New AF CAS aircraft program

[Terry Carraway]

Some folks have discussed the F-35 being used in a CAS role. Here's the info on their gun.
Only the USAF version has an internal gun. (3 barrel 25mm) The USN/USMC versions will have to carry a gun pod if they want to strafe. (bye-bye stealth)

And the internatl gun has something like 187 rounds to expend.

Talking to a current A-10 guy, they work on delivering about 100 rounds per pass. So for the A-10, that is about 117 passes with a full gun. The F-35 can go a bit over 1 3/4.

[Dave Siciliano]

Being circulated on the net :-)

[Dave Siciliano]

Some folks have discussed the F-35 being used in a CAS role. Here's the info on their gun.
Only the USAF version has an internal gun. (3 barrel 25mm) The USN/USMC versions will have to carry a gun pod if they want to strafe. (bye-bye stealth)

[Terry Carraway]

Hey Terry (mainly but certainly open), I’m going around with some fast mover guys who insist the A-10 is out dated and there’s no need for a dedicated CAS aircraft. The fast movers can do it all. I don’t see how the button pushers can replace eyes on the ground with loiter time. How would fast movers work in close proximity to friendlies? I would appreciate any thoughts. It’s really a corporate culture thing to a large degree. Having done this, I know what I need, but the boys in blue are telling me they know better. :-)

We can talk at Duluth, if you can wait.

Fast movers have a number of issues in the CAS environment. There is a reason that the A-10 was designed.

Oh, and for fun, ask ANY ground pounder who they want for CAS support. F-16, F-15E, F/A-18, or A-10. I KNOW what the answer is.

[Dave Siciliano]

AF Army relations on this issue

[Randy Sohn]

Yes, the conclusion I've come to

CONCUR!!!!

best, randy

[Dave Siciliano]

Yep, another way to look at it. I don’t think anyone’s opinion is wrong here; there’s a fine line between CAS and other combat missions. The Army picked up the rotary wing part, but now wants to specify there will be a dedicated fixed wing jet. The AF wants multi-role aircraft. Looks like this all comes down to who pays for it.

[Ward Miller]

I've always looked at this with a simple mind. If the problem involves the water, let the Navy solve it. If the problem is in the air, give it to the Air Force. If it is on the ground, it's the Army's responsibility.

Sometimes the description of the problem crosses the line between the Services. The Navy ship designed to transport the Army's invasion troops to the beach must be designed to hold not only the troops, but also their equipment. The same with the Air Force planes carrying combat troops; they can't have seats like a commercial airliner.

In the case of CAS, it appears to me the Air Force should design their CAS mission aircraft to support the mission, as described by the Army.

[Dave Siciliano]

Yes, the conclusion I've come to after reading a lot of reports is the Army has a different vision of CAS than the USAF. The Amry didn't want to pick up the tab for a dedicated CAS plane. The AF had it thrust upon them and did it, but now wants to give it up. Since it's really an Army requirement, hard to sympathize if they aren't willing to pay for it.

[Russell Holton]

I’m going around with some fast mover guys who insist the A-10 is out dated and there’s no need for a dedicated CAS aircraft.

You may have to introduce them to some experienced ground-pounders.

[Dave Siciliano]

‘Course boys in blue are saying we don’t need no 30 mm

[Tom Tyson]

Fast movers with a 30mm cannon? Yeah, sure.

[Dave Siciliano]

Hey Terry (mainly but certainly open), I’m going around with some fast mover guys who insist the A-10 is out dated and there’s no need for a dedicated CAS aircraft. The fast movers can do it all. I don’t see how the button pushers can replace eyes on the ground with loiter time. How would fast movers work in close proximity to friendlies? I would appreciate any thoughts. It’s really a corporate culture thing to a large degree. Having done this, I know what I need, but the boys in blue are telling me they know better. :-)

[Dave Siciliano]

For your reading enjoyment: Close Air Support Joint Publication 3-09.3 which some fast mover types are touting will provide adequate CAS to ground troops in close combat. And that John McCain must not have been up on it when he fought to keep the A-10. I'll reserve any opinions until completely reviewed.

https://fas.org/irp/doddir/dod/jp3_09_3.pdf

[Terry Carraway]

Seems like most recent ones are smallish units to secure an airfield, where more troops and supplies can be landed.

It think there was one in the Congo also. Early 60s, Belgian troops dropped to take the airfield, to land additional troops, then evacuate Europeans held by rebel forces.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Dragon_Rouge

This seems like a smart way to use the technique.