Jump to content
COMBATSIM Forum

USAF looking to ditch the A-10 Warthog


Stans
 Share

Recommended Posts

The plane USAF brass never loved because it's not fast, it's not sleek and it's not sexy looking is once again on the chopping block. Department of Defense budget cuts and the USAF's love for the unproven F-35 has resulted in a plan to reduce the number of A-10 squadrons.

They've just announced here that our Australian government is only obliged to to take two F35 from there original order ...... for training purposes. :rolleyes:

Maybe they'll buy your A-10's instead. At least we know how good they are, and that's just from flying LOMAC. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

burns my noodles about the F-35 snafu :( our PM Harper wants to buy a bunch of them "sight unseen" from the US for billions of dollars and is now muttering about cutting old age security for the poorest of seniors because costs too much :angry:

so......spend X billions for a plane that nobody knows if it works or not.....or spend X billion to make sure that seniors who have worked all their lives on the lower end of the scale don't live in poverty....easy choice for me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is nothing wrong with the A-10, so why cut back the squadrons? More of Washington's socialist plan to weaken and shrink the military. :angry:

I think Gunny or Stans should run for POTUS.

I'll second that, Donnie! But neither of them could put up with all the BS required to exist in Foggy Bottom. So our Resident President is trying to cut the A-10, eh? Aren't they bloody marvelous, these Politicians? Get rid of a marvelous gun platform in favor of a slick, untested, narrow-usage a/c because it looks good! Gawd!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

burns my noodles about the F-35 snafu :( our PM Harper wants to buy a bunch of them "sight unseen" from the US for billions of dollars and is now muttering about cutting old age security for the poorest of seniors because costs too much :angry:

so......spend X billions for a plane that nobody knows if it works or not.....or spend X billion to make sure that seniors who have worked all their lives on the lower end of the scale don't live in poverty....easy choice for me.

Well said Arch. My feelings exactly. I can't see any use for the F-35 other than a new toy for the boys.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll second that, Donnie! But neither of them could put up with all the BS required to exist in Foggy Bottom. So our Resident President is trying to cut the A-10, eh? Aren't they bloody marvelous, these Politicians? Get rid of a marvelous gun platform in favor of a slick, untested, narrow-usage a/c because it looks good! Gawd!

And I second that! :icon_salute3:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

History repeats. Again and again.

After WW2 the Air Farce scrapped thousands of P-47s in favor of the sexier Mustang. When they went to war in Korea the need was for ground support aircraft, not piston-driven fighters. A good many AF pilots ended up dead or in prison camps because their attack bird couldn't take ground fire like the Jug could. The Navy and Marines had the Corsair, which lugged more payload than the Mustang and often came home even after taking severe damage to the engine.

In the early 1960s our vaunted Air Farce mothballed all their A-1 Skyraiders. When the air war erupted in Vietnam, guess what they really, really, desperately needed? Yup. Radial-engined beasts capable of loitering over ground targets or a downed jet pilot for hours on end. I can't even guess how many pilots owed their lives to Spad drivers and their helicopter rescue partners. But most of the Air Farce Spads came from Navy stocks. Some were pulled in from Reserve units.

So here we go again. The panting AF brass can't wait to send the Warthog to the boneyard in order to buy sleek new jets that go fast, fly high, and . . . . well . . . . that's enough, ain't it?

Ten years after the A-10 is no more our ground forces find themselves engaged in some godforsaken corner of the Earth, fighting fanatics of one kind or another. Some bright Zoomie colonel will suggest that they refurbish those ugly Warthogs and . . . . . at that point he is demoted to lieutenant and sent to Greenland to count snowflakes.

And the poor bloody infantry pays the price. Again.

OG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But, OG, you don' unnerstan! "If I don't support my F-35 against the A-10, then I won't get the Appropriations that I've been fighting for, which means that I don't get another star, and Lockheed won't wine and dine me and my missus like they have, and....................................etc, etc, etc!"

Same old shit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm a dedicated F22 (TAW2.0) flight simmer. But that's what it is ....... a sim. In the real combat world would I fly something that's tested and proven or something that's new, shinny, but untested? Ok .... we have to move on ....... horses for courses ....... but don't throw the baby out with the bathwater. Any chance the big wigs are reading this thread? ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Highly unlikely and even if they were, it wouldn't matter. The A-10 ain't sleek, it ain't fast, it ain't sexy and it ain't gonna be inventory in large numbers much longer.

Old Guy's right, the Air Force will strike the A-10 from inventory, then we'll get into some shooting war in some little sh!t hole, the infantry will be getting hammered and the Air Force will be looking for another CAS aircraft.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The AF was looking to get rid of the A-10 during the original post-Cold War drawdown, and for the very same reasons (i.e. "Fighter Mafia"). Fortunately, events of Desert Storm gave the bird a 22 year reprieve.

Personally, I don't see where a stealthy (and therefore fragile), single-engine bird with comparatively fragile avionics has any place in the CAS arena. Of course, I'm not sold on the F-35 even for its intended mission, so I'm a bit jaded.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...