A-10 Warthogs Could Serve Until 2040

[Feuer Frei!]

http://images.defensetech.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/A-10takeoff.jpg

So it might be 2040 before the Air Force’s fleet of A-10 Warthog attack jets is replaced by the F-35 and whatever drones emerge in the coming years.
Check out this solicitation (https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&mode=form&id=a9055b79134aa77caaf58f8fe0b44ae0&tab=core&_cview=1) for tooling necessary to keep the jets flying until 2040.


This would put the invaluable Hog up there with workhorse jets like the B-52 Stratofortress and KC-135 Stratotanker as planes that will serve until 2040.
This may be due to the fact that the A-10 is such a unique and cost effective weapon. It’s a relatively simple plane that’s tough as nails and can do everything from kill tanks to loiter low and slow over a battlefield dispatching enemy insurgents.
While it’s pretty easy to see the F-35 performing the ground attack and fighter missions of jets like the fast-moving F-16s, it’s harder to see the JSF rolling in slow and unleashing a torrent cannon fire on a beehive of enemies. Do you really want to risk getting a stealth jet all shot up on CAS runs (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Kim_campbell_damage_a10.jpg)?
Furthermore, could this be a sign that the service is considering slowing of reducing its F-35 buy in favor of keeping more Hogs in service and while focusing on using the JSF to replace F-15s and F-16s, (at least initially)? This last one may be a stretch, but who knows?


SOURCE (http://defensetech.org/2011/07/22/a-10-warthogs-could-serve-until-2040/)

[Stealhead]

That sounds like a bit of a stretch 2040(who knows though with the current "nextgen" programs progress and costs) to me but I do know that the A-10 is an "in" plane with the USAF at the moment.Currently many ANG and Reserve units are turning in their F-16s for A-10s mainly because the current conflict in Afghanistan suits the A-10 very nicely and the A-10C is much more capable a COIN air frame than any other USAF air craft including older non upgraded A-10s.

I have a friend a Captain who works in intel with USAF fighter and bomber squadrons(he is the guy that tells the pilots what the bad guys are supposed to have might be capable of) he told me that some brass in the USAF are wanting to acquire a turboprop COIN platform something like the Texan II http://www.defensemedianetwork.com/stories/light-air-support-las-contest-between-at-6-texan-ii-super-tucano-continues/ (already used as a trainer) to perform the COIN mission with the Hog.

Funny as the A-10 was on the chopping block in the late 1980s even due to then fears that Soviet air defense was too strong then it got a re-birth during Desert Storm, for a while in the mid to late 90s most became OA-10s a some what lowered status then in the mid 2000s up the Hog has been born again.

I find the fact that the A-10C is replacing F-16 in some wings very ironic as at one time in the F-16 was taking over the A-10s role now the tables are turned and the Hog gets the last laugh or snort.The improvements that the A-10C has such as the ability to employe JDAMS among other avionics improvements is a huge factor in all of this as is the fact that some of the older F-16s can be sold or loaned to allied nations so it is more multifaceted then it first seems.

I love the Hog though my first base was Davis Mothan(DM on the tail where the A-10 in the pic above is from) I used to smell the jet fuel 10 feet away from A-10s and work in direct support of them every day so I was a member of the Air Force not the Chair Force.

[NeonSamurai]

Well in this sort of conflict the A-10 has the advantage over the F-16. The 16 is a superb multi role fighter (particularly the most recent variants), but it is still a fighter, not a dedicated CAS/Strike platform like the hog. But then in these sort of conflicts you don't need much in the way of fighter support.


Personally I think they should bring back the A-1 Skyraider :DL

[CaptainMattJ.]

ill be an old man by 2040! :cry:

Whats that? Warthogs going out in ought' 40 you say? i couldnt quite understand ye. its this darn hearing aid again. Back in Ought' 11, the United states air force had so many warthogs, they filled the sky hehehe. Those were the days. Did you know computers usually only had 8 gigabytes of Ram in those days!! And ran Direct x11! oh my were they slow!

[Tribesman]

Personally I think they should bring back the A-1 Skyraider
Now that was a aircraft project where they definately got full value for money.

[Skybird]

Never was a fan of the F-35 myself. And too expensive it is anyway. It would even be too expensive for an economy in better financial state than it is the case.

In preparation of getting my DVD next week (German release date), I recently did a lot of reading about the A-10C. And the more I learned about it, the more I realised what a great fighterplane it is in the C-version.

[Oberon]

If it ain't broke...

And it sure ain't broke.

Go ugly early baby, roll it hot. :salute:

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_NXNggkQ07g4/S-w7kedv_yI/AAAAAAAAAH4/O-amaBim8PY/s1600/A_10_burning_tank.jpg

[joea]

Heck didn't the HMS Victory serve for a long time? Keep flying Warthog. :salute:

[Sailor Steve]

This would put the invaluable Hog up there with workhorse jets like the B-52 Stratofortress and KC-135 Stratotanker as planes that will serve until 2040.
If they're going to keep the B-52s until 2040 then they ought to stretch it out until 2055. The only aircraft ever to stay in service for 100 years!

[Syxx_Killer]

I'm glad they're gonna keep the Warthog around for a while. Every so often they fly around overhead. I love to watch them when I can. Those things make an incredible noise! Everytime I see one I think how glad I am they are on our side. :salute:

[Stealhead]

ill be an old man by 2040! :cry:

Whats that? Warthogs going out in ought' 40 you say? i couldnt quite understand ye. its this darn hearing aid again. Back in Ought' 11, the United states air force had so many warthogs, they filled the sky hehehe. Those were the days. Did you know computers usually only had 8 gigabytes of Ram in those days!! And ran Direct x11! oh my were they slow!

Guess you have never heard of upgrading avionics systems.This is done all the time no single airframe stays up to date for very long and needs to be improved.In some cases like the B-52 and it should seem the A-10 the basic airframe can be extended many years.This does not mean that from an electronic standpoint that a B-52H of 2011 or A-10 of 2011 is anything like what came of the production line originally.(not sure if you are being sarcastic in your post or what)


A few times during Vietnam the USAF who got all their A-1s from ex-Navy stock(they stopped building them in the late 50's) looked into starting limited production of A-1s but it was determined to have been too expensive.

I think today the best option is the A-10C and some sort of smaller turboprop like the Texan II or the Tucano will work nicely.A new A-1 would be more costly because they'd have to use the old radial engines which require much more maintenance than turbofans and turboprops do and it would need to have modernized avionics making it very expensive.The A-1 was an impressive plane but its time has passed and it deserves its retirement.

That is why a modern turboprop like a Texan II with some upgrades is a very good match with the A-1OC you'd have the Hunter and the Killer.Much like the AH-1 and OH-6 back in Vietnam or the AH-64 and OH-58 today.

@Syxx that is because the Michigan ANG flies A-10s they are based at Selfridge where ever that is in Michigan.Another ANG unit that swapped F-16s for A-10s.

Hope no one is an F-16 fan because the oldest ones are going to become QF-16s for use at Tyndall.If you do not knew Q stands for drone....target drone in other words missiles says boom QF-16 is "retired".

[Skybird]

South of Osnasbrück, in the Teutoburger Forest region, there is a bigger forest with hilly terrain and a "mountain" ridge, the region belongs to Georgsmarienhütte. I used to study in Osnabrück when the A-10s and other combat planes still practiced low flights in Germany frequently. Supersonic bursts and low flying Tornados, Phantoms and I think Jaguars were part of the week. I love that region and forest and strolled around there quite often.

There are two observation towers on that ridge, some hundred meters apart, you have 360° view from there. I once happened to stand on one of the platforms, when a pair of Warthogs came by. Combat planes often used that ridge/mountain top probably as a navigation mark, you also often saw them changing course right over that terrain feature (but I think it is not the place where the VOR OSN is located, that is some kilometers away). Also, Bundeswehr camps were often to be met on that ridge when walking there. Those towers are quite high, the planes were in trail formation, and on that day they almost flew on the same eye level with me, standing on that platform. That was awesome, even more so, since the second pilot seems to have seen me, because he raised his arm and waved and I believe it was a greeting he gave me - he was on same eye level with me, they were flying very very low over that hilltop, and so close that the plane from top to tail was so long that it appeared longer than the distance between my spreaded hand's tips of the thumb and the little finger when raising my arm.

That was a stunning meeting on that day, really. I think somewhere I even have an old slide of another A-10 on another day that I caught with a 600mm reflector when passing that tower, not so close like above, but still illustrating they used those towers as navigation points, probably.

[Sailor Steve]

(not sure if you are being sarcastic in your post or what).
It wasn't even sarcasm. He was just making a little joke about how old he'll be then. I thought it was pretty good. :sunny:

[Stealhead]

Yeah I did not really even think about that I suppose it makes alot of sense then what he said though he wont be all that old I will in my early 60s by 2040 I will be "old". He will still be 25 years from retiring while I will be only 10 years from retiring if things keep going the way they do.

Who knows maybe the singularity will have occurred by then and we will all be slaves of now much smarter than humans self aware computers who will electronically laugh at our primitive aircraft.Maybe we will use A-10s and B-52s to bomb Skynet.

[Sailor Steve]

If I'm still around I'll be 90, and probably won't care much one way or the other. But whatever happens I'll probably say "See? I told you so!"




And of course "Get off my lawn!"

[Feuer Frei!]

And of course "Get off my lawn!"
You'll be ok Steve:

http://i52.tinypic.com/2rg04ue.jpg

[Stealhead]

Back to the A-10 for a minute; I can fondly recall once while I was stationed at Ramstein AB in Germany driving along the flight line on some odd errand with an fresh from tech airman.We rode past two F-16s and an A-10 that had stopped over from Spanghlem AB which is where they sent all the F-16s that used to fly out of RA in 1993 RA and the A-10s from various bases in West Germany is mostly a cargo base now.RA is close enough to SP that it is used as a diversion base in case of weather or in flight emergencies.

This young airman had never really seen any combat aircraft up close before and wanted to stop so I agreed.There where three planes but only one pilot standing by one of the Vipers.So we ask him what happened to the others.

Turned out this captain had accidentally locked his canopy and well the "keys" are 60 miles away:haha: so his wingmen left him to wait for the SP guards to show up which was taking some time.What was really funny was that this Viper pilot clearly envied the A-10 pilot said the Hog was a more fun plane to fly than the Viper and decided that he was going to request that he be assigned to one of the Hog squadrons when he got back to base. The young airman was surprised a pilot would prefer the A-10 to an F-16 or 15. I wonder if he locked his canopy on purpose in the vain hope that theyd simply assign him to Hogs seeing as he could not handle the complex nature of the Vipers egress systems.:har:

[Oberon]

:har: Nice.

We used to get the Hogs over from the 81st TFW at Bentwaters and Woodbridge. I remember one banking low over my primary school, so low I could see the Warthog face on the side of the plane. It was a terrible shame when they all left in 1993.

Here's a couple of A-10 related shots from the Bentwaters Cold War Museum:

http://img51.imageshack.us/img51/5159/1034564.jpg

http://img840.imageshack.us/img840/2633/1034565.jpg
What an awesome plaque to be given, eh? Big salute to MSGT Robert D. Hale Jr :salute:

[Platapus]

I think the GAU-8 qualifies as a BFG. :yep:

It is almost like General Electric built this gun and the Air Force told Fairchild "build an aircraft around this, OK?"

:D

[Oberon]

I think the GAU-8 qualifies as a BFG. :yep:

It is almost like General Electric built this gun and the Air Force told Fairchild "build an aircraft around this, OK?"

:D

They pretty much did! :haha:

[Stealhead]

No that is precisely what they did the A-10 was designed around the gun though the gun designers where told: design a gun for a CAS aircraft specifically for tank killing.So the concept for the A-10 was around yes but the gun was the first thing to be designed.

The chamber that fires the shells is in the dead center of the airframe which actually makes the rest of the gun not dead center it is slightly to the port side of airframe if you see a head on shot you can see this from other angles it is not as clear.Of course today the GAU-8 is hardly ever used to kill armored vehicles and more often to attack soft targets so the favored load out is more high explosive incendiary rounds and less AP.Of course that was the entire idea of the A-10C upgrades was to make the plane more capable in roles beyond tank busting which is not as much of a need at the current time.

I have always felt from when it was first shown publicly that the F-35 was a joke a freaking multi billion dollar joke.I guess that is related to this thread but the damn F-35 is really pathetic if you ask me.I mean the thing is crap what does it have that nothing else can do?Stealth ability at the cost of being a piece of dog ****?Ridiculous it is just a program to keep Lockheed in business.

[krashkart]

Always enjoyed seeing or hearing the A-10's fly overhead when I still lived near a base. We always knew when a deployment was coming up, as the local news would report about it. In most cases that meant that the local PD would be a man short for awhile; one of their officers was a pilot, you see. Got a lot of respect for folks who choose those risky lines of work. They're comprised of far better and more courageous stuff than I am. :salute:

The canopy in Oberon's picture looks pretty beat up. Is there a backstory to that, or just wear and tear? :ping:

[Raptor1]

I have always felt from when it was first shown publicly that the F-35 was a joke a freaking multi billion dollar joke.I guess that is related to this thread but the damn F-35 is really pathetic if you ask me.I mean the thing is crap what does it have that nothing else can do?Stealth ability at the cost of being a piece of dog ****?Ridiculous it is just a program to keep Lockheed in business.

Oh? What can't the F-35 do that the F-16 and F/A-18, which it is designed to replace, can?

It might not be worth the development cost and time, but the aircraft itself doesn't seem like a step backwards to me...

EDIT: Ah, should read the opening post. Didn't know the F-35 was supposed to replace the A-10 as well...

[Stealhead]

I will say that it has much lower range,is less maneuverable,and has a much lower payload and would often have to carry some load out externally meaning that its stealth gets compromised half the time thanks to that.

Not going to get into a discussion about it beyond that as you obviously have posted nothing else in this thread and are clearly a big fan of the F-35 and are o the hunt so to speak not taking that bait just because you are a fan boy don't assume that others are:03:.

I am not saying stick to older technology I am saying develop newer better airframes not ones that only gain one thing at the cost of others when one can develop something that is much less of a compromise.

[Oberon]

I think it was a Martin-Baker job, it was donated to the museum by a collector...not sure the precise story behind it. Next time I'm there I'll have a look. :yep:

[Stealhead]

Well I can tell you that A1C Lott was one of the planes crew chiefs because you can see his or her name on the canopy.There likely is the rank and name of an NCO on the other side that would have been the lead crew chief.

[Raptor1]

I will say that it has much lower range,is less maneuverable,and has a much lower payload and would often have to carry some load out externally meaning that its stealth gets compromised half the time thanks to that.

Not going to get into a discussion about it beyond that as you obviously have posted nothing else in this thread and are clearly a big fan of the F-35 and are o the hunt so to speak not taking that bait just because you are a fan boy don't assume that others are:03:.

I am not saying stick to older technology I am saying develop newer better airframes not ones that only gain one thing at the cost of others when one can develop something that is much less of a compromise.

:hmmm:

Fanboy? Hunt? A bit early for baseless accusations, I think. All I did was ask a question and state my opinion on the aircraft. I even said it might not be worth the development time and cost...

From what I know the F-35 variants are supposed to have more range than the aircraft they are designed to replace, a similar or bigger payload when using external ordnance, and better maneuverability in certain cases (At least compared to the F-16). I could be wrong, of course, but that's only the fault of my information...

[kraznyi_oktjabr]

:hmmm:

Fanboy? Hunt? A bit early for baseless accusations, I think. All I did was ask a question and state my opinion on the aircraft. I even said it might not be worth the development time and cost...

From what I know the F-35 variants are supposed to have more range than the aircraft they are designed to replace, a similar or bigger payload when using external ordnance, and better maneuverability in certain cases (At least compared to the F-16). I could be wrong, of course, but that's only the fault of my information...
Based on Wikipedia:
Combat radius/Ferry range:
F-15C: 1,061 nm (interdiction missions)/3,000 nm (with external tanks and CFTs)
F-16C: 294 nm/2,280 nm (with drop tanks)
F-35A: "over 590 nm on internal fuel"/ 1200 nm on internal fuel

Speed:
F-15C: hi-al Mach 2.5+ lo-al Mach 1.2
F-16C: at altitude Mach 2+ at sealevel Mach 1.2
F-35A: Mach 1.6+ (tested on Mach 1.53

Have to remember few things.
1. Its not clear (atlest to me) what is under F-15's wings/belly during interdiction missions? Are there any extra fuel tanks?
2. In case of speed it would be useful to know are those numbers got when aircraft is in clean configuration or with missiles, tanks etc. under wings?
3. You can always get figures favourable to your position. Its just matter of what you forget to mention... on your product or competitors.