Air Force Announces Aircraft Retirements in Fiscal Year 2025
Vložit
- čas přidán 26. 03. 2024
- Mover and Gonky discuss aircraft being retired by the USAF in FY 2025 and how it impacts readiness.
Join the channel to watch LIVE every Monday at 8PM ET or to see full episodes of The Mover and Gonky Show. You can also join in on LIVE Q&As with the Mover Mailbag: / @cwlemoine Monday at 8PM ET, Mover (F-16, F/A-18, T-38, 737, helicopter pilot, author, cop, and wanna be race car driver) and Gonky (F/A-18, T-38, A320, dirt bike racer, author, and awesome dad) discuss everything from aviation to racing to life and anything in between.
Send your voice message for the show: podcasters.spotify.com/pod/sh...
Looking for a good book? www.cwlemoine.com
The appearance of U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) visual information does not imply or constitute DoD endorsement.
Views presented are my own and do not represent the views of DoD or its Components.
“ If anything happens, we did not commit suicide “ - Mover & Gonky
Next video will be a sweating Gonky, with a black eye, staring straight into the camera. "I. Am. Doing. Well. Any. And. Have. Not. Come. To. Any. Harm. I. Have. Nothing. But. Respect. And. Admiration. For. The. Fine. Folks. At. Boeing. I. Am. Recording. This. Of. My. Own. Free. Will."
Yah, yah, yah...Thats what they all s.... (dial tone). Mover over Gronky, you are N....😢😂
What's awesome is that, when the AF first announced the retirement of the A-10 the Army said "give 'em to us". The AF response was "We'll maintain these legacy platforms until a suitable replacement is found"
I bet that, if the Army once again says "Give 'em to us" the USAF will grind teeth, wheel around and announce a new service-life extension program for the Warthog......................
I think this round will stick and continue fast. The battlefield is changing too fast and too risky for many aircraft now. The Pentagon has seen this writing on the wall for a while.
The Army doesn't want the a-10 nor can it support it. And for all the Fanboys for them; Ukrainian drones have killed a lot more tanks.
You don't need F22 and F35 if you're only dealing with a middle east upstart or a banana republic, and from the reports from Ukraine, even russia would have trouble trying to shoot down an A10 !
@@steverpcb On the contrary, Russia has lost over 350 aircraft. And Ukraine doesn't have a functional Fixed force. And those third world republics? Hardware is for sale. Just ask the guys in Yemen...
@@steverpcb On the contrary, Russia has lost over 350 aircraft. And Ukraine doesn't have a functional Fixed force. And those third world republics? Hardware is for sale. Just ask the guys in Yemen...
"Fiscal Responsibility Act." Hahahahahaha!
Good enough for government work. It is a general rule that the name of a law has no bearing on it's content. In fact, it's almost certainly the opposite.
ficking hilarious
2025: "We need to retire these aircraft."
2028: "We need $200 billion to develop much-needed replacements for the aircraft that were retired in 2025."
2030: "We have canceled the $200 billion project to develop the replacements due to reasons."
2033: "We need $400 billion to develop replacements..."
The right hand washes the left hand..
@@talvid1988 "All right, Chief Government Liaison Executive of Giant Aerospace Company, we approve this $400 billion packa- hey, wait a sec. Weren't you the General who told us five years ago we needed to spend $200 billion at this company?"
I remember reading my old man’s Air Force Magazine back in the mid to late ‘70’s, and the Air Force brass hated the A-10 back then…lolol
So much that the GAO slammed the USAF for purchasing 700 of them.
>finds out Army is trying to put rotary wing above all
>has YA-10 and YA-9 flyoff, gives up A-7F variant
>gets criticized for buying TOO MANY A-10s
>says it's time to retire it by the legitimate year it should start to be phased out due to age
>forced to drag it around for three decades longer
>"hurr durr you always hated the A-10"
>mfw
It's an ugly plane. It's a pitbull, not the sleek dog which wins "best in show". I swear, nobody will admit aesthetics matter, but on some level I'm sure they do.
Love the A10 but regardless how it performed in the gulf war where it was challenged to some extent by air defenses those air defenses where old even back in 91 it wouldn’t fair to well in a near peer contest with modern day surface to air capabilities I feel like people have a fondness of the A10 after GWOT but they need to understand both OIF and OEF where uncontested airspace’s where the A10 could thrive this would not be the case against china or Russia.
@@ChucksSEADnDEAD were you even around in the ‘70’s? USAF’s idea of CAS was to boom and zoom. Fly in above 400kts, drop your ordinance, and get the hell out, not loiter at 300kts at 5000ft. They actually said the A-10 would be a good plane for the Marines.
The USAF leadership never liked the A-10. It’s not fast and cool. But it’s what was needed for CAS & CSAR. It probably should’ve been flown by the Army & Marines, but the Air Force didn’t want to give up any of the fixed-wing game. (Supported A-10 ops for 25 years - Bosnia/Kosovo/OIF.)
The F-16s being retired are older blocks. The goal is to be block 40/42 and 50/52 only by 2027
The old f16 probably going to ukraine
Sheesh even the 40’s are old already.
The F-15Es that the air force wants to retire are early examples powered by the F100PW-200 engines, and the F-16Cs that the air force wants to retire are mostly Block-30/32 series in the Guard.
slight correction....220s. The only ones with 200s are old Cs
The KC-10s are being retired by Sep 2024 as these remaining units convert over to the KC-46s. I recently talked to one of their boomers and they said the recent software upgrade fixed several of their problems and a future hardware upgrade sounds like it'll fix the rest of them. In the meantime they just make sure their orbits don't put the sun at their 6 while refueling.
I remember seeing a new A-10 on display at an airshow in 1975. Williams AFB AZ
We're going to regret a lot of things when the next big one kicks off..
If the Space Force is growing, why don't they get their own budget?
Still part of the Department of Air Force, just like the marines being part of the Department of Navy.
@@Sturmvogel8964do the marines not get their own budget?
i've watch that series. its awesome.
@@shotnothing3419 Nope, their budget is shared with the Navy
I agree
thank you for changing the intro for the gonky and mover show. This one cooks.
What Gonky said about the KC-10, the 10 is being retired this year FY24
Sept 2024
KC-10 retirement was due by September this year, last reported
The A-10 has been getting retired for years lol. Long live the A-10 and long live the B-52
We all love the A-10 but look at battlefield footage from Ukraine. MANPADs and SAMs are cheap and deadly. Anything flying low and slow like an A-10 is not real survivable these days against any remotely credible foe.
Think about it, the A-10 is primarily a tankbuster. How many of our foes have mechanized armor but no MANPADs or SAMs? Their role has basically been reduced to doing strafing runs on Toyota Hiluxes.
@@johnbewtythe hog can take hits and still fly
@@MattKearneyFan1Flak and cannon fire, yes. Missiles.... not so much. You don't need to believe me, check the operational history yourself, particularly in the Gulf War where we lost a few to SAMs.
@@MattKearneyFan1
The pilot might survive and make it back to base, but the plane will be written off. Better not to get hit.
And B-1
Imagine the cost savings if the Hair Force cut back on office chairs and sharpies 😂😂😂
In the late 80's, I was at the Altitude Chamber at WPAFB -- It happened to be right at the time that the F-16's (I think it was the 'A' model???) were being told that they were going to replace to A-10A's for CAS. To a man, the pilots mentioned that not only could it NOT have been done, but for their lives, THEY weren't going to be the ones who were going to be called on to do it (i.e., CAS). They mentioned that they couldn't carry the combat loads, they were not protected by ground fire (the F-16 was known to NOT be able to take ANY punishment AT ALL). They stated that the comparatively and ineffective M-61 A1 20 MM cannon wasn't able to bust tanks (Some APC's, yes, but MBT's? Not really!!!) like the GAU-8 Avenger 30 MM on the A-10A/C and the biggest thing was: We (i.e., the F-16) only had ONER -- Count 'em, ONE engine. The F-16 was not the answer -- and for the foreseeable future, there is NOTHING on the drawing board planned to do what's needed to be done (with the A-10C). That is the mistake that the 'MIC' made with the A-10A DECADES ago, and I have full confidence that under the current needs and plans, they are also going to repeat that mistake.
I think there are a couple of different problems with military spending, especially AF spending leading to these cuts. The first is we're no longer in a cold war type arms race driving the for more and better aircraft to be churned out faster than the othe guy. The second issue is the way military contracting works now. There has been so many mergers that realistically there are 2 major manufactures and almost 0 competition for contracts. This also means a much smaller talent pool where design and manufacturer are concerned and causing cost and delays to skyrocket. This also means that the government/military can't strip something like the T-7 contract form one manufacturer and give to another when the issues and delays become excessive.
No longer in a Cold War type arms race??? Have you studied what China and Russia are doing lately?
Northrop Grumman seems to just be good at getting planes built on time compared to Lockheed.
Yep. Pretty much everyone is better at that than Lockheed.
Lockheed is currently going through layoffs because of supply chain issues and is currently hangering unfinished airframes due to such. Inside source tells me they can’t build hangers fast enough.
Honestly, this sounds like a deathblow of Guard & Reserve aircraft and nothing coming behind it to keep units flying... I don't know, I'm no expert, but we haven't seriously built or procured new aircraft, ships or ground fighting assets for 50 years. Cuts are never fun and someone always loses, but this cut is deep....
But they are doing this when their budget went up.
Budgets aren't going up in real terms. In the cold war, defense was about 6% of GDP at times. It's down at 3% today. That's how we bought all those airplanes and ships 50 years ago.
@@major__kong But it's still triple what China is spending while China is expanding their military. We're already getting close to a trillion dollars a year. You really want to double that?
@@krtwoodno it’s not china lies about how much they spend
@@krtwoodin terms of real spending, the budget is decreasing because of inflation
The B-21 is more or less on time and on budget because they kept the program black as long as possible to do an end run around the normal DOD procurement system.
If keeping programs black and super secret squirrel is what is needed to keep things on time and on budget then so be it. From what limited info has gotten out it seems the NGAD is getting a similar treatment (there is a claim of a technology demonstrator prototype being developed in just one year and flying).
They also kept cutting edge tech to those that are evolutionary vs bleeding edge tech needing time to mature.For example, the B-21 airframe has relatively modest changed from the B-2 and thus much of it's flight regime should be very similar it. I suspect the avionics will be mostly the same to the B-2 thus reducing development costs and the need to test them out. New reported ISR, drone and other capabilities will be some changes that will need to be developed and tested but appear likely to be minimal in overall testing needs. The engines are reported to be modified non-afterburner F-35 engines of the Pratt & Whitney F135 family. The engine has over 500,000 flight hours so most of their testing will also be limited vs using a new engine. Thus many practical reasons why this program appears to be on track, on time and on budget.
@@ItsEricAZ Do we know if B-21 is twin or 4 engined? I'm guessing just 2 engines, but the mil thrust of the Pratt/Whitney F-135 engine is amazing. In F-35 it's about 28,000 pounds thrust. Same numbers that most PW/GE engines used to make wet. Eg, the B-1B engines(GE-101- make about 30,000 at Max power). I wonder how an engine out situation during takeoff effects "flying wing" designs? SR-71 had some pretty bad Black Zones during single engine launches. I wonder if the Raiders FCS can provide enough "rudder" authority during single engine ops? 4 engines would make this a non issue I'd assume. Similar reasoning the B-52 is sticking with 8 engines coupled with the shorter tails employed on the current H model BUFF.
I was also wondering if they can stuff 2 GBU-57 Massive Ordnance Penetrators inside it, but with the Raider's lighter landing gear compared to B-2, I'm guessing not. Each MOP is a 30,000 lbs weapon and B-2 Spirit could carry 2 of them.
Let's not get spoiled with the way the B-21 program has gone. It definitely appears to be a unicorn... thus far. Take a picture, though. You may never see that again in your AF career.
retiring 65 F15s while only buying 18 EXs and not selling our aging airframes to our allies is INSANE
Drones from tiny to large is going to make a big impact in the future.
A-10s have had to start operating at medium altitude, which means they can’t use their gun. Without that USP, the Hog hasn’t got any attributes that other platforms have. Want persistent CAS? Load a B-52, or B-1 with JDAM, or SDB.
Curious - why have they had to?
@@wyldhowl2821because AA defence has come a long way since the 1970's. Man portable SAM's are a lot more common now, auto cannons bigger than 23mm have been developed, and radars have gotten better at filtering out ground clutter.
I read a book by an A-10 pilot during his time in the gulf war, and I'm pretty sure it said they shot at 15k feet and pulled up at 10k to stay out of the majority of triple A.
@@wyldhowl2821 Because they can’t survive against peer to peer anti-aircraft defenses anymore.
Only thing an A10 could be used for now. If, they upgrade it to use modern munitions. Is to sit back, loiter around out of Air Defense range. And be a missile truck for forward fighter jets
There are basically three versions of F-15E.
Old radar/old engines
New radar/old engines
New radar/new engines.
I believe one of the SJ squadrons has already been decommissioned.
Add in old airframes and it becomes uneconomical to upgrade them for the 5-8 years of life you would get out of them. This is on top of the money issues of so many old airframes needing to be replaced at one time.
Hey Mover! Just for future reference ARRW can be and usually is pronounced like an “arrow”. The program seems it is being canceled by the AF but still had lockheed martin continue with AUR flight tests to gain data and knowledge for future hypersonics
Curious if the f15EX ’s will get a bump since they are retiring all the C’s and D’s? Are there enough to go around or all just transferring to the f35?
0:44, I knew me, and Gonky were laughing at the same thing ahahaha
"And this time...we mean it."
The ARRW is the Air launched Rapid Response Weapon; an Air launched Hypersonic weapon system, Mover.
A-10's have too many wing stress cracks as well as cracks in the engine thrust mount area.
Always interesting to hear conversations about aircraft retirement. I was told A10’s we’re being retired. Check with a maintenance guy at Luke AFB. He said not true. Who know what’s actually happening.
ARRW is the AGM-Q83A hypersonic missile that the Air Force has been strapping to the B-52. It's the one with the HGV. They canceled it last year, but I'm a bit suspicious on that one. I think that program still has life. They had a series of test failures like unable to separate from the pylon. Stupid failures. Nothing failed that was part of the missile IIRC. Then they came back recently and did a final test and it was a full success. If they officially cancel it, I feel like it will just be shelved or other money will be directed towards it. It just seems like it's a good performer. I also think the AF wants to go with HAWC which is the scramjet cruise missile, which is my favorite hypersonic program.
To me it would make sense to keep a small number of A-10's operational as an option in near future non near peer conflict. Affordability against any other option outside of no replacement should be weighed.
Not the A10... People will go nuts.
It's an obsolete, inadequate platform that should have been reitred years ago.
B-1 has to be the most pointless aircraft in the USAF inventory.
@@EvoraGT430 No way, 24 JASSM/LRASM internal, with 8 more external. Greater than B-52 loading at 1% the radar return. Both B-1B and B-52 will be required for playdates with China. Plus with A-10 going away, B-1 is an excellent CAS asset. Some deployments saw "Chrome Dome" like sorties with a Bone in the air at all times. the 44 that remain in the active fleet are now visiting tinker AFB for 1 month durations receiving approx. 5,000 hours of work and will cycle back through about every 5 years until final retirement once the last of the B-21s are delivered.
@@GregPrice-ep2dk I don't often take national defense advice from randos on the Internet.... but when I do, I pick ones who can't spell, either.
@@harveywallbanger3123 debate the point, not the spelling.
Good point by Gonky on the CR budgetting issue, this is a real problem. I have been concerned about overall readiness for a long time, and some of these items seem to still have a place in the inventory. If Ukraine has tought us anything quantity still matters. I also wonder how much the F35 is responsible for eating up the budget, even if it is a "better" aircraft no way it is THAT much better per unit.
The KC-10s are already gone. The few that remain flying we're already authorized to be retired in fiscal 24 that's why there aren't any in fiscal 25. The last jet will hit the Boneyard September of 24
Should go in KC-10 fleet by September 2024!?!
I saw an article in the air force times that said the a10 can't refuel from the new kc46 and that's probably what their latest reason for retirement is.
Doesn't the budget also require a upgrade of the nuclear force? I understand they want to replace the Minutemen missiles?
I love listening to you guys here in the UK. I notice that you are pretty disparaging about the air tanker programme. Most of us in Europe use the Airbus 330 derivative, which appears to work very well, but was rejected by the US government after what I understand was a successful trial session. I’m wondering if you have any views on that?
So does the F-35 replace A-10 as the main close air support platform?
Yuuup, f-35 is designed to be the jack of all trades but the master of none although it does have its own niche.
So it has a Gatling gun and small diameter bombs. I suppose I watched too many real time videos of the A10 saving Platoons in Afghanistan to not love the Hog@@JG20204
@@richardcarbery7035 oh I love it too. One of my faves for sure
Keep the A-10 as long as the B-52!!
Lol
Lol
They don’t even have a replacement for the A10. It still serves well in its role and does it better than anything else
Not really. CAS in Iraq and Afghanistan was conducted more so from other aircraft than the A-10. In Iraq specifically, the A-10 flew less sorties than the F-16 and still suffered more casualties. Really it's only advantage is that it's the cheapest option.
Greatest CAS aircraft ever built was the AD/A-1 Skyraider which is what the A-10 is designed from the experience of.
KC-10 already flew its last operational mission.
There are still KC-10s flying TACC missions out of Travis.
A-10s should be converted into optionally manned aircraft typically piloted remotely. Use similar conversion as that used for the QF-16. Remove the iconic GAU-8 30mm gun and replace it with An intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance suite that includes electronic signals intelligence capabilities. Fly them in similar roles as Reaper drones but focused more on the more dangerous missions in hostile contested airspace or at lower altitudes with more potential for ground fire. Can still load them up with Hellfire missiles when the mission calls for them.
Gonna unbalance the hell out of the CoG by removing the gun, and I don't think it was ever rated for Hellfire use. Its primary A2G missile is the AGM-65 Maverick.
GAU-8 weighs a bit under 300kg empty. Swapping in the ISR hardware into the same location should help keep the weight balance close to the same. That hardware in pods tends to weigh over 200kg.
The ammo weight and the other changes can be compensated for by careful placement of supporting batteries that can serve as weight ballast.
That doesn’t change the maintenance cost and parts issues.
Nope but it keeps assets that could be useful for a war in the near future while waiting on deliveries of future types of drones not yet available.
Prohibit procurement officers from going to work at defense contractors. Generals, “why else would we become Generals?!?!”
Maybe they should just move the A-10 to strictly Reserve and Guard units and keep a few squadrons "just in case"
"12 HH-60's" is about 2 Air Guard Squadrons worth. But even that seems low since there are 3 Guard, 2 Reserve & 1 AD Sqdn still flying the Golf. Perhaps when Big Blue Retires the HH-60W, the crew will fly a -60G home from the Bone Yard. 😆
They need a replacment for the A-10. Pilots log a lot of hours on the A-10. I find it important just to have pilots flying. Maybe when T-7 has good numbers.
-- Oh, no! Sounds so familiar "A-10 retiring", it happens all the time NONE-STOP since early 1980s! BTW this is first comment on this video!
Boeing assassinated that man.
100%
Epsteined
After the success of the SU-25 in Ukraine I don't see why people still think the A-10 is a viable option for CAS in a contested environment.
lol. The 25 is not the hog in terms of surviving
@@MattKearneyFan1 When you say surviving, do you mean crew survival, or aircraft survival?
@@MattKearneyFan1 the Su-25 is faster
Speed is life
@@MattKearneyFan1 no armor you can put on a plane will stop it from going down when hit by a SAM, or at best being a write-off even if it makes it home. The goal is to not get hit by the SAM at all, or better yet, to not have the SAM fired in your direction in the first place. The Su-25 proves that's just not something a low and slow attack plane, like the A-10, can do. Not to mention it costs more than the F-16 to keep operational.
@@razgriz25thinf lol. The 16 is a superior air to air fighter and high value ground attack aircraft but not much cheaper
Imagine a drone with the A10 gatling gun
Someone would call that an insane war crime. But I like how you think. 😈👍
People keep fawning over a gun. when it really doesn't get much use.
@@WALTERBROADDUSBecause the A-10 is essentially a GAU-8 with wings and an engine.
They should build one, honestly. Or drone-conversions for the existing airframes, so they can do what they do (missions where you might have to take some damage and keep going) without worrying about the risk to a human pilot.
@@reubensandwich9249 missiles and bombs do most of the work however....
The defense budget cuts are beginning to sound allot like the Russian budgeting cuts after the breakup of the Soviet Union.
The A-10 is the perfect CAS workhorse (or warhorse, if you will). Its stupid to get rid of it. Having a 1 size fits all aircraft just isn't going to work.
Well... not as many fighters... fighter pilot shortage fixed!
My son saw his Herc at The Bone Yard.
It made him a little sad.
The whole A-10 squadron at DM is closing up shop and the personnel are being sent elsewhere.
Someone said the F22 is going to DM.
This retired army combat scout will miss the A-10, it's a total lifesaver...SALUTE A-10
fiscal problems due to mismanagement (beyond DoD, though there are plenty of examples there) ... not availability of resource.
parking the Hawg w/o a legit replacement is a mistake.
The hog can not be replaced and operating the 35 will make it more costly on the budget
Already has been. Strike Eagles and F-16s performed the majority of CAS since 2014, with A-10s only getting 11% of CAS sorties.
Why not just give the A-10s to the US Army?
Everyone seems to love the A-10s outside the airforce.
It’s against the Key West accord and a few other conventions that were signed when the Air Force was created. The army can’t own and operate fixed wing combat aircraft.
@BLUEYENKO Then give them to the Marines.....they'd love to have em and they operate fixed winged aircraft.
They don’t want them either.
With all the stress fractures and parts limitations, they’re more expensive to keep than they are worth, and if the air war in Ukraine is anything to go by, in a modern near-peer conflict they would just be expensive coffins.
No word on the crop duster air farce being retired ?
The A-10 will always be my favorite CAS aircraft, but the reality is that drones are going to make these things obsolete... eventually. Godspeed, you glorious pigs.
i remember watching a video of some senator or some such claiming that the B-1B was a better support aircraft than the A-10 and they used the grossly imbalanced wars in the middle east to justify. Would B-1B crews be wanting to orbit over contested airspace in a near peer conflict? Im sure near peer adds increased risk to a hog pilot as well. How do they compare in survivability in their respective domains though.
Are all the Navy F-18s retired yet?
Navy Alphas thru Charlie's are gone. The Marines have a mix force of Charlies and Deltas.
We keep re winging the A-10 ;-) again this is all about paper work accountability lol
The Air Force has been trying to retire the A-10 for 20 years. Good luck with that.
We've also been in Afghanistan for 20 years where the A-10 flew uncontested. Won't be the case in an actual conflict.
What about ICBMs?
Can't retire until the replacement is ready.
Note: The theatres and aircraft employed for certain jobs, is twisted so badly now, it's insane. The 15EX and A-10 are cheaper per hr, than 22/35's to operate, yet are backbones once the 22/35's have done the "secret work". Keep the cost(s) down, employ costly A/C where needed, then let the Pit-bull's come in and clean up! We don't employ M.I.T. grads to hand out mail to Community College employees, do we!?!? If ya don't get the concept...YOU may need not apply!
The procurement death spiral
a 10 is one of the best things that the USA made it can be used in anti-tank and interceptor
Well they keep claiming that the f35 can do the same role as CAS,
@@corporalhicks4532 hahhahaah. that so funny
@@rock_ok Well I'm like you are skeptical about it.But they need to retire it,cause they can't scheme money of old planes. The money is in the new ones. Just look how much over budget the 35 went . Willing to bet a lot of it went to greasing pockets
The Air Force will need at least as many new equivalent aircraft at the same time older planes are retired.
Hmmmm let’s get rid of what works and keep what doesn’t. Hmmmmm
Why wouldn't the USAF just give the A-10s to the Marines?
So few trainers and they definitely won’t last 80 years like the T38
If grunts have anything to do with it, the A10 will not be retired.
Now they can finally afford to actually hire the real Steve Carell as head of Space Force. Think of the publicity, it’ll be perfect, trust me.
Divest to invest is a bad plan for preparing for a potential major power conflict in the near future.
lol did I say I dated one? And honestly, he was the best man out of all people I knew. The best
You dated an A-10? That’s hawt.
I dated one of the best top gun pilots. He was flying F-18
56 A-10 out of service sucks. :( A-10 is a shining jewel in the USAF.
"Retirement" just means the fancy old folks home in the desert and encapsulated.
Seems like everyone thinks "retirement" means gone forever, ya'll know that isn't the case.
Until these "retired" pieces of equipment are cannibalized they are still viable if need be.
A lot of this is political, what's made and repaired in my district. It's more about senators and congressmen than the military.
Fiscal responsibility act…800 billion is just enuff.
Three years of no budget. Continuing resolutions are impossible budget for. With less & less money each year a bunch has to go. A10 is a great aircraft but it is OLD (50) and other aircraft can do the job.
I’ll take one if they don’t want them. Just saying.
the Maryland ANG decided to shift all of its focus to cyber security late last year. Due to this, the 175th wing at Warfield/Martins state airport is retiring its entire A-10 fleet, which is the only aircraft they currently fly. The phase out is supposed to start this fall. After this, Maryland will be the only state without an active air wing.
But they are upgrading the buff so that beast will be flying on the moon soon
Fleet of disposable CAS drones > A-10 "can't pull G's cause human"
It's way more complicated than just squishy human
Anything worth giving (practicle) to Ukraine?
These budgets thingy's are strange. Navy get billions up on billions to build ships that can't leave port.
But they wanna give crumbs to the stuff that actual works
I think CAS mission going to end up taken over by autonomous wingman stuff. Like the Light Recon/assault helo program canceled likely for unmanned craft. Give an apache/F35 some autonomous drones with CAS munitions and have them operate forward.
Too bad there is a shortfall rn when things seem pretty spicy worldwide, but seems like techwise there is a lot of potential in the pipeline to change things up in the next decade and keep US in the lead Air capability wise. Stealth+Drones likely the future.
At some point soon AI target/friendly recognition is going to leap over human capability and autonomous reaction times are going to put humans to shame. The only thing that'll keep that back long after it becomes more capable are going to be politics/personal feelings.
US definitely has its internal troubles though effecting everything, hard to know how it all shakes out until it happens.
32 F-22s being retired! That is very bad…
Agreed. This report is year old, a couple videos ago Mover reported that those F-22s will be upgraded.
There are two major versions of the F-22: 32 x Block 20/25, and approx 154 Block 30/35. Only the Block 30/35s are combat ready. The Block 20/25s are significantly less capable than the 30/35 versions, and are used only as trainers. These, the older Block 20/25 trainers, are the F-22s that the Air Force wants to retire. The Air Force wants to upgrade the Block 30/35s, including with some NGAD technology, and keep them until at least 2030 or when NGAD aircraft are supposed to be coming on line.
So far Congress has blocked retirement of the block 20/25s, but the USAF says it makes no sense to keep them or try to upgrade them. The Air Force states the 20/25 versions are so different from the 30/35, the pilots transitioning from one to the other have to relearn some tasks to fly the newer version. To upgrade the 20/25 versions to the block 30/35 standard would require 10 years of engineering development along with pulling resources (manpower and money) away from F-35 and NGAD.
@@Spectator1959Why do AF aircraft block numbers always read like fractions? Like Block “20/25?” What happened to Blocks 21, 22, 23, and 24?
Sorry, I served in a B-52H base and AFAIK all of them were of the same model and block.
I knew the jig was up when they put an F22A and a B2A on public display at Wright-Patterson a few years ago. Instant first though: "Ah, so the CIA and NDC have finally grudgingly admitted that the Chinese have stolen every piece of useful data about these aircraft already and designed countermeasures to specifically negate their edge."
@@Ryan_Christopher in my experience, it’s been because there was some small but significant difference between models being produced at the same time, but not significant enough to lead to an entirely new block.
For example when I worked with the E-3A in 1980s, the operational software block was 20/25. We had two slightly different versions of the software, because the first few (I forget exactly how many) E-3As were produced with an IBM 4Pi computer called the CC-1 that had actual ferrite core memory. Partway through the production of the E-3A the memory unit was changed to semiconductors, and this one was known as CC-2. Block 20 software was for the CC-1, block 25 software was for the CC-2. I don’t remember precisely what had to be changed between the two software versions, but it handled the new computer and radar, and otherwise the software was (edited) similar.
I don’t know what the difference is with the F 22A; I’ve seen the blocks referred to simply as block 20 and block, 30, but other sources list them as 20/25 and 30/35.
ETA: It’s been near 40 years, I forgot that the radar was upgraded along with computer, from APY-1 to APY-2 with maritime capability, and the airframe redesignated E-3B because of that.
Give the A10 to the Army😅😅😅😅
Robbing Peter to pay Paul, not a great long-term strategy.
Real pigs will fly before the Warthog stops.
The first pig flew in 1909
Look on the bright side, you’re NOT in Canada, not only can we not train Pilots we don’t have any airplanes to speak of… the Royal Canadian Airforce is in a Terrible state …. You should do a show on that ! Would LOVE to hear yours and Gonkys opinion on that
Wait until S.N.A.K.E. comes online🤫.........😬
Air Force with no planes means no pilots means no Air Force.
A-10 +1 pilots life costs x amount . .. .. Manpad Cost x amount