform were well known, but a 250 lb bomb (lase and GPS kits available) was in the works.

With the proper FAC/JFAC-to-Aircraft link and procedures, it does better than you might expect. But yeah, I"d rather an A-10 for a variety of reasons if it were me on the ground.

For Boudreaux Bob: some day, over a beer, I'll try to explain how CAS and airborne fires have evolved since Viet Nam. They have. Even the Marines like the new way of doing it.
Artillery is LESS ACCURATE and LESS PRECISE than air delivered munitions in the year of 2014.

Until then, cheers.

Does not "Less Accurate" but available trump "More Accurate" but not available?

My argument is all about having Supporting Fires "On Call" and available in a timely manner.

Nothing has changed since the concept of Combined Arms when it comes to having superior firepower at hand when it is needed by Troops in contact.

I fully understand Technology has greatly improved the Accuracy and Effectiveness, but that presupposes it being available and timely. Otherwise, the Grunts are out there throwing Copper Jacketed Lead Rocks at the Bad Guys who might just have a Tactical Advantage on them.

I know first hand what both situations feel like.

When the Good Guys showed up it changed the whole outlook on the Day's Activities.

It was Dumb Iron Bombs, Napalm, and 20MM Rounds in conjunction with 2.75 Inch Rockets and 7.62mm rounds from Helicopters but it allowed Watashie to be here to talk about it.

The presence of an Air Force FAC coordinating the support also aided in the process of getting help to us. We were all by ourselves for a few minutes until the Cavalry showed up but when they did it made a World of difference.

The Artillery was still beating the place up when all the Airplanes and Helicopters left for Happy Hour.

Timeliness was what mattered then as it does today. When your Butt is swinging in the Breeze it gets awfully windy.

Bob, for engagements away from populated areas, yes, it's still pretty much the same.

For engagements in "urban terrain" and even in thinly populated areas like towns and rural communities, arty and mortars have too many downsides, many of them tied to what RoE seems to have as a template.

The concern for who is being hit by various fires all to often put the ground commander in a position where he can't call in a mortar or artillery mission. A ground commander was probably not as constrained in this way in Viet Nam, where you had up close and personal experience.

Welcome to the brave new world.

It's a different sort of :mad: sandwich to be an infantryman these days.

PS: "on call CAS" remains the wish of every ground commander on any square foot of turf. It is still a limited asset controlled by a higher HQ. That hasn't changed, except that there are probably fewer tubes and fewer aircraft available for that call.

Someone seems to have laid a little six sigma/lean on combat operations. :mad::mad::mad:

Your post is correct and follows time old CAS traditions.

Problem is the new and splintering non traditional battlefield that allows for artillery and AH-? support isn't always the norm. With SF's playing a larger role further out ahead of the tail, assets like the B-1 come into their own.

Which one?

The one that got you/us into it?

The ones that continued it?

Or the one trying to get you/us out of it?

:ugh:

Turin,

The current "One" sure seems bound to build upon his successes it would appear. The "One" could have snapped his Imperial Fingers and without consultation with Congress or his own Military and simply ordered it done just as he does on so many other occasions.

We are seeing the results of his good Thinking are we not?

Libya, Syria, Israel/Palestine, Egypt, Iraq, and Afghanistan all spring to mind of late.

Are you trying to suggest he has set the example for Leadership that your own leaders should imitate?

Like the following examples of superior CAS by A-10s?
Desert Storm:
A-10 strafes U.S.Marine OP in Khafji (daytime) (4 dead)
A-10 Strafes U.S.Marine Convoy FOR 4 passes (daytime)
A-10 shoots U.S. Marine LAV with Maverick (daytime) 7 dead
Washingtonpost.com: Fog of War - Post Archive (I know a Marine who was with that unit at that time)
A-10 attacks British Marines convoy of Warrior vehicles (9 dead)

Iraqi Freedom:
A-10 attacks British Blues & Royals Warrior vehicles (daytime) (1 killed 5 wounded)
A-10 attacks U.S. Marine AAV (daytime) (up to 10 dead - 18 killed, some by Iraqis, some by A-10, and some by both. In the end only 1 was A-10 only, and that is the only "official" BoB fatality)
Friendly Fire Marred Iraq 'Battle' - CBS News
A-10s (2) attack NATO forces, killing 1 Canadian soldier


And these by AH-64s?
Desert Storm:
AH-64 (3) attacked 2 US Army vehicles, killing 2 and wounding 6
Operation Desert Storm: Apache Helicopter Fratricide Incident

Afghanistan:
Of two helicopters called in to support operations by the British Grenadier Guards and Afghan forces in Helmand, the British WAH-64 engaged enemy forces, while the accompanying American AH-64D opened fire on the Grenadiers and Afghan troops.


And this by a RAF Harrier?
In Sangin Province, an RAF Harrier mistakenly strafed British troops missing the enemy by 200 metres during a firefight with the Taliban on 20 August 2006. This angered British Major James Loden of 3 PARA, who in a leaked email called the RAF, "Completely incompetent and utterly, utterly useless in protecting ground troops in Afghanistan".


Exactly - the list is long, and contains almost every aircraft type used.

You can add the two Blackhawks downed by the F-15 in Iraq too that list as well, and the Tornado whacked by the Patriot Misslie in Saudi and lots of other Blue on Blue incidents.

Technology has come a very long way since the Gulf War.

Marking the target and communication is the key and in these days making sure the GPS Coordinates being given and received are all correct, correctly entered.

It is never going to be a perfect science as there are too many things that can go wrong both on the human level and with the weapon systems employed.

By very definition CAS connotes a need for communication and a way to accurately fix the Target and the Friendlies.

Go down through that list and see how many failed those requirements.

And the point is, that when you look at the list of "friendly-fire" incidents, the A-10 leads with more incidents than any other platform.

Which is the exact opposite of what you were claiming in your earlier posts.

That is not what I said at all GK and you know it. I made no comparison of any aircraft when it comes to Friendly Fire incidents. That is your own doing and not mine at all.

I pointed out my personal choice would be the A-10, AH-64, and the AC-130 if I needed CAS as that is what they are designed to do and carry a greater choice of Weaponry.

The one similar event I recall occurred when the SpecOps guy changed batteries in his GPS and as a result incorrect Coordinates were passed to the Aircraft.

That could have happened no matter which aircraft was dropping the GPS guided Bomb.

I suggest an A-10 or AH-64 can deliver Cannon fire much closer to Friendlies than the B-1 can drop Bombs for no other reason than the Kill Radius of the Bomb compared to the Cannon Rounds.

Green Knight
The major no doubt had good reason for being a bit cross, and even for sending his intemperate email. But his account of strafing has to be called into some doubt, because the RAF Harriers in theatre at the time didn't carry guns. (Don't ask) But anyway, no one could have been 'strafed' by an aircraft without a gun.

airsound