Apache pilot explains “Do Helicopters actually do CAS?” DCS Helicopters
Vložit
- čas přidán 2. 07. 2024
- I explore what CAS actually is and how Helicopters, particularly Army ones, treat this technique and are employed.
References: JP 3-09.3 CAS- www.doctrine.af.mil/Portals/6...
FM 3-04 Army Aviation- armypubs.army.mil/epubs/DR_pu...
Patreon: www.patreon.com/CasmoTV?fan_l...
Low Level Hell Discord: / discord - Hry
I used to work at the place that created the doctrine you linked to (doctrine.af.mil) and I wanted to say you did an outstanding job explaining this topic. You're correct about the way Army and Marines treat the mission differently. Here are some quotes from JP 3-09.3 to back that up:
"Army RW attack assets use close combat attack
(CCA) procedures. CCA is not synonymous with CAS, and the Army does not consider
its attack helicopters a CAS system. Although some Army aircrews may be proficient in
CAS TTP, JTACs should not expect Army attack aviation assets to perform CAS TTP without further coordination and training"
"Marine Corps RW attack assets are trained and equipped
for CAS missions to support the ground commander’s objectives and may be tasked
accordingly."
A simpler way to think about it is that CAS has a slot on the daily Air Tasking Order (ATO) for the area's commander (you referenced the Joint Forces Air Component Commander (JFACC), this is that person and this person falls under the 4-star that is responsible for all US forces in a geographic region). When I was working at the institute we would just say "Army aviation does its own thing" and just worried about tasking everyone else. Ground commanders would worry about the choppers.
Looking forward to the rest of these. Great job.
Mike Solyom thanks for the feedback. It’s really a complex web when you get into the ATO and apportioning/allocating. I want to do a video about that but I gotta get my mind right on the subject again haha. I’ve been to two joint courses on the subject but sometimes it’s still a morass of info.
Thanks for the validation tho. Always good to know I’m on the right track.
Yeah there is a good summary of this in the JFIRE from 2007 (or more recent if you have a CAC)
During the height of OEF as a Forward Observer(I was ranked PFC in the position of a SGT) Our JTAC qual was just to go to a range with the Air Force equivalent who gave us a short lecture and then go out and do it for "real". Apparently that was enough for us to be allowed to control aircraft for CAS.
Was a lot of fun though.Pilots are incredible at locating targets just from vague directions like "that hill to the right" lol
"Tell em a bit about yourself, I've got this many bullets and I enjoy long walks." Made me laugh. Great vid Casmo, very informative.
This type of knowledge should be in dynamic campaigns of realistic simulators like DCS and BMS.
Those simulators would be even more awesome.
Good info, that "CAS 9-line and you got everything you need" is a typical casual-DCS-player misunderstanding. What you described basically can be cut into:
- Check-In
- Sitrep
- Gameplan
- 9-line
- Remarks
And that's how we deliver it and there's tons of sources in the internet to learn it that way.
JP 3-09.3 for those searching for that information.
And this is more or less how I've always done 12 step CAS. It's way more than a 9 line. CAS and CCA can go incredibly fast, but not that fast to ensure proper deconfliction, target identification, and desired end states.
Ya man, gimme the coordinate and I drop da bomb.
So the role of CAS is to act like artillery, shooting at designated targets from 'outside' the battle line.
While the Helicopters act as cavalry, skirmishing and picking off easy or particularly critical targets.
Yeah pretty good approximation.
The helicopters are there to scare everybody, including friendlies and distract them.
That was an awesome presentation thank you so much for your hard work and dedication and service, I myself was active duty USMC in the 80's I know this is late after your presentation but hope you will see one day. BE BLESSED BE LOVE!!! SEMPER FI!!! OH Where did you get those images for your presentation very nice.
I liked the way you toned down a bit the 9 line. I have flown with some really hardcore 9-liners DCS squadrons (usually fixed wing boys) that wouldn't let you fly a mission without attending a 3 hours 9 line training class before and I already suspected they were a little bit over the top with this.
Can confirm they are way way way over the top.
9 line confuses me to no end, more so because all the games I play lack proper coordinate systems
I hate that. It's been a while since I delivered the entire 9 line without abbreviating or omitting something.
Nice vid, bro. Binge watched your videos a couple of days ago. Keep it up.
As a JTAC to put it in the simplest terms possible is, that...
CAS (Close air support) is the name of a doctrine or set of procedures. CAS came about from USMC and got taken over as a multi-service procedure. The restrictions You talked about are in place due to the fact, that the supporting aircrew and acft are not organic to the supported unit. USMC and USAF do CAS as primary A-G support procedure. Detailed integration is achieved by having the JTAC as a mediator of information. A liaison if you will between branches.
CCA (Close combat attack) is US Army equivalent of CAS with a different set of procedures. The outcome is exactly the same - Air to Ground effects are achieved. The difference comes from the fact, that doctrinally the Army considers its RW as organic to the unit they're supporting or even as a maneuver unit as Casmo stated. This means, that the "detailed integration" is achieved by having the aircrews included in the planning process. Thus no JTAC is needed (as a JTAC I don't like CCA, that much btw. No control 😱, but flexible af).
Also would like to say, that both CAS and CCA have also been adopted by NATO. NATO helos usually are CCA, while FW are CAS. That's just the way it is. Also worth noting is that transport helo door guns are not considered CAS by anyone I've met. And the only USAF asset to use a CCA-like procedures is the AC130, when its using its side-mounted guns. Procedurally the differences are simply put, that CAS is structured and very methodical, whilst CCA makes use of plain text and aircrew initiative.
In closing, one is not better than the other. Just the difference comes from how one builds their supporting aircrew's situational awareness of ground ops. Best A-G specialists utilize both CAS and CCA to kill the enemy.
Yeah that’s a good point about the AC-130. Never got a chance to use them. The call (and the CCA- which had a name change 🤢) are very artillery-like calls. Which doesn’t help convince the ground force commander to use army copters like maneuver.
Hope you join the Low Level Hell discord. I’m always looking for people smarter than me to help out! Drop me a note.
Yeah CCA used to have a real mouthful of a acronym like AACFF or smth. Army Aviation Call for Fire.
And totally agree about the convincing of GFCs.
@@CasmoTV will do on the discord
Dang, a doctrine reply. Q: Does CCA use 9 line format?
@@PappyGunn No. Its a 5-line format. Google Army Attack Aviation Call For Fire.
Great content. Opening up the complexities of the airborne battle space.
20 years in the military you learn to use powerpoint and excel very well with little formal training lol.
Great video, keep'em coming!
Great video with great content.
Great video, thanks!
Brilliant topic thank you
Nice job 👍🏻
Are you working with BD on something for the Kiowa? 12:30 :D
Sharp eyes...
No surprise there isn't that many JTACs out there, considering size requirements, as per your Power Point.
I wont hold it against you that you were a tanker...but it probably helps to understand the ground commander's general situation and what he is experiencing. Great video. Look forward to more in the future. PowerPoint skills are real.
I mean at least he wasn't artillery. =)
Nice to know the difference. Didn't know that. Apaches are more Hunter/Killer elements. That will help when creating missions for the upcoming Apache in DCS.
Just make sure you got your 30mm loaded and a lot of technicals to chase around the desert. Call it the rat patrol
I am now smarter. Mission accomplished.
No, they do fire support or whatever the Army calls it (depends on nations). CAS is for aircraft with the wings bolted on, not flinging all over the place. Except for the Marines but nobody could get through explaining that to them. The exact definition varies by doctrine but it is generally understood to be engaging targets in close proximity to friendly troops. That Air Force doctrine. But the way helos operate is different when supporting troops.
Thx Casmo, for a great video. Would be cool if there were a simulator that was made for air-land battle! I do have DCS, but it's not that interesting regarding land battle...I think.
I think DCS is good for solo air to ground. Air to air the AI cheats too much, so its better online.
Arma 3 is decent when it comes to making massive battles. The AI can be a bit OP like in DCS but like in DCS it can be fine tuned.
So, would you say that the army rotary-wing procedure is more of a kill box type of sort by default, for high intensity conflicts ? You got a defined "box" and you are cleared to engage without the need for terminal guidance ?
What happens in a COIN environment where Danger Close is something way more probable to happen ? Do you do CAS then ? I've always thought about CAS as most needed when in close proximity to the enemy and you have to make sure deconfliction from friendlies is happening.
Oh, sick graphics by the way!
Sorta. I’ll talk airspace soon and maybe that’ll make more sense.
I have a question. That define of CAS has little change like 'air action by fixed and rotary wing('19) -> by aircraft('20)'. Is that aircraft meanning both fixed and rotary ??
Just depend on the service owning the aircraft and how they interpret it.
You were a tank crew? Why and how did you change and did you prefer helicopter?
Cause helicopters means (generally) not sleeping outside. 🤷🏻♂️
Check out the “Kiowa pilots talk about the DCS Kiowa” video and it has my origin story lol
Is a FAC-A in an armed jet allowed to clear themselves hot under CAS rules?
Good question. I assume so since they are a current and qualified JTAC.
All aircraft technically have clearance authority over themselves. I haven't met a pilot that's necessarily comfortable with dropping ordnance based on nothing but a voice on a radio, but they can.
It boils back to both the inherent right to self defense and those situations where no controller is available but somebody needs help quick. We aren't going to leave a squad in a TIC to die because the JTAC's radio died.
I'm sorry for being stupid, but however I tried I didn't get what exactly "9-line" was. All I could find was a call for emergency medevac.
Sir, your videos are brilliant, but I would appreciate if you broke down professional terms for us and explained why things are as they are. You are a professional and you talk about things you know with your very guts. A noob and a non-military person like myself has no idea what it all is and why it is as it is.
9 line close air support call.
@@CasmoTV Thanks, I see now. However, what I meant was that you should give definitions of the terms you use. Sometimes you start using a professional term in the middle of a video without explaining its exact meaning and this is somewhat confusing.
I wonder, why aren't jets also used as maneuver elements? They certainly have the capability to find targets themselves, so why aren't they allowed to act flexibly and independently, like helicopters?
Your have to ask all the friendlies who have been strafed and bombed by jets who have been accidentally identified as enemy. That’s a glib answer but the reality is that jets have a very difficult time finding targets without having someone on the ground, and frankly their ability to properly identify friend from foe is not as high a probability as a helicopter that’s much closer to the action. And this isn’t my opinion; this is doctrinally based fact backed up by other jet pilots I’ve spoken to through my career who acknowledge that a tiny screen down by their knee is a poor way identify what kind of tank that is.
Additionally they CAN be employed that way in something called SCAR but it’s usually A-10s from what I gather. But again, the British have their own problem with A-10s finding their own targets. You can find that video somewhere on CZcams.
@@CasmoTV I see, I underestimated how much of a difference the simple practicality of distance makes. Thanks for your reply!
@@presidentbanana4536 yeah the high ground is a good thing but I equate it to this. If you’re overlooking a battlefield from a small hill, you can see and direct your forces. Now you’re on top of mount Everest… can you still really see and direct what’s going on?
That is difficult because jets are fast and have trouble finding targets on the ground. They fly around 400 mph. And it's a waste. Jets are good at interdiction like blowing up bridges and concentrations behind the front. Or deeper, get the bad guys in the bunker type stuff. The kind of missions that only they can do.
A Tank guy, you say?
Attack helicopters exist for some reason that isn't transport