This ISR and your ISR are apples and oranges.
Equipping a C-130 to do your job wouldn't be impossible, but Harvest Hawk does not, and will not equal EP-X.
-
Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?
Go here:
Edit Account Details and Profile
Marine "A"C-130s AKA "Harvest Hawk"
- Thread starter Flash
- Start date
This ISR and your ISR are apples and oranges.
Equipping a C-130 to do your job wouldn't be impossible, but Harvest Hawk does not, and will not equal EP-X.
I suspect you are probably right, but it does beg the question, "What and why are they putting on there?"
I'm as big a believer in "spray and pray" when it comes to doing ISR as anyone...but where does the interest come from? Most of what we've been getting requests for is FMV anyway...not traditional ISR.
On a totally unrelated note...damn...its nice to be back here.
I'm as big a believer in "spray and pray" when it comes to doing ISR as anyone...but where does the interest come from? Most of what we've been getting requests for is FMV anyway...not traditional ISR.
On a totally unrelated note...damn...its nice to be back here.
The slideshow in the link that Jarhead posted on the first page of this thread is the most informative and authoritative thing I've seen on the subject.
It is a capability worth having, but $22M is kinda expensive. I wonder what the annual budget/Marine is compared to the budget/Soldier. I'll bet it's becoming less stellar than it used to be.
I suspect you are probably right, but it does beg the question, "What and why are they putting on there?"
I'm as big a believer in "spray and pray" when it comes to doing ISR as anyone...but where does the interest come from? Most of what we've been getting requests for is FMV anyway...not traditional ISR.
On a totally unrelated note...damn...its nice to be back here.
ISR means many things to many people, dependent upon the user and the mission. "What?" could be any number of things, "Why?" It's the USMC, they like organic capability and self-sufficiency.
Just because FMV is the most requested ISR right now does not mean that it should be the dominant factor when considering new ISR platforms. While there is an enormous amount of focus current conflicts, as there shoudl be, we should not forget that there are other, very different threats out there and some require very different types of ISR to tackle the problem. There is still a critical need for the other types of ISR provided by the EP-3 and RC-135's, maybe not as much in Iraq and Afghanistan but it is certainly the case everywhere else in the world. There are a lot of platforms that do FMV and do it well, there are only a handful that can do what the EP-3 does.
The C-130 would not be a very good choice for the new EP-X for several reasons, the lower operating altitude being a big one.
I know that the the USMC has wanted something analogous to the Spectres for a while (and FWIW, I think they should have it)...
but I'm with Lawman. I'm not sure how strapping a $22 million module on what is a dedicated tanker/shit hauler "a bargain". Either buy no-shit AC-130s or not. This is a half ass/stop-gap that will invariably detract from other stuff the "J" was meant for. Still dosen't even have a bushmaster gun.
but I'm with Lawman. I'm not sure how strapping a $22 million module on what is a dedicated tanker/shit hauler "a bargain". Either buy no-shit AC-130s or not. This is a half ass/stop-gap that will invariably detract from other stuff the "J" was meant for. Still dosen't even have a bushmaster gun.
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.
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.
Probably wouldn't be to hard to hang a jamming pod or two on the wings and pick up the Prowler mission too.
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?)
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...
Viper Strike and Griffin, both will come off the ramp.
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.
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.
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.
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