 |
| An A-10C Thunderbolt II from the 40th Flight Test Squadron, moves down the runway at Eglin Air Force Base, Fla. The aircraft is loaded up with weaponry to test the combat carriage limits of the Sargent Fletcher external fuel tank. The A-10 flight personnel are testing to ensure the A-10 can carry the tank into a combat environment safely. If proven to be safe to carry, the tank will add up to 60 minutes of flighttime to its combat sortie. (U.S. Air Force photo/Samuel King Jr.) |
I'm waiting for them to test an escort loadout for SOCOM CV-22's. This plane is an oldie but it really does appear to be irreplaceable.
*CV-22 escort.
*Special Ops infil/exfil support.
*Anti-ship/anti-pirate ops in the littorals.
*Aerial combat patrol against insurgent smuggling routes.
Those are just a few things off the top of my head that they can get done for our nation in the Pacific. That pesky smuggling route between the Philippines and Malaysia/Indonesia? Squashed. CV-22 escort? Done. Anti-ship operations in the littoral zone? Probably one of the best assets going especially if teamed with UAVs. SOCOM infl/exfil support? SOCOM took alot of hits either going in or leaving the landing zone. A few dedicated A-10's to support their mission sets seems like a no brainer.
The A-10. The plane that can't be boneyarded (or more precisely, "refuses to die in a ditch").
Imagine if the USMC simply asked for a STOVL capable A-10 equivalent... Instead of the F-35B.
ReplyDeleteThe Marines flying Cobra Rattlers would be very cool, definitely!
DeleteWould it be that hard? Tilt wings have been done in the past.
DeleteOr even reusing the Pegasus engine in a more A-10 like airframe.
It is impossible and that is why it has never been done. The A-10 is the most expeditionary strike aircraft in the entire US inventory.
DeleteImagine if the Corps simply decided STOVL was over rated. Now imagine they bought the A-10 instead of the AV-8A, or simply thought half a dozen STOVL attack squadrons was enough STOVL and never came up with a requirement for the F-35B.
ReplyDeleteOr imagine if the USMC decided to fight joint like every other service and ditched the fixed-wing component completely. Let the Navy and the USAF bring that capability.
DeleteMaybe in doing so, they avoid cutting MEU/MEBs by focusing on the unique Marine capability: a forward-deployed, sea-based land component.
Maybe then it won't take 14,500 Marines to deploy a reinforced regiment.
you're being idiotic. don't confuse a Marine Regiment with an Army Regiment. two totally different beasts.
Deletealso don't try and make the Marine Corps more Army like. the Marine Corps fights joint and they do it with aircraft. if the Army can't get fixed wing then either correct the issue or stop bitching but don't do both.
last, no one is talking about cutting MEBs or MEUs. they're talking about cutting infantry Battalions.
9th Marines were reactivated for the Afghanistan/Iraq war. now its being deactivated. that was expected. what isn't expected are the deeper cuts coming down the line. oh and let me remind you, the Army is facing the same issues, so save your venom for an Army site and keep that stuff off mine.
Once again the wisdom of Lane leaves me astounded. What if all those years ago we had adopted the A-10 when it first came out? Sigh...
DeleteWhy do they have to be different? If the Marines didn't have fixed-wing air, the Air Force and Navy would fill the need, just like they do with the Army. The mission would still get done.
DeleteWhy shouldn't the Marine Corps be more like the Army? The Army fights joint with fixed-wing aircraft to. Just not their own.
Marine fixed-wing air is a redundant, expensive capability, IMHO.
ok. got it. you're done here.
DeleteIts still baffling that the airfore wants to get rid of all the A-10s. They are realistically the backbone of the airforce, doing more missions per plane than anything else the airforce has. Honestly, the airforce should up been seriously looking at building new build upgraded A-10s a long time ago.
ReplyDeleteIt's still baffling why this meme persists. The USAF is spending billions upgrading the A-10 fleet.
DeleteIt persists because of USAF press releases that say the F-35 is going to replace the A-10. And because of the A-10 pilots that i have personally talked to that say that the USAF cannot wait to get rid of their platform.
DeleteThey are upgrading them because congress year after year tells the USAF GTFO when the USAF proposes either canning entirely or cutting severely the A-10 Fleet. When the US Congress has to repeatedly tell the USAF that they cannot reduce the A-10 fleet and that it is required, it isn't hard to infer the feelings of senior USAF leadership wrt to the A-10. The USAF fleet is a mirror of the leadership of the USAF that feels that if a plane isn't a jet fighter, then they shouldn't have it.
DeleteIt is a shame they never made a maritime version of the a-10! You know what would be kinda of neat, a S-3 Viking retrofitted with GAU-25 with two additional wing hard points. you would have a lot of room for ammo and the gun in place of the internal weapons bay, plus you have a weapons officer. Its not the same as an a-10, but it would be pretty versatile, and has a long loiter time. Also dumb thought, I wonder if an A-10 or S-3, could launch conventionally from an LHA, given the appropriate gear.
ReplyDelete