Question for Army, edweird, devildog, etc. . . .

[bleachit]

I have actually heard, dont remember where... maybe from an Army recruiter, that the Army does have more aircraft than the Air Force.


how else are they gonna move all their stuff that blows other stuff up?

[kosmo]

I work for the military,

So I am really getting a kick out of most of these replies. Some of you guys are very good at making it sound like you know what you are talking about.

But trust me.... You don't.

I think you just want to make yourself sound smart, when in reality you don't know what you are talking about.

This is how bad info gets passed around.

If you dont know about the topic....Dont make yourself sound like you do.

Cause some Air Farcemen believe anything they hear.

/I had something applicable to say, but I forgot what it was.
//copy and paste
///That army recruiter was counting UAVs as airframes. Dont listen to him, its all propaganda.

[thecavemankevin]

I work for the military,

So I am really getting a kick out of most of these replies. Some of you guys are very good at making it sound like you know what you are talking about.

But trust me.... You don't.

I think you just want to make yourself sound smart, when in reality you don't know what you are talking about.

This is how bad info gets passed around.

If you dont know about the topic....Dont make yourself sound like you do.

Cause some Air Farcemen believe anything they hear.

/I had something applicable to say, but I forgot what it was.
//copy and paste
///That army recruiter was counting UAVs as airframes. Dont listen to him, its all propaganda.

I ask, so since you are "in the know" then why not enlighten us with your vast array of knowledge since you are soooo much better than us.



and i answer......

Some of you guys are very good at making it sound like you know what you are talking about.

But trust me.... You don't.

[FooTemps]

way to kill a meme kev

[Steelrat]

Well, he IS right about the aircraft. The army only has a few light utility planes. They must be adding in UAVs and helicopters. Sounds like typical recruiter BS.

Lets talk about a real debacle now: The FCS program. What a waste of time and money that turd is. Everyone else is fielding larger and more capable tanks, and 52 cal plus SP arty, and we come up with 20 ton crap to replace our heavy forces, just because they deploy faster. Our artillery sucks enough as it is. I mean, its pathetic that the Iraqi South African howitzers outranged our 109s.

[kosmo]

Artillery is dead. The jobs it used to do are more effectively handled by mortars, mlrs, or aircraft. The only role it has left is counter-fire, which doesnt really need super technology and armored sparty.

[txaggie08]

I work for the military,

So I am really getting a kick out of most of these replies. Some of you guys are very good at making it sound like you know what you are talking about.

But trust me.... You don't.

I think you just want to make yourself sound smart, when in reality you don't know what you are talking about.

This is how bad info gets passed around.

If you dont know about the topic....Dont make yourself sound like you do.

Cause some Air Farcemen believe anything they hear.

/I had something applicable to say, but I forgot what it was.
//copy and paste
///That army recruiter was counting UAVs as airframes. Dont listen to him, its all propaganda.

You know more than we do becasue your thouroughly indoctrinated into the militaries way of thinking,......shure. I see your types around mil. History and science all the time, you dont know more because your a soldier, your just indoctrinated completely.

Interesting debate, I wish i could get a couple of my proffesors involved....

[Steelrat]

Artillery is dead. The jobs it used to do are more effectively handled by mortars, mlrs, or aircraft. The only role it has left is counter-fire, which doesnt really need super technology and armored sparty.

From my understanding, mortars just don't have the range of arty, and with aircraft, if they aren't on station, you gotta wait until they show up. MLRS is an area effect weapon, no way you can drop rockets anywhere near friendlies. As for counter-fire, how are we supposed to do that if our newest stuff only does 30km, and the bad guys are shooting 40km+?

[kosmo]

Mortars dont have long range capabilities, theyre for short range. If its longer than that, in order to get clearance of fire youre much more than likely going to have to wait for a lot of clearance to be signed off, in which time you might as well get aircraft anyway. If it isnt somewhere crowded or in a neighboring AO so you dont need to get clearance, its going to be a wide open area where MLRS would do a better job anyway. Counterfire is extremely difficult in the majority of the areas in Iraq because its all built up areas, and you cant counterfire into an entire neighborhood. Thats something Israel does, but not us. In Afghanistan is the only place left where we really need counterfire beyond the range of a mortar, and even then 99.9% of what is shot at us is 107mm rockets, which can only reach about 8k.

[Steelrat]

Mortars dont have long range capabilities, theyre for short range. If its longer than that, in order to get clearance of fire youre much more than likely going to have to wait for a lot of clearance to be signed off, in which time you might as well get aircraft anyway. If it isnt somewhere crowded or in a neighboring AO so you dont need to get clearance, its going to be a wide open area where MLRS would do a better job anyway. Counterfire is extremely difficult in the majority of the areas in Iraq because its all built up areas, and you cant counterfire into an entire neighborhood. Thats something Israel does, but not us. In Afghanistan is the only place left where we really need counterfire beyond the range of a mortar, and even then 99.9% of what is shot at us is 107mm rockets, which can only reach about 8k.

Well, you are talking specifically about use in Iraq and Afghanistan, which are essentially COIN missions. Lets not make the mistake of preparing for only one type of conflict again. If we configure all our forces for counter insurgency, what will happen if we have to fight a traditional conflict against, say, Chine or NK? When we are fighting something other than a low-intensity conflict, just watch how fast all the sign-offs for a fire mission disappear.

And I love mortars, no unit should be without them. Awesome short ranged and immediate support.

[geekwarrior]

And I love mortars, no unit should be without them. Awesome short ranged and immediate support.

which is why we need to have an effective one for paintbball!!

[kosmo]

No thats what Im saying is MLRS and aircraft can cover the traditional roles of artillery better than artillery can, and mortars are generally better for our current fight. In the rare instance artillery is needed, our little guns are more than good enough. Logistics for the 155s are a nightmare and just not worth it. Slap 50 tons of armor and engine on one and its even worse.

[Steelrat]

No thats what Im saying is MLRS and aircraft can cover the traditional roles of artillery better than artillery can, and mortars are generally better for our current fight. In the rare instance artillery is needed, our little guns are more than good enough. Logistics for the 155s are a nightmare and just not worth it. Slap 50 tons of armor and engine on one and its even worse.

Depending on aircraft is dangerous. In a low intensity conflict, you always seem to have some loitering around. Now try a full-on battle, with massed AAA and SAMs facing your aircraft. Depending on them is just going to get a lot of people killed. And again, MLRS is no replacement for artillery. It has its uses, but cannot fulfill all the roles of traditional artillery. In additonal to being able to fire more accurately, the MLRS really just has 2 types of "rounds." Can't do smoke, can't do illumination, etc etc.

[Recon by Fire]

Artillery is dead? Please inform the Artillery branch about this, we have heard the same incorrect statements concerning armor.

[Caffiend]

Say what you will, and sorry I don't happen to have a nifty graph to post for you. Not that you would suddenly believe me anyway. But the Army has a ton or aircraft (mostly rotary wing of course) and ships (most would be considered more boats than ships likely but they still have some large cargo ships also). The Army is a big orginization with lots of toys!

I'm sure the Army is a big organization, but the AF and Navy aren't exactly book clubs...


Googled it, found this
Army has about 3,000 helo's (down from 7900 back in '91.)

AF has 2,400 Fighters, 200 bombers, 750 heavies (judging from a graph), 560 tankers, and about 1, 200 trainers for a total of 5110 aircraft.
Figures from here I couldn't find numbers for the AF's helicopters. And I didn't count the UAV's the listed.

Wow, the Army was closer than I thought and I bet it was true back in'91. My mistake, but when you said aircraft, I wasn't counting helos, they aren't aircraft in my book. (Their wings go faster than their fuselage, that's just CRAZY!)