SSG Philip Cotton 100840 <div class="images-v2-count-0"></div>Lawmakers in both the House and Senate are planning legislation to block the Air Force’s plans to retire the A-10. Many service members are also voicing their opposition to the A-10 cuts. I feel that this aircraft is not only a symbol of American badassness, but also still serves as a vital piece of close support equipment.   How do you feel about Lawmakers trying to stop cuts to the A-10 Warthog? 2014-04-13T14:32:26-04:00 SSG Philip Cotton 100840 <div class="images-v2-count-0"></div>Lawmakers in both the House and Senate are planning legislation to block the Air Force’s plans to retire the A-10. Many service members are also voicing their opposition to the A-10 cuts. I feel that this aircraft is not only a symbol of American badassness, but also still serves as a vital piece of close support equipment.   How do you feel about Lawmakers trying to stop cuts to the A-10 Warthog? 2014-04-13T14:32:26-04:00 2014-04-13T14:32:26-04:00 SSG Private RallyPoint Member 101295 <div class="images-v2-count-0"></div>With it's service record, the A-10 is seriously one of the most effective air-to-ground support aircraft to ever exist. As far as I know, it is one of the only aircraft to ever be designed around the weapon it carries, the 30mm cannon, and it devastates ground forces with ease. Until the DoD can come up with something that can compare to the A-10 (e.g. carry more ATGMs, have better aerodynamics, more armor), it should stay in operation. Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 14 at 2014 12:39 AM 2014-04-14T00:39:15-04:00 2014-04-14T00:39:15-04:00 PFC Glen King 101535 <div class="images-v2-count-0"></div>The A-10 is a valuable asset. Worst case they should be given to the 160th SOAR for close air support. Response by PFC Glen King made Apr 14 at 2014 11:34 AM 2014-04-14T11:34:45-04:00 2014-04-14T11:34:45-04:00 PO1 William "Chip" Nagel 101887 <div class="images-v2-count-0"></div>I'm a Romantic, I would hate to see them go. They used to fly out of Richards Gebauer AFB here in Kansas City. I miss seeing them all the time. Response by PO1 William "Chip" Nagel made Apr 14 at 2014 7:46 PM 2014-04-14T19:46:25-04:00 2014-04-14T19:46:25-04:00 SSG Mike Angelo 195758 <div class="images-v2-count-0"></div>Americans voted these legislators in office. Americans can vote them out of office. We need more Veterans in Congress. Response by SSG Mike Angelo made Aug 6 at 2014 2:04 PM 2014-08-06T14:04:58-04:00 2014-08-06T14:04:58-04:00 Lt Col Private RallyPoint Member 326539 <div class="images-v2-count-0"></div>I feel like they are talking out both sides of their mouths. It's only because of the sequestration that lawmakers imposed that the USAF is even considering the retirement of the A-10. The same lawmakers who oppose the cuts also oppose giving us enough funding. If we don't retire the A-10, we will have to retire something else. These are also the same lawmakers that won't let us do a BRAC and close our excess capacity. Response by Lt Col Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 14 at 2014 10:18 AM 2014-11-14T10:18:10-05:00 2014-11-14T10:18:10-05:00 CPL James Fillinger 330478 <div class="images-v2-count-0"></div>That piece of military equipment has saved countless lives, they're crazy to get rid of it! Response by CPL James Fillinger made Nov 17 at 2014 5:58 AM 2014-11-17T05:58:40-05:00 2014-11-17T05:58:40-05:00 Maj Wayne Dahlke 330479 <div class="images-v2-count-0"></div>I posted this in the forum "TACP Association joins lawmakers in opposing A-10 cuts", but it explains WHY cutting the A-10 in favor of the F-35 is a very bad idea.<br /><br />"The best CAS platforms are NOT "fighters". Fighters are designed for Air Superiority (kill other aircraft) or Air Interdiction (Kill other aircraft before they get to the fight).<br /><br />Close Air Support requires fine discrimination of Targets vs Friendlies vs Neutrals, and the ability to remove from the fight anyone who is threatening our ground forces. There are really only 2 manned platforms that can accomplish this for more than 3 hours at a time, the AC-130 and the A-10. The AC-130 is a Special Operations specific platform that sometimes can be used by conventional forces. The A-10 is the only "Big Blue" asset that is routinely used by the ground forces that was designed SPECIFICALLY to support ground forces. They need the capability, and their is no replacement for it anywhere in the acquisition pipeline. F-16, F-15, F-35, F-18 and F-22 do not have the loiter time or the weapons load-out to provide precision fires in danger lose situations, not to mention, they have to go get fuel every 90 minutes.<br /><br />Keep the A-10 until you can replace the capability. Do not remove the capability for political reasons."<br /><br />My feelings about this have nothing to do with tradition or any other sentiment. They have to do with capability and keeping guys stuck on the ground SAFE (or at least as safe as possible).<br /><br />Until Congress can fund the Air Force to replace the capability with something better, they have a moral obligation to keep the A-10 around. Upgrade it, enhance it, but only replace it when you have a capability that can do what the A-10 can do, only do it better...fighters can't at this moment in time. Response by Maj Wayne Dahlke made Nov 17 at 2014 6:06 AM 2014-11-17T06:06:22-05:00 2014-11-17T06:06:22-05:00 SSG Roger Ayscue 711675 <div class="images-v2-count-0"></div>SGT Cotton, YOU are SPOT ON on this one. Response by SSG Roger Ayscue made Jun 1 at 2015 12:39 AM 2015-06-01T00:39:57-04:00 2015-06-01T00:39:57-04:00 2014-04-13T14:32:26-04:00