Elite Air Force operators brace for uncertain future as Pentagon pulls plug on A-10 Warthog fleet

[KellyinAvon]

Many moving parts here. KellyinAvon, SMSgt, USAF (Retired) who once worked at HQ Air Combat Command, very familiar with programmatic funding, PPBE (Planning, Programming, Budgeting, and Execution,) and Air Support Operations Groups/Squadrons (ASOG/ASOS.)

First off, the authorized manning of the TACP career Field (1C4X1) IS NOT tied to the A-10 aircraft. Multiple things here.

The Air Force expects the A-10 Warthog to be completely retired by 2028 or 2029​

This is Fiscal Year (FY) 2023. This means the POM (Program Objective Memorandum) out past FY29.

More to follow...

Elite Air Force operators brace for uncertain future as Pentagon pulls plug on A-10 Warthog fleet

The U.S. Air Force will cut personnel assigned to its elite Tactical Air Control Party career field nearly in half as the service looks to continue retiring the A-10 Warthog.

www.foxnews.com

 

[tcecil88]

With the way the tensions between the US, China and Russia have been lately, it makes perfect sense to retire the best ground support platform we have without having something just as capable to replace it. Brilliant!

 

[Cameramonkey]

With the way the tensions between the US, China and Russia have been lately, it makes perfect sense to retire the best ground support platform we have without having something just as capable to replace it. Brilliant!

THIS.

I would love to hear their rationale.

 

[rhamersley]

THIS.

I would love to hear their rationale.

10% for the big guy?

 

[Tactically Fat]

the best ground support platform we have without having something just as capable to replace it.

"Best" is subjective. Fighting an enemy that doesn't have modern capability? It's pretty good.

Fighting a modern well supplied-with-anti-air-weapons? Probably not so good.

Technology marches in lock-step with time.

 

[Hawkeye]

IIRC the AF has been trying to kill the A-10 for something like 20 years. Not sure there are even any Active squadrons flying it. Just Reserve and Air NG. I know that the Reserves and Air Guard are pretty much integrated with the Active, but it says something about the mindset of AF leadership. They really don't like the CAS mission.

 

[BroodXI]

maybe they plan on sending them to Ukraine.

 

[KellyinAvon]

The special operations job field, referred to as TACP, will shrink to roughly 2,130 positions from its current manning of about 3,700, a 44% reduction in the overall strength, according to a report from Military.com.

This is freaking huge. In FY 07 a significant number of TACP positions were added (authorized positions, which eventually leads to 75%-80% being filled actual TACP troops.) Positions added were to support Army Brigade Combat Teams. The Army transformed, didn't tell the USAF until afterwards. I was at the meeting, now kidding.

And most TACP are assigned to Air Combat Command (ACC,) not Air Force Special Operations Command (AFSOC)

(Rose knows NOTHING about how first term or career Airmen retrain into other career fields. Did we shove all the U2 Crew Chiefs out the gate when that fleet retired? NO!!)
Rose Riley, a Department of the Air Force spokeswoman who confirmed the cuts to the TACP career field to Military.com, said that there are currently "no plans to retrain TACPs to other career fields in light of the manning reduction, but the Air Force is opening opportunities for those who would prefer to pursue other careers."

(Probably an old ROMAD, what we now call TACP. PREACH!!)
The move to retire the A-10 and shrink the TACP career has faced pushback from groups such as Troops-In-Contact, an advocacy of A-10 and other air support veterans who argue the push to eliminate the plane and its support could result in negative consequences.
"If successful, this plan would kill the CAS (Close Air Support) profession and cripple America's CAS capability," the group wrote in a statement on its website. "Ground troops would be supported, if at all, by CAS amateurs in a small, expensive fleet of fragile aircraft that are far less effective. In Low Intensity Conflict, that will cost lives."


(Career F-16 pilot... Vipers fly CAS too. Fast mover-drivers have always hated the A-10. Pre-Desert Storm they tried to kill it. Then after smoking a metric ****-ton of Iraqi armor the A-10 stayed around. F-35?? Is that fleet still grounded??)
Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. Charles "C.Q." Brown, who is currently in line to become the next chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said earlier this year that he expects the A-10 to be completely retired by 2028 or 2029, according to Military.com. In its place, Brown believes the F-35A Lightning II will be capable of providing CAS in the future.


More to follow

 

[KellyinAvon]

Calling CAS is different than summoning aircraft to your general vicinity.

Extremely oversimplified description of CAS:

If the pilot can identify the friendlies and non-friendlies? Pickle button can be pressed. Otherwise Joe Fighter-Pilot turns circles.

Danger close and the pilot can't identify the friendlies/non-friendlies? TACP (actually a Joint Terminal Attack Controller a JTAC calls the CAS. JTACs are TACP, not all TACP are JTACs) says put the 500/1000/2000 pound JDAM/cluster bombs/Small Diameter Bombs/Maverick Missile/Hellfire Missile/cannon fire/40mm/105mm from an AC-130 RIGHT THERE!

 

[jwamplerusa]

I still believe the answer is to kill the key West accord. Give the army back the close air support fixed wing function. The Air Force can retain everything that flies high and fast, the army gets everything that is primarily low and slow.

There is a place even on today's battlefield, my personal opinion, for a specialized close air support fixed-wing aircraft. Yes they are vulnerable to both anti aircraft fire and air defense missiles. However they are both faster and able to carry more ordinance and stay on station longer than rotary Wing aircraft.

Let the army have the function and give them the budget to develop the A10's replacement.

With modern materials, modern engines, modern avionics, and the proper design philosophy you could probably end up with a transonic aircraft with high acceleration deceleration capability and still have phenomenal load carrying capability range, and loiter time. Oh, and still carry a really big f****** gun.

 

[KellyinAvon]

I still believe the answer is to kill the key West accord. Give the army back the close air support fixed wing function. The Air Force can retain everything that flies high and fast, the army gets everything that is primarily low and slow.

There is a place even on today's battlefield, my personal opinion, for a specialized close air support fixed-wing aircraft. Yes they are vulnerable to both anti aircraft fire and air defense missiles. However they are both faster and able to carry more ordinance and stay on station longer than rotary Wing aircraft.

Let the army have the function and give them the budget to develop the A10's replacement.

With modern materials, modern engines, modern avionics, and the proper design philosophy you could probably end up with a transonic aircraft with high acceleration deceleration capability and still have phenomenal load carrying capability range, and loiter time. Oh, and still carry a really big f****** gun.

This is more likely.

 

[HoughMade]

With the way the tensions between the US, China and Russia have been lately, it makes perfect sense to retire the best ground support platform we have without having something just as capable to replace it. Brilliant!

Except for the fact that China and Russia have actual anti-aircraft capabilities and fighters.

Better to put the money towards a platform that can defend itself.

 

[MrSmitty]

IIRC when the AF first proposed getting rid of the A-10, the Army said, good, we'll take it...the AF changed it's tune...for a while ......"don't want no grunts flying no jets" Loiter time is the key, the A-10 has it in spades, the F-35, don't... plus the A-10 is a flying tank, the F-35 is a carbon fiber single engine plane.. one good hit in the engine and it's gone...the Warthog has earned it's place in the battle space, and history!!

 

[bobzilla]

Except for the fact that China and Russia have actual anti-aircraft capabilities and fighters.

Better to put the money towards a platform that can defend

But there isnt one. Part of the success of cas is owning air superiority. Top cover aircraft to keep the bad guys off their backs while they help the grunts **** **** up. That’s how the us has been so successful. We have owned the airspace long before the ground pounders rolled in, then when they needed cas it was there.

 

[JettaKnight]

IIRC when the AF first proposed getting rid of the A-10, the Army said, good, we'll take it...the AF changed it's tune...for a while ......"don't want no grunts flying no jets" Loiter time is the key, the A-10 has it in spades, the F-35, don't... plus the A-10 is a flying tank, the F-35 is a carbon fiber single engine plane.. one good hit in the engine and it's gone...the Warthog has earned it's place in the battle space, and history!!

That's the key word - it's history. The parts supply chain, the heavy, cable driven hardware... it's all history.

As for loiter time, that's now now the domain of drones, and a lot of cheap drones can destroy a lot of armor, with a lot less maintenance and support cost.


The A10 is formidable platform, but it's a cold war era platform.