Posted on Sep 16, 2015
US Air Force: Russia Has Closed Air Power Gap With NATO
7.42K
42
24
7
7
0
US Air Force: Russia Has Closed Air Power Gap With NATO
NATO’s air superiority vis-à-vis Russia is waning, Air Force (USAF) General Frank Gorenc, the commander of U.S. Air Forces in Europe and Africa told an audience at this year’s Air and Space Conference held near Washington DC, according to military.com.
“The advantage that we had from the air, I can honestly say, is shrinking not only with respect to the aircraft that they’re producing, but the more alarming thing is their ability to create anti-access/area-denial [A2/AD] that are very well defended,” Gorenc said.
With his remarks, the general has joined a chorus of defense analysts and policy makers dispensing Cassandra-like warnings about the slipping technological edge of the United States military and the growing danger posed by effective countermeasures to American power primarily based on precision-strike regimes (See: “No More Easy Victories for the US Military?”).
According to the general, Russia accelerated the development of A2/AD capabilities during the 2008 war with Georgia and has heavily invested in fielding modern long-range surface-to-air missile systems (.e.g., the S-400) and other land-based A2/AD weapon systems based on their experience during the war. “They learned a lot along the way, and they made moves to close the asymmetric advantage posed by the quality of our air force; they’ve done it,” he emphasized.
Read more:
NATO’s air superiority vis-à-vis Russia is waning, Air Force (USAF) General Frank Gorenc, the commander of U.S. Air Forces in Europe and Africa told an audience at this year’s Air and Space Conference held near Washington DC, according to military.com.
“The advantage that we had from the air, I can honestly say, is shrinking not only with respect to the aircraft that they’re producing, but the more alarming thing is their ability to create anti-access/area-denial [A2/AD] that are very well defended,” Gorenc said.
With his remarks, the general has joined a chorus of defense analysts and policy makers dispensing Cassandra-like warnings about the slipping technological edge of the United States military and the growing danger posed by effective countermeasures to American power primarily based on precision-strike regimes (See: “No More Easy Victories for the US Military?”).
According to the general, Russia accelerated the development of A2/AD capabilities during the 2008 war with Georgia and has heavily invested in fielding modern long-range surface-to-air missile systems (.e.g., the S-400) and other land-based A2/AD weapon systems based on their experience during the war. “They learned a lot along the way, and they made moves to close the asymmetric advantage posed by the quality of our air force; they’ve done it,” he emphasized.
Read more:
US Air Force: Russia Has Closed Air Power Gap With NATO
Posted from thediplomat.com
Russia
Threat
Posted 9 y ago
Responses: 8
8
8
0
When one stops development one is run over by those that didn't stop. Superiority is fleeting for the complacent.
(8)
(0)
Capt Seid Waddell
COL Ted Mc, sir, this article mentions the A-10s vulnerability to ground fire; I have not yet located the more extensive discussion on the subject.
http://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/blog/lists/posts/post.aspx?ID=1570
http://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/blog/lists/posts/post.aspx?ID=1570
(0)
(0)
COL Ted Mc
Capt Seid Waddell - Captain; If anyone can actually figure out how to deliver CAS accurately through anything other than "low and slow" they will be deserving of whatever rewards the want.
The unfortunate fact is that the ONLY way (at present) to be sure that your CAS isn't landing on your own troops is to be low enough and slow enough to be accurate. This puts you into MANPADS territory.
Of course helicopters also place you into MANPADS territory and so does landing honking big cargo aircraft on landing strips so I think that the MANPADS argument is just something that the USAF advances to "justify" eliminating one of the unsexiest combat aircraft since "Puff, The Magic Dragon" of Vietnam fame.
The article says that the A-10 is "not survivable" in Syria but really doesn't say why.
Where the article IS specific is when it says "The Air Force needs to make room for aircraft that are newer, more capable and survivable, he added." and (when you look at the reality of the situation) that really means "newer and flashier".
The unfortunate fact is that the ONLY way (at present) to be sure that your CAS isn't landing on your own troops is to be low enough and slow enough to be accurate. This puts you into MANPADS territory.
Of course helicopters also place you into MANPADS territory and so does landing honking big cargo aircraft on landing strips so I think that the MANPADS argument is just something that the USAF advances to "justify" eliminating one of the unsexiest combat aircraft since "Puff, The Magic Dragon" of Vietnam fame.
The article says that the A-10 is "not survivable" in Syria but really doesn't say why.
Where the article IS specific is when it says "The Air Force needs to make room for aircraft that are newer, more capable and survivable, he added." and (when you look at the reality of the situation) that really means "newer and flashier".
(0)
(0)
Capt Seid Waddell
COL Ted Mc, sir, I believe the argument is that with the advent of smart weapons accuracy in CAS can be achieved using fast movers at higher altitudes. I don't know if that is true or is simply justification for what they want to do anyway.
I had heard that late in our combat phase A-10s were not sent into hostile areas - which would rather negate their primary purpose, it would seem.
It would be nice to hear from RP members with direct experience on this matter.
I had heard that late in our combat phase A-10s were not sent into hostile areas - which would rather negate their primary purpose, it would seem.
It would be nice to hear from RP members with direct experience on this matter.
(0)
(0)
COL Ted Mc
Capt Seid Waddell - Captain; Indeed it would be nice to hear from any A-10 pilots on the board. Equally, it would be nice to hear from those whose butts were saved by A-10s.
The problem with "smart weapons accuracy" is the lead time it takes to program the target location into the weapon (or the availability of functional ground based adjuncts for targeting).
Probably the fastest acting "guidance system" is the Mk1 DuplexOptical Data Receiving and Processing Unit if connected to the Mk1 Onboard Heuristic Digital/Analog 'Fuzzy Logic' Enabled Computational and Analytical Unit (read as "working eyes connected to a working brain").
The problem with "smart weapons accuracy" is the lead time it takes to program the target location into the weapon (or the availability of functional ground based adjuncts for targeting).
Probably the fastest acting "guidance system" is the Mk1 DuplexOptical Data Receiving and Processing Unit if connected to the Mk1 Onboard Heuristic Digital/Analog 'Fuzzy Logic' Enabled Computational and Analytical Unit (read as "working eyes connected to a working brain").
(1)
(0)
7
7
0
Our superiority lies in training, tactics and strategy. They may be able to match our technology, but they will never match our personnel.
(7)
(0)
COL Ted Mc
MSgt (Join to see) - Master Sergeant; Are you quoting from the official US military doctrine as it existed on 06 DEC 41?
If, on average, an American fighter aircraft can shoot down 10 Russian fighter aircraft and if, on average, each American fighter aircraft encounters 11 Russian aircraft, who wins?
If, on average, an American fighter aircraft can shoot down 10 Russian fighter aircraft and if, on average, each American fighter aircraft encounters 11 Russian aircraft, who wins?
(1)
(0)
(0)
(0)
5
5
0
At the same time there are multiple stories that the Russian Air Force has planes crashing at unprecedented levels. Yes they have technology, but their ability to sustain a high ops tempo is still lacking.
(5)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google