Ed Rasimus wrote:
:On Fri, 10 Feb 2006 15:18:39 GMT, Fred J. McCall
wrote:
:
:Ed Rasimus wrote:
:
::On Fri, 10 Feb 2006 03:08:52 GMT, Fred J. McCall
wrote:
::
::Ed Rasimus wrote:
::
:::The USN has a tendency to be a bit parochial about who is defending
:::them!
::
::Primarily because we're afraid that the Air Farce might do the same
::stellar job when they take over that job that they did for so many
::years in providing close air support for the Army. :-)
::
::Even with the smiley face at the end, that is patently absurd. I could
::introduce you to a lot of AF airplane drivers both current and dating
::back to SEA that spent a lot of time putting ordnance "in the wires"
::and working both at night and under the weather in support of guys on
::the ground. There is no more important mission.
:
:And I could introduce you to a lot of grunts on the ground that
:thought parts of the Air Force were being taught that CAS was
:something you did from 30,000 feet and would rather have the Marines,
:the Navy, or the Australians up there.
:
:Strange is it might seem, doing CAS from 30,000 feet today is the
:better choice.
Yeah, you lot were just ahead of your time, trying it 40 years ago.
:With modern technology it isn't necessary to go
:nose-to-nose with the bad guys at low altitude.
Depends on the mission profile. If you're self-lasing you can't be
clear the hell up in "God's Country".
:The bombs are more
:accurate, the delivery more timely and the response is available to a
:much larger area.
Variable. I'd still rather the guy up in the air had some good idea
of where things are on the ground before he just takes the hand-off
targeting and bombs the Chinese Embassy or some baby milk factory.
:It's still fun to see a fast-mover laying it down in front of the
:troops or an A-10 shooting over their heads, but it isn't necessary.
Again, depends on the mission.
::I have a foil I want to use at a meeting, but I need to make sure no
::USAF personnel are there before I do. It's a shot of a Hornet on
::final to trap, with the caption:
::
:: "If it was easy, we'd let the Air Force do it."
::
::You ought to put up a video clip of Baghdad in the middle of the night
::with all of those missile trails and tracers then one of Sadaam's Hq
::buildings being excised from amidst the neighborhoods without
::collateral damage by an F-117, B-2 or F-15E. The caption can be:
::
:: "If the Navy could reach it, we wouldn't have to do it."
:
:Except, of course, that would be preposterous since the Navy could and
:did 'reach it'. We didn't have 5 carriers over there for sport,
:sport.
:
:Until the Navy gets stealthy, there are going to be a lot of high
:value targets that can't get serviced.
This is what 'stand-off' is for.
:We operate a lot more jointly today than we ever have in the past.
:That means USAF, USN, USMC, Army Aviation, and Allied nations get
:integrated into the battle plan. Nobody does it alone, Sport.
Now try telling me something I don't know, Sport.
Oh, and USN and USMC assets are still pretty likely to 'push back'
because they think your plan is sloppy, Sport.
::No one ever won a war by "out-landing" the enemy.
:
:Uh, that's how you win the air war. If a higher percentage of your
:take-offs end in landings than the enemy can manage, you get air
:superiority.
:
:That is a different spin than the first statement. Do all the cats and
:traps you want, but if you don't put iron on targets you don't win the
:war. Yes, you always need to come home at the end of the
:mission--failure to do so is a victory for the other side. But there
:have been enough AF exchange guys landing on boats to make your first
:statement a bit of hyperbole.
It's a ****ing JOKE, Ed. Get over it!
Gods, you powder blue types get all up yourselves and cry SO easily.
:Hell, I even had a USN exchange guy as one of my IPs when I went
:through F-105 training. He holds a couple of distinctions beyond just
:imparting some wisdom to me in my youth--he was later skipper of the
:Blues and tragically he was the last fixed wing operator to be lost in
:the Vietnam War. Harley Hall.
:
::Besides, why would
::you want to fight a war from any place without a bar?
:
:Well, there is that. (?)
:
:A good point, particularly with consideration of today's theaters of
perations.
:
:[And this might explain that issue that so many grunts had with USAF
:CAS. :-)]
:
:Still not funny. I've had a lot of grunts buy me drinks when they
:found out my specialty. And, if we're talking about threat exposure,
:I'd point you toward a list of the services of returning POWs for the
:last several wars.
See above.
Sense of Humor - If you can't get one through USAF supply, I'm sure
they're available over on the Navy side. Just another thing you lot
will have to bludge off us.
Oh, and there *is* still a serious aspect to that when you go back to
SE Asia days. Why do you think they took Marine Air away from just
supporting Marines (and why were Marines upset about this and Army
guys real happy)?
--
"May God have mercy upon my enemies; they will need it."
-- General George S Patton, Jr.