Warbird Information Exchange

DISCLAIMER: The views expressed on this site are the responsibility of the poster and do not reflect the views of the management.
It is currently Thu Mar 28, 2024 6:04 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Classic Wings Magazine WWII Naval Aviation Research Pacific Luftwaffe Resource Center
When Hollywood Ruled The Skies - Volumes 1 through 4 by Bruce Oriss


Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 6 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Fri Nov 14, 2014 12:39 pm 
Offline
Been here a long time
Been here a long time

Joined: Sun May 02, 2004 1:16 am
Posts: 11275
Quote:
Senators, Congressmen Reject New Air Force Proposal to Retire 72 A-10s
Defense Daily 11/13/2014
Author: Megan Eckstein

Several members of the House and Senate sent a clear message to the Air Force on Thursday that they were not willing to accept any compromise deals on the A-10 fleet.

After the Air Force proposed a plan to retire 72 of the A-10 Warthog close air support planes – rather than divesting the whole fleet, as the service’s fiscal year 2015 budget request would do – Sen. Kelly Ayotte (R-N.H.) assemble a group of lawmakers, former Joint Terminal Attack Controllers and the Tactical Air Control Party Association to highlight the importance of keeping the entire A-10 fleet in service until a sufficient number of F-35s are based around the globe to adequately replace the Warthogs.

The House Armed Services Committee, in an overwhelmingly bipartisan vote, agreed to stop the Air Force from retiring its A-10 fleet as a cost-saving measure.

“I’ve been fighting so hard for the A-10, and there’s only one reason for that: I believe when we send our men and women to fight on our behalf that they deserve the very best, and we have a responsibility to ensure we can do everything we can to bring them home,” Ayotte said. “There’s no doubt the A-10 is the best close-air support platform out there.”

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), who serves with Ayotte on the Senate Armed Services Committee, noted the unique role the A-10 plays in the Air Force’s ability to keep ground troops safe.

“Attack helicopters are great. You have a lot of fast moving airplanes that are great. But the A-10 is right in the middle, it’s a flying tank that can hover over the target and deliver a punch,” he said.

“I’ll tell you who would love to retire the A-10, that’s the enemies of this nation. When they hear that thing coming they try to get out of the way,” Graham continued. “We’re going to fight the Air Force because it’s budget-driven. I’m convinced if we had an appropriate budget for the United States Air Force and the other branches of service we would not be having this discussion.”

Retiring Sen. Saxby Chambliss (R-Ga.) took a more conciliatory tone with the Air Force, saying “the Air Force is in a tough spot, we all know that. We know sequestration is having a huge impact on the budget, and I am very confident that under the leadership of John McCain on the Armed Services Committee next year that we’re going to make some corrections in sequestration. The Air Force has basically made their recommendation to Congress on the retirement of the A-10; it’s imperative that members of Congress take the information that the Air Force has and make our decision not just based on what the Air Force recommends, but also it’s imperative we take information from those folks who have their boots on the ground.”

Those folks were adamant too that the A-10 ought to stick around. Retired Master Sgt. Tim Stamey, a former JTAC, began by saying that “what the Air Force is doing, in my opinion, is a travesty.” He said the difference between the single-role CAS platforms and the multirole aircraft that can perform CAS is the level to which the aircraft and its pilot can be successful. A-10 pilots train only for CAS, meaning they know how to read the situation on the ground better and they practice coordinating with Army helicopters and other assets that might be used for a CAS mission. The aircraft itself is also set up for success better: they have a titanium tub under the pilot to protect against bullets from the ground, have a larger weapon – a 30mm cannon – that is more successful against tanks and trenches in the ground, move slow enough to allow for operations at night with night vision goggles, and can loiter for nearly an hour compared to other platforms’ 20-minute loiter time before returning to base to refuel.

“The Air Force says it can’t afford the A-10,” Stamey said. “We can’t afford to lose the A-10. The A-10 is the cheapest CAS aircraft to maintain.”

Rep. Ron Barber (D-Ariz.), who led the fight to save the A-10s in the House Armed Services Committee, called the decision budget-drive and vowed to continue the fight as long as the Air Force persists. It looked as though the Warthogs would stick around another year after both House and Senate supporters pushed language into defense authorization and spending bills earlier this year to prevent the Air Force from divesting the platforms or putting them into storage. However, over the past few weeks the Air Force has said its ability to reach initial operational capability for the F-35 and to maintain the first jets coming into the fleet would be compromised if the A-10s remained in the fleet (Defense Daily, Oct. 30, 2014). Service officials pitched a plan to retire 72 of the aircraft from various overseas bases, Ayotte and others confirmed during the press conference.

“I just want to say to the Air Force, any move by the Air Force to lessen the prohibition language or set up a false fight between supporters of the A-10 and supporters of the F-35 is going against congressional intent,” Barber said, rejecting both recent Air Force pushes. “We will continue to fight this battle into the next congress if necessary. We are united in our determination that the men and women we send into battle will be protected by the best close air support system available to them, and that’s the A-10.”


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 17, 2014 12:42 pm 
Offline
2000+ Post Club
2000+ Post Club
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 23, 2004 3:00 pm
Posts: 2128
Location: Utah
Interesting. I know the A-10 is "old" but I cannot imagine the F-35 beinging 1/4 as adept at close ground support as the A-10.

Tom P.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 08, 2015 2:24 pm 
Offline
Been here a long time
Been here a long time

Joined: Sun May 02, 2004 1:16 am
Posts: 11275
http://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/ ... ation-2015

Quote:
The defense appropriations portion of the Fiscal Year 2015 “omnibus” spending legislation the U.S. Congress passed in December extends production of the Navy’s EA-18G Growler and prevents retirement of the Air Force’s aging A-10 Warthog.
<SNIP>
Among other spending items, the bill provides $337 million to maintain an A-10 close air support fleet the Air Force seeks to retire, but one that nevertheless continues to see action in Iraq.
<SNIP>
Separate legislation the Congress passed in December—the Carl Levin and Howard P. “Buck” McKeon National Defense Authorization Act (H.R. 3979)—prohibits retirement of any A-10s in FY2015, but allows the DOD to place up to 36 aircraft into “back-up inventory status” subject to a review by its Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation Directorate.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 14, 2015 1:22 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jun 16, 2013 6:56 pm
Posts: 21
Location: Minnesota
The F-35 is still not a proven system either. We should not even think about retiring the A-10 until the F-35 proves herself.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 15, 2015 5:01 am 
Offline
1000+ Posts!
1000+ Posts!

Joined: Tue Jun 17, 2014 4:19 pm
Posts: 1377
wendovertom wrote:
Interesting. I know the A-10 is "old" but I cannot imagine the F-35 beinging 1/4 as adept at close ground support as the A-10.

Tom P.

I can't imagine anything being as adept as the A-10 in fact.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 18, 2015 7:07 pm 
Offline
2000+ Post Club
2000+ Post Club
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 23, 2004 3:00 pm
Posts: 2128
Location: Utah
Just a little more recent info on the A-10 :

http://breakingdefense.com/2015/02/air-force-to-hold-close-air-support-summit-may-need-new-weapon/

I think that if the sole need for ground support in the future would depend on a high speed single pass attack I could agree with the F-35 as the choice of weapon. But I really don't see the practicality of the F-35 supporting troops the way the A-10 can. Heaven forbid we are involved in another large scale ground offensive the A-10 would be the ONLY realistic option.

Tom P.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 6 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 14 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group