- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: USAF plans to retire more A-10 Warthogs; “crippling” close air support capabilities
Posted on 3/19/24 at 1:06 pm to tide06
Posted on 3/19/24 at 1:06 pm to tide06
quote:
My question is accepting that CAS is not possible until local ADS and airspace are controlled, why would you not want these available for use as soon as superiority is achieved?
Because if we keep paying for things that may be useful on say day 30 of a fight, we can't afford the things that get us to day 30. Same reason we are divesting B-1s, B-2s, F-16s, F-15Es, and older F-15Cs.
For those who want to complain about what this means for our own CAS capability, flip the argument. What would the Army say if the AF can't afford to buy the aircraft that allow us to gain air superiority so now our troops are having CAS done against them? A US ground troop hasn't been fired upon from the air since the Korean War. Pretty sure they would prefer to have the AF have the right capabilities to gain air superiority and then do CAS as effectively as possible with what got you to that point rather than have a great CAS capability that can never be brought to bear because we didn't gain air superiority and the enemy is now conducting CAS against us.
1
Posted on 3/19/24 at 1:11 pm to Boudreaux35
quote:
Why are we insisting on replacing these ultimate fighting machines with less reliable planes?
Because our current administration is doing all they can to weaken America.
Posted on 3/19/24 at 1:16 pm to HeadSlash
quote:
They could wipe out chinese human wave attacks
If they can get into range and survive, sure. The next war will not involve uncontested, universal American control of all battlefield airspace
The A-10 is a great platform and has given incredible service. But holding on it it as some CAS panacea in the 2020’s forward falls squarely in the “fighting yesterday’s war” category of military planning. The A-10 is slow, not maneuverable, and completely incapable of air to air combat against modern planes or air defense systems. I still think it can be an asset, but we should absolutely have moved on to developing a replacement by now.
This post was edited on 3/19/24 at 1:19 pm
Posted on 3/19/24 at 1:21 pm to FlyingTiger06
The F 35 program will cost us $1.6 trillion. This argument just doesn’t hold any water whatsoever.
That’s more than every country in the world combined spends annually.
That’s more than every country in the world combined spends annually.
Posted on 3/19/24 at 1:22 pm to kfaulk03
quote:
That’s more than every country in the world combined spends annually.
Only because we’ll never actually know what China spends on their development programs.
Posted on 3/19/24 at 1:27 pm to HenryParsons
Sad, no better friend to ground troops.
Posted on 3/19/24 at 1:28 pm to The Pirate King
quote:
I don't know if you've seen video of the Russia-Ukraine war, but they're trotting out Cold War-era equipment and in an all-out war both countries would send wave after wave of humanity to win a war of attrition.
Conversely, we've see what modern war can become. Why sink millions into a CAS airplane options when we can fly a few dozen small explosive drones in exactly where we need them? The principles of war stay the same, but the techniques can change.
Posted on 3/19/24 at 1:30 pm to HenryParsons
Their role is being replaced by drones.
Posted on 3/19/24 at 1:34 pm to HenryParsons
I think this is representative of our national shift away from ground conflicts as we become more militarily isolationist. The United States is, first and foremost, a maritime military power. We're a Navy that also has an Army, not the other way around. In fact, I could see the Army shrinking. Most of our future conflicts are going to be done with air and naval power with Marines being used in instances where boots are absolutely needed.
Posted on 3/19/24 at 1:35 pm to kfaulk03
quote:
This argument just doesn’t hold any water whatsoever.
Which argument? I don't know which comment I made you are referring to here.
quote:
That’s more than every country in the world combined spends annually.
OK...now normalize that against what it costs to make things in the US versus other countries; especially China. Their buying power is much, much greater than ours.
Posted on 3/19/24 at 4:54 pm to GeauxxxTigers23
We need a lower cost option for CAS in a smaller and cheaper platform than using an F35 which is not suited to the mission
Posted on 3/19/24 at 4:59 pm to SteveLSU35
quote:which is ironic since it's been involved in more friendly fire incidents than like any modern aircraft
Soldiers love the A-10 and the moral boost / effective way they roll in and dominate.
Posted on 3/19/24 at 5:04 pm to HenryParsons
As much as I love this platform, I really would hate to fly it given how effective portable SAM equipment is becoming.
Posted on 3/19/24 at 5:08 pm to jcaz
quote:
These airframes are old and the mission set is not needed as much since we are now transitioning back to Great Power Competition. In a modern conflict with China or Russia the A-10 would not have good survivability odds.
I don't trust the DoD to make such predictions. They made the opposite prediction and it led to the Littoral Combat Ships. Now they're adjusting back from that and they'll no doubt make fricked up decisions in the other direction. Congress needs to tell the War College / Lockheed-Martin weirdos to go off and polish their gold-plated slide rules and get back to basics.
Posted on 3/19/24 at 5:17 pm to MC5601
quote:
We need a lower cost option for CAS in a smaller and cheaper platform than using an F35 which is not suited to the mission
For low threat environments like Iraq and Afghanistan we should have a low cost option like the super tacano.
Posted on 3/19/24 at 5:24 pm to HenryParsons
The A-10 is being replaced by search teams and DNA testing.
Posted on 3/19/24 at 5:27 pm to HenryParsons
Give them ALL to Texas.
Posted on 3/19/24 at 5:29 pm to bountyhunter
Redeploy it to the US/Mexico border. After a couple of sorties you won’t even have to hit anyone. That Brrrtt sound will scare the shite out of anyone thinking of coming in
Posted on 3/19/24 at 5:39 pm to samson73103
quote:
Because our current administration is doing all they can to weaken America.
The top 5 Air Forces in the world are:
U.S. Air Force
U.S. Naval Aviation
Russia
U.S. Army Aviation
U.S. Marine Corps Aviation
I think we’ll be okay
Posted on 3/19/24 at 5:53 pm to Sasquatch Smash
quote:
Is this a direct shot at the F-35 or do they speak of other things? And I suppose “they” “have” to do this so they can buy more F-35s.
F22 has a 20mm Gatling gun system
F-35 has a 25mm Gatling gun system
A-10 is 30mm
LINK
This post was edited on 3/19/24 at 5:54 pm
Page 3 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News