Posted on 06/16/2017 11:38:17 AM PDT by 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.
(Excerpt) Read more at thedrive.com ...
They’ve been trying to kill the A-10 since it was in development. It was supposed to cut a lot more than that this year, until they didn’t. I’ll believe they’re cutting the A-10 when they actually start getting moved next door.
Can someone post a good video short of a two ship A-10s flying?
Dream on. A B-1 is an astonishingly bad choice for support of ground troops.
Rather than replacing the A-10 (which pilots and troops on the ground JUST LOVE!)...
...let's replace the " two senior Air Force officials " with some less-senior-however-more-practical-and-mission-connected Air Force officials.
Unless someone is getting kickbacks from manufacturers of new aircraft, I cannot imagine why the USAF hates and for many years has hated the A-10. It is 40 y/o, but it is still a great aircraft that gets the job done far better than anything designed in the decades since then.
Or the Army! The Marines already have some Harriers left and FA-18s of its own, the Army has no fixed wing ground attack aircraft.
how about dronify the a-10 (even if it means a new airplane)?
Pilots are just too valuable.
They are so valuable that they should never have to be in danger to enemy forces.
In order to protect our pilots, we must use drones for all combat and reconnaissance missions.
The Army should control those drones as their Soldiers are not as valuable as pilots.
Fine.
Give all the Warthogs to the Army - they will put them to great use......guarantee it........
And how many sorties a day can a B-1b fly from 2000 miles away?
My departed father, may he RIP, flew 50 missions in a P-51. He is rolling in his grave. The way he destroyed the enemy was by aiming to hit, not aiming high.
That's fixable. Have the Air Force evaluation committee for officers to be considered for general be composed of Army combat commanders, who will select primarily on the basis of how well the AF guy is committed to close air support.
But not an aircraft that needs a runway and the basics of LIMITED unimproved capability.
Logistics and supply is well beyond Army and Marine fixed-wing capability. . .see previous threads for a repeat of our discussions.
General Fired For 'Treason' Rant Against A-10 Supporters
The two-star general who told officers they would be "committing treason" by advocating to Congress that the A-10 should be kept in service has been fired and reprimanded, Air Combat Command announced on Friday.
The military blog John Q Public first reported that Maj. Gen. James Post made the comments in January at Nellis Air Force Base, Nevada, prompting the Air Force Inspector General's Office to look into the matter.
The IG found that Post did use the word "treason" during his remarks to more than 300 airmen at the Jan. 10 Tactics Review Board, an Air Combat Command news release says.
"The IG report surmised that Post's 'choice of words had the effect of attempting to prevent some members from lawfully communicating with Congress,' which is a violation of the U.S. Code and DoD Directives, whether that was his intention or not," the news release says.
As a result, Gen. Hawk Carlisle, head of Air Combat Command, has removed Post as vice commander of Air Combat Command and issued Post a letter of reprimand, the news release says.
Trump promised to rebuild the military and give us a 355 ship Navy. Like the wall, the money for those things is no where in sight.
Wow. Interesting link. Amazing how the A-10 Warthog seems to push some of the brass over the edge. It’s like WDS!
How many members of the UAV squadrons are on flight orders or receiving flight pay?
Gotta get the funds for all of those gender reassignment surgeries from SOMEwhere...!
Move the A-10 fleet to the Army. Problem solved.
They have brought back into service the OV-10 BRONCO Turbo Prop from 50 years ago to give dirt naps to ISSA in the ME.
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.