Donward Posted May 6, 2015 Report Share Posted May 6, 2015 No. See. The correct response should be "OHMY FUCKING GOD YOU SCRUB, DONT YOU KNOW ANAKIN WAS NINE YEARS OLD IN PHANTOM MENACE YOU POSER HICK CLOWNSHOW!!!!1!!!1" And yes, the first time we have a blue-on-blue with a drone killing friendly American soldiers or - as I clearly stated in my first post - if American soldiers die because of a decision to only use drones as CAS you will see a media and political shitstorm of the likes that hasn't been seen since The Little Bighorn. If you can't grasp that simple fact of American political life then you really know anything about American politics at all. I mean holy hell, look what a shit storm erupted over the M4 "failing" in Afghanistan. You think a DC is simply going to shrug its collective shoulders? Get with the program man. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zinegata Posted May 6, 2015 Report Share Posted May 6, 2015 No. See. The correct response should be "OHMY FUCKING GOD YOU SCRUB, DONT YOU KNOW ANAKIN WAS NINE YEARS OLD IN PHANTOM MENACE YOU POSER HICK CLOWNSHOW!!!!1!!!1" And yes, the first time we have a blue-on-blue with a drone killing friendly American soldiers or - as I clearly stated in my first post - if American soldiers die because of a decision to only use drones as CAS you will see a media and political shitstorm of the likes that hasn't been seen since The Little Bighorn. If you can't grasp that simple fact of American political life then you really know anything about American politics at all. I mean holy hell, look what a shit storm erupted over the M4 "failing" in Afghanistan. You think a DC is simply going to shrug its collective shoulders? Get with the program man. Downward, I know enough about American politics that a "shitstorm" will only happen if one party can hurt the other without shooting itself in the foot. And a friendly-fire drone incident isn't going to be one of those issues because the Republicans want to portray themselves as the party of Defending Murica and they aren't about to question a program that was more successful at blowing up AQ leaders in other countries than anything Bush ever did. Meanwhile, Obama already got away with blowing up two American citizens - one a terrorist and another a hostage - using drones. Do you see any "shit storm" over drones over the death of a hostage? Maybe you should consider that the party that traditionally would be complaining over this - the Democrats - are also too busy using the drone program to play up their Defend Murica credentials hence they're also letting it pass? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toxn Posted May 6, 2015 Report Share Posted May 6, 2015 No. See. The correct response should be "OHMY FUCKING GOD YOU SCRUB, DONT YOU KNOW ANAKIN WAS NINE YEARS OLD IN PHANTOM MENACE YOU POSER HICK CLOWNSHOW!!!!1!!!1" And yes, the first time we have a blue-on-blue with a drone killing friendly American soldiers or - as I clearly stated in my first post - if American soldiers die because of a decision to only use drones as CAS you will see a media and political shitstorm of the likes that hasn't been seen since The Little Bighorn. If you can't grasp that simple fact of American political life then you really know anything about American politics at all. I mean holy hell, look what a shit storm erupted over the M4 "failing" in Afghanistan. You think a DC is simply going to shrug its collective shoulders? Get with the program man. Man that kid was terribly miscast. Beyond that, the whole idea of a nine year old kid meeting his teenage future lover and then having incredibly stilted dialogue to suggest that they will get down to boning in movie two is enough to sink the movie all by itself... As Zin points out, the American public seems to be pretty happy with drones right now so long as they hum around killing filthy foreigners/American citizens we kind of don't like, and don't do any top-gun shit that might put all the Tom Cruise wannabes out there out of a job. I don't see blue-on-blue stuff as being either especially likely or especially troubling to the public. My beef with this attitude is that drones are actually much worse platforms for making the right decision on which guy rocking a beard to splat than manned aircraft are. Manned aircraft, in turn, are much worse than people on the ground in terms of splatting the beard owner. Drones, IMHO, will be amazing in the near term for air-to-air stuff (which we've already debated) and acting as an artillery surrogate guided in by a forward observer on the ground. Barring that, direct control should be performed as close in as is safely possible by dedicated control units of some sort (AWACs, drone command trucks, mini-carriers or whatever). Another use for drones is area denial: make them fully autonomous and let them go to town on anything with a human outline and heat signature in a given sector. Finally, the role/usefulness of drones changes depending on what sort of war you're fighting. For the sort of low-intensity shit we're seeing now, I'd actually prefer to put a manned system in close to the ground to get a little more precision. For full-on, heavy-metal war I'd view drones as a great way to substitute productive capacity for manpower in roles where the wastage rate is too high to be sustainable. Here it should be noted that both sides during the Cold War figured on running out of aircraft and pilots within the first week. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sturgeon Posted May 6, 2015 Report Share Posted May 6, 2015 Zin, you're upholding a pretty low standard of posting here. Stop misrepresenting people's arguments and condescending to them. It's a habit that will take time to break, so get on it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toxn Posted May 6, 2015 Report Share Posted May 6, 2015 I think it's more a case of Zin taking every statement absolutely seriously and straight-faced. Which is a different issue, as it invites trolling and subsequent escalation. We should all be very careful to consider other angles and interpretations for arguments here - text is a bit low-bandwidth to tease nuance out of situations, especially when you have folk from a bunch of different cultures chatting together. And I'm obviously just as guilty as anyone else in this regard (see: arguments about American topics as understood by a dude sitting in Joburg). Further than that, I'm keen to completely drop this line of argument about the future of CAS and design a napkin A-10/Frogfoot killer. Because mudfighters and armour and ordinance and big guns and high-bypass turbofans and oh god I think I came. Belesarius, Jeeps_Guns_Tanks and Sturgeon 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Belesarius Posted May 6, 2015 Author Report Share Posted May 6, 2015 I think drones become the preferred CAS option when they are controlled by an FAC on the ground with the troops. When the controllers ass is on the line, I think we get a pretty solid option for calling in danger close. Recent advances in US PGM tech have knocked back the danger level of this significantly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Belesarius Posted May 6, 2015 Author Report Share Posted May 6, 2015 I think it's more a case of Zin taking every statement absolutely seriously and straight-faced. Which is a different issue, as it invites trolling and subsequent escalation. We should all be very careful to consider other angles and interpretations for arguments here - text is a bit low-bandwidth to tease nuance out of situations, especially when you have folk from a bunch of different cultures chatting together. And I'm obviously just as guilty as anyone else in this regard (see: arguments about American topics as understood by a dude sitting in Joburg). Further than that, I'm keen to completely drop this line of argument about the future of CAS and design a napkin A-10/Frogfoot killer. Because mudfighters and armour and ordinance and big guns and high-bypass turbofans and oh god I think I came. I'm ok with this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toxn Posted May 6, 2015 Report Share Posted May 6, 2015 Let's get the ugly-but-sexy ones out of the way first: Tiltrotor Osprey/Combat Helo hybrid Just straight up remaking the IL-102 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Belesarius Posted May 6, 2015 Author Report Share Posted May 6, 2015 Let's get the ugly-but-sexy ones out of the way first: Tiltrotor Osprey/Combat Helo hybrid Just straight up remaking the IL-102 I seriously am confused why the USMC hasn't been way more serious about making an escort/CAS version of the Osprey. It literally boggles my mind why this hasn't already been done with COTS tech. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toxn Posted May 6, 2015 Report Share Posted May 6, 2015 Because they are under the malignant spell of the cult of the Cobra? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Belesarius Posted May 6, 2015 Author Report Share Posted May 6, 2015 I want a Osprey with a center line mounted Bofors L60. And lots of Brimstone/70mm/Hellfires. Because reasons. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zinegata Posted May 6, 2015 Report Share Posted May 6, 2015 Zin, you're upholding a pretty low standard of posting here. Stop misrepresenting people's arguments and condescending to them. It's a habit that will take time to break, so get on it. Before accusing me of "misrepresenting people's arguments and condescending to them" consider that you yourself admit that you never actually bothered to read the entirety of my post. Anyway I'm dropping this thread. And maybe this entire forum given that it's pretty clear to me that "low standard" is synonymous with "disagreeing with Sturgeon and his favorites" because some people are too immature and who, in the face of someone seriously discussing a topic, hides behind "don't be serious" every time an argument doesn't go their way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toxn Posted May 6, 2015 Report Share Posted May 6, 2015 Before accusing me of "misrepresenting people's arguments and condescending to them" consider that you yourself admit that you never actually bothered to read the entirety of my post. Anyway I'm dropping this thread. And maybe this entire forum given that it's pretty clear to me that "low standard" is synonymous with "disagreeing with Sturgeon and his favorites" because some people are too immature to tell the difference between someone making a serious argument and who hides behind "jokes" when the argument doesn't go their way. Dude, I'd rather you didn't leave us. And I have a well-known problem with finding about 50% of what Don says to be utter crap (the other 50% being complete genius, sadly). But you're also a stubborn fucker (hence the faceless butcher) who doesn't respond to common debate tactics well. Making jokes and referring to previous jokey comments is, like, 50% of forum activity. I don't want to turn this thread into moan-about-our-feelings page, but it's clear that sorting things out requires some of this communication malarkey that we all manfully chortle about. I suggest you, Sturgeon and whoever else might hold a stake here take it to PMs and hash it out until you have something that everyone can live with. And if that ends up being that you decide to opt out, then at least it will be a thought-out decision rather than the result of simply getting pissed off. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donward Posted May 6, 2015 Report Share Posted May 6, 2015 Hey. I think that 50 percent of what you post is misinformed too Toxn. But since you are so typical of the gregarious, kind and open-hearted South Afrikkan who has touched the hearts of the world for three generations, I just can't help but love you! As all good Internet arguments go, obviously this is a lot of wanking over something that won't happen. The US military isn't going to get rid of manned fighter jets and bombers any time soon. As for drones, I'd say they are with us for a good long while as well although, as I've mentioned, American politics is a strange thing. There is a sizable portion of the population that is anti-drone. Not a majority, I don't think, but they are vocal and have clout and can do things like force the Seattle Police Department to end its drone programs. Now obviously it is a far cry comparing drones in a civilian police force to their use in the US military. But when I see folks on both sides of the political spectrum (usually more fringe types like libertarians and anti-capitalists) and when we have viable presidential candidates making anti-drone noises at times, I'm not comfortable sitting make and making grand pronouncements of what the future of air warfare will look like as I'm clacking away behind my laptop screen drinking coffee and eating leftover cornbread. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Belesarius Posted May 10, 2015 Author Report Share Posted May 10, 2015 http://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/this-video-will-leave-you-begging-the-usaf-to-keep-the-1703292861 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Belesarius Posted October 1, 2015 Author Report Share Posted October 1, 2015 Welp, this is still a thing. http://www.jqpublicblog.com/congress-issues-air-force-sharp-rebuke-bars-a-10-retirement/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sturgeon Posted October 1, 2015 Report Share Posted October 1, 2015 I say it's a good thing, not necessarily because we should retain the A-10, but because the Air Force needs a good slap upside the head. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xlucine Posted October 11, 2015 Report Share Posted October 11, 2015 The elements of the A-10 follow on study that congress are demanding read like a laundry list of "how not to do engineering design". (e) STUDY ON REPLACEMENT CAPABILITY REQUIREMENTS ORMISSION PLATFORM FOR THE A–10 AIRCRAFT.—(1) INDEPENDENT ASSESSMENT REQUIRED.—(A) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of the Air Force shallcommission an appropriate entity outside the Departmentof Defense to conduct an assessment of the requiredcapabilities or mission platform to replace the A–10 air-craft. This assessment would represent preparatory workto inform an analysis of alternatives.( ELEMENTS.—The assessment required undersubparagraph (A) shall include each of the following:(i) Future needs analysis for the current A–10aircraft mission set to include troops-in-contact/closeair support, air interdiction, strike control and recon-naissance, and combat search and rescue support inboth contested and uncontested battle environments.At a minimum, the needs analysis should specificallyaddress the following areas:(I) The ability to safely and effectively conducttroops-in-contact/danger close missions or missionsin close proximity to civilians in the presence ofthe air defenses found with enemy groundmaneuver units.H. R. 1735—31(II) The ability to effectively target and destroymoving, camouflaged, or dug-in troops, artillery,armor, and armored personnel carriers.(III) The ability to engage, target, and destroytanks and armored personnel carriers, includingwith respect to the carrying capacity of armor-piercing weaponry, including mounted cannonsand missiles.(IV) The ability to remain within visual rangeof friendly forces and targets to facilitate respon-siveness to ground forces and minimize re-attacktimes.(V) The ability to safely conduct close air sup-port beneath low cloud ceilings and in reducedvisibilities at low airspeeds in the presence of theair defenses found with enemy ground maneuverunits.(VI) The capability to enable the pilot andaircraft to survive attacks stemming from smallarms, machine guns, man-portable air-defense sys-tems, and lower caliber anti-aircraft artilleryorganic or attached to enemy ground forces andmaneuver units.(VII) The ability to communicate effectivelywith ground forces and downed pilots, includingin communications jamming or satellite-deniedenvironments.(VIII) The ability to execute the missionsdescribed in subclauses (I), (II), (III), and (IV) ina GPS- or satellite-denied environment with orwithout sensors.(IX) The ability to deliver multiple lethal firingpasses and sustain long loiter endurance to supportfriendly forces throughout extended groundengagements.(X) The ability to operate from unprepareddirt, grass, and narrow road runways and to gen-erate high sortie rates under these austere condi-tions.(ii) Identification and assessment of gaps in theability of existing and programmed mission platformsin providing required capabilities to conduct missionsspecified in clause (i) in both contested and uncontestedbattle environments.(iii) Assessment of operational effectiveness ofexisting and programmed mission platforms to conductmissions specified in clause (i) in both contested anduncontested battle environments.(iv) Assessment of probability of likelihood of con-ducting missions requiring troops-in-contact/close airsupport operations specified in clause (i) in contestedenvironments as compared to uncontested environ-ments.(v) Any other matters the independent entity orthe Secretary of the Air Force determines to be appro-priate. They have no idea what "solution neutral" means, and I'd love to know just how often re-attack times are an issue. Also, since when did the US airforce have to slum it & use roads as runways? The only time that'll be an issue is in a nuke fight with russia, and CAS will of marginal utility in that scenario Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Priory_of_Sion Posted October 12, 2015 Report Share Posted October 12, 2015 I think what they are looking for is an attack helo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sturgeon Posted October 24, 2015 Report Share Posted October 24, 2015 MZW weighs in on the A-10's retirement.I would have to check my figures again, but I'm pretty sure the M14 was like 1.1 times as expensive as the M1, not 3 times as expensive. It was mediocre, though.F-35 will hopefully not be that bad. It at least isn't a warmed over, like, F-117 or something. In general, though, his argument checks out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Belesarius Posted October 24, 2015 Author Report Share Posted October 24, 2015 http://www.duffelblog.com/2015/03/op-ed-i-sexually-identify-as-an-a-10-thunderbolt/ Donward 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sturgeon Posted October 24, 2015 Report Share Posted October 24, 2015 I am officially hijacking this thread. It is now about posting the absolute dumbest A-10-related shit you can find. We'll start off with this classic: Huh, it looks like they've basically whitewashed everything an F-15C can do, and they've basically restated "CAS/Strike" a bunch of different ways for the A-10. That sounds like fun, I want to try! ShamefurDispray, Tied, That’s Suspicious and 1 other 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donward Posted October 24, 2015 Report Share Posted October 24, 2015 So we better swap over all of our planes to Piper J3s? At which point Alaska suddenly has the most powerful air force in the world. On paper at least... Also. That I-sexually-identify-as-an-A-10-Thunderbolt link. He must now always make the sound BRRRRrrrrrrttt when engaging in CAS with his sexual partner. Sturgeon 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toxn Posted October 24, 2015 Report Share Posted October 24, 2015 Things get rocky when it sexually identifies as a tunguska. Tied 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Belesarius Posted November 10, 2015 Author Report Share Posted November 10, 2015 Increased 'demand signal' (Jeeze, buzzword much?) has the Chair Force considering delaying the A-10's retirement. http://www.janes.com/article/55895/usaf-considers-a-10-retirement-delay Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.