Posted on 01/14/2016 6:35:58 AM PST by rktman
The Air Force is indefinitely doing away with its plan to retire the A-10 jet, a move that seems both inevitable and shocking, given the aggressive steps leadership has taken to get rid of the aircraft and the fierce push back they received in response.
The remarkably high demand for A-10s from commanders is almost universally cited among critics of the A-10 decommissioning process. More details will be available when the Pentagon’s 2017 budget plan to keep the bird is sent over to Congress for consideration.
(Excerpt) Read more at dailycaller.com ...
Makes no sense to get rid of the A-10 unless something better comes along,& I don’t think it has.
LOL! Roger that. ANY cajones would be more than them combined.
I’m not sure the ‘forbidden by law’ is accurate. The limitations were put in place by Key West and various MOUs, but the law itself (National Security Act of 1947) said (Section 205):
“(e) In general the United States Army, within the Department of the Army, shall include land combat and service forces and such aviation and water transport as may be organic therein. It shall be organized, trained, and equipped primarily for prompt and sustained combat incident to operations on land.”
The statutory language itself would permit integral close air support.
As for the Air Force (Section 208 of the 1947 Act):
“(f) In general the United States Air Force shall include aviation forces both combat and service not otherwise assigned”
So the SecDef could probably assign the A-10s to the Army any time he wanted to face up to the political pressure the Air Force, Boeing, Lockheed, and Grumman could bring.
If I’ve missed something more recent, please let me know.
Great pic from the bone yard. I think the first three rows, and most numerous planes, are A-6s, another great plane which has NOT been replaced with its departure from the Navy. A lesson on what NOT to do with A-10s. The A-6 was the longest range medium bomber on carriers, and was excellent at low level penetration,,, to be replaced by the A-12, but that was cancelled... and now the Navy just has to do without that long range capability.
The photos of them returning, all shot up, are pretty impressive.
Only a B-17 could take more punishment & survive.
That’ll buff out...
I’d been predicting it all along, but I must admit they took so long I was starting to have doubts.
Actually, if you read the full text, with handwritten notes (found at Eisenhower’s library), you will find he was referring to the need for a standing MIC, and that it is incumbent upon our leaders and people to know about the need for a MIC and to be informed so we can make informed decision regarding national defense, that we were no longer able to transition quickly from making washing machines to making tanks. He understood that and recognized we needed the MIC as we were no longer able to enjoy spin-up and re-tooling time. We needed a standing MIC not a part-time industry, and we needed an informed people and representatives to deal with a new situation where we HAD to constantly upgrade and invent..
Now, in that same speech, seems everyone forgets he warned us about universities and their connection to the federal government.
Like Trump. . .it’s obit has been written many times but it refuses to die. . . .and rightly so.
Actually, I think Dugan was removed for speaking publicly about our intel capability. . .giving away a little too much.
“making a carrier compatible versions”
Actually, already tried. . .but they couldn’t figure out how to put the tail-hook on backwards and do a reverse trap. . . bada-bing. . .(joke about how slow it flies).
And, the A-10 flies so slow it doesn’t have a clock in it. . .it has a calendar. . .bada-bing. . . I’ll be here all week, try the veal and don’t forget to tip your waitress.
I flew the A-10 in Germany, Low Fly 7 was my favorite place to be.
True. . .but she acted wrongly when she went to the IG instead of running it up the chain.
What I am talking about is she was deployed to Kuwait and objected to wearing a small cover because she was a female while off-base.
She demanded the right to wear usual civilian clothes and was denied by the wing and base commanders. Instead of taking it up the chain, or even going to the IG, she took it outside the Air Force, went to the media and congress.
Thing is, we had no status of forces agreement and that meant we had no exemptions for military from local laws regarding women in the military. The State Department did but the military did not.
She demanded special treatment and was turned down and she whined out of school. . .all for herself. . .she was NOT respected very much by Hawg Drivers to begin with, and after what she did was held in even lower esteem.
It’s hard to take down an A10!
Good review.
The agreement included a provision that the Army could fly fixed-wing but not CAS fixed-wing.
The agreement was to allow the Army to fly CAS but said CAS was to be conducted by helo’s, not fixed-wing.
The issue is the Army because of its nature and “operating conditions” (i.e., the field), the A-10 could not be sustained in the field and needed runways. Additionally, the logistics, support and supply train necessary for forward deployed A-10’s ops is beyond the existing capabilities of the Army.
Further, fixed-wing ops for the A-10 (and other aircraft) are basically theater assets, meaning they can fly anywhere in theater and be employed anywhere needed. If the A-10 was assigned as an organic asset for a brigade or even corps, then the brigade/corps commander would view those assets as “his” and we would have a repeat of WWII Tunisia experience.
The reach and flexibility of the A-10 is beyond being considered an “organic asset.”
No doubt the Army and Marines would appreciate the jet more that the zipper-suited sun-gawds in the Air Force.
Politics aside, she didn't piss off too many people up the chain of command. She got a squadron command out of it, A-10s no less.
I have met her and she is very dynamic, unashamedly patriotic and very much a no bull$#!t type. I would have been happy to have her as a CO.
My own after-action review of damaged jets indicate:
After taking hits, the A-10 had an 80% chance of returning to base.
After taking hits, the F-16 had a 20% chance of returning to base.
Can't argue the numbers. . .
Meant to open with. . .
“True. . .but she acted wrongly when she went to congress and media instead of running it up the chain.”
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.