Say BY BY to the A-10

[MrCoffee]

Even for National Guard units? I sure hope not because I think A-10s are really remarkable aircraft. I would expect the A10 to still fly with the NG units after they leave the main AF.

[osage]

The Apaches got their tulips kicked in Iraq.  The pilots couldn't deal with brownouts and augered on takeoff and landing.

Plus they got the crap shot out of them by poorly trained units using small arms, AAA.

The A-10, as usual, performed superbly.  No way are they gonna retire them.

Cadillac of the skies!

[OIO]

Maverick is fire and forget while the hellfire is radar guided or laser-guided (Longbow Apache has the Radar H'Fires though).

Either way, for close support, the helo beats the A10 good. However, if you got 2 units, 100 miles apart engaged in fighting,  the A10 can go to each one and drop ord. on each when called upon, the helo can only stay with 1 unit providing said fire support.

[anonymous]

Originally posted by OIO
Maverick is fire and forget while the hellfire is radar guided or laser-guided (Longbow Apache has the Radar H'Fires though).

Either way, for close support, the helo beats the A10 good. However, if you got 2 units, 100 miles apart engaged in fighting,  the A10 can go to each one and drop ord. on each when called upon, the helo can only stay with 1 unit providing said fire support.

no disrespect to helo and apache guys but in afghanistan the a10 was giving great close support in places where apaches could not go without probably getting shot down. apaches can kick some bellybutton but mgs will hurt them in the end because they can be hit much easier than the a10. a10 is a tough mofo AND its not easy to hit for a guy with a mg. i sure hope they dont get rid of them.

[anonymous]

Originally posted by midnight Target
The guy in the office next to me was a Marine A-4 pilot in Vietnam. He has some amazing tales to tell, but this one seems to be very Vietnamesque.

Every Marine pilot is assigned as a forward observer for a portion of his tour. The logic was(is?) that a pilot should be the one talking to the pilots.

Actually even the forward observer was insulated from the guy with the ordinance. The guy on the ground would talk to a guy in a Bronco, who would vector in the air support. Art (my co-worker) said this was to filter out the stress level the forward observer sometimes conveyed over the radio.

Well during one very nasty firefight, Art's company was in deep doo doo. The VC were within 30 yards of their entrenchment, and the situation was dire. Art called the Bronco pilot and requested a drop within 30 yards of his position. Not wanting to make a mistake, the Bronco pilot flew into the teeth of the situation to make sure he called in the right coordinates. A napalm drop was made close enough to Art so that "One guy stood up in his foxhole and was fried." The rest were saved by the drop.

Later Art, (a Marine Captain) wrote up a request for a commendation for the Bronco pilot. HQ read Art's write up of the events of that day, and promptly busted the Bronco pilot for flying too low.

sheeesh.

maybe your buddy got told a bogus story. i cant see how a fac could ever be busted for going for max accuracy.

[anonymous]

Originally posted by osage
The Apaches got their tulips kicked in Iraq.  The pilots couldn't deal with brownouts and augered on takeoff and landing.

Plus they got the crap shot out of them by poorly trained units using small arms, AAA.

The A-10, as usual, performed superbly.  No way are they gonna retire them.

Cadillac of the skies!

thats not really a fair call on what happened. look at it from the pov of iraqi soldiers. when apaches are around they are the most dangerous and most visible thing that every mg gunner can actually hit. the work in a dangerous place dont fault them when they get shot down more often.

[Jack55]

I think the Apache guys fire from a hover and were an easier target than the fast moving A-10.

[Glasses]

A-10 a Cadillac of the skies? More likea Ford Bronco of the SKies :-D

[Ack-Ack]

Originally posted by anonymous
maybe your buddy got told a bogus story. i cant see how a fac could ever be busted for going for max accuracy.

I wouldn't doubt that it did happen during Vietnam.  From the stories my dad and uncles have told me about some of the stupid, silly crap they got busted for, it's quite possible the FAC pilot did got popped for violating a hard deck rule.


ack-ack

[Ack-Ack]

Originally posted by Jack55
I think the Apache guys fire from a hover and were an easier target than the fast moving A-10.

Not to mention that the Iraqis did learn something from our time in Somalia.  Fire as many RPGs and bullets in the sky and eventually you're going to bring down something and they did.


Ack-Ack

[mjolnir]

Well, whoever the guy is who wrote that article couldn't find his as*hole with both hands and a flashlight.  If the A-10 is going to be decommissioned, it won't be to make room for the JSF or anything else.  And it certainly won't be because all Air Force brass still advocate High Altitude Daylight Precision Bombing like this joker thinks.  It's because the plane was designed with a 20 year life expectancy, which is rapidly approaching if not already past, and maintainence crews are having more and more trouble keeping them airborne because no one makes spare parts for them anymore.  It's a great airplane, and I'll hate to see it go, but if we can't maintain them anymore, then we'll have to move to something that we can.

[Chairboy]

Mjolnir, I hope you aren't suggesting that this 'simply couldn't happen' based on the question that 'if there was no suitable replacement, why would they retire this plane?'

1. The A-10 is being retired.
2. There are no planes with equivalent capability in the pipe to replace it.

Please reconcile those two.  Unless you know about some secret armored close support aircraft for the Army that's about to enter service....

[flakbait]

Guys, look at what happened with the Navy A-6E. Their only dedicated bomber capable of flying in any weather, and they retire it with nothing of similar capability around. Max bomb load of six tons, all-weather avionics, ugly as sin too! Grumman offered to redesign the aircraft for more modern everything and restart production. That got thrown out. The Air Force offered 'em a Navy-version of the F-117 with AB's, and that got thrown out. In the end, the A-6 was replaced with the Plastic Bug (F-18), which will get replaced by the Stuper Bug (F-18E/F). With the exceptions of the Army, who rarely use fixed-wing AC, and the Marines, who aren't dumb when it comes to CAS, everyone is going towards "higher, faster, better". Looks like the Marines might take over the CAS role for both Marine and Army units. Cause at this rate the USAF will be dropping one bomb per month on a tank column and saying "We achieved maximum destruction with no casualties"

Never trust a staff-level officer to do anything right; they're more dangerous then a squeaky-clean Lt with a radio and a map!



-----------------------
Flakbait [Delta6]
Delta Six's Flight School
Put the P-61B in Aces High

[mjolnir]

Originally posted by Chairboy
Mjolnir, I hope you aren't suggesting that this 'simply couldn't happen' based on the question that 'if there was no suitable replacement, why would they retire this plane?'

1. The A-10 is being retired.
2. There are no planes with equivalent capability in the pipe to replace it.

Please reconcile those two.  Unless you know about some secret armored close support aircraft for the Army that's about to enter service....

That's not what I'm saying at all.  I'm not arguing that the A-10 is going to be retired.  I'm just saying the reasons listed in the article aren't necessarily correct.  It's time is up, we can hardly keep the things in the air anymore because no one makes parts for a plane that wasn't supposed to last any longer than this.  So we have to move to another platform.  I don't really think the Lawn Dart or the JSF will do the job the same way as an A-10, but that's all we've got now.  So in typical AF fashion, we'll try to do more with less.  

Another thing to consider is that the CAS role is rapidly being redefined.  Look at Afghanistan.  The guys on the ground were calling in B-52s for CAS.  The job is not plane-specific, much as some would like it to be.  The definition of CAS, as laid out in AFDD-1, is:

CAS consists of air operations against hostile targets in close proximity to friendly forces; further, these operations require detailed integration of each air mission with the fire and movement of those forces. CAS provides direct support to help friendly surface forces carry out their assigned tasks.

It doesn't say "low and slow strafing runs with a 30mm cannon."  It just says attacks against hostile targets in close proximity to our own guys.

[midnight Target]

Originally posted by anonymous
maybe your buddy got told a bogus story. i cant see how a fac could ever be busted for going for max accuracy.

He wasn't "told" the story he was the forward observer. He related this story to me while I was reading a copy of the request for commendation he had written to HQ.

All true.