Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The U.S. Air Force has waged a years-long campaign to scrap its 1970s-era A-10 fleet in a bid to save roughly $4 billion in operating costs. Service leaders contend the A-10’s close air support functions can be performed by other planes, including the F-35.
Congress has flatly rejected the push to mothball the A-10 and has been highly critical of claims about the F-35, largely because years of cost overruns and technical delays have kept the fifth-generation warplane, which could cost taxpayers more than $1.3 trillion over its lifetime, from ever seeing real combat.
The F-35 has to be considered one of the most successful warplanes ever created even if it never sees any combat. This aircraft has converted many billions of taxpayer money into wages and bonuses for tens of thousands of workers and tremendous profits for the businesses that did the work. This is far more important than how effective a weapon it might ever be.
Well, I WILL talk negative about the Hog, since I flew it before I flew the F-16. And it IS the coolest aircraft I ever flew, my favorite. (A lot has to do with the fact that every flight I took in the Hog was solo... no two-seaters.)
Positive: Big a$$ gun. Unequalled low-speed maneuverability and loiter capabilities. Very low infrared signature. Big a$$ gun. Survivability built in. Great from-the-cockpit visibility. Flown by pilots who understand close air support better than anyone else. Big a$$ gun. Huge amount of countermeasures (chaff and flares) onboard. Did I mention the big a$$ gun?
Negative: Slow. Really slow. When I flew the Hog, other fighter pilots would joke "The A-10 doesn't have a clock in the cockpit, it has a calendar!" That can be critical when responding to a firefight miles away. That lack of speed means the A-10 is vulnerable to ground fire. A friend of mine was killed when shot down in Desert Storm. (I raise a glass to you, Syph!) Tankers must come to the Hog, and refuel at lower altitudes than F-16s or F-22s. Its lack of radar means it can't detect enemy aircraft intercepting it, so it must have fighter cover. And that huge radar cross section makes it vulnerable to SAMs and air-to-air radar missiles; I have seen A-10s from a very long distance, both visually and on radar.
The Hog is a great aircraft, no denying it, but the modern double-digit SAM threat is eroding its capability and exposing it to a world of hurt that the 4th and 5th Gen fighters can avoid.
Well, I WILL talk negative about the Hog, since I flew it before I flew the F-16. And it IS the coolest aircraft I ever flew, my favorite. (A lot has to do with the fact that every flight I took in the Hog was solo... no two-seaters.)
Positive: Big a$$ gun. Unequalled low-speed maneuverability and loiter capabilities. Very low infrared signature. Big a$$ gun. Survivability built in. Great from-the-cockpit visibility. Flown by pilots who understand close air support better than anyone else. Big a$$ gun. Huge amount of countermeasures (chaff and flares) onboard. Did I mention the big a$$ gun?
Negative: Slow. Really slow. When I flew the Hog, other fighter pilots would joke "The A-10 doesn't have a clock in the cockpit, it has a calendar!" That can be critical when responding to a firefight miles away. That lack of speed means the A-10 is vulnerable to ground fire. A friend of mine was killed when shot down in Desert Storm. (I raise a glass to you, Syph!) Tankers must come to the Hog, and refuel at lower altitudes than F-16s or F-22s. Its lack of radar means it can't detect enemy aircraft intercepting it, so it must have fighter cover. And that huge radar cross section makes it vulnerable to SAMs and air-to-air radar missiles; I have seen A-10s from a very long distance, both visually and on radar.
The Hog is a great aircraft, no denying it, but the modern double-digit SAM threat is eroding its capability and exposing it to a world of hurt that the 4th and 5th Gen fighters can avoid.
These negatives can be addressed easily actually.
But you need will of Congress and budget of course.
I am reading about the 1991 Battle for Khafji which actually was an Iraqi push along the entire southern front and tactical air support appears very dangerous and limited if visibilty is not ideal. Just like in earlier wars with more primitive targeting and identification systems. In a number of cases poor visibility was such that a/c would orbit over the battlefield trying to ID what was on the ground. Then the communication network was jammed both by the Iraqis and due to other conversation. Then confusion in map reading coordinates. etc.etc. What a mess. That was 1991 so hopefully things are better now. A-10s drivers were the friendlyfire culprits. There is the other incident where U.S. helicopters shot up some British mech. units.
I know I would cringe if own aircraft were flying close in support because I would not know if the ordnance was coming my way.
I've noticed that the A-10 seems to be the aircraft the media "loves to love", while the F-35 is the aircraft the media "loves to hate". I think its a David vs. Goliath thing: Can the cheap, simple, ancient A-10 take on the super expensive, brand new stealth F-35?
They never seem to get that they are different airplanes suited for completely different roles. Its a little like trying to compare an '87 Ford Bronco to a new 911. If you set up the comparison test in the woods, based on how well both cars can off-road, the Bronco will do better, and you could create some stupid headline like "30 year old rust bucket beats new $100,000 supercar!" Click here to find out more...
I've noticed that the A-10 seems to be the aircraft the media "loves to love", while the F-35 is the aircraft the media "loves to hate". I think its a David vs. Goliath thing: Can the cheap, simple, ancient A-10 take on the super expensive, brand new stealth F-35?
They never seem to get that they are different airplanes suited for completely different roles. Its a little like trying to compare an '87 Ford Bronco to a new 911. If you set up the comparison test in the woods, based on how well both cars can off-road, the Bronco will do better, and you could create some stupid headline like "30 year old rust bucket beats new $100,000 supercar!" Click here to find out more...
I've never met anybody that doesn't like A-10!!!
All my friends that are into aviation literally love it
And i'm sure among troops it's probably the most popular and loved bird!
So i don't think this love has anything to do with it's price or anything.
Besides it has a lovely sound
Imagine you're on the ground in a hot spot and you're hearing Hogs coming in!!
Imagine being on the ground and hearing over the radio the Warthogs are 10 min out. Then you are told the -16s will be overhead in 1 min. Or being asked to lase the target for the B-52 that is waiting for a target. As Sluggo said the A-10 is slower to react.
The A-10 was built for a specific threat. It was meant to overwhelm large formations of armored vehicles in Europe. It found other missions and has done an excellent job with them. But it has limitations just as any aircraft does.
Imagine being on the ground and hearing over the radio the Warthogs are 10 min out. Then you are told the -16s will be overhead in 1 min. Or being asked to lase the target for the B-52 that is waiting for a target. As Sluggo said the A-10 is slower to react.
The A-10 was built for a specific threat. It was meant to overwhelm large formations of armored vehicles in Europe. It found other missions and has done an excellent job with them. But it has limitations just as any aircraft does.
I had a Ranger JTAC at Fort Sill when I was guest-teaching doctrine tell me how he had an Al Qaeda HVI (High Value Individual) in a hide site identified and requested air. The nearest flight was a pair of A-10s which were over 15 minutes away. The HVI left before they could level the place. A week later they found the guy, had a B-1 nearly overhead, and two JDAMs later it was teeth, hair and eyeballs. Responsiveness means speed or forward basing. That's why the Marines love their Cobras and Harriers.
They can easily address the A-10 being slow, having no radar, and unable to operate in contested airspace?
Quote:
Originally Posted by J.Thomas
I've never met anybody that doesn't like A-10!!!
Fortunately we don't procure weapons based on fanboy love. See your above ridiculously naive comment.
The overwhelming majority of USAF close air support is done by fast movers (mostly F-16s) dropping precision guided munitions, and since upgrade to Precision Engagement Package the A-10 is usually deployed similarly with LGBs, JDAMs, and targeting pod.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
