The Air Force has been trying to get rid of the A-10 since before it was in production. And it's mostly superficial -- it's not fast, not sexy, looks like an old WWII fighter, doesn't have all the gee-whiz avionics of newer fighters (though the proposed A-10C does have a lot of that gee-whiz -- and most of the A-10 community says they don't need it).
Yet it's consistently proven itself to be the best ground support platform devised. And it's practically indestructible, able to continue supporting the ground troops when most planes wouldn't even be flyable anymore due to battle damage. Maintenance times and turnaround are short.
The Air Farce doesn't want the A-10 because no one wants be a mud-mover, let alone flying a plane that is dedicated to mud-moving. To which I say, let the Air Force get rid of them, get rid of that ridiculous law about Army fixed-wing aircraft not being armed, and let the Army fly the A-10s. And keep the A-10 in production -- our current examples, despite their excellent quantities, are getting long in the tooth.
__________________
I'm guided by the beauty of our weapons... First We Take Manhattan, Jennifer Warnes
Entirely too much T2K stuff here: www.pmulcahy.com
|