What does lite FW CAS bring to the table that RW CAS can't, other than range and loiter time?......
The absolute only thing these lite CAS aircraft bring to the table that the new Zulu or a 64D can't do is range/loiter time.
They cant observe and ID as well as we can with the new FLIR we have. Sorry I dont care how low and slow you can fly, I can kick around at Max RC/E around 75 knots and just fly bowties or left orbits while the CPG stays eyes on with the TADS and be ready to immediately push in and put steal on target from any point in that profile. They can do that. They dont bring anything heavier than a 500lbs bomb to the fight and with the scenarios we are dealing with most of the time you couldnt drop something that heavy for fear of collateral damage. Thats one of the big reasons for the new laser guided FFARs that we're developing. Apparently the Warhead on a K2A Hellfire is too big to keep from breaking windows and kicking up gravel and we cant have any of that. It cant deliver fires as accurately as we can.......
You all should not be so dismissive of the advantages of fixed-wing 'light CAS'. There are several advantages to the Super Tucano/AT-6/PC-9/KT-1's of the world over attack helicopters. Some examples:
-Wider variety of ordnance to include precision guided bombs (including Small Diameter Bombs) and almost all the rockets and missiles the AH-64 and AH-1 carry. Those 500 pounders might not be used as much any more but it is still nice to have them.
-More payload=more bombs/missiles/fuel.
-Greater range/more persistence. Why does that matter so much? Two A-29's that can loiter for 4 hours can do the work of 6 Apaches that loiter for a little over an hour.
-Much greater capability at higher altitudes. The Apaches had trouble at Tora Bora.
-Faster. Why does it matter for CAS? Gets you to the fight faster, which sure as hell matters to the guy on the ground getting shot at, waiting 5 minutes is better than 10.
-Quieter. The first thing the enemy might hear is the impact of the bombs falling on them, everyone can hear an Apache wandering around. Dont' think it is an advantage, ask Raul Reyes about that. Oh wait, nevermind......
Then there are the other advantages that might not be so evident to those that don't have to deal with them:
-Cheaper. The Super Tucano is half the cost of an Apache up front. With the required support for all of the unique systems throughout the life of the aircraft, there is a reason third world countries have lined up to buy the Super Tucano and only the richest buy the Apache.
-Maintenance. Much easier to maintain a slightly souped up fixed-wing trainer than a purpose built attack helo (see above).
-Systems. Much more 'plug and play'. Need a new EO/IR system? Buy a new pod and slap it on. Usually a little bit more than that with a helo.
At last but most importantly in the case of
Imminent Fury, the Navy's A-29 program, they were going to have very experienced combat aircrew who knew the FAC(A) and CAS missions through and through, and that was the most important piece of the puzzle. Whatever they did not bring to the fight they would be able to call it in and control it themselves, part of the whole point.
There are disadvantages to fixed-wing aircraft as well but they both have their strengths and weaknesses, part of the reason we have a mix in our military. But don't be so besotted with your new ride to be blind to it's disadvantages or the advantages of other platforms. Especially when you come from a service that treats it's aircraft like flying trucks.
As for the Marines and 'light CAS' aircraft, it might be a good idea in the current conflict but maybe too much of a niche for them, they have bigger procurement battles to fight right now.