“Treasonous” A-10 defenders
According to the Arizona Daily Independent, Major General James Post, Vice Commander of Air Combat Command, told junior officers that “if anyone accuses me of saying this, I will deny it . . . anyone who is passing information to Congress about A-10 capabilities is committing treason.”
So, I guess it’s treason to defend a weapon system that saves US lives on the battlefield. In defense of the General, the local PAO wrote to the ADI;
“The general’s use of hyperbole in his comments during a recent discussion with attendees at a Tactics Review Board at Nellis were intended to communicate a serious point: the Air Force decision on recommended actions/strategic choices for the constrained fiscal environment has been made and the service’s position communicated.”
Yeah, well, whatever. I guess every US infantryman who describes the warm and fuzzy feeling he gets when he sees the A-10 floating above his battle space is a traitor, well, in the hyperbolic sense. No one should tell Congress that Iraqis during the Gulf War called it the “cross of death” because of it’s unique shape and the fear the mere sight of it causes in our enemies. That’s a combat multiplier right there.
Of course, the Air Force isn’t in the business of fighting wars, I suppose. The Swiss Army knife of the aviation community, the F-35, is supposed to replace the A-10 in it’s close air support role, but, according to Investors Business Daily, the F-35 won’t be able to fire it’s 25mm cannon until 2019, even though it’s going into service this year with the Marine Corps. If the Air Force gets it’s way this year, troops will have no close air support for four more years.
I’m sure that’s all good news for the Islamic State which is dealing with the “cross of death” currently.
Category: Air Force
“If only those “traitors” had kept quiet . . . we could be doing 11% worse against ISIS.” — John Q. Public (a.k.a. Tony Carr, military blogger)
http://www.defensenews.com/story/defense/2015/01/19/a10-strikes-isis-11-percent/21875911/
I have felt, since the first time that I heard of shutting down the A-10, that it should be crossed over to Army Aviation. It may not be pretty enough for the Air Force to enjoy, but it is damned sure effective enough for the grunts to love it. Leave the high altitude stuff to the Zoomies, and give the ugly assed Warthog to the Grunts who will appreciate it.
You know, you might have something there. It’s still my all-time favorite military plane. I wish I could have had the opportunity to learn to fly it.
Amen.
Frankie Cee.. You are so right that these awesome protector should be turned over to the Army. I use to love to watch these planes during their training along side of the cobras, (yes cobras).
+100. Turn all of them over to the Army and/or USMC!
The USMC probably won’t take it because they can’t be carrier based.
Hey, if you can land a C-130 on a carrier, how hard can it be to land an A-10?
🙂
I don’t think it’s a problem of landing, it’s a problem of taking off. Not enough engine power and too heavy. 🙂
Same engines as on the S3 Viking I believe. I’m not saying you are wrong. There’s also the landing gear issue.
For comparison (from Wikipedia):
S3 Viking-
Empty weight: 26,581 lb (12,057 kg)
Loaded weight: 38,192 lb (17,324 kg)
Max. takeoff weight: 52,539 lb (23,831 kg)
Powerplant: 2 × General Electric TF34-GE-2 turbofans, 9,275 lbf (41.26 kN) each
A10 Lightning-
Empty weight: 24,959 lb (11,321 kg)
Loaded weight: 30,384 lb (13,782 kg)
CAS mission: 47,094 lb (21,361 kg)
Anti-armor mission: 42,071 lb (19,083 kg)
Max. takeoff weight: 50,000 lb (23,000 kg)
Powerplant: 2 × General Electric TF34-GE-100A turbofans, 9,065 lbf (40.32 kN) each
Landing gear for hard landings and wing folding for storage- the lack of both prevent the plane being carrier based.
Too bad though. As a former Marine I would have loved having Warthogs backing us up!
And I am sure Army Aviators would do one heck of a job of flying the A-10, even the commissioned officers as well :>))
Off limits for Butterbars…
I can think of nothing more fearful than an A-10 with a Marine aviator in the cockpit.
Duck!!
I bet they’d trade in their few remaining AV8-B’s in a heartbeat.
The USAF floated that trial balloon back in the late early 90s. I was ready to stand in line (I was a commissioned Army Aviator, Club Manager!) for that transition.
When the Army showed interest, the USAF screwed the deal by saying they would transfer airframes, but no personnel or funding.
That’s their ploy. They don’t want it, but they damn sure don’t want the Army to have it!
“If the Air Force gets it’s way this year, troops will have no close air support for four more years.”
Hell, I’m just a ship riding and flying squid and this pisses me off to no end. If I was a ground pounder, I would be fucking furious.
Seeing that the Air Force is enamored of sleek, fast, expensive aircraft that don’t necessarily work, let them have the high altitude bombing and air superiority mission and leave the mud moving, grunt saving work to the Army by moving the A-10 to the Army Aviation inventory. I’m sure there are a bunch of crusty Army Warrant Officers who would love to wrap their hands around it’s stick.
Yeah, as someone in the Air force? This is downright goddamn infuriating. I talk to the flight line guys on the regular, and they hate the F-35 with the type of fervor that’s typically reserved for ISIS and Russia.
My favorite aspect of the F-35 as a CAS aircraft is the whopping 180 rounds of ammo that will allow it to stay on station for about 3 minutes in a CAS role…so I guess the plan is that no firefights will be allowed to last longer than 3 minutes…
Morons, the lot of them…
This drives me nuts. Due to the cost of the F35, we’ll have fewer aircraft in the AO and the ones we have will have the OR rate of a 77 Pinto. Not to mention the fact that dedicating F35s for the CA’S mission will require the combatant commander to pull teeth out of the local AF commander. They’ll resist “wasting” their cool new toys on an unsexy mission. All this will happen even if the F35 ends up being effecting for CA’S in the first place, so it’s pretty much a best case scenario. That’s just freaking great.
Just one little question.
While I have nothing personal against USAF peeps in general, the mindset about airplanes seems located off in space some place.
Hase Mr. Post watched Star Wars and Battlestar Galactica too many times?
Where does he think opponents like ISIL/IS will get pilots to fly fighter jets and engage in aerial dogfights? They can’t even fly helicopters, you know.
Does he even have a clue AS TO what is actually going on over there? Or does he think there’s some sort of hot dog air combat off in an amorphous cloud of ‘the future’?
Just trying to understand here.
The A-10 has been paid for. The F-35 is BEING paid for. Some Congressman or Senator is building his personal fortune on this Air Force abortion — screw whoever might need air cover in a war somewhere.
This particular ‘problem’ has been around as long as the military has purchased anything from contractors. I’d imagine the Roman Legions probably cursed some part of their equipment for the same reason.
I believe forty six states are involved in the procurement process. That’s a lot of Congressmen and Senators. Truthfully, it’s brilliant in how diabolical it is – no politician wants to cut jobs in their state, so make sure plenty of states are involved.
There’s even a website that shows the per-state jobs:
https://www.f35.com/about/economic-impact-map
Damn, that dog’s got a lot of teats.
It may not fly real well, but it seems to be an amazing money vacuum.
And two of biggest benefactors are Texas and California which means both Dems and Republicans are in the bag for the F-32.
Right on the money!!! (Sorry for pun).
Just like when those pederast cormorants (whose sons are too valuable to serve) swapped out the POS m-16 for combat-proven m-14 during midst of Vietnam war… u best believe dat beaucoup $$$$$ were
lining political poltroon pockets at cost of many Marines lives n limbs: despicable, deceitful, and TYPICAL.
Kelly6 actual, out
I remember that one. It still astounds me that we’re still using it.
Well, it has evolved through the years…but when initially fielded; no training on weapon, FUBAR ammo, no cleaning gear. Total, complete leadership FUBAR.
What’s changed?
Until weasel-back, rat-face punks put their kids up front (which will NEVER happen) the song will REMAIN da same.
Kelly6, out
One must also point out that while a Swiss Army knife does many things, it does few things well and the steel in the blades is soft and must be sharpened frequently to be effective. I carry one daily – as well as a sharpener.
“[I]f anyone accuses me of saying this, I will deny it . . . .” He didn’t deny it. I guess that makes him a liar as well as an asshole.
The brass would rather chop them up for scape than give them to another branch. I suppose the four star clowns need financial help with their meager retirements and a have to supplement them with jobs on the BOD for the F35. $$$$ is king!
Breaking the Air corps off from the Army was the worst move ever made by the Military/politicians. Once the air forces were removed from army control they were free to wander off in their own directions. As cool as the bombing of Iraq was during Desert storm was, it did not win us a war, in fact we have never won a war since the Air Force was granted a separate service status. All ground support must be under control of the ground force commander. And answer to him.
My Pa (LtCol D) always said that very thing. He started out as a top turret gunner on B-24’s in 41, got commissioned as a nav on B-17’s, flight engineer on B-29’s and B-36’s, retired in 68 as a B-52 EW. Remained Army to the core the whole time. That whole ” Army of One” circus nearly caused a stroke
I’ll counter that by we’ve lost damn few ground troops due to enemy air power since there was an Air Force too. So don’t go saying the Air Force is to blaime for us not winning wars, last time I checked that was more a factor of the ‘brain trust’ at the big five side and tue white house than any one service. Or are you saying the Army and Marines can’t close the deal once the AF and Navy clear the way in?
For the record, not that most on here don’t know, I think all the branches have their roles and most of the time do them very well. Also as one of the resident zoomies I think my former service has it head up its fifth contact point on this one! And not all us zoomies think it has to he fast and sleek to be sexy. Sexiness for an aircraft has as much to do with form and function as appearance. Personnaly three of my favorite air frames can be considered ugly by some: (in no particular order) BUFF (Big Ugly Fat F*cker aka the B-52), A-10, and the AC-130 (gotta love an aircraft with a freaking howitzer!)
I know to some I may have made an outrageous claim, so I looked it up April 15, 1953 was the last ground combat loss due to enemy aircraft when two US Army soliders were KIA by soviet made North Korean Po-2 biplanes. (Source PACAF Historian’s Office) Some would say 60+ years is a damn good track record of keeping enemy air out of the fight. (Your welcome btw)
I have to admit I want see the F35 up hear in Vermont. Just because their future base is surrounded by rich hippie’s from out of state/flatlanders. They want the land for condos and a very exclusive golf club.
Gen. Zoomie wants shiny toys to play with, people who live in the dirt want BRRRRT.
The F-35 isn’t like a Swiss Army Knife, it’s more like an El Camino- It’s not a very good car, but hey, it’s also a pretty bad truck, too!
Whenever a leader starts a statement with “if anyone accuses me of saying this I will deny it” they need to leave their CAC at the door and walk away. At that point you’ve proven to your subordinates that you have no integrity and shouldn’t be a leader. Unfortunately, the military is full of officers who don’t seem to have a problem with that statement.
Any leader that starts off with that statement has already stepped on his CAC and needs to be shown the door.
I have been a firm supporter of the Warthog since it entered the Air Force. The truth is my wetdream is a A10 flying as my cover on a hot Med-Evac. I don’t think the LZ would be hot or stay hot for long. The emeny is not dumb they will know how much ammo and long being able to stay on the CAS. I did not have to worry about any Migs shooting down, true and thank you fixed wing. The Warthog is perfect for CAS. Just give the planes and we (the Army & the Marines will make it work really. Actually we can read manuals too. Joe
Focus, folks!
This argument is not about the relative merits of the various services – it is still about a stupid, misguided few within the USAF, and an apparent many in Congress. They are the only ones trying to rid the inventory of the Warthog.
When they decide it is going, it is gone. Not transferred, not put into limited service, but gone. It will either remain in USAF inventory or disappear.
The stupid USAF brass that is going along with this mess is trying to protect the rest of its budget. Stupid brass in the Navy, Army et al are doing exactly the same thing about the empires they are building.
So, if we want the Warthog to remain in the inventory, perhaps we should let our Congress critters know exactly why it a revered weapons system.
[…] After Calling For Civility, Obama Immediately Taunted Republicans This Ain’t Hell: “Treasonous” A-10 Defenders Weasel Zippers: Salon Writer Laments “Having To Suppress My Black Rage To Get Along With […]
In the 90’s,our local ‘brilliant’ 2nd district of Virginia congressman was on the house armed services committee and loudly proclaimed the A-10 outdated and not able to survive modern combat.The local rag,the Virginian Pilot,talked up his ‘brilliance’ at finding ‘waste’ in the military,like keeping A-10’s.I wrote him and asked if he knew that the average A-10 at that time had fewer flight hours on the airframe than the planes he thought we should replace it with.He replied that he knew nothing about such matters.Like all democrats,he was an expert without any particular knowledge.He’s gone and the A-10’s remain.
We can’t afford to lose what can’t be replaced.But if idiot generals want to get rid of A-10’s,give them to the taxpayers who paid for them(I’ll take a few).Or use them as firebombers,where their manuverability and toughness would be put to the best use outside of the battlefields where they’ve saved so many lives.But save the best friend our soldiers have had since the Skyraider.
Does anyone know where they’re launching the A-10s from in Iraq?
Yeah, we really need to get rid of those A-10s and their treasonous defenders:
http://www.luke.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123437149
New development in this story:
http://thehill.com/policy/defense/231947-air-force-urged-to-remove-officer-over-a-10-treason-comments