It was reported by a credilble source that while Congress has put money out for the USAF to use to rewing older A-10 Warthogs the USAF has no plans to follow through on process. This will result in 110 A-10s to be retired leaving only 170-180 available for service in the coming few years.
This is truly and underhanded attempt by the USAF to force this aircraft out of service. The development for a true CASA (Close Air Support Aircraft) is still many years away from the competing stages of development. There has also been abounding skeptisim from within the USAF and outside that the intended replacement, the F-35A is unequipped to fill the role of the A-10 in terms of manueverability at low altitudes, loitering time, and effectiveness in CAS (close air support) situations. While some A-10s will remain in service, the lose of nearly 1/2 the current fleet can be extremely detrimental if a conflict arises with the need for CAS and armed division deterrence.
That’s truly sad. The A-10 is truly an awesome aircraft and is deadly effective at CAS roles.
Why do they want to retire the A-10?
Its a shame how hard they are trying to get rid of the A10.
Money. Plain and simple. The former chief of staff who started the debacle of trying to force out the A10 now sits on the board of directors for Northrop Grumman…
Still kinda confused.
Forcing out the A-10s would earn who money? The Air Force or Lockheed Martin?
It’s a big political scandal if you ask me. Evidence came out recently that the Air Force Public Affairs Officers, with the Chief of Staff and the Secretary of the AF blocked a promotional video on the A10. Basically they didn’t want anyone to see what and how good the A10 was as they were trying to paint the picture that it was a crap plane not doing anything. Also, I higher ranking general said aloud in a briefing that any outspoken criticism of getting rid of the A10 was treasonest. Trying to silence those that want it to stay.
It would earn Lockheed, Northrop, Texatron or whoever was awarded the new CAS aircraft contract billions. You can’t buy a new plane though until the old one is pushed out.
So, someone in the Air Force is apart of Lockheed Martin?
I thought the A-10 was retired 10 years ago.
BRRRRRRRRRT the sound of freedom!
What do you mean by that?
The A-10 has a potisivley massive gun which makes a BRRRRT sound.
It’s all a bunch of corruption, someone’s always protecting interests other than the organisation they work for. I mean Airbus win a contract for the tankers, they then go back and award it to Boeing citing that it will save the taxpayers money. Shocker it cost way more.
Same all over the world the governments can’t be seen supporting other country’s when there country offers something similar.
I personally stand by this. A-10’s are in a way like the F-117’s, they were intuitive, advancing, and good at what they did. However, now newer, more versatile options are available, and that is what the US must go with. Change feeds progress.
The F-35 will not be as good as a ground support aircraft as the A-10, undisputed. But, the A-10 is subsonic, stealth, and old, therefore costly. In my eyes, it’s better to have an aircraft that can do many things good, than a few things great.
That is why the F-117 was retired. Great stealth, but the F-22 provided a more all around approach, and that is what the Air Force needed, and that is why you don’t see any F-117’s around, and why they served such a short lifespan. It’s the right move.
Also, people complain about delays in the F-35 program, and those are because of the A-10. Money used to keep the A-10 afloat is money lost/held off on in the F-35 program. F-35 orders were put off because of the A-10.
@THE-OP I got the pleasure to meet Welsh, didn’t know he got in at Northrop. He was the base commander at Ramstein when my family was stationed there.
What we really need is a better F-14. Everyone loves what the F-14 did and the f-18 isn’t the same.
I loved the F-117 it was one of few USAF aircraft I liked the rest I don’t personally like. Also I didn’t relise how badly up to date I was on the USAF I just looked up a few aircraft mentioned and found the were retired.
I am afraid that you are a bit mixed up here. The F-18 is an unbelievable capable aircraft. The F-14 was old, expensive, complex, and massive. It was flashy, but is that what was needed?
The F-14 was a dedicated air superiority aircraft. Notice how the it’s the F/A-18? It’s much more versatile, as well as more efficient to operate. It’s often said that the F-14 is a muscle car while the F-18 is a minivan. Yeah, muscle cars are cool and fast, but a minivan has extra space, great gas mileage, TV’s for the kids, all the bells and whistles. Realistically thinking, what is better? The fast car or the all around workhorse?
The Navy looked at several options to try and upgrade the F-14 into a more capable multi-function fighter, but those ideas fell by the waste side to the F-18.
What the common complaint is is that the F-35 is a bad replacement for the F-18, not the F-14 for the -18. The hornet is the Navy’s best aircraft that they ever had.