Venerable A-10 Warthog Faces Extinction

[TuFun]

Here we go again...

"The venerable A-10 tank killer aircraft is taking a hit of its own as part of the Defense Department’s decision to eliminate six of the Air Force’s tactical air squadrons and one training squadron.

Air National Guard squadrons will bear the brunt of the losses. Three of the five A-10 squadrons going away will be Guard units. Air Force leaders plan to eliminate one Reserve and one active duty squadron."

http://www.military.com/news/articl...rve-in-planned-closures.html?ESRC=airforce.nl


Had three A-10's fly near the Korean demilitarized zone, two had bullet holes fired by the North in 84. Also, a pilot lost his brakes, so he pulled the emergency handle on the right console... canopy blew off!

Took me a week to fix that one! Oh, and it's the emergency handle on the left console for the brakes. Suwon, S. Korea 84-85 -TuFun

 

[stiz]

i know its bad people looseing their jobs etc ... but are 17 odd squadrons (at my count, prolly wrong!) of a-10s really needed nowdays??

 

[strikehawk]

Ask the guys on the ground that the Hogs protect with CAS if 17 squadrons of A-10 are needed.

Ahh, the bean counter mind at work. Reminds me of the Navy's "Master Plan" for it's helo's a few years back. Even though the the threat from subs has diminished, it's still there but not like the Cold War, the Navy eliminated the only two HCS squadrons to save the HS mafia's precious HS units. Sadly they found out that the only two units that were dedicated C/SAR and SEAL Team support assets had what the HS/HSC units lacked, trust from the SEAL community. It only took them five years to realize the mistake and the Navy has it's dedicated C/SAR units with most of the enlisted and officers from the previous units running again. I hope that the AF does not endanger the lives of the guys in combat to save a few bucks. The A-10 is a great bird and we loved them when the worked with us on exercises, they could fly as slow as the helos and hang around until it was time to go home, just like the Sandys of Viet Nam. Fast moves are not accurate or slow enough for that mission and a Vipers idea of CAS is "well we were close enough with our ordnance to scare the bad guys", is unacceptable. That last bit is spoken as a father of a Marine and Army Infantryman that were in combat and protected by those ugly guardian angels.

Stupid bean counters should not dictate program cuts unless they want to go into combat to see who their ideas are working out. I'm sure that they would be most welcome out in injun country.

 

[Railrunner130]

I see your point. The biggest word in this effort is flexibility. While the A-10 is simply the best airplane ever built for that role, it's not an air-to-air machine.

Since mid-2003, the only F-15s in the desert (that I'm aware of) were the F-15Es, with both the air-to-air and strike capabilities. The Pentagon believes that by retiring some of the fighter fleet, they can reuse the money they would've spent flying and maintaining those "excess" airplanes into the F-35.

In many ways, it's a similar story to the demise of the F-14. It was a great air-to-air airplane and, in it's final days, a great Bombcat. It delivered precision guided municians with pin point accuracy. What got the Tomcat was the cost of maintaining it. Something like 10 man hours went into each flight hour and the Navy decided it could do just as good a job cheaper with the F-18.

 

[Prowler1111]

The Pentagon believes that by retiring some of the fighter fleet, they can reuse the money they would've spent flying and maintaining those "excess" airplanes into the F-35.

And that my friend..is the whole reason...(besides isn´t the 35 supposed to replace the hog as well?)

Prowler

 

[redriver6]

And that my friend..is the whole reason...(besides isn´t the 35 supposed to replace the hog as well?)

Prowler

yeah sure...i know the Air Force will let 35's fly low slow circles around a SAR mission

 

[Allen]

Well the Pentagon wants to slow prodution of the F-35.

http://mdjonline.com/view/full_stor...ckheed’s-F-35-program?instance=home_news_left

Since the F-35 is years away from being use at all let alone in real combat I'm sure the Predator and Reaper drone will work fine tell the bads guy send a few million doller aircrafts crashing like AirHogs toys with over the counter computer parts.

 

[Odie]

If the USAF doesn't want them (as was going around before Desert Storm), the Army was saying, "Give'em to us and we'll use them." Could be the same today.

 

[redriver6]

If the USAF doesn't want them (as was going around before Desert Storm), the Army was saying, "Give'em to us and we'll use them." Could be the same today.

that is exactly what they should do.

 

[airattackimages]

The idea that we'd never again need large numbers of Hogs is a dangerous thought process to have... And its running rampant in Washington right now, in regards to several different facets of the military.

Get rid of all these once essential pieces of hardware now just because they're not essential at the moment, and reap the nightmare a few years down the road when you suddenly realize you need them.

And as for the F-35, it'll never be half the aircraft the A-10 is. The type of CAS it will be able to provide will be lackluster at best. Just another airplane, when the troops want a Hog.

 

[redriver6]

with the AF cutting the demo teams...and A-10's...i guess we won't be seeing anything like this in the near future..

 

[stiz]

Ask the guys on the ground that the Hogs protect with CAS if 17 squadrons of A-10 are needed.

but surley theres another aircraft/helicoper that can do the same job, just as well, for cheaper. The Taliban dont exactly have any russian tanks and armour and things have progressed in other areas since the hog was first designed. Also its not like their not getting rid of all the A10s, just 5 squadrons, so its hardley an extinction! Also ask yourself, how many of the 17 squadrons actually do Ops?

 

[CG_1976]

Just transfer the effected A10's to the USMC. The Warthog has Marines written all over it.

 

[airattackimages]

but surley theres another aircraft/helicoper that can do the same job, just as well, for cheaper. The Taliban dont exactly have any russian tanks and armour and things have progressed in other areas since the hog was first designed. Also its not like their not getting rid of all the A10s, just 5 squadrons, so its hardley an extinction! Also ask yourself, how many of the 17 squadrons actually do Ops?

There it is again... The idea that the Taliban is the last enemy we'll ever face. Nice to know we have found utopia and (other than the Taliban) will never find ourselves in combat again.

As far as another plane that can do the job just as well... There isn't one. And none of the platforms you can come up with will be cheaper.

 

[stiz]

There it is again... The idea that the Taliban is the last enemy we'll ever face. Nice to know we have found utopia and (other than the Taliban) will never find ourselves in combat again.

As far as another plane that can do the job just as well... There isn't one. And none of the platforms you can come up with will be cheaper.

I never said the taliban will be the last enemy that the US will ever face, but its the current one and most likely will be for a while. But ask yourself, cool plane as it is, is a stonking big jet designed to knock out tanks and armour really the best choice (cost+matenince+logistics) to deal with their hit n run tactics?? Surely more apaches who can hover in an area is better than a jet that does 1 pass then has to extend out, turn, line up etc? or a slower prop plane??

Also the sqns going are one active-duty, one Reserve and three National Guard units. Lets face it, do you really need a10s to protect the states? will there be a time when enemy armour actually lands and US soil before the main active full time sqns arrive from whereever they are in the world AND after the army+navy etc throw stuff at it? I know they do tours etc but in my opion its a bit like useing a nuke when a bullet would do the job just as well.

 

[deathfromafar]

I never said the taliban will be the last enemy that the US will ever face, but its the current one and most likely will be for a while. But ask yourself, cool plane as it is, is a stonking big jet designed to knock out tanks and armour really the best choice (cost+matenince+logistics) to deal with their hit n run tactics?? Surely more apaches who can hover in an area is better than a jet that does 1 pass then has to extend out, turn, line up etc? or a slower prop plane??

Also the sqns going are one active-duty, one Reserve and three National Guard units. Lets face it, do you really need a10s to protect the states? will there be a time when enemy armour actually lands and US soil before the main active full time sqns arrive from whereever they are in the world AND after the army+navy etc throw stuff at it? I know they do tours etc but in my opion its a bit like useing a nuke when a bullet would do the job just as well.

An extremely short sited viewpoint, assumption.. First of all, A-10's are a very flexible and powerful platform that can operate in a wider degree of terrain and conditions than any rotor craft. There are quite a few locations within Afghanistan where the altitude makes it very difficult to impossible to operate choppers at normal combat weapon/fuel weights. Even if they go in light, because of Altitude/Density they are very sluggish at best and very vulnerable. The A-10 has no such problems and can stay on station for quite some time, especially is there is a tanker track set up for them to hit and then return to a hold point. Truth is, there is not a single platform in existence that can perform the same way that the A-10 can. Especially since the C model upgrades are coming online adding even greater flexibility. The A-29 will be a great supplement to the A-10(more to fill a gap) but never replace it in capability.

But, it is not that we need a lot of A-10s to defend our own soil. In fact we're highly unlikely to need them on our own soil at any point. Planes like the A-10 and other platforms may be needed for the unforeseen threats(usually most all conflicts are) that could potentially spread to other nations causing massive loss of life, disrupt major commerce, shipping, and vital energy supplies which could literally cripple many nations around the world. In these days of austerity measures our current situation is not unlike such days of past that left many nations exposed to threats both large and small. Painful lessons of the past have taught us if the question is asked; “Do we really need this or that”, almost invariably the answer will be “no” only to later learn we did need certain instruments of war we didn’t have. It’s not a secret that there are some potential major storms ahead which even some of the blind can see. While some cut, others are building. If we as nations are to expect to maintain both our sovereignty and way of life(peace being included), we can’t afford not to invest in the only thing which will yield the former dividends.

 

[Railrunner130]

Another thing to keep in mind is that this is the fourth time that the USAF has tried to boneyard the A-10. Hopefully, this will be as successful as the 1991 attempt.

 

[CWOJackson]

The bureaucrats, generals and bean counters have all had their say...seems the only folks to not have a say in this decision are the ground pounders.

 

[CG_1976]

1st Afghan war history. Ask the Russians about helo's and how many were lost. As I recall quite high. Hit and run can be a excellent tactic and has been numerous times. Blue coats used it very effective against the Red Coats:mixedsmi:. The Warthog is easy to maintain and the cheapest and most effeective and very strong and will always almost bring home it's pilot alive.