Posted on Oct 13, 2023
CSM Charles Hayden
15.1K
324
57
95
95
0
04d959b
Are they being sent to Israel to assist or as a means of removing them from the USAF inventory?
Avatar feed
Responses: 31
COL Randall C.
39
39
0
The A-10s aren't "useless" to the USAF inventory - they are being replaced primarily because they are viewed as a single-role airframe (CAS) and would likely not survive if facing an adversary with modern air defense capabilities and if we didn't have at least a favorable air situation at the time of their employment.

Yes, we (the Army) love them. They became the darlings of the Gulf War, racking up thousands of vehicle kills to include about 1/3 of all tank kills during the conflict. Anyone that has been on the ground when they come in can attest to how close they can deliver accurate CAS to engaged forces - they are basically a slow-flying ordnance factory that we view as being able to chew up whatever is on the ground with the 30mm cannon or by delivering from one of the 11 hard-points carrying the heavy duty stuff if the 30mm doesn't do the job.

On the other side of the argument is that they ARE great - as long as there is no serious threat to them. They are durable, but unlike the popular myth we ground-pounders have about them, they are not invincible. We lost four of them during the Gulf war to 1980s era air defense systems and MANPADS and some others (3?) were taken out of operation because they were too damaged to be airworthy. Even when they were first put into operations (~45 years ago), planners expected to lose every A-10 in the inventory (>700) within a few weeks of combat with the Soviets if they invaded.

However, getting back to the specific question you posed about "why are they being sent to Israel as an immediate action airplane?". It still remains the pre-eminent precision CAS platform we have in our inventory ... as long as there isn't a serious anti-aircraft threat. The anti-aircraft capabilities that are present in Gaza have been very limited so far based on what's been used against the Israeli aircraft. To date the only threat has come from old SA-7s MANPADS although they claim to have more advanced MANPADS such as the SA-18 and SA-24 (again, no evidence of that and only SA-7s have been used against Israeli F-16s).

Note - this isn't new to the region as a squadron of A-10s were deployed earlier this year* at AFCENT's request due to increased tensions from Iranian-backed forces in Syria.
-----------------------------
* https://www.airandspaceforces.com/a-10s-centcom-bolster-air-force-presence/
(39)
Comment
(0)
Sgt Michael Clifford
Sgt Michael Clifford
21 d
I would like to see us turn over all the "obsolete" weapons we have including the A-10's to the Ukrainians who are fighting to survive as a soverign nation against the re-emergence of a Soviet empire. Folks who can't see the threat of Russia if they win even one square acre of Ukrainian territory just have not studied history.
(0)
Reply
(0)
MSgt Donald Graves
MSgt Donald Graves
17 d
Sgt Michael Clifford - It was the Obama Admin. ignoring the theft of Crimea that led to Putin feeling he can rebuild the old Russia that he see as owning most of Europe.
(0)
Reply
(0)
Sgt Michael Clifford
Sgt Michael Clifford
17 d
I agree to a point however remember Putin made his first military foray into neighboring soverign nations when he sent the Russian Army into the Republic of Georgia in August of 2008 and even now occupies 2 regions. Putin will continue moving against his neighbors as long as he believes he can do it without serious interferance by the free world.
He has been shocked by the effective and determined resistance of the people of Uktraine. We have to give Ukraine whatever help we can to drive the Russians back to their own borders.
(0)
Reply
(0)
CPT Jerry Lucas
CPT Jerry Lucas
14 d
BG Jim Drago - would it be worthwhile to make the A-10 a part of the Army inventory, and transfer them from the Air Force?
(0)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
1SG Russell S.
21
21
0
Cause the USAF knows the F35 can not do close air…even though they say it can do everything wonderfully. The AF says that “Close Forward Air Support” is just a FM definition of something and all of their aircraft can do the job just perfect.
(21)
Comment
(0)
MSgt Donald Graves
MSgt Donald Graves
17 d
When the A-10 was first made the USAF did not want them. Congress forced them on us because they were cheaper, (Read more expendable) than the F-15 and F-16. I can say the from an aircraft maintenance stand point they were a dream. Of course so were the F-15 and F-16 compared to my fist aircraft the F-$ Phantom II.
(0)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
CSM Richard StCyr
16
16
0
They are not sexy thus they must be scrapped.
(16)
Comment
(0)
MSgt Karl Hawes
MSgt Karl Hawes
6 mo
Sometimes I drive just onto the rumble strips alongside the road to be reminded of the cannon fire coming from an A-10 30mm. Gives me a big smile and makes my day.
(10)
Reply
(0)
CSM Richard StCyr
CSM Richard StCyr
6 mo
MSgt Karl Hawes - Thats' a good one
(5)
Reply
(0)
PO2 Mike Keyes
PO2 Mike Keyes
4 mo
MSgt Karl Hawes - That's funny- It reminds me of the Navy's Phalanx CIWS.
https://youtu.be/3_qSLR7a5qI
(3)
Reply
(0)
MSgt Craig Gauger
MSgt Craig Gauger
4 mo
In 2008 I was managing the Pax Terminal at JB Balad and was out bringing a baggage pallet in, in the early evening. I didn't know that one of these was mounted just 20' above my head. Well, there were incoming mortars (I learned later) and this machine went off. I just about jumped out of my boots! I'm glad that I'm not incontinent.
(3)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small

Join nearly 2 million former and current members of the US military, just like you.

close