Posted on 06/26/2015 10:38:30 PM PDT by Rabin
The Air Force based its plan to retire the A-10 on projection of cost savings, ignoring mission (close air support), the Government Accountability Office. GAO punches holes in Air Force's bosses decision to retire the attack jet, saying planners did not, did not include the increased workload on other aircraft tasked Baltic & Black Sea theater realities. Rep. Martha McSally, R-Arizona, to block the Air Force's pro Soviet armor superiority, review. The agency states that the Air Force made the plan to retire the A-10 based on a "enemy with-in" review". The Air Force's guidance prioritized fifth-generation aircraft, readiness and mufti-role F35 high speed semi-stealth fighter, that should be combat capable by 2020, over the hard body Russian Armor eater, A-10. The report highlights the A-10 as the only aircraft that can escort attack helicopters in enemy territory. A-10 is the best aircraft to counter "swarming" enemy boats that may insult any U.S. carrier group in the constricted Persian Gulf, off Ras Al-Khaimah.
(Excerpt) Read more at combataircraft.com ...
Dempsy's Dumpsters Rab thinks.
R.
Two reasons: Mr. Obama told us to and we want to be generals someday.
It’s not about American superiority on the battlefield anymore. It’s about “cost savings”. Obama has other plans for that cash.
I think soon Israel will be forced to fight ISIS, either to protect Druze or because ISIS will topple Jordan or Lebanon and be on Israel’s border.
Since we are not interested in these planes we should see if Israel wants them and work out terms of a sale rather than scrap them.
I thought the A-10 was a relatively cheap aircraft. Lot of bang for the buck. They are going to replace it with an unproven plane that that costs multiples of what the warthog costs.
I am a pilot but not a military pilot thus I must rely on the advice of my son a non pilot but grunt on the ground in Iraq for two tours. He was not behind the wire.
“If you get in trouble the Apache and the A10 are your best friend.”
Exactly; their reasons don’t make sense. The replacement can’t protect helicopters. It is just not a close air support craft.
It is simply because of that truth that The Usurper wants to get rid of this airplane.
It's not budgets. He laughs at budgets.
The A10 is out of favor because of two reasons - It's cheap and it works.
His buddies in the Moslem Brotherhood come crying that this thing is killing their guys on the ground. He knows it provides our guys a boost in morale and effectiveness - and *that* he hates.
Leadership: Tradition Cripples The USAF UAV Fleet
June 23, 2015: The U.S. Air Force recently reduced its UAV operations by eight percent because it was unable to train enough new operators.
snip
The air force was and is unable to get enough manned aircraft pilots to “volunteer” to do a three year tour as a UAV operator and cannot train non-pilot officers fast enough to be career UAV operators. A lot of pilots are getting out of the air force in part because of the prospect of another three year tour with UAVs. At this point UAV operators leave the air force at three times the rate of pilots of manned aircraft. Worst of all, UAV operators are not shown the same respect as pilots who go into the air aboard their aircraft. All this would go away if the air force allowed NCOs (sergeants) to be operators of the larger UAVs but the air force leadership is very hostile to that idea. Despite the GAO study, the head of the air force continues to insist that all UAV operators be pilots.
The Air force is corrupt.
http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htlead/articles/20150623.aspx
Hadn’t watched Live Free or Die Hard in a while and realized the movie had glorified the F-35 and wondered if Congress and the builders have their heads in the clouds if they think they’ll ever be able to do what is in that movie.
Anyway. It was fun, but the A-10 is my fave, with the Osprey right behind (based purely on seeing them fly over my home for a year or more at 2 different homes since I know y’all would know they don’t fly together).
I am not sure how much that cost is exactly relevant here, as the A-10 was designed in the 70’s with most of the current fleet built in the 80’s. Costs for airplanes have changed a lot in the intervening 30 years.
I think an important, but neglected point is that the A-10 effectively replaced the by then worn out A-1 Skyraiders that had been designed for the Navy as multi-role strike craft (replacing both the Avenger and the Dauntless). The Airforce went to the Skyraider after they found the P-51 did a very bad job in close air support, and they had already removed the P-47s from the inventory.
SIMPLE SOLUTION:
Give the low, slow (GREAT, unbelievably EFFECTIVE) plane to the ARMY, where it belongs in the first place.
Obama et al, has issues with the HOGS because they KILL MUZZIES!
The money is wanted for the “gimmees”, and illegals such as the unknown one.
I think we get 7 or 8 A-10’s for the price of 1 F-35.
Put all A-10s in Israeli hands?
Do you what to scare the Crap out of the entire Arab World?
LMAO!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.