Why Congress May Let Air Force Retire The A-10

[unhappycamper]

http://breakingdefense.com/2014/03/why-congress-may-let-air-force-retire-the-a-10/



Why Congress May Let Air Force Retire The A-10
By Colin Clark on March 14, 2014 at 5:30 PM

CAPITOL HILL: Aside from Sen. Kelly Ayotte, the reaction from Capitol Hill to the Air Force plan for retiring the ugly and beloved A-10 has been relatively muted and may remain so. Why would Congress, beloved for going slightly nuts whenever the military tries to retire a ship, aircraft squadron, or anything else that means jobs in their districts or states, not rail against this sweet plane going quietly into the night? They will be replaced at most A-10 bases by F-16s, C-130Js or KC-135s so few or no jobs or money will be lost.

The Air Force has crafted a plan in stark contrast to its efforts last year to trim assets. And the reaction to this one has, so far, been quite muted. The slide above, which depicts the shifts and their timing, was part of a detailed briefing to professional staff and Military Legislative Aides in the last week that included classified assessments of the various tradeoffs the Air Force considered to save the $3.7 billion the Air Force expects to save. Among the scenarios gamed: sending the entire B-1 bomber fleet to the boneyard; pushing 40 F-35 As to the far out years; and retiring 356 F-16s. The Air Force, Chief of Staff Mark Welsh told me after today’s House Armed Services Committee hearing, ran war games to assess the impacts of each action. The retirement of the A-10 fleet was found to be the least disruptive to America’s global capabilities.



Members did discuss the A-10 today at today’s House hearing, including Rep. Vicky Hartzler. Whiteman Air Force Base, home to an A-10 Reserve unit, sits in her district. She was not convinced by the Air Force’s arguments saying she did not ”agree that a B-1″ can do the same job as an A-10. The Air Force argues that precision weapons have replaced the need for the A-10′s depleted uranium cannon shells. Hartzler said she believes ground troops “want to see the A-10 coming over that horizon.”

Several other members voiced what sounded like pro-forma objections to the A-10′s retirements. When Welsh answered their objections they appeared to accept his explanations. Gen. Welsh brings a certain authority to the issue, having been an A-10 pilot himself.




--

In Vietnam the A-1 Skyraider was the beall/endall for close air support.



This bad boy would carry SHITLOADS of ordinance with a long loiter time. And A-1s shot down two MIG-17s.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A-1_Skyraider

During the war, U.S. Navy Skyraiders shot down two North Vietnamese Air Force (NVAF) Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-17 jet fighters: one on 20 June 1965, a victory shared by Lieutenant Clinton B. Johnson and Lieutenant, junior grade Charles W. Hartman III of VA-25;[17] and one on 9 October 1966 by LTJG William T. Patton of VA-176.[12] While on his very first mission, Navy pilot LTJG Dieter Dengler took damage to his A-1H over Vietnam on 1 February 1966, and crash-landed in Laos.[18]