"Jake McGuire" wrote in message
om...
"Kevin Brooks" wrote in message
et...
Well, if you don't even *have* a gun, that is not going to be a problem,
is
it? Of course, neither will the CCT (or its supported ground combat
element)
get the CAS effort they want either... As to the value of the guns, it
is
interesting to note that one of the comments that came out of the
Anaconda
participants was, "Every light division needs a supporting *squadron* of
AC-130's." Pie in the sky statement that may be, it points out the value
those ground folks placed upon aerial gunfire support.

It points out the value that the ground troops placed on AC-130
support. Which is naturally much more effective than fighter strafing
support, as the AC-130 has more, larger guns, on trainable mounts,
with dedicated gunners, and a very long loiter capability. This is
not the same as a fighter that can make two or three 20mm strafing
passes before he's out of ammunition.

Well, you kind of snipped away the related bit about the scenario where you
are well within danger-close and under a significant MANPADS threat during
daytime, which sort of eliminates the AC-130 from the running. The point
was that the groundpounders found the guns a better starting point for CAS
during that operation than PGM's. Are you claiming that the 10th LID and
101st AASLT DIV folks did not like getting that 20mm strafe support they
received from the F-15E's and F-16's that day?


OFCS, the separation range mentioned in a couple of the reports (one
from a
participating Viper pilot and one from a CCT guy on the ground) was
*seventy-five meters*. Do you want any kind of bomb going off that close
to
*your* patrol if there is another method entailing less risk of
fratricide
available to be tried first? I wouldn't.

There is a good point buried in here - namely that minimum
friendly-target distance is an important figure-of-merit for CAS
weaponry. It might also be true that the M61 is the best existing
fighter-mounted weapon by that standard.


It is hardly buried, if you bothered to read the previous messages in the
thread--it (being within danger-close range) has been a key point.

Your mistake is to assume
that this is always going to be the case. The Small Diameter Bomb and
the Advanced Precision Kill Weapons System both address this issue,
and address it very well. And if they don't do a good enough job,
then it's always possible to develop something better.

Your mistake is drawing the wrong conclusions based upon different platform
requirements, for starters. APKWS is a Hydra-based (or Hellfire based)
solution (neither is scheduled for USAF use), and just like the option of
using a gun pod, requires specific load out. In other words if your existing
CAS support package does not have it onboard when they show up, or are
routed in based upon urgent need, and the separation between forces
precludes use of larger PGM's, the ground guys are out of luck. OTOH, if
they have their trusty internal cannon the ground guys will get at least
some form of support. SDB is admittedly going to have a smaller danger close
margin than the current minimum 500 pounders, but even a 200-250 pound bomb
is going to have a danger close margin that exceeds 75 meters.


So if we have (God forbid) another Anaconda situation (and you know as
well
as I do that there *will* be someday another force inserted somewhere
that
will find the enemy in an unexpected place, in unexpected strength, and
find
itself fighting for survival), and our CAS stack is made up of Typhoons
and
STOVL F-35's sans guns, you think that is OK?

Depends on what weapons they're carrying. If they have a pair of 2000
pound JDAMs each, probably not. If they've each got 12 SDBs and 38
laser-guided 70mm rockets, then that's a very different story. And in
that case, having STOVL in the case of the JSF or another 15 minutes
on station or another 4 SDBs in the case of the Eurofighter are both
probably more valuable than the three or four strafing runs you get
from a gun.

Hydra is a rotary delivered weapon, and unless they change their plans to
make it a fixed wing package it is a non-player in the conventional CAS
arena (we are not talking helos here). SDB is still going to have a danger
close margin. So you are back to the question of whether or not you want to
remain flexible enough to provide gunfire support when the situation
precludes use of the bigger stuff. Since the gun also serves as a secondary
air-to-air weapon, IMO retaining it for the foreseeable future is a wise
move.

Brooks


-jake