View From the Hill
Written by Rep. Jeff Miller (R-Fla.)
TOGETHER TO FIND A SOLUTION THAT WILL
PROVIDE A LEANER, MORE EFFECTIVE GUNSHIP.
Time and again our U.S. military leaders have extolled the virtues and importance of AC-130 gunships in supporting our operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. As Lieutenant General Donald Wurster, commander of Air Force Special Operations Command, puts it, “Everybody wants a gunship overhead.” The fact is that the AC-130s are one of the most lethal weapons we have on the battlefield and have been vital to our missions during Operation Enduring Freedom and Operation Iraqi Freedom.
Stationed out of Hurlburt Field in the panhandle of Florida, the U.S. Air Force uses the AC-130 for close air support, air interdiction and force protection. Esteemed for its ability to linger over targets while unleashing a massive amount of weaponry, the real effectiveness of the gunship comes from its precision firepower during the low-light, moderate-altitude missions in which it typically operates. Over the past 40 years, the gunship has been directly involved in missions from Operation Urgent Fury in Grenada to Operation Just Cause in Panama and Desert Storm in Iraq. They’ve supported U.N. missions in Somalia and NATO missions in Bosnia-Herzegovina. Across the world the AC-130 has long been revered for its ability to decimate a target accurately while protecting our troops on the ground.
Yet, despite the tremendous value to our troops overseas, our fleet of AC-130s is growing old, wearing thin and breaking down.
AFSOC currently maintains a fleet of eight AC-130H Pave Spectre IIs and 17 AC-130U Spookys. The first AC-130s arrived in Vietnam in 1967, and the average age of the current gunships is approaching 30 years old. By itself, this age would not necessitate a critical need to replace the fleet of gunships. However, the relatively small number of AC-130s available for use and the reliance on their protection and firepower over the past seven years in Iraq and Afghanistan has rapidly accelerated their rate of deterioration. AC-130 pilot Lieutenant Colonel Mark Clawson reported to the CBS Evening News early last year that the AC- 130s in the Middle East have “been flying at a rate four times what they ever anticipated,” a fact reiterated by AFSOC command. Recent inspections have shown cracks appearing in the gunships’ center wing box structures, causing planes to sit on the ground even longer. Wings have to be replaced sooner, guns have to be fixed more often, and additional maintenance has to be performed between missions.
With the cost of maintenance rising and the threat to our troops increasing as these planes grow older, there is a recognized need to either replace or modernize AFSOC’s AC-130 gunships within the next decade. The Pentagon and Congress are considering three options to achieve this goal: building new C-130 gunships and retiring the older versions, phasing in a smaller gunship commonly called the “gunship lite,” or continuing to maintain, rebuild and retrofit the current fleet of aircraft. The first option, building new AC-130s, is both costly and difficult to realize in the short term. The cost of a new AC-130 Spooky is $190 million in 2001 dollars, and it would be quite some time before any new planes would be fully operational. Based on the fiscally constrained environment facing the U.S. and recent comments from the Obama administration regarding defense budget cuts, we do not expect funding for new AC-130s to replace the current fleet.
The alternative to new AC-130s would be the development of a smaller, less expensive gunship better adapted for the conditions our soldiers face in areas like Afghanistan. The current C-130s are slow, must fly mostly at night to better avoid shoulder-launched missiles, and are usually required to attack at a set altitude. During the early years of the Afghanistan and Iraq wars, these limitations did not significantly impede the efficiency of the gunships, but as our battles turn from invasion to counterinsurgency and irregular warfare, the need for an aircraft that can operate from small, isolated airstrips has emerged.
AFSOC’s original plan included the purchase of C-27s from the Army, which would be converted into light gunships. In 2008, General Wurster expressed his support of the proposed AC-27—a heavily armed version of the new Joint Cargo Aircraft—stating that it would provide AFSOC an airplane with “a lower footprint, a smaller footprint that we can rapidly deploy.” Admiral Eric Olson, commander of U.S. Special Operations Command, concurs, noting that SOCOM is hoping to move forward on a plan to develop a lighter gunship by “mounting guns on a C-27, flying it in an orbital pattern to provide quick response—primarily to troops in contact or where troops may be expected to be in contact—with the surgical precision that we’ve come to expect from the AC-130.”
However, cuts to the FY10 defense budget have forced the Air Force to delay development of the AC-27 project, and instead focus on a third option: overhauling and modernizing existing planes to meet current needs. During a House Armed Services Terrorism and Unconventional Threats Subcommittee hearing in June of this year, Admiral Olson outlined to members of Congress a plan to install a “platform-neutral Precision Strike Package on our existing MC-130W aircraft, and to field them as soon as possible.” By using the already-developed MC-130W refueling plane as a platform to create a gunship, AFSOC can replenish the aging AC-130s in Afghanistan and Iraq at a lower cost and at a quicker rate. In addition, the retrofitted MC-130s will feature lighter guns, making it more maneuverable and better suited for combat operations in the Middle East.
In the immediate future, retrofitting MC-130s with gunship capabilities will provide AFSOC with enough planes to preserve a viable fleet of gunships for present operations in Afghanistan and Iraq. But this is simply a stop-gap measure. Longer-term, our military leaders at SOCOM and the Pentagon must decide on a force structure for gunship capability. We must determine if a smaller gunship is indeed required or if our troops are better served by redeveloping and modernizing a future generation of AC-130 gunships. I concur with Admiral Olson’s opinion that we can accept some short-term risk in order to provide gunships quickly, but that “a future program will be required to address the resultant shortfall.”
The AC-130 has been a vital part of our military operations for more than 40 years and has been instrumental in countless American victories, but most current planes are nearing the age of retirement. I am confident Congress and the Pentagon can work together to find a solution that will provide a leaner, more effective gunship that meets the needs of our armed forces without impeding our current military operations or sacrificing our future defense capabilities. ✯
__________________________________________
U.S. Rep. Jeff Miller, R-Fla., is the ranking member of the House Armed Services Terrorism and Unconventional Threats Subcommittee, overseeing U.S. Special Operations Command. Representing the panhandle of Florida, Miller’s district includes both Hurlburt Field and Eglin Air Force Base. He also serves on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and the Veterans Affairs Committee.