Don't mess with an A-10

[oz rb fan]

i might have to do am A10 whiff then

[Adam the Akrodude]

Hey RB, what sort of A-10 WHIF are you considering? A RAAF A-10 would be uber-cool to see - what do ya reckon?

Just received my GAU-8 barrel assembly from Poland - absolutely stunning and I think just must have "bling" for any A-10 build.

[RHB785]

Well Adam, I was thinking of 1/72 scale as I don't have the space for anything larger so all my builds are 1/72. The two seater would be a night full IFR CSAR and the two single seaters would be day VFR/limited IFR desert and forest camo CAS/CSAR birds, all in RAAF colours and markings. I described my thoughts earlier in this thread. My White Albatrosses L-39 is almost finished and I've taken the photos for the reviews of the Zlins, the Spitfire MkIX UTI, the Airspeed Envoy and the Beech Staggerwing I purchased from Graeme H. I hope to get the reviews up this weekend sometime.

Regards,
RHB.

[Adam the Akrodude]

Wow! That sounds very cool Ross! Sounds like you indeed have a soft spot for the Hawg! A ex-RAAF mate of mine was a gunnie - in fact spent some time up your way with 3 Sqn years ago before heading over to the "Giant Sandpit" to work for BAE for a period on Tornados (RSAF F.3's). Anyhoo, as a gunnie, his fav aeroplane is the Hawg! I think a gunnie on a Hawg would be a very busy person indeed and I guess get pretty fit in this role! Lots of stuff to hang under a Hawg - let's face it!

[hrtpaul]

Bahahahahahahaha it seems the US congress doesn't share the USAF's enthusiasm for retiring the Hawg and the ability to replace it. Long live the Hawg and BRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRTTTTTTTT
http://www.jqpublicblog.com/congress-issues-air-force-sharp-rebuke-bars-a-10-retirement/

[Adam the Akrodude]

That is good news Paul! Let's see just how long it lasts. Poor Hawg really is up against it when it's owner no longer wants it. Same thing happened with the premature retirement of the SR-71 which did leave USA with a reconnaissance gap - which may even still exist. I think there is more "love" in Congress for the A-10 though.

It just seems crazy for a lay person like me for the USAF to enter into a multi-million dollar program to build wing sets for the Hawg to keep it flying another 20 years and then in the next breath want to send them to the bone yard - such incredible waste. A great percentage of CAS can and is done by other assets but they do not have that "In your face" aspect that the Hawg offers - both to intimidate the bad guys and lift the morale of the good guys. This is what will be lost of the Hawg goes. Very difficult decision when a finite amount of money can only go around just so far.

Whilst there is all this crap to be dealt with over in the "Great Sandpit" and beyond, the Hawg has a vital role and must stay I say!

BTW, my "bling" has arrived for my future Hawg build - 4 x GBU-38's plus the "Sniper" pod. This is the sort of load out I'm aiming for.

[oz rb fan]

the US Army wants them if the USAF doesnt.....but as we know ...that will never happen

[tor lives]

the US Army wants them if the USAF doesnt.....but as we know ...that will never happen

Just like Richard Branson wanting the Concords that British Airways no longer wanted....but, as you say Paul, never happened

[RHB785]

Apparently President Obama doesn't agree and has said in the last 24 hours he will veto any attempt to keep the A-10 in service. As much as I like the A-10 there are those in the USAF pilot community who think it is now more of a liability than an asset. There were apparently many losses in the First and Second Gulf Wars due to the enemy purchasing greatly improved SAM assets. Heck, even a Herc with an Aussie navigator was shot down at 15,000' over Baghdad. If they can hit an aircraft at 15,000' with a shoulder launched missile they certainly can hit a Hawg flying not that much faster than a Herc, down in the weeds. Having said that, there are surely other roles the Hawg can take on. I know that some have been re-winged and re-wired so why not make use of that investment to find new roles for the beloved Hawg. Perhaps they could bomb the daylights out of the enemy from 30,000' and then come down to the weeds and continue sorting him out down there with that fearsome gun after making sure with a recce pod that he has no SAMs left. That pod doesn't necessarily have to be on a Hawg. It could be carried by something faster and better able to deal with low level SAMs and relay this info to the Hawgs via secure data link so not even any voice chatter to give the game away.

I hope that if what's being reported in the last 24 hours is true then President Obama will rethink this veto as so much money has already been invested in the modernisation and MLU programs that it would be a waste not to see them through. I know he has other important things he wants to achieve before his mandatroy second term is up but this one is so important to the ground troops that it should in my opinion continue. During my RAAF service I've talked to young American soldiers and airmen (ground types) who had nothing but praise for the Hawg. They spoke of it in terms similar to what Aussie WW2 troops spoke of the Boomerang. Just my 2c worth on a subject I have to admit I don't know a whole lot about.

Regards,
RHB.

[Adam the Akrodude]

Incredible just how political this has become! If for no other reason, the A-10 should be kept for Combat Search and Rescue I think. Look what the USAF did during Vietnam - bought a bunch of old A-1's from the Navy for this role in particular. Keeping one wing of them just for this service would be money very well spent. They're in the National Guard so direct cost to the USAF must not be as much versus say a active wing surely.

It's all about balancing the budget, jobs in key states and the A-10 just ain't loved like it used to be. It amazes me how lessons have to keep being relearnt! What's the bet there will be some kind of compromise. The number of A-10 wing sets on order will be reduced. A bunch of A-10's will end up mothballed at AMARG and perhaps a wing of them kept? The clever thing to do would to keep some flying until the F-35 proves whether or not it can perform the same sorts of jobs the A-10 can. My guess is it won't of course do all the A-10 can, just as the A-10 can't remotely do what the F-35 can. F-35's I just can't see operating below say 20k feet. You simply will not risk loosing a $100 million asset strafing some mud hut - ain't gonna happen. You instead have a JTAC tell you exactly where to drop a JDAM/SDB from 30k feet - bombs away - bad guys vaporised!

A-10C I think is the very best asset USA has for CSAR right now - until a direct A-10 replacement is found. Fingers crossed they keep some A-10's flying for a little longer.