-
American F-16s Aren’t Supposed to Dogfight MiG-29s and Su-27s — War Is Boring — Medium
Automatic budget sequestration cut deeply into the U.S. Air Force’s training in 2012. Air Combat Command got just $3,1 billion—three-quarters of what it needed to fully train the thousands of pilots flying the command’s 1,600 F-15, F-16 and F-22 fighters, A-10 attack jets and B-1 bombers.
So the command did something radical—and with far-reaching consequences as American air power retools for fighting high-tech foes following more than decade bombing insurgents in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Air Combat Command stripped certain airplanes of many of their missions, thus cutting back on the number of flight hours a particular pilot needed to be officially war-ready. Air-to-air dogfighting and low-altitude maneuvering suddenly became much rarer skills.
Perhaps most interestingly, the command essentially barred F-16s—at a thousand strong, America’s most numerous fighter—from engaging any enemy jet newer than a 1970s-vintage MiG-23.
via American F-16s Aren’t Supposed to Dogfight MiG-29s and Su-27s — War Is Boring — Medium.
Here’s the funny thing about the F-16. Designed from Day 1 to be the most maneuverable fighter around, the Air Force has never really treated it as a fighter. It’s always been more of a light attack aircraft. To be sure, it has always had, and continues to have an impressive air to air capability. But a look at the US air campaigns of the past 30 years shows the Fighting Falcon has been primarily used as a striker, and left the air to air mission largely to the F-15 fleet.
So while we would, in an ideal world, continue to train F-16 crews for both the air to air mission and the air to ground mission, given the limited resources, it makes sense to actually focus on the mission they’re most likely to actually be tasked with.
-
U.S. Navy Expects Further Orders of Boeing
Chief of Naval Operations Admiral Jonathan Greenert said the Navy was reviewing its inventory of tactical aircraft, including Growlers and strike fighters, to ensure its electronic attack needs were met.
Congress, responding to an “unfunded priority” list submitted by the Navy earlier this year, is poised to approve orders of 12 more EA-18G Growlers in the fiscal 2015 budget, which will help Boeing extend the production line for the jets in St. Louis through 2017.
via U.S. Navy Expects Further Orders of Boeing.
For many years, back in the Prowler days, the Electronic Attack squadrons only had four jets. In recent years, with shrinking numbers of air wings, though, the Navy has gone to five jets in a VAQ squadron. All the EA-18G squadrons have five planes.
Even with five birds, a squadron is hard pressed to have more than one or two birds up in the air at any one time. Now, if the air wing is only supporting one strike, that’s not a major issue. But in today’s environment, guided munitions mean a carrier can launch widely dispersed attacks at several targets. While the Growler can cover a lot of ground, even it has a finite limit to just how much it can do. Further, the Navy is learning that the EA mission is more than just jamming radars. The uses keep expanding.
At the same time, the total numbers of tactical aircraft on a carrier deck is decreasing, leaving a fair bit of room for a few more aircraft.
And so, the Navy is taking a long hard look at possibly increasing the size of its Growler squadrons to as many as seven or eight aircraft each.
It would love to do so, but the problem is money and manpower. First off, money to buy the additional jets needed. Right now, the desire for additional jets is unfunded. The Navy is kinda sorta hoping the Congress will add the money over and above the Navy’s budget request. And it just might.
The second issue, manpower, is a little trickier. It takes time, money, and planes to expand the Growler community. There is already a chronic shortage to tactical fast jet aircrew in Naval Air, and it’s not looking to get any better. An increase in the total numbers of TacAir crews is going to be hard to achieve. But the payoff, in greater capability, is a laudable goal. It just remains to be seen if it is a realistic goal.
-
Piracy off the Coast of Spain
Well, Greenpeace would say it’s a peaceful protest in support of environmental awareness. But from where I sit, the harassment and interdiction of lawful shipping and commerce at sea is nothing but piracy. And it would appear that the Spanish Navy has had enough of Greenpeace’s antics.
-
Load HEAT- Amy Jo Johnson
I’m going to tell you something. I’ve seen far more of the Mighty Morphin’ Power Rangers than someone my age typically would. It turns out, when our local mess hall installed big screen televisions, for some reason, MMPR always seemed to be on during meal time. Dunno why. But it was fun to watch some mindless entertainment while considering just what the mystery meat of the day was. And of the MMPR, who can forget the Pink Ranger, the lovely Amy Jo Johnson.
-
Daily Dose of Splodey
-
Early Apaches
How many times have we discussed the post-Vietnam era weapon acquisition of the “Big Five?” The M1 tank, M2/M3 Bradley, the MIM-104 Patriot missile system, the UH-60 Blackhawk transport helicopter, and the AH-64 Apache attack helicopter were all key components of the modernization of the Army after a generation of procurement lost to Vietnam.
We like to think of the Apache as being cutting edge technology. And to some extent it really still is. But we do have to acknowledge that it first flew in 1975.
This video touting the survivability of the Apache shows improvements to the weapons, countermeasures, and survivability of the Apache over its predecessor, the AH-1.
Sharp observers will note that the YAH-64 shown differed in a couple significant ways from today’s production model. The horizontal stabilizer used to be mounted at the top of the tail, but is now at the bottom. The profile of the nose has changed somewhat, as the YAH-64 didn’t have the complete TADS/PNVS installed. The sponsons along the nose are longer on the production model.
Production models also have far better Radar Homing and Warning devices and flare/chaff dispensers.
Still, the Apache is not invulnerable. But it was a great improvement over the limitations of the preceding AH-1 Cobra family of helicopters.
-
Grumman at War
Spill mentioned today that with the retirement of the Prowler, the only Grumman aircraft on US decks now will be the E-2 Hawkeyes and C-2 Greyhounds. Mind you, the E-2 will be around till at least 2045. But there was a time when the word “Grumman” was synonymous with carrier aviation.
-
Home is the Prowler, Home from the Sea.
With yesterday’s return of VAQ-134 to Naval Air Station Whidbey Island, a forty year history of Prowler deployments aboard US Navy aircraft carriers has come to an end.
KING5 News had a nice little video of the return.
The Marines will continue to operate the EA-6B for several more years, but for the Navy, the Electronic Attack mission will now be solely in the hands of the EA-18G Growler.
I moved to NAS Whidbey in 1973, when the Prowler was virtually brand new. From childhood to today, there have always been Prowlers. Oh, how I miss the days of my youth with Intruders and Prowlers in the skies over my home.
-
The Defense of the West-SeaCoast Fortifications
Unlike the eastern seaboard, the western coast of the continental United States has relatively few major ports. From south to north, the main seaports include San Diego, Los Angeles, San Francisco, the Columbia River, and Puget Sound. There are others, but those are the “Big Five” handling the majority of seagoing vessels.
Interestingly, all five are quite suited to seacoast defense. Depending on the time in question, Los Angeles and Puget Sound might have posed a challenge for the defender, but by the Endicott period, the guns and mines available were quite suitable to close off each port.
Craig has an interesting post on the concerns the Union had for the security of San Francisco during the Civil War. At that time, San Francisco was by far the most significant western port, and as the shipping point for the vast majority of California gold rush gold that was financing the Union, could have made a very attractive target for a Confederate raider, or an adventurous foreign power, say England.
All of this was known by authorities in Washington. In 1856 a survey of the terrain brought back numerous recommendations to fortify the bay. Those included additional batteries to supplement Fort Point and located on Alcatraz, Yerba Beuna, and Angel Islands, Point San Jose, and, most important to the Golden Gate, Lime Point opposite Fort Point. I’ve highlighted some of those on a snip from the 1859 coastal survey map (which, by the way, indicates that someone had “cast a lead” into those waters to figure out the depth):
Similarly, last weekend I enjoyed the view from Cabrillo National Monument. CNM and Fort Rosecrans National Cemetery are today on the grounds of Naval Base Point Loma, but used to be within the confines of Fort Rosecrans, a Coastal Artillery post with several batteries guarding the entrance to San Diego harbor.
One of the interesting things about San Diego is that it has only one channel in or out. To say that Fort Rosecrans dominates that channel is something of an understatement. The seaward facing batteries control the approaches, and the channel itself was narrow enough that even a very modest minefield could completely seal the channel.
The Endicott/Taft period batteries consisted of 8 12” mortars, 4 10” guns, 2 5” guns (later replaced by 2 3” guns) and two 3” guns.

A mine casemate for a controlled minefield was also included.
To give you an idea how restricted the channel is, here’s the USS Chancellorsville, CG-62, passing through the channel.
During World War II, several additional batteries were added. The big punch added was a pair of casemated 16” guns at Battery Ashburn (aka Battery 126).
Arguably the most interesting two batteries were Battery Zeilin and Battery Gillepsie. Battery Zeilin was two 7” guns on pedestal mounts, while Battery Gillespie consisted of three 5” pedestal mounts.
Both batteries were originally training batteries for the US Marine Corps. And therein lies an interesting side story.
The US Army’s Coast Artillery Corps was responsible for the defense of the US ports and harbors and those of its overseas possessions. But what of advanced bases?
During the interwar years, having tasted the success of large scale operations in World War I, the Marines were soon relegated back to fighting in banana wars in South America, and providing detachments aboard US capital ships. In search of a raison d’etre, the Marines looked to the Pacific, and like others, saw a likely war with Japan.
They saw that any US fleet movement across the Pacific would entail seizing and defending forward operating bases. And contra our vision today of the Marines storming the beaches, the hope was they would be able to occupy undefended, or lightly defended island outposts, and then defend them against Japanese counterattack. Accordingly, there was a significant slice of Marine Corps doctrine that focused on seacoast defense of forward bases. And Batteries Zeilin and Gillespie were training batteries allocated for Marine Defense Battalions to practice their trades.
And apparently, the instructors at Battery Gillespie did right by their students, as Marines manning 5” guns at Wake Island suceeded in sinking the IJN destroyer Hayatuke during the initial Japanese landing attempt, the first of many Japanese surface ships sunk during World War II.
Batteries Zeilin and Gillespie were turned over to the Army early in the war. And while Fort Rosecrans was never called on to actively defend San Diego, it stood guard throughout the war. Further it was a major training center for the Coast Artillery, providing training in both seacoast defense and anti-aircraft artillery defense.
The age of aviation rendered the seacoast gun obselete by the end of World War II, and Fort Rosecrans was soon surplus to the Army’s needs. Closed in 1948, it was turned over to the Navy in 1959, and continues to this day to be home to significant naval activities, as well as the lovely Fort Rosecrans National Cemetery, and the beautiful and popular Cabrillo National Monument.
-
Stand by to stand by…
Erstwhile coauthor Craig reminded me of this old Army classic, the “stand by to stand by” scenario.
Let’s say you have a battalion function, a formation, at 0900. The company 1SG will order the platoon sergeants to have a formation at 0830. The platoon sergeants will order a formation at 0800. Squad leaders, not wanting anyone tardy, will order a formation at 0730. Team leaders, knowing their soldiers are squirrelly, will order them to report at 0700.
Craig will be using this scenario to discuss Sherman’s march to the sea later this evening at his excellent To the Sound of the Guns blog later today.
What kind of silliness have you had to put up with in the service or in business?