Don't have to be seen to win. Just have to sink their navy. They can't go anyway without a navy. Offshore blockade. Sinking a 500 tonne Chicom fishing vessel takes a 50 kg warhead. Ukraine doesn't have a navy but has been able to drive the Russians 900 km from the nearest Ukrainian-controlled coastline. Just as the Ukrainians have been sinking Russian vessels in port, it is possible now to sink Chinese vessels tied up at Hainan Island and all the way up their coast. Israel started the Iran War using Silver Sparrow missiles, developed from a missile used to practice their ABM against. It weighs 1.9 tonnes with a 2,000 km air-launched range. It comes straight down on the target to go through the hole in the SAM coverage.
testing a new box? joyriding? logging combat pay chip? searching for an elusive emitter that would prove the CCP gave Iran XXX? Wing Cdr, doing the ride along to demonstrate his big brass balls once more? After all, Gregory Peck did it, and so did the Chaplain, Doc, and Harvey...
I went through SERE school in 1982, when many instructors were VN vets and even some former captives. We learned about "extractions".... And there was anther, more cynical term: "VIP extractions," for when somebody who had no real business being there wound up there.
Meanwhile, in water survival phase, the basic gouge was that if you go down at sea, and it's you versus the mighty Atlantic, Pacific, Indian, etc... Your life-clock begins to tick down quite fast. Your job in the raft is to stay alive long enough that somebody friendly will come looking for you, and you can signal them to pluck you out of the soup. There's no swimming home.
I recall being face-down in the dirt on the side of a hill at Warner Springs, Calif... Tired, hungry, thirsty, filthy, beat-to-cr@p, running on adrenalin... And I looked up to see this gorgeous. palm-sized tourmaline in a chunk of milky quartz that had broken off from a nearby pegmatite. So being a geologist at heart, I slipped the specimen into my pocket. Later on, when captured and searched, my counterparts found the item and accused me of "robbing the patrimony of the nation." Which led to extra-special treatment for moi... Although when the course ended, one instructor walked up and handed me back the mineral specimen. He said, "Hey, you bought and paid for this. It's yours to keep." And I still have it.
By the end of Vietnam there was a rule prohibiting 0-6 and above from flying combat missions due to the loss rate they were having as they weren't proficient and were of high value to go MIA or POW. Maybe this was the case here.. not as proficient running the defensive systems and got him and his crew shot down for the trouble. We won't know for a while.
In the day, Cols flew as Group Cdrs. LeMay had led a Group for 8 months in daily combat by the time of the Schweinfurt Regensburg raid. I suspect he was current in his role.
Might be a LCOL squadron CO or XO, media isn't good with ranks a lot of the time.
Not much knowledge of what is standard with the flyboys, but it's my impression that the CO and XO fly operational missions with all the rest.
If a full bird COL perhaps the wing CO or XO. Less reason for them to by flying unless it's a big operation with the full wing flying at the same target set.
Since the V-22 has been, ahem, disappointing reliability-wise, and from these august armchairs of knowledge we are of course looking to the future, the Army’s MV-75 tiltrotor looks to have a appreciable range, and could be useful as a fleet CSAR asset if sufficiently navalized. I wonder if the USN is peeking over the shoulder of the Army on that program at all?
I think the V-22 issues have been overblown, but that doesn’t make it the right platform for CSAR either. I wonder if the size and wash of the platform might not make the Blackhawk (which they previously used) a better CSAR platform, at least for the moment.
The MH-60S flown by the HSC units is not the same. No aerial refueling, no radar and I am sure lacking several other CSAR toys the USAF has. The MH-60S was basically a hand me down from the US Army during late Clinton Admin where the Army had bought a couple hundred too many Blackhawks so they were modified in production but not all the way to serve the Navy and it was a messy ad hoc conversion. The MH-60S does not fit very well on a CG/DDG deck due to the ill suited Blackhawk tail wheel. They fit but not like a SH-60B or MH-60R does.
Have we considered using USVs? The Navy is buying a bunch of them, and those that don't simply drive into something and go boom (such as missile launchers) will go Winchester. Once they do, re-vector them to the coordinates of downed Naval Aviators. The boats are not that large, but better than floating in the water. Adding a five gallon jug of water or two on board would also help.
We will be really stretched thin after day one after day 30 I think we will be back to everyday weapons and a shortage of ships and aircraft along with men and women to run them.
Interesting that you didn’t include a discussion of the CSAR mission that rescued Scott O’Grady in Bosnia in 1995 after 6 days of evading Bosnia Serb forces. Not only was it Joint, it was NATO. I was TAO on USS Ticonderoga providing Red Crown coverage for the Kearsarge ARG. US Marines from heavy-helicopter squadron HMH-464 and the 24th Marine Expeditionary Unit conducted the rescue. Yes, the USN knows how to do CSAR, and yes, it takes a village.
USMC sent a village...an entire mortar section reinforced with some infantry & comms.
This brings up a greater but related issue....could the USN/USMC effect such a mission today? Sure there's plenty who will say yes of course but, as we've seen over the last two decades, the embassy rescue/evac mission has been given over to SOCOM given their agility and adaptability. The Maduro-mission didn't have a USMC component despite all the assets coming from the sea. In fact 22nd MEU's entire ACE was put ashore in Puerto Rico to make room for JSOC aviation.
HCS-4 (Red Wolves): Established in 1976 as HAL-4 at NAS Norfolk, Virginia, and redesignated HCS-4 in 1989. It was deactivated in March 2016 after 40 years of service.
HCS-5 (Firehawks): Established in 1977 as HA(L)-5 at NAS Point Mugu, California, and redesignated HCS-5 in 1988. It was disestablished on December 31, 2006.
Note you didn't use embarked HC assets or HS assets which had a tertiary CSAR role. After Vietnam they deliberately got rid of their dedicated active duty unit/s that did this sort of thing day to day.
I’ve worked on CSAR/NAR portions of OPLANS in the past and I’ve looked at using USV/UUV for rescue in the Pacific. The issue is - will the aviator be capable of getting themselves into the rescue asset following a period of exposure in the water. Korean War experience says no - an era that led to the rescue swimmer program as many pilots were incapable of something as “simple” as attaching themselves to the rescue hoist given water temps. CSAR has and ALWAYS will be a moral imperative and the joint force needs to do more. In WWII and Korea we used submarines, crash rescue boats, amphibians and helicopters. We need to think outside the box and come up with more solutions. I have plenty of ideas - but the USAF declaring “CSAR in the Pacific against a peer adversary is too hard, so we’re cutting the purchase of HH-60Ws” is not one of them.
Love the idea, but when I worked the problem we found no reliable way of hauling someone aboard an asset. Even if we found that solution, we would still need to address the treatment of an injured and likely hypothermic aviator - limited in their ability to provide self-aid. I love the unmanned world, but there are just things that will always require us putting others in harms way. In professional development conversations I always used the example of the Streetcar 304 PR operation in ~May 1968. There is a great book out there, bottom line - to rescue that ONE naval aviator we lost six additional aircraft, at one point there were seven aviators on the ground awaiting rescue, and tragically although the naval aviator was rescued, one of the downed A-1 Sandy pilots was captured and spent the next 4 years, 9 months in the Hanoi Hilton. That Others May Live. It’s who we are - so it’s what we do. The answers are out there - a minimally manned version of the Orca XLUUV, the CCH, CV-22s and yes, potentially the US-2. Just my two cents! BTW - love this blog and the number of intelligent adults always willing to engage in stimulating conversation about mission/capabilities vice politics as on other blogs.
love the seaplanes. airships too, of course. one advantage for airships that might make a huge difference is that airships can be made stealthy. seaplanes...not so much. could be a huge thing to be able to get in and rescue downed pilots...without being seen by enemy.
-are you sure we will be crossing the beach with manned assets in a [“limited”] fight with PRC?
- my sense is that the carnage could be so great that 50-100 downed aviators (of all services) may not be a priority. Where is the true capability to quickly recover ~325 sailors in the water when a DDG gets sunk?
- Big Navy is more or less aware of the value of seaplanes in a war at sea scenario. We had ~1000(!) PBYs in the fight in WW2, and they did a lot of the search and a lot of the rescue then. But the rotary wing and patrol communities may see funding for such assets as coming out of their hides.
Or 3,000+ sailors. It is borderline dereliction of duty (or worse) for the Navy's refusal to buy numerous Japanese ShinMaywa US-2's. Not inexpensive, though only about the same cost as our C-130 aircraft. (~$130 million). Plus, the US-2 is a specialized aircraft for the mission, not a cobbled-together C-130 with floats.
USSOCOM looked at the US-2 at least as far back as 2022.
I noted the capabilities of the US-1 and PS-1 in 1994 and wondered why we didn't keep an amphibious aircraft like that in our inventory.. oh wait those don't have pointy noses. Big Navy air isn't into unsexy aircraft, then or now though the rotary wing side has made significant enroads towards being more significant then they used to be.
Some day, a Commander will be faced with the tough decision to either use his resources to "Bring Them Home", or to continue to try and win a closely fought battle...
If it were to mean losing that vital convoy continuing to be under attack...
And if the survival of that convoy means the difference of its recipients being driven back into the sea or not...
What would you do?
The more apt choice is if Commander pulls off his entire CAS support for a Division being hard pressed by the enemy, and to support the SAR effort, imposes a no fire area that allows the enemy unfettered access across a still intact bridge for days...
See also the fall of of FSB (Fire Support Base) 31 during Lam Son 719 in RVN, 1971. An F-4 was shot down and a FAC and available TacAir were allegedly diverted to rescue the 2 man crew.
"BREAKING: Former CENTCOM commander Ret. Gen. Frank McKenzie just said it PERFECTLY
“It takes a year to build an aircraft — and it takes 200 YEARS to build a military tradition where you don't leave anybody behind!”
without giving Adm AB Cunningham credit he was due, on the topic of the evacuation of Crete:
Cunningham was determined, though, that the "navy must not let the army down", and when army generals feared he would lose too many ships, Cunningham said,
"It takes the Navy three years to build a ship. It will take three hundred years to build a new tradition. The evacuation will continue."
The invasion of Crete is an interesting study. The choice for the Germans was between a seaborne invasion and an airborne one. Seaborne could put more troops on the shore more quickly but at the risk of losses to British naval forces. https://nzhistory.govt.nz/war/the-battle-for-crete
"The story of the RA-5C Vigilante reconnaissance/attack navigator who became the only American aviator to escape after being captured in North Vietnam"
If the pilot had been captured it would have been a propaganda triumph for the Islamic Republic.
If the mission had failed it would have been a triumph for the defeatists, useful idiots and traitors at home.
I hope that Trump does not back away from overthrowing this regime. Any agreement would only kick the can down the road. We see what the ayatollahs can and will do without atomic bombs. It doesn’t take much imagination to see what would happen if they do gain that power.
I sometimes wonder how Trump manages to juggle the dozens of Priority 1 problems he must be dealing with on a daily basis. Trump is a warrior and will not leave the Radical Islamists in power if he can help it. Needs must, but Trump will do his best. I do not know if Israel can take down the current regime on its own, but we may find out.
Billy's parents sent him to boarding school in New England for High School, where he became fluent in America English. He returned home to Russia, and took a job with Putin's regime.
As a lifelong civilian I'll leave this discussion to the folks who know what they're talking about, but I could not have been more dazzled if we had beamed the colonel up to the Starship Enterprise. No other military could have done this, and no other military would have been crazy enough to try. Bravo Zulu.
OK retired Navy Helo guy here. Big Navy has made poor decisions the past number of decades. The joke among rotary wing is that the fighter mafia wants to get rid of everything that doesn't have a pointy nose and fought USN rotary wing from having anything more than torpedo's and a light machine gun for several decades. Gone are the A-6, A-7, S-3. Useful albeit not attractive and yea at this point obsolete but roll back to the early mid 90s and there was a proposed A-7F and A-6F and we should have had a follow on S-3 as we gave up mid zone ASW coverage when we gave it up among other capabilities - my point is, everything is about F-14/F-18/F-35 and uncool looking aircraft need not be supported. Back to the rotary wing side.. We had a dedicated CSAR squadron (HC-7 Sea Devils) in Vietnam and a actual Navy Helicopter attack squadron in HAL-3 (Seawolves). After Vietnam the Navy got rid of both. HAL-3 literally commissioned and de-commissioned as a unit in Vietnam. They formed HAL-4 and HAL-5 back in the states as reserve squadrons in the 70s which ran through the mid 80s and were converted to HCS-4 and HCS-5.. Notice.. the A was gone. Those 2 squadrons were highly professional and pretty active in special warfare support and CSAR should the need arrive through the Iraq conflict. I have known several over the years. Then I believe during late Bush or early Obama they were disbanded and HS-85 which was a H-3 unit became HSC-85 a HSC unit with the MH-60S. Now to be fair they finally have come around to arming helicopters again. The mighty SH-60B which I flew after it was found to be very useful in Gulf War 1 in finding things but lacking any ability to shoot them, they finally came around and had a drug deal to give it the Penguin missile.. begrudgingly. It was actually the Surface Navy that promoted this not the Air side. Then came Hellfire but big navy didn't want a forward firing gun, got rid of the Penguin once the shelf life expired and wouldn't fund helicopter Maverick. Finally HSC is getting forward firing guns of some consequence and hellfire and rocket pods but it has taken 3+ decades of fighting to get those things. The HSL / HSM community does NOT do any kind of CSAR and it is literally prohibited. Those are your CG/DDG based aircraft with a few on the CVN's these days as well. HSC is not embedded into the special warfare world the way that HCS-4 and 5 were. The USMC calls CSAR "TRAP" tactical recovery of aircraft and personnel. I don't know a great deal about it other than then they practice it but it's CSAR for joint and practical purposes. They send in a whole package of fixed wing, AH-1, and 53 helicopters and probably V22 these days. As for the China problem, the Navy is lacking pretty significantly in truly well practiced and trained units for this. It's a mission but not trained and practiced to the level of the USAF units I am certain. I do know that they do practice CSAR at Fallon during workups but never participated myself being a HSL guy and we didn't participate in that part of workups and weren't part of the airwing in those days and it wasn't a mission for us and they take a dim view of littering Lake Tahoe with sonobuoys. So short version is, in some ways the Navy is better equipped and doing a slightly better job but gave up it's specialty units and highly trained crews along the way. HCS this was their primary mission along with the special forces / SEAL support. HSC does everything but mostly is utility and VERTREP when there isn't a civilian VERTREP det around and is passable at the other stuff but I seriously doubt they are doing the level of integrated training that the Jolly Green guys are doing. I seriously doubt they work together on any meaningful basis or regular cycle. I seriously doubt the Navy's VR usage V-22's do anything at all in terms of tactical employment (C-2 greyhound replacement). Note there has been no mention of USAF V22's in this event that I have noticed. Sorry for the length but this is one of those things that has bugged me for 3+ decades.
Preach it, Brother! Was fortunate to have the first AAS-38 FLIR on a Seahawk going to the PG. Hornet Wing loaned us one and told us "you only can fly it for 100 hours since the mount is not certified". My AMHC det chief checked it out and said it would last 500 at least. It mounted on port pylon so we were constantly turning to keep swivel head on target. First report I wrote: "obviously needs to be mounted on nose with a very effective vibration dampening mechanism". But it was great. We hosted 2 AHIPS and we'd fly at night and find Boghammers and they would go whack them with forward firing 50 cal, Hellfire, and my fav - flechette 2.75s! The Army bubbas were aghast that we didn't at a minimum have a door mounted Gecal 50 AND a pylon mounted 2.75 launcher, and this was in 88 right after Preying Mantis. Where are we today? Not much better.
I flew the old FLIR in 94/95 pylon mounted it was better than nothing or the TAS 6 which was pretty useless as well. In 99 I flew the 44 flir with the Litton Darkstar laser designator, we had that one pylon mounted. We had another withe current nose mount which is the now nearly 3 decade standard. I found the Pylon mount actually pretty useful as you could have it lock a target and turn through 360 degrees without losing it if the turns you made were gentle. Of course it had limitations there but for the surveillance and search functions it gave you the ability to look at things behind you and buddy lase if needed so it wasn't terrible.
Fighter bros have done the same thing to us in the MPRA community. While the P-8 can carry just about anything in the inventory, they block the money for testing anything other than harpoon and the Mk-54. I think the decision to give is LRASM was dictated from on high, so they didn't have a say, but everything else ASUW related has been blocked or slow-rolled.
P-8s could easily complete the entire kill chain in uncontested areas, with the legs to go much farther than any carrier based platform, but we're the red-headed step-child of Naval Aviation.
Don't have to be seen to win. Just have to sink their navy. They can't go anyway without a navy. Offshore blockade. Sinking a 500 tonne Chicom fishing vessel takes a 50 kg warhead. Ukraine doesn't have a navy but has been able to drive the Russians 900 km from the nearest Ukrainian-controlled coastline. Just as the Ukrainians have been sinking Russian vessels in port, it is possible now to sink Chinese vessels tied up at Hainan Island and all the way up their coast. Israel started the Iran War using Silver Sparrow missiles, developed from a missile used to practice their ABM against. It weighs 1.9 tonnes with a 2,000 km air-launched range. It comes straight down on the target to go through the hole in the SAM coverage.
Does anyone know why a USAF Colonel was doing "wizzo" duty (Weapons Systems Officer) when the plane was hit and both crewmen ejected?
testing a new box? joyriding? logging combat pay chip? searching for an elusive emitter that would prove the CCP gave Iran XXX? Wing Cdr, doing the ride along to demonstrate his big brass balls once more? After all, Gregory Peck did it, and so did the Chaplain, Doc, and Harvey...
BAT- 21
somewhat. That guy was an LTC, in a crew of 3 LTCs, 2 MAJ and one LT, flying an EW RB-66.
and LTC's command SQDRNs, thus must fly with the troops, though he wasn't the CDR.
In the Navy, do O-6 CAGs get many combat hours? other than the first Alpha strike of a war?
I went through SERE school in 1982, when many instructors were VN vets and even some former captives. We learned about "extractions".... And there was anther, more cynical term: "VIP extractions," for when somebody who had no real business being there wound up there.
Meanwhile, in water survival phase, the basic gouge was that if you go down at sea, and it's you versus the mighty Atlantic, Pacific, Indian, etc... Your life-clock begins to tick down quite fast. Your job in the raft is to stay alive long enough that somebody friendly will come looking for you, and you can signal them to pluck you out of the soup. There's no swimming home.
My Nephew a Marine Crew Chief on a Phrog served two tours in Iraq, one was combat Assault the other tour was medivac.
He went through SERE he said it was rough.
I recall being face-down in the dirt on the side of a hill at Warner Springs, Calif... Tired, hungry, thirsty, filthy, beat-to-cr@p, running on adrenalin... And I looked up to see this gorgeous. palm-sized tourmaline in a chunk of milky quartz that had broken off from a nearby pegmatite. So being a geologist at heart, I slipped the specimen into my pocket. Later on, when captured and searched, my counterparts found the item and accused me of "robbing the patrimony of the nation." Which led to extra-special treatment for moi... Although when the course ended, one instructor walked up and handed me back the mineral specimen. He said, "Hey, you bought and paid for this. It's yours to keep." And I still have it.
OUCH! Robbing the patrimony of the nation? You must have been captured by College educated GRUNTS LOL
By the end of Vietnam there was a rule prohibiting 0-6 and above from flying combat missions due to the loss rate they were having as they weren't proficient and were of high value to go MIA or POW. Maybe this was the case here.. not as proficient running the defensive systems and got him and his crew shot down for the trouble. We won't know for a while.
Emulating Curtis LeMay? He personally led the Regensburg mission and several other dangerous raids. He was a Colonel at the time.
In the day, Cols flew as Group Cdrs. LeMay had led a Group for 8 months in daily combat by the time of the Schweinfurt Regensburg raid. I suspect he was current in his role.
May have been the Strike Leader?
Might be a LCOL squadron CO or XO, media isn't good with ranks a lot of the time.
Not much knowledge of what is standard with the flyboys, but it's my impression that the CO and XO fly operational missions with all the rest.
If a full bird COL perhaps the wing CO or XO. Less reason for them to by flying unless it's a big operation with the full wing flying at the same target set.
Seeking Glory or medals maybe or using a new system and weapon that required his pay grade.
Isfahan nuclear facility is 21 miles away, what a coincidence!
Hmm. I wonder what 21 miles is in flying time...
On a little bird?
Since the V-22 has been, ahem, disappointing reliability-wise, and from these august armchairs of knowledge we are of course looking to the future, the Army’s MV-75 tiltrotor looks to have a appreciable range, and could be useful as a fleet CSAR asset if sufficiently navalized. I wonder if the USN is peeking over the shoulder of the Army on that program at all?
I think the V-22 issues have been overblown, but that doesn’t make it the right platform for CSAR either. I wonder if the size and wash of the platform might not make the Blackhawk (which they previously used) a better CSAR platform, at least for the moment.
AF CSAR is an MH60 variant, whispers, like the ones you guys used in HSC-85
The MH-60S flown by the HSC units is not the same. No aerial refueling, no radar and I am sure lacking several other CSAR toys the USAF has. The MH-60S was basically a hand me down from the US Army during late Clinton Admin where the Army had bought a couple hundred too many Blackhawks so they were modified in production but not all the way to serve the Navy and it was a messy ad hoc conversion. The MH-60S does not fit very well on a CG/DDG deck due to the ill suited Blackhawk tail wheel. They fit but not like a SH-60B or MH-60R does.
can you launch a V-22 from a DDG?
Nope. Won't fit.
Possibly a Zumwalt.
Have we considered using USVs? The Navy is buying a bunch of them, and those that don't simply drive into something and go boom (such as missile launchers) will go Winchester. Once they do, re-vector them to the coordinates of downed Naval Aviators. The boats are not that large, but better than floating in the water. Adding a five gallon jug of water or two on board would also help.
I'd think those might be slower and much more challenging than using a VTOL UAV with a basket.
What use is a USV if the individual to be rescued is disabled/injured?
Very Smart People say we will waste resources doing CSAR. The pilots also won't have aircraft, even if we save them.
They also believe in Joint.
We will be really stretched thin after day one after day 30 I think we will be back to everyday weapons and a shortage of ships and aircraft along with men and women to run them.
Interesting that you didn’t include a discussion of the CSAR mission that rescued Scott O’Grady in Bosnia in 1995 after 6 days of evading Bosnia Serb forces. Not only was it Joint, it was NATO. I was TAO on USS Ticonderoga providing Red Crown coverage for the Kearsarge ARG. US Marines from heavy-helicopter squadron HMH-464 and the 24th Marine Expeditionary Unit conducted the rescue. Yes, the USN knows how to do CSAR, and yes, it takes a village.
I didn't fit preconceived ideas. Interservice cooperation drives the boys all out of Joint.
USMC sent a village...an entire mortar section reinforced with some infantry & comms.
This brings up a greater but related issue....could the USN/USMC effect such a mission today? Sure there's plenty who will say yes of course but, as we've seen over the last two decades, the embassy rescue/evac mission has been given over to SOCOM given their agility and adaptability. The Maduro-mission didn't have a USMC component despite all the assets coming from the sea. In fact 22nd MEU's entire ACE was put ashore in Puerto Rico to make room for JSOC aviation.
The Navy gave up it's own SOC support when they got rid of HCS-4 and 5. It was a deliberate decision.
BRAVE SEARCH:
HCS-4 (Red Wolves): Established in 1976 as HAL-4 at NAS Norfolk, Virginia, and redesignated HCS-4 in 1989. It was deactivated in March 2016 after 40 years of service.
HCS-5 (Firehawks): Established in 1977 as HA(L)-5 at NAS Point Mugu, California, and redesignated HCS-5 in 1988. It was disestablished on December 31, 2006.
Note you didn't use embarked HC assets or HS assets which had a tertiary CSAR role. After Vietnam they deliberately got rid of their dedicated active duty unit/s that did this sort of thing day to day.
They used embarked CH-53s, AV-8Bs, and AH-1Ws from the Kearsage.
It succeeded despite being joint & NATO.
Don’t let facts get in the way of your cynicism.
I’ve worked on CSAR/NAR portions of OPLANS in the past and I’ve looked at using USV/UUV for rescue in the Pacific. The issue is - will the aviator be capable of getting themselves into the rescue asset following a period of exposure in the water. Korean War experience says no - an era that led to the rescue swimmer program as many pilots were incapable of something as “simple” as attaching themselves to the rescue hoist given water temps. CSAR has and ALWAYS will be a moral imperative and the joint force needs to do more. In WWII and Korea we used submarines, crash rescue boats, amphibians and helicopters. We need to think outside the box and come up with more solutions. I have plenty of ideas - but the USAF declaring “CSAR in the Pacific against a peer adversary is too hard, so we’re cutting the purchase of HH-60Ws” is not one of them.
That’s an area where robotics might come in handy.
Love the idea, but when I worked the problem we found no reliable way of hauling someone aboard an asset. Even if we found that solution, we would still need to address the treatment of an injured and likely hypothermic aviator - limited in their ability to provide self-aid. I love the unmanned world, but there are just things that will always require us putting others in harms way. In professional development conversations I always used the example of the Streetcar 304 PR operation in ~May 1968. There is a great book out there, bottom line - to rescue that ONE naval aviator we lost six additional aircraft, at one point there were seven aviators on the ground awaiting rescue, and tragically although the naval aviator was rescued, one of the downed A-1 Sandy pilots was captured and spent the next 4 years, 9 months in the Hanoi Hilton. That Others May Live. It’s who we are - so it’s what we do. The answers are out there - a minimally manned version of the Orca XLUUV, the CCH, CV-22s and yes, potentially the US-2. Just my two cents! BTW - love this blog and the number of intelligent adults always willing to engage in stimulating conversation about mission/capabilities vice politics as on other blogs.
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/172433 The Rescue of Streetcar 304: A Navy Pilot's Forty Hours on the Run in Laos
by
Kenny Wayne Fields
to HMSLion's point below, perhaps robotics and UUV or UUv/USV capable, instead of USV. Maybe could come up beneath and take the guy, raft and all.
love the seaplanes. airships too, of course. one advantage for airships that might make a huge difference is that airships can be made stealthy. seaplanes...not so much. could be a huge thing to be able to get in and rescue downed pilots...without being seen by enemy.
anyway.....love the Japanese US-2
Sal,
-are you sure we will be crossing the beach with manned assets in a [“limited”] fight with PRC?
- my sense is that the carnage could be so great that 50-100 downed aviators (of all services) may not be a priority. Where is the true capability to quickly recover ~325 sailors in the water when a DDG gets sunk?
- Big Navy is more or less aware of the value of seaplanes in a war at sea scenario. We had ~1000(!) PBYs in the fight in WW2, and they did a lot of the search and a lot of the rescue then. But the rotary wing and patrol communities may see funding for such assets as coming out of their hides.
Or 3,000+ sailors. It is borderline dereliction of duty (or worse) for the Navy's refusal to buy numerous Japanese ShinMaywa US-2's. Not inexpensive, though only about the same cost as our C-130 aircraft. (~$130 million). Plus, the US-2 is a specialized aircraft for the mission, not a cobbled-together C-130 with floats.
USSOCOM looked at the US-2 at least as far back as 2022.
https://japan-forward.com/for-25-years-the-worlds-oceans-are-a-stage-for-japans-us-2-rescue-plane/
I noted the capabilities of the US-1 and PS-1 in 1994 and wondered why we didn't keep an amphibious aircraft like that in our inventory.. oh wait those don't have pointy noses. Big Navy air isn't into unsexy aircraft, then or now though the rotary wing side has made significant enroads towards being more significant then they used to be.
Flags are not interested in spending money where they cannot improve their post-retirement gig. Far more insidious.
Some day, a Commander will be faced with the tough decision to either use his resources to "Bring Them Home", or to continue to try and win a closely fought battle...
You mean like the convoy escorts that stayed with the convoy instead of stopping to rescue mariners in the water?
If it were to mean losing that vital convoy continuing to be under attack...
And if the survival of that convoy means the difference of its recipients being driven back into the sea or not...
What would you do?
The more apt choice is if Commander pulls off his entire CAS support for a Division being hard pressed by the enemy, and to support the SAR effort, imposes a no fire area that allows the enemy unfettered access across a still intact bridge for days...
I ask that, because it has actually happened:
https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/tr/pdf/ADA220660.pdf
Bat 21: A Case Study
The 3rd ARVN Division lost.
See also the fall of of FSB (Fire Support Base) 31 during Lam Son 719 in RVN, 1971. An F-4 was shot down and a FAC and available TacAir were allegedly diverted to rescue the 2 man crew.
OT: I was disappointed to read
"BREAKING: Former CENTCOM commander Ret. Gen. Frank McKenzie just said it PERFECTLY
“It takes a year to build an aircraft — and it takes 200 YEARS to build a military tradition where you don't leave anybody behind!”
without giving Adm AB Cunningham credit he was due, on the topic of the evacuation of Crete:
Cunningham was determined, though, that the "navy must not let the army down", and when army generals feared he would lose too many ships, Cunningham said,
"It takes the Navy three years to build a ship. It will take three hundred years to build a new tradition. The evacuation will continue."
McKenzie has no room to talk given his time as CinC CENTCOM.
wasn't he CENTCOM during Kabul debacle?
Unfortunately he was... He's been on a legacy rebuilding tour promoting his book of late
The invasion of Crete is an interesting study. The choice for the Germans was between a seaborne invasion and an airborne one. Seaborne could put more troops on the shore more quickly but at the risk of losses to British naval forces. https://nzhistory.govt.nz/war/the-battle-for-crete
Many may not have heard of this tale...
https://theaviationgeekclub.com/the-story-of-the-ra-5c-vigilante-reconnaissance-attack-navigator-who-became-the-only-american-aviator-to-escape-after-being-captured-in-north-vietnam/
"The story of the RA-5C Vigilante reconnaissance/attack navigator who became the only American aviator to escape after being captured in North Vietnam"
Bones Morgan, Charlie Putnam...
Some of the people I remember growing up.
If the pilot had been captured it would have been a propaganda triumph for the Islamic Republic.
If the mission had failed it would have been a triumph for the defeatists, useful idiots and traitors at home.
I hope that Trump does not back away from overthrowing this regime. Any agreement would only kick the can down the road. We see what the ayatollahs can and will do without atomic bombs. It doesn’t take much imagination to see what would happen if they do gain that power.
I sometimes wonder how Trump manages to juggle the dozens of Priority 1 problems he must be dealing with on a daily basis. Trump is a warrior and will not leave the Radical Islamists in power if he can help it. Needs must, but Trump will do his best. I do not know if Israel can take down the current regime on its own, but we may find out.
The CSAR mission succeeded. Coincidence this all happened 21 miles from Isfahan's nuclear facility?
Anyway, the regime won't be overthrown. All Trump is doing now is risking the lives of men better than himself, and encouraging Iran to go nuclear.
Always nice to hear from a defeatist. Are you French by any chance? Do you throw down your rifle and beg for mercy?
No, I'm not a dolt that doubles down on stupid.
I wouldn’t be so sure if I were you.
Dull & uninteresting, don't ever change.
Billy's parents sent him to boarding school in New England for High School, where he became fluent in America English. He returned home to Russia, and took a job with Putin's regime.
As a lifelong civilian I'll leave this discussion to the folks who know what they're talking about, but I could not have been more dazzled if we had beamed the colonel up to the Starship Enterprise. No other military could have done this, and no other military would have been crazy enough to try. Bravo Zulu.
Israel might try.
They did pretty well at Entebbe, with far fewer resources than the US has.
I’ve had my head in the sand for too long, didn’t realize we killed the 60H and the squadron. Carrier TACAIR beware…
OK retired Navy Helo guy here. Big Navy has made poor decisions the past number of decades. The joke among rotary wing is that the fighter mafia wants to get rid of everything that doesn't have a pointy nose and fought USN rotary wing from having anything more than torpedo's and a light machine gun for several decades. Gone are the A-6, A-7, S-3. Useful albeit not attractive and yea at this point obsolete but roll back to the early mid 90s and there was a proposed A-7F and A-6F and we should have had a follow on S-3 as we gave up mid zone ASW coverage when we gave it up among other capabilities - my point is, everything is about F-14/F-18/F-35 and uncool looking aircraft need not be supported. Back to the rotary wing side.. We had a dedicated CSAR squadron (HC-7 Sea Devils) in Vietnam and a actual Navy Helicopter attack squadron in HAL-3 (Seawolves). After Vietnam the Navy got rid of both. HAL-3 literally commissioned and de-commissioned as a unit in Vietnam. They formed HAL-4 and HAL-5 back in the states as reserve squadrons in the 70s which ran through the mid 80s and were converted to HCS-4 and HCS-5.. Notice.. the A was gone. Those 2 squadrons were highly professional and pretty active in special warfare support and CSAR should the need arrive through the Iraq conflict. I have known several over the years. Then I believe during late Bush or early Obama they were disbanded and HS-85 which was a H-3 unit became HSC-85 a HSC unit with the MH-60S. Now to be fair they finally have come around to arming helicopters again. The mighty SH-60B which I flew after it was found to be very useful in Gulf War 1 in finding things but lacking any ability to shoot them, they finally came around and had a drug deal to give it the Penguin missile.. begrudgingly. It was actually the Surface Navy that promoted this not the Air side. Then came Hellfire but big navy didn't want a forward firing gun, got rid of the Penguin once the shelf life expired and wouldn't fund helicopter Maverick. Finally HSC is getting forward firing guns of some consequence and hellfire and rocket pods but it has taken 3+ decades of fighting to get those things. The HSL / HSM community does NOT do any kind of CSAR and it is literally prohibited. Those are your CG/DDG based aircraft with a few on the CVN's these days as well. HSC is not embedded into the special warfare world the way that HCS-4 and 5 were. The USMC calls CSAR "TRAP" tactical recovery of aircraft and personnel. I don't know a great deal about it other than then they practice it but it's CSAR for joint and practical purposes. They send in a whole package of fixed wing, AH-1, and 53 helicopters and probably V22 these days. As for the China problem, the Navy is lacking pretty significantly in truly well practiced and trained units for this. It's a mission but not trained and practiced to the level of the USAF units I am certain. I do know that they do practice CSAR at Fallon during workups but never participated myself being a HSL guy and we didn't participate in that part of workups and weren't part of the airwing in those days and it wasn't a mission for us and they take a dim view of littering Lake Tahoe with sonobuoys. So short version is, in some ways the Navy is better equipped and doing a slightly better job but gave up it's specialty units and highly trained crews along the way. HCS this was their primary mission along with the special forces / SEAL support. HSC does everything but mostly is utility and VERTREP when there isn't a civilian VERTREP det around and is passable at the other stuff but I seriously doubt they are doing the level of integrated training that the Jolly Green guys are doing. I seriously doubt they work together on any meaningful basis or regular cycle. I seriously doubt the Navy's VR usage V-22's do anything at all in terms of tactical employment (C-2 greyhound replacement). Note there has been no mention of USAF V22's in this event that I have noticed. Sorry for the length but this is one of those things that has bugged me for 3+ decades.
Preach it, Brother! Was fortunate to have the first AAS-38 FLIR on a Seahawk going to the PG. Hornet Wing loaned us one and told us "you only can fly it for 100 hours since the mount is not certified". My AMHC det chief checked it out and said it would last 500 at least. It mounted on port pylon so we were constantly turning to keep swivel head on target. First report I wrote: "obviously needs to be mounted on nose with a very effective vibration dampening mechanism". But it was great. We hosted 2 AHIPS and we'd fly at night and find Boghammers and they would go whack them with forward firing 50 cal, Hellfire, and my fav - flechette 2.75s! The Army bubbas were aghast that we didn't at a minimum have a door mounted Gecal 50 AND a pylon mounted 2.75 launcher, and this was in 88 right after Preying Mantis. Where are we today? Not much better.
I flew the old FLIR in 94/95 pylon mounted it was better than nothing or the TAS 6 which was pretty useless as well. In 99 I flew the 44 flir with the Litton Darkstar laser designator, we had that one pylon mounted. We had another withe current nose mount which is the now nearly 3 decade standard. I found the Pylon mount actually pretty useful as you could have it lock a target and turn through 360 degrees without losing it if the turns you made were gentle. Of course it had limitations there but for the surveillance and search functions it gave you the ability to look at things behind you and buddy lase if needed so it wasn't terrible.
Dude, paragraphs!
Sorry.. too used to Facebook where you can't use them in a reply.
Fighter bros have done the same thing to us in the MPRA community. While the P-8 can carry just about anything in the inventory, they block the money for testing anything other than harpoon and the Mk-54. I think the decision to give is LRASM was dictated from on high, so they didn't have a say, but everything else ASUW related has been blocked or slow-rolled.
P-8s could easily complete the entire kill chain in uncontested areas, with the legs to go much farther than any carrier based platform, but we're the red-headed step-child of Naval Aviation.