Air Power in the New COIN Era

[Entropy]

<sigh>

Thanks for setting me straight. I made some dated erroneous assumptions based on the tales a couple of old school armor guys I know. My apologies on that.

[Rob Thornton]

Man - seems like we retake this hill every so often.

Re-reading Secretary Gate's speech at Maxwell (and worth comparing to his speech at USMA, and Secretary Geren's speech at the Marshall Awards), I don't think he was worried too much about the procurement end and hardware - he was targeting grey matter.

I don't discount the $$$s - but I point out that the materiel piece is the end product. If we let the product define and constrain us, the enemy gets the advantage at some point. I think most of the hardware pieces I've seen in action are mostly suitable to us and our range of requirements - the piece that is sometimes lacking is our ability to get past our constrained thinking. On the ground - its people that make it work, that innovate, adapt, cooperate, empathize and understand the operational environment - breaking free from service cultures and prejudices. I've got many an Army 19D, Logistician and MI bubba, many an airman (who flew ISR, EW, and CAS missions), many a seaman (the naval EWOs & logisticians) to thank. All of these guys broke the mold - they discarded the mantra "that's not my job" and adopted "support the mission".

If we get the "grey matter" piece right - the rest will follow.

Best, Rob

[Umar Al-Mokhtār]

Man - seems like we retake this hill every so often.

Weigley's The American Way of War?

[Ken White]

"Before we get too involved in who can pee the farthest"

said 120mm. He also said

"I put it down in the "even if it was forced upon those services, it was the natural result of ignoring/neglecting the future of conflict since 1989" category at the very least."

causing me to wonder if he was talking about DoD, the Army, the USAF or anyone else other than C. Krulak...

He also added

"...And the Army is not blameless, here. In fact, you won't finding me defending The Army as an institution."

I can agree with that...

Selil said:

"Oh, you don't have to believe me because the Air Force said it all first."

I think that's a dated document and the AF has fixed most of that. Last time the kid was in Afghanistan, he had a JTAC with his Platoon frequently and said the CAS was way better than his previous two tours in both theaters. I believe they're flooding the zone with JTACs and that many of the RAND recommendations have been or are being implemented

Umar Al-Mokhtar said:

"...more like better focus on the Nation's task at hand rather than advocating for future capabilities that have no application to the present situation."

Sounds good but I'm not sure the Marines are ready to dump the EAV, the Army to dump NLOS or the Navy ready to stop building Submarines. I suspect the respective Bosses realize that there's more going on in the world right now than the two big theaters; that it takes an excessively long time to develop and field new stuff and that there's no certainty in predicting war. We have the luxury to focus on the here and now; they do not.

He also said:

"USAF CAS is really good but Marine CAS is better (just as USAF air superiority has the edge over the Marines), so part of staying relevant to the fight is to learn from those who do it for a living."

True, good point. It also makes the point -- correctly -- that CAS is the primary mission of Marine Tac Air while it is a secondary mission for the USAF. AS, IMO, it should be and stay...

I agree with Umar on the C17s but realize that Congress is a part of the problem with that. As is Lockheed Martin.

I tend to agree with Hacksaw.

[ODB]

I've been getting caught up on this one. Notice a lot of AF bashing, just wanted to give them a thanks. They have gotten my brothers and me outta a lot of hairy situations. When your running black on ammo and A/C are stacked overhead to bail you out there is no greater feeling. Gotta love em' for what they do. How they get there I honestly don't care, as long as they are there, which they have been when they were needed most!!!

[Umar Al-Mokhtār]

yet as the old adage goes "squeeky wheel gets the grease" and it also may attract more than it's fair share of unwanted attention.

And since the thread specifically targeted Air Power in the New COIN Era and given the recent SecDef speech at Maxwell it was pile on time.

Sandbox can get rough like that.

Plus almost everyone had good things to say about what the AF does bring to the fight.

So what about those sneaky Sailors and all this talk about new submarines?

[120mm]

The problem with addressing problems is that you paint yourself into the corner as a "critic" pretty quick.

I think the USAF does a pretty good job in their specific mission, and CAS has become a "good thing" in recent years.

The great majority of the perceived problems between the services could be solved by practicing basic fundamental customer service techniques, and that is a two-way street. When I was assigned a FAC team in the early 90s, I made a point of treating them right, and in return, I got everything I wanted from them.

The rest of the issues are basically the natural result of the competitive nature of the services. The Army can't advocate for Air Force solutions, because that would be "blood in the water" come funding time.

In my fantasies, the USAF takes over the great majority of UAS operations because they insinuate themselves into the Army Loop, and push Air Force support hard. Give the Army more than they can use or expect, and I think the USAF may get the control they want and need in the field of UAS. The Army UAS guys I know don't particularly like being in charge of it, and I'm not impressed with the job they do.

Simply demanding that the USAF get control of UAS ops, and saying they'll let us know how they will support us doesn't cut it. It's an example of attracting more flies with honey kind of thing.

I wish I could take some time and actually elaborate on this, but as of yesterday, it's back to "head crushing time" for me at work.