Now The USAF Wants to Cut A-10 Squadrons and Stop Re-Winging The Fleet

The WarZone ^ | June 9, 2017 | JOSEPH TREVITHICK

[huldah1776]

Not only has the fight not been won, but the Air Force's new arguments sound a lot like the old ones.

As more details emerge regarding the U.S. Air Force’s plans for the A-10 warthog in the 2018 fiscal year and beyond, it has become clear that the service’s apparent promise to maintain the entire remaining fleet of hardy attack aircraft was highly conditional and entirely temporary. The details come as the low- and slow flying planes continue to prove their worth in the fight against ISIS in Iraq and Syria. Sadly, none of this is really surprising.

On June 7, 2017, two senior Air Force officials told the House Armed Services Committee that they were only planning on keeping at least six squadrons of A-10s through 2030. This stood in stark contrast to written statements from both the service and the Pentagon when it unveiled its portion of President Trump’s Fiscal Year 2018 budget in May 2017. Overview briefings stated, without the apparently necessary caveats, that the entire fleet of more than 280 aircraft across nine combat-coded squadrons would be “fully funded” for at least the next five years.

snip

As it turns out, the Air Force only requested money to “fully fund” the operations and maintenance costs – day-to-day expenses that include things like payroll, fuel, and basic preventive maintenance – associated with flying the A-10s. The service then shunted a request for money to replace the wings on more than 100 of the jets into its so-called “Unfunded Priorities List,” a wish-list separate from the budget proposal with items it hopes Congress might consider paying for if at all possible.

[huldah1776]

Guy probably spends 16 hrs a day in front of the monitor. Like me. I’m addicted to news. I suck at games/simulators though. I would love to be able to walk and do this.

[huldah1776]

Linky in source article...

http://www.defensenews.com/articles/air-force-to-cut-three-a-10-squadrons-unless-funding-for-new-wings-emerges

[ontap]

So if there are six enemy tanks you think it would be more efficient to send a B1 than a A-10!!!

[2ndDivisionVet]

The Marines and Army both have all kinds of aircraft currently.

[huldah1776]

It would. But what if my Marine is 50 yards from the guy shooting at him?

[lacrew]

IIRC, the military is hiring civilians to operate UAV’s, out of warehouses thousands of miles from the battlefield. I don’t have a particular problem with that...although the flight suits seems strangely silly.

[Mariner]

“So if there are six enemy tanks you think it would be more efficient to send a B1 than a A-10!!!”

Of course not.

But you can position 1-2 B-1b’s over a battle space at 50,000ft and take out several dozen such clusters of armor...all in about an hour.

That’s FAR more efficient than 1/2 dozen squadrons of Hogs.

Anything that is left, ongoing ops, can be handled by F-16 and F-35s.

[batterycommander]

Are the AF Generals captives if K- Street?

[Mariner]

Precision guided small diameter bomb.
You can put a couple of hundred of those on the B-1.

[NorthMountain]

The flight suits are the only thing I find a bit odd; their fire protection qualities are unnecessary. OTOH, the particular placement of pockets on flight suits would be as useful to a UAV driver as to a manned aircraft driver.

[batterycommander]

Maybe they should sell them to Russia.

[Flick Lives]

The A10 is too simple, rugged, reliable, and cheap. The higher ups and defense contractors will never get rich off of that plane.

[Paladin2]

Maybe the A-10s could be made into drones.

[Rebelbase]

By the time the B1B got there the firefight would be over.

[Mariner]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hyaIrhGrCzo

[Mariner]

The B-1 would already be there.
Two of them could cover all of Iraq and be within 15mins of striking any target in country.

[thorvaldr]

“Maybe the A-10s could be made into drones.”
The more I think about that the more sense it makes.
An A-10 at least looks fairly stable, I bet you could fly them remote and maybe even save some weigh on armor for the cockpit...
Someone needs to be seriously analyzing the Ukraine war>. I’ve heard that the Ruskies are trying to jam everyone and everything and that EVERYONE on the battlefield is flying a drone. I wonder how those two things are interacting.

[Candor7]

Now The USAF Wants to Cut A-10 Squadrons and Stop Re-Winging The Fleet>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Horrible mistake. Obama holdovers want this. NOT TRUMP!

Mattis needs to make some big noise on this.

See why?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nvg7qrIiDTM

[SandRat]

Exactly when the Air Force will drop down to six A-10 squadrons will depend on multiple factors, including operational tempo over the next few years and the buy rate of the F-35. But Holmes said the first planes could be phased out within five years, as their wings run out of service life.

“When their current wings expire, we have some flexibility in the depot, we have some old wings that can be repaired or rejuvenated to go on. We can work through that, so there’s some flex in there," he said in a June 8 interview. "We’re working on a long-term beddown plan for how we can replace older airplanes as the F-35 comes on, and we’ll work through to figure out how we’re going to address those A-10s that will run out of service life on their wings.”

The Air Force "can continue to provide close air support across the spectrum of conflict with those 173 airplanes,” he added.

Defense News Stayin’ alive: No retirement in sight for the A-10 and U-2 Although an A-10 follow-on aircraft — sometimes called A-X — is still on the table, Holmes noted that decision would come further in the future as the Air Force contemplates whether to replace the remaining 173 A-10s with a purpose-built close air support platform in the late 2020s.

Confirmation of a move to eliminate even a portion of the A-10 fleet will likely inflame ardent supporters of the aircraft in Congress, who have in prior years prevented the service from retiring the aircraft.

Holmes noted that the Air Force’s current plan to mothball three A-10 squadrons adheres to the 2017 defense authorization bill, which mandates that the service maintain 171 A-10s until the Pentagon’s director of operational test and evaluation conducts comparative tests between it and the F-35. However, he acknowledged that “Congress gets the final say on everything we do” and could try to prevent any divestitures.

During a House Armed Services Committee hearing Wednesday, Rep. Martha McSally, R-Ariz., asked Bunch and Harris to explain the Air Force’s apparent decision to cut a third of its A-10 squadrons. McSally, an A-10 pilot herself, represents Davis–Monthan Air Force Base, which is home to three A-10 squadrons, according to Air Force data.

“From my view and my experience, if we need that capability until a proven, tested replacement comes along, nine squadrons is the absolute minimum,” she said. Due to House votes, the hearing was called to a close before McSally could receive an answer from Bunch and Harris.

[RCFlyer]

I believe sometime around the 1980s, the Air Force did offer the CAS mission and the A10s to the Army. Army declined.