A 10 warthog defeated. Good night sweet prince

I swear. That really makes me angry. What are they going to use to replace it? Apaches? HA! dont make me laugh! the F-35? not likely. No the Soldiers are going to be left out in the cold this time.

Please feel free to post your respects.

a reply to: yuppa
Almost makes me as sad as when we scrapped the F-14 Tomcat.

Link or it didn't happen.

ETA: I am sure there is something ready to replace it. Maybe not today, maybe not tomorrow but one day and for the rest of your life.

originally posted by: Rosinitiate
Link or it didn't happen.

ETA: I am sure there is something ready to replace it. Maybe not today, maybe not tomorrow but one day and for the rest of your life.

Probably drones with smart bombs? I can imagine a couple well-placed munitions could do just as much damage as a strafing run. They wouldn't see it coming, either. Linky poo

House panel kills warthog


Well. thats it folks. more proof our representatives hate soldiers. Im glad i never could go into the services now.

a reply to: yuppa



The first ever model I made as a kid.

Forever in my heart the most beautiful warthog in the world.

Cody

a reply to: ScientiaFortisDefendit

They have gutted the AC-130 armament, so now it carries smart bombs, and Hellfires on the wings. The Griffin has a range of almost 50 miles, or they can carry SDBs, or up to 32 Hellfires per launcher.

I hope this is not true, I love watching my local Air national guard, do there practice runs. Its an amazing airplane.

I spent a lot of years turning wrenches on the A-10... hate to see her go

What a waste of money doing the SLEP (Service Live Extension Program) and A-10C upgrades...

So what is the cost of a hell fire to a few 30mm rounds? You know they tried to kill the A-10 a number of times, but it keeps coming back due to the shear efficiency of taking out a lot of armor very quickly. They were saying it was on it's death bed back just before Desert Storm and the first time it when down a road and laid waist to a line of tanks they decided that it wasn't quite obsolete, that was over 20 years ago.

I think the A-10 pretty much makes armor obsolete when you own the skies.

Noooooo.....

I grew up on the freaking thing! It's a hero!

Well, it did it's job well and like no other. It filled a space that at the time was needed. I can't wait to see what they have to replace it!

originally posted by: Xtrozero
I think the A-10 pretty much makes armor obsolete when you own the skies.

From the way it was described to me; the plane was designed around the gun. I grew up seeing the A-10 as a flying tank gun :p

We have fully traded skill and close work for gizmos and whiz bang remote warfare. As close as possible to it and working for more, all the time.

Anyone recall the aerial dog fighting stats between Korea and early Vietnam when skill had been traded for missile use? Kinda hard lesson....that no one seems to have learned.

Nothing said and no one can possible suggest we couldn't have both. We're still north of 600 BILLION dollars spent on defense and nothing about these older systems is radically expensive or superior to militaries running on tiny fractions of that money. So it's B.S. to say this was cost cutting. This was force cutting and gutting a big piece I understand men loved to have available to call in and which very likely saved a lot of tails in battles it engaged in.

Just another piece of American strength chopped for the blinding wonder of Gizmoism. Those damn Gizmo systems better work PERFECTLY. 100% PERFECTLY. We have so few OF them by comparisons to cost and losing anything to back them up, should ....I know, it's never happened before.... they fail to work as advertised.

dumb decisions.

Unless they don't plan on having air superiority and cant keep them flying because the f-35 or f-22 are crap and they know it.

What a bunch of idiots. This is one of our best proven and most effective platforms. Give it to the army. They make the most use of it anyways.

I suspect there is actually a plan to undermine the US and make us weak for conquest.

a reply to: Zaphod58

I know this isn't your decision or anything, but a 130 gunship can do lots far off, but little to nothing up close and personal. The A-10 crawls up your backside and blows holes in you from the inside out. It's the perfect tool for the job it does.

I am sure they have some BS drone to use for that now. But I reiterate, when you have an airplane that was built around a really, really big gun, you have something special.

a reply to: network dude

The Gunships used to have a massive psychological effect to them, due to the amount of sheer firepower they could bring. They could get up close, but during the day they were a lot more vulnerable than any other CAS platform.

There are UAVs that can provide some CAS support, but the Gunships will take over the lions share of the A-10 mission. Other manned platforms will do the rest.

We haven't even talked about smart bullets that could make things like hell fire obsolete. Wouldn't it be funny we go back to the old gun but the high tech is the bullets.

Sad really. Grew up hearing these things, very unique sound. I would say this also serves as a giant middle finger to Davis-Monthan AFB.

a reply to: yuppa

I'm really sorry to hear this. So no close ground support or reconnaissance.

I guess they plan on using drones for such 'unimportant' support functions.

My father is rolling over in this grave over thus stupidity. It's time to disband the Air Force.

The A-10 is unique in the world of CAS and there is no platform that can do the same thing with the survivability this aircraft ahs with a proven track record. The politicians need the money for new programs that are much more costly but put more money in their pockets in the end.