ikar Posted January 21, 2015 Share Posted January 21, 2015 I just found this in my mail: http://www.dodbuzz.com/2015/01/16/general-praising-the-a-10-to-lawmakers-is-treason/?ESRC=airforce.nl Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Exhausted Posted January 21, 2015 Share Posted January 21, 2015 (edited) From one of the comments, "With friends like these - we don't need enemies." I can think of few lawmakers, on both sides of the aisle, who may have any practical experience with support from A-10s. Those are the ones who should be testifying to other legislators about the effectiveness of a military system only considered for retirement to make a point about funding. But on behalf of all the Air Force officers (who have to adhere to a the strict code of conduct banning public support on political issues) is a generation of grateful Americans who depended on A-10s for reliable support. It should be mandatory to hear a testimony from someone who can speak for those who depended on that death angel for their lives. Only after that should they vote on the budget. Edited January 21, 2015 by Exhausted Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Jinxter13 Posted January 21, 2015 Share Posted January 21, 2015 (edited) You're kidding right, congress listen to folks who've actually benefitted from the "Warthog's" capabilities. Why would they listen to folks who can tell them how good it is, and that they are actually in those seats testifying because the A-10 did it's job and help to keep them alive, or actually saved their lives. Edited January 21, 2015 by #1 Greywolf Quote Link to post Share on other sites
fulcrum1 Posted January 21, 2015 Share Posted January 21, 2015 Well, that's one way to end a career. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ElectroSoldier Posted January 21, 2015 Share Posted January 21, 2015 So what wonder toy do the air force want to play with instead of the A-10? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Sketchh22 Posted January 21, 2015 Share Posted January 21, 2015 AT-6B Quote Link to post Share on other sites
fulcrum1 Posted January 21, 2015 Share Posted January 21, 2015 So what wonder toy do the air force want to play with instead of the A-10? Tops in Blue Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Horrido Posted January 21, 2015 Share Posted January 21, 2015 So, for the sake of starting an argument, what's the comparison in performance and capabilities between an AT-6 and Super Tucano set up for COIN or CAS? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Jennings Posted January 21, 2015 Share Posted January 21, 2015 I ****REALLY**** wish someone would look up the definition of "treason" before they toss it off like that (and in a lot of other contexts). There are a lot of high ranking officers in the US Air Force who really need to retire. But what's new there? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
TaiidanTomcat Posted January 21, 2015 Share Posted January 21, 2015 (edited) A-10 pilot skin not as thick as the airplane's I see. You're kidding right, congress listen to folks who've actually benefitted from the "Warthog's" capabilities. Why would they listen to folks who can tell them how good it is, and that they are actually in those seats testifying because the A-10 did it's job and help to keep them alive, or actually saved their lives. Actually its been Congress telling the military to keep the A-10, not the other away around. It should be mandatory to hear a testimony from someone who can speak for those who depended on that death angel for their lives. Only after that should they vote on the budget Well the A-10 is the only aircraft that any ground troop ever depended on. Air Force proposes cuts to airshows/thunderbirds "The Air Force sure is smart, cutting something that will spark public outcry like that" Air force proposes cutting A-10 "The Air force hates the A-10!!" Gets additional funds and massive congressional support to keep them, including laws forbidding their retirement. LOL suck it air force, now you are stuck with additional assets that can't be retired and are now funded!! Edited January 21, 2015 by TaiidanTomcat Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Exhausted Posted January 21, 2015 Share Posted January 21, 2015 You're kidding right, congress listen to folks who've actually benefitted from the "Warthog's" capabilities. Why would they listen to folks who can tell them how good it is, and that they are actually in those seats testifying because the A-10 did it's job and help to keep them alive, or actually saved their lives. Exactly! These are lives we're talking about. The bottom line is we (as well as our allies) NEED support from A-10s and there is no current replacement. That means that keeping out existing fleet of Warthogs is cheaper than developing and producing the Warthog's replacement. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Exhausted Posted January 21, 2015 Share Posted January 21, 2015 So what wonder toy do the air force want to play with instead of the A-10? Bring back the OV-10! At least it has a -10 in it! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
TaiidanTomcat Posted January 21, 2015 Share Posted January 21, 2015 (edited) Exactly! These are lives we're talking about. The bottom line is we (as well as our allies) NEED support from A-10s and there is no current replacement. That means that keeping out existing fleet of Warthogs is cheaper than developing and producing the Warthog's replacement. C'mon man. Its not that simple. Edited January 21, 2015 by TaiidanTomcat Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Exhausted Posted January 21, 2015 Share Posted January 21, 2015 Does that mean America needs to produce some Il-2s instead? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Murph Posted January 21, 2015 Share Posted January 21, 2015 Well the A-10 is the only aircraft that any ground troop ever depended on. Obviously if low, slow, and simple is better, then the Air Force should be working on a crash program to go even lower, slower, and simpler. Bring back the SPAD XIII. Hell, bring back the Wright Flyer! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
TaiidanTomcat Posted January 21, 2015 Share Posted January 21, 2015 Obviously if low, slow, and simple is better, then the Air Force should be working on a crash program to go even lower, slower, and simpler. Bring back the SPAD XIII. Hell, bring back the Wright Flyer! I have just the thing! According to reports these can get as low as inches, and are so slow they can stop and even fly backwards. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Murph Posted January 21, 2015 Share Posted January 21, 2015 I have just the thing! According to reports these can get as low as inches, and are so slow they can stop and even fly backwards. If you can base enough of them in Arizona, the esteemed Senator will support them like a rabid wombat. Regards, Murph Quote Link to post Share on other sites
fulcrum1 Posted January 22, 2015 Share Posted January 22, 2015 http://www.foxnews.com/us/2015/01/21/legendary-10-warthog-sends-isis-fleeing-even-as-it-faces-pentagon-cuts/ Quote Link to post Share on other sites
TaiidanTomcat Posted January 22, 2015 Share Posted January 22, 2015 http://www.foxnews.com/us/2015/01/21/legendary-10-warthog-sends-isis-fleeing-even-as-it-faces-pentagon-cuts/ very original Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Trigger Posted January 22, 2015 Share Posted January 22, 2015 sends ISIS fighters scattering like cockroaches on the Iraqi desert plains So it doesn't kill 'em all, it maybe gets a few and sends the rest of them scurrying back into all their hiding places, making it all that much harder to kill them and dragging this out longer. Ya see 'em out on the "Iraqi desert plains," send a damn B-1 or B-52 with a f***ton of crowd pleasers and be done with it. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
fulcrum1 Posted January 22, 2015 Share Posted January 22, 2015 very original That's some Pulitzer winning reporting there. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
TaiidanTomcat Posted January 22, 2015 Share Posted January 22, 2015 That's some Pulitzer winning reporting there. "There are a number of strike platforms, of course, that are engaged in it," James said. "[The] A-10 is one of it, but there's also F-16s, F-15s, and so forth. They're each contributing." How did they allow that to stay in the article? also: The Air Force has been itching to junk the plane for years, with some speculating that top brass believes the A-10 bucks the embraced strategy of high-altitude strategic bombing. Mark Welsh III top brass, former high altitude pilot of strategic bombing A-10 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Exhausted Posted January 22, 2015 Share Posted January 22, 2015 Maybe it's time to paint them silver and put D-Day stripes on them. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Don Posted January 22, 2015 Share Posted January 22, 2015 Maybe it's time to paint them silver and put D-Day stripes on them. Not silver, but D-Day marked: :) Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Exhausted Posted January 22, 2015 Share Posted January 22, 2015 There they go, the P-47 fighter escorting a high altitude strategic bomber during the initial climb to 25,000 ft. Most people don't know this, but the nose of an A-10 has room for a bombardier and a norden bombsight. They clearly thought of everything. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.