What the US should do with its A-10 Thunderbolt

[rangerrebew]

What the US should do with its A-10 Thunderbolt
By Sen. Marco Rubio
 Wednesday, Jun 7

 
After years of obstruction, Congress is finally approving the Air Force’s plan to retire the A-10 Thunderbolt. This is the right call, as the A-10 is no longer suited to America’s geostrategic needs. However, we should not simply dispose of this venerable plane; in the hands of our international partners, it can continue advancing the national interest.

The U.S. government created the A-10 in the 1970s to provide close-air support to American ground troops. At the time it was an effective counterweight to the threat of Soviet tanks, and in the decades since it has served the military faithfully.


The A-10 proved especially useful in the Gulf War, when it flew 8,100 sorties and destroyed thousands of Soviet-era combat vehicles and equipment. Later, it helped the U.S. destroy hardened enemy positions in the war on terrorism.

https://www.defensenews.com/opinion/2023/06/07/what-the-us-should-do-with-its-a-10-thunderbolt/

[PeteS in CA]

Wrong. Call.

[Bigun]

Wrong. Call.

  Absolutely! But the $$$ ain't there so it's sayonara.

[Kamaji]

[sneakypete]

Absolutely! But the $$$ ain't there so it's sayonara.

@Bigun

Ahhhh,but the money IS there,and it's coming in plain brown wrappers from people looking to make millions from building a replacement attack fighter/bomber.

The concept of "If it ain't broke,don't fix it" doesn't have a chance when it is facing off with the concept of "We need these new contracts and jobs to keep our voters voting for us."

I flat freaking LOVED the old A-1's. No,they are NOT the "zoomy jet fighters" that the USAF so dearly  loves,but they were the best damn troop support aircraft in history.

Plus,I gotta admit,I LOVED the sound of those old radial engines.

BTW,if they have any  Skyraiders left over and don't know what to do with them,I will GLADLY take a Navy folding wing version,and promise to roll it in my garage and wipe it clean every day while I am out there hugging it.

[Smokin Joe]

Wrong. Call.

Odd how the B-52s are flown by the grandkids of the original pilots, but the A-10 is considered "obsolete".
What.
Works.
Works.

CAS is likely as much dropping serious 'shock and awe' on your enemies as a bomb or missile, and the A-10, for those who have even seen one maneuver, does both--not to mention the gun...

The ones I watched were likely out of Nellis AFB, Nevada.

If the plane is in capable hands, suddenly, you have the feeling of being the mouse in the open being hunted by a jet-powered hawk.
Definitely mind-messing/awesome.

[sneakypete]

Odd how the B-52s are flown by the grandkids of the original pilots, but the A-10 is considered "obsolete".
What.
Works.
Works.

CAS is likely as much dropping serious 'shock and awe' on your enemies as a bomb or missile, and the A-10, for those who have even seen one maneuver, does both--not to mention the gun...

The ones I watched were likely out of Nellis AFB, Nevada.

If the plane is in capable hands, suddenly, you have the feeling of being the mouse in the open being hunted by a jet-powered hawk.
Definitely mind-messing/awesome.

@Smokin Joe

I can tell you with heart-felt sincerity that every time I saw them "working" in Asia,I was awful damn glad they weren't targeting me!

They not only "bring the damn-dam",they can fly low and slow enough to put it where you want and need it put.

Jet attack aircraft just fly too damn fast to be anywhere near as accurate with their ordinance. Other than their rockets. They can fire their rockets from any altitude and put them where they want them.

PRECISION bombing and strafing with cannons/machine guns is a LOT more complicated and demanding than that.

[PeteS in CA]

The A-10 probably would not fare well in a peer-vs.-peer environment, much as Su-25s are taking losses in Ukraine (both sides). However: 1. the US has not faced a peer  in battle; 2. the US has SEAD and EW assets and tactics that are more substantial and capable than most/all near-peers.

[Timber Rattler]

This is the right call, as the A-10 is no longer suited to America’s geostrategic needs.

The grunts on the ground say otherwise!

[sneakypete]

The grunts on the ground say otherwise!

@Timber Rattler

Yeah,but the senior USAF officers are ALL gentlemen,and gentlemen  don't converse with grunts.

Ironically enough,I was TOLD there were was a LOT of competition amongst the junior officers to see who got to fly the WW-2 era fighter/bombers,and the Korean War fighter-bombers,whose designation slips my  mind at the moment. They were the last USAF fighter-bombers produced before they went "all jet".

BTW,I would like to put in a word of admiration here  for  the pilots that  probably took the most chances,where the mostly likely to be shot down when flying their missions,and the least celebrated pilots in history,the guys that flew the old and VERY slow WW-2 propeller planes with  one engine, and two seats over enemy territory to see if they would draw any fire  from flying low and slow while checking out possible insertion sites for SOG recon teams. These planes were so outdated they were only used for flying around important passengers in WW-2. I am TEMPTED to say they were Piper Cubs on flat green,but that would probably be wrong even if it does give you an idea as to their size and capability.

The guys flying these things over enemy  territory with a SOG observer (NO co-pilot) reading maps and telling him where to go didn't even have any weapons to fire back at the enemy. At most,they  would have  a few smoke rockets  they could  use  to mark sites for the fast movers to strike,as well as the SOG guy in the passenger seat leaning  out the  door to fire his CAR-15.

I hope that some day,before the survivors all die of old age,that their courage and their accomplishments are officially recognized  by the army. BTW,AFAIK,they were all flown by US Army pilots.

[Smokin Joe]

@Smokin Joe

I can tell you with heart-felt sincerity that every time I saw them "working" in Asia,I was awful damn glad they weren't targeting me!

They not only "bring the damn-dam",they can fly low and slow enough to put it where you want and need it put.

Jet attack aircraft just fly too damn fast to be anywhere near as accurate with their ordinance. Other than their rockets. They can fire their rockets from any altitude and put them where they want them.

PRECISION bombing and strafing with cannons/machine guns is a LOT more complicated and demanding than that.

@sneakypete From: https://armyaviationmagazine.com/70th-anniversary-of-the-korean-war-a-brief-look-at-army-aviation-fixed-wing-aircraft/

An O-1 (L-19) Bird Dog; a derivative of the Cessna 305, replaced the L-4 Cub and Stinson L-5 as the Army Ground Forces’ cooperation aircraft. Known as the Bird Dog, it would faithfully serve in two wars, Korea and Vietnam.

I think this is the spotter aircraft you are referring to. The Skyraiders were supposed to be either Air Force or Navy, but also served in both wars. Other prop planes in Korea included F-82 (Twin Mustang)  the F4U Corsair, and the B-26, but those didn't make it to 'Nam.

[Bigun]

Brought the Dam Dam with a vengeance on many occasions in Vietnam.

[sneakypete]

@sneakypete From: https://armyaviationmagazine.com/70th-anniversary-of-the-korean-war-a-brief-look-at-army-aviation-fixed-wing-aircraft/

I think this is the spotter aircraft you are referring to.

@Smokin Joe

YUP!

The Skyraiders were supposed to be either Air Force or Navy, but also served in both wars.

SOMEONE was also flying the prop fighter-bomber that was created late in WW-2 that was sleeker,faster,and could carry more ordinance than the Skyraiders. It was also used in the Korean War,and IIRC,even had a pretty good record in dog fights against Soviet jet fighters. Can't remember the nomenclature of it to  save my  life at this point,but it  was a LOT sleeker and lighter than the Skyraider,as well as more powerful. IIRC,every one I saw flying was white.

Other prop planes in Korea included F-82 (Twin Mustang)  the F4U Corsair, and the B-26, but those didn't make it to 'Nam.

The prop fighter  I am thinking of looked exactly like the F-82 would look if it only  had one cabin. In FACT,you can see one flying fighter escort duty for the F-82 in the photo in the link below.

https://nationalinterest.org/blog/reboot/during-korean-war-americas-f-82-twin-mustang-came-control-koreas-skies-166893

Ok,I now have a confession to make. I FLAT LOVE those old radial engines. Just hearing one idle gets me aroused,never mind the  sound one of those things makes while diving on a gun run.

Yeah,jets are faster,carry more,fly higher,etc,etc,etc,but they just don't "play the right music".

[sneakypete]

Brought the Dam Dam with a vengeance on many occasions in Vietnam.

@Bigun

When you were surrounded somewhere and the NVA were getting close enough you  could see them blink,one of those things showing up  and then going into a roll and ground attack with the wing guns playing their music and the napalm capsule starting to flip  like a burger on a grille,you could literally hear "Holy shit! Retreat,retreat! and the sounds of small bushes being trampled as the NVA tried their damndest to "get out of Dodge".

The pilot would finish his gun and napalm run,and then many  of them would do a barrel roll over us so close to the ground you  could see his "squadron scarf" flying in the breeze coming in his open cockpit,and the pilot smiling at us on the ground.

It was just like watching a WW-2 John Wayne movie about the US troops fighting the Japanese troops in the jungles that we all grew up  watching.

THE coolest freaking thing I have ever seen or heard!

[Hoodat]

Odd how the B-52s are flown by the grandkids of the original pilots, but the A-10 is considered "obsolete".

B-52s keep Air Force pilots far from danger.  Not so with A-10s.

What the US should do with it's A-10 Thunderbolt?  Hand it over to the Army where it belongs.  From the beginning, the Air Force should have never been involved with this aircraft.

[Wingnut]

  From the beginning, the Air Force should have never been involved with this aircraft.

Amen.   

[Smokin Joe]

The prop fighter  I am thinking of looked exactly like the F-82 would look if it only  had one cabin. In FACT,you can see one flying fighter escort duty for the F-82 in the photo in the link below.

https://nationalinterest.org/blog/reboot/during-korean-war-americas-f-82-twin-mustang-came-control-koreas-skies-166893

Ok,I now have a confession to make. I FLAT LOVE those old radial engines. Just hearing one idle gets me aroused,never mind the  sound one of those things makes while diving on a gun run.

Yeah,jets are faster,carry more,fly higher,etc,etc,etc,but they just don't "play the right music".

That's a P-51.

As for your confession, I agree. The radials have a sound like no other, and it is music to my ears. One of the best thrills I ever had was getting to board a B-17 (The Collings Foundation's '909') and B-24 (The All American). The sound of those 4 Pratt & Whitney engines on the B-17 doing a flyby was unreal--the kind of harmony that gives you goose bumps! In-line engines just don't match it, and jets aren't in the same music school.

[Bigun]

Amen.

And  again!

[sneakypete]

B-52s keep Air Force pilots far from danger.  Not so with A-10s.

What the US should do with it's A-10 Thunderbolt?  Hand it over to the Army where it belongs.  From the beginning, the Air Force should have never been involved with this aircraft.

@Hoodat

We both  KNOW that is true,just like we both KNOW the USAF is NEVER going to do that.