Previous post
The Air Force reported on Friday that a two-star general was fired for accusing officers of ‘treason’ should they attempt to block retirement of the A-10 Warthog by talking to Congress.
Major General James Post III, then the vice commander of Air Combat Command, had spoken to 300 Air Force officers at Nellis Air Force base on January 10 and warned them not to speak to Congress in support of continuing the low, slow, but utterly effective tank-killing aircraft. According to a report investigating the general’s remarks, his words and reference to treason had a “chilling effect on some of the attendees and caused them to feel constrained from communicating with members of Congress.” The general apologized in a statement, writing, “It was sincerely never my intention to discourage anyone’s access to their elected officials. I now understand how my poor choice of words may have led a few attendees to draw this conclusion and I offer my humble apology for causing any undue strain on the command and its mission.”
Due to budget cuts, the Air Force has been working for years to retire the 40-year-old tank buster in favor of aircraft like the F-35, despite the fact that the A-10 is a favorite of ground troops and Congressmen from both sides of the aisle. The Air Force may have even gone so far as to doctoring data to demonstrate that the A-10 is “dangerous” to troops and civilians alike.
It’s obvious the Warthog, despite being an absolutely fugly piece of military hardware, is quite spectacular. It’s heartening to think that the spurt of its 30mm cannon is the last thing the ISIS barbarians hear.
Now I am no expert on military aircraft. I don’t know if retiring the A-10 to replace it with the F-35 and other aircraft is logical from a military standpoint. What bothers me is a two-star general threatening lower-ranking officers with references to treason and attempting to stifle their communication with legislators, a clear violation of US Code and Defense Department rules. And why is the brass so dead set on sending the A-10 to the scrap yard? Are the “perfumed princes of the Pentagon” serving their troops, or perhaps the desires of the Obama administration, and by extension, themselves?
There is one very famous man who wants to save the beloved Warthog from the bone yard.
It’s Air Force veteran Chuck Norris.
Norris plans to sell T-shirts with the words “Save the A-10” on the front. On the back are the words, ““Chuck Norris’ First Born Son was a Warthog. He cried tears of ‘BRRRRRRRRRRRTTTTT.”
And we all know you don’t mess with Chuck.
Wfjag says: At $207 Million each, no one will risk losing a F-35 to ground fire, a Manpad or a Quad mounted 23mm AAA cannon.
The A-10 can not only survive any of those, it will – as our enemies have learned – do a 180 and kill whoever was foolish enough to shoot at it. Additionally, and more valuable, is that it can linger over a target. If an enemy moves, either the A-10 will spot the movement and attack, or will spot the target for ground forces to attack. However, ground forces which are frozen in place will be destroyed in detail. The F-35 is a fast moving one and done attack.
But, unlike the hi-tech, stealthy, geek’s wet dream and the love of every contractor who gets a piece of the $207 Million for each of them, the 40 year old, low and slow (and basically paid for) A-10 ain’t sexy.
joecro says: isn’t the unit cost of the f-35 around 270 million instead of 207? i read a while back that it’s nearing 300.
Wfjag says: Could be. Originally the F-35 was to cost less than $90 Million each. But, that was long, long ago, in a Pentagon far, far away.
GWB says: You ain’t kidding on the “ain’t sexy” part. Unless you’re more into a muscly construction worker with a farmer’s tan than you are into a super model with a spray-on, who couldn’t fight his way out of a biker bar with a bazooka.
I’ve said for decades that an air-to-mud should be fugly. I *loved* controlling A-10s. Air-to-mud is where the work gets done, but it isn’t fast and sleek and purty, so all the prima donnas want it killed.
BTW, one of the prime reasons for cost-overruns is the “cost plus” contract that most of our weapon systems now fall under. There really is ZERO incentive to prevent cost overruns (most often caused by “Oh golly, we’ve found a problem, but it will take more time and effort and manpower to fix, so you’ll need to pay us some more….”).
The down side is, the purges continue.
The up side is, eventually, the Obama Administration will have cashiered so many military officers that there won’t be anybody left to impose martial law when the time comes.
5 Comments