"Starving the A-10" Topic

…a new report reveals how hard the service has been working behind the scenes to starve the aircraft of replacement parts over the past 14 years.

Task & Purpose: link

This is typical behaviour when government wants to get rid of something….says a public servant whose seen it happen all too often.

They do it with health facilities and schools here in Australia – deliberately don't invest money in it until it's too dangerous then close it.

It gets glossed over with an upgrade to another facility to take over the slack or they build a new smaller facility to replace two larger ones and secretly let capabilities lapse.

Said here many times I worked on A-10s at RAf Bentwaters late 70s. Guess I'm getting old as well.

Even as a 80s UK civvie… if an A10 'popped up' over a hill… it was a GOOD Thing… maybe! lol.

Disgusting, but not surprising for the Air Force, which has REALLY hated the aircraft and mission from the beginning.

They NEED to transfer the A-10s to the Army, who will appreciate them, and help to complement their attack helos too.

The Air Force has been trying to get rid of the A10 since the beginning. They don't like an aircraft devoted to supporting the Army. All they want is fighters and bombers.

Congress needs to change the law that won't let the Army fly fixed wing armed aircraft. If the Air Force doesn't like the close air support mission, turn it over to the Army.

But the Air Force would fight that, too. Back when the Army developed the Mohawk recon aircraft, it was originally going to have .50 cals mounted on it, but the Air Force objected.

This is the major reason the Army puts so much emphasis on helicopters, so it can provide it's own close air support, but with limitations. If you're in the Army, you love the A10, if you're an Air Force pilot, you love fighters and bombers.

I was Air Force.

I would give my right nut to fly it.

One of my favorite planes, and we hear this "USAF hates the A-10" stuff constantly. Very discouraging. Play some games, any games, and try winning with and without the A-10. It's the most effective thing on the battlefield, and it's not expensive. Grow up, do your job. Nothing else carries as much ordnance or puts it as close to where you want it as the A-10. Yes, you need air superiority to use it, but that's doable, so do it. Sheesh.

Marines hate A-10s

This was one of the reason I despised the idea of an indipendent air force. In WWII italian navy was defenseless against allied attacks, because she, contrary to WWI, didn't had any air support, the same for Kriegsmarine, and we know how awful was early FAA situation,look how effective were IJN and US Navy, or how good attack aircraft had the USAAF(P47,A20 and so on).Sadly an indipendent air force will always try to acquire more power and money for her, at detriment of other armed forces. I remember reading about a querelle btw Goering and the navy about who had to man the AA guns in the ships, expecially their (hypothetical) aircraft carrier.

The A-10 is well liked by many in the Army. I've trained with them as an Air Ops Officer in the 101, '82-'83. We had a tactic back then called a JAAT – Joint Air Attack Tm. With AH-1s then AH-64s and A-10s working in concert.

The A-10 was designed to help stem the "Red Tide" when the USSR/WP crossed the IGB. You had to have a Tank Killer for all the armored waves that the USSR/WP would have if WWIII broke out.

The JAAT would be a good Tank Killer. The Army gunships would hover behind cover and concealment, e.g. trees, structures, ridges, etc. When the USSR/WP horde was crossing the plains on West Germany. The Gunships would pop-up, fire their TOWs, etc., then go back under cover moving to an alternate position, etc.

At that point the A-10s would sweep in and destroy many of the USSR/WP armor/forces. This tactic would repeat until basically the US aircraft would run out of ammo, fuel, etc. Or all the targets were destroyed, etc.

The JAAT would support the ground forces. US Army Infantry, Armor, etc., would engage the "Red Forces". With all their organic weapons systems supported by FA & mortar fires. With the Priority Targets being ADA/AAA and C3 … To give the air assets any easier time with no ADA/AAA having to deal with. And killing C3 is always a good idea.

Sounds like the exact plan the Canadian government uses to hamstring the Canadian forces.No spare parts,no new acquisitions…buying used foreign equiptment on the cheap.

Now may be doing someone a disservice… if so, apologies. But only 'trouble' with A10s was that with all that weaponry, pilots may have wanted 'to use it'.
Was it 1st Gulf when UK APC 'Blue on Blue' fatalities… thought that was an A10 but could be wrong.
There was footage of what might have been an A10 blowing S**t out of a Glass Windowed Multi Story… certainly 'could ' have been legitimate target.. but had the feeling that it was for Fun.
Hope I am in the wrong.
Still like the plane and some did a D**n Good job, so Thanks.

Was it 1st Gulf when UK APC 'Blue on Blue' fatalities… thought that was an A10 but could be wrong.

It was the second round in 2003:

link

Sometimes things just happen.
link
Sad for All.

Although looked several times since… cannot find the news footage of the Tower Block… it 'was' there on TV.

Blue & Blue, CD, etc., does happen no matter how much we try to avoid it. However, IIRC, new tech may limit Blue on Blue since 2003.

Sometimes things just happen.

My mistake, you were correct about it happening in 1991, I just remembered the more recent incident in 2003.

Always have been 'Blue on Blues' and always will. Good Guys with no luck.

Hm. On another Forum, I queried whether 'Ultra Modern' AFVs have some sort of IFF for GROUND combat?

Any sort of tech around now?

Friendly fire incidents have gone on from time a man had to reach the man in front to modern age. Sad but it will never go away.

AFVs have some sort of IFF for GROUND combat?

Any sort of tech around now?

As I said … However, IIRC, new tech may limit Blue on Blue since 2003.

E.g. Combat ID Panels link

VS-17 Panels – link

You saw these on some vehicles in Desert Storm. Affixed to the top of some AFVs etc. We had these when I was in the 101, '80-'83. IIRC they were first used in Vietnam(?). In the 101 we'd use them to mark LZs/PZs/DZs, etc., as well as for Vehicle ID for aircraft. We had them in Mech and Armor when I was with those type units, '84-'90. To ID AFVs, mark positions for aircraft, etc. However many times they were among the items our vehicles were "short".

In WWII you saw Germany would sometimes have the Nazi flag draped over the top/back deck of AFVs, etc. Even in WWII NA the Italians would paint large white discs on the top of turrets etc., at times for Aircraft ID.

I've spend a lot of time in the 101 as cargo in UH-1s, CH-47s, OH-58s and later UH-60s in the 101. In many cases at some altitudes vehicles in the open are hard to IFF.

IIRC I have heard they were working on some sort of electronic devices for ground vehicles ID with other ground units and aircraft as well. There as been aircraft electronic IFF for sometime.

Marines hate A-10s

The Marines also have their own organic close air support with armed fixed wing aircraft.

2021 and still Flags / Recognition panels / painted markings? 2003… yeah… all there was.
Given the tech for target aquisition / missile lock… there HAS to be some sort of 'bleeper' for 'some' situations?
Don't need details… just tell me something has changed since WW2!

Yes, I realise IFF will be 'hackable'… therefore not really reliable… plus a possible target, but… there has to be somthing to warn that laser has 'pinged' you?

Much is classified AFAIK … However Combat ID Panels are fairly new. And AFAIK are effective. Nothing like that in WWII, I assure you. Electronic IFF like in aircraft would be expected to be on AFVs, etc. However it comes down to $ as always …

Plus as always we have Restricted & Coordinated Fire Lines, etc., which are graphic lines on a map. But they are not always effective either.

Thanks for that Legion 4. Admit guilt in not using link you provided for the IR panels… have just googled to same wiki!
I was still thinking of the reflective cloth panels from WW2!
Apologies!

A-10s　kill Marines

Apologies!

No problem ! As I said, I have had some experience with VS-17s. Which are similar to the WWII version.

A-10s　kill Marines

Killed some Canadians too … sadly. Blue on Blue very sadly happens. And historically A-10s are not the only aircraft that Blue on Blue has occurred. And Aircraft are not the only weapons that cause Blue on Blue. As with CD … it is avoided at all costs. But …

Zoomie lobby is strong…perhaps re-create the US Army Air Force again and give it the role of CAS, and let the zoomies do their zoomie-bomber thang.

That ain't gonna happen anytime soon …