"US Lawmaker Threatens to Give the Next Attack Plane" Topic

…to the Army.

"Frustrated by the U.S. Air Force's slow fielding of propeller-driven attack planes to support ground troops, one lawmaker raised the possibility of putting the project under Army control.

"My frustration is almost palpable at why it is taking so long to get this platform out to where the warfighters need it," Rep. Michael Waltz, R-Fla., said Wednesday at a Mitchell Institute event.

The House has already given U.S. Special Operations Command the authority — if not yet the appropriations — to buy such planes. But Waltz said the need is so great that perhaps the Army should also be given such authority…"
Main page
link

Amicalement
Armand

Good idea in my opinion should have been done a long time ago. Heck give them the A-10s too.

The USAF "Fighter Mafia" is a real thing, and still in power.

They're also fighting on the other front, against the rise of the drones.

Yep, give them both aircraft, to go with their helos.

Yep, give em to the Army.

Years ago, the USAF toyed with the idea of getting rid of the A-10's. The Army leaped at the chance to get them and the AF backed away. The AF doesn't like the CAS mission. They want fast airplanes and don't want to be bothered with the low and slow CAS missions. I worked with a unit that transitioned from A-10's to F-16's. CAS was one of their missions, and when they did it, they ID'd the targets from way far away and hit the area going as fast as they could! Needless to say, they tried, but weren't very good. The A-10's though, the Army loved those guys! Low and slow, long loiter times and Deadly on target!

I have long maintained that we should disband the Air Force entirely, giving the tactical nukes and air to the Army and the strategic nukes and bombers to the Navy. Bingo -- billions of tax dollars saved.

U.S. Army Air Forces – 'nuff said…

The problem is the Key West agreement, which says that the USAF gets all the armed fixed-wing aircraft.

I don't see why that should be a problem It's not like it's a treaty between two governments it an agreement between two government departments not a law.

Jeff Ewing – I tend to agree with you. Under that proposal, air and aerospace defense would logically be turned over to the Air National Guard of the state in which the particular asset is located.

I think the argument could also be made for shifting strategic airlift and air refueling into the MSC, with tactical airlift falling under the Army.

The more "green" airframes, the better, as I see it. A separate air force does not make sense; air assets should be directly allocated to the force they support.

Regarding the original article – an interesting development is the converge of speeds between turboprop light attack aircraft, and advanced vertical-lift platforms. The Super Tucano and V-280 actually have the same listed cruise speed! An attack tilt-rotor or good compound helicopter (anyone remember the Cheyenne?) starts to blur those lines in a good way.