Air Force 1477393-a_10_thunderbolt_ii_shark_face

Published on September 20th, 2013 | by Editorial Staff


R.I.P A-10 Warthog

It looks like this is the end of the road for the beloved A-10 Warthog.

Land and air forces alike loved the powerful old plane and it’s massive rotary cannon. However, with the Air Force looking to eliminate single-mission aircraft, it appears the low and slow A-10 is the odd man out.

Here’s to a great career and great service!


NATIONAL HARBOR, Md. — As an old Warthog pilot, Lt. Gen. Stanley E. Clarke III spoke in near mournful tones Wednesday of the likely mothballing of the venerable A-10 close air support aircraft and tank killer.

“Can we save the A-10?” was the question from the audience Wednesday at the Air Force Association’s Air & Space Conference here.

Clarke, director of the Air National Guard, came at the question in roundabout fashion. He loved flying the A-10 Thunderbolt, better known as the “Warthog,” Clarke said. He noted that the plane was “near and dear to land warriors” for its GAU-8 Avenger, a 30mm rotary cannon that is the heaviest such weapon mounted on an aircraft.

But the Air Force was “looking at reducing single mission aircraft,” Clarke said, and under the sequestration process “we’re not getting any more money – that option is out.”

The Air Force “has to have a fifth generation force out there” of stealthy, fast and maneuverable aircraft, and the low and slow A-10 just didn’t fit in, Clarke said.

“We’re on board with moving towards Air Force 2023,” the concept for the future of the force which has no room for the A-10, Clarke said.

Gen. Mark Welsh, the Air Force chief of staff, also declared his affection for the A-10, which happens to be an aircraft he has 1,000 hours flying.

“I love that old ugly thing,” Welsh said.

However, the chief of staff explained the service has to take part in finding over a trillion dollars in cuts to the defense budget over the next ten years because of sequestration. In this budget environment, he said the Air Force will likely be unable to afford the Warthog.

The A-10, developed by Fairchild-Republic in the 1970s, was credited with destroying more than 900 Iraqi tanks in the first Gulf War and has been a close air support mainstay in the Iraq and Afghanistan wars.

However, Welsh said the A-10 finds itself on the chopping block because “it’s a single-mission airplane, essentially,” and would struggle in more contested airspaces.

Read More at Military.com

Tags: , ,

Leave a comment! What did you think?


About the Author

144 Responses to R.I.P A-10 Warthog

  1. Robert Dalton says:

    Give them to the Marines

    • Will Alibrandi says:

      The USMC’s budget is also affected by sequestration, and their F-35B is the most expensive version being developed. I don’t think they’d have the money to take over the Warthog fleet.

      • Jeff Erickson says:

        I worked for USMC Acquisition and they are comparing the F35B to the M2 Bradley Program. Well, the Bradley turned out to be a badass, the but the Lightning III will be that supposed money saver when all it is in reality, is a money pit.

        • skrewdisqus says:

          The F-35 is a D=O=G!!! And Yes, I know what I’m talking about. I work for the DoD in a slot close to this abomination. It is a delicate little flower of a boondoggle that was supposed to play the role of 3 different aircraft so it doesn’t do any of the 3 jobs well.

      • Biker Dash says:

        Actually, the C version costs about 4 million more per plane than the B version.

        • Will Alibrandi says:

          I looked it up and was surprised. You’d think the B with its more complicated engine/flight controls would be the most expensive version.

    • Jeff Erickson says:

      Robert, don’t know if you’re a former Marine, but I’m sure they’d even say (I used to work for USMC, I’m an 82nd Airborne vet) that it’s the USAF’s mission. Marines and Airborne are ground pounders with a specific mission. A10s are Ground Based, they don’t fit into the Marine Corps Amphibious Assault Directives. The A10 has no roll in the USMC mission. That’s why the USMC has the current Air Wings of fixed and rotary aircraft for CAS. BTW, you can’t launch it off and land it on a light carrier. It’s not built to those specs.

      They’re being decommissioned because elected officials are being too pussy footed when it comes to telling King Mabubula to back the fuck off the US Military and take care of his bullshit economics programs and Mabubulacare.

      Clinton raped the Navy while he was in office, Mabubula is destroying our USAF because I guaranfuckingtee he wants this country to become a Sharia state.

      This, is King Mabubula’s doing. Not the USAF.

      • Mac says:

        Jeff, respectfully request you never force me into a situation where I have to defend the king. Sequester was his brainchild. But the AF have been trying to pitch the A-10 literally for decades. Desert Storm stayed it’s execution and Operation IF did again but every time things wind down the Warthog faces elimination. We could go into all sorts of plans and rationalizations and cost/benefit analysis but the simple stupid truth is the outstanding old dog just ain’t as sexy as an electric jet. Unfortunately that matters.

        • Mark Andrew Edwards says:

          Mac be preaching here. Despite excelling at its role, and an important role at that, the AF has been hating the A-10 for decades. I hope and pray they don’t ditch something that works for something that may, sorta, kinda work for ground support at about ten times the cost of the old Warthog.

          Honestly, the mentality at work in this decision just makes my head spin. It’s the same breed of stupidity that made the Brits give up their Harriers.

      • br1150 says:

        Ah yes, Because “King Mabubula” voted on the budget and everything. Had he vetoed the budget you may have a point, but in reality it was out of his hands.

        Don’t worry, our Military budget is still thousands of times greater than any one else in the world…. I’d say we are pretty safe.

        • Gus Bailey says:

          We are safe, but this machine keeps safe those who risk their lives to keep us safe. I’d like to think we were focusing on mission effectiveness over bling.

        • Jason Adams says:

          Safe from who br? Obama said he wants a civilian force that is as well armed and funded as the military. In the 1930’s Hitler called it the SS. In 2013 it’s called Homeland security.

        • CommonSense says:

          An Obama lover I see…

      • Guest says:

        I agree with you Jeff, I know ultimately it’s not the USAF. We have idiots in charge. I was in the USAF on KC-135’s under Clinton’s rule and he axed our forces so much, that it was very hard to take care of the numbers of aircraft we had. Then he put the “Stop-Loss” in place so that military leaving in droves because of his stupid actions couldn’t leave.

      • Kyeld says:

        You sound like a paranoid racist ignoramus.

      • dano2112a says:

        I agree with Mac and Mark. The AF never liked the A-10. The al wanted to fly the F16 and F15. The Warthog was shown it’s marching orders back in 1991. The only reason why it exists today is because of the Gulf War. Personaly, I think they should be handed over to the Marines or the Army. I am sure that they could put them to god use.

        • David Hanaway says:

          A-10s are top-notch CAS workers and it’ll be a great loss for us to ditch them at a point in time where we still have boots on the ground that rely on that type of top-cover. Sure, it probably already has a spot in the Smithsonian but we shouldn’t slide it over there until it makes a few more enemy lives hell. They can also take a mean beating, unlike the upcoming F35 who relies more on a stealthy, can’t catch me sort of attitude…but the reality is you could knock one of them out of the sky with a pea shooter compared to the Warthog. We still have the grandmotherly B-52’s laying the beautiful red carpet for our illustrious gracious enemies out in the field so I think the Warhog has a few more years of making them piss their pants…and we should allow it.

        • novoice1254 says:

          That maybe how all of you older vets may feel about things. But I seriously doubt the younger servicemen and women share the same sentiment. There is something amiss in DC and I feel that it’s just not the President alone. Case in point take a long hard look at all of the people he put in at all of the different positions in DC. No offence but have any of you really listened to these jokers. Like Senator Feinstein for example. The best way to look at these persons is to compile everything they have ever said on video. And listen very carefully to their comments on various subjects. Sorry to say this but some of them sound like they were politicians from old USSR with some of the things they want to implement. But that is only my impression of them. I could be wrong on that one. Well I hope that I am.

          • Frank Jankowsky says:

            “younger serviceman” here. As an Infantrymen I’m going to miss the old girl. The Hog’s an effective and deadly CAS platform that has saved our hides numerous times.

          • KnuckleDragger says:

            I’m almost certain that us “younger” groundpounders appreciate it more than guys who were in previous conflicts – not to discount their experiences in combat either.

            When you’re on the verge of getting overrun, in mountainous terrain where no QRF has any chance of reaching you, and an A10 comes roaring in on danger close ECAS; you quickly come to love that airframe.

            Apaches and other rotary platforms are great, but nothing – absolutely nothing, has as much of a demoralizing impact on the enemy than the A10.

          • Dominic says:

            During Desert Storm, the A10 is so quiet coming at you thet you cant even hear it till it is too late. The enemy had no chance to react. It saved mine and a bunch of other butts then and can do the same now.

        • Dominic says:

          Those A-10 Warthogs were invaluable in close air support during Desert Storm. I for one, am appreciative of them for they supported and saved my butt more than once. No aircraft in the Air Force inventory can take more punishment and still accomplish the mission and get the pilot home safe. They always want the latest and greatest, but those weapon systems are easier to break. Sometimes old, slow and reliable is just what the doctor ordered. I hope the Army or Marines take this Aircraft and utilize it for what it was made for, GROUND SUPPORT. Soldiers AND Marines will thank you.

          • Mark Gatton says:

            I was in the Air Force during the 80’s – 90’s. I never saw anything that could match the CAS capabilities of the A-10. I saw aircraft come back missing major pieces of its airframe (large holes, sections of wings and tails and a couple missing the entire engine) and the pilot still landed it. I would like to see any other aircraft in our inventory that could to that. The F-16 is a great aircraft but, engine goes and it becomes a lawn dart. Getting rid of the A-10 is a mistake.

      • disqus_GFp0XsWf0T says:

        I agree the A10 doesn’t fit the Marine Corps mission but they would be great to have for backup. You can never have to much fire power.

      • Scott Smith says:

        Jeff I can tell you are ARMY because MARINES are AIR, LAND, and SEA. We are not confined to just the ground like the Army is. Give the Hogs to the Marines who will fly the hell out of them.

      • Kootur says:

        The military needs to be cut down anyway. Such a waste of money.

        • Davis says:

          Protecting your butt and mouth and giving you the opportunity to live in a country where you can say things that don’t make sense.

          • leedogg says:

            That same song and dance doesnt mean they’re entitled to spend almost as much as the rest of the world combined. Learn to spend within our means and learn to use what we spend more efficiently and effectively.

        • Brad says:


        • usa says:

          can you elaborate upon your statement?

          • Kootur says:

            The military is given as much money as it wants and spends it like limitless credit card. They need to strip down the waste and work on a budget like the rest of us. There isn’t any reason to have 8 different fighter planes when you can cut it down to 4. Same goes for the ships, we don’t need 300 ships with 10 roles.

      • Tom Schweiger says:

        Jeff there’s no such thing as a former Marine.

      • Brad says:


      • India312 says:

        Good post, I kinda agree but with forced reservations.

      • Biker Dash says:

        Ok, the Marine Corps’ mission, as you say, is amphibious assault. That being said, let us look at how much amphibious assault the Marine Corps has done compared to land based combat. How much amphibious assault was done in Desert Storm after we took the beaches there? How much was done in the latest conflict in Iraq and also Afghanistan? Very little actually.

        Do you honestly believe that combat is going to change to accommodate the new F-35? (The “F” in that name stands for Failure, btw) I think not. The F-35 flies too fast, cannot carry no where near the needed bad boy thumping toys, and is as fragile as a Christmas bulb connecting with Mark McGuire’s bat.

        The Marine Corps could easily make full use for a plane that costs 1/20th the cost of the replacement, and yet can do the mission 20 times better.

        And before you ask, yes, I AM a Marine.

        Corporal Justin P. “Biker Dash” Emery, USMC (91-95)

    • India312 says:


  2. William Castic says:

    Robert, given the historical perspective that the Marines only get things when the other services are through with them, I have no doubt that this is what will happen…….

  3. Paul Moglr says:

    Outstanding idea.The Marines need close air support and the A-10 will fill this niche…

  4. CherokeeRayne says:

    They will miss them, if they mothball em!

  5. Donald Pollack says:

    They can mothball them and bring them back out if the need arises. They store alot of aircraft in depot in the USA, including the A-10. Can be used for parts, sold off or brought back out of retirement if needed.

    But it is a old aircraft and has served well.

    • jim peacher says:

      they went through a refurbishing in 05 or o6 I believe,the refurbish them in Belgium because you have to crawl into the wing spaces to recoat the tanks etc.Osha rules makes it too expensive to do them in the states.This was in a stars and stripes article I read in Iraq,it was supposed to extend the life of the hogs for another decade.

    • avnrulz says:

      Once this is mothballed don’t ever expect it back; the USAF has never ‘wanted’ this aircraft, it only ‘put up with it'; the molds were destroyed after the production run so new airframes could be built from scratch.

  6. charlesbraley says:

    With the advances being made with stealth technology, drones, etc – why doesn’t this surprise me?

    • Infantry says:

      Stealth is not something you want when your in Infantry Man in a valley getting shot at. The best close Air support is the A-10. Shelving this without something to replace it is a huge mistake.

    • br1150 says:

      Ding ding ding!!!! The A-10 is a sitting duck. If we were fighting an actual enemy instead of men with beards hiding in caves we would loose many A-10’s to AA missiles. A drone can provide the same CAS without risking a human pilot. I’d expect to see a Warthog type of drone in the near future.

      • Bunk says:

        This screams I have no idea what I’m talking about lol

        • br1150 says:

          Because the article doesn’t say the exact same thing in the last sentence right?

          • KaoticForce says:

            Tell you what. You go mount a 30mil on a drone, give it engines to fly while firing it, the capability to lose full hydraulic power and still maneuver, and carry more than just a couple Mav’s, and tell me what you get.

            Oh yeah, the A-10.

          • xxsimmonsxx says:

            yeah cause only 30mil bullets can kill people. the fact the drone can be undetected and get behind the enemy lines without them seeing it isn’t some kind of benefit either. shooting them all from their open flank isn’t worth it. killing them before they know where they are being shot from isnt worthwhile either. what we really need is a gigantic flying aircraft that everyone can see for miles that lays down fire that -might- miss and will be giant flying target at the same time. I love the warthog. Ive liked them since I was a little kid. Now i’m 34 and the world is changing its weapons. its time for us to update.

          • Stacey Bright says:

            Have you actually ever see an A-10C IRL? They aren’t that huge, and you would very hard pressed to spot one visually before its attacked. You don’t even hear it until its basically right on top of you, and that would be well after things started exploding around you.

          • Schlangemann says:

            Except ya wouldn’t, because an unmanned drone does not need to be able to return home after losing hydraulics. When it goes down, you detonate it and move on. It would maneuver harder, faster, and it would not need a 30mm ballistic platform. I will not argue that the 30 is a gorgeous way to deliver ordinance on target, but it is time to move to systems that do not rely on pointing yourself directly at something that can return fire. The enemies of the future are less and less likely to lack the resources required to down the A10.

  7. fasterfind says:

    Sure, the new aircraft are fancy and customizable… but what matches the dexterity of the A10? I doubt anything can effectively replace it.

  8. Travis Sartele says:

    So what do they intend to replace them with ??? There have been many a grunts lives that have been saved due to the growl of the might A-10 !

    • Frank Onorata says:

      F35 is slated to take on this mission. this will fail hard and the A10 will be unearthed once again.

      • skrewdisqus says:

        F-35: overpriced piece of crap that they’ll be afraid to fly because the replacement cost is too high to risk then over the fight. The grunts are going to pay for this decision with their lives.

  9. Don says:

    Damn shame its probably one of the most pratical weapons they have and one of the most cost effective to own and operate…….

  10. Pingback: New York fines companies for fake online reviews | News To Me with George Mathis

  11. Pingback: Goodbye, Blue Monday | Animal Magnetism

  12. Don Bramblett says:

    sounds like this along the same lines as when Clinton disarmed all American bases and made us more vulnerable! remember FT.HOOD!!!!!!

  13. Terrence M. Shea says:

    It is a shame to see the old Warthog go due to politics. The A 10 has saved many lives
    and there is no one piece of equipment that can replace it.

  14. Jimmie says:

    I still think this war bird will still be seeing service in ANG units for a while.

  15. Brutus974 says:

    Let’s hope the “Air Force 2023″ will still be able to fight battles against isolated terrorist groups… The A-10 works well in that role…

    • Sam TwoDat Costanza says:

      The Air Farce operates under the impression that they will only need sexy, stealthy Mach 2-capable fighters in the future. Unfortunately, the future of warfare is almost certainly going to be more brushfire wars, and unsymmetrical combat. The Flying Moneypit is not going to be well suited for COIN work. The Strike Eagle isn’t, either. Drones are non-starters for this work, because they lack the ability of a pilot on the scene to make decisions, and lay down suppressive fire, while operating yards from friendly forces. Unfortunately, there aren’t enough Apaches to handle that role. Turning the Hogs over to the Army would be the most logical decision. It’s a frakking shame nobody in the Puzzle Palace knows what logic is.

  16. Guest says:

    Give this machine to the Marines – they need it badly. Worst decision EVER! I’m working on an art piece of this venerable aircraft and I’ve had several Marines tell me that this aircraft alone has saved their lives over and over.

  17. disqus_eric says:

    What will take its place? I’m assuming there’s a muti-mission airplane that can provide the same level of support and survivability?

  18. Christopher James Elder says:

    Mean while as we give billions of dollars to other countries…..

  19. Rex Crouch says:

    They will probably bring it back as soon as they realize what they’ve done.

  20. Camasi says:

    I hope they don’t seriously think the F-35 can replace this? I see the problem the A-10 faces in more contested airspaces that have greater SAM capability but surely it still has a use in certain situations. Hopefully it isn’t discarded altogether!

  21. Clarence Worley says:


  22. Tiajuana seemynuts says:

    Cut the B-2 cut anything BUT the A-10! I will NEVER forget the first time I heard the roar from the Gatling gun….

  23. Tiajuana seemynuts says:

    She is the last analog gauge cockpit in the inventory and the last “Fly by cable” bird too

  24. Diego says:

    Why not modify the jet, a-10 will be even more deadly with modern technology onboard

  25. avnrulz says:

    But meanwhile they are still flying 50 y/o B-52s?! Face it, the USAF never wanted the A-10 and the reflected glow of the ‘Highway of Death’ has worn off.

    • Kevin Buller says:

      And the complaint that the A10 is a single mission aircraft doesn’t float very well when you look at the single mission B52. The Buff just has the strategic backing side of things that the poor A10 doesn’t have.

      • avnrulz says:

        Did you know the molds were broken after the production run of the A-10s? Brilliant aircraft, loved hearing it over Ft. Drum, hope that the ones cancelling it never have to read about troops lost because there was no air cover.

  26. Bobbie Ballard says:

    All of you GI’s out there stop the bullsh*ting. Although most of you are stating facts or atleast partial truths. This has nothing to do with the Military or cost cutting. This is purely political. This is the third time the US Air Force has put the A-10 on the chopping block and for what? To get an unproven more expensive model with new high tech features? Every time this happens the Generals talk about how old and slow the A-10 is. Guess what General, that’s it’s frigging job. Just ask any ground pounder what aircraft they would like to see is. Because it is big and slow is what makes it so damned effective. The question that should be asked is; how many have we lost? How many Pilots have we lost? How many Pilots are refusing to fly it because it is too dangerous. I served in the Air Force and this type of thinking is what has always hurt the Air Force. I say give this great aircraft to the people that need it. The Marine Corps and the Army. They will appreciate it. This is a stupid arguement.

  27. Gary T says:

    I worked this aircraft for 8 years, gulf war did save them. we lost 5 in the gulf war all but one was able to fly back to friendly airspace with all the damage they had. love to see these new ones do that. anyone remember the one with the rear stat replaced, had a big bandaid on it that said OUCH

  28. Jerry N LouAnn Olson says:

    I Am Ashamed of the Crap that goes on in the name of ‘cost savings’ or any other politicians trying to look good at the price of losing another effective weapon to fight our nations battles.

  29. Bruce Parker says:

    At the end of WWII the original Thunderbolt faced the same kind of decision making. The USAF kept the sleek sexy P-51 Mustang, and scrapped the P-47 Thunderbolt that had proven so rugged and surivable at close Air Support. The Navy kept its F4UCorsair and the A-1 Skyraider that arrived just after WWII ended and got excellent service from both aircraft in Korea and The Skyraider served well into the Vietnam War! The P-51 with its liquid cooled engine was succeptable to being downed with a single bullet through the radiator. The P-47 was often able to make it home with damage that would have downed a Mustang. History Does often Repeat itself, and here is another example. USAF, enjoy your shiny new toys!…

  30. Terry La France says:

    These guys live in a fantasy world. They are so enamored with the fast, stealthy next generation aircraft they’ve forgotten what an air force is for. Still trying to win wars from the air only. If they want to save money, put the Air Force back in the Army Air Corps.

  31. Dan Larkin says:

    One of the most potent weapons platforms ever devised!! Gov’t tried hard to kill the “Hog” even when it was being developed back in mid-70s. I think only 1/4 of the original order were built and deployed. Sad story. I would have loved to have mastered this aircraft and I believe the Hog pilots are, or were, the most talented aviators flying.

  32. Kpoc says:

    As an AH64D driver, i will miss working with these awesome birds. They were and are the only airforce assest that would get down in the knife fights with us. Many a ground guys would not be with us now with out this machine.

    • Dominic says:

      You hit the nail on the head. While they are pounding them and distracting you are targeting, pop up and make the kills. Tag team at its best. No other fixed wing aircraft can help you do your job better.

  33. Guest says:

    Too bad. It killed hundreds of Iranian tanks in the Gulf War!

  34. Patriot says:

    Too bad. They killed hundreds of Iraqi tanks during the Gulf War!

  35. William Norvell says:

    Well as a former A-10 weapons loader I find it that today is a very sad day. I fell that the national guard here in Maryland has lost the most first the C-130 and now the A-10, I wonder what will become of them. RIP to the A-10 it was a fun time.

  36. Kevin Buller says:

    It may not be able to take off of a carrier…. but I would vote for the Marines to get them too. It is a tough old bird and fits their character.

  37. Brian Choi says:

    Rugged, reliable, and maybe most importantly, cost-effective. I’m just a humble former Navy enlisted, but I have to say, I disagree with this current obsession over “advanced,” stealthy multi-role weapons and vehicles. Bang-for-buck, stealth features aren’t worth it for anything but submarines, recon/spy planes, and nuke-armed strategic bombers. Multi-roles are too expensive, require too much training to be used effectively, and never excel in any specific role – we could develop and field 3 next-generation non-stealth limited-role aircraft (probably a Thunderbolt III, Harrier III, and your choice of either a Tomcat II or Hornet II) for the cost of the F-22 Raptor alone, and we’d enjoy both superior numbers, and superior individual performance.

    If it were up to me, for cost-effective (and simply plain effective) ground support, I’d also commission a new generation of battleship-class naval vessels. Shells are a much cheaper method of blowing things up than missiles and bombs, and with today’s targeting systems, even a naval shelling would be accurate enough to be acceptable. The majority of friendly fire and collateral damage comes from bad/lazy intel anyway, not weapon inaccuracy.

    It’s easy to try to blame the loss of the A-10 on overall budget cuts from Congress and/or the President, but it’s also the fault of our military-industrial complex for pushing exponentially more expensive stealth and multi-role technology on us in an era when we no longer have the Soviet Union to fight, and when the only other nation (China) that could ever possibly have the capabilities to engage us in a conventional war, instead of random terrorism, is decades away from developing that capability. Stealth is meaningless to some dude in a cave with a Stinger who doesn’t have a radar, and while 1 lucky shot will down a Raptor, even 3-4 lucky shots won’t down a Warthog. “Defense” corporations, please stop trying to sell us overpriced weapons we won’t need for half a century…

  38. Will Malven says:

    Typical American military thinking . . . next time there’s a war on and they don’t have any A-10s or “single-mission” aircraft intended for close-air support, they will wind up building a new aircraft to fulfill the same mission at 10 times the price of keeping these.

  39. Joelene Lachance says:

    What a damn shame…….if this is really gonna happen. I had the honor and privilege of working on this awesome beast. This is such bullshit, this airframe has proven itself again and again every time its been called to action. I want to know where they are gonna find something that “fits ” their new age of thinking. It’s just not possible to replace something so indestructible.

  40. Jody Philpott-Smith says:

    This has got to be some kind of ploy to purposely keep our defenses down as thee United States of America knowing full well that the A-10 enabled our military to gain greater victory in wars past including aiding in our defense in Afghanistan. So who do you think you are diplomats and dignitaries/enemies of the U.S. and our military men/women?! So thee old Warthog costs too much but how much more are the “new” aircraft going to cost and how well will they really be able to defend our country and how much “less” are they supposedly going to cost for regular maintenance? Reality says that new technology always costs more for mechanical work and upkeep…..even if it turns out to be more economical there’s always a price to pay! Plus there’s the costs of tests which must be done to know or get an idea if thee success rate of an aircraft ordinarily performed out in the desert or are we just going to surpass that too and use soldiers as crash-test dummies?! Soldiers are here to defend our rights and to protect our freedoms and the more I hear, read, and see of this bureaucratic bull crap and red tape the less I see our government as a government that’s for the people and by the people and allowing “the people” justice of any kind.

  41. BabylonHasFallen says:

    This is garbage, this is easily one of the most successful and important aircraft platforms ever developed for the US forces. They will dump the money into some pit project instead. This aircraft has save and supported thousands upon thousands of US ground forces, to say it is to slow in contested air space is nonsense. This was developed for confrontation with the Soviets in contested battlefields in Europe. That’s why the US forces deployed the most sophisticated fighters and anti radar systems in the world. Those first wave forces takeout radar networks and enemy fighters so the A10 could bring great firepower to support ground forces. This is a loss for the US Air Force, and maybe a greater loss for the US ARMY, and the Marines.

  42. chrisloomis says:

    One bullet can take out any of these new high-tech fighter. A 100 bullets will just piss off an A-10

  43. Mike Scalf says:

    Munition wise there is no other aircraft in inventory to mach the A-10. 30mm API rounds the size of a milf bottle tipped with depleted uranium that will penetrate the armor of any enemy tank on the battlefield. The only nearly perfect accurate platform for the AGM-65 air-ground missile with its shaped charged warhead that can blast through immense thickness of concrete and steel bunkers. Jets have to slow down to near Warthog speed to effectively use that missile making them very vulnerable to ground launched heat seekers. The A-10 engine is a turbo fan, not a turbo jet. So while it cannot go mach and do all that crazy stuff, it leaves a very low heat signature. There is more heat coming from the three second bursts of the gun than from the engines. This war plane has a very specific use, one that cannot be filled by a jet.

  44. Lincoln Pope says:

    Only some sort of communist would get rid of the A-10. Countless troops owe their lives to this aircraft and the pilots that fly them. It’s just another slap in the face to our military.

  45. Bill Bailey says:

    Fear not Hog fans, the Israelis have been begging for A-10s for years and they’ll probably finally get them and everybody’s happy. The Israelis get what they want, their enemies will get very nervous and the USAF won’t have to look at them anymore …. until the NEXT time they need a down in the weeds CAS airplane. While the F-35 may be the all singing all dancing wonder weapon (that’s still to be determined) one thing it ISN’T is a CAS airplane. Yeah it can lob smart weapons with near pinpoint accuracy, but it ain’t never gonna get down in the weeds where true CAS happens, they won’t risk it there. Remember the F-16 was SUPPOSED to take the place of the A-10 back before the first run through the sandbox and they quickly found out CAS is NOT a game for wizzbang electric jets. Yet they keep trying and I suppose this time they’ll get it done. How sad.

  46. 3rdjerseyman says:

    For 60 years no American has been killed by enemy air. Thanks to this regime that record is in danger. We needed to keep the F-22 line open. We destroyed too many 52’s. The public has no idea how few planes we have. God help us if we ever get in a big war again.

  47. Wayne Wilkinson says:

    I’d really love to see the actual budget numbers here. Saying the A10 needs to be retired because of budget concerns, compared to almost every other aircraft this country fields, smells like bull $t to me. This is like saying a 1970 Chevy C10 pick-up is more expensive to own and operate than a new Bugatti Veyron. At the end of the day, it’s all about boys and their toys and the bureaucrats in the industrial military complex like big expensive ones. One might think these big expensive systems with their big government contracts help fund second careers for the Colonels & the Generals. One might think.

  48. Ben Parsons says:

    An incredibly capable aircraft who’s mission, for the most part, is over. I hope they are mothballed with a little special care for a few years, and a handful of pilots kept simulator level familiar. Just in case.
    This old tanker sure appreciated their security blanket presence.

  49. Jonathan Chew says:

    Hey, we just upgraded a number of them to the A-10C!

  50. Somewhere there is an article which states with mods the service life has been extended to 2040.

  51. DoNotTread73 says:

    They said the same thing right before desert storm, and that proved them wrong time and time again,are their memories that short?

    • Michael David Severson says:

      No, but politician’s memories are infinitely shorter, along with those who play with politics… :-(

  52. marymroe says:

    Be patient with me gentlemen. The A-10 Warthog doesn’t “fit in” anymore and will be replaced by what sounds like a multi purpose plane. But what has made the Warthog so effective and feared by our enemies is it can go slow and go in close. Isn’t anyone worried that the no-doubt technological replacement will be difficult to keep flying, won’t survive a hit like the Warthog can and can’t go in close enough to make sure you are hitting the bad guy.

  53. Bob Mason says:

    Good By My Old friend, I,m sure going to miss not seeing you around anymore!!

  54. Pingback: R.I.P A-10 Warthog - ALIPAC

  55. I knew this would happen one day, next they will probably retire attack helos,

    Read: Attack Helicopters losing their touch

  56. Hitch says:

    Welp guess I ain’t going for pilot any more.

  57. Josh Barnes says:

    this should help show why we need this great airplane


  58. Brad says:

    Give em to the reserves and or send em to the AFC (Air Force Acadamy) for Training useage

  59. Brian K Seitz says:

    Efficiency is not always effective…..sometimes a single purpose system is needed t get the job done right and right on time…

  60. Lee Weida says:

    give them to local law enforcement.. just like all the MRAP’s.. great for “civil disobedience” lol

  61. John Oliver says:

    I want one!

  62. Michael David Severson says:

    I see a collusion of many facets within government in play engaged here. Since Vietnam, look at our total force strength, bases, logistics, etc. The ever-increasing, left-leaning and liberal government has decimating our total force footprint for decades.

    When President Reagan took office in 1981, he was met with great opposition to his intentions to reinvigorate our total force capacity. The cold war was still on, despite being 6 years since the official end of the Vietnam war.

    Many forgot that President Reagan was a military officer during WWII in the Army Air Corps. He believed in a strong defense/offensive posture as a deterrent.

    We are decimating our ground troops with multiple deployments, resulting in burnout, violence and other readjustment issues upon return, and PTSD is off the end of the charts.

    When you look at the total force picture from that time frame until now, second-guessing at the intent and motives of all this is not needed. We are weaker, more vulnerable than ever, and our total warfighting “package” is mostly empty space, and no means to reconstitute into a major force for a contingency operation.

    Large scale mobilization simply cannot and will not happen, It is that simple. As much as I like seeing friendly forces convening with us for Red Flag exercises at Nellis and the Tonopah ranges in Nevada, it appears to me that the international forces are sub-planting slots that were formerly occupied by our own.

    As an Air Force Veteran in the Command and Control field, we used force status to brief both our local commanders and the NCA (National Command Authorities) daily about status and strength of our forces, logistics, personnel, etc.

    I look at the smattering of aircraft that compose a modern Air Wing today, and compare it to 70’s figures when I was in, this is scary. And then when you pull the teeth out of proven systems that give battlefield superiority like the A-10 has effectively proven beyond all doubt, such a specter alarms me considerably.

    All the e-toys (electronic gadgetry) that these new-generation aircraft have, PALE in comparison to the effectiveness, lethality, and cost effectiveness of the A-10 to operate in theater and out.

    Consider the 30mm “can opener” it carries. Then compare an old AGM-65 Maverick Missile at a cost range of $17K to over $100K, depending on configuration. That is one shot, and hopefully, one kill. In contrast, a 30mm X 173mm armor-piercing round only costs $19.34 USD per round.

    Kill ratio, economy, etc. all factored in, there is nothing, ABSOLUTELY NOTHING more effective in COIN, CAS, and GAT missions.What is not shredded by the 30mm cannon, gets cleaned up with cluster bombs, etc.

    Factor in the design for survivability, battle hardiness, etc., and there is nothing else on the planet as effective as the A-10.

    The F-4 PhantomII went well over 30-40 years before retirement, due to the triple threat capabilities of the F-15 Eagle, the F-16 Falcon, and then the A-10. Had it not been for all that diverse capability, no doubt the Rhino would still be the last word in Air Superiority.

    With the loss of the A-10, we are going to lose that Air Superiority edge, hands down. Not a pretty plane? So what!? Not stealthy enough? Not applicable. Mission effectiveness is the answer that demands attention!

    And WITHOUT QUESTION, the A-10 has all the critics beat on the topic. There is simply NO argument that is valid. Somebody tried to promote drones.

    There are too many limitations in a fluid battlefield scenario that cannot be sorted out with an electronic brain and a real one thousands of miles away that cannot see or maneuver a drone with the same effectiveness a live pilot has in an A-10, especially when it comes to COIN, CAS, GAT and other interdiction scenarios that can turn on a dime in a real world event.

    The first thing I notice about doing simulator time, is my very limited field of view, even with multiple screens and wide view. I cannot see and react to what is on my Six in real time, or assess a growing threat that might be amassing to counter what a drone is doing.

    The bottom line is simply being reinforced here, there is NO viable substitute for the A-10 in our inventory, and the lives of our ground troops rely on this umbrella of protection when it counts the most.

    I challenge the JCS and Air Force Command Staff to do a combined Red Flag Exercise with ground troop operations integrated into several battle scenarios, and to deliberately exclude the A-10 from them.

    I will bet money with anyone, that either a hostile ground force (tanks) or troops will seriously hose our forces, and we will be begging to have the A-10’s back online in a New York second… Let’s see if any commander is worth their salt to test what I am saying.

    As for being a single-role aircraft, it can be modified for other tactical uses that would diversify its mission as needed, or put in the AF Reserves/ANG, to be utilized as needed for a compromise deal. But mothballing? Don’t you dare!

    And trying to retrofit faster, stealthy, more fragile (READ: QUIRKY) new generation aircraft without the genius that keeps the A-10 unbeatable, is like trying to superglue feathers on a dog and attempting to transform “Fido” to “Flydo”…. It won’t work, folks! All that said, I rest my case…

    MD “Doc Severson, USAF
    35th TFW Veteran

  63. Todd says:

    John Boyd is turning in his grave. The factors used to make these decisions are focused so clearly on enriching contractors and promoting generals, it sickens all of us watching. The USAF once again lives up to its reputation as a spoiled debutante.
    The article should be titled, R.I.P., Ground Pounders.

  64. Dominic Delia says:

    Yes, because leaving whats left of our ground troops without decent air support is just what the Obama administration is all about…..

  65. Sheila Barr says:

    Another reason why Obama and all of his administration needs to be removed from the White House and our government?

  66. Montirey Reyes Montilla says:


  67. Joseph Martin says:

    I personally think that retiring the A-10 is a big mistake, at least keep them intact until the next administration.

  68. Frank Onorata says:

    After having worked on 12 different airframes as a munitions troop, I can honestly say that this aircraft needs to stay. the F22 has been an expensive complete bust, and the F35 which is supposed to replace the A10 will never ever be able to hold up to the punishment this aircraft can endure. With all that has been cut already with Troops, supplies and equipment, the latest generation jets should be the ones that get cut since those are whats forcing us to do this in the first place. way over budget and are grounded most of the time is no way to fight wars. With everything going on the Military is scared to even send these aircraft in to battle. Makes the point of calling this the worlds largest private pilots club

  69. Scott Brauer says:

    The PCAS system will initially be demonstrated with the A-10 Warthog… A-10’s future perhaps. http://rpdefense.over-blog.com/tag/JTAC/

  70. Castaway50 says:

    If the asshole in our White House would stop giving millions of our tax dollars away to those damn muslims in other countries, we would have the money to keep these birds flying!

  71. HairTeethAndEyeBalls says:

    If they want to get rid of “single mission aircraft” why don’t they get rid of all the F-15Cs and Ds? I love ’em but ALL they do is fling missiles at other aircraft.

    As far as “highly contested airspace” is concerned, since when have Hawgs been tasked for long range strikes against fixed targets? Shouldn’t their(“wonderful”) F-22s and F-35s be able to beat back the opposition near the front lines?

  72. skrewdisqus says:

    So let’s see, we have a paid-for, proven CAS bird here with a sterling record and low maintenance cost, along with great survivability and they want to replace it with a “go-fast” again (like they had in Vietnam with the F-100’s, F-104,’ F-101’s, Skyraiders, Corsairs, and F-4’s) using something like the F-22 (all altitude air-superiority fighter) or the F-35 (a flying camel that does NOTHING well but compromises at everything. It is slower that the F-22, doesn’t have the legs, isn’t as stealthy, costs MUCH more to buy and maintain that the F-22 or the A-10 and with a single engine and virtually no armor, would rapidly be turned into an electronic lawn dart if used for close air support, Ask the men who flew the “Thuds”) so we can fly real fast over the battle zone (to keep from eating a SAM) & drop our air support munitions on our own troops again? Some azzhole needs to stood against a wall and SHOT. How many times are the going to make the same dumb-azzed mistake? Shall we lose the AC-130’s Cobras, Apaches, Kiowas and Little Birds too? After all, they’re a single role aircraft also.

    I remember when they put one of these up against an F-16 in a dogfight and the A-10 won, The F-16 couldn’t go guns-on because the hog could turn inside him and come up on his tail no matter what the F-16 pilot did. Baby, that’s air superiority!

    You must know that this is really about making our troops more vulnerable to barry soetoro’s muslim brotherhood. it just more insanity like the ROE’s in Afghanistan that are getting our troops killed while saving the lives of the mooj.

  73. David Vance says:

    It is a dumb decision

  74. Ed says:

    Ok, I’m just a
    civilian. I grew up an army brat. My dad flew Huey’s in Nam. Forgive me for
    butting into the conversation but I have a few questions. Granted, the Warthog
    was a slow CAS aircraft that did its job superbly. It had to stay low and close
    to the ground to be effective, and no other aircraft could take punishment like
    the A-10. It was basically a flying tank. My question is about its replacement,
    the F35. What good is stealth, speed and fancy electronics if a CAS vehicle has
    to be low and slow? If you can see the dam thing you should be able to take it
    down. Can the F35 be effective without being low and slow? Has it even proven
    itself to be useful/effective? If the AF hates the A-10 so much, why not give
    it to the Marines? They’ll dam sure use it like it’s supposed to be used. So
    the A-10’s are ground based. Where have we ever been in a conflict where we
    didn’t have a base close enough to fly CAS missions from? If its got to die,
    give it a chance to go down fighting. If there is no money for them, fly them
    until they fall apart. If you need money for them, turn Obama upside down and
    shake him until money falls out. The service has to cut a TRILLION dollars …
    REALLY? By the way… I truly thank all of you guys for your service. As my AF
    uncle says, Without the U.S. military, there would be no U.S.

  75. Denise Lynn Hemmingway says:

    It was once kicked around in a time long past when the Air Force also wanted to can the A-10 to move the A-10s over to the Army and make them part of the Air Cavalry. I guess that’s not a solution either these days.

  76. Matt McCay says:

    single mission, yeah, but it does that mission better than any fast/stealty aircraft could do.

  77. James Dauphinais says:

    Bull. Every time the talk about parking this war bird they find a new job for her. This is an incredible weapons platform.

  78. Ken Cozier says:

    Makes ya wonder! Figure the reasoning of attacking part-time goat herders with multi-multi million dollar fast movers…Mindless ! The A-10 was designed for CAS…. that’s what the troops need in Afghanistan..

  79. John Farrell says:

    I have an idea, actually two, the first is since it ain’t broke, fix or replace it(air farce idiots). the second put the hog killers on front line for 72 hours without one for support. lets see what happens.

  80. Damien says:

    Let the Marines have them.

    The Air Force is making a huge mistake by getting rid of this aircraft.
    There is NOTHING that can do it’s job effectively.

  81. Zammel Abdellatif says:

    No , Warthog will be still active till 2050 , isaw 2 A-10 sent by John Connors to intercept drones machines in terminator salvation :p 😀

  82. Carl Pyrdum Jr. says:

    Horse hockey and bovine supposition! This is just one more example of Obama’s destruction of the American military. What’s next? The B-52? The C-130? America will rue the day they ever allowed the bastard in the white house.

  83. Tizwicky2009 says:

    Big mistake taking the A10 out of the inventory! The unique close air combat role of the A-10 cannot be easily replaced by other fixed wing or rotary wing aircraft.

  84. Joseph Asbery says:

    Fellow Vets past and currently serving say goodbye to this Ugly and lovely Steel Jawed Angel… It is the end of a fabulous era in aviation history. Thank you for watching over us in the form of close air support (CAS) while covering us ground folks…We will miss you…We will miss the buzz of your cannon, the distinct screech of your engines, the total lethality of your cluster-bombs and daring low level gun runs that kept our adversaries in check- YES CHECK!!!!(or changed their attitude)…In any case Remember her…Never forget her… Jawbreaker…Warthog…..Thunderbolt…Banchee…TANK BUSTER!!! Farewell and thank you for keeping watch over us!!!!

  85. Pingback: http://galaxy88.com

Back to Top ↑
  • Recent Posts

  • Contact Us

    • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.