U.S. deploys low-flying attack planes in Libya

[cali]

By Greg Jaffe and Karen DeYoung, Monday, March 28, 7:10 PM

The U.S. military dramatically stepped up its assault on Libyan government ground forces this weekend, launching its first attacks with AC-130 flying gunships and A-10 attack aircraft, which are designed to strike enemy ground troops and supply convoys, according to senior U.S. military officials.

Their use, during several days of heavy fighting in which the momentum seemed to swing in favor of the rebels, demonstrated how allied military forces have been drawn deeper into the chaotic fight in Libya. A mission that initially seemed to revolve around establishing a no-fly zone has become focused on halting advances by ground forces in and around Libya’s key coastal cities.

The AC-130s, which fly low and slow over the battlefield and are typically more vulnerable to enemy fire than fast-moving fighter jets, were deployed only after a week of sustained coalition attacks on Libyan government air defenses and radar. Armed with heavy machine guns and cannons that rake the ground, they allow strikes on dug-in Libyan ground forces and convoys in closer proximity to civilians.

<snip>

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/us_deploys_low_flying_attack_planes_in_libya/2011/03/26/AF9grPqB_story.html?wprss=rss_homepage
Their use in Libya could be “a significant game changer,” said a senior military official, who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive military operations.

[bluestate10]

1. The AC-130 should allow removal of Qaddafi troops encamped inside cities. nt

[PufPuf23]

2. Essentially, the USA and NATO have taken sides in a civil war.

Col. Quadaffi had even gone along with the West since 2003.

There will be more deaths and longer grudges in Libya than had the internal dissent played out.

One could expect the results to be ragged ala Iraq as Libya as a country was Brits drawing lines on a map post WWI.

[theoldman]

3. The C 130's use a gatling type gun made by GE.

The do not use cannons.

[ChimpersMcSmirkers]

7. All AC-130s carry a 105mm howitzer as well as the gatlings.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_AC-130

[kenny blankenship]

8. AC130s have been fitted with a variety of guns

including 105mm artillery. The fire control system for their 40mm and 105mm cannons tracks the impact of shells to provide fire correction for both guns simultaneously for two different targets.


AC130 with 105mm gun.

[Statistical]

33. AC-130 has just about every gun every made...

well that is an exaguration BUT...

Armament


Gunners loading 40 mm cannon (background) and 105 mm cannon (foreground)

AC-130A Project Gunship II
4× 7.62 mm GAU-2/A miniguns
4× 20 mm (0.787 in) M61 Vulcan 6-barreled gatling cannon

AC-130A Surprise Package, Pave Pronto, AC-130E Pave Spectre
2× 7.62 mm GAU-2/A miniguns
2× 20 mm M61 Vulcan cannon
2× 40 mm (1.58 in) L/60 Bofors cannon

AC-130E Pave Aegis
2× 20 mm M61 Vulcan cannon
1× 40 mm (1.58 in) L/60 Bofors cannon
1× 105 mm (4.13 in) M102 howitzer

AC-130H Spectre<31>
(Prior to circa 2000)
2× 20 mm M61 Vulcan cannon
1× 40 mm (1.58 in) L/60 Bofors cannon
1× 105 mm (4.13 in) M102 howitzer
(Current Armament)
1× 40 mm (1.58 in) L/60 Bofors cannon
1× 105 mm (4.13 in) M102 howitzer

AC-130U Spooky II
1× General Dynamics 25 mm (0.984 in) GAU-12/U Equalizer 5-barreled gatling cannon
1× 40 mm (1.58 in) L/60 Bofors cannon
1× 105 mm (4.13 in) M102 howitzer

[sad sally]

4. fly 'em low, watch 'em blow.

[Baclava]

32. Here's a vid of one in real action. . .

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Iz5MwPsfyo&feature=player_embedded

[Canuckistanian]

5. If they fly any lower

Their boots could touch the ground.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

6. So much for a now fly zone only approach

[lonestarnot]

10. Doesn't apply to us. Were just doin' some fancy pageant walk'n.

[joe_sixpack]

9. Is this what is meant by NATO taking over?

Or are they just taking over command and control while our military still flys combat missions? Confused.

[neverforget]

11. I wonder how many Special Forces are on the ground to direct these

strikes?

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

12. We've got to fight them there so we don't have to fight them here.

[bluestate10]

14. The saying is tired. Plus nothing like that has been said by President Obama. nt

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

18. "our vital national interests" are tired as is the neo-con/neo-lib claptrap for more war.

[amandabeech]

13. Do the Brits or any other NATO country fly these things?

These are ground attack weapons, and I see their use as a major escalation. This is a huge mission creep from a no-fly zone.

If we're the only one flying these things, then how are we going to hand over to other countries?

P.S. The article states that commanders in Afghanistan want more A-130s. Now they are being diverted to Libya. How does that help us in Afghanistan?

Too many questions, and not enough answers.

[bluestate10]

16. The AC-130 is good, but a bit outdated. Drones have my vote. nt

[amandabeech]

23. Who else has the drones?

If we're going to get out of this, the NATO allies have to run the drones.

Or maybe this is a unique U.S. contribution.

Do we have enough drones to use in AfPak and in Libya at the same time?

Too many questions and not enough answers for me.

[FLPanhandle]

26. Hard for a drone to match the firepower of a gunship though. nt

[Baclava]

29. No doubt. Want to fly along on a mission?

"This thermal imagery is the most detailed. comperhensive gun camera footage avalable to the general public in years, if not decades.
A must see for anyone for, or against war."

http://www.archive.org/details/AC-130_Gunship_Ops_in_Afghanistan_HighResolution

[Statistical]

34. Outdated or not nothing matches the raw firepower

AC-130 is a slow lumbering target so it is a niche player. Only useful when enemy air assets and air defense have been anihilated but pound for pound nothing brings as close air support as an AC-130.

Predators carry couple hundred pounds of ordinance. An AC-130 carries a couple tons and the ability to circle over the target area for hours raining down firepower nearly continuously.

The airforce actually hates both of these planes (AC-130 and A-10) because they are low tech slow, and essentially flying weapon dump trucks. Still they are unmatched for what they do.

[joe_sixpack]

17. The Brits fly Hercs, C-130 cargo planes,

but this particular gunship is unique to us, I believe.

[bluestate10]

20. The AC-130 is mostly attached to Special Forces. If SF are operating on the ground

more power to them.

[amandabeech]

21. My quick check (wiki) says that we're the only ones operating A-130s and A-10s.

These things, as you know, are made to attack the enemy on the ground.

They fly low, and could be shot down more easily.

NATO plus others may enforce the no fly zone, but who is going to go after the Libyans on the ground?

What do the Brits or French have that would take over these missions?

Somehow, I'm feeling like the Obama speech was technically correct, but gave the wrong impression deliberately. Sort of like too many lawyers and the definition of "is."

[Statistical]

35. While nobody else has AC-130 and A-10 other jets can be used for close air support.

Other nations (with smaller budgets) just use multi-role fighters. They lack the sheer firepower of A-10 and AC-130 so it takes multiple aircraft and multiple missions to cause the same amount of damage but they get the job done.

For example the French Mirage fighters carry the AS-30L air to surface missile. 330lb shaped charge, decent range, high speed. Not the most powerful air to surface missile but more than a match for anything the Lybian forces will muster.

[Baclava]

36. AC 130's can linger over a target area at low altitudes, unlike a fighter

Somebody's going to have a bad day, they can pick out individuals on the ground with thermal imaging

[Cali_Democrat]

15. I thought this was about preventing Gaddafi's aircraft from flying?

This is indeed a major escalation. I've read about AC-130's and A-10's before. Those things are vicious and brutal.

[bluestate10]

19. "vicious and brutal" And Qaddafi would pet kittens if we leave him alone. nt

[Cali_Democrat]

22. I never said Gaddafi was an angel, but weren't we told that this was only about a no-fly zone?

Isn't the mission changing a bit? Aren't we getting increasingly involved in another country's civil war?

[amandabeech]

25. Mission creep to take out a human creep.

Gadaffi is pond scum, but we can't get out of this fast enough for me.

Remember, the no-fly zones in Iraq went on for 10 years until Jr. decided to go in.

How long could this last?

[bindelh]

31. UN Resolution 1973 (2011)

but weren't we told that this was only about a no-fly zone?

Only by the 'Right wing Radio and TV blipverters.

Actually the 'Mission' has been well spelled out in the resolution. (warning: be prepared for big words and clarity of purpose)

A good read for those that strive to be 'well informed'.

http://daccess-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N11/268/39/PDF/N1126839.pdf?OpenElement

[Alamuti Lotus]

39. Does the record of US/NATO massacres in Iraq, Pakistan and Afghanistan warrant intervention..

against Europe and America? Would you support helicopters strafing Camp Pendleton, air-strikes on Diego Garcia, and a naval blockade of Norfolk in order to "protect civilians" in Iraq, Pakistan, and Afghanistan? (among other places)

[JohnyCanuck]

24. A-10 Warthog is noted for its use of depleted uranium ammo.

DU burns intensely and is very hard. DU is also much cheaper than the substitute metal, tungsten. In effect, the U.S. military is trading off lower costs for increased health hazards. The health dangers of using DU-munitions have now been widely recognized, hotly debated and reported upon and need not be repeated here.2 Beyond just the health consequences, DU-munitions must be considered weapons of mass destruction insofar as the consequences of their usage are indiscriminate.

Intensely bombed hard target zones like Tora Bora and Shah-i-Kot may now be heavily contaminated with DU oxide. During the battle of Shah-i-Kot, A-10s were heavily used, flying up to eight hours every day from an unnamed base outside Afghanistan. The potential health risks to U.S. and Afghan troops being sent to check out bombed cave systems are horrendous unless they are using full nuclear, chemical and biological (NBC) protection. But even more serious are the risks in densely populated target zones like Kabul - where DU oxide is likely to contaminate soil, buildings and water and be suspended in the Kabul "haze" seen in several media reports.

Depleted uranium is the staple in the ammunition used by the M1A2 Abrams main battle tank , and in the 30 mm rapid fire Gatling gun in the A-10 attack aircraft and Apache AH64 helicopter. The Gatling cannon fires 4,000 rounds per minute of 30 mm armor-piercing munition, delivering 1,200 kilograms of depleted uranium per minute!

http://cursor.org/stories/uranium.htm

How thoughtful of the US military to help liberate oppressed Libyans by showering their landscape with carcinogenic and teratogenic depleted uranium dust. Depleted uranium is a waste product of the nuclear industry which otherwise would have to be stored away or some way found to safely dispose of (no doubt at some expense). What a brilliant solution to load up American aircraft with the waste product of the "civilian" US (and Canadian) nuclear industries and spread it across the lands of foreign nationals. Let those brown skinned suckers deal with it. It's not our problem any more.

[Gravel Democrat]

27. Few cared when Depleted Uranium was spread all over Kosovo

so one could say there is precedence




*****

http:costofwar.com

[amandabeech]

30. Just terrific.

And of course, no mention of any of this in tonight's speech.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

38. Its use is optional

There are other loadouts for the GAU-8. However, it is the right stuff to take out tanks.

[Baclava]

28. A-10's and AC 130 gunships? - You asked for a 'no-fly' zone - you got it.

Now you can have your 'no-drive' zone too.

[deaniac21]

37. Yay, War!

[Luminous Animal]

40. So it is war.

Extremely depressing.