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

[IndyDave1776]

IFR...I Follow Roads!

 

[Spear Dane]

Yes, I know I am flying, but I will just take 65 from Louisville to Indianapolis, run 465 to 69, and then take it the rest of the way home to Ft. Wayne. Makes the navigation a lot easier!

That is literally the way it used to be done and it is still a viable (Or was when I got my license) alternative method of air nav.

 

[9mmfan]

Now if the fools would bring back the F-22.

 

[IndyDave1776]

Now if the fools would bring back the F-22.

You're expecting them to make sense. Stop that. It's against their principles!

 

[beeeman]

I believe Fort Wayne Air Guard is switching back to the F16 in 2016
Toledo Blade

 

[BugI02]

I believe we could end the F35 program and repurpose those $$$ to the A10 and F22 programs without a significant reduction in capabilities

 

[AmmoManAaron]

I believe we could end the F35 program and repurpose those $$$ to the A10 and F22 programs without a significant reduction in capabilities

 

[Thor]

The AF is actually looking at starting new procurement for the F-15 and F-16...even considering the F-18. The F-15 has had its end of life date extended beyond the current life of the F-22...doesn't mean that won't change for the Raptor but it's telling.

Physics doesn't change much (at all). You still need to carry X amount of bombs to the battlefield on something. Lift, thrust, range...do the math and come up with a winning solution.

Therein lies the problem. Winning solutions are not always politically viable solution.

 

[IndyDave1776]

I believe we could end the F35 program and repurpose those $$$ to the A10 and F22 programs without a significant reduction in capabilities

 

[IndyDave1776]

The AF is actually looking at starting new procurement for the F-15 and F-16...even considering the F-18. The F-15 has had its end of life date extended beyond the current life of the F-22...doesn't mean that won't change for the Raptor but it's telling.

Physics doesn't change much (at all). You still need to carry X amount of bombs to the battlefield on something. Lift, thrust, range...do the math and come up with a winning solution.

Therein lies the problem. Winning solutions are not always politically viable solution.

My take on it is that the F-35 has turned into a highly-expensive white elephant. Anyone who could not see this coming needs new glasses. Airframe and powerplant variations or not, you can only get so much diversity out of any design. This one is trying to be too many things at the same time and its progress shows this. I would strongly lean toward cutting our losses here.

Our legacy aircraft are still very capable platforms, especially with new airframes with no wear/stress and built ready to use rather than the cobbling process involved in upgrades. I would also point out that Russia's best and newest in service are legacy platforms. Unlike us, they assign new model numbers to upgrades. For example, in Russian parlance, the M60A3 tank would have been the M65. Similarly, the late-model Sukhoi fighters are modified variants of the Su-27 and the newest MiGs are reworked MiG 29s (both design bureaus have completely new designs in prototype, but only in prototype where we have the F-22 in service).

Now, the Raptor. The biggest things it brings to the table are the ability to travel a useful combat radius at supersonic speed for the entire trip, unlike any other fighter in common use, two-dimensional thrust vectoring which significantly enhances maneuverability and is more reliable than the Russkie three-dimensional nozzles, and its stealth features. The latter is not bulletproof nor does it enjoy any guarantee of immunity from future innovations in detection equipment, but it is still better than anything else we can presently put in the air as an air-superiority fighter.

I will take Thor's excellent point and be much more blunt with it. Right now, too many people in positions of influence (i.e., able to buy politicians) have too much to gain pissing money down rat holes with the F-35 to give it up peacefully.

 

[BugI02]

I think there might be a limited role for the F35 if all development was directed toward the VTOL version as a more capable Harrier replacement. Ideally focusing on one area would significantly decrease development costs going forward

 

[IndyDave1776]

I think there might be a limited role for the F35 if all development was directed toward the VTOL version as a more capable Harrier replacement. Ideally focusing on one area would significantly decrease development costs going forward

 

[xoregonian]

When you hear that whine from the engines

you know help is on the way

Calls for a flyby


View attachment 44365

 

[Thor]

The F35 is a switchblade being sold as a Swiss army knife. The problem is that it can't do all the 'stuff' in the marketing literature that they have to say they can do to sell it. It may be a good addition to the force, it is NOT a replacement for the A-10. Anyone who says it is is selling something (like an F35 or attempted political 'gravitas'.)

 

[IndyDave1776]

The F35 is a switchblade being sold as a Swiss army knife. The problem is that it can't do all the 'stuff' in the marketing literature that they have to say they can do to sell it. It may be a good addition to the force, it is NOT a replacement for the A-10. Anyone who says it is is selling something (like an F35 or attempted political 'gravitas'.)

The concept is eerily reminiscent of the F-111. McNamara tried to present it as the future USAF fighter, bomber, interceptor, and recon platform, in addition to a carrier fighter/bomber/interceptor, sparking the Second Revolt of the Admirals ending with a number of forced retirements and the F-111 being properly consigned to the two roles for which it had merit--interceptor and bomber--and NOT from a carrier!

 

[Who Dares Wins]

I say that both the A10 and F22 are great aircraft and we should buy more of them, and cut back on F35's.

I am thinking that USAF offered the A10 up for the chopping block hoping/knowing that congress would vote it back in and provide additional funding for them. The games they play!

 

[GNRPowdeR]

The AF wants the A-10 gone because it isn't sexy. The Army and USMC want / need the A-10. AF doesn't want to allow the Army or the USMC to have their own Air Corps and diminish their roll in conflicts, but the aren't willing to admit their high tech toys can't do what the A-10 has done / can do (against the odds) for several decades!

Funny enough, I was reading up on this just yesterday...

 

[IndyDave1776]

The AF wants the A-10 gone because it isn't sexy. The Army and USMC want / need the A-10. AF doesn't want to allow the Army or the USMC to have their own Air Corps and diminish their roll in conflicts, but the aren't willing to admit their high tech toys can't do what the A-10 has done / can do (against the odds) for several decades!

Funny enough, I was reading up on this just yesterday...

Funny how getting the job done, and done right in reality can be diametrically opposed to image and pissing contests, isn't it?

 

[Thor]

The concept is eerily reminiscent of the F-111. McNamara tried to present it as the future USAF fighter, bomber, interceptor, and recon platform, in addition to a carrier fighter/bomber/interceptor, sparking the Second Revolt of the Admirals ending with a number of forced retirements and the F-111 being properly consigned to the two roles for which it had merit--interceptor and bomber--and NOT from a carrier!

The 111 was GREAT at what it was great at...almost untouchable high or low and fast, faster than anything trying to shoot it down especially when you saw the rapidly diminishing weapons effectiveness window as 'here she comes, she's coming, there she goes, she's gone'. Fleet defense off a carrier? No thanks. I've done some cats and traps and I couldn't imagine it in that aircraft though it was a Cadillac strong and smooth when running low and fast.

It would have made a great air defense interceptor too...unfortunate they never employed it in that role. But I suppose in the day they had the F-106 to fill that slot. In the world of bad decisions by the McNamara whiz kids though they put those aside for the F-16. Back in the early days when the Falcon was a day VFR fighter that couldn't carry radar missiles. We went from having a jet, the fastest single engine aircraft in the world, with legs that could get to the bomber orbits unrefueled to on we had to launch with tanker and couldn't shoot the bombers down when they got there. Good decision again whiz kids!

The AF had to use those as drones to shoot down ASAP because a fleet of 106's waiting to be re-launched was a threat to then future F-15 funding. It's almost like those same people are in charge...but it's probably just their protégé.

 

[IndyDave1776]

The 111 was GREAT at what it was great at...almost untouchable high or low and fast, faster than anything trying to shoot it down especially when you saw the rapidly diminishing weapons effectiveness window as 'here she comes, she's coming, there she goes, she's gone'. Fleet defense off a carrier? No thanks. I've done some cats and traps and I couldn't imagine it in that aircraft though it was a Cadillac strong and smooth when running low and fast.

It would have made a great air defense interceptor too...unfortunate they never employed it in that role. But I suppose in the day they had the F-106 to fill that slot. In the world of bad decisions by the McNamara whiz kids though they put those aside for the F-16. Back in the early days when the Falcon was a day VFR fighter that couldn't carry radar missiles. We went from having a jet, the fastest single engine aircraft in the world, with legs that could get to the bomber orbits unrefueled to on we had to launch with tanker and couldn't shoot the bombers down when they got there. Good decision again whiz kids!

The AF had to use those as drones to shoot down ASAP because a fleet of 106's waiting to be re-launched was a threat to then future F-15 funding. It's almost like those same people are in charge...but it's probably just their protégé.

My best guess with the pointy-headed idiots is that they do something similar to a family. You have a strong element of institutional culture and knowledge, but just like most kids think dad's and idiot and grandpa is god, I believe you have some of the same type of back and forth in a bureaucracy, especially when it is driven by people who haven't been there and done that making decisions.