Aurora Mark Posted February 19, 2015 Share Posted February 19, 2015 I came across this article today, and was blown away. At What Point Does The USAF's War Against The A-10 Become Sabotage? I was an Infantier with the 2nd Battalion PPCLI deployed in Afghanistan in from August to February of 2006-2007 and again from February-September a year later. We had A-10 support (as well as Apaches) and I have to say that we loved that aircraft. I was there at BP 101 when November Company (of the RCR's) was hit with the A-10 friendly fire, and truth be told, those of us on the ground hold the FAC responsible, not the A-10 Pilots. Years later, I still hold the A-10 with incredibly high regard and their Pilots with an incredible amount of respect for what they do. That is why articles like this strike me, and leave me wondering "Why?" Why get rid of such a fantastic platform? Am I missing something here? Mark. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
phantomdriver Posted February 19, 2015 Share Posted February 19, 2015 The Hog is reputedly the one thing the groundpounders say they'd rather have watching their six... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
11bee Posted February 19, 2015 Share Posted February 19, 2015 Why get rid of such a fantastic platform? The bottom line is $. Money is tight and unlike the other air force tactical jets, the A-10 is really a one trick pony. The higher ups have decided that something has to be cut and you save a lot more $ by eliminating an entire weapons system instead of just cutting a few wings of each type of aircraft in the inventory. They would also make a case that many other aircraft can adequately perform the CAS mission. I wonder if it's not time to petition to the moderators to start a new Forum entirely dedicated to all things pertaining to the beloved Hog? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Trigger Posted February 19, 2015 Share Posted February 19, 2015 I wonder if it's not time to petition to the moderators to start a new Forum entirely dedicated to all things pertaining to the beloved Hog? I think we've already eclipsed the Tomcat Sunset. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
TaiidanTomcat Posted February 20, 2015 Share Posted February 20, 2015 I think we've already eclipsed the Tomcat Sunset. No way, this will be way worse. 100 percent SRS. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
TaiidanTomcat Posted February 20, 2015 Share Posted February 20, 2015 I came across this article today, and was blown away. The whole point of any article from that site is to get an emotional response, and generate web traffic. Its delibrately set up to get the maximum amount of google hits, its poorly researched, grossly oversimplified, and is basically an editorial soap box for a blithering idiot. That is why articles like this strike me, and leave me wondering "Why?" Why get rid of such a fantastic platform? Am I missing something here? Mark. Yes. Stop going to foxtrot alpha. That site is the equivalent to grade school rumor. Or cancer. Thanks for your service, I wonder if it's not time to petition to the moderators to start a new Forum entirely dedicated to all things pertaining to the beloved Hog? I volunteer to do the "cliffs notes" that bring everyone up to speed err slow we are talking A-10s. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Deke Posted February 20, 2015 Share Posted February 20, 2015 Its delibrately set up to get the maximum amount of google hits, its poorly researched, grossly oversimplified, and is basically an editorial soap box for a blithering idiot. It's been proven that every time the A-10 fires its 30mm cannon global warming is halted. If it does it whilst flying low and slow the effect is multiplied three fold. I read it on the internet. Deke Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Trigger Posted February 21, 2015 Share Posted February 21, 2015 No way, this will be way worse. 100 percent SRS. Oh, I know you are. Even if the A-10 makes it to it's originally planned 2028 retirement date, it's still going to make the Tomcat Sunset look like a dignified state funeral by comparison. It's been proven that every time the A-10 fires its 30mm cannon global warming is halted. If it does it whilst flying low and slow the effect is multiplied three fold. I read it on the internet. I read that every time the A-10 fires its gun, Putin poops his pants and Chuck Norris flinches. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Jennings Posted February 21, 2015 Share Posted February 21, 2015 Because Fairchild's lobbyists aren't as persuasive as Lock-Mart's lobbyists. It's all about the money. Capability and what's best for the troops has ZERO to do with it. The DoD has become a wholly owned subsidiary of Lock-Mart, Raytheon, and Northrop-Grumman. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
TaiidanTomcat Posted February 21, 2015 Share Posted February 21, 2015 Because Fairchild's lobbyists aren't as persuasive as Lock-Mart's lobbyists. You mean Boeing? It's all about the money. Capability and what's best for the troops has ZERO to do with it. I couldn't agree more, which is one of the reasons why the people fighting hardest for the A-10 remarkably come from districts that rely on the A-10 for jobs, while making it look like its all for the poor grunt. the US military has more platforms that perform CAS in its history. the USAF is being told to pivot to the pacific while having its funding cut. the US was supposed to be drawing down from the middle east, but then the JV guys in Lakers jerseys showed up the US deploys about a dozen or so A-10s while hundreds of other aircraft from Av-8Bs, to B-1s, to F-18s, to F-15Es to rotary wing assets provide CAS also IMHO the A-10 got proposed for cuts because the USAF knew cutting it was politically impossible. Thus it became a martyr and is now getting additional funding --SUCCESS!!. The 1980s meme that the USAF "hates" the A-10 and its "ground support" missions is preposterous and has been for about the last 20 years, even more so as the UAV craze is taking over. No one is in a hurry to cut manned aircraft, in a force composed of pilots The DoD has become a wholly owned subsidiary of Lock-Mart, Raytheon, and Northrop-Grumman. It will never be like the great old days in the 1970s and 1980s. You forgot Boeing again. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Don Posted February 21, 2015 Share Posted February 21, 2015 ...the US was supposed to be drawing down from the middle east, but then the JV guys in Lakers jerseys showed up... :lol: too funny! Good Saturday morning chuckle over coffee. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
TaiidanTomcat Posted February 21, 2015 Share Posted February 21, 2015 :lol:/> too funny! Good Saturday morning chuckle over coffee. Who would have thunk that the JV posers in pro uniforms were these fellas? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Don Posted February 21, 2015 Share Posted February 21, 2015 But what a nice ride ! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
TaiidanTomcat Posted February 21, 2015 Share Posted February 21, 2015 (edited) The Hog is reputedly the one thing the groundpounders say they'd rather have watching their six... really? So we can tell all these Helicopters, land based fighter/attack, carrier borne fighters, strategic bombers, UAVs, Spectre gunships and tanks and artillery to go home then? Good deal. :thumbsup:/> Edited February 21, 2015 by TaiidanTomcat Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Trigger Posted February 21, 2015 Share Posted February 21, 2015 (edited) I couldn't agree more, which is one of the reasons why the people fighting hardest for the A-10 remarkably come from districts that rely on the A-10 for jobs, while making it look like its all for the poor grunt. The A-10 isn't a defense platform, its a federal jobs program. the US deploys about a dozen or so A-10s while hundreds of other aircraft from Av-8Bs, to B-1s, to F-18s, to F-15Es to rotary wing assets provide CAS also The call the reaction to this Hog deployment as well as the recent one to Europe as "The Fappening." You forgot Boeing again. And the US Congress. Gotta keep those jobs in my district! Edited February 21, 2015 by Trigger Quote Link to post Share on other sites
TaiidanTomcat Posted February 21, 2015 Share Posted February 21, 2015 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Trigger Posted February 21, 2015 Share Posted February 21, 2015 Where can I get some of that cord? I have a yard to remove from tree stumps. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
TaiidanTomcat Posted February 21, 2015 Share Posted February 21, 2015 (edited) A-10s be like "we are low and slow" Edited February 21, 2015 by TaiidanTomcat Quote Link to post Share on other sites
GEH737 Posted February 21, 2015 Share Posted February 21, 2015 The 1980s meme that the USAF "hates" the A-10 and its "ground support" missions is preposterous and has been for about the last 20 years, Not entirely true. In the late '80s, I was in the audience at England AFB, 23rd TFW (A-10's) - where General Chuck Horner was there to present our "Outstanding" award for our ORI (Operational Readiness Inspection). He didn't hide his dislike for the A-10 at all. He stated that we were obsolete, and he wanted A-10 funding to go towards the F-16 which would be our CAS replacement. The irony of him later being in charge of the air war during the first Gulf War and being forced to use A-10's with great success (at General Schwarzkopf's insistence) was entertaining. But hey, you could be right and military decisions are made without any political influence. History doesn't bear that out - but it's still a possibility. Like many of these discussions - if you had a better successor on the ramp, it wouldn't be much of a discussion. Since many don't see that there is, and that it appears to have a high political quotient, the debate will continue. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
TaiidanTomcat Posted February 21, 2015 Share Posted February 21, 2015 Not entirely true. In the late '80s, 2015 - 20 =1995. Is there anyone left in the USAF that remembers a pre A-10 era? This is where things start to fall apart. Who is "Air Force"? Its the boss? Because the Boss man now flew A-10s?? If one guy hates it is he "Air Force?" In my padded wall institution the boss is called the Commandant, but just because he does something doesn't mean it speak 100 percent for every person in uniform. In fact if 20 percent of people think he is a good guy, clearly there is something wrong. But I understand the hive mind Borg-like nature of my institution. I keep looking for this "Air Force" guy, Where could he be? I'll find the SOB one day, right after I find this True Scotsman. The irony of him later being in charge of the air war during the first Gulf War and being forced to use A-10's with great success (at General Schwarzkopf's insistence) was entertaining. But hey, you could be right and military decisions are made without any political influence. History doesn't bear that out - but it's still a possibility. Q: Did the war have any effect on the Air Force's view of the A-10?A: No. People misread that. People were saying that airplanes are too sophisticated and that they wouldn't work in the desert, that you didn't need all this high technology, that simple and reliable was better, and all that. Well, first of all, complex does not mean unreliable. We're finding that out. For example, you have a watch that uses transistors rather than a spring. It's infinitely more reliable than the windup watch that you had years ago. That's what we're finding in the airplanes. Those people . . . were always championing the A-10. As the A-10 reaches the end of its life cycle-- and it's approaching that now--it's time to replace it, just like we replace every airplane, including, right now, some early versions of the F-16. Since the line was discontinued, [the A-10's champions] want to build another A-10 of some kind. The point we were making was that we have F-16s that do the same job. Then you come to people who have their own reasons-good reasons to them, but they don't necessarily compute to me-who want to hang onto the A-10 because of the gun. Well, the gun's an excellent weapon, but you'll find that most of the tank kills by the A-10 were done with Mavericks and bombs. So the idea that the gun is the absolute wonder of the world is not true. Q: This conflict has shown that? A: It shows that the gun has a lot of utility, which we always knew, but it isn't the principal tank-killer on the A-10. The [imaging Infrared] Maverick is the big hero there. That was used by the A-10s and the F-16s very, very effectively in places like Khafji. The other problem is that the A-10 is vulnerable to hits because its speed is limited. It's a function of thrust, it's not a function of anything else. We had a lot of A-10s take a lot of ground fire hits. Quite frankly, we pulled the A-10s back from going up around the Republican Guard and kept them on Iraq's [less formidable] front-line units. That's line [sic] if you have a force that allows you to do that. In this case, we had F-16s to go after the Republican Guard. Q: At what point did you do that? A: I think I had fourteen airplanes sitting on the ramp having battle damage repaired, and I lost two A- 10s in one day [February 15], and I said, "I've had enough of this." .... Interview with General Horner USAF Magazine. Like many of these discussions - if you had a better successor on the ramp, it wouldn't be much of a discussion. Since many don't see that there is, and that it appears to have a high political quotient, the debate will continue. Define "better"? And They are on the ramp now, and I'm not talking F-35. I'm still waiting for the battleship that will come online after we retire the Iowas. Fingers crossed. And don't give me this aircraft carrier horse crap! how about their guns? and armor? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Horrido Posted February 21, 2015 Share Posted February 21, 2015 I'll find the SOB one day, right after I find this True Scotsman. Well, good news! I've got yer Scotsman right here!: I'm still waiting for the battleship that will come online after we retire the Iowas. Fingers crossed. And don't give me this aircraft carrier horse crap! how about their guns? and armor? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0H5xz8alVfo Though my preference is still for new-build, atomic-powered, Chobham armored Montanas with scramshells and VLS. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Trigger Posted February 21, 2015 Share Posted February 21, 2015 I'll find the SOB one day, right after I find this True Scotsman. Well, good news! I've got yer Scotsman right here!: Language is very NSFW. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
gocoogs Posted February 21, 2015 Share Posted February 21, 2015 (edited) I'm still waiting for the battleship that will come online after we retire the Iowas. Fingers crossed. And don't give me this aircraft carrier horse crap! how about their guns? and armor? With all due respect, that seems like an absurd analogy. Edited February 21, 2015 by gocoogs Quote Link to post Share on other sites
TaiidanTomcat Posted February 21, 2015 Share Posted February 21, 2015 With all due respect, that seems like an absurd analogy. Guns, and armor were its chief virtues, relatively short weapons range, a new way of war with a plethora of guided missiles that make the guns obsolete for the one trick pony that can't justify its expense for what the relatively small fleet does while tying down thousands of people and millions of dollars that could be better spent elsewhere? How is it absurd? Don't get me wrong as Marine I wanted them, but of course that juice wasn't worth the squeeze when confronted with reality. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
TaiidanTomcat Posted February 21, 2015 Share Posted February 21, 2015 Language is very NSFW. He is right there, right next to this institutional hatred I am told exists somewhere in the USAF. Before the cuts the plan was to keep it until 2028. One could say that meant it was pretty well liked and proven, that the old guard that didn't like it was long retired, and seeing as the guy running the whole show flew them, that whatever institutional inertia that was keeping the A-10 people down was seemingly gone. Its not hated, its limited. Thats never been disputed in fact its often called a virtue, the A-10 won't leave ya to go save AWACS-- because it can't! People forget they were really expected to last long in the 1980s anyway: According to the latest issue of Combat Aircraft, the flying branch predicted that, if the A-10s went into action, seven percent of the jets would be lost per 100 sorties. Since each pilot was expected to fly at most four missions per day, each base would in theory generate more than 250 sorties daily. At this pace, a seven-percent loss rate per 100 flights equaled at least 10 A-10s shot down at each FOL every 24 hours — and that’s being conservative.At that rate, in less than two weeks the entire A-10 force at the time — around 700 jets — would have been destroyed and the pilots killed, injured, captured or, at the very least, very shook up. And when confronting the republic guard suffered noticeable losses and injuries. The Irony of a hog pilot purposing the hog slaughter isn't lost on me. Clearly an Air Force anti A-10 sleeper agent. 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.