Asymmetric warfare and United States military aviation

Triton

Donald McKelvy
Senior Member
Joined
14 August 2009
Messages
9,707
Reaction score
2,061
Website
deeptowild.blogspot.com
If future conflicts fought by the United States are expected to be asymmetric warfare, should the United States military be investing in manned light attack and COIN aircraft? Such as refurbishing/updating the OV-10 Bronco and the OV-1 Mohawk? Investing in Lockheed Martin/Hawker Beachcraft AT-6B Texan II or Embraer/Sierra Nevada A-29 Super Tucano aircraft? Or developing the next generation of COIN aircraft? US Aircraft A-67 Dragon? Or do UAV platforms such as the General Atomics MQ-1 Predator, General Atomics MQ-9 Reaper etc. do a better job in the asymmetric battle space? Thoughts?
 
To my opinion, we won't see refurbished Broncos or Mohawks and not even AT-6 Texans or
Super Tucanos in the future. It's not so much because of their military usefulness, but of political
reasons and all those types, although based on "old" airframes, would add a "new" type to the
inventory. That may be harder to press home politically in our cash-strapped times (especially
if not "invented here"), than modifying an existing one. And those parts of the industry developing
UAV/UCAV and small and smart weapons seem to be in a much more favourite position in the
moment. And there are still armed helicopters, having at least two pairs of eyes for direct use over
the battlefield and actually put in harm's way.
So, to my opinion, we'll see more UCAV and more weapons integrated for them (why not even a fixed
machine gun for use as a gunship à la "Spectre" ?) and more things like the Griffin/Harvest Hawk
(see http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,7402.0.html ) or the laser guided 70mm
rocket, fired from what essentially are transports circling in a safe distance.
 
I think UCAV provides the most sensible solution towards asymmetric warfare and the US, in terms of ability to stay over the area of conflict longer than manned light attack alternatives.
Add in the pilotless feature, which vastly reduces the potential for US casualties a la Black Hawk Dawn and Mogadishu....
The current UAV platforms have shown their worth in Afghanistan and elsewhere so why turn away from a proven method towards manned alternatives ?
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom