U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Military Life and Issues
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
 
Old 04-13-2017, 09:33 PM
 
203 posts, read 68,451 times
Reputation: 277

Advertisements

Found this interesting video and wanted the thoughts of those with experience:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_up7IHd3LDs
Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-14-2017, 08:12 AM
 
Location: New Mexico U.S.A.
22,755 posts, read 34,376,943 times
Reputation: 26405
Quote:
Originally Posted by Debnor View Post
Found this interesting video and wanted the thoughts of those with experience:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_up7IHd3LDs
1. I could not find the entire approximately 3+ hour testimony. You present a less than 5 minute snippet of that testimony.

2. I had the pleasure of meeting United States Senator John McCain twice during my 22+ year Army career.

3. I hope you did not come here to bash Senator McCain. Not knowing the whole issue, I would stand behind him...
__________________



Terms of Service: http://www.city-data.com/forumtos.html


Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-14-2017, 09:42 AM
 
Location: SW OK (AZ Native)
11,471 posts, read 5,181,337 times
Reputation: 5094
Quote:
Originally Posted by Poncho_NM View Post
1. I could not find the entire approximately 3+ hour testimony. You present a less than 5 minute snippet of that testimony.

2. I had the pleasure of meeting United States Senator John McCain twice during my 22+ year Army career.

3. I hope you did not come here to bash Senator McCain. Not knowing the whole issue, I would stand behind him...
Same here... he was present at my commissioning, and at Barry Goldwater's funeral. (Barry, I mean. General Goldwater administered my oath.) A very good man. His grilling of Secretary James was harsh but he wanted facts (and was protecting the largest A-10 base in the USAF). It had to be abrupt and to-the-point.


What side do I take? Neither. That interview is old business. I did fly the A-10 as my first assignment after UPT, loved it, but it's not a suitable aircraft in any environment other than very reduced threat areas such as Afghanistan.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-15-2017, 09:40 AM
 
Location: Texas Hill Country
389 posts, read 141,571 times
Reputation: 821
First, a quick history:
Quote:
After 1947, the USAF believed that strategic airpower could decide wars, whether global or local. Destruction of enemy will and industrial capacity through conventional or nuclear means would result in victory. Control over nuclear weapons passed to the Air Force because of the connection of such weapons with the concept of strategic bombing.

Ground support also fell under the purview of the new Air Force. However, the Air Force did not take to this mission with the same enthusiasm it exhibited for strategic bombing. Ground support inherently involved collaboration with the Army and consequently subjection to Army aims. Autonomy and the glory of victory would go to the Army, rather than to the Air Force. Still, the Air Force ensured that it would have a role in ground support operations through the 1947 Key West Agreement, which mandated that fixed-wing aircraft would remain under Air Force, rather than Army, control.
The A-10 was designed as close air support for ground forces. It's slow, so it has better time on target. Being slow, it's more vulnerable to anti-aircraft interdiction, so the cockpit is titanium for better protection. It's not a fighter aircraft, so it's not considered "sexy" by the fighter mafia who've run the USAF for decades.

The USAF thinks it's time has come and gone, and wants to replace it with fast and sexy.

The ground forces love it, because it actually supports ground forces. It's incredible firepower is an awesome thing to behold from underneath and behind it. It also tends to arrive rather quietly, then its engines blast mightily as it flies past, doing major damage along its path. Yeah, we ground types do love this aircraft.

When the USAF first proposed retiring the A-10, a number of senior Army officials proposed transferring the entire fleet and all personnel to the Army, since its close air support mission is so important to the Army.

The USAF had major heart palpitations over the very idea that Army would dare to go against the Key West Agreement. So it's kept the A-10 in the inventory while it develops other faster, sexier aircraft that may or may not provide true close air support. Remember, CAS is not sexy to the Air Force.

One argument against the A-10 is that it's an old airframe and costs a bunch to maintain. True, but then how does the USAF logically counter that argument when the B-52 airframe is so much older and still remains in the inventory (one of my Zoomie friends claimed he flew the same airframe his dad had flown)? Answer: The B-52 is a strategic bomber, which is one of the USAF's main missions, and therefore is sexy.

Both service positions are right. The USAF doesn't want to fly something it thinks is too slow, and doesn't want to do CAS, anyway. The Army needs serious CAS, and has had to configure as many rotary wing aircraft as it can to do the job the USAF doesn't want to do.

The Key West Agreement is long outmoded. Only the USAF still cares about it, and only that part that applies to strategic bombing and fighters.

The A-10 or a very similar CAS airframe should belong to the services (USA and USMC) who need it, not to a service that wants the glory but not the responsibility.

I love my Zoomie buddies, but let's be real here, folks. Y'all really don't want to have to coordinate with us ground types, so let us protect ourselves with fixed or rotary wing CAS airframes. It won't take away any of the USAF's awesomeness in its preferred missions.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-15-2017, 11:35 AM
 
4,585 posts, read 5,075,807 times
Reputation: 8070
^^^

Concur

As to the briefing to Congress, they always are contentious and no one with any sense wants to go before Congress. Yet it is Congress' oversight role to haul in the executive branch to explain things to Congress' satisfaction

On what was said, see above post. army loves close air support, AF loves other missions. Troops love the warthog and IMO this mission should go Army USMC

As to Sen McCain's demeanor, I would much rather have him asking hard questions in Senate committee hearings than rushing to a microphone stating his opinion on whatever is the issue of the day
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-15-2017, 11:59 AM
 
Location: St Paul, MN
279 posts, read 114,948 times
Reputation: 504
OP, if you are looking for a political discussion, you need to post this in the Politics forum.
Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


 
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:
Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Military Life and Issues
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2017, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32 - Top