Quick.
What is the difference between Close Air Support and Close Combat Attack? Don't know? Well quite honestly I never even knew the term Close Combat Attack even existed! Read American Mercenary's follow up on his CAS article here.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments
(
Atom
)
A good explanation given by AM. In case that does not suffice, there is always the Transformers 1 movie. When they first encounter that earth digging robot near the egyptian village and call for support. Everything from Predators to the AC-130 comes.
ReplyDeleteQuestion isn't that, question is if Army was given the role of CAS, and the associated USAF budget, and given a free choice of how to spend it, what would they do, would they have more attack helicopters that can take off and land vertically, would they opt for something like the harrier with vertical landing, short take off? Being fair, A10 doesn't need the best runways though, so there is a good chance they would keep that.
ReplyDeleteOr would they use F35s that require good runways?
Maybe they even favour hybrids, tiltrotors like V280 valor with 8 Hellfire missiles and 30mm cannon, that can carry soldiers, sort of akin to the MI-35 hind. Or perhaps they just spend some of that money on more artillery, or direct fire support ground vehicles?
DeleteSomehow I don't think they would use what will probably cost upwards of 200M ea (by the time they enter service), single engine planes, that can only takeoff from non-dusty, well maintained airfields.
If the Army Starts using F-35s, the Air Force will be nothing more than a 187 plane F-22 collection and a niche bomber collection. Then Air Force pilots will put forth a case to call themselves Special Forces as well.
DeleteI meant to imply they wouldn't use F35s, because F35s require nice, shiny, long, clean runways which may not be available, big logistics problems, and are extremely expensive, they may be able to get 20-40 155mm SP-Artillery for that price, with a 50KM range using Base-bleed or rocket assist, that works out too between 280x280KM or 396x396KM of coverage! That is a big trade-off for having an F35, especially when F35 ammunition cost like 200K a missile!!!!!
DeleteYes I know, big difference between 30mm cannonfire, and massive 155mm artillery shells, the shells are more comparison of A10 missiles, but you could get submunition shells that are less lethal! And you could get more 35-75mm equiped vehicles for direct-fire support, or even smaller level mortar units equiped with AMOS.
FunFact: For price of 20 F35@200M ea, you could theoretically get between 400-800 SP Art at 5-10m ea, with a coverage area of between 1,772x1,772KM - 2,506kmx2506km with 50km range.
More fair comparison though would be AH-64 apache vs artillery, since F35 is so ridiculous and not serious replacement, I I have per unit cost of 35M 2014 cost, if artillery cost between 5-10m ea mass produced, we get between 3.5-7 155mm artillery per apache. Assume that you can get 12RPM in first minute (not necessarily sustained, but because burst fire is faster), then you get between 42-84 rounds in a 1 minute barrage, before scooting! Ah-64D carries upto 16 missiles.
DeleteThose rounds could be carrying DPICM, or something akin to bonus SMArt 155. which carries two self-targeting/guided sensor fused munitions to destroy vehicles from the top. This is much more firepower than the AH-64D! What you are paying for is mobility!
So question is what is most effective structure for fire support?
Since we are talking prices and economics......the entire cost of the F-35 program can be used to fund an ISIS style Insurgency all over the World potentially covering.....Unlimited X Unlimited Square Kilometers (Metaphorically). You can take that much money and create a modern day mongol hoard/Atilla the Hun style Invasions over the whole world. The central Asian horse will be replaced by a Japanese Pickup.........well, if USA is funding, why dont we use F-150's instead. The cavalry composite shortbow will be replaced by the Kalashnikov, and Ghenghis Khan will be replaced by Al Bakr Al Baghdadi....or whatever his name is.
DeleteA calculation
DeleteOto Melara 127mm Vulcano ammunition can reach about 120 km (INS/GPS/Laser guided) with the 127/64 LW gun. With overlap one gun cover an area of about 6 x 120 km x 120 km / 2 (43,200 km²).
Afghanistan has an area of 652.864 km². With about 15 howitzers like the PzH 2000 the whole country could be covered.
Unit cost per PzH 2000: $4.5 million
$135 million to cover Afghanistan with two howitzers at each base.
How many F-35 and tanker aircraft would the US Air Force need to cover Afghanistan on 24 hour base?
umm, Afghanistan is not a big flat plain.
DeleteIt is full of mountains, valleys, and areas where artillery can't reach
Off the top of my head the Army can doctrinally use helo assets as a maneuver element, whereas in the Marine Corps the maneuver element is the infantry for the most part.
ReplyDelete