Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire USAF not buying light attack aircraft.

You forget that the Army has no runways.

I think Army fixed wing SOF elements would face the same logistical problems today as the A-10 when it became operational that's why IMO rotary wing is the right call..

Not strictly true, I've taken off from Mackall for a jump a few times. I think that was a Caribou though, I'd have to check my jump logs. I get your point though.

Flyboy I agree the logistics would be a PITA but as long as the costs were kept reasonable, I think it would be able to be done. Keep the cost somewhere between a Blackhawk and an Apache if at all possible.

https://www.wearethemighty.com/gear-tech/socom-light-attack-aircraft-fleet

I live right down the road from Ft. Knox, and they still have Godfrey Field right there, I drive past it all the time. It used to house a P-51 squadron there, and they land C-130s there all the time. Ft. Bragg has an ex-AFB on hand, and I'm sure the others also have runways, I know Ft. Benning does (US Army Jump School has to have aircraft, and they have to take off from some place. My father took his one (and only) airplane ride at Ft. Sill OK. Yeah, the Army has runways.

That work out great for CAS missions in Kentucky, Georgia and Oklahoma.

Rocky are you talking about overseas?

I know in both Aghanistan and Iraq I was right next to an airfield. Afghanistan I had was actually close to two of them, Salerno and the one at Chapman.

Still a healthy support staff in Bethpage that go back to the Fairchild days but now work under the name Norhrop Grumman. Only a few remain but I had the pleasure of working with quite a few (since retired) that were there from the beginning of the A-10.

Very true on the jigs, dies, etc....every year in support of the SLEP and Modernization programs people go down to AMARG and look for the old Fairchild tooling that is believed to be somewhere in the desert boneyard.

Half of the A-10 fleet currently has brand new wings (Boeing built) with the remaining planes in the fleet slated to get new wings. While not building them new, a new wing is a pretty big investment and certainly adds a healthy number of service hours to the airframe.

Not only does the US Army have runways, it has more aircraft than the USAF. Oddly enough, Army aircraft don't require an officer to pilot them, like the USAF, USN, and USMC.

I have taken off many times from Henderson Army Airfield at Ft Benning, though remarkably fewer landings at ANY airfields.

Oh, and I think the light attack aircraft will mirror the rotary wing little birds' capability vis a vis apaches: smaller, lighter, easier to transpo via cargo aircraft...yet still provide good enough CAS for the environment.

My boy is thinking about a stint in the military after HS. Along with being a SOF dog trainer, flying one of those little buggers would be a nifty MOS.

There were about 300 fixed-wing capable airstrips in Vietnam, the majority were dirt or PSP and built/used by the Army.

The Airforce is keeping 228 A-10’s operational through 2040. All have been or are going to be rewinged. They are dumping 44 of the oldest A-10’s. That’s probably enough A-10’s to cover operations where they’re survivable. It only made sense to buy the light attack aircraft if they were going to get rid of the A-10’s but congress won’t let the Air Force get rid of the A-10. I think it’s the correct move. In a big war with a near peer adversary the A-10 isn’t survivable. The A-10 is unique in its capabilities but I suspect that cheap , capable , and easily available , manpads will end its career before 2040. The equivalent of current stingers will be made and sold by counties like China and sold to dirtbag 3rd worlders for next to nothing.
Btw , I’ve been used as targeting practice a half dozen times that I was aware of while driving my truck down 94 in South Georgia. Really cool planes to see practicing stalking and targeting. Running across a big clearcut and then popping up over a plantation tree line and dropping the nose down on you for just a moment and then diving back down into the cut. Amazing how they can turn.

No aircraft requires an officer to pilot them. The service itself does.

If you are inferring that Warrant Officers are not officers, then you are wrong. A Warrant Officer is commissioned at CW2. They can reenlist soldiers, they can take command, etc, etc. And yes, I was a Warrant Officer and I did reenlist several soldiers throughout my career.

Most of your line pilots in the Army, are Warrant Officers. They are specialists in their field. They do not go off to all the weird places the Commissioned folks go. Aviation Warrant Officers spend their careers in the cockpit, versus behind a desk.

Not sure the difference in speed, but would not the small turboprops be even more susceptible to missiles than the A10? The pilot wouldn't be as well protected either. Nor can they carry as much ordinance. Cheaper yes.

As some pointed out, the Army doesn't have many airfields.Why not look at a smaller attack helicopter, similar to the old Cobra? No need for airfields, more deployable than a fixed wing.

I'm not sure where the idea that the Army doesn't have runways came from. Almost all Army posts have them. It's how we get their equipment to theater... C-17 to Army Airfield, then head out to theater.

The Army also has a sizeable fleet of fixed wing aircraft already.

I have my opinions about the Army (read: infantry mafia) generals effectively employing armed fixed wing assets, but that's a different discussion.

My bad: army aircraft do not require _commissioned_ officers.

For my part, I would convert most all non-combat commissioned officers to warrant officers, while maintaining equivalent pay & perquisites & such. Do we really expect a fine surgeon & administrator of surgeons to lead a combat unit when he ought to be fixing up boys who get tore up? Do we really need to bother Congress to commission a shiny new S1 butterbar?