Warthogs, Vipers and Pink Flamingos

[Gums]

Salute!

Ran across an article on a "climate science" blog, no kidding. Was about military force planning and the link is worth reading IMHO and am wondering why Sgt Mac hasn't caught on to it yet, as cerebral as he is.

http://warontherocks.com/2015/08/black- ... ce-design/

The quote that strikes me is what we need to remind Senator McCain and others of, including some here...

the military must strive to explore history to acquire lessons, but also to be able to recognize when changes in context have made doctrine and past practice obsolete.

No doubt we should not prepare to fight the last war, but lately we have abandoned weapon systems simply to make room for the new ones. In my wildest dreams I can not see using most of the 40-year old systems employed in current scenarios. Make no mistake, the Warthog would have ruled in South VietNam and most of Laos 45 years ago. With some of the A-7D avionics it would have been the premier attack system for CAS and work along the Trail. The Buff is different, as USAF constantly upgraded the avionics and also did lottsa "body work", heh heh. Ditto for the Viper, which ain't that much younger than the 'hog. So some of the old weapon systems can still play a huge role in current scenarios and some postulated ones in the near future.

Our problem with many old farts ( not me!!!!) is they are stuck in the past and/or can not unnerstan the need to spend $$$$ nowadays to get the same bang-for-buck we got back from 1960 to 2000. Most inmportantly, they do not unnerstan the actual threat out there. McCain never flew agains the old SA-6, nor did McSally, nor did any of the Congressional delagation tying to dictate military doctrine and weapon choices. I only flew against the SA-6 at Red Flag, and it was a bear. Just ask our first IAF students about Yom Kippur. I have not seen any reports of the SA-6 in DS or even 'raqi Two.

Just thot I would break out from the never-ending A-10 thread.

Gums sends...

[spazsinbad]

This thread and the article thread above locked up my computer (I guess from a long running script) so in case of emergencies - make a PDF - so here 'tis attached.

[oldiaf]

Salute!

Ran across an article on a "climate science" blog, no kidding. Was about military force planning and the link is worth reading IMHO and am wondering why Sgt Mac hasn't caught on to it yet, as cerebral as he is.

http://warontherocks.com/2015/08/black- ... ce-design/

The quote that strikes me is what we need to remind Senator McCain and others of, including some here...

the military must strive to explore history to acquire lessons, but also to be able to recognize when changes in context have made doctrine and past practice obsolete.

No doubt we should not prepare to fight the last war, but lately we have abandoned weapon systems simply to make room for the new ones. In my wildest dreams I can not see using most of the 40-year old systems employed in current scenarios. Make no mistake, the Warthog would have ruled in South VietNam and most of Laos 45 years ago. With some of the A-7D avionics it would have been the premier attack system for CAS and work along the Trail. The Buff is different, as USAF constantly upgraded the avionics and also did lottsa "body work", heh heh. Ditto for the Viper, which ain't that much younger than the 'hog. So some of the old weapon systems can still play a huge role in current scenarios and some postulated ones in the near future.

Our problem with many old farts ( not me!!!!) is they are stuck in the past and/or can not unnerstan the need to spend $$$$ nowadays to get the same bang-for-buck we got back from 1960 to 2000. Most inmportantly, they do not unnerstan the actual threat out there. McCain never flew agains the old SA-6, nor did McSally, nor did any of the Congressional delagation tying to dictate military doctrine and weapon choices. I only flew against the SA-6 at Red Flag, and it was a bear. Just ask our first IAF students about Yom Kippur. I have not seen any reports of the SA-6 in DS or even 'raqi Two.

Just thot I would break out from the never-ending A-10 thread.

Gums sends...

Check about 1 of 2 USAF F-16 Shut downed on Jan 19 1991 during package Q strike in DS by SA-6

[tincansailor]

Salute!

Ran across an article on a "climate science" blog, no kidding. Was about military force planning and the link is worth reading IMHO and am wondering why Sgt Mac hasn't caught on to it yet, as cerebral as he is.

http://warontherocks.com/2015/08/black- ... ce-design/

The quote that strikes me is what we need to remind Senator McCain and others of, including some here...

the military must strive to explore history to acquire lessons, but also to be able to recognize when changes in context have made doctrine and past practice obsolete.

No doubt we should not prepare to fight the last war, but lately we have abandoned weapon systems simply to make room for the new ones. In my wildest dreams I can not see using most of the 40-year old systems employed in current scenarios. Make no mistake, the Warthog would have ruled in South VietNam and most of Laos 45 years ago. With some of the A-7D avionics it would have been the premier attack system for CAS and work along the Trail. The Buff is different, as USAF constantly upgraded the avionics and also did lottsa "body work", heh heh. Ditto for the Viper, which ain't that much younger than the 'hog. So some of the old weapon systems can still play a huge role in current scenarios and some postulated ones in the near future.

Our problem with many old farts ( not me!!!!) is they are stuck in the past and/or can not unnerstan the need to spend $$$$ nowadays to get the same bang-for-buck we got back from 1960 to 2000. Most inmportantly, they do not unnerstan the actual threat out there. McCain never flew agains the old SA-6, nor did McSally, nor did any of the Congressional delagation tying to dictate military doctrine and weapon choices. I only flew against the SA-6 at Red Flag, and it was a bear. Just ask our first IAF students about Yom Kippur. I have not seen any reports of the SA-6 in DS or even 'raqi Two.

Just thot I would break out from the never-ending A-10 thread.

Gums sends...

Always interesting Gums. Too the point from the article about improving SAM systems it's amazing how dense people can be. You would think that former combat pilots like McCain and McSally would have a better understanding of the subject. The A-10 issue is so clouded by emotion it seems impossible to argue rationally. The Myth of the A-10 is many times stronger then the aircraft itself.

We now see that the USAF is going to be sending A-10C's based in Turkey into combat in Syria. We should pray they stay high, and that neither Assad's, or Russian Forces engage them. The A-10's will need heavy escort to keep them safe, like F-105's needed lots of F-4's over N-Vietnam to protect them. Finally the F-4's had to do the bombing missions themselves. I hope the air force isn't trying to teach a grim lesson. I hope their not capable, (And I don't think they are) of such a cynical ploy that could cost lives.

Syria has SA-2, SA-3, SA-5, SA-6, SA-10, and SA-11. I understand the Russians have moved SA-17 into Syria. Israel has operated against all of these systems except SA-17. They've only been able to do that with fast jets equipped with first class ECCM, and in many cases stand off weapons. Does anyone really think the A-10 can survive in a contested airspace like Syria?

I guess the best analogy which I'm sure has been used many times on this board is to compare the A-10 to the JU-87 Stuka. Fantastic in uncontested airspace, but easy pickings vs. a peer competitor. Since that comparison is obvious to anyone even remotely familiar with the subject why would it require losing aircraft and pilots to prove the point to people who should know better?

McCain has never been too bright, and he's degenerated into a stubborn old man. Somewhere along the line he got an idea in his mind that the A-10 is the symbol of American Air Power. At the same time his zeal for cutting waste in government directed his ire against the F-35. As with Truman that zeal creates a bean counting mentality that hurts military readiness. McCain is now talking about cutting F-35 numbers to save money. Of course the fact that will drive up unit cost, and the obvious fact we'll have fewer combat aircraft seems to be lost on him. Lets just hope he loses his reelection bid next year.

As for McSally it might just be nostalgia. You know I'm nostalgic for the A/B-26 attack/bomber. The A-26 of WWII became the B-26 post war. It's a 400mph aircraft that can carry a ton of bombs, 10, 5"rockets, and make a strafing run with 14, 50cals. Against infantry 14 widely spaced 50cals would be more effective then 1, 30mm cannon in a strafing run. I'm sure your familiar with the B-26 Gums, they used them in Vietnam. They even played an effective role in the Bay of Pigs. If JFK had allowed all 16 assigned for the mission to be used they might have succeeded in taking out Castro's T-33 Jets on the ground. Do you think if I got elected to congress I could bring the B-26 back, and send them to Syria?

[charlielima223]

No doubt we should not prepare to fight the last war, but lately we have abandoned weapon systems simply to make room for the new ones. In my wildest dreams I can not see using most of the 40-year old systems employed in current scenarios. Make no mistake, the Warthog would have ruled in South VietNam and most of Laos 45 years ago. With some of the A-7D avionics it would have been the premier attack system for CAS and work along the Trail. The Buff is different, as USAF constantly upgraded the avionics and also did lottsa "body work", heh heh. Ditto for the Viper, which ain't that much younger than the 'hog. So some of the old weapon systems can still play a huge role in current scenarios and some postulated ones in the near future.

Our problem with many old farts ( not me!!!!) is they are stuck in the past and/or can not unnerstan the need to spend $$$$ nowadays to get the same bang-for-buck we got back from 1960 to 2000. Most inmportantly, they do not unnerstan the actual threat out there. McCain never flew agains the old SA-6, nor did McSally, nor did any of the Congressional delagation tying to dictate military doctrine and weapon choices. I only flew against the SA-6 at Red Flag, and it was a bear. Just ask our first IAF students about Yom Kippur. I have not seen any reports of the SA-6 in DS or even 'raqi Two.

Just thot I would break out from the never-ending A-10 thread.

Gums sends...

I like the way you think...

(Bare with me for a moment or two, I will make my point) Over at Breaking Defense there is a troll their named Herby. I've tried to educate him but not even a highly motivated Drill Sergeant can fix his level of stupid. I tried to explain to that F-tard that having the initial lead can make all the difference some times. The F-tard (Herby) counters with "in war the initial lead can quickly be lost"... he points to Axis powers of WW2 as his example. Instead of taking my time to counter and sink his incredibly weak "argument"/"stance"... I just decided to say "I can't fix stupid".

(what I wanted to say was) Having the initial lead can make all the difference but its how that "lead" is leveraged that is just as important. The US has a rather large lead when it comes to LO designs and platforms... but more or just as important is how best to use them to keep that advantage... tactics.

[vanshilar]

McCain has never been too bright, and he's degenerated into a stubborn old man. Somewhere along the line he got an idea in his mind that the A-10 is the symbol of American Air Power. At the same time his zeal for cutting waste in government directed his ire against the F-35. As with Truman that zeal creates a bean counting mentality that hurts military readiness. McCain is now talking about cutting F-35 numbers to save money. Of course the fact that will drive up unit cost, and the obvious fact we'll have fewer combat aircraft seems to be lost on him. Lets just hope he loses his reelection bid next year.

I dunno, I have the opposite opinion, that he knows exactly what he's doing. He's a politician. He's a senator from Arizona. The A-10 fleet brings billions to the Arizona economy every year. He's going to want it around as long as he can, and to knock out anything that remotely seems like competition.

[oldiaf]

Salute!

Ran across an article on a "climate science" blog, no kidding. Was about military force planning and the link is worth reading IMHO and am wondering why Sgt Mac hasn't caught on to it yet, as cerebral as he is.

http://warontherocks.com/2015/08/black- ... ce-design/

The quote that strikes me is what we need to remind Senator McCain and others of, including some here...

the military must strive to explore history to acquire lessons, but also to be able to recognize when changes in context have made doctrine and past practice obsolete.

No doubt we should not prepare to fight the last war, but lately we have abandoned weapon systems simply to make room for the new ones. In my wildest dreams I can not see using most of the 40-year old systems employed in current scenarios. Make no mistake, the Warthog would have ruled in South VietNam and most of Laos 45 years ago. With some of the A-7D avionics it would have been the premier attack system for CAS and work along the Trail. The Buff is different, as USAF constantly upgraded the avionics and also did lottsa "body work", heh heh. Ditto for the Viper, which ain't that much younger than the 'hog. So some of the old weapon systems can still play a huge role in current scenarios and some postulated ones in the near future.

Our problem with many old farts ( not me!!!!) is they are stuck in the past and/or can not unnerstan the need to spend $$$$ nowadays to get the same bang-for-buck we got back from 1960 to 2000. Most inmportantly, they do not unnerstan the actual threat out there. McCain never flew agains the old SA-6, nor did McSally, nor did any of the Congressional delagation tying to dictate military doctrine and weapon choices. I only flew against the SA-6 at Red Flag, and it was a bear. Just ask our first IAF students about Yom Kippur. I have not seen any reports of the SA-6 in DS or even 'raqi Two.

Just thot I would break out from the never-ending A-10 thread.

Gums sends...

Always interesting Gums. Too the point from the article about improving SAM systems it's amazing how dense people can be. You would think that former combat pilots like McCain and McSally would have a better understanding of the subject. The A-10 issue is so clouded by emotion it seems impossible to argue rationally. The Myth of the A-10 is many times stronger then the aircraft itself.

We now see that the USAF is going to be sending A-10C's based in Turkey into combat in Syria. We should pray they stay high, and that neither Assad's, or Russian Forces engage them. The A-10's will need heavy escort to keep them safe, like F-105's needed lots of F-4's over N-Vietnam to protect them. Finally the F-4's had to do the bombing missions themselves. I hope the air force isn't trying to teach a grim lesson. I hope their not capable, (And I don't think they are) of such a cynical ploy that could cost lives.

Syria has SA-2, SA-3, SA-5, SA-6, SA-10, and SA-11. I understand the Russians have moved SA-17 into Syria. Israel has operated against all of these systems except SA-17. They've only been able to do that with fast jets equipped with first class ECCM, and in many cases stand off weapons. Does anyone really think the A-10 can survive in a contested airspace like Syria?

I guess the best analogy which I'm sure has been used many times on this board is to compare the A-10 to the JU-87 Stuka. Fantastic in uncontested airspace, but easy pickings vs. a peer competitor. Since that comparison is obvious to anyone even remotely familiar with the subject why would it require losing aircraft and pilots to prove the point to people who should know better?

McCain has never been too bright, and he's degenerated into a stubborn old man. Somewhere along the line he got an idea in his mind that the A-10 is the symbol of American Air Power. At the same time his zeal for cutting waste in government directed his ire against the F-35. As with Truman that zeal creates a bean counting mentality that hurts military readiness. McCain is now talking about cutting F-35 numbers to save money. Of course the fact that will drive up unit cost, and the obvious fact we'll have fewer combat aircraft seems to be lost on him. Lets just hope he loses his reelection bid next year.

As for McSally it might just be nostalgia. You know I'm nostalgic for the A/B-26 attack/bomber. The A-26 of WWII became the B-26 post war. It's a 400mph aircraft that can carry a ton of bombs, 10, 5"rockets, and make a strafing run with 14, 50cals. Against infantry 14 widely spaced 50cals would be more effective then 1, 30mm cannon in a strafing run. I'm sure your familiar with the B-26 Gums, they used them in Vietnam. They even played an effective role in the Bay of Pigs. If JFK had allowed all 16 assigned for the mission to be used they might have succeeded in taking out Castro's T-33 Jets on the ground. Do you think if I got elected to congress I could bring the B-26 back, and send them to Syria?

As I understand ... Russian moved 3 batteries of SA-22 to Syria not SA-17 plus 1 SA-12 in one of the ships

[basher54321]

Our problem with many old farts ( not me!!!!) is they are stuck in the past and/or can not unnerstan the need to spend $$$$ nowadays to get the same bang-for-buck we got back from 1960 to 2000. Most inmportantly, they do not unnerstan the actual threat out there. McCain never flew agains the old SA-6, nor did McSally, nor did any of the Congressional delagation tying to dictate military doctrine and weapon choices. I only flew against the SA-6 at Red Flag, and it was a bear. Just ask our first IAF students about Yom Kippur. I have not seen any reports of the SA-6 in DS or even 'raqi Two.

I gather the point you are making is Yom Kippur is a good case study on what happens when you come up against unknown advanced systems?
Initially the ECM gear used by the IDF was all tailored to the SA-2 from Nam - the rhaws they had couldn't pick up SA-6 guidance (CW) for a start.

Multiple accounts from DS / Deny Flight / Allied Force state SA-6s used (87-0228/TJ lost in DS / 89-2032/AV lost over Bosnia). Especially in Allied Force due to its mobility - but system appears to be virtually irrelevant by then due to ECM systems and tactics.

Yom Kippur 6-25 October, 1973 (19 days)
1300 SAM firings, up to 140 total kills (~19,000 sorties) (SA-6 and ZSU-23-4 given as biggest killers)

Allied Force Serbia/Kosovo (24 Mar - June 10 1999)
673 SAM firings, 2 Aircraft lost - both to SA-3 (Allied sorties given as 38,000)

Although you could assume exploitation of some S-300 types due to some friendly countries having it the likelihood of another Yom Kippur SAM kill rate could still be very high.

(btw the figures are rough from multiple sources)

[sprstdlyscottsmn]

I dunno, I have the opposite opinion, that he knows exactly what he's doing. He's a politician. He's a senator from Arizona. The A-10 fleet brings billions to the Arizona economy every year. He's going to want it around as long as he can, and to knock out anything that remotely seems like competition.

You know Arizona has one ANG base for A-10s and two for F-35s right? The Marines that declared IOC are in Yuma Az. Luke AFB on the western edge of the Phoenix area is transitioning from the largest F-16 training facility in the world to an F-35 training facility.

[Gums]

Salute!

But first some admin/protocol, huh?

PLZ STOP QUOTING ENTIRE POSTS!!!! Cut-and-paste "quotes" as I shall do here and a few have done on this thread. Fer chissakes, we can reference posts if the thread is too long.

Steps off of podium
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

From Basher

I gather the point you are making is Yom Kippur is a good case study on what happens when you come up against unknown advanced systems?
Initially the ECM gear used by the IDF was all tailored to the SA-2 from Nam - the rhaws they had couldn't pick up SA-6 guidance (CW) for a start.

Yep, exactly the point. IAF did not anticipate changes in both equipment or employment tactics. I think the only pilot in their Viper cadre that did not fly in Yom Kippur was the young elltee that died in Columbia years later. They told us the capability of the SA-6 to track and hit down really low was a huge shock, and their losses the first two or three days almost sealed their fate.

The second observation from them was the desert in the Sanai was littered with wires from the anti-armor missiles.

Third, they showed us a decent way to attack an SA-6 site, but admitted the best way was to taxi a tank up to the sucker and blow it to kingdom come, heh heh.

The Viper is almost as old as the 'hog ( I reported to Hill in the summer of 1979) . Hell, the flight tests were only two or three years apart, but the 'hog went into production sooner. Funny, but GD was able to crank out more Vipers per month than Republic did with 'hogs. You know, the cheap, low-tech, slow, simple point design USAF demanded for CAS and tank-busting.

My counterparts from the old A-7 days that transitioned to the 'hog in 1976 laughed at the lack of nav gear or a computer or even an autopilot. The thing was basically a large A-37 or jet A-1.

A wise old aviation pioneer from the early days cautioned " you must anticipate changes in the nature of war before thay occur". And we have yet to see the modern missiles and planes be employed by very competent adversaries. The Vee were the best we have seen in tactics for their systems.

Gums opines....

[deadseal]

dont forget modern digital medium range sams.....like the SA-22 (which syria has according to the web). If you find yourself in the bucket when it turns on, and you are not stealthy, you will be hit unless a random PET shot is already in the Air. My big problem with all these monkeys on capitol hill is how do they expect these legacy fighters to survive? The data is all right there in their faces!!!how do they look at themselves in the mirror at night knowing they are not giving their own soldiers the best chance at living? are they going to right the ****** letter to the parents??....."Dear misses Quents, your son died today because i was worried about my constituents voting me out of office......." it makes me so sick i want to puke and then punch them all in the face...
you want to know the answer? put them in the MTCs.....let McCain try and shake off an SA-20.....then maybe he'll wake the **** up and do what is right for the nation, not just what is right for him. If we go to war and ONE death occurs in a legacy fighter due to a radar qued system....that death is on them....but im sure they dont care bout that


and dont talk about jamming....cause you know guys get all jacked up after the push and may be off axis.

[tritonprime]

Were McCain, McSally, and/or Ayotte responsible for the deployment of the twelve A-10C from Moody AFB to Incirlik AFB in Turkey replacing six F-16?

[vanshilar]

You know Arizona has one ANG base for A-10s and two for F-35s right? The Marines that declared IOC are in Yuma Az. Luke AFB on the western edge of the Phoenix area is transitioning from the largest F-16 training facility in the world to an F-35 training facility.

Point taken. But are they are risk of getting shut down if we get less F-35's than planned, or would Arizona get more F-35's stationed there if we get more F-35's than planned? I think comparing that, versus the cost of losing the A-10's, is the political calculus here.

[tincansailor]

I dunno, I have the opposite opinion, that he knows exactly what he's doing. He's a politician. He's a senator from Arizona. The A-10 fleet brings billions to the Arizona economy every year. He's going to want it around as long as he can, and to knock out anything that remotely seems like competition.

You know Arizona has one ANG base for A-10s and two for F-35s right? The Marines that declared IOC are in Yuma Az. Luke AFB on the western edge of the Phoenix area is transitioning from the largest F-16 training facility in the world to an F-35 training facility.

So cynical sprstdlyscottsmn. You may well be right, but I still think McCain is a stupid stubborn old man. Having said that I do think he's a patriot so I hope your wrong. As you pointed out F-35s will be stationed in Arizona replacing A-10s. No one ever knows what McCain is thinking, or why he does what he does.

When Harry Truman was a senator he chaired a committee charged with eliminating waste in the defense industry during WWII. He did very good work but that experience coupled with a resentment against regular army officers; because they rejected his transfer to the regular army in WWI made him distrustful of most generals and even more distrustful of admirals.

He never believed they needed the money they requested. This is why defense budgets in the late 40s were so tight they crippled the military. This resulted in the 1949 "Revolt of the Admirals" and nearly losing the Korean War. A lot of GIs died in Korea because of lack of training, understrength units, obsolete weapons, and weak leadership.

I've always suspected McCain resented the navy command, like he hates republican orthodoxy. The Maverick label is a façade for being a contrarian. Republican leaders said they had to deal with McCain like he was a separate party of his own. Being independent is one thing, being erratic is another.

My guess is the money that was wasted on the F-35 at the time of it's poor management set him against the project, and nothing will change his mind. As the Book of Exodus tells us, "And the Lord hardened Pharaoh's heart." Short of the slaying of the first born, or the Lord softening his Heart I don't know what can change what passes for the mind of John S. McCain. We can only hope the people of Arizona tell McCain 2016 is the time to retire, and enjoy life with his pretty wife, and lovely family. After all he's already living in the best state for retirement, what more could he want?

[oldiaf]

McCain was critical of F-22 and now a critical of F-35 , Does anyone know what this man wants ?!!