A-10 Being Retired

[javelina1]

On my way back from a Mexico business trip few months ago, I spent a day i Tuscon, AZ. I visited Pima air and space museum and the A-10's were taking off and flying all over the museum grounds. It was cool to watch them climbing and catching up formation ...

 

I've been Javelina hunting a few times, down in the Southeast of Arizona. And have seen a number of A-10's flying low level over the desert. They sound like a whole lotta trouble, when flying around. One wicked bird.... :D

[RIPTIDE]

The only possible scenario when you would need stealth for CAS/ground attack plane is full scale invasion on Russia and China (or covert operations).

 

Now, that is not very likely to happen, isn't it? :)

I still remember reading about A-10's been tasked to tackle SA-3 sites in GW1. Some F-16s and Mighty F-15Es were lost to SA-2/3/AAA fire. And this war was by all accounts a very lopsided tussle. And even still aircraft had to fly in risky areas and conditions because they had to push forward.

 

I think there is a general idea that has been cultivated over the last 20 odd years that these Wars go down in some very discrete steps with little temporal overlap.

 

Something like:

 

1) Cruise missile S-200/EWR/C&C/Airbases

 

2) DEAD/SEAD/Anti-Air

 

2) Anti-Armor/Infrastructure Interdiction and General Land Army Action

 

 

IN a real War where opponents are more closely matched.... ALL of the above happens very close to each other with lots of overlap. More crucially even when you're winning, Stage 2 might never be completely finished until the War itself is in it's closing stages.

 

And because of that there will always be the potential for losses. And the reason is, that one can't wait so long. If you do, you simply loose the war. You have to take the risks and the associated losses that come with it.

 

Sturmoviks, B-17s flying against the Axis never waited until they had Superiority in the air. They couldn't wait! Thay had to get in and do what they could. B-52's never enjoyed overall Air-Superiority in the air in Vietnam. Though they did at times enjoy local air Supremacy at huge expense and effort from ECM, DEAD raids and chaffers.

 

So you see, a Major War... no one has time to wait. Armor will go on without full air superiority, as will bombers as will everyone else... and they will suffer from it at times. I guess the key of course is to try and create Local Air Supremacy. THe F-35 provides that more than A-10 in the CAS Ground support role. If you wait for the SEAD/DEAD aircraft to thouroughly clean an area for <4th Gen aircraft, by the time it's done your own mechanized ground units have lost the War. A closer example... the 2008 tiff in Georgia. If the Russians had to wait until they found every SA-11 battery the Georgians had, they might not have done so well, so quickly. THey still sent in Su-25s to bomb Georgia and lost a few in the process and a few other things aswell.

 

That said... I still believe there will always be a need for Cost Effective Fixed Wing CAS as local conditions of a fluid front line demand. :thumbup:

[Scrim]

Yes, but the thing is, if there are so many ground threats around that your CAS assets need stealth to accomplish their mission, you are fighting a losing war. And the stealth CAS ability of the F-35 is embarrassingly bad. If it carries anything outside the internal weapons bay, kiss good bye to stealth. And the internal weapons bay only has room for 2 GBU-12s. And if they do bring that, they'll need an escort, because then they are flying without air-to-air capability into a battlefield where the enemy is so strong they still have a majority of their radars and advanced SAMs and AAA intact.

 

That certainly wasn't the case in Georgia when and where the Russians sent in their SU-25s. And I have to disagree with the B-17/B-52 comparisons. They were flying strategic bombing missions, and here we're talking about sending planes into suicidally strong enemy territory for CAS missions, that are about as tactical as it gets with planes.

[badger66]

I feel the only people who have the right to speak up for the A-10 and should be listened too are the troops it is working with . The Generals know crap , the politicians only know what they are told to say .....

 

Fact is , the grunts want the Hog ..... end of in my book !!!

[RIPTIDE]

Yes, but the thing is, if there are so many ground threats around that your CAS assets need stealth to accomplish their mission, you are fighting a losing war. And the stealth CAS ability of the F-35 is embarrassingly bad. If it carries anything outside the internal weapons bay, kiss good bye to stealth. And the internal weapons bay only has room for 2 GBU-12s. And if they do bring that, they'll need an escort, because then they are flying without air-to-air capability into a battlefield where the enemy is so strong they still have a majority of their radars and advanced SAMs and AAA intact.

Wrong analysis. There is no kissing goodbye to stealth.... there is no stealth to kiss goodbye to. There is stealthy and then there is less stealthy. There is Engagement ranges shrinkage with stealthy. There is still engagement range issues with less stealthy.

 

That certainly wasn't the case in Georgia when and where the Russians sent in their SU-25s.

What wasn't the case? That ~4xSu-25 and possibly 1-2 Su-24M were lost to Anti-Air assets? Aircraft that might not have been lost had they waited several days to DEAD the country and ultimately lose the initiative?

And I have to disagree with the B-17/B-52 comparisons. They were flying strategic bombing missions, and here we're talking about sending planes into suicidally strong enemy territory for CAS missions, that are about as tactical as it gets with planes.

I think you miss the point. It's the approach that is the comparison. The approach being that you can't stand rigidly and wait for complete Supremacy of the Air domain before you send assets in at risk.

[danilop]

...

 

Especially when the decision is set in stone that they are going to build the F-35.. they will make it work even if it means changing procedures / strategies, etc..

 

True. You can't fight bureaucracy ...

Edited March 1, 2014 by danilop

[RIPTIDE]

I feel the only people who have the right to speak up for the A-10 and should be listened too are the troops it is working with . The Generals know crap , the politicians only know what they are told to say .....

 

Fact is , the grunts want the Hog ..... end of in my book !!!

What grunts have experienced Ground Support from F-35s yet? They have no comparison. They'll be even less support if they see it falling to the ground in flames from ubiqutous and cheap mobile Anti-Air units in the future.

[Exorcet]

Yes, but the thing is, if there are so many ground threats around that your CAS assets need stealth to accomplish their mission, you are fighting a losing war.

Not true. You could be winning the air war, but having a tough time on the ground.

 

Even if you're simply outright losing, what's the reason? Tactics, technology, lack of information? It's not set in stone that once you're on the defense, the war is over. See WWII (which is more than one example of this) and Korea.

 

And the stealth CAS ability of the F-35 is embarrassingly bad.

It's so far beyond the capability of the A-10 as there is no comparison, so the A-10 isn't even worth mentioning. You might as well be using a WWI airship to do CAS in the A-10's place. The A-10 is incapable of performing stealth anything.

 

If it carries anything outside the internal weapons bay, kiss good bye to stealth.

I explained how this is a serious issue for the A-10. The A-10 has no weapons bay, a serious disadvantage.

 

And the internal weapons bay only has room for 2 GBU-12s.

Or 8 SBD.

 

And if they do bring that, they'll need an escort, because then they are flying without air-to-air capability into a battlefield where the enemy is so strong they still have a majority of their radars and advanced SAMs and AAA intact.

Air to air doesn't mean much against SAM's and AAA. Escort? More F-35. The F-35 can carry AIM-120 and bombs at the same time anyway. You could send it escorts for the A-10, but it's still going to be slow when it needs to run and won't need to be as close to the enemy to be vulnerable.

[Scrim]

Wrong analysis. There is no kissing goodbye to stealth.... there is no stealth to kiss goodbye to. There is stealthy and then there is less stealthy. There is Engagement ranges shrinkage with stealthy. There is still engagement range issues with less stealthy.

...

What wasn't the case? That ~4xSu-25 and possibly 1-2 Su-24M were lost to Anti-Air assets? Aircraft that might not have been lost had they waited several days to DEAD the country and ultimately lose the initiative?

...

I think you miss the point. It's the approach that is the comparison. The approach being that you can't stand rigidly and wait for complete Supremacy of the Air domain before you send assets in at risk.

 

Yes, if you put the maximum wing hardpoint load on the F-35, which still won't come close to the A-10 in that regard, there is no stealth to talk about any longer.

 

In Georgia, there was no super capable air defense network, it was a small conflict zone, and during all that time they were conducting SEAD missions to minimize Georgian AA capabilities.

 

I agree, of course you can't wait for Task A to be completely finished before moving on to Task B. But if you're sending stealth CAS planes in to an area where stealth is absolutely vital to the mission, you're doing something wrong. Perhaps you don't wait for complete rule of the skies before doing certain things, but you certainly do modify your tactics and procedures until the enemy's AA capability is reduced, regardless of what aircraft you have.

 

You don't do CAS very far behind the front lines, and around the front lines there just won't be the same types of AA, and there will be SEAD around.

 

 

Exorcet: Yeah, I'm ignoring you until you start arguing without taking everything people write out of context and using outright false claims. Have a good day.

[Exorcet]

Yes, if you put the maximum wing hardpoint load on the F-35, which still won't come close to the A-10 in that regard, there is no stealth to talk about any longer.

 

Would make people wonder why the F-18E exists.

 

In Georgia, there was no super capable air defense network, it was a small conflict zone, and during all that time they were conducting SEAD missions to minimize Georgian AA capabilities.

 

I agree, of course you can't wait for Task A to be completely finished before moving on to Task B. But if you're sending stealth CAS planes in to an area where stealth is absolutely vital to the mission, you're doing something wrong. Perhaps you don't wait for complete rule of the skies before doing certain things, but you certainly do modify your tactics and procedures until the enemy's AA capability is reduced, regardless of what aircraft you have.

 

How much do you reduce it by? When there is a 50% of chance of losing A-10's, do you send them in? How long would it take to get to that stage? Is it worth waiting if another aircraft can strike now?

 

You're also still thinking very linearly, that one side will gain an edge and that advantage will steadily increase with time. That's not a given.

 

You don't do CAS very far behind the front lines, and around the front lines there just won't be the same types of AA, and there will be SEAD around.

 

Air defense mobility and stand off capability seem to be ignored here. Maybe overall you can say that air defense will be less dense, but that doesn't prevent them from fluctuating from a thin cover to a sizeable force. This can also go for more strategic assets behind the lines if they have the range to strike. An A-10 that is easily visible and unable to run is much easier to hit than a stealth fighter.

[Scrim]

Exorcet: Yeah, I'm ignoring you until you start arguing without taking everything people write out of context and using outright false claims. Have a good day.

 

The above has not turned 180 degrees in the past 30 minutes.

[ironmarc]

The official explanation, from a USAF Chief of Staff, for the A-10 to be retired is exactly that they want to open more room in their budget to accomodate the F-35.

 

And of course there is private company interests, they are lobbying for this to happen, but I doubt the USAF would accept that if it was a completely unreasonable deal.

 

I think there are two points of view on this matter and none that is completely right or wrong, there are pros and cons in this decision, regarding the retirement of the A-10 and replacement with the F-35.

 

Now, obviously the ideal situation would be to have both planes, I don't think anyone would even dispute that, but if you had to choose one option or the other, which situation would you prefer?

I think they chose the F-35 and maybe they are not so wrong about that.

[Exorcet]

Pretty much as you said. They have to go with the one that's more flexible. Though recent combat would certainly bolster the attractiveness of the A-10, the US doesn't want to give up the ability to fight a full scale a war.

 

As I was never a fan of the F-35B, I wonder if it would have been a good idea to have never developed that aircraft and instead support the A-10 or A-35 (A radically less commonality-focused JSF version). The former would still leave aged airframes though.

 

Even if the USAF was swimming with money, I think an A-10 replacement would still be an interesting option, only this hypothetical aircraft would be just as niche as the A-10 itself. Without having to worry about weighty full-stealth design, I wonder how light you could get a military plane with modern composites.

[GhostDog]

Defense budget proposal affects Air Force Reserve units

 

Whiteman AFB, Mo. - Retire 27 A-10Thunderbolt II aircraft and replace them with 21 F-16 Fighting Falcon (Block 40) aircraft in the 442nd Fighter Wing, tentatively scheduled for 2018.

 

Davis-Monthan AFB, Ariz. - Retire 28 A-10 Thunderbolt II aircraft and replace them with 21 F-16 Fighting Falcon (Block 40) aircraft in the 924th Fighter Group, tentatively scheduled for 2019.

 

:no_sad::no_sad:

 

http://www.afrc.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123402752

[HiJack]

Wow, that's quite some list. Must be a lot of ppl that must go also.

[agamemnon_b5]

The Maryland Air National Guard has announced how the retirement of the A-10 will affect the 175th Wing.

 

http://www.md.ngb.army.mil/absolutenm/templates/?a=1253&z=11

[SkateZilla]

http://www.combataircraft.com/en/News/2014/03/11/Guard-units-to-get-new-aircraft-to-replace-A-10s/

 

 

Funny that people in charge of the A-10 Retiring are repeatedly bringing up the Age Card,

 

The F-16 they're replacing them with is a little more than a Year younger than the A-10.

 

12Mill/Unit for A-10 vs 15-19Mill/Unit for F-16...

Maintenance on the Supersonic / High G Airframe, Fuel Usage, Etc.

 

Ummm... I thought we were supposed to be cutting costs here?

[GGTharos]

They are cutting costs. The replacements aren't new aircraft.

[SkateZilla]

They are cutting costs. The replacements aren't new aircraft.

 

Oops, brainfart, I knew that.. lol.

[HiJack]

Yes, it looks like they activate backups and decommission the active including the current active ppl. Is that sane? Maybe they're old and lazy :P

[SkateZilla]

I'll buy a decommisioned, demilitarized hog off the ANG.

[Snoopy]

Ugly!

 

http://www.af.mil/News/ArticleDisplay/tabid/223/Article/473679/air-force-officials-announce-fy15-force-structure-changes.aspx

 

 

Moody AFB, Ga. - Inactivate the 476th Fighter Group, an A-10 Thunderbolt II classic associate unit.

 

http://www.afrc.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123402752

Edited March 11, 2014 by Snoopy

[NineLine]

Gotta love how government works.... We are gonna retire the A-10... We are going to look into upgrading the A-10... :)

 

https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&mode=form&id=aea44971bc6390b56490e56e48ba5dc0&tab=core&tabmode=list&=

[HiJack]

Gotta love how government works.... We are gonna retire the A-10... We are going to look into upgrading the A-10... :)

 

https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&mode=form&id=aea44971bc6390b56490e56e48ba5dc0&tab=core&tabmode=list&=

I guess it's their final meeting :music_whistling:

[Snoopy]

Not surprised...suite 8 has already been paid for so we'll upgrade software as well as continue installing new wings.