AF Says, “A-10 to stay 'indefinitely'”

Air Force Materiel Command chief Gen. Ellen Pawlikowski recently told AviationWeek that the depot line that maintains and repairs the Air Force's 283 A-10s has been reopened to full capacity.


“They have re-geared up, we’ve turned on the depot line, we’re building it back up in capacity and supply chain,” said Pawlikowski. “Our command, anyway, is approaching this as another airplane that we are sustaining indefinitely.”


More @ http://www.businessinsider.com/air-force-keep-a10-indefinitely-2016-10

 

That's the Air Force Elephant Walk.

I wonder why they call it the "elephant walk" ?

 

Sen. McCain has been arguing to keep the A-10 for a while now. I was watching some of his committee meetings on youtube last week.

 

Comes from a John Wayne movie -The Baby Elephant Walk

https://youtu.be/b1z4JfxFb6c

 

Is the origin historically correct ???

Google images results for U.S. Air Force "elephant walk." -> https://www.google.com/search?q=air...7YPQAhWiiVQKHR7rBXYQ_AUICigD&biw=1366&bih=631

 

A-10s in support of ground troops in Afghanistan.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mfWuKse2LwI

 

I don't understand why we don't just build a new version. Keep the gun, lose the pointless armor, give it modern engines, sensors, weapons etc.

 

I would dump the gun (GAU-8 ) and replace it with 2 X 20 mm cannons and 4 X .50 cal. HMG's.

The GAU-8 30 mm cannon was designed for busting up Soviet tanks. Not an effective weapon for CAS strafing missions.

7.62 to 20 mm is the proven and most effective weapons for strafing.

But the GAU-8 does have a big phycological effect on Muslims so I have been told. And it's a morale booster for the grunts on the ground.

 

If you are talking strafing with a COIN aircraft for low intensity conflict (which means we are no longer talking about an A-10, intended for CAS in a high intensity conflict), then use a pair of GAU-19's: .50cal Gatling guns with a firing rate equivalent to 8 .50 M2's. With AP-I rounds and that firing rate, they'll take out any armored target a 20mm would and if you need HE power, carry rockets.

 

Not reffing to COIN aircraft but high intensity warfare where enemy troops are with in 45 meters of friendly troops and no other fire support can be used upon the enemy except strafing by friendly aircraft. It the enemy troops are closer than 45 meters to friendly troops, don't believe Obama's lies that bayonets are obsolete, FIX BAYONETS !

Aircraft that are armed with gatling guns/cannons like the 30 mm GAU-8 or the 20 mm M61A1 Vulcan 6-barrel Gatling cannon have such a small cone of fire and a narrow impact dead zone they aren't effective in a CAS strafing attack.

 

1. In a high intensity modern conflict, strafing is a non-starter unless you are going high caliber and fast firing. SAM systems and especially combination gun-missile ADA systems like the Tunguska are common among our potential enemies. The A-1 Skyraider/A-4 Skyhawk you love, the slow strafing platform is dead meat.

In modern conflicts, that danger close air support is the realm of helicopter gunships that can hide behind tree lines or hills until the last second before they fire.

2. Any soldier with experience in modern CQC will tell you they'd rather have a carbine length rifle and full auto capability if the enemy are danger close. Bayonets are obsolete. They are weapons of desperation.

3. There's little point in a wide strafing cone on a high intensity battlefield if you are can't get out enough rounds to make it worth it. It doesn't matter how wide the cone is when your rate of fire is so slow that you only get off a couple hundred rounds before getting shredded by a hail of 35mm rounds.

 

Re: #2.
The last time American troops have properly conducted combat in an urban evioroment was during the Tet Offense of 68 during the battle of Hue up in l-Corps.

During Tet of 68 is when they broke out all of those so called obsolete WW ll weapons like the BAR, air cooled .30 cal Browning machine guns and the Thompson submachine gun.

I missed out participating in the battle for Hue, I wasn't in-country yet. But served with and know many Marines who were there. Have been able to read most of the "after action" reports and "lessons learned" after they were declassified.

The most effective individual weapons for clearing buildings was the .45 ACP Thompson submachine gun and the 12 ga. shotgun. The ONTOS gest a whole lot of credit for winning the battle of Hue. An entire NVA division was erased from the NVA Order of Battle during that battle.

Lessons learned:
The ROE have to be thrown into the crapper.

Urban warfare and using CAS is a completely different ball game.

 

And this is why your mindset is totally divorced from modern warfare reality.

Tet was 50 (*)(*)(*)(*)ING YEARS AGO. Technology has moved a lot in the last 50 years, especially ADA technology. Strafing aircraft on a modern high intensity battlefield will be annihilated.

I don't know if you know this, but they invented these things called "Attack Helicopters" that are usually the primary CAS aircraft in urban environments. Also, while Hue may have been (if you ignore Fallujah, the early stages of Afghanistan, Kuwait City, Al Nasiriyah, etc. but you do because your mind is still in the 70's) the last major urban battlefield in US military history, numerous urban battlefields have occurred in Yugoslavia, Chechnya, Georgia, Ukraine, and Lebanon. The kind of ADA employed by combatants in high intensity conflict today make strafing aircraft totally obsolete.

 

You keep using the term "modern warfare." What is modern warfare ? Every rifleman tactics used today goes back as far as the American Civil War considered the first modern war fought. But todays American riflemen tactics go back to pre American Civil War. Basically putting a whole lot of lead down into the "beaten zone." Using the M-16 or M-4 as if it were a musket not as a rifle.

It was the U.S. Army back in 1957 who would take the American grunt back 100 years. Good bye individual combat marksman of fire discipline with well aimed shots. Hello point aim fire with a fire team or rifle squad putting a whole lot of lead down range in to the "beaten path" where the enemy is. Very effective if you have a whole lot of ammunition on you have a logistical support established being able to resupply the grunts with ammunition on the battle field.

During WW ll in the Pacific Campaign your Marines and soldiers went in to combat with 80 rounds of ammunition, ten 8 round clips for their M-1 Garands. Average ammunition expenditure in heavy combat was around 50 rounds per day. Because your Marine rifleman or soldier took deliberate aim at the enemy. BRASS: breath, relax, aim, sight picture, squeeze the trigger.

When I served, the Marine Corps issued three different service rifles, the M-14 (my favorite) the M-1 Garand (my second choice) and the M-16 A1 (a pea shooter chambered for a varmint cartridge). So I was trained in using both tactics in combat. The combat rifleman tactics used today by the Marines and Army are from the 1700's and early 1800's. Works well when used by a fire squad or rifle squad and you have a (*)(*)(*)(*) load of ammo. But doesn't work so well when it's just one rifleman facing another enemy rifleman.

No (*)(*)(*)(*).

When I was in-country we had this one Huey that was called the "Hog" an UH-1 C. America's first attack helicopter gunship. Then they started being replaced with Huey Cobra AH-1 attack helicopters. Nothing new, Vietnam War era (*)(*)(*)(*).

Could be because Fallujah can't be compared to Hue.

Battle of Hue:
One Marine rifle regiment (3 rifle battalions) entered the city defended by a division size enemy force where every single building had to be fought for and cleared, building by building.

End game:
216 Marines killed.
2,123 wounded.

The bad guys:
8,100 VC/NVA killed.
85 enemy POW's taken alive.

Fallujah:

American troops, 10,500

Islamist insurgents, 3,700 to 4,000.

Endgame:

95 American troops killed
560 WIA

1,200 to 1,500 Islamist killed
1,500 captured.

 

The AF is so short on planes they'd redeploy WWII P47 Thunderbolts if they had them.

 

The P-47 was a good tank buster during WW ll.

 

The P47 was an incredible aircraft and very versatile. Extremely rugged. Huge firepower for the era. Good dogfighter. Outstanding at ground attack. It's real shortcoming was lacking range to escort bombers all the way to Germany.

 

Why do you keep talking about riflemen? Do you not understand have warfare has become even more mechanized in high intensity conflict than it was even in your ancient era?

 

https://warisboring.com/the-air-for...retty-sad-replacement-adb2cef00361#.vcwv7hsxw

?

 

That article is 3 years out of date. Check the article in the OP.

 

What high intensity conflict are you referring too ? Vietnam ? That was the last high intensity war that America hes fought.

Vietnam was a war that should have been fought as a small war but it wasn't.(Personally I don't think we should have been there in the first place. JFK should have listen to President Eisenhower's warnings and advise but JFK always listened to his Harvard buddies (the young and brightest) he surrounded himself with instead. In the end game they weren't so bright.)

The Vietnam War was high intensity comparable to WW ll in the Pacific or Europe when it came to Hue and also low intensity. All depended when and where you were.

Now South Vietnam wasn't tank country but up in I-Corps there were more than a few tank vs. tank battles. Mostly platoon or company size engagements. But during the Easter Offense, Gen. Giap woke up one morning thinking he was Field Marshal Rommel and launched a large armor assault across the DMZ. Don't know how many NVA tanks there were but 400 NVA tanks were destroyed most by the USAF. Also for the first time in history under control of ANGLICO NGF spot teams, navy gunfire destroyed moving NVA armor columns. That was a first !!!

The Bradley's, Stryker's and LAV's armored vehicles are nothing more than battle taxis. They transport the grunts to the battle field.

During the late 60's and early 70's the U.S. Army was looking for a replacement for the M-113 APC battle taxi. Every thing was working out fine until some pencil pusher in the Pentagon said "Why not put a gun on top of the new APC ?" Then another Pentagon pencil pusher said "Lets put some little port holes on the APC so the soldiers could stick their rifle out and shoot at people ?" And they kept adding more crap to the M-2 Bradley.

They actually made a movie about developing the Bradley Armored Fighting Vehicle, "The Pentagon Wars."

 

Dude, you are seriously divorced from reality. Have you forgotten Gulf War One or the opening stages of Iraqi Freedom? Both of those were high intensity conflicts and both have occurred since Vietnam.

Vietnam was a low intensity conflict. 99% of it was guerrilla warfare.

The modern versions of the Bradley are infantry fighting vehicles. They have the armor to stay on the battlefield and support the infantry they were were carrying. They are not battle taxis.

Strykers are the same, although LAV-25's are intended as reconaissance verhicles.

BTW, IFV's predate the Bradley. The Soviets and Germans both operated them before we did. The Bradley was an attempt at playing catch up.

 

Have you ever seen it strafe? I have, and it destroys everything it touches in the surrounding area. It is a damn good war plane that has not yet seen its day.

 

Sure have and during the real thing. One time with in 100 feet of the beaten path of the rounds. Mostly F-4's, F-8's, A-7's, A-4's and UH-1C and AH-1 Cobra gunships.

Have watched the A-10 Warthog conducting a strafing mission at the Nellis Range in Nevada.

The Air Force use to conduct an annual air combat competition every year out of Nellis AFB. USN and USMC not invited but all of the NATO air forces participated along with the Aussies. The events are AA, bombing strikes, strafing, etc. etc.

Not open to public but the local Las Vegas newspapers would report the results. But the strafing competition was conducted just north of Hyw. 95 near the Indian Springs AFS. And you could pull over the side of the road, open up the ice chest and consume a lot of beers and watch the strafing competition. Goods free entertainment.

What they had were tall telephone type poles with large white sheets strung across the poles, maybe 100' wide and 50' or more high. The aircraft would make a run at the targets then they would go out and count the holes and dispersion of the hits.

Watch three of these events over the years all during the 80's. One year the Canadians took first place. Forget what kind of aircraft they were flying. The other times USAFR A-7's took first place. The last competition I watched the A-10 participated. What a show, I give it a D ticket. (An E ticket being the highest like watching an Iowa class BB firing a nine 16" gun broadside or the detonation of a nuclear weapon) When those 30 mm rounds hit the ground each round sounded like an explosion and then you heard the ripping sound of the A-10's 30 mm cannons. The target, just one big hole, you couldn't count the individual hits.

BTW, the A-7 won the competition that day.

 

Yaaayyy!

BBBBBBRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT I love that sound