[tbpiper]

That comment is a slap at all Hog Drivers,"

Don't take it that way. It’s the decision makers I’m not sure of. I remember that early on there seemed to be quite a few disparaging remarks about the A-10 and its mission by some in congress and uniform who were for a bigger and faster Air Force and not a lower and slower one. I suppose they thought we could carpet bomb or nuke Soviet tanks rather than go at them one on one with our own flying tank. I thought Gulf War I was a big ‘I told you so’ to those folks. Now when I hear that some want to do away with the A-10 I think some of those original dunderheads are at it again.

I can understand budgetary problems and I haven’t a clue as to how to effectively use the A-10. I love watching it fly and am awed by the GAU-8 (as are the Iraqis, I hear). I just hate to see a good plane go away. Can you tell me if there is a place for the A-10 in the near future?

I worked on some of the first A-10 simulators. These didn't use a motion base but used strap tighteneres and whoopie cushions to simulate g loads. Don't know how well they really worked, seemed like a cheap approach to me. Did you ever fly one and if so, how did it work?

[Gunrunner2]

Okay. But too many times I hear that sort of statement and it is a slap, as if the USAF doesn't appreciate the CAS mission. it does, but prior to Gulf War I, they thought the F-16 a much better platform (all proof to the contrary). Since Gulf War I the "powers" had to accept the fact that we Hog Drivers knew all along--the A-10 is a kick-butt aircraft and would rock the world of any bad guy, under any circumstances.

Sadly, there are no plans to replace the A-10. Instead the plan is to use smarter and smarter weapons systems. Poor choice, in my opinion.

The volatile and ever changing battlefield is the place where the Mark I Eyeball, interfaced with a Cranium Bucket processor, work best when it comes to weapons delivery.