Re: Pentagon To Scrap all 283 A-10s

Re: Pentagon To Scrap all 283 A-10s

Author
Discussion

y2blade

Original Poster:

56,029 posts

214 months

Monday 26th January 2015
quotequote all
From elsewhere:

On Jan. 15, Air Force Secretary Deborah Lee James pointed out that the A-10 had conducted 11% of all sorties against IS since August, despite the fact it was not deployed to the battlefield until November.

But it may be shot down soon by the budget-cutters. The Pentagon figures it can save $4.2 billion in operation and maintenance costs over five years by retiring all 283 of the Air Force's A-10s. It also believes the F-35, despite its unit cost and troubled development, can fill the need for close air-support need. Whether it can take the punishment the A-10 can is open to question.

http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials/012315-73...

MartG

20,619 posts

203 months

Monday 26th January 2015
quotequote all
USAF Generals hate it and want to kill it, US Army love it but the USAF won't let them operate it - this has been the A-10's ongoing saga since it first flew frown

anonymous-user

53 months

Monday 26th January 2015
quotequote all
A shame, but thought this had been on the cards for a while.

I have a very vivid childhood memory of a pair of A-10s appearing out of the clouds right in front of us whilst flying past Bentwaters in a Cessna 182, just after the USAF approach controller had told us that there was no traffic likely to conflict.

kowalski655

14,599 posts

142 months

Monday 26th January 2015
quotequote all
Remember going to Bentwaters in the ATC, and sitting in 1,getting shown around it,and the base. Loved that plane. Shame it is going as it is still so effective. Maybe the Army should just buy some instead of helicopters smile

Perik Omo

1,883 posts

147 months

Monday 26th January 2015
quotequote all
I remember going to Bentwaters too on a Flight Safety day in the 80's, it covered near misses/avoidance of military aircraft and they showed some scary in cockpit videos of some collisions that had happened, one was a Hercules that had collided with (I think) a Phantom in the 'states and the video was cut into one second chunks first you see a dot on the horizon then a couple of seconds later "BAM" they collided. Had the opportunity to see a stripped down A10 and remember just how big that gun was (almost the full length of the fuselage) also sat in one as well as a Phantom that had been flown in by a UK airforce pilot. There was also a "live" fire demo from a low-level A10 over the other side of the airfield.

-crookedtail-

1,558 posts

189 months

Monday 26th January 2015
quotequote all
but THAT gun!!! yikes

Great aircraft, tough as old boots! Exactly what is needed against these ISIS/IS, whatever they are called tts.

On a side note, why aren't we/the yanks getting some Apache action going on against them, are we scared we might lose one?

Eric Mc

121,768 posts

264 months

Monday 26th January 2015
quotequote all
Back in the 70s it was agreed that the US Army wouldn't operate any front line fixed wing aircraft.

Inter-service nonsense does more damage than many enemies.

scubadude

2,618 posts

196 months

Monday 26th January 2015
quotequote all
Its a shame as that buzz saw gun probably has a bigger physiological impact on the enemy than the threat of £30K missiles hitting them from over the horizon.

Admittedly using the A-10 down low probably is expensive on maintenance and does risk loosing aircrew more than standoff types of aircraft and weapons but they are currently fighting a dirty guerrilla style war against low tech infantry... logic says the relative low tech of the A-10 is ideally suited to ripping IS apart?

Eric is right about the Army vs Air force issue- after all this is essentially an airborne tank, where it belongs is abit dubious, IMO its an Army tool.

Mave

8,208 posts

214 months

Monday 26th January 2015
quotequote all
scubadude said:
logic says the relative low tech of the A-10 is ideally suited to ripping IS apart?
I think that counter logic is that even low tech IS with manpads poses too much threat to an A-10 so it tends to get used like any other fast jet.

mebe

292 posts

142 months

Monday 26th January 2015
quotequote all
Mave said:
I think that counter logic is that even low tech IS with manpads poses too much threat to an A-10 so it tends to get used like any other fast jet.
^This

Yes it's iconic with a BFG but it's vulnerable. If it's safe to use it an attack helicopter is a much better option. If it's not something high and fast is a better option. Really dont get the love-in.


FourWheelDrift

88,375 posts

283 months

Monday 26th January 2015
quotequote all
-crookedtail- said:
but THAT gun!!! yikes
Still used by various navies (including the RN) in the form of the Dutch made Goalkeeper close-in weapon system.

On the bow of HMS Bulwark here

V8 Fettler

7,019 posts

131 months

Tuesday 27th January 2015
quotequote all
mebe said:
Mave said:
I think that counter logic is that even low tech IS with manpads poses too much threat to an A-10 so it tends to get used like any other fast jet.
^This

Yes it's iconic with a BFG but it's vulnerable. If it's safe to use it an attack helicopter is a much better option. If it's not something high and fast is a better option. Really dont get the love-in.
Isn't the Apache too delicate for the desert environment? Hence the continued use of the A10. High and fast = restricted loiter + restricted flexibility.

Lincsblokey

3,175 posts

154 months

Tuesday 27th January 2015
quotequote all
And the A-10's being used heavily at Red Flag this week. Interestingly with a lot of US Army staff on the flight & ground crews....

TvrTone

288 posts

205 months

Tuesday 27th January 2015
quotequote all
-crookedtail- said:
but THAT gun!!! yikes

mebe

292 posts

142 months

Tuesday 27th January 2015
quotequote all
V8 Fettler said:
mebe said:
Mave said:
I think that counter logic is that even low tech IS with manpads poses too much threat to an A-10 so it tends to get used like any other fast jet.
^This

Yes it's iconic with a BFG but it's vulnerable. If it's safe to use it an attack helicopter is a much better option. If it's not something high and fast is a better option. Really dont get the love-in.
Isn't the Apache too delicate for the desert environment? Hence the continued use of the A10. High and fast = restricted loiter + restricted flexibility.
Well they've survived the last few sandy expeditions but rumour has it they are now a bit flakey and need some love.

FourWheelDrift

88,375 posts

283 months

Tuesday 27th January 2015
quotequote all
40+ year old aircraft last built new 30 years ago. So the back will be starting to ache and it'll be making that groaning "ooooo aaaaah" sound just before it touches down now.

Elroy Blue

8,686 posts

191 months

Tuesday 27th January 2015
quotequote all
The A-10 has new wings and avionics. It's the ineptness of Politicians that has caused a financial crisis, forcing the USAF to cull whole fleets of aircraft. The Senate has stopped the USAF from doing so, so they're stuck with it for the moment. The F-16 and F-15 are ageing fast, so there is going to be a big fighter 'gap' in a few years.

onyx39

11,109 posts

149 months

Wednesday 28th January 2015
quotequote all
Elroy Blue said:
The A-10 has new wings and avionics. It's the ineptness of Politicians that has caused a financial crisis, forcing the USAF to cull whole fleets of aircraft. The Senate has stopped the USAF from doing so, so they're stuck with it for the moment. The F-16 and F-15 are ageing fast, so there is going to be a big fighter 'gap' in a few years.
But the F35 solves every problem in every Air Force though right?

maffski

1,866 posts

158 months

Wednesday 28th January 2015
quotequote all
onyx39 said:
Elroy Blue said:
The A-10 has new wings and avionics. It's the ineptness of Politicians that has caused a financial crisis, forcing the USAF to cull whole fleets of aircraft. The Senate has stopped the USAF from doing so, so they're stuck with it for the moment. The F-16 and F-15 are ageing fast, so there is going to be a big fighter 'gap' in a few years.
But the F35 solves every problem in every Air Force though right?
The be fair the F35 also solves the A-10s problem of having to repeatedly expose itself to risk in close gun passes. It does this by only carrying two seconds worth of ammo.

V8 Fettler

7,019 posts

131 months

Wednesday 28th January 2015
quotequote all
mebe said:
V8 Fettler said:
mebe said:
Mave said:
I think that counter logic is that even low tech IS with manpads poses too much threat to an A-10 so it tends to get used like any other fast jet.
^This

Yes it's iconic with a BFG but it's vulnerable. If it's safe to use it an attack helicopter is a much better option. If it's not something high and fast is a better option. Really dont get the love-in.
Isn't the Apache too delicate for the desert environment? Hence the continued use of the A10. High and fast = restricted loiter + restricted flexibility.
Well they've survived the last few sandy expeditions but rumour has it they are now a bit flakey and need some love.
There are several accounts on several websites describing the generally delicate nature of the Apache, but nothing from a definitive source. Although the fact that the Warthog continues in service is perhaps a measure of the issues with the Apache; the latter is probably very good on the North German Plain though.