A-10 Being Retired

[countto10]

I keep hearing that 241 will remain in service until 2040 despite all this fear-mongering.

[Invader ZIM]

I hate to see the A-10's go, but it's not like they are going to be extinct any time soon. Besides having an F-35 fly over and do this:

 

 

 

 

Each F-35 is a mini combined Awacs/JSTAR system that can immediatly send positional data to other networked systems in the air or on the ground. If the area is clear of AA threats and a 30mm gun run is the best option I think the A-10 could still have a place. Or the F-35 can drop a SDB on the individual heads of enemy soldiers and tanks alike. Or allow an MLRS system to hit that AA threat and hit the tanks with DPICM if in range. A lot more options for the F-35's given the sort of view they get with the new systems onboard.

 

I know, it's a Wiki but: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairchild_Republic_A-10_Thunderbolt_II#Future_retirement

 

In 2007, the A-10 was expected to be in USAF service until 2028 and possibly later,[92] when it may be replaced by the Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II.[30] Critics have responded by saying that replacing the A-10 with the F-35 would be a "giant leap backwards" given the performance of the Warthog and the rising costs of the F-35 program.[93] In 2012 the Air Force briefly considered the F-35B STOVL variant for replacing the A-10 as a CAS aircraft, but concluded that the variant could not generate enough sorties to meet its needs.[94]

In early 2012, the USAF proposed to disband five A-10 squadrons in its budget request, in order to lessen cuts to more versatile aircraft in a smaller future fleet.[95] Congress however delayed this action in favor of more studies on the issue.[96]

As of August 2013, Congress and a National Commission on the Structure of the Air Force are still looking at the proposal to cut A-10 numbers down to 246 aircraft, as well as others. The Air Force has been trying to replace the A-10 with a multi-role fighter that can cover more area and have a wider mission set for some time. The F-35, and even the MQ-9 Reaper unmanned aerial vehicle, are seen as having the multi-role ability and modern sensors to fill the Warthog's missions of destroying vehicles and providing close-air support. A-10 pilots have been vocal about the aircraft's superiority in its field and its frequent request, sometimes by name, by ground commanders. One lesser-known function of the A-10 is escorting helicopters on combat search and rescue missions. Some believe that an A-10 that can perform this low-altitude, long-loiter time task and take ground fire is superior to an F-35 performing that job. The Thunderbolt II is armored and can take hits, while the Lightning II is not protected enough and cannot afford to be replaced if shot down. If the F-35 must do combat search and rescue, it will have a 360 degree distributed aperture infrared system that cannot be fitted to the A-10. Furthermore, the two planes have different primary armaments. The F-35 relies on deploying guided bombs and missiles, which can be vulnerable to jamming, while the A-10's 30 mm cannon is immune to electronic warfare. The A-10 can destroy 14 targets per mission, while the F-35 can not. Air Force officials have stated publicly that the F-35 won't duplicate the A-10’s missions, but they do need a multi-role aircraft and it has a longer range. Air Combat Command has said it should not be about which newer weapon systems must replicate the exact capabilities of older systems, but how many new systems will be needed to address future capabilities. The Air Force has not ruled out replacing the A-10 with another light attack aircraft to maintain numbers and mass firepower with the advantage of being able to integrate next-generation sensors.[89]

As part of the Air Force's FY 2015 budget, they are considering retiring the entire A-10 Thunderbolt II fleet. The A-10 and other single-mission aircraft are in danger to prioritize multi-mission aircraft and keep future procurements on track. While the service had previously considered cutting squadrons, cutting an entire fleet with its infrastructure support is seen as the only way to gain major savings. The Pentagon and active Air Force had tried to retire the single-mission platform for years. While Congressional resistance had saved the A-10 in the past, budget realities may finally defeat the aircraft. Members of the Air National Guard and Air Force Reserve argue that moving A-10s from active use to their control completely would achieve saving while still keeping them in the Air Force inventory. Half of the fleet is already under National Guard control. The U.S. Army has expressed their dissatisfaction with the process of replacing the aircraft they call on for close-air support. They also do not like the idea of replacing it with the more expensive F-35 Lightning II, which is not as heavily armed. The Army has shown interest in obtaining A-10 jets themselves if the Air Force retires them.[97][98]

 

Combined with the drones and Apache's, there's still some CAS available, but personally I would not want the A-10's retired from use until there were enough of the other systems to fill in the gap.

[Nealius]

ouch .. no money left to run or upgrade them.

 

I find it hard to believe that it's cheaper to introduce the F-35 than to maintain a fleet of A-10s.

[HiJack]

Drones will do the close support

[Nealius]

...that's even worse.

[Snoopy]

The Air Force is looking at retiring the entire fleet of the following ACFT:

• F-15C
  
• A-10C
  
• KC-10
  
• B-1B
  

 

IMO it's "the sky is falling" type of argument because of sequestration with the hope Congress will do something about it.

[Leviathan]

Well, other great planes will come. I'm sure people were mourning when the F-14 got downed. Now, everyone loves the F/A-18, its replacement. It's just how things are, the war planes come and go... And once in a while, there's a legend like the A-10C among them.

[schroedi]

They want to replace the B-1B and want the B-52H to stay in service? What should replace them - there isn't even an early prototype of a new bomber.

[Weta43]

I find it hard to believe that it's cheaper to introduce the F-35 than to maintain a fleet of A-10s

 

I suspect you're right, but I also suspect that from the point of view of a lobbyist for the aircraft manufacturing industry, that's a good thing, not a bad thing...

 

Of course that would only matter if principled politicians let lobbyists influence vital decisions like which aircraft/vehicles/vessels the airforce/army/Navy need...

[countto10]

They want to replace the B-1B and want the B-52H to stay in service? What should replace them - there isn't even an early prototype of a new bomber.

LRS-B. The B-52 carries the long range cruise missiles. However I would have replaced it because it's going to need replacing soon anyway being about the oldest plane in the airforce. That would leave B-1, B-2 and LRS-B (B-3) by 2025-2030.

[dumgrunt]

we'll buy em off ya for $1 an aircraft if they are so worthless :thumbup:

 

but in all seriousness why put the entire fleet through a major upgrade, just to send them to the boneyard just after its done?

 

look i have great confidence that despite all the negativity and the speculation that the f-35 will be a great combat aircraft, but without its IOC confirmed isnt it a bit early to start retiring the current inventory?

[ff4life4]

A-10's on Chopping Block

 

Thought some of you may find this interesting, and disheartening.

 

http://www.military.com/video/aircraft/attack-and-fighter-aircraft/af-admits-a-10-on-chopping-block/2683350275001/

[charmande]

Interesting, very much so thank you for posting.

Edited September 22, 2013 by charmande

[badger66]

Typical political decision ..... listen to what ground commanders say about it for a change .

 

Wonder will the Air Force put out a tender for a new CAS replacement ..... with a 30mm gun ?

[will-]

dont they already have one? c-130.

[Hamblue]

It's not a GAU 30mm and there are relatively few of them.

[Weta43]

but in all seriousness why put the entire fleet through a major upgrade, just to send them to the boneyard just after its done?

 

Bit like the story of the British and their Harriers - scrapped to make way for F-35 (which version ? - any version that works...)

[will-]

guess that would be the same as the huey's also, but i have seen a few CAS videos of them.

[doright]

The Air Force only built the A10 because the US Army said they would develop their own close air support fixed wing aircraft. That would have sucked budget from the AF, that is worse then battlefield causalities around the pentagon. It has been the AF's illegitimate adopted foster step-child ever since. A fledgling the AF would like to lock in the closet under the steps. But even having to make do with hand-me-downs and lack of support it still has out performed its rivals doing what it was designed to do - Close Air Support with long loiter times and survivability.

[FieroCDSP]

It can be said that the airframes are aging, their role limited, and their battlefield survivability more and more at risk in the advancing electronic battlefield where even Stealth-tech is having to improve dramatically.

That being said, there are virtually no new platforms in the Air Force arsenal since the F22 is limited and the F35 has yet to be something more than a production waiting game.

Scrapping the fleet of A-10's is a mistake, at least until the F-35 can prove it does the job as well. You can retrofit the heck out of several A-10's for the cost of one F-35, and lets be honest here, sometimes you need to loiter forever and have a lot of ordinance to deliver just before you head home. It has its place in CAS role and can continue to for some time.

[drmagnumwolf]

I think it is a bad choice if they do choose to do that. I might just be an armchair geek, but I'm pretty sure the A-10 is the PERFECT plane for today's battlefield. Lots of payload and loiter time, plus popular with the troops and feared by the enemy.

 

If they, indeed do this, it would be a similar decision of using P-51's in the Korean War instead of the P-47's and the retirement/production line closure of the F-14 Tomcat.

 

-BP8fRbuadA

 

Preaching to the choir, I know, but the people that has the power to save or doom this plane need to hear it from the troops on the ground and the pilots.

[Taproot]

Budget Cuts - A-10

 

Some good points regarding the scrapping of the A-10

 

http://www.pogo.org/our-work/straus-military-reform-project/weapons/2013/air-force-brass-ignores-wars-lessons.html?fb_action_ids=10201056012775862&fb_action_types=og.likes&fb_source=other_multiline&action_object_map=%7B%2210201056012775862%22%3A223206611175881%7D&action_type_map=%7B%2210201056012775862%22%3A%22og.likes%22%7D&action_ref_map=%5B%5D

[Chazz_BMF]

I can´t believe the Danish Airforce is considering buying the F-35, even though there is no runways long enough for it to land in the country! Politics :doh:

Edited September 29, 2013 by Chazz_BMF

[Vekkinho]

That's why they'll buy more expensive VSTOL version of it...

[Pilotasso]

I always thought they were getting the F-35A not the B.