IGX

...that occurred in Afganistan in June of this year. Pretty fucking tragic. Doesn't make the Air Force look too good i.e. use of the B1 for close air support instead of the A-10, the use of a sketchy combat controller etc. Definitely worth the read.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/201 ... -a/?page=1

I'm not a John McCain fanboy. But he is doing God's Work in defending the A-10. There is no other aircraft that can provide the A-10's level of close air support.

Agreed

I read a brief synopsis of the Air Force's reasoning on why they are moving to retire the A-10. Basically they have determined that the aircraft is obsolete against our possible antagonist "peer" forces i.e. Russia and China. They possess simple, effective, shoulder-fired anti-aircraft missiles that would easily bring down the low-flying, slow-moving A-10, regardless of how "armored" and resistent to damage it is. They claim it's successful in Afghanistan and Iraq simple because the combatants there don't possess these weapons. And to maintain the aircraft, even in this limited theater of operations takes away time, money, resources that could be spend on other programs geared towards replacing or improving other fast-moving aircraft to take over the ground support role. As said in the article, the Air Force tried to pound a square peg through a round hole by using the B1 and 5 good men lost their lives because of it. Fucking outrageous chain of events. This "sniper pod" device the weapons officers utilize...and they don't know it's incapable of picking up the warfighter's IR strobe? WTF? One thing this article brings out...those Air Force combat controllers have played major roles during this war and they maybe don't get the accolades they deserve...this article demonstrates how a fuckup by one of them has fatal consequences.

Because I live in the area of the McChord Airbase, the local paper gives some coverage to JTACs as they receive their Bronze or Silver Stars for their competence & courage. They are the guys on the ground who translate air superiority into success on the ground.
But there's almost no national recognition. For that, you have to shoot some kids in school or expose your neighbors to Ebola.

***

As to the "obsolescence" of the A-10, we've been fighting Third World tactics in Third World countries for the past fifty years. Why is the Air Force discounting those wars?
I suspect those in purchasing & acquisition push the Big Bucks projects to feather their retirement nest in Big Defense.

Only Spectre rivals the A-10 for giving you the warm and fuzzies when it goes on station. No idea why the A-10 would be considered more vulnerable than an AC130. B1 may not be vulnerable but then again it's nowhere near the battlespace.

To the events, seems it's training issues due to top level decisions on pre-deployment workups and the the troops on the gorund are taking the hit. B1 flyers are part timers in this role at best. The ground force commander I guess is supposed to know the other half of his split force went to high ground without having good comms to be told so. As the article says, terrain matters. Mastery of the ground is at least as important as mastery of your weapons.

Definitely a bad call letting that particular JTAC go but having discipline issues is not the same as incompetence. These days, one of the ways they are selecting troops for separation to downsize is using minor disciplinary issues during their enlistment as the deciding factor. His reported lack of knowledge and skill shortcomings apparently didn't manifest until the after-action on this? That's a leadership issue at the tactical level but this guy would be the first CCT that wasn't A1 squared the fuck away that I know of. They do seem to switch out CCT for JTAC in the write-up at will but they are not the same. CCTs are JTACs but not the other way around. Rangers now JTAC train many of their FOs to avoid just such an issue.