F-16.net

F-16.net Editor Joined: Sep 23, 2003 Posts: 2848

Pretty shocking that we have generals like this willing to sell out the rest of the sustainment of the airforce on an airframe that doesn't provide much. Really pretty shocking. Need to change some of the classes at the academy and air war college if this is the product we are getting.

RE: This article...

Joint Strike Fighter program crucial to future Air Dominance

The title by its self rings of oxymoron.

http://www.f-16.net/news_article1712.html

F-16.net Sponsor

This message from our sponsor will disappear if you log on as a member.

Of which airframe do you speak??

elp speaks about the F-35. He really doesn't like it. Truth is the JSF is overrated.

The JSF will most likely prove itself to be an exceptionally capable multi-role fighter. Bear in mind, your beloved lawn dart was a problem child in its adolescence.

Arctus, what do you mean by "your beloved lawn dart"? If I post in the F-16.net forum, it doesn't neccessarily means that I'm a Viper "addict".

You also say:

Quote:

The JSF will most likely prove itself to be an exceptionally capable multi-role fighter

Maybe. But I wouldn't call "exceptionally capable" a plane (even if stealth) that can only carry TWO 1000 pounders and 2 slammers (I'm talking only about the stealth config. obviously). What about WWR? It can't take the AIM-9 internally.

Marines F-35B who's role will mainly be CAS has NO internal gun (we all know the gun is the bread and butter of any CAS operations).
Navy's F-35C has also no internal gun. Viewing the situation from the outside (like me) one can only wonder if the US military has already forgotten the lessons learned the hard way over North-Vietnam.

I agree that all fighters should have a gun. To honest I probably should have held off before posting. I read ELP's comments(rant?) then Chandler's statement. Without the benefit of a little research (yes I know better) I jumped to the defense of the JSF because Chandler's comments sounded reasonable, in that we need a 5th gen attack bird to complement the F-22. I was not aware of the JSF's armament limitations. I suspect you are correct in your VN analogy vis a vis' the evolution of the F-4 which means the F-35 will end up with external bomb racks. So much for stealth. The Pentagon strikes again!

My apologies

Salute!

Whoa!!!!

Let's talk about modern CAS and such.

I do not agree that the gun was a big player in CAS. For the Sandys that did SAR, it was a player, but a last resort. For air-to-air, gotta concede the point. Hell even the "Colonial Vipers" use some kinda laser/gun/magic doofer, right?

I noted the JSF at Nellis could carry a few of those new small diameter JDAM-type eggs. Good if you have all the neat targeting coordination, but lousy if you are down in the weeds in poor weather and need to "go manual". Remember, boys and girls, Luke went "manual" when poor R2 got fried by Vader.

IMHO, CAS wil revert to the helos. The JSF and Viper and such will be more like artillery.

There seemed to be hardpoints on the beast that could be used for dumb bombs and CBU-type weapons. So if stealth ain't a big deal, then we have a shorter-legged Viper.

I do not agree that the Viper had many growing pains in those early years. Not on the tactical level.

We had motor problems, and then the electrical problems with the FLCS. Neither would have stopped USAF and the EPG folks from flying the things all-out in the WW3 conventional war scenario. The weapon systems worked as advertised, maybe even better.

The JSF seems to be a good replacement for the Viper in some respects, mainly ir-to-ground. OTOH, with a coupla Slammers loaded internally, it might do real well sneaking up on someone and blowing their brains all over the combiner glass.

out,

Gums wrote:

Quote:

IMHO, CAS wil revert to the helos. The JSF and Viper and such will be more like artillery.

I tend to have a different opinion. Helos will do just fine in CAS role if we're talking about a situation like Fallujah (relatively small area, the battle is rather static - no big distances to be covered, an improvised take-off landing field nearby...)

But let's think about this: somewhere in Afghanistan a land convoy is ambushed (happens more often than we would think). Say the nearest chopper is at 30 miles. Still needs some 15 minutes to get there, by that time everything's all over. Not to mention the poor performance of the helo due to the high altitude of the terrain - less payload, speed and maneuvrability). The Soviets found out the hard way that the Mi-24 was unsuitable for this task, so they rushed into service the Su-25.

Also, if you use only helicopter gunships for CSAR support you might not be able to overcome a modern system like Gepard or Tunguska, which are way more effective than any VC-manned ZPU-4 or ZSU-23.

Well, just my 2c.

Enthusiast Joined: Apr 12, 2006 Posts: 72 Status: Offline

thats why b-52s are doing cas, dont laugh its true. The have a huge loiter time, they carry tgp's and lgb's, they can cover a large area, dont think they do too many strafe passes though...

Quote:

thats why b-52s are doing cas, dont laugh its true. The have a huge loiter time, they carry tgp's and lgb's, they can cover a large area, dont think they do too many strafe passes though...

True enough. But there are cases when you NEED a gun. Some time ago there were some grunts pinned down by fire from dug-in positions somewhere in Afghanistan. They were too close for any LGBs to be used so a Viper with the gun did the job...I don't see a B-52 pulling that one off.

Bottom line is that there are a lot of different CAS situations, depending on the enemy's equipment, terrain, own forces on the ground...in more cases than not you need to have a gun. It's relativley cheap, simple and very precise.

Let's not kid ourselfs. PGMs are not an end to all means. They do miss, and when you have a limited number of them (1-4), you can't afford to miss.
With a gun you can do multiple passes if need be.

Elite 1K Joined: May 26, 2005 Posts: 1132

I'm just an armchair fan of military aviation who reads a lot. I'm by no means an authority on anything "zoom zoom bang bang" related. Gums however is. And what he said above makes sense to me.

RoAF wrote:

With a gun you can do multiple passes if need be

You can with SDBs too, that's the point. And SDBs are guided and allow the attacking jet to stay up above the trash fire (bolts of lightning from God anyone?). And a Viper has enough ammo for what, 2 or 3 two second bursts? Not to mention for a gun pass you need to be going low, and if you want to be accurate you can't be rolling in at the speed of heat either.

And "dumb" aren't all that dumb if you drop them from a platform with a good bombing computer. You can get a pretty good CEP from a medium altitude dive bomb run. And dumb bombs are fire and forget, once they're off the pylon you can get the hell clear.

I think the most terrifying thing for a ground troop would be to have a flight of modern attack helos with all their sensor wizardry roaming the area looking for things to break and people to hurt at night. I'm really glad US troops don't have to face that, thanks to pretty much guaranteed air supremacy.

Is a gun worthless for A2G? No. Is a gun more valuable than PGMs and a data link to crunchies on the ground? Hell no. Should a jet intended for A2A ever not have a gun? HELL no.

I'll repeat myself but I'll make it short:

1. There are times when you can't use bombs (guided or not) for CAS due to the very short distance between friendlys and hostiles. Say you only really need the gun in 1 case out of 10. Well if you don't have it some soldiers which could have been saved will be killed. Is that an acceptable loss? I think not.

2. Attack helicopters are NOT a valid CAS platform in a high-threat environment (against a well equipped and trained enemy) - never happened yet, but that doesn't mean that US troops will fight guys armed only with Kalashnikovs and RPGs forever.

Salute!

Ok, let's establish the credentials.

Only CAS ever done in a high threat area by this old fart was SAR missions. in those cases, we combed our hair forward and lit the Zippo.

I flew almost 400 combat missions in mudbeaters, and well over half were CAS.

I dropped and strafed within a few dozen meters of the good guys. I never once did that with radar-controlled ZSU-23's or SA-6's or SA-8's zooming all about.

Let's face it, you can't do the old-fashioned CAS in a very high-threat environment. You just can't.

The gun is fun, but how many of you have been down in the dirt and seen what your firing range has to be for accuracy. The Warthog has the longest range gun in the world, and it's still like 4,000 feet slant range for tanks, and maybe 8,000 feet slant range for "area" coverage. Same for the Viper's area coverage, but it's gun ain't that good on the tanks. Was same for the SLUF, too.

I am here to tell you that the old-fashioned CAS is gone except for an occassional firefight amongst the "warlords" in some godforsaken country. I like the capability to satisfy the requirement for those type of missions, but they are gonna be 1, maybe 2%. I want all of you to think about what I thought 20 years ago with the Fulda Gap scenario staring us in the face. Made me wanna get out my white bandana and have a sip of Sake before the mission.

Go ask the IAF about Yom Kippur, and that was over 30 years ago. I taught those initial Viper pilots from the IAF and I would like them to repeat for you all what they said about CAS in 1973.

Oh well, we gotta change our ways before the situation "makes" us change. Else, we're fighting an uphill battle, so to speak.

later,

I ended up on this subject, just because I saw Gums had made the last post; I like to follow him around here, and see what he has to say- and normally I am not dissapointed Smile

However, I disagree on this one, just a hair. The 388th FW (my current home) just brought one squadron back from the AOR, and sent another one out. Word around the water cooler (as I haven't got to speak to any of the returned pilots myself) is that the 20MM got alot of use over "there", and the training for the guys that just headed out focused hard on straffing (I saw that myself every day on the line- hot gun and full ammo when they left, and empty when they returned). But, every situation is different! So, hard to say....

Salute!

Yeah, you're right VPRGUY.

It's the "warlord" scenario I mentioned. 400 kt + and flares. No integrated air defense with cosmic missiles, dozens of ZSU-23's, all that stuff, etc.

I am thinking more about the intitial days of the Storm and Freedom. Not too many strafing passes those days except SAR pick-ups.

Just wanted to clear up the scenarios I believe lend themselves to the gun and low-alt releases, staying in the tgt area after first pass, etc.

later,

F-16.net

Forum: F-16 News

"Howie" needs a complete rethink on air warfare