Posted on Mar 8, 2016
Should the A-10 Warthog be flown by Army Pilots since the Air Force does not care for it and Senator McCain sees through the AF b.s.?
38.9K
380
130
21
21
0
Senator McCain again grilled the Air Force Chief of Staff on the lack of a good replacement. The plane should be kept in service and flown by Army Aviatiors, Guard and Reserve, who often have commercial jet pilot experience already. The price of the F-35/F-16/F-18 is like comparing the price of a Bentley vs a Dodge Challenger Hellcat that can do the job better for a fraction of the price. Keeping the A-10s will save lives. Keep the extra ones not used in Guam or Diego Garcia ready for use. Put some in England to protect NATO. Hire retired air force A-10 veterans or Air Guard mechanics to fix them. If a 1950s B-52 is being kept until 2040, why not keep a 1970s A-10 around just as long? Makes sense to any Army Soldier or Marine who prefers an armored plane vs an unarmored fast mover that can't see you very well! Senator McCain and Congresswoman McSally should pursue having every single A-10 air frame out of Davis-Montham and be rebuilt to the C-model modern tank killer just like the Army rebuilds their tanks at Anniston Army Depot and makes them M1A2s. I doubt two F-16s today can destroy 32 Iraqi tanks in less than 90 minutes like the two A-10 Alpha models like did in Desert Storm back in 1991. If it works, don't fix it! Air Force, we love you, we just beg you to keep an effective weapon that Army and Marines love! I am an admirer of Air Force as a whole. http://www.stripes.com/news/mccain-lambasts-air-force-chief-of-staff-over-a-10-in-islamic-state-fight-1.397359
Aviation
Warrant Officers
A-10 Pilot
A-10
A-10 Dedicated Crew Chief
Edited 10 y ago
Posted 10 y ago
Responses: 36
2
2
0
It doesn’t matter, Air Force has shot down many attempts by the Army to fly fixed wing aircraft for close air support. They are not going to give up the fight on that any time soon.
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
I said no, not because I agree, but because it is the law, as the Key West Accord does not allow the army to have attack fixed wing aircraft.
(2)
(0)
LTC Stephen Conway
Understood, I just wish they would do something to amend the Accord because now they don't want to read Wing 1/3 of the remaining warthogs so they will be Parts planes very soon which is just what the Air Force wants to put money into their gargantuan black hole. The Eisenhower military industrial complex is a alive and well and the F-35 Joint or junk Strike Fighter is a perfect example of the politics of bad Aviation decision making
(1)
(0)
LTC Stephen Conway
I meant put new Wings on the remaining 1/3 still flying since they are near the end of their lifespan. The A-10 Warthog comes before the dreamers
(1)
(0)
2
2
0
A-10 is not an old bird. It actually flew after the f-15 and only 2 years before the F-16. Its costs to maintain are a fraction of the cost of these fighters but the Air Force is in love with expensive fast toys. Air Defense and strategic roles should remain with the Air force. The muddy day to day CAS needs should be regulated to the Army. Give the plane to the Army and let them properly handle it.
(2)
(0)
LTC Stephen Conway
Rep. McSally confirms deficiencies of F-35 to conduct Close Air Support
Confirming the A-10’s unmatched capabilities as the U.S Air Force’s best Close Air Support (CAS) asset, U.S. Rep. Martha McSally yesterday during a House Arm...
turf wars small budgets (until the next war)...and military industrial complex!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xrZoU9SR7II
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xrZoU9SR7II
(0)
(0)
2
2
0
2
2
0
If the Army could figure out the budget and structure to incorporate the A-10 I would be all for it!! It's an awesome aircraft. I only see one huge issue with this...I would probably want to trade in me being a AH-64 pilot to be an A-10 pilot haha
(2)
(0)
PVT Raymond Lopez
What is one of the scarcest sound heard in a combat zone? A Warrant Officer pilot saying "Watch this shit!!"
(1)
(0)
2
2
0
To all the Marines and Soldiers; the plane was replaced years ago when they produced the smart weapons that we have today. The plane is still capable in a low threat environment, but so is the F4U Corsair. The AF's contention is that there's not enough money to go around and prepare for the future war. The infantry isn't tasked by the Nat'l Command Authority to win air superiority in a future large scale conflict with a capable enemy Air Force, but the service that has to foot the bill for the A-10 is.
If you give the plane to the Army, then take away their tanks and attack helicopters. The A-10, according to the infantry, makes the enemy tank obsolete and can do the same mission as the Apache. Therefore, they don't need tanks and Apaches. Without tanks and attack helo's, there should be enough money for the Air Force to keep the A-10
As for the Marines, they provide they're own close air support. I forgot, how many A-10's did they build and buy to support their infantry? In a service where every marine is a rifleman, they bought the F-18 because it gives you more options that the single role A-10
If you give the plane to the Army, then take away their tanks and attack helicopters. The A-10, according to the infantry, makes the enemy tank obsolete and can do the same mission as the Apache. Therefore, they don't need tanks and Apaches. Without tanks and attack helo's, there should be enough money for the Air Force to keep the A-10
As for the Marines, they provide they're own close air support. I forgot, how many A-10's did they build and buy to support their infantry? In a service where every marine is a rifleman, they bought the F-18 because it gives you more options that the single role A-10
(2)
(0)
Capt (Join to see)
I was typing up a huge response to this but your concise response hits the "nail on the head".
(0)
(0)
PVT Raymond Lopez
MSgt John Taylor for the record, I enlisted in the United States Army at age seventeen (17). At age eighteen (18) I was in combat with the 1st Air Cavalry Division in the Republic of Vietnam by the time I was nineteen (19)I had been awarded the Combat Infantry Badge and the Purple Heat with Oak Leaf Cluster (Second Award)so I have some small in ground combat. MSgt John Taylor says in his brilliant military analysis that “The infantry isn't tasked by the Nat'l Command Authority to win air superiority in a future large scale conflict with a capable enemy Air Force, but the service that has to foot the bill for the A-10 is.” When was the last time since the Korean war that the United Sates Air Force tasked by the Nat'l Command Authority to win air superiority in a large scale conflict with a capable enemy Air Force? Yet the United States Army and the United States Marine Corps have had to send ground combat units into action how many times in the same time frame.
Why does the Air Force maintain ground combat units? In the spirit of MSgt John Taylor comments the United States Air Force should give ALL its ground combat units including armored vehicles, indirect fire weapons, motorized units and any other airborne type units.
By the way in 1966, the heaviest casualties my unit suffered were when the United Sates Air Force hit one of our platoons by MISTAKE!! Since then how many times has the United Sates Air Force had “BLUE ON BLUE” MISTAKES? By the way, United Sates Air Force B-2 Bombers lousy ground support aircraft!!! How many Infantry were killed or wounded that day.
Why does the Air Force maintain ground combat units? In the spirit of MSgt John Taylor comments the United States Air Force should give ALL its ground combat units including armored vehicles, indirect fire weapons, motorized units and any other airborne type units.
By the way in 1966, the heaviest casualties my unit suffered were when the United Sates Air Force hit one of our platoons by MISTAKE!! Since then how many times has the United Sates Air Force had “BLUE ON BLUE” MISTAKES? By the way, United Sates Air Force B-2 Bombers lousy ground support aircraft!!! How many Infantry were killed or wounded that day.
(1)
(0)
MSgt John Taylor
PVT Raymond Lopez - Pvt Lopez, I appreciate your service. The USAF is manned and equipped to fight what the NCA deems as THE future conflict, all services are. When we have to fight the Taliban instead of the red hoard, we have to adjust with the equipment we have on hand, just like you did in Vietnam. Also, the USAF's security forces are not trained to storm beaches, but to defend it's airfields. When the Army wanted to share the pain of convoy duties in Iraq and Afghanistan, all the services provided bodies and not all were "combat troops."
Blue on blue happens in the fog of war. No platoon will ever win against an aircraft so it seems one sided. But how many time were soldiers killed by friendly arty? By another platoon? Furthermore, we drop smart bombs, and they do hit what they're told to hit. The type of aircraft has nothing to do with that. In all of the Troops in contact calls that my F-15E's in Afghanistan answered, not one turned us away in favor of an A-10. As a matter-of-fact, we answered more calls because we could get there faster.
I started my career on the A-10, it will always be my first love and my favorite aircraft. But, it won't be the most capable aircraft I worked on. We drop precision weapons when in close contact with friendly troops, any aircraft can do that. The only thing that the A-10 has that the others don't, is the 30 mm cannon. How many tanks do you think that the taliban or are using? 20 mm kills them just the same and is cheaper.
I think that the A-10 should stay, as long as there's money for it and that it doesn't interfere with future aircraft development.
Blue on blue happens in the fog of war. No platoon will ever win against an aircraft so it seems one sided. But how many time were soldiers killed by friendly arty? By another platoon? Furthermore, we drop smart bombs, and they do hit what they're told to hit. The type of aircraft has nothing to do with that. In all of the Troops in contact calls that my F-15E's in Afghanistan answered, not one turned us away in favor of an A-10. As a matter-of-fact, we answered more calls because we could get there faster.
I started my career on the A-10, it will always be my first love and my favorite aircraft. But, it won't be the most capable aircraft I worked on. We drop precision weapons when in close contact with friendly troops, any aircraft can do that. The only thing that the A-10 has that the others don't, is the 30 mm cannon. How many tanks do you think that the taliban or are using? 20 mm kills them just the same and is cheaper.
I think that the A-10 should stay, as long as there's money for it and that it doesn't interfere with future aircraft development.
(0)
(0)
2
2
0
Don't know how Kosher, Cost Benefit Analysis, Whatever but I love the A-10 Warthog. They used to be HQd down the Street at Richards Gebaur. between them and the Chinooks I always saw Military Aircraft over Johnson County, KS. Might as well have been a war zone.
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
1
1
0
That was floated out there right before ODS. As soon as the Army expresses interest, the Air Force seems to hang on to it tighter.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
With the present set of missions that we do, wouldn't it be more cost effective to use the air frame we are buying for the Afghan's the Super Tucano? Am I mistaken that since Desert Storm most CAS missions have been in a non air threat environment against non armored targets? So my question is there a cheaper alternative that is still effective?
(1)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google