Combat search and rescue’s uncertain future: As A-10s phase out, US Air Force faces questions of wha

[rangerrebew]

Combat search and rescue’s uncertain future: As A-10s phase out, US Air Force faces questions of what comes next
By Michael Scanlon
 Apr 16, 2026, 04:21 PM
 
The callsign “Sandy,” used by U.S. Air Force aircraft and pilots conducting combat search-and-rescue operations, traces to late 1965.

Capt. J.W. “Doc” George, a U.S. Air Force A-1 Skyraider pilot, arrived at Udorn Royal Thai Air Force Base, Thailand, as part of a CSAR replacement rotation from Bien Hoa, South Vietnam. When asked what callsign his flight would use, he suggested the one he used at Bien Hoa: “Sandy.”


The name stuck, was passed to his replacement and soon became the standard callsign for all A-1 Skyraiders flying CSAR missions protecting downed aircrews.

The Sandy role was later transferred to the faster LTV A-7D Corsair II in 1972 as the last Skyraiders were withdrawn from Southeast Asia. However, the A-7 struggled in the role due to its higher maneuvering speeds, which made it less effective for low-and-slow visual searches and close helicopter escort than the A-1.

https://www.airforcetimes.com/news/your-military/2026/04/16/combat-search-and-rescues-uncertain-future-as-a-10s-phase-out-us-air-force-faces-questions-of-what-comes-next/

[Smokin Joe]

No other aircraft can fill that essential niche.

[rangerrebew]

Is this question actually coming from the AF or democrats in congress or the MSM?

[Smokin Joe]

Is this question actually coming from the AF or democrats in congress or the MSM?

Hard to say. Smart money is on the latter two.

[Wingnut]

How many times has the AF tried to kill the Warthog?

[mystery-ak]

No other aircraft can fill that essential niche.

That's right...and they are using them now in Iran...

[Smokin Joe]

That's right...and they are using them now in Iran...

I am a fan of the aircraft, having seen them maneuver while I was working a well in Nevada. My impression was of a hunting bird of prey, looking for prey on the ground. It made the hair on the back of my neck stand up, being glad they weren't hunting me. Incredibly graceful at low altitude maneuvers, the pilots and their aircraft were a joy to behold (knowing they were on our side).
I have never been in the military, but I can't help but think the presence of those planes overhead would be a comfort to any in infantry or combined arms, and a lifesaver when the chips were down.
They should not be retired unless and until there is something better suited to fill the CAS niche as well or better than they do.

[PeteS in CA]

How many times has the AF tried to kill the Warthog?

I don't know how many times, but in 1979 and 1980 when I worked at Kaiser Electronics testing and aligning A-10 Projection Units, it was already known the USAF wanted to kill the A-10. IIRC, production of the A-10 ended in 1982 (I was at a different job by that time).

[Bigun]

I am a fan of the aircraft, having seen them maneuver while I was working a well in Nevada. My impression was of a hunting bird of prey, looking for prey on the ground. It made the hair on the back of my neck stand up, being glad they weren't hunting me. Incredibly graceful at low altitude maneuvers, the pilots and their aircraft were a joy to behold (knowing they were on our side).
I have never been in the military, but I can't help but think the presence of those planes overhead would be a comfort to any in infantry or combined arms, and a lifesaver when the chips were down.
They should not be retired unless and until there is something better suited to fill the CAS niche as well or better than they do.

I have been in the military, long before the A-10 came along, and can assure you that their prop driven predecessors were often quite a comfort.

[Smokin Joe]

I have been in the military, long before the A-10 came along, and can assure you that their prop driven predecessors were often quite a comfort.

I have heard that as well. When my Dad was in Korea, they occasionally benefited from napalm and rocket/strafing runs by F-4U Corsairs. Skyraiders were after his time in the service, but both turned out to be low and slow, able to hit targets with a surprising amount of ordnance, and able to absorb some battle damage and keep going. I see the A-10 as an updated version of that, With not only the 'gun', but an incredible and varied ordnance load out (something for everyone on their naughty list).



It can carry up to 16,000 pounds of ordnance, some 2-4 times what a B-17 could (depending on the distance covered by the B-17 and fuel needed).

We haven't mentioned the modified B-25s of WWII (with up to 13 forward facing .50 caliber machine guns, or an array of 20 and/or 37 mm cannons), mainly used against Japanese shipping, which deserve a mention as ancestral cousins to heavily armed purpose build CAS aircraft. Theirs is a different story.

And "Puff" (Spooky, AC-47) and Spectre (AC-130A) and Ghostrider (AC-130J) aircraft are in a class all their own, too.

[Hoodat]

I don't know how many times, but in 1979 and 1980 when I worked at Kaiser Electronics testing and aligning A-10 Projection Units, it was already known the USAF wanted to kill the A-10. IIRC, production of the A-10 ended in 1982 (I was at a different job by that time).

The USAF wants to kill the A-10 because the USAF doesn't want to fly the A-10.  It really is that simple.  And it's really stupid to expect them to.  The A-10 is not an Air Force plane.  It is an Army and Marine Corps plane.  Cut the USAF out of the picture, and hand that budget money over to the Army and Marines.