Pour One Out For The A-10 And The U-2

"ttyymmnn" (ttyymmnn)
02/04/2014 at 11:16 • Filed to: planelopnik

In a recent !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! , the head of Air Combat Command, Gen. Michael Hostage, paints a bleak picture for the future of two of Oppo's favorite aircraft, the A-10 and the U-2. It looks like the A-10 will, in fact, be going away, and that politics will effectively kill the U-2's combat missions.

According to Gen. Hostage, the A-10 will be the victim of budget cuts and the ability to do the A-10's job with other systems, which led to some very "hard choices."

We talked specifically about the A-10, a weapon system I would dearly love to continue in the inventory because there are tactical problems out there that would be perfectly suited for the A-10. I have other ways to solve that tactical problem.

It may not be as elegant as the A-10, but I can still get the job done, but that solution is usable in another level of conflict in which the A-10 is totally useless.

The only way for Gen. Hostage to truly save the money he needs to save is to cut the A-10 entirely, as it makes no sense to maintain half a fleet of aircraft, as the cost of support and training will still be significant. The 188th Fighter Wing at Ebbing AFB in Arkansas recently !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! . They will be transitioning to flying ISR (Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance) with the !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! . And that's got to be a bitter pill for the pilots who joined the USAF to fly planes.

The fate of the U-2's combat role seems sealed by political pressure, as Gen. Hostage says they are "being driven by politics" to adopt the !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! , a very expensive system.

It appears that I will be told I have to continue to purchase Global Hawks, and given the budget picture that we have, I cannot afford both the U-2 and the Global Hawk. I will likely have to give up the U-2. What that means is that we are going to have to spend buckets of money to get the Global Hawk up to some semblance of capability that the U-2 currently has. It is going to cost a lot of money, and it is going to take time, and as I lose the U-2 fleet, I now have a high-altitude ISR fleet that is not very useful in a contested environment. It will change how I am able to employ that airplane in a high-end fight or a contested domain.

And all of this is tied directly to the fiscal pressures of the F-35 and the F-22. Gen. Hostage discusses those systems, and says that he will fight tooth and nail for the F-35, as he needs a fifth-generation fighter that will compete with the latest systems of our adversaries. But you can't have the F-35 without the F-22, and the F-22 needs significant upgrades to its computer systems.

That is why the current upgrade programs to the F-22 I put easily as critical as my F-35 fleet. If I do not keep that F-22 fleet viable, the F-35 fleet frankly will be irrelevant. The F-35 is not built as an air superiority platform.

It's a fascinating interview, one that should be read in its entirety. I don't envy the general's job, but it sounds like he's trying to play the strongest game he can with the hand he's been dealt.

Source: !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!!
Photo: !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!!

DISCUSSION (46)

For Sweden > ttyymmnn
02/04/2014 at 11:18

the ability to do the A-10's job with other systems

wat

ttyymmnn > For Sweden
02/04/2014 at 11:19

I can only imagine he's talking about the F-35, or maybe even drones. But I had the same thought.

David E. Davis > ttyymmnn
02/04/2014 at 11:21

Looks like Gen. Hostage is an appropriate name in these two instances.

Textured Soy Protein > ttyymmnn
02/04/2014 at 11:30

Who you gonna call?

Kinja'd!!!

vdub_nut: scooter snob > David E. Davis
02/04/2014 at 11:31

Was General Asshat taken?

;_;7 RIP in Peace, you ugly bastards.

Atomic Buffalo > ttyymmnn
02/04/2014 at 11:32

1. What other systems can loiter as long, take as much damage, and deliver as much destruction as the A-10?

2. It's dead, it's alive, it's dead, it's alive, it's dead — this is getting to be like SAAB.

puddler > ttyymmnn
02/04/2014 at 11:32

i could use one of those a-10 guns.

jariten1781 > ttyymmnn
02/04/2014 at 11:34

I imagine it's a combination of helicopters, drones, and 35s all of which are multi-use.

Dukie - Jalopnik Emergency Management Asshole > ttyymmnn
02/04/2014 at 11:36

Kinja'd!!!

OtherBarry > Atomic Buffalo
02/04/2014 at 11:40

C130 gunship. I would prefer to keep the A-10 as ground support, but looks like no budget... It is a sad day indeed.

Doge_Supreme drives a BRZ > puddler
02/04/2014 at 11:42

but where would you mount it? Its bigger than a Beetle.

Kinja'd!!!

Dukie - Jalopnik Emergency Management Asshole > jariten1781
02/04/2014 at 11:44

I imagine it's a combination of there's some fucking idiots in Washington D.C.

puddler > Doge_Supreme drives a BRZ
02/04/2014 at 11:44

trailer. i'd be the guardian of the passing lane.

Gamecat235 > Dukie - Jalopnik Emergency Management Asshole
02/04/2014 at 11:45

I suspect that this is the closest to the truth.

Bad Idea Hat > jariten1781
02/04/2014 at 11:46

The 35's are great at many kinds of fuckups.

Doge_Supreme drives a BRZ > puddler
02/04/2014 at 11:47

Kinja'd!!!

I'd just stick with a couple of these mounted to the hood and load with incendiary ammunition

puddler > Doge_Supreme drives a BRZ
02/04/2014 at 11:49

but can it cut through traffic jams?

Arch Duke Maxyenko, Shit Talk Extraordinaire > David E. Davis
02/04/2014 at 11:50

Gen. Lee A. Hostage

Doge_Supreme drives a BRZ > puddler
02/04/2014 at 11:50

they've been shown to chew through cars without any issues.

Aaron James > ttyymmnn
02/04/2014 at 11:54

for everyone that hasn't seen it. No combat footage, just showing off for Family Day. Shootin' starts after 1:05.

puddler > Doge_Supreme drives a BRZ
02/04/2014 at 11:54

as soon as i get an electric paintball gun i'd like to mount it behind my grille, using the horn button as a trigger. people will eventually learn not to get behind the marked cars.

ttyymmnn > Dukie - Jalopnik Emergency Management Asshole
02/04/2014 at 11:59

Lt. Col. Paul C. Zurkowski and Major Christopher D. Cisneros, Maryland ANG, were awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross with Valor for this action.

http://www.175wg.ang.af.mil/news/story.asp…

ttyymmnn > puddler
02/04/2014 at 12:07

The Transporter > ttyymmnn
02/04/2014 at 12:17

the A-10 will be the victim of budget cuts and the ability to do the A-10's job with other systems

So they've fitted the GAU-8 to another airframe? They haven't. Ah, I see, the Genera's statement is a pack of lies, then.

ttyymmnn > The Transporter
02/04/2014 at 12:21

The general is as much of a politician as he is a warrior. I would think you have to be to rise to that level of command.

f86sabre > ttyymmnn
02/04/2014 at 12:21

There has been some talk of the Army picking up the A10. That would be an interesting discussion. If they have budget it would be a good fit. The A-10C has been upgraded so it can have a service life into the 2020s.

ttyymmnn > f86sabre
02/04/2014 at 12:25

But....but.....the Army doesn't fly jets! That's the Air Force's job!

SteyrTMP > OtherBarry
02/04/2014 at 12:39

While the payload cam be about as destructive, the AC130 can't handle the same damage. There are no other air-to-ground planes sporting outboard engines that are not wing-mounted.

OtherBarry > SteyrTMP
02/04/2014 at 12:44

I agree with you. But bean counters would say that Reapers and C130 gunships can fill the roll the A-10 for cheaper.

M54B30 > ttyymmnn
02/04/2014 at 12:45

My brother in law is a Crew chief on A-10s. He was excited when he went in (2010) but learned quickly that he's limited to bases in Arizona and Georgia.

I wonder if we had put the money we've spent on the disaster that is the F-35 program into the A-10s and upgrades to F15/16 where'd we be. I firmy believe the F35 is a weapon for a war we don't have coming.

SteyrTMP > OtherBarry
02/04/2014 at 12:48

Yeah, I know where they are trying to go. I don't want to go there.

OtherBarry > SteyrTMP
02/04/2014 at 12:55

I don't either. Defunding one of the useful aircraft for how we now go to war is embarrassing.

ttyymmnn > M54B30
02/04/2014 at 13:03

General Hostage addressed the idea of upgrading current platforms:

If you gave me all the money I needed to refurbish the F-15 and the F-16 fleets, they would still become tactically obsolete by the middle of the next decade. Our adversaries are building fleets that will overmatch our legacy fleet, no matter what I do, by the middle of the next decade.

Unfortunately, I think both the F-22 and the F-35 are flawed systems, and we're going to have to do the best we can with what we've got.

You can tell a Finn but you can't tell him much > Dukie - Jalopnik Emergency Management Asshole
02/04/2014 at 13:52

Whichever idiot thinks anything can replace the A-10 should be given a choice. They can place something of great value to themselves in the tank of their choice and choose whether it gets strafed by the A-10 or the F-35. Whichever airframe they choose to do the strafing run is not the one that will be used for CAS.

Axial > f86sabre
02/04/2014 at 14:11

I think the A10 might be a better fit for the Marine Corps, given the whole "first in" role.

The Transporter > ttyymmnn
02/04/2014 at 14:18

To be a general grade officer, you have to be a politician in a soldier's uniform. The only time a politician isn't lying is when they're dead.

FJ80WaitinForaLSV8 > ttyymmnn
02/04/2014 at 16:28

personally, I would prefer to see a capabilities gap for 10 years rather than continue down the flawed path that is the JSF. Its a flawed premise that will lead to an extremely mediocre result. Quite frankly, I'm not sure I buy that the F-35 will perform better than the assorted air-frames it is seeking to replace.

I harbor hope that the F-22 being a more purpose built aircraft will find more success however its challenges remain daunting as well.

FelixScout > Dukie - Jalopnik Emergency Management Asshole
02/07/2014 at 13:33

Though, oddly, it seems congress has forced the Air Force to hold on to the A-10 for one more year until 2015.

FelixScout > OtherBarry
02/07/2014 at 13:36

Except, apparently the new AC-130 is less armored to suit its new multi function role not gunship only role. https://medium.com/war-is-boring/…

FelixScout > f86sabre
02/07/2014 at 13:44

Though isn't there a rule that the US Army cannot fly fixed wing combat aircraft? I know the Johnson-McConnell agreement of 1966 prohibits the Army from flying tactical airlift planes in exchange for the Air Force not flying helicopters, mostly.

FelixScout > Axial
02/07/2014 at 13:45

Both ground arms need it since both do offensive operations.

Axial > FelixScout
02/07/2014 at 14:58

True. Almost makes you wonder why both still exist, though.

FelixScout > Axial
02/07/2014 at 15:27

Army traditionally tends to operate overland with few amphibious assaults. The Marines traditionally were for ship's security and amphibious operations. But with the shift from massed combat to counterinsurgency neither group really fits the role, though they got better in the last 5 years. Of course one must not set themselves up to always fight the last war.

f86sabre > FelixScout
02/07/2014 at 16:46

Rules can change.

FelixScout > f86sabre
02/08/2014 at 00:13

True, but will they?

user314 > FelixScout
02/14/2014 at 15:42

Yeah, the Key West agreement . It's amazing how the Air Scouts won't let the Army fly CAS, when they have no interest in doing it themselves.