Army aviation to remain part of Russian Air Force

Army aviation will remain part of Russia's Air Force, and its fleet will be fully upgraded in the future, a deputy Air Force commander said on Wednesday.

Army aviation was an arm of the Ground Forces prior to becoming part of the Air Force in 2003. The possible return of army aviation assets to the Ground Forces has been one of the main discussion topics during the ongoing military reform in Russia.

"Army aviation will continue to fulfill the set tasks as part of the Air Force," Lt. Gen. Igor Sadofyev said.

It will carry out a wide-range of missions, including tactical air support of the Ground Forces, tactical aerial reconnaissance, transportation of airborne troops, and electronic warfare, Sadofyev added

A good idea and one that would never work in our dod because the power brokers would make it die quickly.

Why is it a good idea?

The USAF is horrible when it comes to getting it’s priorities right. The fighter maffia running their show bleeds things like the a10 and neglects aspects that are critical while they chase down their dreams of f22s. The USAF does not set it’s priorities based on what is actually needed and this became evident in 2001, 2003.

The fighter mafia in the USAF lose sight of the mission requirements, and instead seem to focus mainly on the latest. The F-22 is best at air superiority. The A-10 is best at supporting the groundpounders. Using F-16’s and F-35A’s for CAS is a waste, those planes best serve in a different strike role.

The Russians (and the Soviets before that) had organized as several separate air force organizations, depending on mission. Frontal Aviation serves the same role as TAC, VV-PVO/IA-PVO serves the same role as ADC (however also includes anti-air missile batteries), Long Range Aviation (LR-AF) is similar to SAC in mission (however the Strategic Rocket Forces make up an entirely separate arm), and a separate transport arm. Through in AV-MF for the naval mission. Apparently a bit more compartmentalization over there.

They had excluded Army Aviation from a Ground Forces for a reason.
Since WW2, to Afghanistan and Chechnya Army commanders neglected using their aerial assets properly.
Lacking good knowledge on a subject if they fond it needed for their task they could order a high performance jet already used all it’s smart munition for low altitude cannon run leading to a plane shot down and airmen captured or killed by insurgents and so on.
An idea of pre-2003 Russian relations between ground commanders and pilots may look good for the Army soldiers who have all the airpower they want but it is absolute evil for airmen forced to fly poorly planned unsafe missions lacking proper intel using coordinates in the way like soldiers see that without noting the difference between their infantry unit&tanks and jets.

The point in all this is that within our USAF (you know this too) there is a lack of emphasis when it comes to the support of the “groundpounders.” Ironically, it is they that will determine success or failure in Iraq, Afghanistan, Somalia, Panama, Grenada............ The USAF generally looks at the A2A, Air Interdiction, Strategic Attack missions and that's where they pour their resources, at least that was the case historically.

I understand the need to achieve air superiority, without which you're not doing much else. But after the fall of the wall and with our current threats, the USAF has shown a severe lack in adapting, i.e. prioritizing. It's pretty sad to see how late in the game the USAF jumped on board with drones. How they tried to can the A10 several times over and argue that platforms that really couldn't can indeed take over its role, how they poured billions into all sorts of things but just recently updated the targeting pod and some avionics on the A10.......... The USAF want’s to “dominate space” when in reality they can't support “Joe the infantryman” all that well. To the fighter jocks running the USAF and still stuck in a "mine is bigger that yours" mentality what are intel capabilities that can support the front line troops, a dedicated CAS platform, certain types of ordinance.....worth? In fact, something like a drone is actually seen as a threat and there is good reason why it wasn't until Iraq and Afghanistan that these technologies began being pushed they way they were!

There is a good argument to be made to strip the USAF of that mission and simply assign fixed wing assets to the Army that support CAS etc. That way the Army which needs these capabilities has direct control and ownership of these capabilities. That way the USAF can devise their plans for invading Saturn with laser powered space jets while the Army fights in Iraq.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.