Marine "A"C-130s AKA "Harvest Hawk"

[phrogdriver]

... maybe, but not as much as you might think.

As far as the Bushmaster goes, this is version 1 ... going off of what HQMC think of as priority, the 30mm will come with later versions. It will be an area suppression weapon at best and with 3 precision weapon options as of now its not something that many are too upset about. If I were to predict some larger bumps in the road in the future I would bet they start to show up when that thing gets thrown out the side.
.

3 precision weps? Hellfire plus what other two? Seriously, I think I've missed it. I've heard of Viper Strike bomblets--is that one?

As hard as it is to get a KC-130 for refueling Xs, I'm scared about their availability if they take on yet another mission. Maybe we need some more of them, especially since low-threat, high-endurance, ISR and CAS seems to be the mission d'jour. (sp?)

[Swanee]

The Marine Corps was looking at fielding something as soon as they could that could provide a) very long time on station b) ISR and c) some CAS capabilities. They did not want to buy brand new aircraft and the powers that be are not big fans of the way Spectres are employed. They wanted something that would be a CAS player, just like every other CAS platform, not having to play by the special rules the ACs play by. Being a "half ass/stop gap" product - well, we will see. First deployment will tell us a lot more about where we will take this thing. As far as detracting from the Herc norm ... maybe, but not as much as you might think. As far as the Bushmaster goes, this is version 1 ... going off of what HQMC think of as priority, the 30mm will come with later versions. It will be an area suppression weapon at best and with 3 precision weapon options as of now its not something that many are too upset about. If I were to predict some larger bumps in the road in the future I would bet they start to show up when that thing gets thrown out the side.

This is noting like an AC-130. The idea (as previously stated, but worth saying again) is to provide the JTACs a CAS asset - one he can work with just like any other CAS asset - that will be hanging around for 6-8 hrs for shootin and ISR.

Excuse my JO naivete but if that is the case why not change the way we employ them?! We don't have to do it because the AF does it...

[Herc_Dude]

3 precision weps? Hellfire plus what other two? Seriously, I think I've missed it. I've heard of Viper Strike bomblets--is that one?

Viper Strike and Griffin, both will come off the ramp.

As hard as it is to get a KC-130 for refueling Xs, I'm scared about their availability if they take on yet another mission. Maybe we need some more of them, especially since low-threat, high-endurance, ISR and CAS seems to be the mission d'jour. (sp?)

I want to say we still have a handful of planes to get from LM from the original contract. 12/squadron and I know we are not quite there yet.

Our community has changed quite a bit in the past 5 years, and now this ... I don't have all the answers.

Excuse my JO naivete but if that is the case why not change the way we employ them?! We don't have to do it because the AF does it...

What I'm talking about is that AC-130s have their own damn section in the JCAS - it is not the same process for using them. Maybe a JTAC here can go into more detail on this for me.

[jfulginiti]

I'm pretty sure the plan is to ADD 3 airplanes to each squadron.... bringing the total to 15. So there shouldn't be a burden on availability for normal missions. With DOD budget constraints, I think this is also the reason the 2 reserve squadrons aren't going to get J models as planned.

[Jim123]

Probably wouldn't be to hard to hang a jamming pod or two on the wings and pick up the Prowler mission too.

True from an engineering standpoint, and the Air Force already did that (jamming pods on C-130s) and picked up some but not allof the Prowler mission. There is some capability overlap between those platforms but they are not the same thing and each can do certain things that the other cannot.

I think it's moot anyway, because airborne EW is already coordinated by "higher" echelons- as it probably should be and will continue to be. (With due regard to OPSEC, suffice to say there are good reasons for this.) Therefore it might be a tough sell to start up a USMC EC-130 program when there is already a similar and mature USAF EC-130 program.

Now from a doctrine standpoint would the Marines really want an organic weapons system that is a single platform with significant (kinetic) fire support and ISR and EW capabilities? Kind of an open ended question here

[scoober78]

Probably wouldn't be to hard to hang a jamming pod or two on the wings and pick up the Prowler mission too.

This is a bit of what I worry about with this project. There is more to ISR than a platform and there are better CAS assets than C-130's I suspect.

[jfulginiti]

True from an engineering standpoint, and the Air Force already did that (jamming pods on C-130s) and picked up some but not allof the Prowler mission. There is some capability overlap between those platforms but they are not the same thing and each can do certain things that the other cannot.

I think it's moot anyway, because airborne EW is already coordinated by "higher" echelons- as it probably should be and will continue to be. (With due regard to OPSEC, suffice to say there are good reasons for this.) Therefore it might be a tough sell to start up a USMC EC-130 program when there is already a similar and mature USAF EC-130 program.

Now from a doctrine standpoint would the Marines really want an organic weapons system that is a single platform with significant (kinetic) fire support and ISR and EW capabilities? Kind of an open ended question here

Yeah, agree. I wasn't thinking the ENTIRE Prowler mission, just the specific one they're doing now. Slap an E-2 dome on top, strap some AMRAAM/AIM-9X on there too..... what else do you need?

[usmarinemike]

Yeah, agree. I wasn't thinking the ENTIRE Prowler mission, just the specific one they're doing now. Slap an E-2 dome on top, strap some AMRAAM/AIM-9X on there too..... what else do you need?

How bout a spray bar for defolient to get rid of those poppies?

Oh, and a cannon mounted under the nose a la Warthog.

And don't forget all the people in the back to work the mess. Marine NFO's just might have a shot.

[phrogdriver]

Viper Strike and Griffin, both will come off the ramp.



.

I know Viper Strike, but have been looking for a description of Griffin online and haven't been able to find much substantive on it. Any links or thumbnail description?

[mmx1]

Page 3:
http://www.quad-a.org/Conventions/Co...al-2%20(2).pdf

[heyjoe]

This all goes back to having an efficient COIN aircraft. We need the OV-10 back with an L-POD, upgraded engines, and avionics. Not the single engine crap they are offering up or Cargo C-130s with weapons.

Somebody heard you....or least thinks the same way.

Proposed new production OV-10X with updated engines, avionics and armament.

[Birdog8585]

read the wrong program req's = ima weetawd

[Lawman]

YGBFSM!! So by amphibious do they mean with floats or capable of surviving at sea? So then maybe they mean Amphibs??...oooo.

Been done before...

[Birdog8585]

We've had the discussion before -> (start at about #134) http://www.airwarriors.com/forum/sho...=137084&page=4

[Pags]

YGBFSM!! So by amphibious do they mean with floats or capable of surviving at sea? So then maybe they mean Amphibs??...oooo.

The LARA program was the original 60s era program. The current one is the LAAR program and it's requirements are: "for a tandem-seat advanced-trainer/light-attack aircraft able to operate from a 6,000ft semi-prepared runway, reach 180kt and fly for 5 hours carrying an EO/IR sensor, datalinks and weapons."