The A-10 Thunderbolt Endures: Congress Once Again Delays U.S. Air Force Plans to Retire the Attack Aircraft in 2026 https://share.google/ZaB8VR9Bx8JwNtTID
Want to know if your Congress Critter has ever been under fire as an infantry unit. Just look at how they vote on the future of the A-10. If they are voting to retire it, with no clear replacement, then they were definitely not in the infantry. I don’t know anyone who was in the infantry that doesn’t love the A-10.
Edit: I am extremely curious why the Air Force is so ready to mothball the A-10 without a ready replacement on hand. Just like the Navy is pushing to decommission the USS Nimitz even though it’s successor is still 2 years or more. Which for 2 years will leave the Fleet shy one Carrier group.
Did you see how they have brought them in for a retrofit?
This is a really good video about them to watch; it tells how the government worries more about paying out to Lockheed than the troops’ safety. The A-10 is cheap in comparison and the most effective for the troops.
This brings me back to my childhood days.. I remember going to work with my father (Ret. M.Sgt.) in the early 80s to Williams AFB in Arizona and being allowed to sit in the cockpit of a Warthog on the flightline. During one trip I was given a expended shell from a pilot. What an extraordinary machine!
Worked in the defense industry, fixed/ rotary wing engines/transmissions for several decades and inclined to agree. Worked on small bits of the F22 and F35 projects, and it’s a bit disheartening watching the waste while knowing there’s F18 pilots dealing with leaking hydraulics, mechanics searching the boneyard for spare parts, and watching every damn crash get blamed on “pilot error.”
F22 got put on hold by the Pentagon, 1/15/92 iirc. LM got told to get the project together before getting more money. F35, one fuster cluck after another, but best as I can tell the money just kept rolling in. Figure their lobbyists had more experience by then.
The A-10 is an amazing weapon. The GAU-8/A Avenger 7 barrel 30mm rotary cannon can put some serious hurt on anything it hits, but the A-10 does have limitations.
First, it is slow. It takes longer for an A-10 to get to the fight compared to an F-16 or an F/A-18.
Second, the A-10 requires that you dominate the airspace prior to sending in the A-10s, or at least provide fighters to protect the A-10s.
Third, the A-10 isn’t equipped for Suppression of Enemy Air Defense missions (SEAD). You need to send in a Wild Weasel crew to eliminate SAM threats before sending in an A-10.
An F-16, on the other hand, is fast, can fight when in contested airspace, and can perform SEAD missions.
In its favor, the A-10 is a brilliant weapons system in situations where the enemy has no opposing air power and limited anti-aircraft systems.
True, this is the way it is designed to be. I also understand the complaints about having to have air superiority to utilize its deployment. The first thing we do is control the air; it is one of the first objectives in any campaign we have done since WW2.
This is true for every aspect of the air campaign. Generally our first mission is to control the air, then we are able to send in the bombers and the helos for the rest of the missions. This is where the A-10 is unsurpassed in its abilities. Each tool for each task.
I would rather have 2 aircraft that cost as much as the A-10 to carry out the missions than one that could do both but that is not good at either. We send fighters with bombers that have a single role; I’m not sure why the same cannot be true of the best support for our troops.
I think the only reason they want to retire the A-10 is funding! They want money to fund an entire new airplane/ drone for ground support . Spend billions like the F-35 and create a new department within the Airforce! Find more ways to line the the pockets of the military industrialists.
The A-10 was “born” as a result of Col. John Boyd’s efforts to re-orient the Air Force’s parochial thinking. The Air Force never liked or wanted the A-10, because it’s entire mission was support of the Army. It was intended as a tank-killer, and Operation Desert Storm confirmed its devastating ability at doing that. The Air Force has been trying to get rid of it for years, because it’s not as sexy as the air defense, tactical bombing, or strategic bombing missions.
Back in the 1970s, after Vietnam, the Air Force managed to institute a policy within the DoD: “The Army gets combat helicopters, but anything fixed-wing belongs to us!” The Army should ALWAYS have owned the A-10, but couldn’t because of that policy: “Fixed-wings belong to us!”
The first time the Air Forces tried to retire it, the Army said, “We’ll take it!” And the Air Force’s leadership replied, “Ahhh, maybe we’ll just keep it going…”
Every generation of AF leaders tries to get rid of the A-10. And every generation of Army leaders always frustrate these intentions by campaigning to take it. It really DOES need to be the Army’s asset. But the Air Force will never let that happen… for only parochial reasons—NOT for the good of the nation.
It does feel like Lockheed and various others like them are the Pentagon’s Purdue Pharma. The amount of money spent is just staggering. Maybe I should just call it like it is: “Takers.” I truly despise when people carry on about the “takers” and do not include these parasites.
It is evident, as it has been written many times over the years by those who wish to have absolute power over anything. In this case, the Air Force.
Individuals with absolute power generally impose their will through unrestricted authority, suppressing dissent, controlling laws, and often exploiting subjects for personal or state gain, leading to a lack of freedom, potential tyranny, and social injustices because power tends to corrupt, as famously noted by Lord Acton. Rulers use propaganda, military force, and control over courts to maintain dominance, turning subjects into instruments rather than citizens with rights.
When confronted with someone who wants “absolute power,” the appropriate response is to challenge the inherent flaws and dangers of concentrated power, using historical and ethical arguments. Sometimes people just have to say, “Are you really that crazy, Don?” Perhaps you know a situation like this.
It is ironic how the individuals can concur when one asks them about something. That seems to be as far as it goes. Sadly, those in power will pervert your responses and go against public opinion. To cater to the minority on both sides. Widening the gap to keep you busy with each other and ignoring the true culprit.
In my opinion, the A-10 should be replaced, but with an updated A-10. Add modern military electronics that would give the A-10 SEAD capabilities, 2 way data link capabilities, and better air to ground targeting. Replace the 50 year old engine design with something that has more thrust and is more fuel efficient.
