US A-10 official issues warning over US Air Force’s ‘devastated’ Warthog fleet - Hollow Force 2: Electric Boogaloo

https://news.yahoo.com/10-official-issues-warning-over-182439650.html

A-10 official issues warning over US Air Force’s ‘devastated’ Warthog fleet​

WASHINGTON — A U.S. Air Force official managing the A-10 Thunderbolt aircraft says the service is “hollowing” its Warthog fleet by starving it of resources amid a push to retire the aging attack plane — but still continuing to heavily fly it.

In a March 31 briefing, Pamela Lee, the A-10 systems manager at Hill Air Force Base in Utah, said the Air Force has “resourced the A-10 to divest yet flew it like an enduring fleet, rapidly accelerating [the] decline toward today’s hollowing fleet.”

The watchdog group Project on Government Oversight posted the slides Tuesday. The Air Force confirmed the slides are authentic, but said they were prepared for internal discussion and that Lee declined to comment.

The A-10, designed during the Cold War to be a tank-killing aircraft, was flown heavily in the Middle East and Afghanistan over the last 20 years to provide close-air support. But the Air Force has long warned the A-10 would not survive a high-end fight in contested airspace and has since 2015 repeatedly attempted to retire the fleet, either in full or in part, to free up funding.

“The A-10 is a great platform for a [permissive] environment,” Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. CQ Brown told the House Armed Services Committee in a Wednesday hearing. “I don’t see very many [permissive] environments that we’re going to roll into in the future.”

Although Congress rejected all the service’s efforts, Lee said the Air Force’s decisions have “devastated” the fleet and left it “dealing with perpetual challenges.”

The “A-10 lives in the shadow of [fiscal 2015] divestiture decisions,” Lee said in the briefing’s summary.

Lee’s briefing slides said the service deferred the A-10′s “hogback” fuselage structural repair work from 2013 to 2019, which she said left 120 jets at risk of being grounded. The number of A-10s heading to depots for major maintenance was also cut by more than half, she added.

Lee said the A-10′s aging engine nacelles are quickly becoming a significant problem, representing a bigger threat to the aircraft’s readiness than its wings.

And she said the A-10′s re-winging efforts are falling short, with new wings purchased for only 173 of the service’s 281 Warthogs. Lee said this means 145 A-10s wouldn’t be able to fly a six-month deployment.

According to the slides, the Air Force has until the second quarter of FY23 to buy more wings before it risks a “stalled recovery.” Fixing the wing, depot issue and other shortcomings would take at least a decade, she said.

If Congress doesn’t grant the service’s request to start retiring the A-10, Lee said, it will have to quickly act to mitigate the worst of the problems that have come from these decisions.

In the committee hearing, Brown said the service plans to buy replacement wing kits for about 218 A-10s. The service called for retiring 21 A-10s as part of its FY23 budget request, leaving the service with 260 Warthogs; Brown said those will not be re-winged.

Rep. Lisa McClain, R-Mich., expressed confusion about the Air Force’s apparent intention to not buy enough wing kits for all remaining A-10s and asked if only 218 planes needed new wings.

“Depends on how many A-10s we keep,” Brown said. “What we don’t want to do is buy more wing kits than we’re going to need if we’re going to start retiring A-10s.”

Air Force Secretary Frank Kendall added that even if those remaining 42 A-10s wouldn’t get replacement wings, they would still be able to fly.

Kendall also said the Air Force, if free to do so, would retire the A-10 fleet by the end of the next five-year plan.
____
From the people who brought you classic hits such as: "Let's ship all our Stingers to Ukraine Without Having Replacements", comes "Let's run our CAS aircraft out of spare parts."

 

[Cpl. Long Dong Silver]

Others have already said it multiple times, but I'll also echo "Give the CAS job and A10s or OV10s (upgraded) or SUper Trucanos (upgraded) to the Army and let the USAF be high-speed mach only faggots". Only having go fast planes sure worked out great for them in Vietnam with the century series.

 

[BelUwUga]

That is at once orky and the perfect getaway craft for a supervillain.

I'm not sure what orky means. If you're looking for a getaway I would recommend against the beeg gun. That's more suited for gun runs on ground targets. Instead I woould put a smaller minigun with more ammo on something like a Flexarm:

The aiming flexibility will more than make up for the smaller size when it comes to air-to-air engagement. You could even put linacs on the arms to control it electronically.

 

[Cpl. Long Dong Silver]

I'm not sure what orky means. If you're looking for a getaway I would recommend against the beeg gun. That's more suited for gun runs on ground targets. Instead I woould put a smaller minigun with more ammo on something like a Flexarm:
Ver archivo adjunto 3229616
The aiming flexibility will more than make up for the smaller size when it comes to air-to-air engagement. You could even put linacs on the arms to control it electronically.

Orky is a 40k reference. Orks don't really have "technology" they just have "belief" in more gun = mo better. So just through sheer belief they have working machines that are just ramshackle retarded weapons of war but they work. So the idea of just strapping the A10 gu onto a Chinook would be "orky".

 

[BONE_Buddy]

Excuse the quality, this was hastily made:
Ver archivo adjunto 3229578
Slightly downward angle and centered within the cargo bay. When firing the helicopter goes faster/ascends, almost always something possible in-flight, or you're more concerned with not crashing than shooting anyway. I'm not saying it's as simple as carting the fucker aboard and strapping it down, but these are modifications that are very possible.

I am fully willing to be wrong on this issue, but as far as I am aware, the Army has not been able to solve the Bucking Bronco problem. The Auto-cannon mounting, even in that configuration is not capable of being and maintaining accuracy.

I heard discussion of skipping mounting an auto-cannon and moving to a full blown 155mm Howitzer with Excalibur munitions. But talk about a rough ride.

_
either way, as other have said, the compound helicopters look promising. Let's hope the by now expected procurement shenanigans don't ruin them.

 

[BelUwUga]

Orky is a 40k reference. Orks don't really have "technology" they just have "belief" in more gun = mo better. So just through sheer belief they have working machines that are just ramshackle retarded weapons of war but they work. So the idea of just strapping the A10 gu onto a Chinook would be "orky".

I see, I did not know 40K had Orks. BTW can you help a literal newbie with where to start to know the lore? Also, if you think that's some Bubba kind of stuff you should have seen v1 of the CAS helicopter plan:

 

[Male Idiot]

I see, I did not know 40K had Orks. BTW can you help a literal newbie with where to start to know the lore? Also, if you think that's some Bubba kind of stuff you should have seen v1 of the CAS helicopter plan:
Ver archivo adjunto 3229657

Definately orky. Orks are tarded but effective. Mounting a giant cannon at any angle plus shredder blades is their thing.

That said, an artillery piece would loose whatever it gains on ammo by being a rough and thus innaccurate ride. So an anti tank missile already does what it does.

That said, the Imperium has many fighters with this loadout of many guns and reliable hulls.

Space wolf series is old but good.

 

[LurkNoMore]

I keep hearing about how the A-10's gun can't kill modern tanks. Which begs the question, can modern missiles kill tanks? From what I've seen, they tend to wreck the vehicle more then kill it.

The concept of CAS aircraft seems outdated. Modern loitering drone-bombs make more sense and would give the army better control over their needs. A chinook fitted as a mother ship popping out loiter drones would function similar to a anti-submarine warfare helicopter and its torpedoes. Or perhaps have it mounted on a ground vehicle.

I think drones are really gonna change the nature of warfare. Namely in anti-aircraft role. Why waste time shooting a missile up in the sky when you can shoot a drone that carries its own missiles to shoot down a plane for you.

 

[1Tonka_Truck]

or fucking Chinooks would startle the fuck out of us, flying on the deck directly over our position, with no warning.... I still have PTSD from that shit.

Nice to know I'm not the only one that has had "where the fuck did that big bitch come from" moments. And that's just from farming around an Army base.

I want to see an Osprey with a 30mm chin gun and this M134 ball turret. It'd be like a baby spooky that can hover.

 

[mr.moon1488]

Alright KF, redpill me. Is the A-10 a glorious, unparalleled ground support aircraft that's absolutely critical for combined arms? Or is it a flying, easily rekt shitheap that has no place in modern combat paradigms?

Because I have literally never heard anything in between.

It was a great plane for many many years, but it's getting old and needs to be replaced. That said, it needs to be replaced with something that can fully take over its role. Meaning not by some bullshit "It'S MuLtIrOlE" massively overpriced fighter that doesn't actually have any real CAS capabilities outside of using ordinance which requires the C in CAS to be put in quotation marks the size of Texas.

I like the sentiment but I think I have a better idea that's already a once-proven showstopper when it comes to CAS.
Ver archivo adjunto 3229539
Now the AC-130 is a fine gunship. That said things like needing that pylon turn and being unable to hover cause some problems. We want the A-10s gun. Helicopters are already something the Army has been given ground on. Hmm...
Ver archivo adjunto 3229529Ver archivo adjunto 3229531
It fits with room to spare.

AC-130 is in the same boat for me as the A-10. Needs to be replaced, but by something with the exact same design intention.

 

[East_Clintwood]

BTW can you help a literal newbie with where to start to know the lore?

Horus heresy books (especially the early ones), Space Marine Battles series as well. if you just wanna get a read on some of the basic lore to learn who the races and shit are I recommend either the Lexicanum wiki, or the 1d4chan one if you likea more humours take.

Which begs the question, can modern missiles kill tanks? From what I've seen, they tend to wreck the vehicle more then kill it.

Mission kill is still a kill, esecpially when the opponent doesn't have the capability to recover and repair the vehicle. That being said missiles, and incresingly smart bombs can absolutely still wreck tanks. Look at the havoc the TB2s have caused in both Ukraine, and the Azerbaijin-Armenia scuffle.

On topic I'm kinda conflicted. On the one hand with the increasing irrelevance of the gun, and the increasing prevalance of smaller and more capable PGMs, a proper airframe that isn't wasting space and weight on the gun, and armour it no longer really needs makes perfect sense. On the other hand I absolutely don't trust the chair force faggots to actually design one.

 

[Jet Fuel Johnny]

APDSDU 30mm rounds are something the Air Force ALWAYS fucking ignores when they're talking about the A-10 gun.

You know, the round that fucking shreds shit.

Eh, nothing is worse than the fucking pilots though. Holy shit, unless there's a teenager to fingerbang around, they aren't interested in actually doing their jobs.

 

[RodgerDodger]

It was a great plane for many many years, but it's getting old and needs to be replaced. That said, it needs to be replaced with something that can fully take over its role. Meaning not by some bullshit "It'S MuLtIrOlE" massively overpriced fighter that doesn't actually have any real CAS capabilities outside of using ordinance which requires the C in CAS to be put in quotation marks the size of Texas.

AC-130 is in the same boat for me as the A-10. Needs to be replaced, but by something with the exact same design intention.

They just built a new state of the art AC-130 gunship variant.

 

[LOWERCASE LETTERS]

I keep hearing about how the A-10's gun can't kill modern tanks. Which begs the question, can modern missiles kill tanks? From what I've seen, they tend to wreck the vehicle more then kill it.

The concept of CAS aircraft seems outdated. Modern loitering drone-bombs make more sense and would give the army better control over their needs. A chinook fitted as a mother ship popping out loiter drones would function similar to a anti-submarine warfare helicopter and its torpedoes. Or perhaps have it mounted on a ground vehicle.

I think drones are really gonna change the nature of warfare. Namely in anti-aircraft role. Why waste time shooting a missile up in the sky when you can shoot a drone that carries its own missiles to shoot down a plane for you.

Not anytime soon, they aren't. There are serious issues with latency when you're controlling a drone from halfway across the world, which doesn't matter so much when you are doing recon or firing a Hellfire at a stationary target, but matters quite a bit when it comes to air combat.

Also, if you want a drone that's capable of winning an air to air fight, even aside from the latency issues, you're gonna need a drone that is at least as capable of what it's fighting... which won't be cheap, and definitely won't fit in a helicopter.

 

[Snekposter]

I see, I did not know 40K had Orks. BTW can you help a literal newbie with where to start to know the lore? Also, if you think that's some Bubba kind of stuff you should have seen v1 of the CAS helicopter plan:
Ver archivo adjunto 3229657

The Gaunt's Ghosts novels are a good place to start, too. A bunch of woad-tatted Scots-Welsh ninja commandoes fighting WW2 in space would make William Wallace proud. And there's always Ciaphas Cain, HERO OF THE IMPERIUM! for something a bit more lighthearted.

F-111 is a strike bomber and never was a CAS aircraft as it was too fast to do much other than dropped bombs and fuck off.

F-111s and especially the EF-111s were still viable in their role as strike bombers and ECM while the B-1s were heavy bombers.

I don't know where to begin with this nonsense. First, the USA has always considered strike bombers to be acceptable CAS planes due to the fact they can drop a crapton of munitions on target. There's a reason the A-20 Havoc and A-26 Invader in WW2 had attacker designations instead of bomber ones. Second, the B-1 was explicitly designed to be able to serve in the strike bomber role if necessary. A great many US strike bombers in the 1950's and early 1960's were supersonic strategic bombers that had outlived their utility in that role and were converted to low-level, high speed conventional bombing as a result, and the B-1B was a continuation of that doctrine. Especially since it had been designed for low-level penetration strikes on enemy targets as opposed to high-altitude runs like the B-52.

And so, EF-111 aside, we had a maintenance hog that was too big and too heavy to be used purely for CAS but not big or heavy enough to be used in any sort of long-range bombing role. And as for the EF-111 turns out smaller planes don't need nearly as much EW protection as larger ones, so a few pods on multi-roles handled that just as well.

 

[Cpl. Long Dong Silver]

I once had a B1 do a show of force in RC east during an engagement. Fucker flew so low I swear I could have hit it with a baseball if I had the timing right. Definitely scared the shit out of the haj.

That said the times we needed actual CAS it was either AH64 or A10.

 

[Uranus Pink]

I don't know where to begin with this nonsense. First, the USA has always considered strike bombers to be acceptable CAS planes due to the fact they can drop a crapton of munitions on target.

Strike bombers are good for dropping a deuce on target and running not sticking around for however long the guys on the ground need them. Strike fighters and fighters are the ones who at least try to stay overhead and support whomever need them.

There's a reason the A-20 Havoc and A-26 Invader in WW2 had attacker designations instead of bomber ones.

You need to look at the aircraft's service history first before making this statement. As neither the A-20 or the A-26 were used as close air support. While the Allison engine P-51 Mustangs were purposely requested, designed, built and used for supporting those on the ground by the RAF. Whether it is engaging the Luftwaffe at low to medium attitude to doing CAS. And paid the price for their service as most were destroyed by the time the English finally got the Merlin engine ready.

 

[mr.moon1488]

They just built a new state of the art AC-130 gunship variant.

Well, that's at least something in the right direction.

 

[Pocket Dragoon]

The FB-22 would have provided all we need the A-10 to do, but I think the F-35 and MQ-9s can replace it. Personally I think the A-10 has outlived its usefulness. The GAU-8 cannot destroy modern Russian or Chinese tanks.

If there was enough funding to develop better/advanced AP rounds, rather than the standard DU and HE (or whatever), the gun would still be useful against Russian & Chinese tanks.

And the value of a fixed-wing strafing troops will never diminish, because that kind of thing takes heat off friendlies in contact. I imagine it's incredibly hard to concentrate being strafed by anything, even if not caught in the open. And with 30mm HE, they only need to be close to shred unprotected troops & vehicles.

Besides ammo & upgraded ECM, the only thing I'd change is possibly lowering the rate of fire, for longer bursts on area targets (like troops in treelines). If tiny drones controlled by individual ground elements can sap the AA before CAS shows up, anything like an A-10 or Frogfoot would have a free lunch.

I don't think the Army is even bothering anymore. They have their own A-10 replacement plans in the pipeline
https://youtube.com/watch?v=dQzroRH7dOE

Goddamn, that thing is obnoxiously loud.

 

[MrJokerRager]

Well the only important thing that I have learned out of this.

Splitting the Chair force from the US Army was a mistake in hindsight after World War 2 as the Navy still has their planes as well as also have a bigger air fleet than the "Air Force" lol.

Also I want to post this meme as well.



Well the USAF got their due when Trump created the Space Force out of them.

 

[Stoneheart]

Orky is a 40k reference. Orks don't really have "technology" they just have "belief" in more gun = mo better. So just through sheer belief they have working machines that are just ramshackle retarded weapons of war but they work. So the idea of just strapping the A10 gu onto a Chinook would be "orky".

But Russians are ORKS, thats how their tech works.

I see, I did not know 40K had Orks. BTW can you help a literal newbie with where to start to know the lore? Also, if you think that's some Bubba kind of stuff you should have seen v1 of the CAS helicopter plan:

Basic ore? youtube video(there are fucktons of them out there, just look around and find somebody you like listen to).
detailed lore? (e-books)
Lore to play the game decently? codex.
aöö of it is free or super duper easy to pirate.

The concept of CAS aircraft seems outdated. Modern loitering drone-bombs make more sense and would give the army better control over their needs. A chinook fitted as a mother ship popping out loiter drones would function similar to a anti-submarine warfare helicopter and its torpedoes. Or perhaps have it mounted on a ground vehicle.

Pilot training for CAS is pretty basic and modern CAS is much more effective than drones.

While the Allison engine P-51 Mustangs were purposely requested, designed, built and used for supporting those on the ground by the RAF. Whether it is engaging the Luftwaffe at low to medium attitude to doing CAS. And paid the price for their service as most were destroyed by the time the English finally got the Merlin engine ready.

Strat bombing destroyed to much of german industry to produce enough more modern aicraft to defend german CAS.
Allied CAS was not very good in WW2, Germany and the soviets were miles ahead on tactic and aircraft.

APDSDU 30mm rounds are something the Air Force ALWAYS fucking ignores when they're talking about the A-10 gun.

why would you use those? Incendiarys all the way, you have rockets to kill modern tanks and burning your enemies in their toyotas is just much more effectvie than killeng them with real bullets.
The A-10 would also make sense without any rockets. The US army still doesnt understand how to use armor and what kind of armor plays what role.
Cracking MBTs open is not what CAS shoudl do and it hasnt been since mid WW2. the bombs(modern day rockets) were fading into the background after Barbarossa.
modern CAs should kill the support of MBTs, not MBTS themself, you have all kinds of other, weapons to do that, like rpgs. the Panzergrenadiers and their IFVs will do most of the fighting while MBTs are there to kill mobile hard targets.

You can see how tanks work if you look at german doctrines. Leopards, PHZ2000 and Puma are advancing as one force, breaking the enemy while moving closer.