The BRRRRTTTT keeps coming: NDAA would fully fund A-10 Warthog upgrades

Discussion in 'Warfare / Military' started by US Conservative, Jun 14, 2019.

  1. US Conservative

    US Conservative Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 19, 2015
    Messages:
    44,776
    Likes Received:
    36,294
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    About four years ago, the Warthog’s future was very much in doubt as the Air Force was trying to mothball the slow, deadly and grunt-beloved close-air support attack aircraft. At the time, the Air Force faced a budget crunch and an incoming F-35 fleet that required more people and resources.

    Critics of the Air Force also said the service wanted to scrap the plane because it was disinterested in flying close-air support, which former Chief of Staff Gen. Mark Welsh vehemently denied.

    But in a sign of how passe the A-10 debate has become, full funding for Warthog upgrades next year — including re-winging them — just passed the House Armed Services Committee with nary an objection. The panel approved its proposed version of the fiscal 2020 National Defense Authorization Act in a marathon session that concluded early Thursday morning.

    [​IMG]

    https://www.airforcetimes.com/news/...-ndaa-would-fully-fund-a-10-warthog-upgrades/


    Looks like the A-10 isn't going away anytime soon.

    Its also less expensive to operate, and part of the reason these upgrades are needed is because they are getting extensive use.

    I wonder how many rounds of 30mm the air force has in stock...



    [​IMG]
     
    BuckyBadger, ArmySoldier and RoccoR like this.
  2. Dayton3

    Dayton3 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    Messages:
    15,063
    Likes Received:
    3,144
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    The main reason the USAF has long hated the A-10s is the staggering number of planes that have crashed into the ground during low level training. It prompted a repeat of the saying "AAA is 5% lethal, SAMs are 10% lethal, the ground is 100% lethal".

    Needless to say the USAF is historically opposed to airplanes that crash a lot.
     
  3. ArmySoldier

    ArmySoldier Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2014
    Messages:
    29,878
    Likes Received:
    10,386
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The BRRRRTTTT sound is my ring tone :)

    People get all weirded out in public when my phone rings
     
    US Conservative likes this.
  4. Dayton3

    Dayton3 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    Messages:
    15,063
    Likes Received:
    3,144
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Arguably the A-10 along with the S-3 Viking and EA-6, C-5, F-22 and others are aircraft that should never have been taken out of production(or conversion) and should never have been retired.
     
  5. US Conservative

    US Conservative Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 19, 2015
    Messages:
    44,776
    Likes Received:
    36,294
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Lol that is awesome.
     
    ArmySoldier likes this.
  6. US Conservative

    US Conservative Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 19, 2015
    Messages:
    44,776
    Likes Received:
    36,294
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Yeah they are vulnerable especially in their original roles.

    And in the "bomb truck" CAS role there are faster aircraft that can carry more bombs.
     
    Dayton3 likes this.
  7. US Conservative

    US Conservative Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 19, 2015
    Messages:
    44,776
    Likes Received:
    36,294
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Agree particularly on the F-22.

    There will never be more, and the US will be the only country to operate them.

    We sold Turkey F35's recently, but they took some russian silkworm missiles so Trump is seizing them.
     

Share This Page