Quote:
Originally Posted by Sadistic-Savior";p="
How is calling for help from an A10 any different? Why not use the same procedure?
|
An A-10 doesn't require a ground spotter, for one thing.
Quote:
|
This has been one of my few criticisms of the military. I dont know of a solution except for training. It really needs to be emphasized...IMO....that they are all on the same side. The Marines are not their own nation. The Army is not it's own nation. They are parts of a whole.
|
Well, it's the same reason the U.S. doesn't like putting its troops under UN command: trust and competing interests.
Someone who comes up through the Army, for instance, understands ground tactics very well -- but not sea and air tactics, or the logistical and organizational concerns of the other branches.
Then you have the fact that at the service level they all compete for resources: funding that Navy destroyer may mean canceling an Air Force contract. So you get into debates over *how* to fight wars, with the Navy pushing a (naturally) Navy-oriented strategy, etc. That trickles down to the tactical level. If the Air Force thinks funding the A-10 will reduce service prestige or threaten that new fighter-jet contract, they're not going to like it.
Me, I always figured the answer was to let the Army operate the ground-support aircraft, just like it operates the helicopters. But the Air Force doesn't like that, either.
Quote:
|
Why? Swapping frequencies cant be that big a deal. there are already commercial products available that can communicate on that level.
|
The Army does not issue every platoon leader a radio that can order aircraft around. At least, it didn't in my day. It wants to maintain command control over the process. If every platoon leader can call for air support, the net will be overwhelmed with such requests. The usual procedure is for the platoon-leader to call up the chain to the battalion HQ, for instance, which actually decides where to send the air support. Cumbersome, yes, but that was how the Army made sure resources went where the *battalion* wanted them to go.
Forward Air Controllers were an attempt to streamline the process -- send the FAC where the battalion wants him, and let him control things from there, eliminating the cumbersome chain-of-command process. But the battalion gives up some operational flexibility when it does that -- to shift air strikes, you have to shift the FAC.