CAS? What’s that?

| November 9, 2023

Looks like the Air Force is once again doing its schizoid dance over close air support (CAS.) I’m pretty sure I dated bipolar psycho virgins who were more consistent.

We all know the on-again, off-again saga of the A-10. The Air Force hates the damn plane and is doing all they can to shake off having to use it, claiming the F-35 is just as capable and can do the job just fine. Until, of course, anyone suggests that the Army take over the A-10s, at which point the Zoomies clench their pudgy little fists and cry, plaintively whining “but it’s MINE”.  (My apologies to some really stand-up AF guys for slandering your service – but…)

Nowadays the A-10 pilots themselves say it’s the institutional A-10 CAS knowledge, hard-won on multiple battlefields, that they really want to preserve – but the Air Force isn’t even formally teaching it so unless there is some serious tribal knowledge-sharing going on with the pilots, it ain’t happening. We’ve covered all this in multiple columns here, right?

They are replacing the Warthog’s 1200-round 30mm gun with a 187-round 25mm, and the seeming hours-long loiter time  with a fast mover that can loiter for maybe 30 seconds or so. We won’t even speak of the comparative cost of each platform. So what could they do to make the situation worse?

Tactical Air Control Party airmen are part of a special warfare job in the Air Force and embed with other services, such as the Army and Marines, to help scout and guide air support in the heat of battle. It’s one of the service’s toughest jobs and involves rigorous physical training and hazardous assignments.

But the plan to reorganize multiple units located at Army bases across the country into just two locations may cause issues, GOP members of the House claimed in a letter to Air Force Secretary Frank Kendall.

“Any soldier who has been in a ‘danger close’ engagement and has trusted a TACP operator to call in effective fires will attest to the mutual trust they develop through close integration,” the lawmakers wrote. “Breaking these relationships will create a gap in expertise at the expense of the warfighter and will force division commanders to assume greater risk across all domains.”

Rose Riley, a department of the Air Force spokeswoman, confirmed to Military.com on Tuesday that the service selected Fort Cavazos in Texas and Fort Liberty in North Carolina to be the candidate locations for the active-duty TACP mission, but she added that “a final decision has not yet been made.”

The Air Force is expected to reduce TACP by 484 airmen, and units at Fort Drum, Fort Bliss, Fort Riley, Fort Carson, Fort Stewart and Fort Campbell will be consolidated into the two existing units at the Texas and North Carolina bases, Riley said.

Military.com

Those first two are the former Fts. Hood and Bragg, for you non-PC old folks.

The Good Idea Fairy is alive and well.

Category: "Teh Stoopid", Air Force, Army, Marine Corps

31 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
11B-Mailclerk

Re-integrate Air Force back into Army and problem solved.

MustangCPT

Yeah, it would be funny to see the culture shock, though. And I say that as a prior enlisted Airman. 🤣

fm2176

I kind of understand the call for a separate Department, but I kind of don’t at the same time. The Navy and Marine Corps have a unique relationship, but both fall under the Department of the Navy. Makes sense…expeditionary forces capable of projecting power at sea and on foreign shores. Oh, and each of those branches has its own specially trained Aviators. The Army and the Air Force stem from the same roots, but (outside of the strategic visions of the early Cold War and concerns of nuclear war) it makes little sense to have a third Department. Navy/Marines = mutually beneficial and able to organically complete their assigned missions. Army/Air Force = rely on one another and lack necessary resources to fully complete a mission.

Maybe I’m off-track here, but the Army needs air superiority and especially CAS to take and hold ground. The Air Force, while capable of operating from far-flung air bases, is a force multiplier at best when it comes to ground wars. Strategic bombing, air-to-air combat, intercepting unauthorized foreign aircraft? Got it, the USAF is great. Supporting the Infantryman on the ground in Syria? Maybe those A-10s and other CAS assets should be sent over to the Army. Everything I’m seeing is that the Air Force is missing the point of Close Air Support, where fire superiority and loiter time reign supreme.

Gecko

Taking on the A-10 briefs well, but it is a programmatic issue. The Army would have to add untold new maintenance and armament MOSs and schools to train them, not to mention building airfields, hangars, maintenance facilities, etc. Aviation is CRAZY expensive, even if you don’t crash the things. We are having trouble keeping the Apaches, Chinooks, and Crashhawks flying, not to mention the issue with recruiting WO pilots…

The Air Force’s primary mission is to gain air superiority and conduct strategic air campaigns- I think the Space Force will take over the Multi Domain Mission Command mission…

SFC D

My dad would vigorously applaud your statement. Career USAF but never forgot his Army Air Corps roots.

2banana

TACPs are cheap (it’s a dude with a radio) and are trained to control massive amounts of firepower to strike precisely where the ground commander needs it.

That’s called a force multipler.

But…da Ukraine needs that money!

5JC

It’s a pilot with a radio. Some of them don’t like being on the ground.

MustangCPT

No, the pilots that are in an Air Support Operations Squadrons are Air Liaison Officers. The guys out front with the Army are the TAC-P’s. TAC-P are enlisted, I had one run through some training lanes at Atterbury with my Platoon when we were doing pre-mob back in 2014.

Mick

“Tactical Air Control Party airmen are part of a special warfare job in the Air Force and embed with other services, such as the Army and Marines, to help scout and guide air support in the heat of battle.”

Ahem. Nope.

Air Force TACPs typically do not embed with Marine Corps units, because the Marines simply don’t need them; the Marines have their own TACPs. I’ve noticed over time that the Air Force wants to keep saying this (recruiting/advertising/propaganda?), but I’ve neither seen it, nor heard of it, ever happening. Could it happen? Sure, but it would most likely only be in some sort of hybrid joint special operations task force involving MARSOC, but even then, MARSOC has its own organic USMC JTACs, so they’d have scant use for an embedded Air Force TACP. As I noted above, USMC infantry units also have their own organic TACPs, so once again, there would be no need for embedded Air Force TACPs, unless under very unusual circumstances.

USMC TACPs consist of Forward Air Controllers (FACs), Joint Terminal Attack Controllers (JTACs), and Joint Fires Observers (JFOs). USMC TACPs have the capability to control CAS/Offensive Air Support, artillery fires, mortars, and Naval Surface Fire Support (aka Naval Gunfire). I was a ground FAC and led a TACP in a Marine infantry company in 2D MARDIV for almost two years, including a deployment afloat in the Mediterranean. We routinely controlled CAS provided by USAF, USN, and USMC aircraft, as well as artillery, mortars, and Naval Gunfire. With these organic TACP capabilities, I’m not sure why we would have wanted/needed an embedded USAF TACP around to duplicate our efforts. And the stale USAF argument that “you need an Air Force TACP to talk to Air Force aircraft” is pure nonsense. We never had any problems talking to USAF aircraft, and the joint CAS procedures are seamless. No issues.

In my opinion, the Air Force’s TACP capability should remain focused on supporting the Army, where it belongs.

Squidly

Simmer down Frances.

FuzeVT

Don’t be rude. Especially on Marine Corps Birthday Eve!™

KoB

I’ll betcha if The Good Idea Fairies that come up with these hair (no) brained plans to get rid of THE BEST CAS Platform EVAH were to find themselves in a situation where THEY needed some CAS and a fully qualified, dedicated TACP operator they would change their mind…REAL fast.

As I’ve said, many times before, I’ll take a Wart Hawg over a pig with lipstick every.damn.time!

26Limabeans

I get CAS everytime I use my CPAP.

President Elect Toxic Deplorable Racist SAH Neande

LOL!

EvilOne03

Gents,
I’ve worked this problem of CAS for the last few years of my career. I can tell you the problems facing the force are not as simple as made to seem, and sadly, the cause was brought upon by the service itself. No one doubts the veracity of the A-10 when air superiority is established. The problem is with increasing lethality of IADS, it cannot operate safely. The cost overruns of new programs have not helped the budget. Worse, when senior leadership announces the divestiture, factories that make parts begin retooling. When the service announces a life extension, the same parts no longer cost the same. The factory had to retool twice, and they will make sure they recoup that cost.
As for CAS expertise, when an A-10 pilot transitions to the F-35, as they are planned to do, does the pilot lose his/her memory? No! There are numerous A-10 pilot weapons school graduates with extensive combat time that transitioned to the F-35. What is more harmful is the fact the F-35 is not required to do CAS for mission readiness. While I love the sound of the GAU-8 (sweet music), it must be employed relatively close for the effects needed.
The problem China poses is very robust. Our entire thinking of war must shift. We will not own the skies, seas, or land; we may not have numerical superiority, so it will come to the pilots and the aircraft capability (and Mx to fix quickly, reload, and refuel…). Sadly, this is not where the A-10 is needed. The F-35 can sneak in and find targets and direct strikes (FAC(A). The strikes do not need to come from its platform. That is where the F-35 makes its money. But my counter argument is when everything is shot up, anything that can carry bombs/missiles is needed. Truthfully, leadership (past and present) is missing.
I don’t have anything nice to say about the TACP issue. Then again, when the CJCS and former CSAF does not have one Air Medal to his credit (never flew combat)…

11B-Mailclerk

The need for CAS is greater, not less, if fighting China.

They weild Mass as their big stick. CAS counters that.

Anonymous

If it ain’t a certain ’80s movie that shall not be named (which is Navy, otherwise they’d only have Iron Eagle and its worse sequels) the Air Force ain’t interested. Just sayin’.

Last edited 11 months ago by Anonymous
AW1Ed

It’s like the Air Force in on a highway to the danger zone.
Or something.

Anonymous

As Archer said:

AW1Ed

You really should know better by now.

Anonymous

Aw, my bad…

Old tanker

I still say that the AF was better managed and integrated in combat ops when they were a branch of the Army. Making them a separate branch has just emboldened the prima donnas in the upper ranks. They have forgotten they are not the be all and end all of combat, just a part of the overall effort.

SFC D

Yup. My dad was in bombers (B-17’s, B-24’2, B-29’s, B-36’s, B-52’s) his entire career. His attitude was always “Bombing is a wonderful thing and works great, but until there’s some poor PFC holding the hill, the battle ain’t over”. Not exactly the prevailing attitude in the days of SAC.

Jerry

The THREE issues the AF has with the A-10
1 – Does not have POINTY nose
2 – Not SUPERSONIC (no POINTY nose)
3 – Rear BIRD strikes (no POINTY nose)

FuzeVT

“Those first two are the former Fts. Hood and Bragg, for you non-PC old folks.”

Thanks, I thought so but wasn’t sure.

MustangCPT

I still say that if they were going to rename Bragg, it should’ve been named Fort Benavides.

Skivvy Stacker

I have the honor of quoting SSGT Mick Woolford (USMC, Ret.), who was an infantry platoon leader in Vietnam. I take this from “Echos From The Halls” by Greg Stoner (DI, USMC, Ret.).
A-10 Warthog
…fires armor piercing rounds capable of tearing gigantic sucking flesh wounds in even the most formidable Soviet-built Commie bastard battle tanks…[it’s] also equipped with enough explosives to blow the Moon into about eight billion tiny inedible cheese wheels…it can survive having a 2002VW Beetle launched at it at extremely high velocity by a Russian-made Volkswagen cannon.
The real badass planes are the ones swooping in one hundred feet above the ground…launching missiles shaped like those giant oversized boxing gloves from the cartoons that give enemy commanders the finger before punching them in the balls.
If you don’t get the idea by now, this Grunt LOVES the A-10.

Anna Puma

How much will the USAF save by the elimination 484 slots? Probably not enough to keep one F-35 in the air for one hour.

They do NOT want to spend any money on CAS or related functions because it does not guarantee them a cushy job upon retirement. CAS is not sexy or expensive, the A-1 drones on by and wags its wings.

But the moment the Army makes noises of CAS, oh my gosh will they squeal like a bull getting gelded though.

Harry

I think they should all be reassigned to Fort Yer Mom’s House😁

Stacy0311

Take the easy way out. Transfer all A-10s to the Air National Guard/Reserve.
The real reason the AF wants to get rid of the A10? LockMart and the rest aren’t making big bank on it like they are with the F35, the B21 Raider and the rest. Therefore the A10 is a threat to post retirement jobs for AF flag officers