Air Force Fails To Kill Off The A-10 Warthog But Boy Did They Try

[red_zr24x4]

The thread is a bit specific, limited to a 10 fans/enemies, and we stay mostly on topic.


So, sorta not like INGO.

Hold my beer

 

[Shadow01]

If the AF doesn’t want the A10 or CAS, just hand the planes, pilots and ground crews over the the Army and let them continue on. The AF can go back to their global nuke hauling

 

[HoughMade]

The certainly want CAS, but they think other platforms can do it better than the A-10.

 

[Ark]

The problem with the gun is that you have to get so close/ low to the target to destroy it. Against forces that do not have manpads and other short range or defense systems, you could get away with this. If the Taliban and the Iraqi guerillas had been equipped with Manpads the A-10 would have been pushed off. Remember, We helped the Taliban screw the Russian helicopters with Stngers, and then spent yours scrambling to get all the stingers back so they wouldn’t do it to us in the next war.

An army that’s employing MBT’s, infantry fighting vehicles, trucks, and all the rest are also likely equipped with short range air defense, which forces the A-10 And any other low slow aircraft, to stand way back and use smart missiles … which are also used by every other fast-moving aircraft.

Even during the first Gulf War the A-10 was generally restricted from flying below 10,000 feet because of the anti-aircraft threat. One of my fellow ROTC graduates flew the A-10 during that war, and he seemed to fly mostly night missions with two Maverick missiles. That meant he got two shots and he was done for the night. The A-10 of the era had very little in the way of electronics, just the Maverick system. The pilots had to use the seeker head of the Maverick to find targets (tanks) on the ground, and as soon as they launch the missile, they went blind, so then they switch to the other missile to hunt for more targets, and when that one was gone, they went home. They could use dumb bombs in daytime, but they were not the most accurate. He got into some closer range stuff at Khafji, but that was about it. The number one tank killer aircraft of the Gulf War was the F111, a supersonic strike aircraft, because it had superior targeting system, ECM … and with PGMs and speed could stand off from ground fire.

The A-10 has been considerably upgraded since the first Gulf War but the PGM systems added also exist on the fast movers, and it’s still all about letting the A-10 stand back away from the ground fire threat.

For those situations where the ground fire/manpad threat is low, and a slow, moving long loiter aircraft with a gun and bombs is useful, the A-10 Is over engineered, with its relatively inefficient jet engines, more armor than is required, and a relatively short loiter time. Hence the armed Air Tractor as a purposebuilt CAS aircraft.

USSOCOM selects Air Tractor-based light combat aircraft for Armed Overwatch - AeroTime

The AT-802U Sky Warden has been selected by the United States Special Operations Command (SOCOM) for its Armed Overwatch program. The initial $170 million contract will see the delivery of up to 75 aircraft, which will begin in 2023. The aircraft are intended to be used for counter-insurgency...

www.aerotime.aero

I don't have a clear picture of how much AA the Russian armor formations in Ukraine are rolling with, but it seems to be enough that the Ukrainians aren't doing a whole lot of CAS. They seem to be doing most of their armor busting with arty and infantry weapons.

Perhaps that suggests the A10, with it's dependence on line of sight and low altitude, wouldn't do well in that environment. For their part the Russians seem limited to over the horizon air asset use, as well.

Maybe the moral of the story is that against a peer state with modern AA the war will be fought on the ground. At least, if you don't have stealth to rely on.

 

[actaeon277]

The certainly want CAS, but they think other platforms can do it better than the A-10.

It depends.

It gets expensive losing an a10 to SAM.

But it also gets expensive taking out trucks with million dollar missiles.

 

[Tombs]

They should just bring back the Cheyenne. The CAS helicopter that we should have adopted, but the air force had a tizzy fit over and forced its cancellation.

It'd far better fill the role that the A10 is responsible for. That Gau8 isn't a threat to anything today that the cannon on the Cheyenne couldn't take out.

 

[Thor]

The A-10 was built to face peer competitor with massive air defense scenarios when it was fielded...it's better today. It is as survivable as any helicopter in the inventory. That gun is still death on a stick to almost anything on the field.

The problem with most folks is assuming that we will take no casualties in a peer to peer confrontation. Get used to it...people are going to die and planes are going to get shot down. The F-35 is not a CAS machine no matter what Lockheed wants to sell you on. If that's where the AF is going then they have given up the ground game.

HQAF is not rife with great decisions on cancelling aircraft. The EF-111 was shut down because they said the navy could cover the mission with EA-6s...great...subsonic jammers that are not as effective covering supersonic strike packages...IDIOTS. Also, the Navy and AF don't have a great track record on mission priority coordination.

Want to get rid of the A-10? Fine, create an American Volunteer Group and send it to the Ukraine with decommissioned A-10's where they can show you how effective they still are against armor on the battlefield. Next thing you know the AF will be looking for a new A-10.

 

[jwamplerusa]

If the AF doesn’t want the A10 or CAS, just hand the planes, pilots and ground crews over the the Army and let them continue on. The AF can go back to their global nuke hauling

This. The Key West agreement should likely have been modified years ago.

 

[Alamo]

If the AF doesn’t want the A10 or CAS, just hand the planes, pilots and ground crews over the the Army and let them continue on. The AF can go back to their global nuke hauling

The Army wouldn't take them. They are smarter than that.

Saying the A-10 is as suvivableas a helicopter is damning with faint praise. The Army also found out in Iraq that fighting an organized army who has a lot of machine guns with low and slow is a mistake. In March 2003 they sent 31 Apache helicopters against the Republican Guard Medina Division in Karbala. The Air Force flew a SEAD mission prior, but due to some scheduling perturbations, the helicopters didn’t arrive until three hours after the Air Force left. 31 Apaches took off, one crashed immediately, and the other 30 attacked. One was shot down and all the rest but one took serious damage from ground fire without seriously hampering the Iraqis. It took a month for the unit to recover. The Army didn't try anything like that again.

During the first Gulf War the A-10s were sent against the Republican Guard at one point but so many of them ended up on the ramp awaiting battle damage repair that they were pulled off and the F-16s flew the rest of the ground attack missions against the Guard divisions. The A-10 flew half the sorties that the F-16 did but had twice the losses.

I previously mentioned the F-111 as the numero uno tank killer, but I found some numbers: In the first Gulf War, the A-10 flew about 8600 sorties total and had 987 tank kills - using the Maverick missile, not the gun. The F-111 flew 3500 sorties and killed 1500 tanks using the Paveway laser guided GBU-12. (Of which the F-35 carries the modern updated version as well.)

The A-10 has been modernized since the first Gulf War to improve its lethality, but the rest of the Air Force and Navy aircraft, have received the same improvements, or even better ones. But the A-10 is still too slow and easy to see (via radar and IR as well as visually) to go in close against any kind of organized air defense

Again, against any modern-ish army with any kind of organized air defense, the A-10 can only play the same game that the F-16, F-15E, F-18E/F play better, and the F-35 stands head and shoulders above that.

For guerrilla/low intensity/Afghan or post-Iraq invasion type conflicts armed UAVs like the Predator, and Air Tractors, and AC-130s, and the Army’s choppers are much cheaper, have long loiter times, and better sensors. And helicopters and Air Tractors even have the Mark I eyeball.

The A-10 was designed for a very specific time period - to blunt a Soviet attack into Western Europe long enough to destroy Soviet logistics behind the front, get nuclear release authority, and get the nuke warheads deployed so we could give the Soviets an ultimatum. Frankly, it wouldn’t have fared well against the Soviet divisional air defenses of the day, but there were 700 or so of them and they would have played a part.

That group of Russians, running around in the Ukraine right now are a far cry from the Soviets of the 70s and early 80s. They resemble a badly organize guerrilla group with tanks rather than anything like a modern army, so yes the A-10 would do OK, but its main protection would be Russian incompetence.

The Chinese, or the Iranians, or even the Norks, if they don’t starve to death first, would be a different story.

 

[Alamo]

By the way the EF-111 was replaced with EF-18 Navy aircraft that are flown by both Navy and USAF crews, as well as the F-16CJ Vipers, backed up by RC-135 Rivet Joint.

You don’t actually need a supersonic EW aircraft to escort a strike package, because once you start hanging bombs and missiles on fourth generation aircraft, you eliminate their ability to go supersonic. The EF-18 and F-16CJ can obviously keep up with their strike brethern,

And when you do want to send supersonic aircraft on
a SEAD mission, we do have one. it will be the… wait for it … the F-35. its current electronic warfare suite and weapons loadout is already capable of doing some SEAD/DEAD, but two years ago the Navy awarded Lockheed a contract to modify F-35A (Air Force) and F-35C (Navy) to perform the full SEAD/DEAD mission.

The F-35 doesn’t have full supersonic cruise like the F-22, but it can fly Mach 1.3 operationally, and has been tested up to at least 1.6. However, neither the Air Force more than maybe have found much use for extended supersonic flight for combat aircraft, and the F-35 will get far more protection from its stealth and EW suite than it will high speed.

 

[Thor]

By the way the EF-111 was replaced with EF-18 Navy aircraft that are flown by both Navy and USAF crews, as well as the F-16CJ Vipers, backed up by RC-135 Rivet Joint.

You don’t actually need a supersonic EW aircraft to escort a strike package, because once you start hanging bombs and missiles on fourth generation aircraft, you eliminate their ability to go supersonic. The EF-18 and F-16CJ can obviously keep up with their strike brethern,

And when you do want to send supersonic aircraft on
a SEAD mission, we do have one. it will be the… wait for it … the F-35. its current electronic warfare suite and weapons loadout is already capable of doing some SEAD/DEAD, but two years ago the Navy awarded Lockheed a contract to modify F-35A (Air Force) and F-35C (Navy) to perform the full SEAD/DEAD mission.

The F-35 doesn’t have full supersonic cruise like the F-22, but it can fly Mach 1.3 operationally, and has been tested up to at least 1.6. However, neither the Air Force more than maybe have found much use for extended supersonic flight for combat aircraft, and the F-35 will get far more protection from its stealth and EW suite than it will high speed.

The SparcVark was retired in 1998, the Growler didn't fly operationally until 2009; so the Prowlers were the backup plan and they could not keep up with the AF strike packages. We had to plan daisy chains of them along the strike route and getting them from the Navy in numbers time and place was like pulling hens teeth. The AF still has the same planning issues getting Growlers. (also, the Phantom, Mud Hen and Viper drivers would be very surprised that they could not go super with bombs on board...maybe not Mach 2)

The F35 community has been saying SEAD/DEAD is the new CAS for years now. I have talked to F35 drivers who were former A10 pilots saying that the Lightning II is NOT a CAS platform and people need to stop saying that. If they do attempt to get down into the CAS environment they will suffer much greater woes than the A10.

The A10 killed a LOT more than tanks in the Gulf War. You have seen pictures of the Highway of Death? APCs, trucks, cars basically any vehicle the enemy used. The WarHog was doing a lot more than tank hunting and our guys on the ground loved it. The tanks they did kill were in contact with our troops...in the CAS environment.

Having Aardvarks take out concentrations of enemy armor was exactly the right thing to do...but that's interdiction not CAS.

 

[actaeon277]

Thought this would be a good place to put this.


Not all planes and big guns are meant for each other.

 

[smokingman]

Looks like they finally did kill the A10.

Air Force Wants To Replace Highly Effective Modern A-10 With 'Flying Tinderbox' | ZeroHedge

ZeroHedge - On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero

www.zerohedge.com

The 2024 version of the National Defense Authorization Act (pdf) allows the Air Force to retire 42 A-10 Thunderbolt 2s in 2024, with the remaining 220 or so to be retired with prejudice by 2029. This retiring of the A-10 “Warthog” is predicated on the fantastical disproven idea that the A-10, which to this day is the most cost-effective plane in the Air Force’s inventory, can be replaced by the F-35.

 

[Cameramonkey]

. This retiring of the A-10 “Warthog” is predicated on the fantastical disproven idea that the A-10, which to this day is the most cost-effective plane in the Air Force’s inventory, can be replaced by the F-35.

 

[oze]

Has anybody in the Fort Wayne area seen A-10s flying over lately? It use to be a daily occurrence of at least a pair flying low and slow overhead, but I think it's been at least a month since I've seen them.

 

[KellyinAvon]

Much like in real life, the Hawg was hard to kill programmatically (retire the fleet) as well.

In 1990, the fast mover drivers running Big Blue tried to retire the Hawg. Then Saddam rolled into Kuwait and the A-10 showed what it could do.

Early 2001: Air Force Chief of Staff Jumper declares “CAS is dead” after a 500 pounder got dropped on the TACP. We know what happened later in 2001.

20 years ago the Hawg got a glass cockpit and added JDAMs to the 30mm and Maverick missiles.

 

[edporch]

If the AF doesn’t want the A10 or CAS, just hand the planes, pilots and ground crews over the the Army and let them continue on. The AF can go back to their global nuke hauling

That was proposed at one time.
But the Air Force wanted to turn over JUST the planes to the Army, and keep all the money budgeted to maintain them to spend on other things.
So the Air Force kept them.

 

[jwamplerusa]

Much like in real life, the Hawg was hard to kill programmatically (retire the fleet) as well.

In 1990, the fast mover drivers running Big Blue tried to retire the Hawg. Then Saddam rolled into Kuwait and the A-10 showed what it could do.

Early 2001: Air Force Chief of Staff Jumper declares “CAS is dead” after a 500 pounder got dropped on the TACP. We know what happened later in 2001.

20 years ago the Hawg got a glass cockpit and added JDAMs to the 30mm and Maverick missiles.

I'll say it again.

Kill the The Key West Agreement, and give the CAS mission to the Army regardless of platform. The concept of the A10 needs to be modernized and reinvigorated.

 

[KellyinAvon]

The Hawg has 1,300 rounds of 30mm. The F-35 has 180 rounds of 20mm.

The guys calling CAS wanted the Hawg’s gun if an AC-130 wasn’t on station.

I’m a nerd, but I used to go to meetings with guys who called CAS, and flew CAS.

 

[KellyinAvon]

I was at HQ Air Combat Command when the U-2 fleet was projected to retire in FY2008. This was early 2006 IIRC.

At some point they (they being at the Pentagon) realized the RQ-4 Global Hawk didn’t have the Signals Intelligence (SIGINT) capability of the Dragon Lady and wouldn’t until the Block Umpteen something upgrade and we were only on Block 3.

STOP THE PRESSES!! Since ACC was the only major command that flew the Dragon Lady the wizards of smart at the 5 sided puzzle palace funded the U-2, by taking the funding from ACC. A fine example of Military Intelligence if ever there was one.