The Hog That Saves the Grunts [A-10s To Be Decommissioned?]

The Air Force is planning to give the A-10 Warthog an ignominious homecoming from the Persian Gulf.

In early April, Maj. Gen. David Deptula of the Air Combat Command ordered a subordinate to draft a memo justifying the decommissioning of the A-10 fleet. The remaining eight active duty A-10 squadrons (in 1991, the number was 18) could be mothballed as early as 2004.

This is a serious mistake. The A-10 was one of the most effective, lethal and feared weapons of the Iraqi war. Its absence will put troops on the battlefield in grave danger. The decision to take this aircraft out of service is the result of entrenched political and cultural shortsightedness.

About the same time that the general's order was issued, a crucial battle of the Iraqi war was unfolding. The United States Army had arrived at a Tigris River bridge on the edge of Baghdad to find Iraqi tanks and armored personnel carriers positioned at the other end. A deadly crossfire ensued. A call for help went out, and despite heavy clouds and fog, down the river came two A-10's at an altitude of less than 1,000 feet, spitting out a mix of armor-piercing and explosive bullets at the rate of 3,900 rounds per minute. The Iraqi resistance was obliterated. This was a classic case of "close air support."

The A-10 was also the most storied aircraft of the first gulf war. It flew so many sorties the Air Force lost count. The glamorous F-117 Stealth fighter got the headlines, but Iraqi prisoners interrogated after the war said the aircraft they feared most were the A-10 and the ancient B-52 bomber.

To understand why the corporate Air Force so deeply loathes the A-10, one must go back to 1947, when the Air Force broke away from the Army and became an independent branch. "Strategic bombing," which calls for deep bombing raids against enemy factories and transportation systems, was the foundation of the new service branch. But that concept is fundamentally flawed for the simple reason that air power alone has never won a war.

Nevertheless, strategic bombing, now known as "interdiction bombing," remains the philosophical backbone of the Air Force. Anything involving air support of ground troops is a bitter reminder that the Air Force used to be part of the Army and subordinate to Army commanders. For the white-scarf crowd, nothing is more humiliating than being told that what it does best is support ground troops.

Until the A-10 was built in the 1970's, the Air Force used old, underpowered aircraft to provide close air support. It never had a plane specifically designed to fly low to the ground to support field troops. In fact, the A-10 never would have been built had not the Air Force believed the Army was trying to steal its close air support role — and thus millions of dollars from its budget — by building the Cheyenne helicopter. The Air Force had to build something cheaper than the Cheyenne. And because the Air Force detested the idea of a designated close air support aircraft, generals steered clear of the project, and designers, free from meddling senior officers, created the ultimate ground-support airplane.

It is cheap, slow, low-tech, does not have an afterburner, and is so ugly that the grandiose name "Thunderbolt" was forgotten in favor of "Warthog" or, simply, "the Hog." What the airplane does have is a deadly 30-millimeter cannon, two engines mounted high and widely separated to offer greater protection, a titanium "bathtub" to protect the pilot, a bullet- and fragmentation-resistant canopy, three back-up flight controls, a heavy duty frame and foam-filled fuel tanks — a set of features that makes it one of the safest yet most dangerous weapons on the battlefield.

However, these attributes have long been ignored, even denied, because of the philosophical aversion to the close air support mission. Couple that with the Air Force's love affair with the high technology F/A-22 ($252 million per plane) and the F-35 fighter jets (early cost estimates are around $40 million each), and something's got to give.

Despite budget problems, the Air Force has decided to save money by getting rid of the cheap plane and keeping the expensive ones. Sacrifices must be made, and what a gleeful one this will be for the Air Force.

The Air Force is promoting the F-35 on the idea that it can provide close air support, a statement that most pilots find hilarious. But the F-35's price tag means the Air Force will not jeopardize the aircraft by sending it low where an enemy with an AK-47 can bring it down. (Yes, the aircraft will be that vulnerable.)

In the meantime, the Air Force is doing its utmost to get the public to think of the sleek F-16 fighter jet as today's close support aircraft. But in the 1991 gulf war and in Kosovo, the Air Force wouldn't allow the F-16 to fly below 10,000 feet because of its vulnerability to attack from anti-aircraft guns and missiles.

Grunts are comforted by the presence of a Hog, because when they need close air support, they need it quickly. And the A-10 can loiter over a battlefield and pounce at a moment's notice. It is the only aircraft with pilots trained to use their eyes to separate bad guys from good guys, and it can use its guns as close in as 110 yards. It is the only aircraft that can take serious hits from ground fire, and still take its pilot home.

But the main difference between those who fly pointy-nose aircraft and Hog drivers is the pilot's state of mind. The blue suits in the Air Force are high-altitude advocates of air power, and they aren't thinking about muddy boots. A-10 drivers train with the Army. They know how the Army works and what it needs. (In combat, an A-10 pilot is assigned to Army units.)

If the Air Force succeeds in killing the A-10, it will leave a serious gap in America's war-fighting abilities. By itself, air power can't bring about victory. The fate of nations and the course of history is decided by ground troops. The A-10 is the single Air Force aircraft designed to support those troops. For that reason alone, the Air Force should keep the A-10 and build new close support aircraft similar to the Hog, demonstrating its long-term commitment to supporting our men and women in the mud.

Not your father's fighter jet
Faster than an enemy cruise missile, more complex than the space shuttle, able to carry out both air and ground attacks - (re)introducing the F-22

By Vago Muradian
Special to the Times

The Air Force is creating a new name, new missions and a new pitch for the jet formerly known as the F-22 Raptor air superiority fighter.

Air Force officials intend to redesignate it the F/A-22, reflecting a year of changes intended to give the stealthy, supersonic aircraft a potent ground-attack and electronic warfare punch. Behind closed doors, they also are arguing that the F/A-22 could play a large role in shooting down cruise missiles heading for U.S. soil, potentially a critical new mission for Air Force fighters.

Service leaders said the moves are driven by the changing nature of warfare. They also hope the broadened mission of the Raptor will help persuade Pentagon leaders that the military should purchase at least 381 of the aircraft, which Air Force Secretary James G. Roche and service chief Gen. John P. Jumper have called a top priority and key to service transformation. The Department of Defense has suggested as few as 180 of the airplanes.

"This isn't your father's F-22," Roche said in a recent interview, echoing a 1990s advertising campaign by carmaker Oldsmobile. "Is it the world's best air superiority fighter? Yes. But it's also going to be one of the world's most lethal strike aircraft, and that's the case that we are making."

Jumper plans to unveil the new moniker on Sept. 17 at the Air Force Association's annual symposium in Washington, D.C.

Armament to fit the mission

Air Force planners had long envisioned a ground-attack variant of the F-22, whose development is spearheaded by Lockheed Martin of Bethesda, Md. A fully equipped strike version was to enter service around 2012, about eight years after the air superiority variant hit squadrons.

But after the Sept. 11 terror attacks, Roche stepped up efforts to outfit air-to-air F-22s with strike avionics and equipment. The secretary has ordered that when the first planes enter service with the 1st Fighter Wing at Langley Air Force Base, Va., they will be F/A-22s with limited air-to-ground capability to go along with their air-to-air abilities.

The Air Force sees the fighter playing out its attack role in two ways.

When attack plans call for stealth, the F/A-22 will carry strike weapons in its two internal weapons bays in its lower fuselage. When stealth is not a priority, the aircraft can externally heft bombs, missiles or 600-gallon fuel tanks on four underwing weapons stations. Each wing will have a pair of stations capable of supporting 5,000 pounds apiece.

The aircraft's initial striking ability will come from a pair of 1,000-pound Joint Direct Attack Munitions in its weapons bays, then get beefed up over time through fleetwide upgrades, Air Force spokesman William Bodie said.

Given the size of the 1,000-pound weapon, the aircraft can carry only two of the bombs internally. That will change, however, with the arrival of the Small Diameter Bomb in 2006. The F/A-22 will be able to carry eight of the 250-pound, high-yield precision munitions internally, and additional ones on the underwing weapons stations. Upgrades will eventually allow the Raptor to hit moving ground targets in all weather conditions, Bodie said.

The name change also highlights the Raptor's new radar, which will be much more advanced and suited to multiple purposes than the one originally planned, he said. Some research and development work on the Joint Strike Fighter will be incorporated into the F/A-22's multimode radar. The blend of advanced capabilities, Air Force officials said, make the F/A-22 an air dominance fighter.

Air Force officials also continue to discuss whether to press ahead with a larger, radically modified version of the F/A-22. Dreamed up last year and dubbed the F/B-22, this medium bomber would carry nearly 30 Small Diameter Bombs at supersonic speeds 2,000 miles without refueling. Bodie called the aircraft "a concept that has focused our minds in creative and constructive ways" but said Air Force officials are focusing on the much less expensive F/A-22 effort.

Air Force will ask for 381 jets

Conceived during the Cold War, the Raptor program has been scaled back as costs rose along with doubts about its relevance. The 2001 Quadrennial Defense Review recommended shrinking the planned purchase from 339 jets to 295 unless the Air Force could keep the program under its $43 billion cost cap. The 2002 Defense Planning Guidance - a Pentagon document that shapes long-term budgeting - recommended that the program be capped at 180 aircraft.

Now Air Force officials say that the aircraft's revolutionary capabilities - grounded in its stealth, speed and range - make the plane well-suited for strike and counter-missile roles, and thereby support increasing the planned buy to 381. That total would allow the service to keep 240 of the jets available for combat at all times, enough to outfit each of its 10 Air Expeditionary Forces with a 24-plane squadron.

Cut that number below 339, and the Air Force has to start treating the Raptor the same way it does reconnaissance and special-operations aircraft, former Air Combat Command boss retired Gen. Richard Hawley told Air Force Times in May. Pilots and maintainers will face a high operations and deployment tempo as field commanders demand the planes be available on short notice.

Those who support the cuts see the Raptor as a "silver-bullet' force. The fighter jet would be sent abroad only when a war threatened and its stealth air-combat and ground-attack capabilities were needed.

But the idea of anything fewer than 339 Raptors doesn't make sense to Hawley.

To be effective warplanes, some Raptors will have to be stationed outside the continental United States, the same way F-15 Eagles are now forward-based in Japan, England and Alaska, he said.

Having jets close to potential war zones is what the four-star generals in charge of the European, Pacific and Central commands expect, Hawley said.

To back up those squadrons, the Air Force will need Raptors in the continental United States. These stateside bases will allow pilots and maintainers to be rotated home and train on the ranges here.

So far, Langley Air Force Base, Va., is the only base slated for a combat Raptor wing. Tyndall Air Force Base, Fla., will be home to training squadrons. A few jets will be scattered at other bases for test and evaluation missions.

Everything but the kitchen sink

The Air Force's highly classified F/A-22 proposal - demanded by the Defense Planning Guidance - was discussed at a series of Sept. 6 meetings and calls between Air Force and Pentagon officials. The meetings laid the groundwork for Roche and Jumper to make their case to Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld later this year.

"We're doing our best to define the Raptor in the transformational context of this era, emphasizing its qualities of combined stealth and supercruise to penetrate not only the next two generations of surface-to-air missile threats, but also handle anything regarding next-generation fighters," Bodie said.

The Raptor's all-aspect stealth will make it virtually invisible to radar, he said. Other stealthy attack aircraft, such as the Air Force's F-117 Nighthawk attack plane, reflect radar energy at certain angles, forcing pilots to approach targets with carefully choreographed flight plans based on careful analysis of enemy defenses. All-aspect stealth has also been deemed too expensive for the new F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, which is under development by Lockheed for deployment in 2008, sources said.

The Raptor's range at great speed offers a solution to the need to destroy mobile targets. Part of the problem is getting a strike aircraft on station fast enough. The F-15 Strike Eagle can fly at twice the speed of sound, but for relatively few minutes, especially when loaded with bombs.

The Raptor, on the other hand, can cruise about Mach 1.5 for hundreds of miles. Dispersed around a military theater, F/A-22s could give military commanders a way to attack targets on short notice, officials said.

And there's more to the F/A-22 than speed and stealth, Bodie said.

"Its capabilities also let us use it as a very sophisticated intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance tool that can data-link critical information directly into our command networks, a capability that we don't have now," he said.

Defense against cruise missiles These abilities, Bodie said, make the F/A-22 key to many of Rumsfeld's most cherished ideals: jointness, transformation, missile defense.

"Taken in total, these capabilities blend well with the new doctrinal emphasis in our Global Strike Task Force, which includes working closely with the Army, Navy and Marines to leverage our stealth, standoff and precision to better support joint operations," he said.

Air Force planners are teaming with their Army counterparts to support the ground service's new Brigade Combat Teams, he said.

"The Raptor can support mobility forces deep in enemy territory while at the same time penetrating any defenses to come to the aid of soldiers on the ground, 24 hours a day and in any weather," Bodie said.

At the high-level meeting, officials also discussed the idea that the F/A-22 might be able to fill near-term gaps in the military's ability to defend the nation against cruise missiles, sources said. The proposal is part of the highly classified F/A-22 briefing submitted earlier this month to the Pentagon leadership.

Roche, Bodie and other Air Force officials declined to comment on this potential use for the F/A-22, why the new aircraft would be suitable for the mission, how the jets would be employed or where they would be based.

But Roche confirmed that Rumsfeld has asked the Air Force to rapidly field a limited cruise missile defense capability.

Vago Muradian is editor of Defense News.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.