A10 Warthog
 

I'm curious about the retirement and replacement of this airplane. When, why, and with what?

I'm sure there are other more knowledgeable folks here who could add more, but I just read this the other day:

The A-10 Warthog Won’t Last Forever. Here Are 5 Potential Successors - Bloomberg

The B-52 is older than any active duty pilot. The KC-135 is just about there as well but it's replacement is about to get into full production.

We sure need to either make a better A-10 or start making more A-10s.

I was at a social event and was listening to two men discuss the A-10. One was a former A-10 pilot and the other a former tank commander and both had been in the first gulf war. It was fascinating to listen to them both. The tank commander at one point said something like "that A-10 transformed before my eyes from the ugliest airplane to the most beautiful thing I had ever seen" Evidently the A-10 had destroyed some "problems" for the ground guys. It just shredded some Iraqi armor.

The Army loves the A10. For some reason that doesnt matter to the folks in DC that write the checks.

I saw a-10s flying in Idaho years ago. They were spooky. Unlike any airplane I have seen. They seemed to defy physics - in a good way. Hard to explain.

The Warthog is getting old and if we go to war with any peer state it will not be involved in the initial fighting since it has a much harder time surviving against current air defenses.

On the Bloomberg article there were a couple points I would like to counter. There is no chance the GAU-8 Avenger or similar cannon is going in anything unless it is a new airframe. Also, the F35 is designed for CAS and not just for dogfighting. From all accounts the F-35 is a capable dogfighter but it was designed to move mud around very well and the Air Force does not designate the same as the Navy did with the F/A-18 so it isn't the F/A 35. That said it is a fast mover and would not be good at the loiter and kill role the A-10 has. With the guided munitions we have the F-35 can do the role, but it will accomplish it in a very different way.

The sad fact is, the Air force does not like the plane and have been actively trying to kill it off for a long time. The A-10 is unique in its abilities and there isn't anything on the horizon that will be a direct replacement for it. Nothing else has the loiter ability with the heavy weapons load and a significant amount of armor and redundancy built in. But, it isn't fast, doesn't look sexy and is the outcast child in the Air Force. Not with the pilots, just the brass.

The Air force pilots are a resourceful bunch. One Strike Eagle crew "shot" down an Iraqi helicopter in flight with a Paveway LGB so there may be some adaptations from the crew now that the F-35 is in IOC.

I should add, had I perfect vision the Warthog would have been at the top of my list.

In the photo, I'm testing a HUD upgrade for the A-10. It was in 2007.

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1471440547.jpg

You can always put new parts on it!

I cannot confirm or deny but I think I read somewhere that because of the difficulty of finding a replacement they are planing (or continuing) to build more A-10's.

I was leaving Las Vegas heading to Utah and a group of A-10 were doing maneuvers... several cars pulled off of I-15 and we got a impromptu air show.

Right out of college, I could have joined NY Air National Guard. I wanted to fly and I wanted to fly the A-10. Low and slow. It wasn't sexy. It was purpose built.

My allergies disqualified me from pilot training, so I never went in. If I had, I would have been finished with training and probably involved in the first Iraq war.

dat GAU8

They tried a modified one (GAU-13/GPU-5) on several different aircraft and it could even be fitted to an F-5 which sounds like a disaster there.

The results were less than desirable. In fact, they were horrible. Within the first 48 hours of continuous combat operations the GEPOD30s were proven to be totally unable to satisfy their intended mission. Precision fire was almost impossible with the setup as the F-16s software had not been adequately modified for aiming, and the vibration was so bad when the gun was fired that software tweaks probably would have made little difference anyway and it wreaked havoc on the F-16's sensitive electronics and mechanical components.

The reality is that the system was so ill-suited to the aircraft that just firing the gun multiple times would tweak the pylon it is attached to and thus it would become skewed far off zero. Not to mention that in comparison to the low and slower flying A-10, in actual combat the F-16's high speed made it hard to get a proper sight picture to aim during long strafing runs. Apparently maintainers and pilots had warned that the gun was ill-suited for the light fighter long before the deployment, but their mission was to try and make it work.

The F-16 Gun Pod That Tried To Shoot Down The A-10 Warthog

replaced with drones...

The CBU-97 works well and they are only getting better.

<iframe width="640" height="360" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/bg9uoI8RQKc" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

A drone can shoot a few missiles and hit a few targets. Not even close to the on board cannon of the A-10 destructive force. And the A-10 can carry missiles as well.

I'd imagine that a drone with the capabilities of the A10 would end up looking a lot like the A10, without the cockpit. The size of the airframe is pretty much dictated by the size of the GAU8, which in turn is dictated by the size of a 25 mm round. The flat wings are there for slow-speed flying. The gun is mounted inline with the centerline of the aircraft (or, more accurately, the firing barrel is). It is built for a purpose, and does it well.

It is the 30mm round and not the dinky 30mm the Apache uses either. The F-35 uses a 25mm round and carries 184 rounds I believe.

You are correct, the cannon was designed and then the aircraft designed around it.

While not a dogfighter it has taken down fighters such as the F-16 when the Viper comes down to play with the Warthog. 7g's at 300kts is a surprisingly tight turn to those fighter jocks pulling 8-9gs at 450kts and no plane wants to be in front of that cannon, though they carry the AIM9L as well.

Glen, the sensor fused weapons will take over the role of that big cannon and the SDB can glide out to 50 (or so I am told) miles to take out a building or encampment.

The A-10 is an awesome place kicker but it is a 45 year old place kicker and they are running more 2 point conversions now and only kick very long field goals now.

There was an article a number of months ago about a B-52 pilot...

...as was his father.

...as was his grandfather.

The B-52 is slated to stay with us for a long time yet. I bet it outlasts the B-1.

The A-10 was developed during the cold war primarily to defend NATO allies against USSR tank invasions. Russia can no longer afford that kind of invasion (as Afghanistan proved and Crimea will prove again), and could not survive a NATO attack in this global economy. Plus, their tanks are 40 years and most are rusted POS's.

They'd never catch NATO by surprise in 2016, considering our advancements in satellite and reconnaissance technologies since the early 80's when A-10's valued. We'd see them coming as soon as they stared massing. A few drones and stealth fighters dropping BIG bombs will be plenty of deterrent.

Other than Russia, China, and the USA, who's left with a significant Tank and armored ground assault capability. The EU kinda prevents Germany from attacking Poland. That's not going to happen again.

The A-10 was an awesome plane. I NDI'd them at RAF Bentwaters in 1980. I loved em...But like the Vought VE-7 Bluebird, the world has moved on.

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1471458909.jpg

if I was pinned down that would be the plane I would want covering me! That is one bad ass plane,

So true. I don't think there's anything out there that does close air support better- especially at that price. If there is I haven't seen it.

The Air Force Spares The A-10 Warthog From Slaughter, Decides To Kill It Slowly Instead

Seems it will remain in service until 2022

The GAU is a big gun, and it is not cheap to shoot, but it is cheaper by far than guided missiles. For that reason alone, some version of GAU totin' airplane will exist - be it the A-10 or an A-10 rehash.

There are a LOT of A-29s being completed and shipped overseas. Member states see the value of a single turbo prop aircraft in both acquisition cost and operational cost. These make very good CAS aircraft, like the good ol' Sandy, but it is not the bullet-flinging gun platform that the A-10 is.

Drones will continue to be an increasing presence on the battlefield, but they are limited in their useful loading. I don't see them going out to defend against columns of armor.

The Beechcraft (Pilatus) AT-6? ROFL. It can't take the abuse of a CAS role. It just barely manages to be a trainer.

The Textron Scorpion.... One prototype built three years ago, and zero traction since then.

https://i.imgflip.com/u2rf0.jpg

http://www.fairfaxunderground.com/fo...10_warthog.jpg

The GAU produces 9000lbs recoil thrust and tends to bend weapons pylons so the airframe will have to be build around it again or dropped into a Super AC-130.

Turboprops have that loiter capability and I think would do well in uncontested airspace. Then again, a B-52 with PGM would do well in uncontested airspace and can carry an additional 20 2000# JDAMS with the new rotary launcher in the bay in addition to what they could carry on wing pylons.

Honestly I don't see battles with columns of armor like WWII and if we do, the battle of 73 Eastings would be a good reminder to the enemy why they shouldn't try conventional tank warfare with us.

A10 Warthog
 

A very effective ground support warplane. Apears to be designed for function first, form was secondary. We used to see them often doing practice runs above I94 in Wisconsin on Friday afternoons when heading out to SCCA race events in the early 90's. DP

Turns out, with big enough engines, a pig will fly
http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1471474824.jpg

I thought the A10 was just another outdated aircraft with a bunch of nostalgic old people complaining about it going away until I saw this:
<iframe width="649" height="390" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/rEdy84YGf1k" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Watch it! 6 minutes of facts that will totally change your mind.

And that hog will throw some serious bacon.

hakuna matata in your face!

Interesting the similarities of two planes that were built like flying tanks, produced decades before, were popular with pilots and those on the ground and had long service lives.http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1471476061.jpg

Since it is a close air support aircraft, why not turn it over to the Army? It is really for their benefit. Bring back the "Army Air Corp"!

Great video Joe, thank you.

The Northrop A-9. The A-10 competitor during the fly off (Northrop lost, of course).http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1471478887.jpg

Agree.

I checked the knots vs mph conversion and 200 knots is 230mph ground speed w/o wind (from what I read)

Space shuttle landed at just over 200 mph. Slow, as the speaker stressed to protect effectively.

not if you swarm...

I have never heard the story of how the A-10 got the 30 mm cannon. Great video! 20 meter accuracy. I can't imagine seeing the enemy turned into flying pink mist 20 meters away.

Missiles can't fire that close or react as quickly, nor operate with that much discretion.

Who is the swarm director when only a 20 meter buffer is required ASAP?

I don't care how ungainly close air support aircraft may look with their bumps, pods, protruberences etc.
They turn into a thing of beauty when they show up and turn things all around for you.
And ones that can stick around a bit are all the better.

I can only imagine how appreciated the A 10 was on the ground in the desert wars, where it and other forces could all but clear the field of armored resistance!

Cheers Richard

Basically, I don't understand two things.

First, is the A10 no longer capable of the ground support role?. If it is still capable, are the existing A10s too old to keep using? If they are, why isn't rebuilding them the most cost effective solution? If they are beyond rebuilding, why isn't making new A10s the next most cost effective solution? After all, developing a new plane will be very expensive and if the A10 works, why develop a new plane?

Second, why are attack helicopters not well suited to ground support? They can carry anti tank missiles for armor, guns for soft targets. They can loiter, operate at low altitude, operate from primitive bases, fire accurately. They are relatively inexpensive. They are not fast but neither is the A10.