A-10 Warthog replacement

[Fox Mike]

Well, I believe when the Air Force was carved out of the Army as a new branch of the military, the "deal" was that AF was prevented from developing helicopters for offensive purposes, and the Army was prevented from doing the same with fixed wing aircraft.

They change laws and such daily. Why not give them to the Army of Marines. Either would love to have them.

 

[Jeepnik]

Actually having two multiple combat tour Marine kids I can tell you if they are in a pickle they don't care who is putting ordinance on bad guys.

One of the nice thing about today (actually since at least 2003) is that CAS control is centralized. When my eldest was pinned down by Afghans a couple of Apaches were tasked to deal with it. And according to my kid they did a superb job.

 

[Sam Summey]

They change laws and such daily. Why not give them to the Army of Marines. Either would love to have them.

The Key West agreement forbid the Army from having fixed wing ground attack aircraft. Now in Vietnam we had the OV1 Mohawk with multiple pods of white phosphorus 2.75" air to ground "marking" rockets. There even may have been some with an M60 mounted on a "hard point". I have even heard of O-1 Bird Dogs with a M60 mounted in the rear compartment. The Air Force "defalcated a brick" when the Army mounted a machine gun on a helicopter.
The three services were there to hash out and define the responsibilities of each branch. The result was a "treaty" of sorts that became known as the Key West Agreement. The is how the agreement broke things down: The Air Force would handle combat in the air and air transport but also promised to provide close-air support for the Army. As a side note in the early stages of Vietnam the Army was hauling more tonnage of cargo with the C-7 Caribou than the Air Force was. The solution to the "problem", all of the Caribous were transferred to the Air Force.

 

[MaxMan]

Well, I believe when the Air Force was carved out of the Army as a new branch of the military, the "deal" was that AF was prevented from developing helicopters for offensive purposes, and the Army was prevented from doing the same with fixed wing aircraft.

Ego over what is best for the troops. I would think the troops safety and offensive capability would foremost. But alas.

 

[MaxMan]

No. Most of the top brass were either fighter or heavy bomber pilots. Anything outside those threatens their egos.

They aren't real keen of helos except for support operations or as taxis. Remember, it wasn't the Air Force that first stuck guns on helos.

The A-10s are very masculine. No place for that in today's military.

 

[MaxMan]

How much armor does it have?

 

[KIR]

Just the bathtub the pilot sits in, but it really doesn't need armor as it can take a lickin' and keep on tickin'!

 

[MaxMan]

Just the bathtub the pilot sits in, but it really doesn't need armor as it can take a lickin' and keep on tickin'!

View attachment 44903View attachment 44904

I was thinking of the pilots armor on the replacement. I don't see the replacement taking that kind of punishment.