Article

2020-04-10 Home Front: WoT

Air Force Targets Davis-Monthan For Bulk Of A-10 Cuts

The fighter fleet keeps trying to nibble away at the real effective CAS
[AZ Daily Independent] The Air Force plans to retire 42 A-10 aircraft at Davis-Monthan Air Force Base in Tucson next year, according to a state lawmaker, a move that would cut the base's fleet of the storied "Warthogs" in half.

Rep. Ann Kirkpatrick, D-Tucson, identified the proposed cuts in letters to the Air Force and to House committees that said cutting the planes would harm military readiness and "bring serious harm to the economy in the community I represent."

Kirkpatrick, who said she was not briefed on the plan, called the move "inexcusable" in a statement Monday.

"I find it incredibly alarming that the Air Force would put out plans without properly briefing Congress nor transparency about the replacement process and timelines," her statement said. "The A-10 Warthog has a mission to protect our men and women in battle and I am committed to fighting in Congress to protect its mission."

An Air Force spokesman did not comment directly on Kirkpatrick's claim Monday, only repeating earlier statements that the service was committed to a $161 million upgrade of remaining A-10s, "our most effective close-air support platform."

A spokesperson for Davis-Monthan said he had not heard about A-10s at the base being affected, and he said he could not comment.

The Air Force unveiled its plan to reduce the A-10 fleet in the fiscal 2021 budget proposal that was released in February. That document called for the service to retire 44 "of the oldest and least ready" A-10s as the Air Force shifts to newer-generation aircraft.

Posted by Frank G 2020-04-10 00:00|| || Front Page|| [11130 views ] Top

#1 After seeing the effectiveness of the Worts, it seems pretty obvious. They just want to spend money, our money.

Posted by Woodrow 2020-04-10 09:32|| 2020-04-10 09:32|| Front Page Top

#2 Way past time to tell the AF either quit mucking about CAS or we move it to the Army, material, equipment, personnel, and budget. If the Marines can have their own CAS, the Army can have theirs (and end Army attack chopper development as a alternative to the AF mishandling of CAS).

Posted by Procopius2k 2020-04-10 09:43|| 2020-04-10 09:43|| Front Page Top

#3 Privatization.
Blackwater AF.

Low and slow?
Imagine shipping lane pirate patrols.

Posted by Skidmark 2020-04-10 09:50|| 2020-04-10 09:50|| Front Page Top

#4 There's an easy solution for the Air force. Inform them that any cuts made to the A-10 will be reflected by an order of magnitude in the entire air force budget. So cut 160 million from the A-10 funds, the air force gets a 1.6 billion dollar cut. Oh and anyone proposing the cuts gets retired to prison for treason.

Posted by Silentbrick 2020-04-10 10:42|| 2020-04-10 10:42|| Front Page Top

#5 Of course they want to replace the A-10 'Warthog' with F-35 'Thingamajigs'...
The bean counters™ love the magic-ness of multi-role aircraft that can (supposedly) do everything ~~poorly~~ ~~mediocrely~~ adequately. On paper they can use 50-ish multi-role aircraft to replace an inventory of 70-ish specialist aircraft. On paper. Paper planes don't fail to back because they couldn't perform the basic mission...

Posted by magpie 2020-04-10 12:16|| 2020-04-10 12:16|| Front Page Top

#6 AGREE with the "BRICK"!

Posted by ranture 2020-04-10 12:55|| 2020-04-10 12:55|| Front Page Top

#7 Baffling. Not a USAF guy here... can someone pls explain why they're doing this? Isn't the Warthog one of the most successful military aircraft we've ever built?

Posted by Lex 2020-04-10 12:58|| 2020-04-10 12:58|| Front Page Top

#8 It's not Zoomy

Posted by Frank G 2020-04-10 13:05|| 2020-04-10 13:05|| Front Page Top

#9 Lex, it's not sexy like a fighter plane. You could also be snide and say that buying a brand new airframe is good for your post-military career as a "paid consultant". There will be competent, hard working professionals in the US military trying to make the best use of this vehicle and hopefully they will have a better result than the ongoing multi-role "dumpster fire" that is the Littoral Combat Ship(LCS) program.

Have you ever watched The Pentagon Wars(1998)? There is a cutting remark about what the push to make a multi-role APC can do for you: (Wiki)...He delves into the mountains of paper documenting the Bradley's development history and comes to the conclusion that it is "a troop transport that can't carry troops, a reconnaissance vehicle that's too conspicuous to do reconnaissance, and a quasi-tank that has less armor than a snowblower, but has enough ammo to take out half of D.C."

Posted by magpie 2020-04-10 13:39|| 2020-04-10 13:39|| Front Page Top

#10 We dug the AD 1 Skyraider in Viet Nam as that thing could loiter overhead with plenty of ordinance...risky was F8 Crusader as first pass was 20 mm strafe,2nd pass was rockets unless he seen you...
Talk about a stain in yer skivies..!!

Posted by crazyhorse 2020-04-10 13:52|| 2020-04-10 13:52|| Front Page Top

#11 Thanks, magpie. Makes sense. Will check out The Pentagon Wars.

Posted by Lex 2020-04-10 14:27|| 2020-04-10 14:27|| Front Page Top

#12 The real test of the Bradley was in the field at 73 Easting.

Posted by Procopius2k 2020-04-10 16:00|| 2020-04-10 16:00|| Front Page Top

#13 /\ Wooden Ships and Iron Men ... in many cases it isn't the vehicle but the crew. I think it can be argued that the army that went into the 1991 Campaign was the best trained and disciplined that we have ever had.

Posted by magpie 2020-04-10 18:52|| 2020-04-10 18:52|| Front Page Top

17:02 Melancholic
16:27 Gravilet Snanter4154
16:20 Chaise Speaking for Boskone7897
16:02 Skidmark
16:01 Skidmark
15:46 Skidmark
15:41 Skidmark
15:37 swksvolFF
15:36 Skidmark
15:34 Skidmark
15:27 Skidmark
14:48 NoMoreBS
14:31 NoMoreBS
14:16 NoMoreBS
14:15 NoMoreBS
14:04 swksvolFF
13:47 Regular joe
13:43 swksvolFF
13:38 swksvolFF
13:34 swksvolFF
13:31 Abu Uluque
13:25 Heribertus Vedente
13:24 mossomo
13:20 Abu Uluque