Unloved Warthog lives to fight another day

Washington Examiner ^ | 12/8/2014 | Charles Hoskinson

[bkopto]

The A-10 fighter jet, designed to kill Soviet tanks in Europe, made its reputation instead in America's Middle East wars. Now it's back in the region while its advocates fight off the Air Force's attempts to kill it.

A-10s from the Indiana National Guard arrived from Afghanistan last month at an air base in southwest Asia, where they will be used for missions against the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, Air Force officials said.

The plane, affectionately nicknamed the Warthog, is slow and ugly compared with the Air Force's other fighter jets, especially the stealthy, supersonic F-35 that is scheduled to replace it. But it's also heavily armed and armored, making it a deadly weapon in close-in combat against enemy ground forces and a welcome sight for friendly troops.

The Air Force says the A-10 is too old and not versatile enough to keep flying in a tight budget environment. Getting rid of the A-10 would save $4.2 billion over five years, the best value with the least loss of aircraft, Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. Mark Welch told the House Armed Services Committee in March.

But Senate and House negotiators agreed Dec. 2 to keep it flying at least through the end of fiscal 2015, forbidding the Air Force from taking it out of service.

[Vaduz]

And enemies fear it that alone makes worth the keep.

[hattend]

The USAF Has To Re-Paint Its Trucks Because The F-35 Can’t Fly On Warm Fuel

Uh Oh!

[Moonman62]

The A-10 gets lots of love, but not from the people who like to steal money from the taxpayer.

[Bloody Sam Roberts]

Unloved? Unloved? Ever talk to a Warthog driver? I have several times...never met one yet who wasn't deeply in love with their little plane with the calendar based airspeed indicator.

Unloved. Right. By pukes with ties on.

[puppypusher]

That is only applicable to the Marine Corp variant.The “B”model.It has something to do with the fuel overheating.

[Freeport]

Ding! Ding! Ding! We have a winner.

[lacrew]

Instinctively, I suspect the A-10 is relatively cheap to maintain, when compared to the modern super-duper fighter jets.

Just depends on how the bean counting gets done.

[Freeport]

Oink-Flap-oink-flap, bang! Opps... That was an F-35 being shot down with a .22...

[Slings and Arrows]

I love the Warthog.

Unconditionally.

<3 <3 <3

[Kenny Bunk]

Now listen here, the USAF can simply not be seen in an ugly clunker that flies on the wrong side of 500knts max, works at under 5,000 feet, costs less than $300 Million a copy, and is subjected to insulting ground-fire. It's like asking a hot-rock fighter jock to drive a '97 Plymouth Mini-Van.

At the same time, The USAF is a signatory of the 1948 Treaty of Key West, which means the Army gets no, that's NO, fixed wing combat aircraft. If those chaps crawling through the dirt need support, they can call armed helicopters, (Would you believe, many flown by non-commissioned officers? Disgusting.) Furthermore The USAF is quite capable of occasionally swooping down low to support our troops at 600 knts. True, we occasionally hit our own guys, or orphanages, but hey, that's war.

[The_Republic_Of_Maine]

Join the US Military fight to protect the UN powers, join your local Militia and be the first and last line of defense for the USA.

[Eric Pode of Croydon]

You'd think that with fewer and fewer aircrew seats projected for the air force of the future, the blue suit mafia would be eager to keep a plane that (for now at least) does a job a drone can't do.

But noooooooooooooo.............

[W.]

I saw an A-10 in flight over Toledo Express Airport a few years back, but it didn't expend any ordnance... ;)

[Eric Pode of Croydon]

The amount of damage an A-10 can take and STILL make it back home is nothing short of amazing.

Yep. Try and imagine a squadron commander putting his precious F-35s into the kind of close support situation which produces that damage. Not gonna happen!

[NFHale]

“...Coming back in to base with holes riddled throughout, seeing the pilot home safely, leaving behind scores of enemy armor smoldering in a heap of ruin....”

Interesting comment... B-17 crews from WWII said the same thing about that amazing aircraft. Look up some of the photos of damaged B-17s - tail sections shot away, two or three engines out of commission, holes galore... and bringing their people home al lthe same. (I don’t think the B-24 Liberators had the same track record, but I may be wrong).

And P-47 Thunderbolt pilots from WWII (original namesake of the A-10) also made similar comments about their aircraft. That developed into a fine ground attack platform, but was originally designed as a “Pursuit” (fighter) aircraft.

We know how to build ‘em, for sure.

[IndyPatriot]

We have a lake home in northern Indiana. The Warthogs, which are based out of Grissom Field, just north of Kokomo, historically fly formation over the lake on 4th of July. It’s an impressive sight. I love those things!

[Pontiac]

They have their entitlement checks and EBT - and they don't want those cut.

Think the military budget is in a vice now?

Wait until ObamaCare really kicks in!

ObamaCare is the Blob that will consume all.

[Bloody Sam Roberts]

I do to...from the very first time I saw a Fairchild-Republic Thunderbolt, I was in love.

There's a wing stationed at Bradley Int'l in Connecticut. A short'ish drive from where I am. It makes a nice day trip during the Summer. There's a great air museum down there too.

[Salgak]

The Marines, MAYBE, but they’re still optimized for flying fixed-wing assets off a carrier.

The Army. . . no. Only because there’d be the need to stand up entirely new maintenance capabilities for the Army that it hasn’t had since World War II, but the USAF does routinely.

[niteowl77]

If the USAF doesn't want them, there are lots of people in the Army who would LOVE to add the A-10 to the stable of "too slow but somehow useful nonetheless" aircraft.

Mr. niteowl77