Red-Dot
Verified Military
Someone must have listened to those of us down in the mud and blood!
A sad day for the soldier/seaman/airman on the ground.... (A-10/CAS Discussion)
- Thread starter Kraut783
- Start date
..... or they figure we will need them soon.
maybe they are finally realizing how beautiful and awesome the A-10 really is... It's like a nice medium rare bacon wrapped steak that's been marinated in Blanton's that has super powers coming to your rescue... But that's just my take.
LibraryLady
Verified Military
- Joined
- Sep 7, 2006
- Messages
- 5,071
Random Musing. I wonder how much of our tax dollars went into this decision making process. :wall::wall::wall:
LL
Devildoc
Verified Military
We've seen this merry-go-round before....CAS gets out-dated by hi-tech, then we get into a war in which we rely on low-tech CAS, which gets out-dated by hi-tech, then we get into a war in which we rely on low-tech CAS.....
Keep the A-10, Keep the AV-8B....hell, bring back the A-1.....
Keep the A-10, Keep the AV-8B....hell, bring back the A-1.....
Blizzard
Member
- Joined
- Dec 10, 2012
- Messages
- 3,986
I think it was just typical politics; threaten to take away things that are most valuable/will cause the most pain to people to do without in an effort to get them to pay attention or bully them to a viewpoint/solution. It's not the first time the A-10 was threatened to be mothballed...doubt it will be the last (even if they say the issue is settled).
With how long the F-35 is taking to become remotely operationally ready for CAS, they can't afford to cut the A-10 right now. I believe we are moving towards more boots on the ground in the fight against ISIS, and that fight will require CAS, as will any and every fight until the end of time. There is no better platform for CAS, and the leadership knows it. They can argue all they want about the F-35/MQ-9 combo being sufficient. Or how F-16s and bombers have done CAS. The fact is that RPA crews are overtasked and undermanned, and we don't have F-35s yet. F-16s are showing signs of their age and that community has started losing CAS proficiency in the last 3-4 years. We call F-16 squadrons now and get told, "Yeah, we're not really training for CAS anymore." Bombers are great if you have 20 minutes to cool your heels between passes. "Oh, we'll just pattern manage then, blow up a whole box." Cool bro, let's add 10 more minutes to that attack setup while 6-10 grids get read, plugged into the system, and read back. Hopefully they're all correct and none have to be re-keyed. "Readbacks correct........ Uh, disregard, those dudes just moved, standby for new coordinates." They don't have a choice. It would be blatant disregard for the dudes on the ground if they went through with cutting the A-10 now.
My guess is the A-10 reprieve resulted in the Block 40 guys moving on.
Maybe, I don't know. The way a squadron from Hill explained it to me, 40's did most of the bombing while 50's were supposed to fly ahead, conduct SEAD/ DEAD, and blast planes as needed. Eh, maybe the paradigm has shifted, but most of the Viper squadrons that went through Bagram were 40's.
CNN jumps in as the AF tries to make cotton candy of their earlier "decision."
ISIS may have saved the A-10 - CNNPolitics.com
ISIS may have saved the A-10 - CNNPolitics.com
Last edited:
Red Flag 1
Verified Military
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2010
- Messages
- 7,580
I'd drink to that. The Spad is Bad.
Complete with music from "Shaft"
If you ever wondered what we had before the A-10, it was ^^^^^^^^^^^.
L. O. L.
Just like in business, it's great to have generalists, but you need to have the specialists in place to really make the show run.
In some ways we're victims of our own success. WWII saw fighters like the P-47, P-51, and F4U Corsair (or FG-1 if you prefer) used in the ground attack role. When people point to the P-47's success they tend to forget it was a "good enough" fighter until the P-51 arrived. Only one of those would fly from a carrier.
The Navy used Panthers in a dual role, but that was necessity as much as capability. The A-1, used in various configurations, were used by both branches as an attack aircraft before becoming a CAS platform because of its speed and availability.
The AF and Navy generally developed their own aircraft because of their unique mission requirements.
The F-4 was used in Vietnam, again out of necessity. The F-105 was a poor fighter and really developed for SAC. In a nuke war it would see use as a short range nuke bomber, not a fighter. F-4's and A-7's were used by both branches, but the F-111, intended as a dual service platform, only saw action in the AF.
Enter today and we have the F-14 upgraded to a very capable bomber prior to retirement. The F-16 and F-18 are dual-use. The F-15 had to become a new variant to act as a bomber.
We've bought into this multiuse concept because it has worked...and it has worked mostly because we haven't fought the 9th Mongolian Horde. I think the A-10 is our first special purpose CAS platform. While it is the best hands down, it wasn't a "need" until we began addressing the quantity of Soviet tanks in Europe. Prior to the A-10 our great CAS platforms were, minus the F4U, a/c past their prime that contained excellent CAS attributes.
The Navy and AF have used the same a/c, but with limitations. The F-16 was considered for the F/A role and the YF-17, which competed against the F-16 for an AF contract, was modified to become the F/A-18; like the YF-17 the F-16 couldn't be a Navy aircraft without modifications.
Now we have the F-35, that abomination which is trying to be all things to all people while also cutting/ bleeding edge in the next war. We've gotten away with it, but only because of our opponents and dual-use/ dual-branch a/c require minor to significant modifications. Anyone who signed off on the F-35's basic concept is idealistic at best and a moron at worst.
The tragedy with the A-10 isn't that we're losing the plane. That is inevitable given time and technology, but we haven't learned from the A-10. After how many years at war since the 80's, we haven't learned the value of a CAS platform? Fighter-bombers are supposed to bridge the gap between purpose built a/c, not supplant them. The AF bought F-22's, but will rely on the F-35 to do most of its fighting in a future war. The Navy realized the -35's limitations and plans to keep -18's in service until 2040. It is like we KNOW the answers but are too blind or proud to do the right thing.
Edited for typos
Last edited:
What we loved about the A-1, it had the AH-1's beat for range, speed and weight of ordnance. 4x 20mms, rockets, bombs etc...got over the target fast and just punished the shit out of it. Like the A-10, armor around the cockpit, could take a beating. We loved the Cobras too but A-1s could drop nape, and do it at controlled speeds that probably enhanced accuracy.
Red-Dot
Verified Military
Too bad they didn't re-tool and build an A-10 MK II. Same great air frame just various upgrades in engine, sensors, frame material etc. (the Avenger would obviously stay)
