It's Time For America To Give Its Allies The A-10 - Polidicks

[b]It's Time For America To Give Its Allies The A-10[/b] Source: [url=http://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/its-time-for-america-to-give-its-allies-the-a-10-1706083434]Foxtrot Alpha[/url] _______________ [quote][img]http://i.imgur.com/MJv77QY.jpg[/img] [url=http://www.janes.com/article/51570/boeing-touts-a-10s-for-international-customers-should-usaf-divest-fleet]Reports state[/url] that Boeing is looking at reselling refurbished and upgraded A-10s, many of which [url=http://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/the-usafs-rationale-for-retiring-the-a-10-warthog-is-bu-1562789528]may be idiotically orphaned by the USAF[/url], to foreign countries. Although it sounds intriguing, the idea to offload the A-10 to allies is really nothing new. I pitched it years ago. As the [url=http://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/at-what-point-does-the-usafs-war-against-the-a-10-becom-1685239179]A-10 remains mired in a fight to the death on Capitol Hill[/url], the re-winging effort for the older ‘thin wing’ A-10s has seen its 105th modification, with 68 more to go under the original contract. This will take the effort through 2017. There are options for another 69 Warthog installed wing-sets after that. [img]http://i.imgur.com/atpdwVM.jpg[/img] Today, there are about 300 A-10s in the USAF’s inventory, with a portion of this number already in reserve aircraft storage. This number is constantly under pressure via the USAF who continues to push for retiring the Warthog fleet as whole. Even if funding continues through the end of the decade for [url=http://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/this-video-will-leave-you-begging-the-usaf-to-keep-the-1703292861]300 active A-10s[/url], dozens of surplus airframes still exist. If the A-10 fleet were reduced or totally retired, throngs of fully upgraded jets with decades of life left on them would be sent to bake in the desert, or even worse, some of them may be destroyed. No other country operates the A-10, so even spare parts reclamation would be very limited for these retired airframes. As such, Boeing says they already have customers for surplus A-10s, with the plan being that the unloved (by USAF brass at least) ‘Hogs would get the upgrades they have always deserved. These include upgraded displays, even improved over the A-10C Precision Engagement Package upgrade that occurred in the mid 2000s, new targeting pods, defensive systems and, yes, new engines.[/quote] I'm ok with this. Letting it rot in an airplane boneyard would be a MASSIVE waste. Also... I still don't quite understand why the USAF wants to retire it so badly?!

Finally those old Warthogs getting the A10-tion they deserve. [sp] kill me [/sp]

The A-10 is already a pretty sick looking plane. It is pretty cool we are sharing it with our allies.

You're welcome. [QUOTE=Pretiacruento;47774975] Also... I still don't quite understand why the USAF wants to retire it so badly?![/QUOTE] Because many people at the DoD believe its cannon is too outdated to combat modern threats.

[QUOTE=LoganIsAwesome;47775000]You're welcome. Because many people at the DoD believe its cannon is too outdated to combat modern threats.[/QUOTE] Are you talking about that Tazmanian devil of a gun sticking out of the nose?

[QUOTE=LoganIsAwesome;47775000]You're welcome. Because many people at the DoD believe its cannon is too outdated to combat modern threats.[/QUOTE] That's fine and all but they shouldn't retire shit when we don't have a suitable replacement.

Thread music (?) [hd]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NvIJvPj_pjE[/hd] Gawddamn, I'd love to hear one of these in person. [B]BRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRT[/B] [editline]21st May 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=LoganIsAwesome;47775000]You're welcome. Because many people at the DoD believe its cannon is too outdated to combat modern threats.[/QUOTE] What do they mean by that?! I keep seeing A-10 videos blasting through *anything* in their path, it looks more than capable to me. Maybe they should work on a 2nd gen cannon -- a completely updated revision of the A-10? It's not like they don't have the money...

[QUOTE=Pretiacruento;47775036]Thread music (?) [hd]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NvIJvPj_pjE[/hd] Gawddamn, I'd love to hear one of these in person. [B]BRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRT[/B][/QUOTE] [T]http://new4.fjcdn.com/comments/Gt+brrrrrrrrt+_06f71ebbd2799302f42f16756b5fa930.jpg[/t]

canada A-10 get pls

[QUOTE=LoganIsAwesome;47775000]You're welcome. Because many people at the DoD believe its cannon is too outdated to combat modern threats.[/QUOTE] "Outdated" [video]https://youtu.be/eCnjWmtfvFo?t=1m4s[/video] Edit: Whoops someone already posted.

[QUOTE=Pretiacruento;47774975]Also... I still don't quite understand why the USAF wants to retire it so badly?![/QUOTE] They're mostly wanting to stop servicing them to make way for the F-35s, since they want to go with the idea of having 1 plane to fulfill all roles at once. It's a really stupid idea when we can still use the A-10s pretty well for CAS against insurgents without proper AA or planes of their own. Have a bunch of articles on this stuff, if you want them. [url]https://medium.com/war-is-boring/now-the-u-s-air-force-wants-you-to-believe-the-a-10-is-too-old-to-fight-87311b3bd95c[/url] [url]https://medium.com/war-is-boring/the-u-s-air-force-is-trying-to-trick-us-into-getting-rid-of-the-a-10-b32efd62f620[/url] [url]https://medium.com/war-is-boring/the-air-forces-smear-campaign-against-the-a-10-relies-on-flawed-data-243d4964aae1[/url]

[QUOTE=AtomicWaffle;47775059]canada A-10 get pls[/QUOTE] Given the tension in Ukraine and Crimea, I think they'd be right at home in their hands. How do you say "I'M A LEAD FARMER, MOTHERFUCKER!" in Ukrainian? :v:

[QUOTE=Pretiacruento;47774975]Also... I still don't quite understand why the USAF wants to retire it so badly?![/QUOTE] From what I've heard, the A-10 is the USAF's Rasputin. They've been trying to kill it for many years because they hate it, but everyone else loves it so they can't get rid of it. The A-10's very existence was an accident to begin with. It was something a contractor drafted up in a few days just to have an entry in the contract bids. It has a funny history and refuses to die.

If Canada doesnt buy a few Im going to be PISSED

[QUOTE=Pretiacruento;47775036] [hd]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NvIJvPj_pjE[/hd] [/QUOTE] it just sounds so happy.

[QUOTE=goon165;47775182]it just sounds so happy.[/QUOTE] It's... it's... it's a war poet!

[QUOTE=Pretiacruento;47774975]Also... I still don't quite understand why the USAF wants to retire it so badly?![/QUOTE] It's a flying logistics problem that cannot perform the role it was originally designed for (killing tanks with its Big Gun) and has been shoehorned into other roles increasingly taken over by drones and multipurpose aircraft, in a military culture where multipurpose is the primary design ethos and specialized single-mission designs are being phased out wherever possible, and has only survived as long as it has because it hasn't gone up against anyone with a credible MANPADS threat. Army guys who see it chew up bunkers full of insurgents love it. Logistics officers who sign the maintenance orders on decades-old airframes and strategists sweating bullets at the idea of going up against modern Russian or Chinese SAM systems hate it.

A gun run from an A-10 is more expensive than a bombing run, and its cannon cannot damage any tank made after the 60s. It's kind of an obtuse aircraft.

[QUOTE=Ceil;47775062]"Outdated" [video]https://youtu.be/eCnjWmtfvFo?t=1m4s[/video] Edit: Whoops someone already posted.[/QUOTE] It's outdated though, the a-10 was made to counter pact tanks such as t-55's, t-62's, t-64's and t-72's as they came in the 70's. All these tanks have been upgraded time and time again since and that gun the plane is made around was not very effective against them then and it's mostly useless now sans soft targets such as the unarmored spg's in the video. However missiles that can be fired from a safe distance away can be wielded by many much better platforms that are not at such high risk from anti-air fire. Sure the a-10 can carry decent missile/bomb load out too but then what's the point of the a-10, many other planes that are not hampered in mobility by that massive GAU-8 can do that job just as well or downright better. edit: damn you catbarf

India will be all over this.

It doesn't take even a pacifistic amish man to admire that the A-10 is a damn fine piece of equipment.

Too bad they aren't going with the drone A10 program, an armored UCAV with two jet engines and an actual gun for once would be better than just hellfires.

[QUOTE=LoganIsAwesome;47775000]You're welcome. Because many people at the DoD believe its cannon is too outdated to combat modern threats.[/QUOTE] True, and until America and Russia finally go to war, Terrorists don't have Tank Divisions :v:

[QUOTE=LoganIsAwesome;47775000]You're welcome. Because many people at the DoD believe its cannon is too outdated to combat modern threats.[/QUOTE] Even though the f-16 and the pretentious f-35 can't mimic its amazing close air support capabilities

[QUOTE=catbarf;47775357]It's a flying logistics problem that cannot perform the role it was originally designed for (killing tanks with its Big Gun) and has been shoehorned into other roles increasingly taken over by drones and multipurpose aircraft, in a military culture where multipurpose is the primary design ethos and specialized single-mission designs are being phased out wherever possible, and has only survived as long as it has because it hasn't gone up against anyone with a credible MANPADS threat. Army guys who see it chew up bunkers full of insurgents love it. Logistics officers who sign the maintenance orders on decades-old airframes and strategists sweating bullets at the idea of going up against modern Russian or Chinese SAM systems hate it.[/QUOTE] Yeah, this is actually a point of interest to me - morbid curiosity you could call it. We have reached a point where generations of military hardware have either barely or not at all seen use in a real theater of war. These localized conflicts and civil wars and insurgencies are not really the same, though I guess you could argue the nature of war has thusly adapted to the nature of the world itself - highly decentralized. What really piques my interest is how would any sufficiently armed sovereign nation fare against another equally equipped one. For reference, coalition troops have been gunning for glory in the Middle East for decades now, but at the end of the day, the odds are ALWAYS massively stacked against the insurgents. No US soldier of this day and age has had to fear anything equivalent of a Hellfire strike or a Su-25 Frogfoot gunrun for example, or the force projection of an opposing mechanized platoon with [I]equally advanced technology, capabilities, logistical/tactical support and the strategical oversight of the attached officers[/I].

[QUOTE=KillerJaguar;47775115]From what I've heard, the A-10 is the USAF's Rasputin. They've been trying to kill it for many years because they hate it, but everyone else loves it so they can't get rid of it. The A-10's very existence was an accident to begin with. It was something a contractor drafted up in a few days just to have an entry in the contract bids. It has a funny history and refuses to die.[/QUOTE] Indeed. One of the main reasons the craft was created IIRC was that the USAF wanted something cheap that they could use for close air support, mainly because they didn't want the army to usurp a role that had generally belonged to the air force. I recommended anyone interested read "The Pentagon Wars" by James Burton. He gives a good look into air force requisitions from Vietnam onwards.

[QUOTE=Sableye;47775711]Even though the f-16 and the pretentious f-35 can't mimic its amazing close air support capabilities[/QUOTE] The AH-64 carries most of the same weapon systems as the A-10, and can keep them trained on the target area for far longer.

[QUOTE=ultra_bright;47775122]If Canada doesnt buy a few Im going to be PISSED[/QUOTE] Yeah, but knowing our government they'd mismanage everything and bungle the whole thing up. Our government's track record of buying other peoples old used hardware is not good, and you need look no further than the 4 Submarines we bought from Britain. Heck our government can't even get buying brand new hardware right. The F-35 project was a total fucking disaster.

[QUOTE=Angua;47775452]It's outdated though, the a-10 was made to counter pact tanks such as t-55's, t-62's, t-64's and t-72's as they came in the 70's. All these tanks have been upgraded time and time again since and that gun the plane is made around was not very effective against them then and it's mostly useless now sans soft targets such as the unarmored spg's in the video. However missiles that can be fired from a safe distance away can be wielded by many much better platforms that are not at such high risk from anti-air fire. Sure the a-10 can carry decent missile/bomb load out too but then what's the point of the a-10, many other planes that are not hampered in mobility by that massive GAU-8 can do that job just as well or downright better.[/QUOTE] Hmm, true. Now that I think of it, it's mostly used for close air support, gunning down lots of insurgents... no tanks or anything heavily armored. I see what they mean, but man... such a damn fine machine shouldn't go to waste like that.

[QUOTE=Sableye;47775711]Even though the f-16 and the pretentious f-35 can't mimic its amazing close air support capabilities[/QUOTE] both the f-16 and f-35 have higher carrying capacities than the a-10 not that it matters because your selective reading skills are incredible anyway COIN will probably be taken over by planes like the AT-6 and the Textron Scorpion where we don't have to spend $17k per flight hour to kill some dudes with AKs [editline]21st May 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=Pretiacruento;47775922]Hmm, true. Now that I think of it, it's mostly used for close air support, gunning down lots of insurgents... no tanks or anything heavily armored. I see what they mean, but man... such a damn fine machine shouldn't go to waste like that.[/QUOTE] the gau-8 can't pen 50mm RHA at 1000m, and modern tanks have about 600+mm effective RHA equivalent composite armor API rounds spit out fire when hitting steel but that doesn't mean it actually damages anything inside, like in the above testing vid