A-10 Warthog - possible victim of the sequestration

[Stitch]

If I recall correctly, 187 was the total number of F-22s ordered...there have been losses, so yeah the current numbers are definitely lower.

The Air Force is planning to maintain a smaller force of F-15C/D, with upgraded radars and other systems. The 130-or so combat-coded F-22s are physically not enough to meet the requirements of any major conflict. Hell, even with the full F-15 fleet, we use F-16s for air-to-air missions all the time. In a defensive scenario, I'd expect F-22s to be the lead, backed up by F-15s then F-35s.

You'd put the Golden Eagles in front of the F-35's? I thought it would be the other way around.

[Blademaster]

How long before they start refitting and training the Mud Hens for primarily air-to-air combat to make up the shortfall.

The hilarious part is that the F-15SE could easily fill the gap. Sure it's no F-22A but it's a damn sight better than coming short in overall numbers.
And it looks to be ready right now.

What can the F-15SE that Raptors can't? It is a honest question.

[jlvfr]

What can the F-15SE that Raptors can't? It is a honest question.

Payload size?

[surfgun]

By being built on a hot production line. Who knows if any jigs have been made for an SE variant?

[TopHatter]

By being built on a hot production line. Who knows if any jigs have been made for an SE variant?

Exactly. The F-22A is out of the production game but Boeing is gearing up to start the SE. They're offering it for $100 million a copy vs $150 million for the Raptor.

It's being offered for foreign sales so I would imagine they're either ready for production or will be shortly.

[Jimmy]

Then I expect that USAF will use F-22s to exploit stealth to their greatest extent. I am imagining one large force of F-15s armed with Sidewinders and a smaller force of F-22s waiting in the wings as an enemy air force have no choice but to send a large force to meet the threat of F-15s, Viola! Comes out the F-22s and BAM! comes the AMRAAMs from F-22s. Anything left over will be left to the F-15s to mop up.

Once enemy radars are down, the F-22s won't be needed anymore and regular fighter planes can do the rest of the job. Hey Gulf War I and I showed that stealth was only useful for the first couple days and after that, it just becomes another expensive deadweight we do not need to wage the rest of the war. I think that is why the numbers of Raptors were so low. We just need to take out the AEWs and radars and dominate the skies so that regular planes can do their jobs without worrying about any external air threat.

Gulf War I was a gross mismatch. Iraq's IADS was much vaunted, but make no mistake, it was child's play compared to what's out there now. Every potential American adversary learned from Iraq's poor C2 and lack of redundancy, and the systems available now are vastly superior than the Vietnam-era radars and missiles Iraq used. It ultimately comes down to "What's the threat?" If we're basing our military needs on an adversary 20 years ago that was using 20-year old hardware, then yeah we're good. If we're looking at the more competent nations, like Russia and China, then the math changes drastically. And when China irons out the bugs in some of their newer systems...and they will, even if it takes another 10 years...that stuff is going to be on the market for anyone to buy.

If we're involved in another OEF or OIF scenario, then you're absolutely right, we don't need everything to be a stealth fighter. But if things go crazy in the Western Pacific and we end up facing off with China, yeah I want F-22s out there knocking J-11s out of the sky while B-2s hit the double-digit SAMs and F-35s hit C2 nodes. While the F-15 sits up in DCA CAPs protecting everything else, because there aren't enough Raptors to get it all done.

"Once radars are down" is a very very optimistic statement. SEAD is a lot easier than DEAD, which means those radars will come back up. The Chinese coast will never be a permissive environment (I use this example because it's pretty much the worst case scenario, which is what I think we should plan on). And in the next 10-30 years, when the F-22 is in it's prime as the US Air Force's premier air superiority tool, the systems that defend that coast will proliferate all over the place. Look at the crazy RPG and MANPADS that have been showing up in Syria. That's going to expand to other, more capable systems.

The F-22 was killed off not because nobody thought replacing the F-15 before it turned 50 was a bad idea, but because it was deemed "too expensive" because there was a cheaper, almost-as-good fighter coming down the pipeline...and yet the F-35 is closing in on F-22 prices, and those prices will continue to go up because Congress isn't done cutting orders yet and neither are the other partner nations.

How long before they start refitting and training the Mud Hens for primarily air-to-air combat to make up the shortfall.

The hilarious part is that the F-15SE could easily fill the gap. Sure it's no F-22A but it's a damn sight better than coming short in overall numbers.
And it looks to be ready right now.

I don't think that'll happen until Golden Eagles start collapsing on themselves in mid-air, so another 20 years maybe. They're only 10 years newer...they're also heavier and less maneuverable, which I expect the SE to copy since it's based on the E.

[Jimmy]

You'd put the Golden Eagles in front of the F-35's? I thought it would be the other way around.

Honestly it depends on the scenario. In certain circumstances, yes.

Exactly. The F-22A is out of the production game but Boeing is gearing up to start the SE. They're offering it for $100 million a copy vs $150 million for the Raptor.

There's no way the USAF gets new-build F-15s for $100M a copy. I don't care what price foreign militaries get it for, we'd pay another 25M per. But that's all moot anyway...the AF can't pay it's bills already, there's not a dime for new fighters. They're starting another round of Reduction-in-Force cuts right now.

[Stitch]

Not trying to necro this thread, but it looks like the A-10 is getting ANOTHER (temporary) reprieve; how many lives does this cat have?

The USAF's Much Maligned A-10 Warthogs Are Deploying To Fight ISIS

[SteveDaPirate]

The USAF's Much Maligned A-10 Warthogs Are Deploying To Fight ISIS

The Warthog's straight wing maneuverability, heavy armor, defensive suite, honeycomb construction and redundant systems allows it to venture down into the MANPADS (shoulder fired heat-seeking missile) engagement envelope, an area where no other fixed wing military aircraft was actually built to operate in.

Uhh...what? I was under the impression that one of the biggest problems with the Warthogs (besides getting worn out) is that they are extremely vulnerable to MANPADS/SAMs making them mostly dead weight in any conflict with a semi-competent adversary.

That being said, as long as we just want to kill angry tribesmen, we may as well keep using the A-10s until they start falling apart.

[Bullfrog]

Uhh...what? I was under the impression that one of the biggest problems with the Warthogs (besides getting worn out) is that they are extremely vulnerable to MANPADS/SAMs making them mostly dead weight in any conflict with a semi-competent adversary.

That seems to be what's happening to Ukrainian Frogfoots. We're not dealing with 1980 MANPADs anymore.

[Gun Grape]

Uhh...what? I was under the impression that one of the biggest problems with the Warthogs (besides getting worn out) is that they are extremely vulnerable to MANPADS/SAMs making them mostly dead weight in any conflict with a semi-competent adversary.

That being said, as long as we just want to kill angry tribesmen, we may as well keep using the A-10s until they start falling apart.

The A-10 started out as a one way ticket. Low cost, lots of missiles, die a glorious death We seem to forget that.

The USAF has been trying to get rid of her because, she showed that without expensive sensors she wasn't up to speed during ODS.
Do you speed assloads of money to make a marginal plane better? Or invest in newer planes?

But she does have her fanboys. Unfortunately many of them are in Congress. And wont let her die

[Jimmy]

It's relatively survivable when it comes to damage, but yeah it's not evading newer systems.

The reason much of the military wants to keep it is because there simply isn't a viable replacement. Nobody buys the line that the F-35 can take over. That jet won't be any better than the F-16 at the mission, and nobody makes a request for Viper 11 to provide CAS, they want Hawg surface to FL200. Particularly since the C model upgrades, the A-10 is simply the best CAS platform we have. Better than B-1s, better than F-15Es, better than F-16s, better than F/A-18s, and more survivable than helicopters. It's not the perfect solution or the best platform for every situation, but it gets the right results.

[SteveDaPirate]

Jimmy, could additional AC-130s or Harvest Hawks fill the gap when the A-10s are finally retired? I'd think one of those in a pylon turn overhead would represent the pinnacle in CAS. Are they too large/slow/vulnerable to be useful if built in larger numbers?

[Operator]

The A-10 started out as a one way ticket. Low cost, lots of missiles, die a glorious death We seem to forget that.

The USAF has been trying to get rid of her because, she showed that without expensive sensors she wasn't up to speed during ODS.
Do you speed assloads of money to make a marginal plane better? Or invest in newer planes?

But she does have her fanboys. Unfortunately many of them are in Congress. And wont let her die

Fanboys, or politicians that don't want to lose bases thus jobs for their community/constituents... I get what you are saying but I don't see it as fanboism. And to be fair, even other AC require expensive sensors to be effective.

[Operator]

Uhh...what? I was under the impression that one of the biggest problems with the Warthogs (besides getting worn out) is that they are extremely vulnerable to MANPADS/SAMs making them mostly dead weight in any conflict with a semi-competent adversary.

It's relatively survivable when it comes to damage, but yeah it's not evading newer systems.

The reason much of the military wants to keep it is because there simply isn't a viable replacement. Nobody buys the line that the F-35 can take over. That jet won't be any better than the F-16 at the mission, and nobody makes a request for Viper 11 to provide CAS, they want Hawg surface to FL200. Particularly since the C model upgrades, the A-10 is simply the best CAS platform we have. Better than B-1s, better than F-15Es, better than F-16s, better than F/A-18s, and more survivable than helicopters. It's not the perfect solution or the best platform for every situation, but it gets the right results.

I'm not near high enough in the chain to know, but isn't it the job of Tomahawks, B-1's, B-2's, F-15E's and the F-22 to suppress the newer systems (at least SAMS sites) that would be targeting the A-10 (in other words the A-10 isn't slotted to be "1st" in)? And as you stated, if Helo's are still a big part of the mission, I don't see why the A-10 is seen so vulnerably. If the combatant commanders feel secure in sending out the Apache or SuperCobra, I don't see why there would hesitation in sending out the A-10.