In the future shot-down airmen may have to go it alone!

[Trailrider #896]

Kelly: Downed Airmen May Have to Get Themselves to Safe Areas By John A. Tirpak The combat search-and-rescue mission will be extremely challenging in a fight against a peer adversary, and the focus may have to shift to downed Airmen finding their own way to safety, Air Combat Command boss Gen. Mark D. Kelly said Aug. 3. The future of CSAR is “a tough, tough equation,” Kelly said during a Life Cycle Industry Days seminar run by the Air Force Life Cycle Management Center. The mission may have to change given the long distances and enormous expanses of water in the Indo-Pacific theater and the “speed, the vulnerability, and the range of our current rescue platforms.” - Air Force Times Daily On-line   In other words, if you have to bail out, you're Foxtrot.....Delta!   Maybe aircrews ought to be given a copy of Louis L'amour's, "The New Breed" as a survival manual. But that might only be useful over hostile land territory.  We don't have any PBY "Dumbos" anymore, and I doubt if any of our attack submarines would be used as plane guards for anybody floating around in a liferaft (do they still have those for pilots of single-seat fighters or even two-crew birds?)!!  Good luck if an airman winds up in the Bejing Hilton!  Great for morale, General Kelly!

[Okie Sawbones, SASS #77381]

That's a great recruitment point. SMH.

[DocWard]

‘Last of the Breed’

[Alpo]

Knew that title sounded wrong.

[Waxahachie Kid #17017 L]

Does our military even have any seaplanes on active duty anymore? I am inclined to doubt it. Helicopters work, but may be limited by their fuel supply, or air-to-air refueling availability. If one relies on only one solution, that may be a mistake. One solution may not cover all the bases. 

 

The current theory is that we have enough aircraft carriers that can get close enough to launch helicopters for the rescue. 

But...if even one downed airman loses his/her life, from this philosophy, would not that be a tragic mistake?    

 

Is the "no man left behind" philosophy being called into question because of time, and distance, and expense...or severe lack of a rescue system that might need to include some older methods/ideas/material?

 

If I was Kelly's boss, I'd have to have him come see me about his statement. I figure he might need to brush up on his K.P. skills.  

 

That dog don't hunt!

 

 

[Pat Riot]

Someone needs to dump Air Combat Command boss Gen. Mark D. Kelly into Afghanistan and leave arse there. That’ll show him. Moron. 

[Sixgun Sheridan]

Are they still issuing snub .38 revolvers to aircrews so they can at least fight their way back to friendly lines?

[Trailrider #896]

2 hours ago, DocWard said:

‘Last of the Breed’

Sorry.  My copy buried somewhere.

[Trailrider #896]

1 hour ago, Sixgun Sheridan said:

Are they still issuing snub .38 revolvers to aircrews so they can at least fight their way back to friendly lines?

No matter what they are issuing (I think there is a new snubbie semi-auto being adopted to replace the M92.)  Problem is not much good when faced with a Taliban or ChiCom with an AK, or several.   That's if you can even eject. Having trouble with the seats in some of the jet fighters.  Don't know how many troops in the belly of the Buffs nowadays...or whether there are enough downward seats, or if some have to wait until a couple eject and try to dive through the hole left!  Over Hanoi, there were reports of Buff crewmen being pinned in the belly by centrifugal force when the beast spun after being hit.  (See pictures of B-17's spinning in WWII and count how many of the ten chutes you count.   Yeah, Kelly, maybe you should take a refresher course in E&E, with maybe tracks on your shoulders instead of four stars! Wonder what the 8th AF troops think of this philosophy, and what they might say, even though they aren't under Kelly.  Haven't heard thoughts out of Gen. Cotton, though he just got confirmed as CINC AFGSC, which includes 8th AF (bombers) and 20th AF (Minuteman III). 

[Sixgun Sheridan]

21 minutes ago, Trailrider #896 said:

No matter what they are issuing (I think there is a new snubbie semi-auto being adopted to replace the M92.)  Problem is not much good when faced with a Taliban or ChiCom with an AK, or several. 

 

I saw where they're now issuing a take-down version of the M4 that fits in a bag under the ejection seat. It's issued with three magazines. Assuming it doesn't get lost during ejection I guess 90 rounds is just enough firepower to REALLY piss off the enemy soldiers you're trying to fight your way past all on your own.

.

[The Original Lumpy Gritz]

Frik'en moron

I say anything more, I'll get hit with the ban-hammer.

I sent 3 sons to war. 

OLG 

 

[Colorado Coffinmaker]

 

Stood in the Door of SAR Choppers in SEA.  Very very hazardous to yer health even then.  The Sand Box is just as bad.  SAR Aircraft are in reality "Slow Low Ariel Targets."  Nobody is going to risk a Multi Billion dollar Aircraft Carrier for the odd Pilot.

 

Sucks to to be them.

[Loophole LaRue, SASS #51438]

3 hours ago, Waxahachie Kid #17017 L said:

Does our military even have any seaplanes on active duty anymore? I am inclined to doubt it. Helicopters work, but may be limited by their fuel supply, or air-to-air refueling availability. If one relies on only one solution, that may be a mistake. One solution may not cover all the bases. 

 

The current theory is that we have enough aircraft carriers that can get close enough to launch helicopters for the rescue. 

But...if even one downed airman loses his/her life, from this philosophy, would not that be a tragic mistake?    

 

Is the "no man left behind" philosophy being called into question because of time, and distance, and expense...or severe lack of a rescue system that might need to include some older methods/ideas/material?

 

If I was Kelly's boss, I'd have to have him come see me about his statement. I figure he might need to brush up on his K.P. skills.  

 

That dog don't hunt!

 

 

 

I don't know the General, but his CV reads like more than a paper pusher - https://www.af.mil/About-Us/Biographies/Display/Article/108818/brigadier-general-mark-d-kelly/

 

6000 flight hours, including 800 combat hours in fighters.

 

I'm going to go out on a limb, and suggest that he understands, very well, the risks faced by pilots in combat.

 

Could it be, that to motivate the cheap SOBs that hold the purse strings, it might not hurt to generate some righteous indignation over the lack of rescue resources available?

 

LL

[Marshal Mo Hare, SASS #45984]

Do you spend billions on contingency plans to recover a pilot or do you spend billions on defensive systems so that your pilots don’t need to be recovered?

 

I know Murphy is on the enemy’s side.

[Chili Ron]

Howdy,

Maybe watch BAT-21 and think about how a lost pilot or other

fits into any battle plan.

Best

CR

 

[Chantry]

Playing Devil's advocate (and maybe being realistic) the underlying argument, however poorly stated, is that current and projected future CSAR assets* aren't survivable or the probability of surviving is so low against modern equipment that sending the CSAR crews is pretty a suicide mission for them.

 

More plainly, do you send 4 (pilot, co-pilot, flight engineer/door gunner and the para-rescue) men on a mission to save 1 man when the chances of the CSAR being shot down are 75%?  How about 90%?

 

*I'm not an aeronautical engineer, but barring some major breakthrough, we aren't likely to see a major improvement over the current CSAR assets.

[Duffield, SASS #23454]

This sounds just like what aircrew had to do in WW II.

History repeats itself.