quote:

---

http://www.airforcetimes.com/story/military/2016/02/02/secdef--10-stay-until-2022/79687644/

Common sense finally prevails.

---

Good news!

I'll save my analysis of USAF leadership for later.

Weren't all the A-10s moved to Guard/Reserve squadrons? If so, will they stay there, or being them back to active duty squadrons.

I'm ignorant of how that all works, if you can't already tell.

Approximately 283 A-10s remain operational, flown by the active duty USAF, Air National Guard, and Air Force Reserve. The information below was mostly accurate as of November 2015.

USAF

• 25th Fighter Squadron (Osan Air Force Base, South Korea)
• 66th Weapons Squadron (Nellis Air Force Base, Nevada)
• 74th Fighter Squadron (Moody Air Force Base, Georgia)
• 75th Fighter Squadron (Moody Air Force Base, Georgia)
• 354th Fighter Squadron (Davis-Monthan Air Force Base, Arizona)
• 357th Fighter Squadron (Davis-Monthan Air Force Base, Arizona)
• 422d Test and Evaluation Squadron (Nellis Air Force Base, Nevada)

ANG

• 104th Fighter Squadron (Warfield Air National Guard Base, Maryland)
• 107th Fighter Squadron (Selfridge Air National Guard Base, Michigan)
• 163d Fighter Squadron (Fort Wayne Air National Guard Station, Indiana)
• 190th Fighter Squadron (Gowen Field Air National Guard Base, Idaho)

AF Reserve

• 45th Fighter Squadron (Davis-Monthan Air Force Base, Arizona)
• 47th Fighter Squadron (Davis-Monthan Air Force Base, Arizona)
• 76th Fighter Squadron (Moody Air Force Base, Georgia)
• 303d Fighter Squadron (Whiteman Air Force Base, Missouri)

Funny how every time we have a war break out, the A-10 gets saved again.

I'd really like to watch a Congressperson or senator put an AF General on the stand to testify, under oath, why the y continually want to get rid of the aircraft. I'd like to know why.

I suspect the answer would involved spreadsheets, budget analysis, and statistical metrics all presented by someone who has never felt the impact of a CAS strike by an A10.

quote:

---

I'd really like to watch a Congressperson or senator put an AF General on the stand to testify, under oath, why the y continually want to get rid of the aircraft. I'd like to know why.

---

That's already happened on numerous occasions. There's a pretty well-circulated video of McCain chastising the CSAF for saying B-1s provide CAS (as part of the official AF answer to why the A-10 isn't necessary). It's a conflict of doctrine and tactics, basically...Big AF sees CAS as providing an effect on a target in contact with ground forces, which a JDAM can do from a B-1, a Hellfire from an MQ-9, and so on. While I agree, that the B-1 does provide the same effect (with greater capacity) as an A-10 in the bombing vein of CAS, it is preposterous to say that any other aircraft in the fleet provides the same effect as that 30mm cannon that has proven its worth throughout the A-10's lifetime...and which the AF has no plans to replace.

quote:

---

They're all pilots. They want newer and "better" toys. They run the USAF. They are the problem. Watch their Congressional testimony on the A-10. Shameful. One general actually told a meeting of officers that if they didn't support the official position on this they'd be committing treason. He got "fired" from his job but he's still on active duty.

---

That is absolutely the truth. The first time the AF tried to get rid of the A-10 was way back in the late 80's. The CAS mission has never been "glamorous" to fighter pilots and it was my experience that most looked down their nose at the both the mission and the airplane.

The Generals in charge love the A-10. Hell, the CSAF is a former A-10 driver.

They have a difference of opinion with the more knowledgeable elected officials on how best to accomplish all the missions tasked to USAF with the money allocated for said missions.

And lets be honest here. The politicians care about what assets are in their states/districts.

quote:

---

The Generals in charge love the A-10. Hell, the CSAF is a former A-10 driver.

They have a difference of opinion with the more knowledgeable elected officials on how best to accomplish all the missions tasked to USAF with the money allocated for said missions.

And lets be honest here. The politicians care about what assets are in their states/districts.We

---

The CSAF wants the A-10 retired because there's no money. No, it's old! No, we have other aircraft that are equally as good at CAS. No, we need the F-35... Sec. Carter says the A-10 stays until 2022. And the CSAF is STILL TRYING TO RETIRE IT EARLY. He does not "love" the A-10. He's barely tolerating it.

Time for CSAF to retire. The USAF has some serious leadership issues

We need more diversity in AF leadership.

Interesting article. I do find it humorous that the way to increase diversity in the AF's general corps is to increase the diversity of operator tribes represented in the general corps.

quote:

---

Interesting article. I do find it humorous that the way to increase diversity in the AF's general corps is to increase the diversity of operator tribes represented in the general corps.

---

We need a finance guy to run the USAF. Half-day workdays and four day work weeks!

So there are pilots and then everyone else?

quote:

---

So there are pilots and then everyone else?

---

There are good leaders and there are poor leaders. Why not choose people for senior positions based on their knowledge and their leadership abilities instead of who is next on the pilot family tree?

quote:

---

That's my perspective. The Air Force intentionally disregards tons of human capital it pays a lot of good money to develop by continuing the practice of only allowing pilots to command in any position that has influence over flying operations. There are thousands of officers that learn and develop as leaders from day one as butterbars (and don't work banker's hours ) that mostly top out at O-5 and O-6.

---

Absolutely!!

And I was kidding about the finance types. I know they work hard.

Speaking of diversity in AF leadership, when I was growing up as an AF brat in the 50's and 60's, AF senior leadership was dominated by SAC pilots. Gen LeMay, the father of SAC, was Vice CSAF from 57-61 and CSAF from 61-65. Tactical Air Command was the red headed step-child of the AF under LeMay and several ex-SAC senior AF leaders that came after him. This quote from his wiki entry sums up LeMay's attitude towards TAC:

quote:

---

LeMay's dislike for tactical aircraft and training backfired in the low-intensity conflict of Vietnam, where existing Air Force fighter aircraft and standard attack profiles proved incapable of carrying out sustained tactical bombing campaigns in the face of hostile North Vietnamese antiaircraft defenses. LeMay said, "Flying fighters is fun. Flying bombers is important." Aircraft losses on tactical attack missions soared, and Air Force commanders soon realized that their large, missile-armed jet fighters were exceedingly vulnerable not only to antiaircraft shells and missiles but also to cannon-armed, maneuverable Soviet fighters.

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

That's my perspective. The Air Force intentionally disregards tons of human capital it pays a lot of good money to develop by continuing the practice of only allowing pilots to command in any position that has influence over flying operations. There are thousands of officers that learn and develop as leaders from day one as butterbars (and don't work banker's hours ) that mostly top out at O-5 and O-6.

---

Absolutely!!

And I was kidding about the finance types. I know they work hard.

---

Between 0900-1600 but not during coffee and lunch breaks, and definitely not on training days, I'm sure they do!

The news isn't as good as was thought?

http://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/the-air-force-spares-the-a-10-warthog-from-slaughter-d-1760975748

Well they are putting it to use:

quote:

---

BOISE - The Idaho Air National Guard is joining the fight against ISIS - the so-called "Islamic State" group - in the Middle East.

A statement released by the Idaho Air National Guard Monday afternoon said more than 500 members of the 124th Fighter Wing - based at Gowen Field - will deploy this spring and summer.

The mission will include multiple aircraft, pilots, maintenance personnel, medical personnel, security forces and other support staff.

---

http://www.ktvb.com/news/local/idaho-air-guard-to-fight-isis/61890360

Let me give another perspective. First off, I know kids flying the A-10 and support their mission. One of my sons is enlisted in the AF. Because of sequestration there is a severe shortage of maintainers. In the last few months BMT classes have gone from 500 to over 800 to replace airman previously cut. One MTI that was an avionics specialist will receive $90,000 bonus to go back in maintenance.

We have been losing at least one RPA a month. Aircraft have using parts from the boneyard in Arizona. Luckily there has been limited manned aircraft accidents. Hopefully, it can be turned around before any fatalities.

With the extended deployments since '01 and sequestration it has pushed the AF to make difficult choices. From what I can surmise, unless things change in the near future and unless some programs are dropped the maintenance problems will continue at every level and every airframe.

I can personally attest to the results of to what maintenance short cuts can cause. And hope that no other family will have to also endure it.

The A-10's from the AF Reserve unit at Ft Smith, AR are already gone. We have a lake house at Lake Tenkiller, OK, not far from Ft Smith. There is a very active Army National Guard base at Camp Gruber, just on the other side of the lake from us.

When Ft Smith still had A-10's, they would often put on CAS demos for the Army Guard grunts (from many states, not just OK) training at Gruber. Turns out the park where our lake house is was where they would come back from a pass, make a low level turn over our park, and then head back toward Gruber.

A glorious sight that I sorely miss. FWIW, I have yet to see an F-16, or any other, AF plane pass low over our lake house. I'm guessing that an F-16 CAS demo is much less impressive than an A-10 demo. And I mean no disrespect to any F-16 drivers on this board.

Good news for Hog fans everywhere. It'll be a sad day when they stop flying that beautiful beast.

Ouch.

McCain vs. Welsh

Great link. Every word was spot on. Thanks for posting it!

The smart thing would be to transfer all the A-10 assets to the Army and let them conduct CAS. The Marines conduct their own CAS with the Harrier. Let the Army have the Warthog!

The Army has the same budgetary woes as the Air Force. No way they want to assume the additional A-10 logistics, training and manpower costs, even if the aircraft are free. The Army's silence on this issue speaks volumes to their lack of interest. Besides, they're already spending hundreds of millions on approximately 800 Apache attack helicopters to provide organic CAS.........

I would not make much of the Army's silence regarding taking over A-10s. The fixed v. rotary wing split is long & well established. I would take note that the Army seems indifferent to the A-10s fate. AWT & drones do a vastly better job at all the current or (probable) future air support roles.
It serves an unnecessary niche in an era or resource scarcity.