Author Topic: A-10 Warthog to be retired by USAF (maybe)  (Read 81190 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Loachman

  • Former Army Pilot in Drag
  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 186,967
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 6,751
Re: A-10 finally done?
« Reply #25 on: February 26, 2014, 10:50:45 »
the continuing RCAF support that was given to deployed forces throughout the mission to CDAG and Afghanistan.

What "RCAF" support was given "throughout the mission to ... Afghanistan"?

The aircraft and personnel in theatre belonged to CEFCOM, for one, and Air Command was not renamed until August 2011, by which time the only thing that the CF had going on over there was the pack-up job.

Offline Journeyman

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 473,915
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 11,934
Re: A-10 finally done?
« Reply #26 on: February 26, 2014, 11:23:32 »
What "RCAF" support was given "throughout the mission to ... Afghanistan"?
Splitting hairs and not really contributing.....but thanks for playing along   ;)


Yes, perhaps I have some anger issues here.

Maybe the lesson is next time Canada commits to a war, the entire CAF should be involved.  If the addition of CF-18s could have facilitated even one less Canadian ramp ceremony, I think it would have been worth the intolerable situation of a fighter-pilot having dusty boots. 

Of course, we'll never know.

Offline Chris Pook

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 185,570
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 11,855
  • Wha daur say Mass in ma lug!
Re: A-10 finally done?
« Reply #27 on: February 26, 2014, 11:29:14 »
Here's another platform to conjure with:  AW 609

This mini-Osprey roughly combines a King Air 350 (MC/UC-12) with a CH-146 Griffin (2 crew + 9 pax or max usable load of 2.5 tonnes) and with the range of a CH-147F.

Low and Slow.  Vertical Take Off and Land.  Ships.  FOBs. 







"Wyrd bið ful aræd"

Offline Colin P

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 103,295
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,912
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca
Re: A-10 finally done?
« Reply #28 on: February 26, 2014, 12:48:22 »
Splitting hairs and not really contributing.....but thanks for playing along   ;)


Yes, perhaps I have some anger issues here.

Maybe the lesson is next time Canada commits to a war, the entire CAF should be involved.  If the addition of CF-18s could have facilitated even one less Canadian ramp ceremony, I think it would have been worth the intolerable situation of a fighter-pilot having dusty boots. 

Of course, we'll never know.

I suspect the next time will be far sooner than many expect.

Offline Eye In The Sky

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 178,980
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,477
    • VP INTERNATIONAL
Re: A-10 finally done?
« Reply #29 on: February 26, 2014, 16:24:16 »
Agree, that is why I said "To me". As Navy man I appreciate the contributions of our maritime air. It just seems to me that the decision makers in most Air Forces are from the fighter community and therefore a focus on their community vice helicopters, cargo, MPA and CAS.

Fighters are the pretty, sexy end for sure.  I have no input or knowledge of why our 18s weren't part of the moving parts in the sandbox and don't like to throw out a WAG on that aspect.  Doubt the facts can't be put into type on here, regardless of what they are.
"...Pilot, Radar...turn right, heading...3-6-5..."

Offline recceguy

    A Usual Suspect.

  • At the core of liberalism is the spoiled child – miserable, as all spoiled children are, unsatisfied, demanding, ill-disciplined, despotic and useless. Liberalism is a philosophy of sniveling brats. -P.J. O’Rouke-
  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Myth
  • *
  • 240,597
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 17,501
  • doddering docent to the museum of misanthropy
    • Army.ca
Re: A-10 finally done?
« Reply #30 on: February 26, 2014, 16:28:47 »
Alright ladies, enough of the hen party. ;)

The thread is about the A-10. Back on track please.

---Staff---
“I am a Canadian, free to speak without fear, free to worship in my own way, free to stand for what I think right, free to oppose what I believe wrong, or free to choose those who shall govern my country. This heritage of freedom I pledge to uphold for myself and all mankind.”

John G. Diefenbaker

Offline Baden Guy

    Full Member.

  • Question everything. Learn something. Answer nothing.
  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 41,322
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,704
Re: A-10 finally done?
« Reply #31 on: February 26, 2014, 19:34:31 »
Info from the PBS Newshour with video, transcript of interview and some very interesting commentary:

‘Beloved’ A-10 Warthog aircraft may not survive Pentagon attack

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/budget-cuts-could-ground-unstoppable-warthog-aircraft/

Offline FAL

  • Guest
  • *
  • 625
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 16
Re: RIP, A-10 Warthog
« Reply #32 on: March 19, 2014, 01:04:38 »
I thought the A-10 was gone years ago, glad to see its still in service (despite being on the chopping block). Nothing like the sound of that minigun ripping apart mortar positions to brighten your day.

Maxigun?

Offline Colin P

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 103,295
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,912
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca
Re: RIP, A-10 Warthog
« Reply #33 on: April 04, 2014, 17:09:56 »
The price of NOT retiring the A-10?

Defense News

Yea, temper tantrums, Congress should call them on that just to see what happens  ;D

Offline MCG

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 189,720
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 11,462
Re: RIP, A-10 Warthog
« Reply #34 on: May 23, 2014, 14:28:54 »
Looks like the A-10 supporters are getting their defence together.
Quote
Critics accuse Air Force of manipulating data to support A-10 retirement
Dan Sagalyn
PBS News
22 May 2014

Over the past five months, Air Force leaders have pointed to one key fact while advocating for their controversial decision to retire the A-10 Warthog, an aircraft specifically designed to provide support to ground troops. The service’s top leaders say the vast majority of so-called “close air support” missions conducted in Afghanistan since 2006 have been flown by a variety of aircraft that are not A-10s. Specifically, the leaders say that the 80 percent of these missions conducted by aircraft other than the Warthog shows that a variety of aircraft can do the critical mission of reinforcing ground forces with firepower from the air.

However, a number of observers challenge the Air Force’s claim that 80 percent of close air support missions are really conducted by non-A-10 planes. These observers assert that the service has deliberately manipulated the data to support its case.

The plan to retire the A-10 has sparked a firestorm of criticism from members of Congress, A-10 pilots and airmen whose job is to embed with ground forces and call in air strikes.

In fact, Congress is well on the way to rejecting the Air Force’s plans. The House of Representatives passed legislation Thursday, rejecting sending the A-10s to the boneyard. The Senate is expected to do the same.

The Air Force says it can save $4.2 billion over the next five years by retiring the fleet of 350 A-10s. The savings would be plowed into other aircraft that can perform a variety of missions, including close air support.

And, in making the case to retire the A-10, the one number that comes up time and again at congressional hearings is this: 80 percent.

“Eighty percent of what we have done in close air support in Afghanistan has been by aircraft other than A-10,” Air Force Secretary Deborah Lee James told the House Armed Services Committee in March.

Building on this statement, Air Force Chief of Staff Mark Welsh has said, “We’ve flown a number of close air support missions with multiple airplanes,” including the B-1 bomber, F-15E, and F-16.

Also included in the 80 percent are FA-18s, Reaper and Predator drones, along with AC-130s gun ships and AV-8Bs.

The PBS NewsHour asked the Air Force about the basis for the 80 percent figure. The NewsHour shared the Air Force answers with A-10 supporters and those who advocate retiring the aircraft. The complete exchange can be viewed in the document linked here.

“This is a classic case of using numbers as propaganda for some bureaucratic position.”“This 80 percent number is a total fabrication,” said Pierre Sprey, one of the key designers of the A-10 in the 1960s and 1970s. Sprey has recently been lobbying Congress to save the aircraft. “This is a classic case of using numbers as propaganda for some bureaucratic position.”

Among the data the Air Force provided was a breakdown of the number close air support sorties flown between 2010 to 1014: 121,653. Also included was the number of sorties with at least one weapon released: 8,691.

Sprey notes that of the 121,653 close air support missions conducted, “93 percent of them never drop a weapon.” Sprey says the Air Force is “counting a whole lot of fluff.”

“The Air Force is counting these missions or these activities in a way that biases strongly against the A-10,” said Winslow Wheeler, a former congressional staffer with more than three decades of experience working for both Democrats and Republicans. Wheeler is now with the Project On Government Oversight, a non-profit watchdog organization.

The Air Force is “not counting sorties where actual munitions delivery actually occurs,” he said. And they are “not distinguishing” between bombing fixed points on the ground from 20,000 feet and supporting troops that are moving while under fire from an enemy in close proximity. Wheeler said it is in situations like this “that really count” and where the A-10 outperforms all other aircraft.

More here:  http://www.pbs.org/newshour/updates/critics-accuse-air-force-manipulating-data-support-10-retirement/

Offline S.M.A.

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 132,340
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 6,515
Re: RIP, A-10 Warthog
« Reply #35 on: June 10, 2014, 17:25:17 »
The death knell of the A-10?

Defense News

Quote
House Appropriators Easily Kill Measure to Save A-10 Fleet
Jun. 10, 2014 - 11:38AM   |   By JOHN T. BENNETT 

WASHINGTON — US House appropriators on Tuesday killed an amendment that would have kept alive the Air Force’s A-10 fleet, becoming the first defense panel to endorse the service’s cost-cutting plan.

The House Appropriations Committee broke with the House and Senate Armed Services committees, which last month used budgetary cuts from elsewhere in the Pentagon’s budget to keep the A-10s flying for one more year.

The amendment to keep the A-10, offered by Rep. Jack Kingston, R-Ga., was shot down via a show of hands, with 13 members voting for it and 23 voting to kill it.

(...EDITED)
« Last Edit: June 10, 2014, 17:31:27 by S.M.A. »
Our Country
--------------------------------
"A leader is best when people barely know he exists, when his work is done, his aim fulfilled, they will say: We did it ourselves."   - Lao Zi (老子)
-------------------------------------------
"Courage is going from failure to failure without losing enthusiasm."
- Winston Churchill

Offline S.M.A.

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 132,340
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 6,515
Re: A-10 finally done?
« Reply #36 on: June 22, 2014, 14:20:26 »
Seems the A-10 is safe for now...

Quote
House Spending Bill Blocks A-10 Retirement
Jun. 20, 2014
By BRIAN EVERSTINE


The US House of Representatives on Thursday evening, during deliberation on the fiscal 2015 defense spending bill, voted to block the US Air Force’s plan to cut the entire A-10 fleet.

The chamber approved the an amendment, offered by Rep. Candice Miller, R-Mich., that would prohibit the Defense Department from using money to divest, retire, transfer or place in storage any A-10 aircraft, along with blocking the department from preparing to cut any of the aircraft.

The vote is the latest in a monthslong battle between the Defense Department and Congress on the future of the aging, popular aircraft. The Air Force has said it would save about $3.7 billion by cutting all 283 of the attack aircraft.

The Senate Armed Services Committee, in its markup of the authorization bill, also prohibits the retirement of the A-10, along with plans to cut any Airborne Warning and Control Aircraft.

The House on Thursday also approved an amendment from Rep. Jon Runyan, R-N.J., that blocks any funds from being used to cut KC-10 Extender refueling aircraft. The service has said it would need to cut all KC-10s if forced to make extensive budget cuts under continued sequestration.


Defense News

Our Country
--------------------------------
"A leader is best when people barely know he exists, when his work is done, his aim fulfilled, they will say: We did it ourselves."   - Lao Zi (老子)
-------------------------------------------
"Courage is going from failure to failure without losing enthusiasm."
- Winston Churchill

Offline FSTO

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 26,345
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,330
Re: A-10 finally done?
« Reply #37 on: June 22, 2014, 16:42:52 »
Why don't they cut the B1's and B2's instead? The manned bomber is about as useful as a battleship these days

Offline MilEME09

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 33,710
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,445
Re: A-10 finally done?
« Reply #38 on: June 22, 2014, 16:58:30 »
Why don't they cut the B1's and B2's instead? The manned bomber is about as useful as a battleship these days

The B1 is already schedules to be retired around 2018, the B2 they wont retire until the B3 program delivers aircraft. I would also say battleships still have their use, however the design of the battleship did not advance with the times. Take for example the new Electromagnetic cannon the US navy is developing. A Nuclear powered battleship with a few of those could hit Moscow from the Black sea with accuracy.
"We are called a Battalion, Authorized to be company strength, parade as a platoon, Operating as a section"

Offline uncle-midget-Oddball

    Back to work in one week... Finally.

  • I dance on street corners for money.
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • 7,065
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 687
  • Why dont you knock it off with them negative waves
Re: A-10 finally done?
« Reply #39 on: June 22, 2014, 18:17:10 »
Why retire them at all? I'm far from an expert at military procurement, but if the A-10 has shown it's worth to the degree it has... then why retire something that is working so well?
It would not be unheard of to keep it around or simply update it:

C-130 Hercules: First flight 1954. Currently in production as the "New" C-130J Super Hercules
CH-47 Chinook: First flight 1964. Currently in production
CH-53: First flight 1964.  Currently in production as the "New" CH-53K for the USMC
AH-1 Cobra: First flight 1965. Currently in production as AH-1Z Viper
What are you doing?

I'm drinking wine and eating cheese, and catching some rays, you know.

Offline Ludoc

  • Member
  • ****
  • 11,185
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 114
Re: A-10 finally done?
« Reply #40 on: June 22, 2014, 18:45:28 »
Why retire them at all? I'm far from an expert at military procurement, but if the A-10 has shown it's worth to the degree it has... then why retire something that is working so well?
It would not be unheard of to keep it around or simply update it:

C-130 Hercules: First flight 1954. Currently in production as the "New" C-130J Super Hercules
CH-47 Chinook: First flight 1964. Currently in production
CH-53: First flight 1964.  Currently in production as the "New" CH-53K for the USMC
AH-1 Cobra: First flight 1965. Currently in production as AH-1Z Viper

I believe they have been out of production for 30 years now. The USAF, while crazy rich, does have a finite amount of money and supporting a 30+ year old air frame is expensive.

Their logic being: it will only get more expensive to support this plane that can only do one thing. Granted it does that thing really well. However for the less money, or worse case the same money, they can support planes that do multiple things well enough.

Offline StudentPilot23

  • Jr. Member
  • ***
  • 2,955
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 85
Re: A-10 finally done?
« Reply #41 on: June 22, 2014, 21:47:23 »
 >:D


Offline daftandbarmy

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 173,770
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 10,711
  • The Older I Get, The Better I Was
Re: A-10 finally done?
« Reply #42 on: June 23, 2014, 01:29:57 »
I believe they have been out of production for 30 years now. The USAF, while crazy rich, does have a finite amount of money and supporting a 30+ year old air frame is expensive.

Their logic being: it will only get more expensive to support this plane that can only do one thing. Granted it does that thing really well. However for the less money, or worse case the same money, they can support planes that do multiple things well enough.

The B52 is only much much older but, of course, is 'Strategic' so will survive:

 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_B-52_Stratofortress
"The most important qualification of a soldier is fortitude under fatigue and privation. Courage is only second; hardship, poverty and want are the best school for a soldier." Napoleon

Offline Loachman

  • Former Army Pilot in Drag
  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 186,967
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 6,751
Re: A-10 finally done?
« Reply #43 on: June 23, 2014, 15:32:46 »
>:D



Really.

Early F15s were built for OCA and DCA. Later ones, like F15E, were built to drop bombs. I've never seen A10s used as FAC or SCAR (I'd never even seen the latter term before) platforms, but F16s, F15s, F18s, Harriers, B1s, and a whole bunch of others are pretty capable of doing everything on that A10 list. Technology has advanced.

Having FACked A10s in Germany during the Cold War, I had rather little faith that they'd have been as effective as claimed in a high-threat environment.

Interesting machine, though, but it is really a niche aircraft whose roles can be performed by others.

Offline GAP

  • Semper Fi
  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 205,110
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 12,881
Re: USAF to retire the A-10 Warthog
« Reply #44 on: June 23, 2014, 16:50:09 »
So, give them to the Army or Marines.

The Air Force never wanted them, they just didn't want the others to have control of them.
Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I´m not so sure about the universe

Offline tango22a

    Just \"LOVES\" being kicked to the curb!!

  • R011C Dinosaur
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 46,900
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 423
  • Lurker in the shadows
Re: USAF to retire the A-10 Warthog
« Reply #45 on: June 23, 2014, 18:17:18 »
Let's face it people... the upper echelon of the USAF Does NOT want to do CAS...period!!!

It's much easier to loiter at 30,000 feet over the battle field and lob JDAMs and JSOWs onto point targets.

That way there is only a minor threat to expensive aircraft and crew(s).

When one goes poking amongst the trees and terrain features one has a lot more chances to make fatal errors.

Unfortunately the mud movers need CAS on call almost immediately and the A10 is best suited for this role.

There seems to be a constant amount of bickering between the "fighter mafia" and the "strategic mafia" for control of input into the role(s) of the USAF in the future.


tango22a
« Last Edit: June 23, 2014, 18:54:23 by tango22a »
DISCLAIMER: THE IDEAS AND OPINIONS EXPRESSED HEREIN ARE MINE AND MINE ALONE! NO ONE OTHER THAN MYSELF IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THEM!

CYNIC .... with a CAPITAL C
Character assassinations a specialty
Still crazy after all these years!!!

Dead Horse Beater......Par Excellence!

Offline Colin P

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 103,295
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,912
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca
Re: USAF to retire the A-10 Warthog
« Reply #46 on: June 24, 2014, 10:09:19 »
So, give them to the Army or Marines.

The Air Force never wanted them, they just didn't want the others to have control of them.

Yes but the Marine or the Army might be successful with them and that would not look good on the USAF

Offline Loachman

  • Former Army Pilot in Drag
  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 186,967
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 6,751
Re: USAF to retire the A-10 Warthog
« Reply #47 on: June 24, 2014, 15:05:51 »
The A10 is not the only machine capable of providing effective CAS. It provided only a small fraction of the CAS missions that I saw during my tours.

The US Army and USMC also have suitable aircraft to provide similar effects already. And I doubt that they want to be hit with the increasing costs of keeping an aging fleet in operation.

Offline Colin P

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 103,295
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,912
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca
Re: USAF to retire the A-10 Warthog
« Reply #48 on: June 24, 2014, 15:22:41 »
The Marines have always been about  Orphan and/or aging fleets so that would fit into their Org structure nicely. But the A10 does take off from a carrier so that would limit their mission profile for the Marines. Hmm I wonder if aircraft carrier trials were ever tried for the Warthog?

Offline rampage800

  • Member
  • ****
  • 3,735
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 177
Re: USAF to retire the A-10 Warthog
« Reply #49 on: June 24, 2014, 19:58:10 »
Quote
The A10 is not the only machine capable of providing effective CAS. It provided only a small fraction of the CAS missions that I saw during my tours.

Yup agree 100%,  saw F-15E's, F-16's, F-18's, AV-8's, B-1B's (the horror) MQ-1's and 9's all do a lot of great CAS work. The A-10 is obviously a formidable aircraft in this field but to discount the capabilities of the others is somewhat short sighted I'd think. The funny thing is really, there is no line on the JTAR to request a specific platform ie A-10, you request an effect !