Why go gunship-lite at all? Pull the weapons and sensors from the current Spectres as they retire and re-install in new C-130J air frames. You maintain full offensive capability* while skirting all the new a/c hassles of the Euro-American design.

 

 

*Sorry, I don't see how carrying a couple of Hellfires can replace the 105. It's a very effective weapon and must be significantly cheaper than guided missiles.

The reason AFSOC is not acquiring "J" models of C-130s is simple: time. By the time we would be able to field new C-130-based gunships, the rest of our older fleet would undoubtedly be grounded and in the shops. There's not enough time to build full-size Spookys that can be ready within 2 years. But that's not the case with the idea of a "Light Gunship", which can act as a temporary solution until the new gunship platform (due sometime in 2018 with the new bomber) is put into the skies.

Anyone know if the plans for the AC-27B include hardpoints for SDB's, JDAM's, or Viper Strike?

 

Care to guess how many years it will be until they can mount a 100KW Solid State Laser on an AC-27?

Lord, I think the Air Force would have a heart attack. Not at all jokingly, I do believe that the Fighter Mafia guys have a perpetual hard hatred of any plane with an "A" designation, believing that the only craft they should ever acquire should either be "F" designates secondarily capable of ground attack, pure strategic "B" types, or the support haulers required to put those combat aircraft into operation and support them.

Even asking them to consider the possibility that a modified trash-hauler might "...include hardpoints for SDB's, JDAM's, or Viper Strike" would kill them.

 

--

...or hot young interns, etc.) may get cranky . . .

The carriage of ordinance is already getting more distributed.  CIA, USAF, and US Army Predator UAV's are all armed.  Nobody on the ground really cares what platform drops the JDAM- all they really want it is long enough loiter time that they can count on something being there when they need it.  So it makes perfect sense to put hardpoints on an AC-27 and/or let it link to other armed airborne platforms.

 

I'm told that the main thing for AC-130 is the sensor package.  Getting a replacement aircraft that can carry the 105 because an airborne 105 is sexy is not a driving requirement.  We lose AC-130 from time to time.  Smaller aircraft with less crew carrying the same sensors and main weapons is in my view just fine.  Certainly the 105 is nice but if something else can be targeted based on the AC-27's sensors (like a hellfire or SDB) then it might be a good tradeoff.  

 

The thing that gives me pause is specific comparitive performance in terms of range and loiter time together with any negative comparisons in operational altitude.  It needs to be able to operate at least as well as the AC-130 in hot and high conditions.  It appears the C-27J does have slightly better performance than the C-130J but I do not know in all areas that pertain to the gunship role.  Given similar or better performance it might be less (size, crew, operating costs) is more. 

''Twas only a matter of time before official-enough people suggested slinging the gunship title onto the Spartan (but are twin 30mm gun, Mk44s no doubt, really credible enough for an aircraft named "Spartan"?).

My question: certainly 105mm howies are outside the C-27's airframe strength...but does anyone think that many of the newest and latest recoil-dampening "soft mounts" might allow a breech-load 120mm mortar??

There are a handful of PGM programs available now, and in addition to the PGMM for the US, perhap we could tailor the gun tube to make it also compatible with the MRM rounds intended for 120mm tank guns.

 

As to hanging ordnance off underwing pylons: Hellfire is a gimme, as should be its replacement, JAGM (providing that one doesn't go the route of JCM also).

There's little reason the guided 70mm rockets wouldn't work, either,

as would that new SCALPEL lightweight LGB, and a host of other lightweight missiles (anti-UAV ops with Stinger packs?).

 

WRT Army fixed wing and what is or isn't allowed by Key West: that's not an etched-in-stone 10-Commandments-of-the-US-Military kind of agreement, in that it can be, as Congress dictates and the DoD decides, it can be amended, adjusted, rewritten, or overruled altogether as the services, and their political bosses, see fit.

It's not like it's the Constitution or anything.

If the Army doesn't get the USAF to provide what it feels it needs (or is it wants?), enough political pressure will bend the rules in the Army's favor.

The USAF will then either have to comply with policy, or accept that they may lose a chunk of Congressional favor (and possibly $$$) as more politicos start showing more sympathy for the Army's "plight".

 

But hey, if gunshipping the Spartan makes for an effective solution, more power to 'em!

(Maybe a few of our allies can then see that even lightweight gunships have merit, and gun-up a handful of their own G-222s, C-27s, C-160s, and CN-235/295s. If even a pair of 30mm guns prove sufficient, then the Brits would love a twinned 40 CTA Spooky.

 

The sensors shouldn't be difficult at all, as current small form FLIR balls and multi-sensor turrets offer leaps of capability beyond all but the latest AC-130U's.