[Muck]

Originally Posted by AKAKBUCK

No idea... just pointing out that was "the plan"

Not knocking you just find those type of requirements funny.

Sometimes I think some of those conversations go like this:

AF General: The plan is for our next strike fighter to be far more capable in the ground attack role.

Congressman: How much better?

AF General: Umm...how about 7..No! Eight times better!?

Congressman: Wow that sounds like a lot!

Originally Posted by cincibuck

It's my understanding that the A-10 argument got to the point where the Army said, "If you don't want to field them, we do." at which point the AF blinked. This would have been between wars and would have been a concession that the AH-64 was not the complete answer. Know anything more?

Dunno.

Rumor has it that when the project was first conceived the AF was luke warm at best about the idea so the Army offered to build, maintain & fly them themselves and threatened to take it to congress. The AF wasn't thrilled with that idea so when ahead with the program.

I do know that the A-10 was slated for the boneyard prior to Desert Storm. The idea was to replace it with a CAS focused F-16. There were a few different attempts at the "A-16" & "F/A-16" all of which turned out to be dogs during testing.

Sometime during that time frame (88-91) the Army supposedly offered to take the A-10s off the AF's hands. I believe Congress even went so far as to order some Warthogs be handed over to the Army & the USMC (who wasn't really interestes AFAIK) but in the end they dictated that the AF be required to maintain two wings of Warthogs.

And then Desert Storm happened and the A-10 became a favored son thus saving it.

Another story is that after Desert Storm the Army & AF chiefs of staff got together and the AF chief of Staff (McPeak) offered to trade the A-10s to the Army in exchange for the Patriots & TACMS (taking the Army out of both of those missions). I have no idea what the head of the Army had to say about that but it's obvious it didn't go through.

Now in the AF's defense they have ponied up to finally give the A-10 some of the modern avionics it needs. They're currently going through an upgrade program creating the A-10C which will have an IR designation pod, a data link, modern glass cockpit and upgrades so it can carry JDAMs and other newer ordnance.

So it's not being completely neglected and is slated to be in service until either 2023 or 2028 (can't remember which) when it will be replaced by the F-35.

I'm as big a fan of the A-10 as the next guy but take a look at the various fratricide incidents from CAS & BAI missions since Desert Storm. The A-10 is disturbingly & disproportionately represented in those numbers. Now without knowing exactly what percentages of missions are carried out by the warthog vs other aircraft it's hard to say where the problem lies but it is something that is worth looking at. My personal (anecdotal) experiences tend to back up those negatives numbers and I know a lot of Marines & British soldiers who don't want the thing anywhere around them for similar reasons.

Now I'm reasonably confident that most of that potential problem relates to the antiquated avionics in the A-10 and the upgrade program should go a long way to alleviate it.

My favorite version of the A-10 ended up stillborn. It was a two seat proposal in the late 70's that would have given the Warthog night & precision attack capabilities 25 years before it ended up receiving them.

Originally Posted by t_BuckeyeScott

I think I would even go as far as to say that I'm slightly worried about the continued cuts in the amount of the F - 22s we're buying.

The number has been frozen at 183 for quite awhile so there haven't really been any recent cuts.

You'll also be happy to know that Congress just set aside money for an additional 20 Raptors to be built pushing the number to 203.

I wouldn't be surprised if that number continues to climb at least a little if for no other reason than to keep the line open.

Edit: Check that, it looks like so far it's just made it through a subcommitte and has to make it's way through the system.