The A-10 Warthog Debate: A Fate Worse Than Death

Scott Wolff​, who was the editor for my recent fiction Novella Vacation Gone South, goes into full detail on the fate of this awesome weapons platform and why it’s ultimately doomed…A good read for fans (and how can’t one be a fan?) of the A-10.

The A-10 Warthog Debate: A Fate Worse Than Death
By Scott Wolf

"Here is a fact, ladies and gentlemen. The A-10 is without match in its given mission sets. There is no other aircraft on the planet as adept at flying close air support (CAS), rescue escort (RESCORT), forward air control-airborne (FAC-A)/strike coordination and reconnaissance (SCAR), and armed escort missions. Not a single one. It is the PERFECT airplane for those missions, given its combination of slow speed, devastating firepower, low-altitude agility, and relative fuel economy. It is slow, mean, and ugly, packs a devastating array of precision and unguided ordnance, and above all else, it has The Gun.

I absolutely LOVE the A-10. I LOVE my friends who fly the A-10. I hate to see the aircraft go away. But go away it must, and go away it will. Its fate has been decided. Just to be clear, I’m not “pro-F-35″ in the way that is “anti-Hawg.” I am pro-America. I am pro-Air Force. I firmly believe that our aerial warfighters need and deserve to have the best tools available to prosecute their mission of raining destruction on any foe who takes up arms against us, our allies, or our way of life. Period."

Cont HERE

If the AF doesnt want it anymore then the SecDef should do the smart thing and give them to the Marines. They are the masters of CAS and would love to have it.

Hearing A-10 and Marines in the same sentence makes me go from 6 to midnight, wonderful idea, but it would never happen. A-10’s need a lot of runway which goes against the ethos of the MAGTF, Marine Air Ground Task Force

RATO baby! :cool:

I was invited to go up in that bird for the Miramar Airshow but I was taking leave at the time, so it never happened, but it would be a great idea.

Most of the worlds problems can be solved by the simple addition of rockets! :ph34r:

Interesting read. The problem is that the argument he makes for the A-10 not being ready for the “next war” doesn’t hold water. It’s no more vulnerable to emerging threats than the F15C/E, F-16, F-18, etc. The only aircraft who have an advantage in that discussion are the F-22 and F35. The A-10 was designed to survive and kill on the battlefields of modern Europe against the Soviet empire and it’s very effective and integrated air defenses.

I also disagree with the author’s premise that the F-16 would be a great CAS platform if given that to focus upon. It cannot fly slowly enough to ID threats and friendlies on the ground. It has a pathetic payload and range. The F-16 is the airframe that should be retired, not the A-10.

Here is an email I sent to Gen Welsh in the beginning of February. Despite many friends who are still serving telling me he will write me back, that has not happened. I don’t really expect him to either. He has sold his soul on this idea and can’t back off from it now.


General Welsh,

I’m writing you as a former Air Force officer who is very troubled by what I’ve seen in the media with regard to the plan to retire the A-10 from service. I’m fully aware of the challenges you face in terms of budgeting for our warfighters, especially when we are forced to operate under continuing resolutions.

A little bit of background for myself, I spent 11 years on active duty and separated as a major in 2006 in order to begin a career in law enforcement. For most of my career I worked the C2 side of Personnel Recovery/CSAR. I spent several years at the AFRCC when it was still at Langley AFB, and I was deployed in 2001, spending 6 months as a CSAR controller in the Joint Search & Rescue Center (JSRC) for CENTCOM. While there I was heavily involved in planning and execution of rescue operations for OSW and OEF. When I left active duty I was the Chief, Special Operations Branch at the AF2ISRC and responsible for the integration of SOF/Personnel Recovery systems for all CAOC’s. I understand how the overall air battle is planned and executed.

I provided that so you’d better understand my frame of reference. When OEF kicked off we (the JSRC) were begging for A-10’s. The few people with boots on the ground (SOF/OGA) were asking for the same. I am aware you flew the A-10, so I know you understand why we wanted the plane in theater. Instead, General Wald allowed the F-16’s in Kuwait (deployed for OSW) to fly missions into Afghanistan. Because of the limited range and payload of the F-16, they needed 3 in flight refuelings to get to their targets, in order to drop 2 bombs, and after a few minutes on station, had to RTB. They of course needed 3 more refuelings to get back to Kuwait. We though the Tanker LNO’s in the CAOC were going to lose their minds.

We both know there is no airframe on the planet that can do what the A-10 does. The F-16, even with a Sandy qualified pilot doesn’t come close. The F-35 will not come close. Neither plane has the ability to carry the payload the A-10 does. Neither plane can fly slowly enough to positively ID threats and friendlies on the ground. Neither plane can stay on station long enough. And of course neither airplane can survive the abuse the A-10 can. It sill amazes me the F-35 has a single engine. Did the Air Force not learn its lesson with the F-16?

Speaking of… let’s discuss the F-16. If you want or need to save money in the budget in order to get the F-35 operational, then there is an obvious choice to those of us outside the “Viper” community. The F-16 typically leads the Air Force in Class A mishaps every year. We have lost far too many lives to the F-16 in peacetime because it tries to be everything and excels at nothing. There is a reason its nickname among the rest of the Air Force is the “Lawn Dart.” The F-16 has been protected by the Air Force over and over again because the pilots who fly it lose all objectivity and keep pushing to take on new roles. When I was in Rescue and we heard F-16 pilots were going to get trained as Sandy crews, we laughed. We also knew it was just another attempt to phase out the A-10. There is a reason you have to keep fighting to get rid of and replace the A-10. It’s because it works and does the job of protecting ground troops and CSAR crews better than any combat aircraft in the history of this planet. That is not hyperbole. The only aircraft that can come close to the same ability to protect our troops are helicopter gunships.

If you truly want to protect American lives to the best of your ability, and you want to reduce the casualties in peacetime and combat, you would be pushing to retire the F-16. Keeping it in service shows a bias toward the sexy, fun, mach 2 fighters that will not ever perform CAS or RESCORT in an appropriate or effective manner. The best analogy I can think of is a person needing to move his family and dog from New York to California. For that role he buys a Corvette. Sure he looks good in it. Sure it’s fun as hell to drive. But it will not accomplish the mission. That’s the F-16. It is the real drain on financial and personnel resources. Sadly the F-35 will merely be a more advanced and low-observable version of the Lawn Dart. Do the right thing for our service and all our uniformed personnel - retire the F-16 and use the money saved to keep flying the A-10. Hell, give funding to the F-15E’s. They have 2 engines and have respectable payload/TOS numbers. But the real problem in your budget is not the A-10. Retiring it without a suitable replacement will only result in more American lives lost.

I take great pride in my time in uniform, but every time the A-10 subject comes up I am deeply embarrassed by the Air Force and the actions of its leadership. I see media reports of Major General Post threatening charges of treason to anyone speaking positively about the A-10 to the media. I see articles like the one in USA Today where information about fratricide is leaked in order to cast a negative light on the A-10. I sincerely hope these things are not true… but knowing what I do about the system, it would not surprise me. If the measure of an officer is how the current Air Force leadership is behaving, then I’m happy I left. At least I can look myself in the mirror and know that I did not choose form over function - especially when lives were on the line. I’ve lost count of how many times the Air Force foolishly tried to divest itself of the A-10. Let’s do the right thing and choose performance over appearance. Keep the A-10 in the skies overhead.

Sincerely,
XXXX XXXXX


I can only imagine the warm and fuzzy feeling the A-10 must give to those on the ground it’s protecting when that big gun opens up. Dude at 1:40 with “Of fuc% ya” made me LOL.

//youtu.be/y-Ti7Jrh_JE

I’m going to make the author aware of this thread to see of he has time/interest in adding comments. You can also leave comments, which he does respond do, below his article on the site. I have known Scott for many moons and he’s a first rate individual.

Scrap that MOA between the AF and Army from way back when and give them to the Army. The AF has never wanted the CAS mission or the planes that go with it, so give it to the people that want to do CAS.

It’s sad how broken procurement is. I don’t doubt that the A10 is expensive to keep flying, but to shelve it with something that isn’t even operational yet is a bit stupid.

Something like a super tucano isn’t that cool, but it’s practical.

The targeting system on the f35 is amazing, but let’s be real, do you really want that thing flying under a few thousand feet? If they are citing costs, how the hell will flight time be cheaper on the f35? Just the fuel usage…

This thinking of the same plane being tip of the spear, bomb truck, superiority, and CAS machine is retarded.

Everyone prepares as we’re going to get in a peer to peer shooting war. Not going to happen. MAD, nuclear or not insures that not happening. We better have thousands of planes, ships and many more thousands of warriors to sacrifice.

So given that, I say yes. Investment in the future is smart. It’s what keeps us safe and prosperous. But, since the modern era doesn’t seem to really support a shooting war with a peer, let’s be realistic and buy/build a cheap CAS platform. One that doesn’t have to super cruise and could a good part of the day on a fuel load.

Let the Pentagon keep throwing money endless money at the JSF. Keep them happy. Go buy some A29’s, fly them cheap or licence and build then here. Just move the A10 pilots over… Win.

Sorry for my rant, I know a few guys over at hill field, (they do A10 and various other plane over haul) and some of the stories just blow my mind.

I can beer-belch like an A10, but that is as close as I get to familiarity, but it seems to me that since the 1950s we have been trying to use missiles to replace guns and it keeps coming back to bite us. I get the argument for drones for this mission. I get that pilotless drones are the next thing and we want to keep pilots safe. You want to talk about economics, a 30mm round on target has the be about the cheapest FU that you smack someone with. Can’t jam it, hack it and have fun carrying enough armor to stop it. Small diameter bombs vs. large caliber bullet?

Unfortunately, it seems that there is a lot of killing that is going to be done in the ME

Kudos to the AF officer - the Army thanks you…

The F-35 made it obsolete. So we dont need them anymore.

rolleyes

Low speed, that b!tch can HOVER!!!

Although not mentioned here or in the article, but I had thought a major reason for wanting to scrap the A-10 was the Apache and it’s various iterations was supposed to be the primary CAS, tank killer, etc. Was it not the Apache that was supposed to take over A-10s primary role as low and slow with plenty of death dealing?

i thought they essentially shut down Apache development programs and cut future offensive helicopter designs completely back in the early 2000’s ?

The author sounds like he’s writing out of the side of his mouth so that he can score points with the right people on an already made decision. Will the A-10’s replacement also be able to perform stable slow speed maneuvers?

I don’t know, but if so, why? I had thought attack helos were the new tanks of the battlefield. No drone can replace the many roles of an Apache, at least not yet. Anyone have an answer to that one?

We had a lot of A10 support during the invasion of Iraq. Nothing comes close to what that thing does. Whenever they were around we all felt much safer out in injun territory.