Tango01 | 17 Sep 2014 9:30 p.m. PST |
"The Air Force does not have a suitable replacement for the planned divestiture of the A-10 Warthog aircraft and U-2 spy plane, senior service leaders said Sept. 16 at the Air Force Association Air and Space Conference, National Harbor, Md. "I don't want to cut the A-10 and the U-2 – we don't have a replacement," said Gen. Michael Hostage III, Commander, Air Force Air Combat Command. As part of its budget request for the fiscal year beginning Oct. 1, the service proposed retiring its entire fleets of A-10 attack planes and U-2 spy planes, and partial inventories of other aircraft. The proposed budget cuts to the A-10 and U-2 fleets are described by service officials as budget-driven necessities given current fiscal pressures…" Full article here link Amicalement Armand |
Chuckaroobob | 18 Sep 2014 5:55 a.m. PST |
Did the Navy ever replace the E-6? Sometimes I think no one wants a plane without a pointy nose. |
John the OFM | 18 Sep 2014 9:22 a.m. PST |
They are not sexy fighter jock planes. Away with them! |
Mardaddy | 18 Sep 2014 9:46 a.m. PST |
Yes, let's get rid of the most proven airborne APC & tank-destroying platform just before another desert threat requires (or could be helped by) their employment… |
Jemima Fawr | 18 Sep 2014 10:17 a.m. PST |
"They are not sexy fighter jock planes. Away with them!" Yes, a catchy little throwaway one-liner, often repeated here on TMP, but when have you EVER heard an Air Force officer espouse that view? Nobody is ever able to give me one example when I ask. I've never met a single USAF pilot (and I've met a few) who doesn't love the A10. And Mardaddy, ok, what will you get rid of to keep them in service? |
Durrati | 18 Sep 2014 10:23 a.m. PST |
NEWS FLASH NEWS FLASH NEWS FLASH Air force general argues against cutting funding and equipment for the air force. Next up, a hard hitting expose on the toiletry habits of bears followed by a shock report on which christian sect the Pope is a member off…….. |
Lion in the Stars | 18 Sep 2014 1:41 p.m. PST |
Did the Navy ever replace the E-6? You mean the EA-6B Prowler? Yeah, that's getting replaced with the EA-18G Growler. If you mean the E-6 Mercury, no. Those are still flying, no announced retirement plans. |
Mardaddy | 18 Sep 2014 1:49 p.m. PST |
Well, I don't really see a compelling interest in even looking at what could be cut. Besides it not mattering because I am not part of the budget authority or process, to make a logical, thorough evaluation and recommendation would require devoting dozens of hours scouring through all their budgetary accounting and justifications and potential fallout if, "not funded," to locate spare tens of millions when I would be ignored by the powers that be anyways. So, no thanks, just stating what should be an obvious thing. |
Raynman | 18 Sep 2014 4:07 p.m. PST |
The Army likes the A-10 too. Long hover times and they hit their targets spot on. Very scary to watch in action. |
Mako11 | 18 Sep 2014 4:13 p.m. PST |
Hmmm, with the new strategy to engage radical islamists from the air only, seems like time for a procurement and funding strategy rethink. I suspect that won't happen until early 2017, though, especially since some are suggesting siphoning off military funds to pay for the Ebola campaign, where 6,000 boots will be on the ground, in country (at 2 boots per trooper). |
Deadone | 18 Sep 2014 4:28 p.m. PST |
A-10 – replaced by F-16 and F-15 – they've been doing CAS for decades now. There has never been a specific planned A-10 replacement – the replacement was always going to be a multirole jet i.e. F-35. U-2 – replaced by RQ-4 Global Hawk and various satelite systems as well as classified projects.
|
Lion in the Stars | 18 Sep 2014 7:55 p.m. PST |
The problem with the F15 or F16 (or F35) as an A10 replacement is that the fast-movers don't have good loiter time, and loiter time is important for CAS missions. I should probably mention that the A10 was the first USAF jet designed as a dedicated Close Air Support bird. Personally, I'm in favor of an A10 replacement, but said replacement needs to be designed for CAS first, other missions must take second fiddle to CAS. Less a true multirole bird than a light bomber that isn't a slouch in a dogfight. This will mean a subsonic aircraft, but if subsonic is good enough for the Long-range Strike Bomber, it should be good enough for the CAS bird. One of the really important things that a replacement (or an upgraded A10 for that matter) would need a lot more installed power. An A10 has 18,000lbs of thrust at full power with a max takeoff weight of 50,000lbs and an empty weight of 25,000lbs. No wonder A10 drivers say the beast is 'sluggish' in acceleration! Needs More Horsepower!!!! Using a pair of CF34-10E engines would give 36,000-40,000lbs thrust (on par with a Super Hornet or F35), which A10 drivers would LOVE to have when fully loaded. Problem is that those CF34-10s are 2000lbs heavier (each!) than the TF34s installed in the A10. With all the experience the US aviation industry has had with composite structures, I would expect that an A10 replacement could be made a bit lighter and stronger, even with an extra 4000lbs of engines. |
Deadone | 19 Sep 2014 12:06 a.m. PST |
Problem is lack of economies of scale which drive up production costs not just for A-10 replacement but also F-15/-16/-18 replacement (F-35)! And the F-35 buy has been reduced by Navy and if A-10s and additional F-15/-16s are retired without replacement, the USAF will reduce its buy even further (though it won't announce this). A number of partner countries have cut planned numbers too (Netherlands, Italy, Turkey, UK). |
Lion in the Stars | 19 Sep 2014 1:47 p.m. PST |
And yet we're building and buying drones in 36-bird lots… |