“Give me your opinions regard this topic and the aircraft(s) you would choose to fight low intensity warfare.”

All depends on who the airforce is and whom they are fighting and what type of rules both sides play by. Also “low intensity” is a very vague term. Rebel groups in a “low intensity” conflict could sport SA-14s and 14.5mm heavy machine guns.

That said the EMB-314 is a good plane for the COIN mission in terms of cost and capability plus after the war is over it can go back to training pilots. For what the Hawk 200 costs you could go off and buy a surplus F-16A/B Block 15 which has a better payload anyways. Yes the Hawk 209 has moved some mud over East Timor and Aceh but not much better (if at all) then a F-5E/F or A-4E could have and did do. Plus I would not want to buy a Hawk 200 in the first place as the UK could get squeamish on its use to put down “low intensity” uprisings.

One of my personal favorites is the AC-47 gunship. It is highly effective in not only killing the enemy but in scaring them as well. The plane is excellent at night and in providing close support for government positions under attack by the enemy. The C-47 is a common enough plane and parts would not be terribly hard to come by. Whether with 7.62mm gattling guns or 12.7mm heavy machine guns it is very useful. The AC-47 has been very effective in the Philippines, Indonesia, Cambodia, Laos, Vietnam and El Salvador for example.

As much as I adore the AT-28 and A-1D/E both are pretty much gone and parts would be a bitch to get.

The F-5E/F is also of much use in moving mud. It can carry 4 Mk.82s and 1 fuel tank along with 2 AAMs which is a useful load for combat. The F-5E/F have been used in “low intensity” conflicts such as Timor and RTAF strikes in Cambodia.

So planes like the AC-47, AT-28, EMB-314, Hawk 200 and F-5E/F are all proven in COIN ops. Hell an F-86D could be of use (done so in the past).

Really its just how you use what you have at the time. A well used AC-47 acting on fresh and accurate intel called in by talented FACs is of more use then a F-16A, Hawk 200 or EMB-314 “plowing the fields” with no intel. Its all the coordination between air and ground assets and the timely use of intel which make the plane useful or not.

I don’t think the F/A-18E/F is junk it just really fails to add up with the F-14. For example the SH is claimed to be ok because of the changed threats the USA faces, that on its face is a fallacy. The SH lacks the range and payload of the F-14 to be a bomb truck over a long range. And the stand off weapons the SH can bring to the game would be of no use bombing the Sudan for example as they lack real AD in the first place and not like Afghanistan has many high value targets worth a JASSM. So for low intensity operations the F-14 offers a better range and payload when using JDAMs and LGBs which are well suited for stomping low tech enemies. Second off for a high tech shooting war the F-14 shows the SH up once again as it could shoot down or at least scare away Flankers, JH-7s, Su-24s or Tu-22Ms much better then the slow F/A-18E/F. The F/A-18E/F might not even be able to catch a Su-24 or Flanker. The F-14 has a longer ranged radar and of course missile, and it is not hard at all to fit an AIM-120 but the AIM-54C is much better in taking out the enemy way before they can fire back. Maintenance wise the SH is better but that’s really all it seems to have going for it. This is like the F-2 (Japanese plane) replacing the F-15E in other words dumb. So really for air combat the F-14 shows it up and operating as a bomb truck the F-14 shows it up once again. Now who knows the SH could add a few MiG-29s to its total but it still will not add up with the F-14 in terms of what it brings to the table.

“Upgraded second-hand USN F/A-18Ds might be a cost-effective solution, if more Su-30MKMs are too expensive.”

Of course. The F/A-18F is expensive and offers very little more then the F/A-18D. The bait for them is the AIM-120 and the APG-79 is not coming with their F/A-18Fs. They use the F/A-18D for ground attack and naval strike and more could give them a full squadron of naval strikers and ground attackers that could be covered by the Su-30MKMs. Also they have not signed an order as of yet so they could be getting second thoughts on buying the F/A-18F. The F/A-18D is cheaper by a good amount and the F/A-18F is not brining too much new in for its cost.

“As for US uniforms…any pictures? Because all the images I’ve seen don’t show US equipment.”

Come on don’t you know everything is the fault of the USA?

“Bae has managed to sell the Hawk to 3 members of its former empire: Australia, Canada and South Africa. I dont call that selling very well”

And they have sold to Indonesia, Malaysia, Saudi Arabia, South Korea, Kuwait, Oman, Zimbabwe, UAE, Finland, Kenya and Switzerland. So I do call that selling very well.

” If the F-5 were to come back on the market and under developed countrys started buy them in large quantity”

Hell at the very least if Northrop Grumman offered tech support the second hand ones would sell better.

“Noone is showing interest in the T-50 and Im willing to make you a very large bet no customers will suddenly appear when it reaches production status.”

Wel it will sell to South Korea and that s good enough for them.