JimofPennsylvan
Platinum Member
- Jun 6, 2007
- 869
- 512
- 910
It looks like Congress and the Pentagon are poised to make a truly big mistake in phasing out the A-10 plane by 2020 which they expect will save $3.7 billion over this time frame. The A-10 has the nicknames Warthog or Tankbuster its unique military value is that it can provide close air support for ground troops it has a Gatling gun in its nose that can fire nearly 4000 rounds a minute bullets that can even penetrate tanks! It's also unique in that it can fly at a relatively low speed over a battlefield so that the pilot has time to target and unload devastating firepower on a lot of targets; it also has an extremely solid design which allows it to withstand ground fire to a much greater degree than other air force planes and provide increased survivor ability to the pilot! If one watched TV in the 1990's during America'a First Gulf War the media showed a lot of film on this plane watching this plane it is like watching a fast action war video game with its destructive power the Air force has no airplane like it.
The reason that the Congress/Pentagon decision here seems so foolish is why shape this decision as an all or nothing proposition. Why not cut the A-10 plane program from the 300 today to 100 or even seventy-five. I bet the air Force didn't even have more than two dozen A-10's in the air on any single day in the theater of Iraq or Afghanistan over the last thirteen years. If the U.S. goes to war it takes a significant amount of time to move our ground troops to the theater in question certainly that would be enough time to move the needed size squadron of a-10's to that theater. The point being the Air force doesn't need to have a 300 plane fleet spread out all over the world it could function with a 100 plane fleet and move the needed number of planes to the war zone when needed remembering to with the size of the Army it seems like America will have going into the future it will only be enough to fight two wars at one time.
It seems like the prevailing expert assessment is that if the Air Force ends the A-10 program it will cost American soldiers lives in any major combat ground operation in the future because no Air Force weapons capabilities can match the A-10. Why are American authorities completely eliminating this weapon system to produce such an abhorrent result pare it down yes to save money but leave enough to support one and a half major wars what common sense calls for!
The reason that the Congress/Pentagon decision here seems so foolish is why shape this decision as an all or nothing proposition. Why not cut the A-10 plane program from the 300 today to 100 or even seventy-five. I bet the air Force didn't even have more than two dozen A-10's in the air on any single day in the theater of Iraq or Afghanistan over the last thirteen years. If the U.S. goes to war it takes a significant amount of time to move our ground troops to the theater in question certainly that would be enough time to move the needed size squadron of a-10's to that theater. The point being the Air force doesn't need to have a 300 plane fleet spread out all over the world it could function with a 100 plane fleet and move the needed number of planes to the war zone when needed remembering to with the size of the Army it seems like America will have going into the future it will only be enough to fight two wars at one time.
It seems like the prevailing expert assessment is that if the Air Force ends the A-10 program it will cost American soldiers lives in any major combat ground operation in the future because no Air Force weapons capabilities can match the A-10. Why are American authorities completely eliminating this weapon system to produce such an abhorrent result pare it down yes to save money but leave enough to support one and a half major wars what common sense calls for!