Best Air Support ?
- Thread starter toglmonster
- Start date
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 110
But how many teflonized teddy bears can a Super Cobra carry?
If the Apache can carry three times more in a single load, it might be the better choice.
How high to these teddy bears bounce? Will the firing aircraft have to take evasive action for its own projectiles?
Obviously, a test program is needed.
Let's start by forming a company . . . . how about T-Rux, Inc?
Jim
If the Apache can carry three times more in a single load, it might be the better choice.
How high to these teddy bears bounce? Will the firing aircraft have to take evasive action for its own projectiles?
Obviously, a test program is needed.
Let's start by forming a company . . . . how about T-Rux, Inc?
Jim
TangoTwoBravo
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 3,065
- Points
- 1,110
What's the range on a Brown Bess and do they come in different barrel lengths?
What is this talk of teddy bears? Two squadrons of Stukas, one million dollars in US funds and a regiment of those flying monkeys from the Wizard of Oz with crossbows and MNVGs is all that I need to end this conflict. Oh yeah, and a Sherman. No school like the old school.
And they said my methods were "unsound."
What is this talk of teddy bears? Two squadrons of Stukas, one million dollars in US funds and a regiment of those flying monkeys from the Wizard of Oz with crossbows and MNVGs is all that I need to end this conflict. Oh yeah, and a Sherman. No school like the old school.
And they said my methods were "unsound."
- Reaction score
- 26
- Points
- 430
Couldn't we find something that would be more flexible and versitile than MNVGs? I know Monkey Night Vision Goggles would be needed by this regiment, but what if we have to pass that kit on to the next ROTO? They would be kinda small, don't ya think? Or are they adjustable to fit larger heads?
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
Hey, don't be dissin' me, man. I need another tour and this sounds as good of an idea as any... Although I'll take your Sherman... ;D
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
Was told at one point that the Apaches were having a hell of a time with their composite rotor blades in the desert sand. They were being sand blasted to nothing and suceptible to delamination... and that isn`t a good thing. The cobras have (or did have) an older solid design that wasn't / isn't suceptible to separation.... so il'll have those 2 or 3 Cobras please.
Chimo!
Chimo!
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 410
Teddy Ruxpin said:
Of course you'll be getting a allowance teddy. The special air delivery for stuffed substitute pacifiers/maternal objects (SADSPAM) allowance bill is now before the Senate. Downside is it won't be cash, but payable in bio degradable certificated redeemable at various herbal and granola venders in the Lower mainland of BC and downtown Toronto.
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 430
OK to try and get this thread back on target....( not that the teddy bear idea is bad )
Lets think this through...out of all out CC130's there has to 1 or 2 that could accommodate the refit yes?
So lets work off the base of 2 with crews so that's what 2 pilots, 1 Nav, 1 FE, and I'm taking a stab in the dark here so feel free to correct me 2 Airborne weapons operators? so 6 total per aircraft so 12 in total for our "new" fleet of 2 ACC130's.. So with 2 aircraft we have 1 in theater with one rotating home for refit and crew swap so we would need say an additional 24 pers in Flight crews.
So is that sustainable? I'm sure short term it's very do able.
I haven't gotten into the benefits of having the ACC130 in theater because everyone knows why it's good and I could site some historical precedence for how it could have been useful in the Balkens and obviously in Afghanistan, plus it gives us even more independent operational ability.
So lets hear it doable yes....but why not?
Lets think this through...out of all out CC130's there has to 1 or 2 that could accommodate the refit yes?
So lets work off the base of 2 with crews so that's what 2 pilots, 1 Nav, 1 FE, and I'm taking a stab in the dark here so feel free to correct me 2 Airborne weapons operators? so 6 total per aircraft so 12 in total for our "new" fleet of 2 ACC130's.. So with 2 aircraft we have 1 in theater with one rotating home for refit and crew swap so we would need say an additional 24 pers in Flight crews.
So is that sustainable? I'm sure short term it's very do able.
I haven't gotten into the benefits of having the ACC130 in theater because everyone knows why it's good and I could site some historical precedence for how it could have been useful in the Balkens and obviously in Afghanistan, plus it gives us even more independent operational ability.
So lets hear it doable yes....but why not?
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 410
Are you talking about our existing fleet for refit? Could these airframes take the punishment of firing a 105mm?
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 410
What is the least amount of flying hours for the Herc's?
- Reaction score
- 5
- Points
- 430
Basic stats for the gunship can be found here: http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/ac-130.htm
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 430
Alright so American standard 13....
So then we need say 5 crews at 13 pers per crew for a total of 65...which starts lowering the odds of being feasible however If we "Canadianize" it we could in theory say lower it to 10 for a total of 50, some re-roleing of Officer postions and NCM training would be necessary if we made some FE's Air weapons techs, which also provides backup FE's to the aircraft in case of incident, As well if Pilots and Nav's were re roled and re trained your talking 2 skills sets per person.
So then we need say 5 crews at 13 pers per crew for a total of 65...which starts lowering the odds of being feasible however If we "Canadianize" it we could in theory say lower it to 10 for a total of 50, some re-roleing of Officer postions and NCM training would be necessary if we made some FE's Air weapons techs, which also provides backup FE's to the aircraft in case of incident, As well if Pilots and Nav's were re roled and re trained your talking 2 skills sets per person.
- Reaction score
- 26
- Points
- 430
I think that this is getting way outside our Lanes. The CF isn't large enough at this time to maintain this specialized equipment economically. If we were in a Total War scenario, it would be more feasible, but not in our current state. We need the Transport. These aircraft would not be able to change their configurations without a 'total' refit, and then they would be gone for good.
The numbers of C130's being talked about, will hardly fill the role of the numbers of C130's that being retired. In the end we will probably have fewer Tactical Airlift assets. I don't think the option you propose is possible. We won't have the aircraft to do it.
The numbers of C130's being talked about, will hardly fill the role of the numbers of C130's that being retired. In the end we will probably have fewer Tactical Airlift assets. I don't think the option you propose is possible. We won't have the aircraft to do it.
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 430
Well this is all in the realm of fantasy isn't it?
I mean for just a pure thought excersise lets think it out shall we, can we in thoery make this work? were only talking about 2 aircraft not a fleet, and 50 Air Force personel, I mean we havent even got into weapon systems or cost of maintaining it.
I mean for just a pure thought excersise lets think it out shall we, can we in thoery make this work? were only talking about 2 aircraft not a fleet, and 50 Air Force personel, I mean we havent even got into weapon systems or cost of maintaining it.
- Reaction score
- 26
- Points
- 430
As a Fantasy, I find it quite appealing and a definite asset that we would readily use.
As Reality, I am quite sceptical that we can afford the lost of even two aircraft at this time to this role.
As Reality, I am quite sceptical that we can afford the lost of even two aircraft at this time to this role.
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 430
Alright I'll play Devils Advocate in the realm or Reality.
2 Aircraft out of a fleet of 32 according to this document
http://www.jcaa.us/AA_Conference_2000/Th-13.pdf
That's hardly a drop in in operational capability for troop lift, when you think about the additional advantage of the gunship refit would add IMO. Now you take into account all the Crews we have standing idle waiting for aircraft to fly ( I haven't a statistic so I'm not sure how many CC130 crews wait for an aircraft's to fly, Air pers please advise) And you role them from troop trans to ground support gunship training and flying, and you do a continual rotation of crews through the cycle of troop trans and gunship.
Now the cost of maintenance isn't that much more expensive for the ACC130's as it would be for the regular CC130. And seeing as 15(?) CC130s are being replaced by new models it infact does't even change the maintenance hours for these aircraft, as 15 of them will need statistically less maintenance in terms of hours.
*Edit: Remember Devils Advocate..... And of course I'm not an Airforce pers so I could well be right out to luch with my estimates on somethings which is why I'm hoping some Airforce pers that haunt these boards will come over and set it all straight
2 Aircraft out of a fleet of 32 according to this document
http://www.jcaa.us/AA_Conference_2000/Th-13.pdf
That's hardly a drop in in operational capability for troop lift, when you think about the additional advantage of the gunship refit would add IMO. Now you take into account all the Crews we have standing idle waiting for aircraft to fly ( I haven't a statistic so I'm not sure how many CC130 crews wait for an aircraft's to fly, Air pers please advise) And you role them from troop trans to ground support gunship training and flying, and you do a continual rotation of crews through the cycle of troop trans and gunship.
Now the cost of maintenance isn't that much more expensive for the ACC130's as it would be for the regular CC130. And seeing as 15(?) CC130s are being replaced by new models it infact does't even change the maintenance hours for these aircraft, as 15 of them will need statistically less maintenance in terms of hours.
*Edit: Remember Devils Advocate..... And of course I'm not an Airforce pers so I could well be right out to luch with my estimates on somethings which is why I'm hoping some Airforce pers that haunt these boards will come over and set it all straight
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 410
Hit while you do present some arguments vis a vis the feasibility of the idea , and I’ll be honest I doubt I’m qualified to say if your figures are on or right the frig outta dere bye.
One other aspect even if it’s doable financially and physically (aircraft and aircrew available) is the political aspect. While we are making progress in shedding this misinformed fallacy that we’re just some organization of blue hated tree hugger who run around the world handing out stuffed animals and candies, we’re not completely there yet. To the great ADD suffering unwashed aka as the voting public it may be seen too aggressive as would A-10s and helicopter gun ships.
Planes, trucks and big honking ships we need and can sell to the public right now and old smiling Jack and the Birkenstock brigade really don’t have a leg to stand on opposing them. Let’s get them in the pipeline and slowly build up an attitude of spending for the military in their minds and then begin to ask for more exotic toys. Especially as has been pointed out these would be “nice to haves” not must haves.”
See I can be serious too 8)
One other aspect even if it’s doable financially and physically (aircraft and aircrew available) is the political aspect. While we are making progress in shedding this misinformed fallacy that we’re just some organization of blue hated tree hugger who run around the world handing out stuffed animals and candies, we’re not completely there yet. To the great ADD suffering unwashed aka as the voting public it may be seen too aggressive as would A-10s and helicopter gun ships.
Planes, trucks and big honking ships we need and can sell to the public right now and old smiling Jack and the Birkenstock brigade really don’t have a leg to stand on opposing them. Let’s get them in the pipeline and slowly build up an attitude of spending for the military in their minds and then begin to ask for more exotic toys. Especially as has been pointed out these would be “nice to haves” not must haves.”
See I can be serious too 8)
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 430
I can accept that premise as to why it's not a complete go at this point for sure, But I would also agrue it needs to be thought prior to our older CC130's being scarped completely. Because when they are you can't bring them back for a refit, they are well and truely gone, and then you are going to loose Troops Transport in doing a refit of available aircraft,
Similar threads
