“So send them to Ukraine where to same conditions prevail and they can commit suicide?”
Actually, yes. The Airforce so hated the A10 that they drove Fairchild Republic, the planes maker, out of business so they wouldn’t have to procure any more. They have been attempting to get rid of them in almost every budget I remember reading over for decades. Congress has resolutely stopped them, just as Congress has saved Abrams for at least since I worked on it starting in 2001.
The Airforce would be happy to get rid of them even if it costs the life of every Ukrainian pilot who flew it. Because the Airforce wants to spend the two billion or so dedicated to A10 on Gee-whiz stuff.
I remember reading that one AF general in the ‘50’s said something like, “If it doesn’t fly higher and faster than last year’s model, don’t even show it to me.” That appears to be the attitude today. Thus, we get ever more capable aircraft that may or may not be optimized for their stated functions. We won’t know until the defecation hits the fan and they either do, or do not perform as advertised. Frankly, I believe, as Stalin said, “Quantity has a quality all its own.”
It would be cheaper and easier to get more SU-25s which are the Russian equivalent of the A-10.
A-10 is a single mission aircraft (CAS).
Air Force pursued a multi-mission aircraft policy. More mission coverage.
Old school Generals were believers in faster/higher aircraft. Until Gulf War I, the A-10 was not thought too highly by old school tac fighter types.
Gulf War I proved the A-10s worth and now enjoys respect from the Air Force.
Gen Horner was quoted a week into the Gulf War I air war: “the A-10s are saving our a$$es—and he was a hard core tac guy that didn’t think much of the Hog. He changed his mind.
Many still want to mothball the jet but the jet keeps performing and doing the mission no other jets can do as well.
A10s were always planned to be part of a package of support jets (a/a escorts, SEAD support, etc). A-10s were never considered a go-it-alone jet, but Gulf War I changed that.
A-10s have staying power and a massive weapons load—the strike fighters do not have staying power therefore could have some effect on the battlefield but the A-10s had long loiter time and weapons flexibility so they really impact the battlefield.
Gen 6 fighters like the JSF have nice stealthy profile but to be effective they have to strap on external weapons load and that destroys their stealth. They can carry some internal load but not near anything like the A-10, and the JSF has a “one pass, haul a$$” staying power due to limited weapons load and no gas.
And the A-10s gun makes all the difference and is highly accurate and flexible, whereas other jets have to reply on satellite guidance weaponry and their gun is a pop-gun, no real anti-armor killing power.
We can go on and one but it is clear, for CAS nothing beats the Hog.