Posted on Nov 14, 2014
TACP Association joins lawmakers in opposing A-10 cuts
17.8K
35
18
17
17
0
From: Air Force Times
For the first time, the largest group of tactical air control party airmen have joined with lawmakers to publicly oppose the Air Force's plan to retire the A-10 Thunderbolt II, a jet beloved by troops on the ground but in the budget cross hairs of the service.
The Tactical Air Control Party Association joined lawmakers on Capitol Hill on Thursday to call on the Air Force to reconsider its plan to cut the entire A-10 fleet, a move that has already faced stiff opposition from lawmakers and is not likely to move forward the way the service had planned.
"This is the first time we've spoken publicly about this issue," said retired Master Sgt. Charlie Keebaugh, president of the TACP Association. "We are compelled to take action at this point. Knowing the status of the world and our brothers, and our friends who are being sent downrange, they deserve to have the support that they need to do the mission."
Thursday's press conference reignited the debate over the Air Force's plans to retire the A-10 as Congress returned to Washington after a break for mid-term elections to take up unfinished business, including the defense authorization bill. Both the House and Senate authorization committees have moved to block the A-10 from being retired.
"I've been fighting so hard for the A-10, and there's only one reason for that," Sen. Kelly Ayotte, R-N.H., said. "I believe when we send our men and women to fight on our behalf, that they deserve the very best and we have a responsibility to ensure we can do everything we can to bring them home.
There's no doubt the A-10 is the best close-air support platform out there. It is very important that we preserve the capacity to give the very best close-air support to our men and women."
The press conference came just days after the Air Force disclosed it was working on a compromise plan to retire about 72 A-10s in order to move maintenance airmen over to the F-35. The service needs 1,100 maintainers to help the F-35 reach initial operating capability in 2016.
The plan has not received much support on Capitol Hill.
"We understand that as time goes on, the A-10 will be replaced by the F-35," said Rep. Austin Scott, R-Ga. "But it makes to sense to take a weapons system away that works right now based on problems right now … to have another weapons system in five, six, seven years."
The TACP Association holds a conference every October. At the conference last month, the association polled all of its members to see if there was any support for the service's plan to retire the A-10.
One hundred percent of the airmen opposed the move, Keebaugh said. The association has 1,300 active-duty and Air National Guard members who have been directed to not speak about the issue, but the 2,000 retired members are united in opposition to the Air Force's plan, Keebaugh said.
The association has sent letters to Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel and Air Force Secretary Deborah Lee James urging them to reconsider the move. The association also suggested a meeting with the secretaries and its members to "get their opinion with no fear of retribution for their career."
The leaders who are suggesting the retirement are out of touch with what troops on the ground need, he said.
"The people who are saying this have never been shot at, have never been on a battlefield and had to employ that asset, and look up in the sky and see a stack of ten different airframes, and choose what they want," he said.
http://www.airforcetimes.com/story/military/capitol-hill/2014/11/13/tacp-airmen-oppose-a10-cuts/18979861/
For the first time, the largest group of tactical air control party airmen have joined with lawmakers to publicly oppose the Air Force's plan to retire the A-10 Thunderbolt II, a jet beloved by troops on the ground but in the budget cross hairs of the service.
The Tactical Air Control Party Association joined lawmakers on Capitol Hill on Thursday to call on the Air Force to reconsider its plan to cut the entire A-10 fleet, a move that has already faced stiff opposition from lawmakers and is not likely to move forward the way the service had planned.
"This is the first time we've spoken publicly about this issue," said retired Master Sgt. Charlie Keebaugh, president of the TACP Association. "We are compelled to take action at this point. Knowing the status of the world and our brothers, and our friends who are being sent downrange, they deserve to have the support that they need to do the mission."
Thursday's press conference reignited the debate over the Air Force's plans to retire the A-10 as Congress returned to Washington after a break for mid-term elections to take up unfinished business, including the defense authorization bill. Both the House and Senate authorization committees have moved to block the A-10 from being retired.
"I've been fighting so hard for the A-10, and there's only one reason for that," Sen. Kelly Ayotte, R-N.H., said. "I believe when we send our men and women to fight on our behalf, that they deserve the very best and we have a responsibility to ensure we can do everything we can to bring them home.
There's no doubt the A-10 is the best close-air support platform out there. It is very important that we preserve the capacity to give the very best close-air support to our men and women."
The press conference came just days after the Air Force disclosed it was working on a compromise plan to retire about 72 A-10s in order to move maintenance airmen over to the F-35. The service needs 1,100 maintainers to help the F-35 reach initial operating capability in 2016.
The plan has not received much support on Capitol Hill.
"We understand that as time goes on, the A-10 will be replaced by the F-35," said Rep. Austin Scott, R-Ga. "But it makes to sense to take a weapons system away that works right now based on problems right now … to have another weapons system in five, six, seven years."
The TACP Association holds a conference every October. At the conference last month, the association polled all of its members to see if there was any support for the service's plan to retire the A-10.
One hundred percent of the airmen opposed the move, Keebaugh said. The association has 1,300 active-duty and Air National Guard members who have been directed to not speak about the issue, but the 2,000 retired members are united in opposition to the Air Force's plan, Keebaugh said.
The association has sent letters to Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel and Air Force Secretary Deborah Lee James urging them to reconsider the move. The association also suggested a meeting with the secretaries and its members to "get their opinion with no fear of retribution for their career."
The leaders who are suggesting the retirement are out of touch with what troops on the ground need, he said.
"The people who are saying this have never been shot at, have never been on a battlefield and had to employ that asset, and look up in the sky and see a stack of ten different airframes, and choose what they want," he said.
http://www.airforcetimes.com/story/military/capitol-hill/2014/11/13/tacp-airmen-oppose-a10-cuts/18979861/
Tactical Air Control Party (TACP)
Air Force
A-10
Posted 11 y ago
Responses: 10
4
4
0
"The leaders who are suggesting the retirement are out of touch with what troops on the ground need."
"The people who are saying this have never been shot at, have never been on a battlefield and had to employ that asset"
I completely agree with the statements above in regards to the retirement of the A-10.
"The people who are saying this have never been shot at, have never been on a battlefield and had to employ that asset"
I completely agree with the statements above in regards to the retirement of the A-10.
(4)
(0)
SSgt (Join to see)
most of the folks calling the shots on the Hill are out of touch w/ what the troops need.
(0)
(0)
3
3
0
The A-10 Thunderbolt II, the Warthog, is the best Ground Support Aircraft ever made. If they are smart they will keep it and make any upgrades it may need.
(3)
(0)
2
2
0
I love the A-10. A flying tank killer built around a 30mm enemy nightmare of epic proportions that has even scored an air kill in combat (Desert Storm). Now please do a story and save my beloved OH-58D Kiowa Warrior!
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
The A-10 is an amazing aircraft, capable of so much havoc and destruction. Our enemies fear it, we love it. Why get rid of it? No other jet around does what it does. We're not replacing it, they're just cutting it to save money for other stuff... unlike retiring the 53's for the V-22's, or 15's for the 35/22, this makes zero sense to me. Theres other planes that should be chopped well before this one!
(2)
(0)
1
1
0
With a few taps on a specially configured Android tablet, a joint terminal attack controller called in an airstrike from an A-10 gunship, the Pentagon’s research arm announced.
The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, better known as Darpa, for the first time tested the so-called Persistent Close Air Support, or PCAS, technology on an A-10 Thunderbolt II attack aircraft from April through June near Nellis Air Force Base in Nevada, the agency announced this week in a press release.
The evaluations “showed that a warfighter serving as a joint terminal attack controller (JTAC) on the ground could, in seamless coordination with a pilot, successfully command an airstrike with as few as three clicks on a tablet,” the release states.
The program aims to develop easier, faster and more precise coordination between ground forces and air crews while conducting strikes against nearby targets, according to Darpa. The goal is to use smaller munitions to hit multiple or moving targets to minimize the incidence of friendly fire and collateral damage, according to the agency.
“We have shown that a flexible architecture and extensible technology toolsets are key to making groundbreaking improvements in air-ground coordination,” Dan Patt, DARPA program manager, said in the release.
The prototype system involves two components: PCAS-Ground software, called the Android Tactical Assault Kit; and PCAS-Air, an automated targeting system on board the aircraft to determine the timed release of laser– and GPS-guided munitions, according to the release.
Of the 50 sorties, ten involved live-fire weapons engagements — all of which were successful and carried out within six minutes, it states. The technology has also been tested on a Marine Corps MV-22 Osprey tilt-rotor aircraft, it states.
The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, better known as Darpa, for the first time tested the so-called Persistent Close Air Support, or PCAS, technology on an A-10 Thunderbolt II attack aircraft from April through June near Nellis Air Force Base in Nevada, the agency announced this week in a press release.
The evaluations “showed that a warfighter serving as a joint terminal attack controller (JTAC) on the ground could, in seamless coordination with a pilot, successfully command an airstrike with as few as three clicks on a tablet,” the release states.
The program aims to develop easier, faster and more precise coordination between ground forces and air crews while conducting strikes against nearby targets, according to Darpa. The goal is to use smaller munitions to hit multiple or moving targets to minimize the incidence of friendly fire and collateral damage, according to the agency.
“We have shown that a flexible architecture and extensible technology toolsets are key to making groundbreaking improvements in air-ground coordination,” Dan Patt, DARPA program manager, said in the release.
The prototype system involves two components: PCAS-Ground software, called the Android Tactical Assault Kit; and PCAS-Air, an automated targeting system on board the aircraft to determine the timed release of laser– and GPS-guided munitions, according to the release.
Of the 50 sorties, ten involved live-fire weapons engagements — all of which were successful and carried out within six minutes, it states. The technology has also been tested on a Marine Corps MV-22 Osprey tilt-rotor aircraft, it states.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
I love the A-10's and have no idea if they should be retired or not. Yet, after seeing one of the engines in class I would dread to work on that aircraft.
-A Mechanics Nightmare
-A Mechanics Nightmare
(1)
(0)
MSgt John Taylor
I spent 4 1/2 years maintaining the A-10. It's the easiest and most reliable plane in the AF inventory. The only thing hard about repairing the jet is finding the part.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
The P-47 was an amazing ground support aircraft, just like the A-10, its time has passed. In this day and age of budget cuts and sequestration, hard decisions have to be made. The A-10 is a hard call, but a logical one. Consider the world and its treats, the A-10 is no longer needed.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
I am not TACP, but being assigned to AFSOC, I have contact with them often. I can say that privately, they have voiced the same opinion as the retired members on the merits of the A-10. It make no sense at all to remove a working system in order to replace it with something else down the road. Common sense would dictate that any decision made to retire the A-10 should involve the troops that use the equipment or receive the benefits of same (ie. Army troops).
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
In other news, slower aircraft, especially those that fly closer to the ground, are more vulnerable to ground fire.
Are they really allowing themselves to be quoted saying this stuff?
http://www.defensenews.com/story/defense/show-daily/afa/2015/02/12/afa-a10-cas-carlisle-air-combat-savings-command/23304551/
Are they really allowing themselves to be quoted saying this stuff?
http://www.defensenews.com/story/defense/show-daily/afa/2015/02/12/afa-a10-cas-carlisle-air-combat-savings-command/23304551/
ACC Head: Follow-On to A-10 Aircraft Possible
A future close air support-specific platform to replace the A-10 remains a possibility, the head of Air Combat Command said Thursday.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
Time to move on. We can be much more precise now with GPS and laser guided munitions that it makes little sense to have the A10 flying low and slow to the ground. Far better to use drones, F16s and F18s until the F35 is ready.
The Air Force wanted to retire the A10 20 years ago!!
The Air Force wanted to retire the A10 20 years ago!!
(0)
(0)
TSgt Robert Dolezal
Close battlefield air support with duration over target continues to have a place in 21st century battlefield strategy with both cost and precision justifications. Until drones emerge with greater capacity for ordinance loads and line-of-sight laser target designation limitations are negated, the ability of high-vantage point platforms like the A-10 fill important gaps in our capabilities.
(0)
(0)
SrA Daniel Hunter
The primary design and mission of the F-16 is not close air support. The F/A-18 or drones are better for that unless our ground troops are in close to the target. They both use the same munitions as the A-10 for the most part. The F-35 costs too much especially in the era of drones.
The Air Force currently uses numerous aircraft it wanted to retire years ago. Retiring aircraft is fine as long as we have one to replace it's mission and do it as well or better.
The Air Force currently uses numerous aircraft it wanted to retire years ago. Retiring aircraft is fine as long as we have one to replace it's mission and do it as well or better.
(0)
(0)
Maj Wayne Dahlke
The best CAS platforms are NOT "fighters". Fighters are designed for Air Superiority (kill other aircraft) or Air Interdiction (Kill other aircraft before they get to the fight).
Close Air Support requires fine discrimination of Targets vs Friendlies vs Neutrals, and the ability to remove from the fight anyone who is threatening our ground forces. There are really only 2 manned platforms that can accomplish this for more than 3 hours at a time, the AC-130 and the A-10. The AC-130 is a Special Operations specific platform that sometimes can be used by conventional forces. The A-10 is the only "Big Blue" asset that is routinely used by the ground forces that was designed SPECIFICALLY to support ground forces. They need the capability, and their is no replacement for it anywhere in the acquisition pipeline. F-16, F-15, F-35, F-18 and F-22 do not have the loiter time or the weapons load-out to provide precision fires in danger lose situations, not to mention, they have to go get fuel every 90 minutes.
Keep the A-10 until you can replace the capability. Do not remove the capability for political reasons.
Close Air Support requires fine discrimination of Targets vs Friendlies vs Neutrals, and the ability to remove from the fight anyone who is threatening our ground forces. There are really only 2 manned platforms that can accomplish this for more than 3 hours at a time, the AC-130 and the A-10. The AC-130 is a Special Operations specific platform that sometimes can be used by conventional forces. The A-10 is the only "Big Blue" asset that is routinely used by the ground forces that was designed SPECIFICALLY to support ground forces. They need the capability, and their is no replacement for it anywhere in the acquisition pipeline. F-16, F-15, F-35, F-18 and F-22 do not have the loiter time or the weapons load-out to provide precision fires in danger lose situations, not to mention, they have to go get fuel every 90 minutes.
Keep the A-10 until you can replace the capability. Do not remove the capability for political reasons.
(3)
(0)
SMSgt Thor Merich
The problem with any platform that is NOT the A-10, is that they are not designed to do CAS. Sure they can adequately perform the mission. But when bullets are flying, I don't want adequate, I want the best choice possible. Think of it like this, if I wanted to haul a load of 60 pound concrete bags from my local hardware store, I could load them up in the trunk of my Dodge Charger. But it would be messy, unsafe, and I would have to make several trips. Or, I could just throw them all in the bed of my Chevy Truck and be on my way. Its a matter of the best tool for the job. I believe that our troops and the American people deserve the best tool for the job. When it comes to CAS, the A-10 is the best tool there is.
(1)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google