Jets & Planes but no UAV's here.

[shahadi]

The issue of the F-35B or really any of the variants performing CAS missions is not definitive. Truly, the issue is one of speed, fast or slow, and altitude. Given danger close of say 250m, can a fast moving F-35 deliver the goods on target, including guns, if necessary, close enough without friendly fire casualties is a question that even the "experts" are divided upon.

So, enter the Air Force, pinned to deliver F-35's in CAS missions, now beginning to develop CAS tactics with the F-35 platform. They can't certainly use the A-10 tactics for obvious reasons, it's just "slow and low," while not "fast and high."

Obviously, then, if the Air Force will use CAS, and the Navy too, they will develop the tactics necessary, but if they rely on external stores and not guns, this is similar to the Phantom in Viet Nam: missiles but no guns. Then, where does one find advantage in the F-35B?

Admittedly, I am not an expert, nor do i suppose to be one, and I suspect most of us in this forum are not experts on the F-35 either. However, we are literate, participate in democratic processes while remaining civil even when disagreeing.

Although, the F-35 is brand spanking new technologies, and as such requires maturation, I'm not so certain an amphibious assault ship is the place for it, while the nearby big boat has them, and maybe could have had better versions if not for the principle of shared design.

And the debate goes on: http://intercepts.defensenews.com/20...t/?sf6244571=1.

I'm confident they will get it done, after all that is what we do, just not sold on "fast and high" CAS platforms like the F-35.

Now, where's my drink!

[Suhiir]

The US Air Force has been trying to get rid of the A-10 for years. As an institution they REALLY don't like CAS, that's not to say the actual CAS squadrons and pilots don't see the need/value.
Ever since its' official founding in 1948 the USAF top brass has been convinced the only thing they need is fighters and bombers, "fast and high". And with the development of smart munitions the bomber can finally hit a target smaller then an airfield/small town.

Ground support missions have two major requirements.

1 - Fast response - The tactical situation is extremely fluid, targets come and go rapidly. Using high speed aircraft that require full out airbases to take off/land cannot be as responsive as an A-10 (long loiter times) or AV-8/F-35B (forward basing).

2 - Target Identification - From 15,000 ft you might be able to spot a tank, but who's? Again this is where the A-10 (flying low and slow) can identify it's target and make sure (most of the time) its shooting at the bad guys. USMC and USN aircraft performing CAS missions typically fly at around 500 ft (and frequently lower). They also typically make two passes over the target, the first to identify it and insure their approach/exit doesn't pass over friendly units (in case they hit short/long) and the second pass to actually fire/drop their weapons. The USAF hates to make multiple passes because the first pass alerts the opposition and the second allows them to fire AA weapons. But the USAF very rarely flies below 5000 feet so can't take advantage of terrain to limit opposition AA.

Low, slow, long loiter time, and a large ordnance load is optimal for CAS. But this inevitably means your aircraft ARE going to take damage. The A-10 is a flying tank, and the better CAS aircraft of any type can handle a certain amount of damage and stay airworthy. High speed, high altitude aircraft just cannot be as rugged (usually) because it needs low weight and streamlining.

[shahadi]

At times it is worthy to recall the thoughts of those before us. In this vain, my son offered this quote:

"Aviation is fine as a sport. But as an instrument of war, it is worthless." General Ferdinand Foch, Professor of Strategy, Ecole Superiure de Guere, 1911.

Or,

"No aircraft ever took and held ground." US Marine Corps Manual, maybe the Handbook for Marine NCOs, I'm not sure which manual this quote is taken from.

[troopie]

As platoon sergeant TerHorst said in basic training forty years ago. You can bomb it. You can sterilise it. You can shell it. But you can't call it YOURS until you can send a rifleman to sit on it.

troopie

(just a rifleman who was sent to sit on it by the okes in Pretoria)

[DRG]

Which is why, in the game, aircraft don't flip V-Hexes and neither does arty ( but if you try to take them without the support there will be far fewer riflemen to sit on them )

[FASTBOAT TOUGH]

Well my Luftwaffe friend Steve had just sent me this on his latest flight operation I'm assuming over the Baltic region as Germany is in the rotation for flying interdiction ops in that area. He's the one who let me post the East German pictures he took as a MiG-29 pilot in this thread. Also posted is a picture of what he's flying these days...yeah it's a rough living I guess.


And something for the future and a project I've put off for years as a taste, probably the most advanced F-5 variant flying today...


Santa has cleared my area now, so too all a good night!

Regards,
Pat

[FASTBOAT TOUGH]

Have to answer a ? on the quick-back to work-anyway this deals with Albania apparently based on some information I came across it looks like they grounded their jets around 2005. This second/third source is of the "gun-slinger" category however they do support the first source.
http://airheadsfly.com/2015/01/01/al...ength-in-2015/
http://www.xairforces.net/airforces....4#.VL_hQizSMng

Airheads one is not to bad a source/second though I've seen it is less familiar to me. The very first source given is solid.

Regards,
Pat

[DRG]

Further confirmation......"The Albanian Air Force is a sole rotary air arm since 2006".........http://airheadsfly.com/2015/01/01/ov...ian-air-force/

[FASTBOAT TOUGH]

As I think about hitting the rack I do so with a smile on my face. It would seem I beat JANE'S in analyzing the F-35 situation and Suhiir has already made the changes in her OOB to reflect it. Victory is ours!!! And to JANE'S I simply say... with lots of droll!!! Before I get further behind the "8 Ball" let me just enjoy this one and share it with Suhiir for hanging with me on this one. Even right down to the date...OK...OK I'll stop now!?!
http://www.janes.com/article/48184/f...ration-in-2014

Well that felt good, in reality we just committed first around the time or just before the below article on the USMC commitment to reach the IOC date. Generally IOC means if all goes well the first operational SQD. will be mission ready. However full operational status could still take up to 2 years after IOC is reached. We just felt we could "pull the trigger first" based on the information we had up to Nov. this past year so I guess that still means we...well never mind I'll sleep good tonight thinking about the "decision tree" anyway.
http://www.janes.com/article/45266/u...s-on-f-35b-ioc

See pages 16 & 17 this Thread.

Regards,
Pat

[Suhiir]

Also makes sense to get the F-35B version fully tested first because it the primary variant they have non-domestic orders for.