
The A-10 Warthog Is Sticking Around for at Least Another Decade - smacktoward
https://www.defenseone.com/business/2019/08/warthog-sticking-around-least-another-decade/159365/
======
potta_coffee
Former Marine here...the A10 is AWESOME. Nothing matches it. It has a huge
amount of firepower, can take a beating and can stay in the area for a
relatively long period of time. Grunts have a fondness for these planes.

~~~
Recurecur
The A-10 is great as long as the opponent isn't a near-tier adversary.

If there are real air defenses around, the A-10 will soon be a smoking hole in
the ground. Even during the 70's when it was brand new, their expected
lifetime in Europe was only a few days if conflict started.

Shoulder fired MANPADs and AAA are too much of a threat for a low, slow, non-
stealthy beast like the A-10. And no, the armor won't help.

~~~
potta_coffee
Sure but that's the same story with helos as well. The A-10 definitely has a
valid role in conflicts like Iraq / Afghanistan.

~~~
Recurecur
> Sure but that's the same story with helos as well.

That's not the case, as helicopters can use terrain to hide in ways an A-10
simply can't. The Longbow Apaches only need to expose the top of their rotor
mast above a hill or treeline to target the enemy. Other Apaches can then fire
missiles indirectly (without seeing the target) and kill the enemy forces.

Flying "nap of the Earth" has its advantages...

------
duxup
Close air support doesn't seem like the role that, at least at this point,
needs the next gen latest and greatest thing.

The A-10 seems to fill its role just fine.

~~~
scanny
Ask yourself who the aircraft has been deployed against.

Then ask yourself what would happen if it were deployed against someone
comparable to the United States.

During the 1980's within "two weeks [of full hostilities between the US and
the USSR] the entire A-10 force at the time — around 700 jets — would have
been destroyed and the pilots killed, injured, captured"[1].

So now, almost 40 years on, how do you think the A-10 will stand?

[https://medium.com/war-is-boring/an-a-10-pilot-could-hope-
to...](https://medium.com/war-is-boring/an-a-10-pilot-could-hope-to-last-two-
weeks-against-the-soviets-1ebff9bfa4df)

~~~
duxup
That sounds like a good way to end up with a plane for use in wars you aren't
fighting at the expense of those they are fighting.

~~~
scanny
It seems to me that armed drones have already taken on the new long-loitering
fire support platform.

Although there are programs looking into a cost efficient replacement that
still fulfills the `guy-in-an-armed-flying-metal-box replacement` [1]
[https://www.indrastra.com/2019/05/USAF-OA-X-
Program-6-Light-...](https://www.indrastra.com/2019/05/USAF-OA-X-
Program-6-Light-Attack-Aircraft-005-05-2019-0063.html)

------
_iyig
Have any UAVs been developed for close air support? Seems like one of the
riskier tasks for human pilots. I wonder if command latency is more of an
issue for low-and-slow gun runs?

EDIT: Looks like DARPA is working on it, sort of:

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persistent_Close_Air_Support](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persistent_Close_Air_Support)

