Air Force Talks Cancelling A-10. Again.
As noted previously, the US Air Force has proposed cutting a large number of A-10s from the inventory in response to the reduced Department of Defense budget.
An article at AOL Defense notes this isn’t the first time this has been proposed, and the author starts to rattle off the reasons people think the A-10 Thunderbolt II (better known as Warthog) is so great:
Two things make the A-10 especially fine at CAS: its amazing 30mm cannon which can destroy a tank with ease; and the titanium bucket within which the pilot sits.
The A-10’s GAU-8 is an impressive piece of armament, without question. Whether it is, by itself, reason to continue to fly the A-10 is debatable. To the “titanium bucket,” would anyone care to venture when the integrity of the “bathtub” was last tested, or when the last non-A-10 fixed-wing pilot returned to base wounded by groundfire?
The article continues:
The A-10 can fly low and slow with great stability, operate in nasty places, take a lot of damage and keep flying, be easily maintained and is just really well designed to do its job.
Lots of aircraft can fly low. Slow? Well, that’s both a blessing and a curse. For example, being slow means it takes more time for the A-10 to respond to calls for air support, when compared to other aircraft the same distance (or even further) away. Slow also means the aircraft is potentially more susceptible to ground fire — which brings us to the “damage” part.
The A-10 is built very ruggedly, and it can take damage and keep flying. That means the pilot can get away from the battle if hit, but it says nothing of the ability of the aircraft to continue its mission or the ability of the Air Force to repair the aircraft. In 2003, much was made of Capt Kim Campbell saving her battle-wounded A-10 — and it did get her back to base. The aircraft, however, was damaged beyond repair and never flew again. You can only do that so many times before you start running out of airplanes, no matter how rugged the aircraft is built.
The final part is probably the most relevant: The A-10 is designed very well to do its job — because that’s the only job it can do. That may be its undoing, as Chief of Staff of the Air Force General Norton Schwartz has indicated the Air Force will be focusing on multi-role aircraft.
“The bottom line is, as remarkable as the A-10 is, it isn’t the only machine that does close air support,” Schwartz told reporters…
Schwartz and Air Force Secretary Mike Donley made clear that the service has made a strategic decision to use multi-role aircraft as much as possible. The Warthog has one main role.
The simple fact remains the Air Force will have a limited budget, so it must decide what stays and what goes. The A-10 is a “remarkable” aircraft, but if the choice is between an aircraft that only does one role well, or one that does many roles (even if not as well), it appears the Air Force has chosen the more versatile of the two.
I would disagree only with the single role premise of your article. When I was still on active duty the A-10 squadrons had 3 missions, CAS, FAC, and CSAR. While you can argue the first two can be accomplished by other A/C and then debate as to the whether they can be done as well, CSAR is uniquely suited to the A-10. It gives me a headache trying to figure out how I would escort a helo with a flight of F-16s. Now, do we need to keep them around for just CSAR? Well, that may be another argument.