DATE:02/07/07
SOURCE:Flight International
US Air Force planners want irreguar warfare wing
By Stephen Trimble

US Air Force Special Operations Command (AFSOC) planners have called for the
stand-up of a new "irregular warfare" wing dedicated to fighting insurgents
and terrorists with an aircraft fleet numbering 44 airlifters, 20
helicopters and 20 turboprop strike fighters.

AFSOC's proposal, which is described in a recent internal White Paper
obtained by Flight International, would dramatically increase the air
force's assets dedicated to the counter-insurgency mission, which now
includes a single squadron equipped with two Bell Helicopter UH-1N utility
helicopters.

"The USAF should establish an irregular warfare wing capable of providing
assistance to partner nations across the full spectrum in developing and
employing indigenous air and space power to defeat irregular internal
threats," says the AFSOC document, which includes a foreword signed by its
commander, Lt Gen Michael Wooley.

In response to questions, AFSOC says: "The air force is looking at several
options to help support the 'Global War on Terror' and the concept of an
irregular warfare wing is just one."

But the idea for standing up an irregular warfare wing with a strike and
mobility fleet dedicated to the counter-insurgency mission is clearly
gaining some momentum. Earlier this year, Rand's "Project Air Force"
published a monograph also calling on the service to create an irregular
warfare wing within its force structure. In April, top air force leaders
also held a counter-insurgency aircraft summit at the Air University at
Maxwell AFB, Alabama.

The Rand study notes that the air force's only counter-terrorism unit - the
6th Special Operations Squadron - is over-subscribed by a factor of two to
four times capacity.

The irregular warfare wing concept seeks to introduce the first dedicated
strike aircraft for fighting insurgent forces since the Douglas A-1
Skyraider in the Vietnam war.

"One possible candidate for the light strike role is the air-to-ground
modified [Beechcraft] AT-6B. Other candidate aircraft include the [Embraer]
Tucano or Super Tucano," the AFSOC paper states. The authors add that a
Cessna Caravan "might be useful as a light mobility, strike, or
intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance aircraft depending on its
configuration".

Perhaps more important than the light strike component, the new wing should
operate four Lockheed Martin C-130s in a "heavy mobility" role, as well as
20 medium lift and 20 light mobility aircraft. The latter can be comprised
of Cessnas or EADS Casa C-212s, while the former might be the Alenia
Aeronautica C-27J Spartan Joint Cargo Aircraft.

Super Tucano:


nice

Why not just use a few A-10's?

Turboprops?

Hmmmm. Anybody remember the turboprop strike king from Vietnam?

Quoted: Turboprops? Hmmmm. Anybody remember the turboprop strike king from Vietnam?

They can re-tool up the Sandy...that might be kinda cool.

Caravan? nah. Beavers FTW

Quoted: Quoted: Turboprops? Hmmmm. Anybody remember the turboprop strike king from Vietnam? They can re-tool up the Sandy...that might be kinda cool.

Sandies and Super Tweets!  Somebody turn up the Hendrix!  Fuck yeah!  

Quoted: Turboprops? Hmmmm. Anybody remember the turboprop strike king from Vietnam?

Too short-ranged and maintenance-intensive. Sounds like they want something that's (fairly) cost-effective with a long loiter time.

Bring back the Hueys too.

+1 on the Skyraider

IMO they could also use a few Helio AU24 gunships.

They will just put hardpoitns on the T-6's and call it good vice buying the Super Tucano.

Although the Tucano has a fifth hardpoint and internal 50 cal wing guns (just one per wing), the PC-9 based T-6 should easily be modified by beech to this standard.


Looks like the Air Commandos are making a come back.  I do find it odd they want a COIN turbo prop coin a/c vice a A-10.

I thought the USAF used MH-60's and Pavelows for the SOF mission, not UH-1N's

Really a MH-60 in a gunship configuration could carry far more than a Super Tucano or a PC-9 based coin a/c.

Idea has merit though.  Throw in a red horse SQ to build an air field for C-17's to deliver the helo, CCT teams and A-10s/AT-29/AT-6 and its a nice little deployable asset.

I'd be curious to see if this idea has been run through the other components of USSOCOM.

IMHO more capability is needed, but that capability should be tailored to the lack of capability of existing systems, and the needs/missions of the ground forces(which includes plenty of Airmen).

Also curious to see what type of advantage a turboprop attack aircraft would have over the existing A-10?  I can think of several reasons, such as--we may not have enough A-10s, a turboprop might be more versatile as far as where it operates, etc.  The idea is pretty cool, though.

If everyone thinks they need this stuff-cool-break out the credit card.  I also know that all the services like expensive new stuff--just because it's new, fancy, and does something cool.

Oh well, what do I know--I'm just a dumb ass Army artilleryman anyways.

Quoted: Bring back the Hueys too.

The USMC and to a certain extent the USN still does

Quoted: Also curious to see what type of advantage a turboprop attack aircraft would have over the existing A-10?  I can think of several reasons, such as--we may not have enough A-10s, a turboprop might be more versatile as far as where it operates, etc.  The idea is pretty cool, though.

I'm almost positive that something like the A-1 has a much greater short/rough field capability. Same with the Huey vice the MH-60 or to a greater extent the MH-53. Smaller area required for LZ. But I am no helo pilot, so maybe one could chime in.

Quoted: Same with the Huey vice the MH-60 or to a greater extent the MH-53. Smaller area required for LZ. But I am no helo pilot, so maybe one could chime in.

Makes sense--now, would we gain more by giving AFSOC more helos, or by expanding the existing regiment in USASOC?    

Um, what about the MV-22?

  I'm not any kind of a warfare or air-warfare expert, but the idea of turbo-prop COIN airplanes are really cool. bring back leather helmets and white scarves too. That would just rock. Have enlisted ranks and Warrants fly them too.

 Sorry, I'll shut up now.

Turboprop is a great idea, turbo props can be more efficent at lower altitudes.  

Quoted: Um, what about the MV-22?

+1 million, the Osprey is mature and gives you turbo prop speed and helo VTOL, what more could you want in a gunship?

Quoted: Quoted: Um, what about the MV-22? +1 million, the Osprey is mature and gives you turbo prop speed and helo VTOL, what more could you want in a gunship?

A wing, or autorotation capability.  

Somehow, I think something like an armed Mohawk or the 'Bronco' is more what they are thinking of than the old single-radial-engine Skyraider....

They are going to want a twin, and they are going to want to load it up with all manner of intel-gathering sensors (stuff that can pinpoint enemy activity on the ground), not just weapons....

Quoted: Quoted: Same with the Huey vice the MH-60 or to a greater extent the MH-53. Smaller area required for LZ. But I am no helo pilot, so maybe one could chime in. Makes sense--now, would we gain more by giving AFSOC more helos, or by expanding the existing regiment in USASOC?

I think that is more of a political decision than anything else, it seems there is a movement to make USASOC more and more its own service, so giving it to AFSOC might not happen.

Piper PA-48 Enforcer.  

Quoted: Quoted: Bring back the Hueys too. The USMC and to a certain extent the USN still does

The AF flies Hueys still too, but in a utility role.  My buddy is a Huey pilot in the AF.

Quoted: Piper PA-48 Enforcer.   aircraftwalkaround.hobbyvista.com/pa_48_enforcer/pa48_01.jpg

Best performance out of anything posted yet, but I doubt if conventional gear would be used today.  Although, special forces guys are known to think outside the box.  I also like that its Aluminum, not composite.  Doing good composite repair in the boonies might be difficult.

Quoted: Quoted: Refit some OV-10s... and take the 10(?) back from batfe Most of them are gone.  They will probably go with something still in production or refit a civilian aircraft like the Grand Caravan.

An armed version of the T-6A makes alot of sense logistics wise.  Plus every new pilot will soon be trained on them already.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Refit some OV-10s... and take the 10(?) back from batfe Most of them are gone.  They will probably go with something still in production or refit a civilian aircraft like the Grand Caravan.   An armed version of the T-6A makes alot of sense logistics wise.  Plus every new pilot will soon be trained on them already.

It would, but the range on the T-6 is limited.  I don't know if they have capability for external tanks or more internals, but an 8-12hr loiter time would be key in this mission.  

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Refit some OV-10s... and take the 10(?) back from batfe Most of them are gone.  They will probably go with something still in production or refit a civilian aircraft like the Grand Caravan.   An armed version of the T-6A makes alot of sense logistics wise.  Plus every new pilot will soon be trained on them already. It would, but the range on the T-6 is limited.  I don't know if they have capability for external tanks or more internals, but an 8-12hr loiter time would be key in this mission.

If I were designing the weapon stations I'd put the plumbing in for drop tanks.  

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Refit some OV-10s... and take the 10(?) back from batfe Most of them are gone.  They will probably go with something still in production or refit a civilian aircraft like the Grand Caravan.   An armed version of the T-6A makes alot of sense logistics wise.  Plus every new pilot will soon be trained on them already. It would, but the range on the T-6 is limited.  I don't know if they have capability for external tanks or more internals, but an 8-12hr loiter time would be key in this mission.   If I were designing the weapon stations I'd put the plumbing in for drop tanks.

If I were designing it I would too, but if I were trying to sell it, no.  The military probably gos for the lowest bidder on their trainers, and besides adding confusing systems to a training aircraft, it would increase cost by 10-20k per aircraft

What about a Pucara:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FMA_IA_58_Pucar%C3%A1

Or an updated IL2:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ilyushin_Il-2

Quoted: Quoted: It would, but the range on the T-6 is limited.  I don't know if they have capability for external tanks or more internals, but an 8-12hr loiter time would be key in this mission.   If I were designing the weapon stations I'd put the plumbing in for drop tanks plumbing.

Not a good idea. If you are close enough to shoot at the enemy, he is close enough to shoot back.

They gonna put sirens on them ?  

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: It would, but the range on the T-6 is limited.  I don't know if they have capability for external tanks or more internals, but an 8-12hr loiter time would be key in this mission.   If I were designing the weapon stations I'd put the plumbing in for drop tanks plumbing.

Whats really scary is if they let Women fly them, what are they gonna do!??

I don't think you could beat the old A-1E Sandy in this role. It was a pretty tough aircraft (didn't it also have some pilot armor?) and it's loiter time was pretty good. Just build an updated version of it with the latest goodies and gadgets.

After doing some reading about the OV-1 and OV-10, why the hell did we get rid of them? Id really like and OV-10 it seems like an amazing plane.

Most of them are gone. They will probably go with something still in production or refit a civilian aircraft like the Grand Caravan.

Most of the OV-10s in the U.S. belong to the California Department of Forestry.  They are flown by DynCorp last I checked.  They're based at McClellan in Sacramento.  They're used as lead-ins for the heavy Tankers, SEATs, and Firecats.

Somehow, I think something like an armed Mohawk or the OV-1 'Bronco' is more what they are thinking of than the old single-rotary-engine Skyraider

OV-1=Mohawk=Army Platform, OV-10=Bronco=USMC/USAF/USN briefly(?) platform.

The Sandy isn't rotary engined, I believe its radial engined.

If anyone ever gets the chance they should ask Marc Gonsalves, Tom Howes and Keith Stansell what they think about using single engine planes as intelligence gathering platforms in areas where non-conventional warfare is conducted.

But I dont think anyone is ever going to get that chance

Quoted: Most of them are gone. They will probably go with something still in production or refit a civilian aircraft like the Grand Caravan. Most of the OV-10s in the U.S. belong to the California Department of Forestry.  They are flown by DynCorp last I checked.  They're based at McClellan in Sacramento.  They're used as lead-ins for the heavy Tankers, SEATs, and Firecats.

And there a bunch of OV-10s that still belong to the US, but are oveseas spraying Coca....

"The USAF should establish an irregular warfare wing capable of providing assistance to partner nations across the full spectrum in developing and employing indigenous air and space power to defeat irregular internal threats," says the AFSOC document, which includes a foreword signed by its commander, Lt Gen Michael Wooley.

Sounds like they're spinning this to hint that the role would not be in support of U.S. Forces, maybe to avoid criticism that we already have the assets we need.  Or if there's a better explanation for this statement, please let us hear from the X-spurts.

And what are they thinking of with space power?

Wonder what the cost comparison would be to outfit this entire wing versus the cost of an F22...

Quoted: Caravan? nah. Beavers FTW www.ftpaviation.com/images/1143air1.jpg www.aviation-news.co.uk/media/guardrail2.jpg

Can I hear a hellz yeah! I just started flying them up here in AK! Its a cool part time gig!

The caravan is probably the toughest and most reliable A/C. they should arm it up. The super Taco is cool too.

Families Want Scrutiny Of Drug War In Colombia
Georgia Pilot's Parents Say He Was Sent To His Death In An Unsuitable Plane. They're Suing.
By Bill Torpy
Return to Drug War News: Don't Miss Archive

Albert Oliver dug into a box of his dead son's mementos to retrieve a photograph of three flag-draped coffins inside the bay of a military cargo plane. One of the coffins carried his son's body.

Oliver stiffened at the sight, proud and angry at the same time.

"That's the end result of trying to fight a war with makeshift equipment," said the World War II combat veteran, who later made a living fixing military aircraft. "That's what burns me."

His son, Butch, died March 25, 2003, when the single-engine plane he was piloting slammed into the Colombian jungle, killing the three men aboard. The crew --- civilian contractors who worked for the military --- was searching for three colleagues being held hostage by Colombian rebels. The hostages, including Georgia resident Keith Stansell, had been taken when their single-engine plane crash-landed six weeks earlier.

Before America fought a "war on terror," it fought a "war on drugs." The Colombian campaign, like the war in Iraq, uses large numbers of private contractors, who often have military experience and perform jobs once done by soldiers. They are hired to augment a military that has shrunk since the Cold War.

Congress in the 1990s limited U.S. manpower in Colombia to 400 military personnel and 400 contractors. Commanders of the Miami-based U.S. Southern Command (SouthCom) now are asking Congress to allow 800 military personnel and 600 contractors, says SouthCom spokesman Stephen Lucas. The added forces, he said, would conduct more surveillance missions and train Colombian military.

Critics say the military uses contractors because they are expendable. "It's like killing an old stray dog to them, just kick them in a ditch," Albert Oliver said. "If they were military, it would be a way, way bigger story."

Butch Oliver, 39, who grew up on a dirt road in Spalding County, was a rookie pilot for SouthCom Reconnaissance System, a military-funded program that gathered intelligence on drug cultivation and Colombian guerrillas. He once worked as a mechanic for the program in Colombia, then flew corporate jets in Atlanta. But he never had a chance to ease into his new job flying routes over hostile mountainous terrain. As he started work, the program's other plane went down and he was thrown into the desperate search for survivors.

Parents, Widow File Suit
The families say the government and Northrop Grumman Corp., the defense contractor that ran the program, have kept them in the dark about the crashes. Butch Oliver's parents, Betty, a secretary on military bases for 35 years, and Albert, a civilian federal employee on military bases for 37 years, say they expect more from their government.

The Olivers and Californian Sharon Schmidt, whose husband, a Vietnam veteran, died with Butch, filed a federal lawsuit against Northrop Grumman, the Department of Defense and other entities and individuals. They say they filed the suit to find answers.

The suit alleges Northrop Grumman used single-engine Cessna 208B Super Caravans in the program because they were less costly than multiengine craft. The suit says government and Northrop Grumman officials ignored warnings from pilots that the planes were "underpowered and unable to provide a safe platform for the surveillance."

After the first crash, the suit alleges, Northrop Grumman and other corporate and government officials created a separate corporation, CIAO Inc., "to protect their profit margin by trying to insulate themselves from liability." Oliver and his crew were "terminated" by Northrop Grumman as they prepared to search for their colleagues and told their contracts had been switched to the newly created CIAO, the suit alleges.

The plaintiffs' lawyers are Jasper attorney Edwin Marger, a pilot who once worked for the CIA, and former U.S. Rep. Bob Barr, a one-time CIA analyst. Barr visited Colombia in late 2002 to inspect the anti-drug program and later wrote a congressional report that criticized the effort's "many stops and stutters" and lack of leadership.

Northrop Grumman spokesman Jack Martin Jr., citing "pending litigation," declined to answer questions about the program or the families' concerns. In the past the company has said it is cooperating with government agencies on the hostage situation.

SouthCom spokesman Lucas said he could not address the lawsuit or the families' allegations.

In a written response to questions from The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, Lucas wrote that the Cessna Caravan "has an excellent history in a wide variety of applications around the world. It was considered adequate for the missions required of the SRS."

SouthCom considered the program to be "very useful and productive," said Lucas, adding that using contractors allows reconnaissance "without deployment of military aircraft and crews, which were employed in other missions."

'A Suicidal Mission'
Butch Oliver was hired by California Microwave Systems, a Northrop Grumman subsidiary, to replace one of two pilots who had quit the program citing safety concerns, including the use of single-engine airplanes and the expansion of their missions to include heavier payloads and longer flights.

"It was a suicidal mission, almost," said one of the two pilots, Douglas Cockes.

Albert Oliver tried to talk his son out of the job in Colombia.

But Butch Oliver saw "the chance of a lifetime," his mother said, with excitement, fulfillment and a $100,000-a-year salary.

"God will take care of me," he told his parents.

Butch Oliver was hired Feb. 10, 2003. Three days later, a Cessna Caravan on a classified mission crash-landed after engine failure. Guerrillas with the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, known as FARC, captured the crew and executed the American pilot and a Colombian army officer. The other three crew members, including Stansell, a 39-year-old ex-Marine who lived with his fiancee and daughter in Colquitt in South Georgia, are still being held hostage.

"They could barely get over some of those mountains with that little plane," said Stansell's father, Gene, who lives in Bradenton, Fla.

Hostage Thomas Howes, the co-pilot, questioned the wisdom of using a single-engine plane for the missions in a documentary, "Held Hostage in Colombia," made by a Colombian journalist. "I don't think any one of the three of us would put our faith in one motor in the mountains over Colombia," Howes said.

In the documentary, the captives were stunned to learn a plane crashed looking for them. "I don't want anybody dying to get me out of here," Keith Stansell said. "This isn't a movie. This is real life."

The military classified its investigations of the two crashes as secret. The Olivers said all they ever got was a half-page investigative summary that says the plane hit a 100-foot-tall tree on a 4,400-foot ridge while on a nighttime "climb-out" from an airport. There was no sign of engine failure, investigators concluded.

Butch Oliver "had no business in the program, especially to be trained on the job," Cockes said. "Talk about taking a lamb to the slaughter."

Sanho Tree, director of the Drug Policy Project at the Institute for Policy Studies in Washington, said, "There's very little accountability, very little oversight" of the Colombia project.

Contractors, he contends, "keep the program under the radar screen." They are "disposable and they're deniable," he said.

And Tree says the eradication effort in Colombia is pointless, like "shoveling water."

Cockes, the pilot who quit the program, disagrees, saying the war on drugs in Colombia is necessary. He supports expanding the program and using contractors.

"The military has too much on its plate," said Cockes, who said he made $150,000 a year in salary and living expenses in Colombia. He said contractors were worth the money, often bringing more experience than many military personnel. Cockes flew 30 years for the U.S. Customs Service, most of it in drug interdiction. Tom Janis, the pilot killed by rebels, had 30 years' military flying experience.

Deborah Avant, a political science professor at George Washington University in Washington, said contractors gave the military "more flexibility." They also help avoid congressional and public debate and disclosure, she said, which could lead to a "more adventurous foreign policy if you have private forces."

The program in Colombia was changed after the crashes. The operation restarted under a different name, the Colombia Reconnaissance System, using twin-engine planes.

Those changes come too late, the families of the killed and captured pilots say.

Hope Remains Strong
In Florida, the Stansells cling to hope that the rebels will release their son.

They don't hear much. "Our government has hushed it over," Lynne Stansell, Keith's mother, complained. She estimates they've watched their son on the documentary video at least 50 times.

In Spalding County, the Olivers surround themselves with reminders of their son. A wooden clock he made and gave to his mother two days before leaving for Colombia hangs on the wall. The ticking soothes her.

A photo of Butch Oliver in a cockpit sits on a desk. The Olivers search the Internet with their son's computer for stories about Colombia. They tend to Maggie, his beloved Labrador retriever.

Butch Oliver died for his country, they say. So Albert Oliver went to Fort McPherson with the flag that accompanied his son's body home. The guard, using the ceremony reserved for veterans' funerals, folded the flag into a triangle.

It sits in a wooden frame on Butch Oliver's old rolltop desk in his parents' family room.

AgCat for Democracy Dusting

Quoted: "The USAF should establish an irregular warfare wing capable of providing assistance to partner nations across the full spectrum in developing and employing indigenous air and space power to defeat irregular internal threats," says the AFSOC document, which includes a foreword signed by its commander, Lt Gen Michael Wooley. Sounds like they're spinning this to hint that the role would not be in support of U.S. Forces, maybe to avoid criticism that we already have the assets we need.  Or if there's a better explanation for this statement, please let us hear from the X-spurts. And what are they thinking of with space power?

More money from Congress.

A few more AC-130 Spectre gunships would be nice. They're turbo props.

God I would love it if they brought this ugly mother back with 21st century avionics and armament...

Sounds like they want the same sort of setup they had when they were using the old A-26 "Counter Invaders" during the run-up to the Vietnam war.

Ive said it for years. Turbo props like what the Army calls Sandys would be perfect for Iraq type situations.

Lots of ordnance and LONG loiter times