More A-10's Sent To Boneyard (1 Viewer)

From Avweb:



As the Fairchild A-10 Thunderbolt II ground attack aircraft (better known as the "Warthog") is being phased out of U.S. Air Force service, increasing numbers of airframes are finding their way into storage at Davis-Monthan Air Force Base in Arizona. The USAF relegated 39 of the popular A-10s to Davis-Monthan in 2024—more than double the number re-assigned to the base's 309th​ Aerospace Maintenance and Regeneration Group (AMARG) the previous year.

According to a post on the website The War Zone, USAF plans call for the twin-engine A-10 to be completely phased out of service by the end of this decade, if not sooner. According to the War Zone report, as of September 2024, there were a total of 157 A-10As and -Cs in mothballs at Davis-Monthan, "many of which are in non-flyable condition." It's unclear how many more Warthogs have been delivered to the Arizona base since then.

USAF A-10s continue to be assigned to combat missions, including recent assignments in the Middle East in anticipation of further escalation of tension between Israel, Iran and other adversaries. In addition, there has been talk of Warthogs serving with U.S. allies' air arms, including Ukraine and Jordan.

MIflyer said:

there has been talk of Warthogs serving with U.S. allies' air arms, including Ukraine and Jordan.

Click to expand...

Ukrain has said numerous times that it doesn't want them.

It's time to let the A-10 go. Even the youngest airframes are over 40yrs old now.

Something I put together years ago:

There were debates in Ukrainian military circles about the A-10 in 2022 and earlier.
General Budanov, the head of HUR (military intelligence), was the highest-ranking public proponent in 2022. Maybe he envisioned a small "HUR airforce" dedicated to special operations only. I don't recall anyone from the Air Force publicly supporting the A-10.

Does this aircraft have the potential for an upgrade for the modern war, I wonder?
GAU-8 out, more countermeasures added... A drone carrier?

Dimlee said:

Does this aircraft have the potential for an upgrade for the modern war, I wonder?
GAU-8 out, more countermeasures added... A drone carrier?

Click to expand...

Using the same argument, anything could be a drone carrier, and for cheaper operating cost.

Best use would as bomb carrier launching stand-off munition like Hammer, just like the Su-25. But Ukrainins still have those and other carrier plus they get mirages. So probably don't need another type for which additional pilot/mech training is required.
Would be different if they had got them in '22

re the 39x airframes being retired

This is my post from 15 May 2023:

ThomasP said:

re the planned retirement of of 42x A-10s in 2024 budget

These 42x airframes being retired are non-operational and have been so for the last 7-8 years. Since congress forced the USAF to continue maintaining the A-10 in operational form the requirement has been to keep ~170x airframes up to standard and available for operations. The USAF/ANG still have ~270x airframes in inventory, but only the ~170x airframes (+ about a dozen more for training) are operational.

Click to expand...

and

Retiring the A/OA-10 from the USAF inventory is not going to happen anytime soon - it has already been budgeted for service through ~2030 and is planned to be kept in service until at least 2040. US Army and JSOC have stated quite clearly that the A/OA-10 is needed until a suitable replacement airframe and/or other operational capability has been provided (both of which the USAF has repeatably failed to do).

One of the major problems involved is the need for training in CAS.

Why is this a problem one may ask? Well, the USAF found (during the studies the A-10 holdouts in the US Army, DOD, and Congress forced the USAF to perform and report on) that for a pilot to be acceptably proficient at the CAS mission he needs 2x-3x as much training time as for the Air Superiority mission. In effect, for every 1 hour devoted to Air Superiority the pilot will have to complete 2-3 hours of CAS training, wearing out the high(er) performance airframes at 3x-4x the planned on rates.

Why can not the Air Superiority airframes do both you may ask, and absorb the cost via fewer overall airframes? Well, one reason is the resulting reduction in airframe life due to the rigors of additional flight hours and the type of flight hours (ie low altitude). In a cost analysis (an analysis forced on the USAF by the GAO) it was found that the current high(er) performance airframes when used for both Air Superiority and CAS will wear out at a 4x higher rate than the same airframes would if used only for air superiority. Since the base A/OA-10 airframe procurement costs are already spent, the retirement of the A/OA-10 would pay for only about 10%-15% of the difference - even when including the foreseen continuing upgrades needed for the A/OA-10 to keep it viable until at least 2040. The cost/flight hour is also about 1/2 - 2/3 of the cost for the high(er) performance airframes.

Why would a the high(er) performance airframe have to fly low altitude profiles and expose itself to MANPADS and such, what with the availability of stand-off PGMs and such, you might ask? Well, the USAF found (during the studies the A-10 holdouts in the US Army, DOD, and Congress forced the USAF to perform and report on) that there is currently no substitute for the Mark 1 Eyeball and the ability to fly at low altitudes during many CAS mission profiles. Flying at higher altitudes and the use of stand-off weapons, even with FLIR and other optical aids, simply does not allow the minimum acceptable required situational awareness of battlefield ground operations.

However, there is no reason that some A/OA-10 could not be sent to Ukraine, as additional replacement A-10 airframes can be taken out of mothball and brought up to operational standards for the US Air National Guard units currently operating the A/OA-10.

Incidentally, I have 2 friends who were part of FIST and FAC teams when they were in the Army. Their experience says that a high(er) performance airframe flying a mission profile at high altitude with stand-off PGM is only acceptable as a substitute for the A/OA-10 airframe at low altitude if:

1. You are unable/unwilling to take losses in CAS airframes.
2. You are operating in a low(er) intensity/threat environment, and then only if you are willing to trade potentially higher losses of ground forces for lower losses of airframes, with the consequent increase in chances of losing the battle on the ground.


re adaptability for other missions

This is my post from 18 July 2022:

ThomasP said:

re the A/OA-10

The US has had at least 1x A/OA-10C squadron in Europe since late-April.

All currently operational A/OA-10 (~170) have been upgraded to the C model, with the following upgrades:

LASTE (Low Altitude Safety & Targeting Enhancement). Provides Ground Collision Avoidance/Low Altitude Autopilot system, which includes the Enhanced Attitude Control system (for stability during gun firing and weapons drop). Includes integration of software for aid in navigation to, and location of target, and targeting via GPS coordinates.

EGI (Embedded GPS & Inertial Navigation System). Integrates improved GPS & INS within an on-board nav system.

IDM (Improved Data Modem) allows secure data link for transfer of data from ground units (primarily FO/FIST/FAC teams and SOF units), including data usable by the LASTE and EGI systems.

SADL (Situational Awareness Data Link).

LITENING ATP (Advanced Targeting Pod) capable. Pod incorporates Daylight and dual-wavelength FLIR HDTV, SADL & JTIDS compatible, Laser Designating/Marking/Multiple Spot Tracking.

Sniper ATP (Advanced Targeting Pod) capable. Pod incorporates Daylight and FLIR HDTV, Laser Designating/Marking/Spot Tracking, video data link compatible with SADL, and supports RTDI (Rapid Target Detection & Identification) and NTISR (Non-Traditional, Intelligence, Surveillance & Reconnaissance) via SADL.

RWR (Radar Warning Receiver).

MWS (Missile Warning System).

Can carry upto 240 chaff and 120 flare in onboard launchers.

HMCS (Helmet Mounted Cueing System). Day or Night capable.

In addition to the LITENING and Sniper pods, various ECM and specialized EW sensor pods can be carried, along with pods for chaff and flare.

Current Mission List
CAS (Close Air Support)
FAC-A (Forward Air Control-Airborne)
SCAR (Strike Control And Reconnaissance)
AI (Air Interdiction)
AM (Anti-Maritime)
CSAR (Combat Search And Rescue)

Current Weapons Capable List (upto 16,000 lbs in addition to GAU-8A cannon)
30mm GAU-8A gatling cannon
dumb bombs from 500 to 2000 lb including cluster bombs
smart bombs from 500 to 2000 lb, including 500 lb LGB & JTID to 2000 lb LGB & JTID
AGM-65 Maverick
AGM-154 JSOW
Hellfire/Brimstone/2.75" LGR
AIM-9 Sidewinder

In addition the A-10 has demonstrated compatibility with other weapons, such as the AGM-84 Harpoon and AGM-88 HARM (see "Best WW2 plane for Ukraine today?"). . . just to mention two.

Plus other stuff . . .

Click to expand...

Basically, the A/OA-10 can carry just about any ordnance that any other fighter-attack aircraft in the US inventory can - with the exception of BVR radar guided air-to-air missiles like the AIM-120 AMRAAM.

Sabrejet said:

Using the same argument, anything could be a drone carrier, and for cheaper operating cost.

Click to expand...

Maybe anything, if it can survive in the current environment. One problem of PSU (Ukraine's Air Force) is that the supply of old (cheap) aircraft will not last forever. Allegedly, Su-24s could still be found on the market and its current fleet in 2024 was larger than before the invasion. But HUMINT says that Su-27s and Su-25s are already in the deficit.

ThomasP said:

Basically, the A/OA-10 can carry just about any ordnance that any other fighter-attack aircraft in the US inventory can - with the exception of BVR radar guided air-to-air missiles like the AIM-120 AMRAAM.

Click to expand...

So, in Ukraine, it could carry any US air-to-ground weapon that currently is carried by Su-25, Su-27, and MiG-29. And with less adaption issues and more than each of them.

ThomasP said:

Retiring the A/OA-10 from the USAF inventory is not going to happen anytime soon

Click to expand...

I find it amusing that the USAF is operating drones that could not survive against anyone who had aircraft with at least the capability of a P-43 but wants to phase out the A-10. They are also arming light aircraft, like cropdusters.

One argument against the A-10 was that while it was very survivable, it was more likely to get hit than faster aircraft and during the "Soviet Drag Race To The Rhine" that was the standard view of a war in Europe, there would not be time to effect repairs before the war was over. Even after the collapse of the USSR that "logic" still applied. Looking at likely conflicts around the world, it appears to me the A-10 is likely to be more useful than anything else.