Posted on 09/10/2014 8:36:34 AM PDT by GonzoII
One day we will miss this incredibly cheap yet incredibly effective airplane and regret the day we retired it.
To hear actual Air Force officers say that an F-16 or an F-35 can replace the A-10 is proof positive that Nancy Pelosis’ functioning neurons have been divvy’ed up and implanted into whatever AF brass remains. That is simply the stupidest statement ever uttered.
Personally, I think the A-10 should be updated and perhaps modified to run quadruple 7.62 miniguns. That SOB would tear up the landscape good and proper.
As an AF retiree I probably should be insulted by your little rant; but I started as an enlisted Marine so I can set it aside as the inconsequential raving of a mere swabbie, servant, and bus driver supporting the Marine amphibious forces.
ouch
The Army would love to get the A-10s but the Air Force would rather retire them than give the Army a fixed-wing aircraft.
I would rather see a pair of .50 cal Gatling guns to punch through any light armor.
Chain guns, maybe. The pilot probably already has enough to do without giving him another pair of cranks to turn ;).
They should send a few to Ukraine, you know, for “testing”
yes
With Mad Vlad around, we are going to need Soviet tank killers.
The air force brass have never liked the A-10, since virtually its inception. It’s not a go-fast fighter so the brass, mostly made up of fighter jocks don’t like the ground support mission. Sometimes I wonder if the A-10 would be a better fit within Marine or Army aviation.
CC
And yes, I know i won't fly from the deck of an amphib. But neither do the KC-130 and the C-130 that are in direct support of a MEU.
The Air Force brass fail to remember the Iraqis had integrated air defense systems. Both times. Same result.
oops, slow-mo double post.
CC
Could see that, I was thinking more anti-personnel. Either way works for me, as well as leaving them the way they are.
The Air Force stands to save $4.2 billion by retiring the A-10, a move that in the current fiscal environment makes eminent sense in the words of chief of staff Gen. Mark Welsh.
...
They need the money to pay for gender reassignment surgery.
Don’t you think the ugly A-10 (my fave) would be a great asset to the Corps? I was bummed when my son said the Marines don’t use them (he had been on his way to Afghanistan). Doesn’t the AF ever do anything for the Corps? Aren’t they supposed to work together? Must be the Marines not asking, eh?
Maddening, isn’t it.
Apparently you don’t know the Navy contracts their depot-level maintenance as well, at various locations globally.
The Navy, staffed by guys that get all excited about being on a ship in the middle of nowhere, surrounded by 5,000 hot sweaty guys. . .not that there’s anything wrong with that. . . http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=InBXu-iY7cw, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zmfd9etbXGE
I'd actually like to see an up-sized version of the Predator drone with a A-10-style gun. And under purely Army control.
Not exactly. But never mind. Its 20mm ‘gun’ needs to close to about 2,000’ in order to pierce an inch of armor, whereas the A-10, with the TRUE 30mm round can penetrate an inch and a half of armor at 8,000’.
And the Warthog can take several punches and still complete the mission. Any of the other aircraft else, usually once they are hit in any fashion they are out of the game and must head to the barn.
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.