Congratulations To The Usaf!

[TOW-2]

It took you 30 years, but you finally killed the A10.

 

You did what SAMs, AAA and general hard use couldn't do.

 

I'm sure the Army and Marines will forever appreciate this.

 

http://security.blogs.cnn.com/2014/02/24/defense-department-to-cut-army-to-pre-ww-ii-size/?hpt=hp_t1

[R011]

The world goes on. F-16's can drop JDAM's and fire Mavericks as well as the A-10 and 20 mm fire kills jihadis just as dead as 30 mm. No different than what USMC F/A-18's and AV-8's.

[rmgill]

The A-10s can do down and low into the dirt a lot better.

[swerve]

Yes, but how much is that needed?

[R011]

Yes, but how much is that needed?

 

Quite. Coming in above MANPADS height seems to be preferred nowadays and with PGM's, all you need is someone to give you an accurate location. I always wondered how well A-10's would do against the Red Hordes with a far more robust front-line air defence net than the Iraqis ever had.

[rmgill]

Yes, but how much is that needed?

It's not needed until it is….We didn't need tanks in the interwar years. Then….

[Colin]

Time for the US Army Air force to raise again

[JW Collins]

Oh don't blame the USAF entirely, sure you've got the same types who are always trying to kill the A-10 but the idiots in DC are enabling this.

[Josh]

Something has to give in the budget and the A-10 is a one trick pony. It makes sense to retire the type in this budget climate. Its role can be filled by other aircraft. As well? Probably not, but the rest of the world gets by without having dedicated CAS aircraft. Outside of gun runs at low level, the A-10 doesn't really bring much to the table an F-16 can't accomplish.

[T19]

dies with a wimper and not a bang

 

Pitty

[Sardaukar]

And I think low-level CAS is going to be taken over by UAVs, lot less risky to pilots. It's still pity to see A-10 to go, though.

[JW Collins]

It's slow speed does give more time to set up Maverick shots. Plus rocket pods for whatever they are worth today.

 

Yes, budget, budget, budget, I just can't believe that there isn't something else we can't cut. How many foreign bases of questionable use do we still have? Maybe we could cut some Powerpoint sensitivity training or whatever other nonsense they do these days.

 

The biggest annoyance I have is that we just upgraded 300+ aircraft to A-10C standard and have rewinged 100 or of those (with more planned) so they can last out to 2028 or beyond.

 

It's true that the rest of the world (excluding the Russians with their Su-25), get by without such a dedicated CAS aircraft, but with our budget we should be able to afford some unique "nice-to-have" assets like the A-10 and AC-130.

 

In war broke out with Soviets in the 1980s the life expectancy of A-10 pilots was pretty low. It was just hoped through tactics and training they would be able to inflict major losses on Soviet armor despite their own losses. Against a first-rate opponent with the latest air defense systems the A-10 is still going to be vulnerable today, but we usually aren't fighting the Russians or Chinese.

[Olof Larsson]

 

Yes, but how much is that needed?

 

Quite. Coming in above MANPADS height seems to be preferred nowadays and with PGM's, all you need is someone to give you an accurate location. I always wondered how well A-10's would do against the Red Hordes with a far more robust front-line air defence net than the Iraqis ever had.

 

 

Well, the USAF did pull back the A-10's from attacking the Republikan Guard during the Gulf war

because of the losses and number of damaged A-10's, leaing the Guards

to the more survivable (i.e. les likely to be hit) F-16, F-15E's, F-111's and B-52's.

 

And of course by 1991 the Red Hords, unlike Iraq had SHORAD with all-aspect missiles

and several times larger warheads.

 

But then before Sprey whent full retard on the A-X with his fantacies about Rudel and his tank-busting Stuka,

the A-10 was in essence intended for supporting air assault units with helo escort and suppressive fire vs. only light air-defence.

[Corinthian]

Has Israel once expressed interest with the A-10? Sokor? It's those two countries I'm thinking that might have use for it.

[rmgill]

I suspect they probably work better where they have terrain to get down and below to minimize the exposure.

[Yama]

Quite. Coming in above MANPADS height seems to be preferred nowadays and with PGM's, all you need is someone to give you an accurate location. I always wondered how well A-10's would do against the Red Hordes with a far more robust front-line air defence net than the Iraqis ever had.

Poorly. But I suggest that it was sort of expected. It was thought that war would be over before USAF would run out of A-10's.

 

Problem with A-10 today is that there's still role for it, but not for the hundreds of them, and cutting only some would result to minimal savings. By contrast, cutting the entire fleet (especially as we're talking about pretty aged aircraft) is a major cost saving.

[R011]

 

Yes, but how much is that needed?

It's not needed until it is….We didn't need tanks in the interwar years. Then….

 

 

Your confusing tactics and equipment designed for them with role. The tactics the A-10 was designed for are mostly no more and for good reason. The A-10 is a really cool aircraft that apparently fit a niche in the 1980's. It now brings not enough more to the table to justify the cost of the fleet.

[Rod]

With advances in sensors and ATGMs (or missiles with FAE warheads) and stealthy UCAVs coming the role of the A-10 is becoming limited. Even ATACMS and GLMRS is giving infantry a bigger toolbox of CAS than before. One can argue that in an airspace where there is no risk of an adversary Air Force or advanced SAM network then it makes more sense to send a AC-130 gunship than a A-10 for suppressive CAS

[TOW-2]

A10 now has a glass cockpit, and can drop GPS munitions. Moreover, I distinctly remember hearing of multiple events in Afghanistan where close range gunfire was called for, but 20mm just bounced off enemy revetments where 30mm HE/HEI would've done the trick.

 

Oh well, my opinion as a taxpayer who wants the most for his military means diddly/squat, so.

[Archie Pellagio]

Yes, but how much is that needed?

 

We've gotten great at killing tool-age savages with tuber-technological overmatch.

 

What happens when we fight someone with a half decent integrated air defence?

 

I keep saying, we're the Boer War generation, we've gotten pretty good at this COIN caper but the Great War is just around the corner and all our neat toys will be forged together into something that will shock us greatly... and kill a lot of us.

Edited February 25, 2014 by Archie Pellagio

[swerve]

Has Israel once expressed interest with the A-10? Sokor? It's those two countries I'm thinking that might have use for it.

S. Korea looks like the best bet, if the Koreans were interested. They're faced with exactly what it was designed to fight, & plenty of terrain to hide behind. If the spoilt fat boy ever goes crazy enough to start it, the S. Koreans wouldn't be in a position to worry about RoEs & minimising their own losses (just keep the exchange rate high enough . . . .).

 

I think Israel would have loved something like A-10 in 1973, but no longer has very much use for it.

[Chris Werb]

What Swerve said on this thread x 10.

[Chris Werb]

Well, the South Koreans recently (very cleverly) came up with an SP howitzer mounting a WW2 US 105mm on what was essentially an updated 1950s M series truck, so they're not beyond thinking out of the box when it comes to recycling old kit. However, one thing the NKs are not short of are optically directed AA and MANPADS, so unless the A-10s would be operating exclusively at night, they wouldn't be expected to last long (see Swerve's comment on acceptable attrition). The RoKs are now one of the World's most technologically advanced armed forces and if they can go after those same targets without going into the MANPADS/optically directed AA/trashfire envelope, they will. The A-10C can drop LGB/JDAM or launch missiles from altitude, but you might as well do that from a multipurpose fighter, an armed trainer or a drone.

[Dawes]

I think they'll all be put out to pasture in the boneyard at Davis-Monthan AFB. In fact, A-10 pilot training is DM's main mission so that place will be a lot quieter if this comes to pass.

[Rich]

We've gotten great at killing tool-age savages with tuber-technological overmatch.

 

Of course we have better potato guns. What's your point?

 

Sorry, but I just couldn't resist.