A-10 Warthog to stay in Service

anatta

100% recycled karma
The US Air Force will delay retiring the A-10 -- a stalwart attack aircraft beloved by ground troops -- because of the ongoing fight against the Islamic State group, a military news site reported Wednesday.

Plans to postpone the mothballing will be outlined when the Pentagon submits its 2017 budget request to Congress next month, Pentagon officials speaking on condition of anonymity told Defense One.

Developed in the 1970s, A-10s can fly low and slow, and are famed for their tank-destroying capabilities and their heavy armor that makes them difficult to shoot down from the ground.

US ground forces delight at the distinctive sound of the highly maneuverable plane's massive cannon, which can drench a target with high-caliber firepower at a rate of about 70 rounds per second.

According to Defense One, Air Force officials have postponed immediate plans to retire the Warthog, as the plane is known, because of its utility in Iraq and Syria, where the United States is leading a coalition against IS jihadists.

The Air Force did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Senator John McCain, who heads the Senate Armed Services Committee, welcomed the report.

"The A-10 fleet is playing an indispensable role in the fight against ISIL in Iraq and assisting NATO's efforts to deter Russian aggression in Eastern Europe," he said, using an alternative name for the IS group.

"With growing global chaos and turmoil on the rise, we simply cannot afford to prematurely retire the best close air-support weapon in our arsenal without fielding a proper replacement."

The A-10's retirement, proposed two years ago, was intended to free up cash to pay for newer planes, including the costly F-35 fighter jet.

In October, the Pentagon announced the deployment of 12 A-10s to the air base in Incirlik in southern Turkey to support anti-IS operations in Iraq and Syria.
http://news.yahoo.com/us-air-force-shelves-warthog-plane-retirement-amid-232648633.html
US Air Force shelves Warthog plane retirement amid IS fight: media
 
landscape_1423842844-a-10-thunderbolt-ii_2.jpg


AF brass has wanted to shed the A-10 for years. They want to keep A-10 funding to buy new F-35s. Most everyone laughed when they tried to convince anyone who would listen that the F-35 was a CAS platform superior to the A-10.
Complete rubbish. I would love to see A-10s, their pilots and the funding go to the Army and Marines so they could actually do their jobs and get the support these aircraft, pilots and ground troops need and deserve.

^ comment

CAS= close air support
 
landscape_1423842844-a-10-thunderbolt-ii_2.jpg


AF brass has wanted to shed the A-10 for years. They want to keep A-10 funding to buy new F-35s. Most everyone laughed when they tried to convince anyone who would listen that the F-35 was a CAS platform superior to the A-10.
Complete rubbish. I would love to see A-10s, their pilots and the funding go to the Army and Marines so they could actually do their jobs and get the support these aircraft, pilots and ground troops need and deserve.

^ comment

CAS= close air support

Billy hates both the Warthog and the F-35!
 
The f-35 is an ugly overtasked money pit. Hopefully it might actually be in combat one day -given another couple hundred billions
, but to hate the old reliable Warthog?

Well I agree, but Billy is a law unto himself. I am sure that they could probably upgrade to A-10 for the price of a couple of F-35s!!
 
Last edited:
Well I agree, but Billy is a law unto himself. I am sure that they could probably upgrade to A-10 for the price of a couple of F-35s!!

lol. they gotta get the F-35 combat ready still. They solved the helmet display as far as I know,
then it was the Autonomic Logistics Information System -generalized avionics, then engine fires...
...talk about ugly..
 
The f-35 is an ugly overtasked money pit. Hopefully it might actually be in combat one day -given another couple hundred billions
, but to hate the old reliable Warthog?

It's a relic that is long past it's actual usefulness on a modern battlefield, propped up solely on nostalgia. It should have been retired 20 years ago, but old fucking Boomers can't let go of the past.
 
It's a relic that is long past it's actual usefulness on a modern battlefield, propped up solely on nostalgia. It should have been retired 20 years ago, but old fucking Boomers can't let go of the past.
I do not have a dog in this fight. Don't know what our capabilities are or how significant the A-10 would be but in todays combat, with pinpoint GPS bombing, artillery and missiles, conventional set piece battles are probably things of the past and asymmetrical warfare the reality. In that case a ground support fighter bomber of any kind is probably a relic. That is it would probably be a weapons asset waiting for a mission that would only rarely occur. I think I would have to side with you here.
 
It's a relic that is long past it's actual usefulness on a modern battlefield, propped up solely on nostalgia. It should have been retired 20 years ago, but old fucking Boomers can't let go of the past.
OK so what replaces it? I realize it's slow -
but not every battle is high tech..if we ever did have to support say the supposed Saudi Arabia coalition in Syria -or similar situations -
drones and smart bombs aren't going to do it. It's a tank buster, infantry support, artillery piece killer
and generalized close air support, and for that singlaur role I don't think anything is better.
 
I do not have a dog in this fight. Don't know what our capabilities are or how significant the A-10 would be but in todays combat, with pinpoint GPS bombing, artillery and missiles, conventional set piece battles are probably things of the past and asymmetrical warfare the reality. In that case a ground support fighter bomber of any kind is probably a relic. That is it would probably be a weapons asset waiting for a mission that would only rarely occur. I think I would have to side with you here.
Yeah, not so much. Helicopters however, have made the A-10 obsolete.
 
OK so what replaces it? I realize it's slow -
but not every battle is high tech..if we ever did have to support say the supposed Saudi Arabia coalition in Syria -or similar situations -
drones and smart bombs aren't going to do it. It's a tank buster, infantry support, artillery piece killer
and generalized close air support, and for that singlaur role I don't think anything is better.
The GAU 8, the sole thing the A-10 was designed around, can not penetrate tank armor anymore. A Super Cobra, or Apache, hell even a properly fitted Kiowa would be better (and cheaper) than a A-10.
 
I do not have a dog in this fight. Don't know what our capabilities are or how significant the A-10 would be but in todays combat, with pinpoint GPS bombing, artillery and missiles, conventional set piece battles are probably things of the past and asymmetrical warfare the reality. In that case a ground support fighter bomber of any kind is probably a relic. That is it would probably be a weapons asset waiting for a mission that would only rarely occur. I think I would have to side with you here.

How about you actually do some research first, instead of just listening to others?

https://medium.com/war-is-boring/th...tting-rid-of-the-a-10-b32efd62f620#.1mmtw1brp
 
The GAU 8, the sole thing the A-10 was designed around, can not penetrate tank armor anymore. A Super Cobra, or Apache, hell even a properly fitted Kiowa would be better (and cheaper) than a A-10.

30 caliper? no I guess it would not anymore -and I've been to live fire exhibitions with a Cobra or was it an Apache?.. damn things are unreal.
How about the range. Suppose there was a battle near Raqqa -or the eastern desert- the A-10 could easily survive
anything IS could throw at it -except maybe hand held anti-aircraft missiles.

It could come in from Turkey's Incirlik do it's thing and then return. .where would a US helicopter base be?
I mean there must be some sound reasons they aren't retiring it now?
 
Back
Top