A-10 Warthog to be retired by USAF (maybe)

[tomahawk6]

The USAF has decided to try out the A-10 in a maritime role.I dont know how this would work in a SAM environment.Basing electronic warfare aircraft at Clark might also be a good idea.

http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2016/05/01/a-new-maritime-mission-for-old-a-10-warthogs.aspx

So, in an effort to allay these countries' concerns, and push back against Chinese military expansion, the U.S. has dispatched the A-10 Warthogs to Clark Air Base in the Philippines. There, says the Air Force, the A-10s will operate in "international airspace in the vicinity of Scarborough Shoal west of the Philippines providing air and maritime situational awareness."

Their mission: to "promote transparency and safety of movement in international waters and airspace."

U.S. Pacific Command (PACOM) notes that the A-10s are just the "first iteration of the air contingent mission" that has been ongoing since the aircraft carrier USS John C. Stennis (CVN 74) began cruising the South China Sea a few weeks ago. In cooperation with the Filipino military, Stennis has entered the area to conduct "freedom of navigation" patrols -- exercising its right to peacefully sail through international waters in demonstration that the U.S. really does believe the waters are international.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

I like the A10, but since most Chinese warships will have some sort of AD, not my first choice. Now dealing with pirates is a way different matter.

 

[Journeyman]

The USAF has decided to try out the A-10 in a maritime role.

  Perhaps a limited role.  :nod:

 

[Fishbone Jones]

But where else are you going to find an aircraft that can have the literal crap blown out of it and still make it back to fly another day?

Exactly. Nothing, in that lineup of replacements, has the protective capabilities of the flying bathtub.

 

[CougarKing]

More new talk, but no new funding:

Defense News

USAF Has Big Plans, But Little Money, For 'Warthog' Replacement
Valerie Insinna, Defense News 7:20 p.m. EDT June 15, 2016


WASHINGTON  — The US Air Force is still pondering if and when it can replace the A-10 Warthog, but outgoing Chief of Staff Gen. Mark Welsh has his own vision for the next close-air-support platform, which he wants to dispense different kinds of munitions as easily as a soda machine dispenses beverage cans.

Welsh, who is retiring in July, has admitted that the service currently lacks the funding necessary to buy a new close-air support (CAS) plane before the A-10 Warthog retires as early as 2022. Such a program would require more money than is currently expected over the next five years. However, the Air Force remains interested in a new aircraft, and officials are building a draft requirements document that could serve as a starting point for an A-10 replacement.

(...SNIPPED)

 

[cupper]

When asked about what improvements he’d like to see in a next-generation CAS plane, Welsh described a “flying Coke machine” that could distribute “firepower on demand.” "You have a Coke machine overhead, you put in a quarter, and you get whatever kind of firepower you want when you want it. In a perfect world that's close-air support of the future,” he told reporters during a June 15 breakfast meeting.

I can see that there will be some inherent problems with this concept. What do you do if you only have bills, no change? Suppose you need a Maverick, but no one's been around to restock it, and all that's left are Sidewinders? Or you plug the machine with quarters but nothing comes out. Who to you complain to?

[

 

[MarkOttawa]

Conclusion of a closely-argued piece by a USAF SME that argues the mission just can't really be done:

The Myth of High-Threat Close Air Support
...
Accepting that some missions are effectively impossible is an acceptable outcome, because the conditions under which high-threat CAS might be required are unlikely.  This is one of those cases where even an unabashed airpower advocate like myself may have to admit that there are cases where airpower is not only not the best option, but may not be a practical option at all.  The high-threat environment may, in fact, be the best argument for land or sea-based precision artillery, which flies faster, can be massed more effectively, is less subject to intercept, and is substantially cheaper than any conventional, air-delivered option.  It is absolutely unnecessary for the Air Force to pursue an expensive, technologically challenging, tactically unexecutable, and strategically infeasible capability that unnecessarily duplicates artillery capabilities resident in the other services.  If the Army or Marine Corps believe that they need fire support in an environment where even air-launched weapons are likely to be intercepted, then they should be encouraged to invest in their artillery capabilities.  For the Air Force, making an argument that airpower can be effective in performing high threat CAS is not a credible story and could drive an unnecessary and unproductive diversion of scarce resources.  There are other problems to solve with airpower.

Col. Mike “Starbaby” Pietrucha was an instructor electronic warfare officer in the F-4G Wild Weasel and the F-15E Strike Eagle, amassing 156 combat missions and taking part in 2.5 SAM kills over 10 combat deployments. As an irregular warfare operations officer, Colonel Pietrucha has two additional combat deployments in the company of US Army infantry, combat engineer, and military police units in Iraq and Afghanistan. The views expressed are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the Department of the Air Force or the U.S. government.
http://warontherocks.com/2016/06/the-myth-of-high-threat-close-air-support/

Mark
Ottawa

 

[Kirkhill]

The A-10 replacement?

The MRLS-Small Diameter Bomb Combination

Not so great on strafing runs but pretty fair on availability, reaction time, lethality and cost (at least in comparison to maintaining a combat air patrol).

Back to discussions on other threads about melding GBAD - LRPRS - Naval Air Defence - Naval Fire Support - CSC - RCA - RCN capabilities.

 

[CougarKing]

2 aircraft to plug the gap that will be left by the A-10?

Defense News

Air Force Boss Wary of Proposal for New Close-Air Support Jets
Valerie Insinna, Defense News 4:36 p.m. EDT July 26, 2016
A-10s enter Estonia in support of OAR

WASHINGTON — While some Air Force officials have begun thinking about replacing the A-10 Warthog, including a new proposal that would involve buying two aircraft types, the service's top civilian leader on Tuesday questioned the affordability of such an endeavor.

During a Defense One event Tuesday morning, Air Force Secretary Deborah Lee James said she had not been briefed on any potential options or an acquisition strategy related to a new close air support (CAS) aircraft, dubbed A-X. One of the options the service is perusing is the purchase of two CAS aircraft meant to augment and eventually replace the A-10.

"So far I have read about this in the news. I have not actually seen a proposal on any of this that has come forward to me. So it sure is pre-decisional. It hasn't been decided on,” she said. “Where would we get the money? Not at all clear to me.”

(...SNIPPED)

 

[CougarKing]

I wonder Trump's position on this aircraft would be:

Defense News

Air Force To Make A-10 Replacement Recommendations as Early As Fal
Valerie Insinna, Defense News 8:11 p.m. EDT August 4, 2016

WASHINGTON — The US Air Force is deliberating if and how to replace its close-air support workhorse, the A-10, and may have a better picture of their path forward later this year, the service’s top civilian said Wednesday.

During an interview with Defense News, Air Force Secretary Deborah Lee James said she and other top service leaders — such as Chief of Staff Gen. David Goldfein — will be briefed on various options for replacing or augmenting the A-10 Warthog this fall, as the service begins to build its next five-year budget plan.

“Any of these types of possibilities would likely come up in the fall to me and the chief during this planning choices forum. And that's when we would discuss and we could make some recommendations,” which could then flow into the budget cycle, she said.

(...SNIPPED)

 

[CBH99]

Isn't it a lot more expensive to buy new aircraft to replace the A-10, when the A-10 is already in service and paid off?  And recently upgraded with thousands of hours left on the airframes?

I feel like the USAF is deliberately trying to create a headache for themselves here....or am I missing something?  (They want to retire the A-10 because the F-35 can do everything under the sun, yet they are still pursuing a replacement for it outside of the F-35...??)

They have also argued that retiring the A-10 would free up funds for the F-35 - which, after multiple investigations - found that the amount of money saved wasn't all that significant. 

Wouldn't buying new aircraft to replace the A-10 be a lot more expensive than just keeping the A-10 in service, therefore limiting their F-35 funds even more?

 

[Colin Parkinson]

The A10's just got new wings a few years ago, is there any other structural issues limiting them for now?

 

[CougarKing]

What's this? A US govt. agency normally notorious for wanting to cut programs is now worrying about what capabilities could be lost if the A10 is cut? Say it ain't so!  ;D

GAO warns of capability gaps after USAF A-10 retirement

IHS Jane's 360 -

26 August 2016

Congressional auditors have raised concerns about potential for lost mission capability in a 24 August report about the US Air Force's (USAF's) plan to retire the Fairchild-Republic A-10 Thunderbolt II close-air support (CAS) aircraft.

The USAF "has not established clear requirements for the missions the A-10 performs and, in the absence of these requirements, has not fully identified the capacity or capability gaps that could result from the A-10 divestment," the US Government Accountability Office (GAO) said. "Without a clear understanding of the capability or capacity gaps and risks that could result from A-10 divestment, it is also unclear how effective or necessary the air force's and the department's mitigation strategies will be."

 

[jollyjacktar]

The "Machete" concept being floated as a possible replacement aircraft for the A-10.  Full story and photos at story link below.

The 'Machete' that could replace the A-10 Warthog: Radical lightweight metal foam attack plane with a PROPELLER
Machete is a concept for a new light-weight attack plane for the US Air Force
Designed with a metal foam instead of the traditional armor
Will be single engine, single seat planes and offered in 2 variants 
Other models for air-to-air combat and advanced training could also be released


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-4229178/Meet-plane-replace-10-Warthog.html#ixzz4Yo7Jqlzl
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

 

[tomahawk6]

If you want an A-10 build an upgraded aircraft or buy the Frogfoot from the Russians.

 

[cupper]

The "Machete" concept being floated as a possible replacement aircraft for the A-10.  Full story and photos at story link below.

But one of the reasons the Warthog was a success because of duplicate systems that allowed it to continue flying when one was taken out.

And the titanium bathtub allowed it to take a major pounding as well.