When they wanted to test the F-35 ability to provide close air support they were all for it. Until the Air Force said okay we're bringing in a few a tens and we'll test it against the F-35 and they said no no no we don't want to test against the A10. The F-35 has only one advantage. It's avionics package. It is slower accelerate slower it does not have the thrust to weight ratio of the F-16 or F-15. Barely has the thrust to weight ratio of an F18. It is also less agile than all of those aircraft. It is not nearly as accurate for close air support as the A10. It also doesn't have the lordering capability. And it's three to five times more expensive to fly and if you lose one you can replace 10 A-10s with the cost of one F-35. The only thing that the A-10 suffers from is that it cannot be mustered in an area where if it had to scramble and get do somebody who needed help in a hurry it takes it a little bit of time to get there if it's not already in the area. Which is why the military is looking for a smaller platform for close air support. Possibly a propeller-driven platform. But every time they go to build one it's about the same size as an A-10. And an air support platform does not have to be that large. Look at history for just a moment. We had the fastest and best air attack helicopter on the planet in 1970. And by the time they decided to completely start from scratch and create the Apache helicopter. They spent enough money to a bot 3000 Cheyenne helicopters and by the time they would have paid for all of them they would have been upgraded to have pretty much the same capability and be a much faster aircraft. By the time they built the first A-10 they could have bought thousands of gas turbine powered P-51 aircraft. Which would have more than fulfilled the role and would have been a hell of a lot easier to keep flying. And posed a much smaller Target. The A-10 would still have been a wonderful aircraft to have had against armor. But a P-51 is more than capable of taking out armor with the right guns and shells. However the A10 is a superb product for what it is designed to do and it performs that function better than any other aircraft on the planet. It's just not pretty
@@princam_4775 It was a single use aircraft it can only do CAS, all the other planes that are used for CAS can also do a variety of other things and the crew that fly them are generally more broadly trained. A-10 crews and planes aren't cost effective by any means, they're only cheap when you consider them in isolation for providing CAS. e.g it obviously costs more for a jet but the jet can do about 90x more things than an A-10 and its considerably less likely to be destroyed compared to A-10's which get pinged out of the sky by even small AA on the ground.
@@princam_4775 They don't have the funds because they are spending them all on the costly f-35 believing that it will replace the A-10 and the F-16 while the other costly aircraft the F-22 is supposed to replace the less costly F-15. So instead of maybe keeping the F-22 for the complete air supremacy then replacing the F-16 with an upgrade that is not a budget breaker they opt to say the A-10 is the oldest and least shiny aircraft so lets get rid of it...At least that is my take on the whole thing.
@@44hawk28 The P-51 Aircraft was never used for Close Air Support because the Merlin is liquid cooled. The first Thunderbolt, the P-47, was the Tank and Train Killer. The A-10 Warthog is actually named the Thunderbolt II. It has Titanium protection for the Pilot and is very, VERY purposefully designed around the Gun and very, VERY purposely designed by the Fighter Mafia group from engines to Stall Speed, etc. The Fighter Mafia group gave the A-10 and the F-16 designs to Air Defense Contracted Corporations. If you want to know "why" the A-10 is constantly under attack it is because, like the F-16, the original company that built them no longer exists and greedy companies like Lockheed Martin want to grow their profits while the Air Force wants to be relevant and the way to do that is to have a large budget and a slightly larger budget next year (then a slightly LARGER Budget the following year).
Senator McCain is absolutely, 100% right in his assertion of the facts. The A-10 is the best tool for the mission and should be kept in service in much the same way as the BUFF.
+ Rick Nieland. No. McCain is right. The A-10 is the best tool for the job and costs far less than the F-35.The A-10 is battle proven,cheap,(relatively,as far as jet aircraft go),and it fills the close air support role better than any other plane on earth. If the Air Force were trying to cut the F-16 or any other plane Congress wouldn't even bat an eye. McCain knows the Air Force is working on a tight budget. You just don't throw away the best tool for the job,especially when money is tight.
+ Mikkall Maybe. But still,what platform are they going to replace the A-10 with? No other weapon platform on Earth is as cost effective and provides close air support as well as the A-10. No one is arguing that. So why replace the best cheapest tool for the job with a far more expensive aircraft that can't provide true close air support like the A-10 does? Did you hear what they wanted to use instead? A B1-B? Ya,because a 1000lb JDAM is cheaper than a 30mm round right? Not to mention that the per unit cost of a B1-B is $400 million compared to an $18 million per unit cost for the A-10. Also,dropping thousand pound bombs next to our own troops in a danger close environment is stucking foopid. There's a reason we don't already do it on the regular when we don't absolutely have to. It's hard to find one whole complete soldier and bring him back home after you drop a bomb on a squad of U.S. Marines or Airborne Rangers.
But they are arguing that... Gen Welsh is arguing that very point in this 2yr old video. Look, I'm the last guy in the world to bag on the A-10. It's bad ass, cool, awesome at what it does, all that stuff. In fact chances are the A-10 is relatively safe for the time being now that the military is getting a budget boost (F-35 cost notwithstanding). Regardless, the A-10 was designed for a fighting war... with fronts, and lots and lots of Russian Tanks. Then the A-10 fell into COIN ops and it fits nicely...... but that does not take away from the raw data that says the F-16, F/A-18, F-15E (each individually) and B1B are already doing MORE CAS than the A-10, and just as successfully. The A-10 is a feel-good for the guys on the ground, which is it's only real selling point at this time as McCain so profusely points out (mixed with his version of facts).
Mikkall not to sound like a you tube jerk but you obviously haven’t spent any time in combat. Boots on the ground with the enemy trying to kill you and no escape. Fight and win or you, your buddies or everyone could be wiped out. The A10 is not just a “feel good” for the Troops on the ground. The A10 is an ass kicking game over for the enemy weapon. It can get in real close, low, slow and ACCURATELY destroy the enemy. An F16,15,35 etc etc is not nearly as effective. Too fast , too high, time on station is often way too short and the list goes on. They can all do cas but nothing like the A10. CAS is all About saving lives on the ground and they deserve the best CAS system. Not budget cuts and high priced fantasies.
The Army's been asking for that for decades now; every time they do, the Air Force decides to keep the Warthogs for another ten years. It'll be a cold day in hell when the USAF lets anybody but themselves fly planes.
Chris Doe one word, morale. The a-10 is a morale machine, not to mention it'll take a stupid amount of time before we get another plane that had the survivability rate of an a-10
As a former U.S. army soldier, I can say truly, that I would rather have the A-10 Warthog (Thunderbolt 2) covering me in a hot environment. If I was on the ground, and was being fired upon, I would be wanting A. Apache support, and B. A-10 support (which one kind of depends on the particular threat and situation) . The A-10 and the Apache are both able to loiter over the battlefield longer and move much more slowly (a very important capability over the really fast moving jets), than the F-16 and/or the F-15E or F-35. And, as Senator McCain said, the A-10 is SO much less expensive to operate (and probably build as well) than the other ones. My 2 cents.
good luck when you fight the russians or chinese with a-10 in the air 😂 they will be shoot down by enemie airplanes or sams by takeoff... the f-35 is nessecery
Philip basler Then don’t use the A10 in those countries. The countries were using them in don’t have the threat of SAM sites or hostile aircraft. You put the laughing emoji like you did something but certain planes have different applications so you might use an A10 in the Middle East a lot but very rarely in Russia or China isn’t like them keeping the A10 requires them to use the A10 if we go to war with China or Russia.
General: We need to reduce our spending and A10 is using alot of our money. Also general: *wants to replace the a10 with f 35s which are like 10x more expensive*
They needed to fund the next generation F35 projects, it is critical. Retiring A-10 early and using other existing newer aircraft to cover the role free up money for next generation projects. This is a transition period for next generation of weapon.
StupidBadyXD it's not like they need the F35s in order to evolve. With our situation in the Middle East, I would imagine air to air combat is practically non existent. Close air support is a must when it comes to conflict in the Middle East. If they want to evolve, they need to get past the F35 project. It honestly sounds like Lockheed accidentally made a surplus of F35s and they're in a dire situation to sell them. Lucky for them, they got Trump who bought a bunch of them.
They're replacing the A10s because the USAF want to focus back on conventional warfare and future conflicts, the F-35 is perfect due the multi-role capability and stealth capability being less vulnerable to High end AA defense systems, meanwhile the A10 is an easy target to AA.
@@juandavidnustesgutierrez9796 Been reading these comments. No one seems to really understand that good AA is becoming cheaper and cheaper, and that the people the US will need to fight in 10 years will be funded enough to use it. Yeah, the A-10 is great against po dunk farmers jihadis with small arms, but literally can't be used against half the threats the US is gearing to face.
The Air Force has tried to get rid of the A-10 since before it was produced in the sixties, the same way they got rid of the C-27. So why not give it to the Army? The Army has wanted it all the time.
Quite so, yet these moronic generals constantly want rid of it. One wonders who's paying them to hold such positions, and how much they have been paid. Because surely it can't be anything other than corruption, since it makes no logical sense otherwise.
@@TheAngrySaxon1 Put the pilot in a titanium bathtub, sling a 20 mm cannon unlinke any other in service in the world, give it huge lifting surfaces and top mounted engines. They made every correct decision possible when they designed the A10. When was the last fighter v fighter combat in real anger???? the us air force has lost its way in so many facets. Screw fighter jets build Better Hogs.
@@aaronlonghuynh5245 You are correct sir. I appreciate the sizable distinctions between the two. Th A-10 is the best "built to do a job" aircraft of all time. Do not let my slip up lead you to believe i do not love this air-frame. Thanks for pulling the foot out of my mouth 30 MM ****
I have talked to a lot of ground troops, both Army and Marines, and they love exactly two fixed wing aircrafts. The AC-130 and the A-10. What about the rest? Screw them, because the AC-130 and the A-10 do something the others don't: stay around and help until the threat is neutralized. Note: I am not mentioned helos because they are pretty universally loved, whether they are attack helicopters like the Apache, general use choppers like the Blackhawk, or large transport ones like the Chinook (god that is an old helo).
@@russg1801 I’m six years late to this party, and I mean no disrespect, but it’s referred to as The A-10 Warthog, The A-10, The Warthog, and The Hog by everyone associated with any part of it’s existence, as well as all of those who rely on the support and coverage it provides on the ground.
@jhon doe Lmao, have you seen what the A10 does to enemy troops and tanks? Theres a reason soldiers cheer with joy when they hear that beautiful sound from the A10. Just like the idiot general, you're fucking clueless to reality. I swear this is a new level of incompetence.
@@martinigasolini4062 That doesn't mean the same job can be done with another airframe more efficiently (in terms of not needing more types of parts, maintenance, training etc) and significantly more safely to the pilot. The A-10 was built to excel in a type of warfare that doesn't exist anymore and hasn't existed for years.
I was fortunate to serve in Desert Storm and saw the A-10 used. It was an awesome plane and will continue to be for many years. Ask the troops on the ground. They love the plane.
in all my years of experience serving as a joint service armchair general, and tier one rainbow six operator, i can tell you- the a-10 kicks ass brrrrrt brrrrrrrt kaboom
My God, this is a man on the committee which decides our men and women in the air capability to fight effectively? Someone who is relying on his disgusting record of treasonous activity, responsible for our men dying? HE is an embarrassment to our country when he sits in the face of facts and refuses to hear the facts!
McCain might be a dork but he is saying what needs to be emphasized - there is no replacement for the A-10! Until there is, he should interrupt the general at every opportunity. The AF is out of control and owned by Lockheed, and he knows it.
Congress allows by funding and McCain has been part of that committee long enough to have made the changes we know should be taken place a long time ago.
As General Welsh once said "People are going to criticize you if you're the one stepping up, making the calls, enforcing discipline, making sure people meet standards and making sure the mission gets done…deal with it. Make the tough decisions.” He doesn't want to get rid of the A-10. He's flown it, he knows how good it is. Unfortunately congress has cut defense spending and after all possible decisions were considered, cutting the A-10 had the least impact on the mission. While many may disagree, we as the public do not have all the information which General Welsh and his advisors have and therefore we cannot make as informed a decision. While I don't want to see the A-10 cut, I know that General Welsh makes decisions with airmen, soldiers, and sailors in mind. If you have ever listened to him to talk, you would see that he does his best to take care of his people. Even if that means taking the heat from an unpopular decision. That is leadership in action.
This General literally used to be an A-10 instructor pilot. I guarantee he knows more about it's effectiveness and limitations than anyone here in the comments.
If the F16 and F15 are effective you'd be using them. We are using them. No you aren't. If they are effective you'd be using them. We are, I can show you the data. No you aren't If the F16 and F15 are effective you'd be using them.
Guys, McCain is interrupting Welsh because he's heard the same bullshit before! This isn't new information, people have come up to McCain with the same statistics and loitering tactics every day, and he's tired of it, and I would be too. He is not changing his opinion on the A-10, and if you don't agree with that opinion, come up with some new shit and stop saying the same stats. Statistics don't make up everything about war; ever read Sun Tzu's the Art of War? "Treat your men as you would your own beloved sons. And they will follow you into the deepest valley." ~Sun Tzu. That's not a statistic. You don't always win wars with statistics.
Mitch you are so right! I'm a Viet era vet, and our General's were constsntly using "stats" like "body counts" to "prove" we were winning! You saw how well that worked!😣🤔
6 років тому+2
You and people like you are so fucking stupid. This has nothing to do with battlefield performance or retirement of aircraft. It has everything to do with finance and the god damn budget that Congress keeps reducing, yet expecting the Air Force to maintain all operations while underfunded.
the A-10 is peak perfection for attack planes. if it gets retired, we may never see an aircraft capable of matching what the A-10 was capable of, and if we do, it won't be for a while.
A-10 is great at one mission, the F-16 and F-15 are excellent muti-mission aircraft. If McCain would let the man speak for more than 15 seconds at a time he might realize that its the budget acts that he helped pass that is forcing the Airforce to retire it even though it doesn't want to. In short the Generals response should have been: SHOW ME THE MONEY!
@@strategosopsikion8576 what other plane will be built around 30mm fucking gun. None. Simple, you cannot replace this plane. No ground troops wants to see a f16 for ground support. The a10 is easily the most effective at everything but air to air combat.
The A10 is one of the most precise weapons ever made, dude! " knuckledraggers " lol you sound like the guys who said the F4 does't need a gun because dogfighting is dead.
McCain: You can't use the F-16 for CAS because if you could, you would. General: We are using the F-16 for CAS. McCain: No you aren't. Repeat several more times.
This comment. I'm really confused about why McCain posted this video? He isn't letting the person (an experienced F-16 pilot himself and AF CHIEF OF STAFF) who was called to testify speak at all? Then proceeds to insert anecdotal points about how the air force pilots he allegedly talks to all the time like the A-10. I don't understand why he didn't let Welsh, who's job it is to analyze this stuff and make decisions based on that, speak in any complete sentences. Makes him look like a child.
@@jamestwojames Welshs job is to make his superiors happy, not give the soldiers on the ground the support they want and need. The A10 was designed for CAS whereas the f16 is a multirole aircraft and simply cant put the same work in. It cant loiter for nearly as long either and cant make quick repeat passes like the A-10. Welsh isnt there representing the interests of soldiers, he might aswell be a lying ass politician at this point.
His argument wasn’t that the F-16 “can’t do CAS” it was that the A-10 does it better, so to correct your comment it would go McCain: If the F-16 or F-15 does it just as good as the A-10 then you wouldn’t be using the A-10 General: We do use the F-16 and F-15 for CAS McCain: But you still use the A-10
Where is Senator McCain getting his information? Someone is giving McCain bad information. It is true the Army loves the A-10 but they don't know the problems it comes with. Everyone loves the airshow 30MM but the engines run great in cool, damp European air - not so good in hot, dry, sandy Afghanistan.
The general should have just said ok we can keep the A-10 but we need $25 billion more every year that we continue to use it or take that money out of the F-35 program. The next month the same general will have to explain to congress why the F-35 program is not progressing fast enough and when is the Air Force going to get rid of that money hog A-10 program.
@@zard1214 false, without stealth basically you're basically making your aircraft a target in today's battleground unless it's some God damn 3rd world country full of men who's most advanced gun is literally a fuckin' Ak and has no access to AA
No doubt that A-10s are the most capable and the most cost-effective assets in the AF, and there is no room for argument. But put if the AF should retire A-10s or not aside, McCain should let Gen Welsh finish his comment. It's unfair and disrespectful to cut in every time Gen Welsh tries to say something.
Sen. McCain has followed the journey of the A-10 since jump. For all these years, the Air Force has bad mouthed the A-10 while the Army praises it time & time again. I don't blame McCain one bit because "General Nuisance" sitting there was trying to feed them that same old worn out BS about the A-10. The Air Force wants to have bigger, faster & more powerful planes all shiny & new. Sen. McCain came as close to saying what I would have said, something like this, "OK, that's enough of your BS" & I would added "Kiss my butt". The A-10 story is a painful illustration of just how much flag-rank military thinking is driven by ego, selfishness and greed and how little of it is relevant to war-fighting.
This shows just how how out of touch brass is with what's actually happening. When SHTF, you want an A-10, Apache, or Specter to show up, not a flipping fighter jet. For the enemy on the ground, the A-10 (and AC-130) are the truly feared planes. The F-15, F-16, F-35, and B1B are all inadequate for CAS, where mission success can be the determining factor in whether your buddies survive or not. The A-10 was built with tons of titanium armor to be shot up to crap but remain operational and protect the pilot from harm. How on earth can a F-35 protect a pilot from harm and yield the same operational effectiveness of the A-10? The inability of the F-15 and F-16 (as great as they are for the tasks they were designed for) to perform certain types of CAS is well-documented, as is the higher chance of fratricide. If the Air Force hates the A-10 that much and cannot understand how it comes through as your Hail Mary when you need it, they should transfer them over to another branch to resume usage as the primary operator. Talk with anyone who has served on the ground and they'll tell you just how stupid-a-move retiring the A-10 will be.
@@chrisdoe2659 If that's true - it would be because of the mission they were flying where in because they were close to the ground they could conduct attacks closer to our own forces. Other aircraft wouldn't even try to make these attacks. And - what is your source for that? .
can anyone tell me how many a-10 goht destroyd in cas missions, and how many f-16 in cas missions? there are more a-10s that goht shoot down with less missions then the f-16...
There is NO replacement for the A-10.The troops on the ground love to see the A-10 coming because they know the enemy is terrified of it and they know they will get the best coverage.
THe A-10 is the best in close aircraft ever built for combat! Any flyer who's ever been in actual combat will tell you this! They can destroy anything on the ground with great accuracy with the greatest suitability of any aircraft ever built! It's cheap and lasts a very long time with minimal maintenance . THis general is a fucking bureaucrat looking for extensive funding for shit that doesn't even exist yet and has presented a vacant argument! He's obviously a Omonkey appointee!
A-10 performs less than 20% of CAS sorties. F-15 and F-16 both perform CAS en masse and together do far, far more than the A-10. Even the B-1B does more CAS than the A-10! Senator, this was just you bullying a General because you could. I don't think I heard a single full sentence from him because you kept interrupting and repeating assertions you had already made earlier, adding nothing and distorting the facts.
dude do you want to know why they do more sorties and also have less effective reports from troops on the ground? they cant hang around the AO because of speed they zoom in drop bombs and zoom out meaning they cannot attack additional targets without going back to rearm which they have to do more of, the amount of ordance they carry which is limited especially considering they dont have effective anti personnel cannons, and overall they are more expensive in a CAS role because instead of using cannons they have to use big fuck off bombs that can be released on a limited amount of targets and thats where the budget comes in. Mcain knew more about the capabilities of the CAS roles than the airforce general and because he was arguing against the continued production of the best CAS support weapon we have it makes him look pretty fucking silly and childish.
@@ddqwf well, reports say the opposite, most blue on blue were caused by A10s, the casualty rate for the A10 was higher compared to other aircraft and about the cannon argument...that's short bus thinking, it's very rare when an A10 has to do that, most of the time they just stay in the air and drop some bombs.
Since 1991, the Hawg has been proven to be not only the best aircraft in the Air Force, but in the world. I say hands down the best plane in the world. I am a fan of the F-35 and hope to fly either that F-35 or A-10.
Except that half of what the Senator argued was false - A-10's have only performed around 12-27% of fixed-wing CAS missions in Iraq, Afghanistan and Syria. The rest have been done with F-16s, F-15Es, F/A-18s and B-1Bs. The favourite asset of the most decorated / honoured US Army battalion in Afghanistan was the B-1B because it beat the A-10 in loiter time, payload and it delivered bombs where the Army wanted. aviationweek.com/site-files/aviationweek.com/files/uploads/2015/03/CloseAirSupport_chart2B.jpg www.airforcetimes.com/news/your-air-force/2016/03/24/air-force-f-16s-fly-the-most-sorties-against-isis-b-1s-drop-most-bombs/ www.washingtonpost.com/news/checkpoint/wp/2015/12/30/the-under-appreciated-workhorse-of-americas-air-wars-the-b-1-bomber/
Question to all servicemen that read this: If you want closer airsupport than a F15/16/35 can provide (fuel, speed, lack of ammo etc), why no one talks about helicopters like the Apaches? Not fast enough or are they easier to target from ground or whats the main disadvantage in helicopters doing CAS?
AF pilots got into trouble for speaking to McCain about it. The AF wanted to retire the A-10 re-direct the money to the F-35 which they are now at 10 times the original cost.
Senator McCain is firing the General up and, yes, it can be seen as rude. However, the Air Force has a strange tendency to just want to shut down the A-10. It just seems like they don't get it and don't take their close air support responsibilities to the Army that seriously.
Its been three years since this clash between General and Senator, but the A-10 still stands strong. Only rookies and small-timers judge equipment by how new it is.
I can look back on my career in DoD QA at Fairchild) (my first station after 8 years as as a Submariner; go figure), and smile knowing that the avionics for the A-10 was one of the first programs I worked on. Our training classrooms were at the Warfield ANG Base at Middle River, where 104th A-10 Fighter Squadron is. And before a Ravens game begins at home, a flight of A-10's from the 104th (about 10-15mi away) does a stadium flyover. I smile and salute each time I see them fly over.
@@tigeruntamed6036 Absolutely; have been an original Baltimore Ravens PSL owner/Season Ticket holder from the first day they arrived. The Raven in my avatar is actually a picture I took of "Rise", 1 of the 2 live Ravens mascots from the Baltimore Zoo that they bring around the sidelines before and during home games. Our seats are Front Row End Zone.
@@tigeruntamed6036 The 104th MD ANG A-10 Fighter Squadron (175th Wing) flies out of Martin State Airport next to Lockheed-Martin in Middle River; they actually did flyovers on May 8th (they flew over us at 1400) to the Eastern Shore (I think). Lockheed-Martin there is also where my last assignment was before I had to retire on disability in '99. They don't necessarily do flyovers every home game, but always on first home game, nationally televised games, postseason, etc. Here's a link to one, end of the NA: ua-cam.com/video/HvfP_UQ9W7o/v-deo.html
A-10 was made specially for CAS. F-35 was made for being an allrounder for the "heavenly" JSF program, which is nothing half and nothing whole for needed tasks like CAS.
Damn, Welsh got served big time. The moment he messed up was when he said, “I don’t want to retire the A-10, but the Air Force must get bigger to do its...” McCain: “Don’t make me come down there and bitch slap you to the sand box! Proposal denied. Fuck off! NEXT!”
One important fact that they omitted is that the Air Force NEVER WANTED the A-10 to begin with & they have been trying to get rid of it since the beginning. It is the Army & other ground troops that want & love the A-10. When the first Gulf War was being planned in 1990, Gen. Norman Schwarzkopf, the chief of U.S. Central Command, had to fight the Air Force to send over a mere 174 A-10s for his use," Kaplan writes. "Yet in the course of the war, those A-10s knocked out roughly half of the 1,700 Iraqi tanks that were destroyed from the air... Even the Air Force brass had to admit the planes had done a good job, and they kept them in the fleet.
So, why do we still have b52s? or even b1s? The B52 is practically useless today, the b1 less so but still has a very limited role as compared to the A-10.
Beyond my youth, I’ve come to respect the late Senator John McCain, he certainly was never a joke and given his POW status he was certainly a no bullshit man. I wish that he would’ve initially won the presidency over Obama and looking back on this, I wish I was old enough to vote for the man.
Speaking as someone who voted for Obama, I can tell you that Senator McCain would not have been in the position to shut down that general had he won the presidency. I actually considered the McCain vs Obama election to be a win/win situation, and (in an admittedly selfish act as an Arizonan) felt it would be more prudent to keep McCain as Senator. In this sense and a small number of others, it seems to have paid off.
The general could have responded that the F-15 and F-16 are able to use their higher speed to respond faster to CAS requests, meaning they don't need as many aircraft in the area. But this is only useful if the ordnance needed is smaller than that carried by an F-15 or F-16. The other issue is that if the F-15 and F-16 were capable of doing the job, the general would have already rotated them out of the area. The Air Force hasn't. Finally would be a case where cost would have come in. Essentially compare the cost to keeping X amount of A-10s in the area vs that same cost to keep F-15 and F-16 in an area, and see which does the better job.
+Todd Kes They don't need higher speed tho. A-10's already use incirlik afb which is close vicinity of the where the combat is going. you guys also had the plans of opening a new airway at the iraqi kurdistan for operations against isil. and pretty much all the time us and coalition aircraft are patrollin syrian airspace armed with ground munitions. please don't kill the a-10 a turk
What's amazing, is how casually they talk about abstractions like missions and sorties and financial efficacy when referring to killing people... Washington's deep military roots, black and gnarled, held in the light. He's right about the A-10 though...
McCain Defensively knows what he taking about, its surprising how a person like Welsh could ever get to such high position. He cut manpower in AF, now we facing the consequences and new Chief of Staff have to solve all this mess he left. I'm not a pilot or anything but you don't have to be one to understand that you don't need F35's to fight terrorist who don't have any air defense. RIP Sen McCain.
I don't think you realize that General Mark Welsh was an air force pilot flying the A10 and the F16, he has over 3400 hours in flight. He is a FOUR STAR GENERAL, he knows what the fuck he is talking about, he probably even knows better than YOU, YOU the UA-cam expert, you've probably watched MORE THAN 5 documentaries on the a10 and the army
Fact: when the A-10 swoops above the field of combat, the enemy sees a pissed of dragon out to get them. And there not wrong. Now I wonder if small superprops have that same effect?
i'm not aligned with any military organization, but if you're still using the a-10 which is x amount of years older than f-15s and f16s and they're cheaper than f35s, what's the counter argument for not retiring it? none. because the numbers reflect that operation costs, usability and effectivity by far they're the tools to be used. because if you got a biga$$ gun flying at a very controlled speed compared to a faster airplane but can't do what it's supposed to do and costs more, why use it.
A-10s are #1 "Ground Pounders" and #1 "Tank Busters" !!! Never meant for anything else !!! Soon as they figure out they cant replace the Armored Twin Engine A-10 with ANYTHING but another A-10... they'll make more or keep what they got, witch they're doing !!!
Question: Why is it that its the civilian people (senators etc.) who wants to keep the A-10 and not the Generals and Majors, despite the fact that there is no other weapon system out the today or in the near future that can perform the same tasks as the A-10? Surely the Army and Air Force should care for such a remarkable weapons platform that keeps their troops on the ground safe(r).
This time mccain right. A a10 can attack a different targets heavily and accurately each 20 seconds. The brrrp on the enemy is devastating. Its the modern day Stuka.
The A 10 should only be retired when they develop the super A 10. So never
kmccurdy21 but what if they put a plane on two of the a10s cannons
@@dillionkoob2343 I THINK THEY WANT THE F-14s. BACK
kmccurdy21 simple new name the A FUCK U
The AA-10 holy shit!
Just stick a second brrrt on it
I hear a voice that cares about the man on the ground. RIP Senator McCain. I salute you SIR!
100 percent right on the money....brrrrrrrrrrT
You say that but the A-10 is the number 1 aircraft in blue-on-blue deaths in US history.
Then he would retire the a-10
General: We don’t have the funds for our A10s. John Mcain: but it goes brrrt
When they wanted to test the F-35 ability to provide close air support they were all for it. Until the Air Force said okay we're bringing in a few a tens and we'll test it against the F-35 and they said no no no we don't want to test against the A10.
The F-35 has only one advantage. It's avionics package. It is slower accelerate slower it does not have the thrust to weight ratio of the F-16 or F-15. Barely has the thrust to weight ratio of an F18. It is also less agile than all of those aircraft. It is not nearly as accurate for close air support as the A10. It also doesn't have the lordering capability. And it's three to five times more expensive to fly and if you lose one you can replace 10 A-10s with the cost of one F-35. The only thing that the A-10 suffers from is that it cannot be mustered in an area where if it had to scramble and get do somebody who needed help in a hurry it takes it a little bit of time to get there if it's not already in the area. Which is why the military is looking for a smaller platform for close air support. Possibly a propeller-driven platform. But every time they go to build one it's about the same size as an A-10. And an air support platform does not have to be that large.
Look at history for just a moment. We had the fastest and best air attack helicopter on the planet in 1970. And by the time they decided to completely start from scratch and create the Apache helicopter. They spent enough money to a bot 3000 Cheyenne helicopters and by the time they would have paid for all of them they would have been upgraded to have pretty much the same capability and be a much faster aircraft. By the time they built the first A-10 they could have bought thousands of gas turbine powered P-51 aircraft. Which would have more than fulfilled the role and would have been a hell of a lot easier to keep flying. And posed a much smaller Target. The A-10 would still have been a wonderful aircraft to have had against armor. But a P-51 is more than capable of taking out armor with the right guns and shells. However the A10 is a superb product for what it is designed to do and it performs that function better than any other aircraft on the planet. It's just not pretty
How do they not have the funds for one of the cheapest aircraft they operate?
@@princam_4775 It was a single use aircraft it can only do CAS, all the other planes that are used for CAS can also do a variety of other things and the crew that fly them are generally more broadly trained. A-10 crews and planes aren't cost effective by any means, they're only cheap when you consider them in isolation for providing CAS. e.g it obviously costs more for a jet but the jet can do about 90x more things than an A-10 and its considerably less likely to be destroyed compared to A-10's which get pinged out of the sky by even small AA on the ground.
@@princam_4775 They don't have the funds because they are spending them all on the costly f-35 believing that it will replace the A-10 and the F-16 while the other costly aircraft the F-22 is supposed to replace the less costly F-15. So instead of maybe keeping the F-22 for the complete air supremacy then replacing the F-16 with an upgrade that is not a budget breaker they opt to say the A-10 is the oldest and least shiny aircraft so lets get rid of it...At least that is my take on the whole thing.
@@44hawk28 The P-51 Aircraft was never used for Close Air Support because the Merlin is liquid cooled. The first Thunderbolt, the P-47, was the Tank and Train Killer. The A-10 Warthog is actually named the Thunderbolt II. It has Titanium protection for the Pilot and is very, VERY purposefully designed around the Gun and very, VERY purposely designed by the Fighter Mafia group from engines to Stall Speed, etc. The Fighter Mafia group gave the A-10 and the F-16 designs to Air Defense Contracted Corporations.
If you want to know "why" the A-10 is constantly under attack it is because, like the F-16, the original company that built them no longer exists and greedy companies like Lockheed Martin want to grow their profits while the Air Force wants to be relevant and the way to do that is to have a large budget and a slightly larger budget next year (then a slightly LARGER Budget the following year).
Senator McCain is absolutely, 100% right in his assertion of the facts. The A-10 is the best tool for the mission and should be kept in service in much the same way as the BUFF.
The problem is congress has cut the budgets so much that they AF has to cut something, McCain is a idiot.
+ Rick Nieland. No. McCain is right. The A-10 is the best tool for the job and costs far less than the F-35.The A-10 is battle proven,cheap,(relatively,as far as jet aircraft go),and it fills the close air support role better than any other plane on earth. If the Air Force were trying to cut the F-16 or any other plane Congress wouldn't even bat an eye. McCain knows the Air Force is working on a tight budget. You just don't throw away the best tool for the job,especially when money is tight.
+ Mikkall Maybe. But still,what platform are they going to replace the A-10 with? No other weapon platform on Earth is as cost effective and provides close air support as well as the A-10. No one is arguing that. So why replace the best cheapest tool for the job with a far more expensive aircraft that can't provide true close air support like the A-10 does? Did you hear what they wanted to use instead? A B1-B? Ya,because a 1000lb JDAM is cheaper than a 30mm round right? Not to mention that the per unit cost of a B1-B is $400 million compared to an $18 million per unit cost for the A-10. Also,dropping thousand pound bombs next to our own troops in a danger close environment is stucking foopid. There's a reason we don't already do it on the regular when we don't absolutely have to. It's hard to find one whole complete soldier and bring him back home after you drop a bomb on a squad of U.S. Marines or Airborne Rangers.
But they are arguing that... Gen Welsh is arguing that very point in this 2yr old video. Look, I'm the last guy in the world to bag on the A-10. It's bad ass, cool, awesome at what it does, all that stuff. In fact chances are the A-10 is relatively safe for the time being now that the military is getting a budget boost (F-35 cost notwithstanding). Regardless, the A-10 was designed for a fighting war... with fronts, and lots and lots of Russian Tanks. Then the A-10 fell into COIN ops and it fits nicely...... but that does not take away from the raw data that says the F-16, F/A-18, F-15E (each individually) and B1B are already doing MORE CAS than the A-10, and just as successfully. The A-10 is a feel-good for the guys on the ground, which is it's only real selling point at this time as McCain so profusely points out (mixed with his version of facts).
Mikkall not to sound like a you tube jerk but you obviously haven’t spent any time in combat. Boots on the ground with the enemy trying to kill you and no escape. Fight and win or you, your buddies or everyone could be wiped out. The A10 is not just a “feel good” for the Troops on the ground. The A10 is an ass kicking game over for the enemy weapon. It can get in real close, low, slow and ACCURATELY destroy the enemy. An F16,15,35 etc etc is not nearly as effective. Too fast , too high, time on station is often way too short and the list goes on. They can all do cas but nothing like the A10. CAS is all
About saving lives on the ground and they deserve the best CAS system. Not budget cuts and high priced fantasies.
Give the A-10's to the Army, problem solved.
The best suggestion EVER!
The Army's been asking for that for decades now; every time they do, the Air Force decides to keep the Warthogs for another ten years. It'll be a cold day in hell when the USAF lets anybody but themselves fly planes.
Fuck you it's ours! You can't play with my tooooyy!
The Army doesn't want them. The AH-64 is cheaper and more effective at CAS.
Chris Doe one word, morale. The a-10 is a morale machine, not to mention it'll take a stupid amount of time before we get another plane that had the survivability rate of an a-10
As a former U.S. army soldier, I can say truly, that I would rather have the A-10 Warthog (Thunderbolt 2) covering me in a hot environment. If I was on the ground, and was being fired upon, I would be wanting A. Apache support, and B. A-10 support (which one kind of depends on the particular threat and situation) . The A-10 and the Apache are both able to loiter over the battlefield longer and move much more slowly (a very important capability over the really fast moving jets), than the F-16 and/or the F-15E or F-35. And, as Senator McCain said, the A-10 is SO much less expensive to operate (and probably build as well) than the other ones. My 2 cents.
Kyle Brown the A10 is a gun with wings that’s how u make a CAS Aircraft properly and thank u for ur service
@@chezmcdave Thank you Chez.
good luck when you fight the russians or chinese with a-10 in the air 😂 they will be shoot down by enemie airplanes or sams by takeoff...
the f-35 is nessecery
The A-10 would not be cheap to build because the construction line no longer exists
Philip basler Then don’t use the A10 in those countries. The countries were using them in don’t have the threat of SAM sites or hostile aircraft. You put the laughing emoji like you did something but certain planes have different applications so you might use an A10 in the Middle East a lot but very rarely in Russia or China isn’t like them keeping the A10 requires them to use the A10 if we go to war with China or Russia.
General: We need to reduce our spending and A10 is using alot of our money.
Also general: *wants to replace the a10 with f 35s which are like 10x more expensive*
They needed to fund the next generation F35 projects, it is critical. Retiring A-10 early and using other existing newer aircraft to cover the role free up money for next generation projects. This is a transition period for next generation of weapon.
yea the a 10 only is like 5 thousand per use and all the other fighter jets they want to replace it with are like 33 thousand per use
StupidBadyXD it's not like they need the F35s in order to evolve. With our situation in the Middle East, I would imagine air to air combat is practically non existent. Close air support is a must when it comes to conflict in the Middle East. If they want to evolve, they need to get past the F35 project. It honestly sounds like Lockheed accidentally made a surplus of F35s and they're in a dire situation to sell them. Lucky for them, they got Trump who bought a bunch of them.
They're replacing the A10s because the USAF want to focus back on conventional warfare and future conflicts, the F-35 is perfect due the multi-role capability and stealth capability being less vulnerable to High end AA defense systems, meanwhile the A10 is an easy target to AA.
@@juandavidnustesgutierrez9796 Been reading these comments. No one seems to really understand that good AA is becoming cheaper and cheaper, and that the people the US will need to fight in 10 years will be funded enough to use it. Yeah, the A-10 is great against po dunk farmers jihadis with small arms, but literally can't be used against half the threats the US is gearing to face.
The Air Force has tried to get rid of the A-10 since before it was produced in the sixties, the same way they got rid of the C-27. So why not give it to the Army? The Army has wanted it all the time.
USAF: "give me more MONEY" is what this is all about. it certainly is not about providing the BEST CAS the ground troops deserve
I'm not a yank, and I have no idea which party he works for but I like that he's working for the foot soldiers on the ground.
He's never worked a day in his life.
@@darthnatas953 Stop being so disrespectful
@@darthnatas953 has Trump told you that lie?
@@darthnatas953 that's plain out wrong, look at his back ground dippy
He was a Navy A-4 Skyhawk pilot who was shot down in Vietnam
I have to admit regardless of facts nothing can replace the A-10.
Quite so, yet these moronic generals constantly want rid of it. One wonders who's paying them to hold such positions, and how much they have been paid. Because surely it can't be anything other than corruption, since it makes no logical sense otherwise.
@@TheAngrySaxon1 Put the pilot in a titanium bathtub, sling a 20 mm cannon unlinke any other in service in the world, give it huge lifting surfaces and top mounted engines. They made every correct decision possible when they designed the A10.
When was the last fighter v fighter combat in real anger???? the us air force has lost its way in so many facets. Screw fighter jets build Better Hogs.
One Mouse Gaming 20mm? 30mm!
@@aaronlonghuynh5245 You are correct sir. I appreciate the sizable distinctions between the two. Th A-10 is the best "built to do a job" aircraft of all time. Do not let my slip up lead you to believe i do not love this air-frame.
Thanks for pulling the foot out of my mouth
30 MM ****
I have talked to a lot of ground troops, both Army and Marines, and they love exactly two fixed wing aircrafts. The AC-130 and the A-10. What about the rest? Screw them, because the AC-130 and the A-10 do something the others don't: stay around and help until the threat is neutralized. Note: I am not mentioned helos because they are pretty universally loved, whether they are attack helicopters like the Apache, general use choppers like the Blackhawk, or large transport ones like the Chinook (god that is an old helo).
You took the words right out of my mouth: “They stick around...”
Probably one of the best and most factual statements regarding the A-10 and AC-130
The time you here an A-10 when your deployed you cant help but smile because you know someone just got rocked!
You tell those brass Senator! Long live the Warthog! Keep our deployed troops SAFE!
It's the Thunderbolt II, not the 'warthog!"
Its always a bloody Warthog. It always will be.
ALWAYS WILL BE A WARTHOG
I wonder how many lives have been saved by the targeted air support of the A10. I bet it's thousands or maybe even 10s of thousands of U.S. troops
@@russg1801 I’m six years late to this party, and I mean no disrespect, but it’s referred to as The A-10 Warthog, The A-10, The Warthog, and The Hog by everyone associated with any part of it’s existence, as well as all of those who rely on the support and coverage it provides on the ground.
A 10.. Good plane no doubt.
@jhon doe Lmao, have you seen what the A10 does to enemy troops and tanks? Theres a reason soldiers cheer with joy when they hear that beautiful sound from the A10. Just like the idiot general, you're fucking clueless to reality. I swear this is a new level of incompetence.
@@martinigasolini4062 That doesn't mean the same job can be done with another airframe more efficiently (in terms of not needing more types of parts, maintenance, training etc) and significantly more safely to the pilot. The A-10 was built to excel in a type of warfare that doesn't exist anymore and hasn't existed for years.
I was fortunate to serve in Desert Storm and saw the A-10 used. It was an awesome plane and will continue to be for many years. Ask the troops on the ground. They love the plane.
I'm with him, the A-10 is really effective you can't retire the most scariest weapon on earth come on now👍👊
It's only good at friendly fire and shooting insurgents on Toyotas. Any semi competent army can deploy enough MANPADs to make an A-10 turkey shoot
I love the A-10
I even did talk to a pilot of a A-10 and she said it was her favorite
I wana keep the A-10 around.... it should alteast go brrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr.... But next gen
Never voted for McCain but I have the UTMOST respect for him. Atleast he was worthy of occupying the resolute desk.
in all my years of experience serving as a joint service armchair general, and tier one rainbow six operator, i can tell you- the a-10 kicks ass brrrrrt brrrrrrrt kaboom
My God, this is a man on the committee which decides our men and women in the air capability to fight effectively? Someone who is relying on his disgusting record of treasonous activity, responsible for our men dying? HE is an embarrassment to our country when he sits in the face of facts and refuses to hear the facts!
McCain might be a dork but he is saying what needs to be emphasized - there is no replacement for the A-10! Until there is, he should interrupt the general at every opportunity. The AF is out of control and owned by Lockheed, and he knows it.
Ron Hoffstein I cannot believe someone Finally fuckin said it. LockHeed took over AF in the 70s with the Blackbird. That was the foundation.
Congress allows by funding and McCain has been part of that committee long enough to have made the changes we know should be taken place a long time ago.
As General Welsh once said "People are going to criticize you if you're the one stepping up, making the calls, enforcing discipline, making sure people meet standards and making sure the mission gets done…deal with it. Make the tough decisions.”
He doesn't want to get rid of the A-10. He's flown it, he knows how good it is. Unfortunately congress has cut defense spending and after all possible decisions were considered, cutting the A-10 had the least impact on the mission. While many may disagree, we as the public do not have all the information which General Welsh and his advisors have and therefore we cannot make as informed a decision.
While I don't want to see the A-10 cut, I know that General Welsh makes decisions with airmen, soldiers, and sailors in mind. If you have ever listened to him to talk, you would see that he does his best to take care of his people. Even if that means taking the heat from an unpopular decision. That is leadership in action.
To think that an air force general doesn’t realize how effective one of his best cas aircraft is...
this
This General literally used to be an A-10 instructor pilot. I guarantee he knows more about it's effectiveness and limitations than anyone here in the comments.
Single greatest thing he did for the grunts was keep fighting for that aircraft. Long Live the Treason Bird!
Out of all the guys I know flying A-10's none of my friends have lost their lives.
A sad reminder of what the Republican Party once stood for.
Best example on how it is so difficult to defend what is right.
Do yall see Welsh's frustration at 3:27 when McCain keeps cutting him off! Lmao! 😂
If the F16 and F15 are effective you'd be using them. We are using them. No you aren't. If they are effective you'd be using them. We are, I can show you the data. No you aren't If the F16 and F15 are effective you'd be using them.
Guys, McCain is interrupting Welsh because he's heard the same bullshit before! This isn't new information, people have come up to McCain with the same statistics and loitering tactics every day, and he's tired of it, and I would be too. He is not changing his opinion on the A-10, and if you don't agree with that opinion, come up with some new shit and stop saying the same stats. Statistics don't make up everything about war; ever read Sun Tzu's the Art of War? "Treat your men as you would your own beloved sons. And they will follow you into the deepest valley." ~Sun Tzu. That's not a statistic. You don't always win wars with statistics.
Mitch you are so right! I'm a Viet era vet, and our General's were constsntly using "stats" like "body counts" to "prove" we were winning! You saw how well that worked!😣🤔
You and people like you are so fucking stupid. This has nothing to do with battlefield performance or retirement of aircraft. It has everything to do with finance and the god damn budget that Congress keeps reducing, yet expecting the Air Force to maintain all operations while underfunded.
the A-10 is peak perfection for attack planes. if it gets retired, we may never see an aircraft capable of matching what the A-10 was capable of, and if we do, it won't be for a while.
A-10 is great at one mission, the F-16 and F-15 are excellent muti-mission aircraft. If McCain would let the man speak for more than 15 seconds at a time he might realize that its the budget acts that he helped pass that is forcing the Airforce to retire it even though it doesn't want to. In short the Generals response should have been: SHOW ME THE MONEY!
janis317 right! McCain had no idea about what he was saying. To him, the the a10 could only be replaced by an A10.
@@strategosopsikion8576 what other plane will be built around 30mm fucking gun. None. Simple, you cannot replace this plane. No ground troops wants to see a f16 for ground support. The a10 is easily the most effective at everything but air to air combat.
You got it right Sen. John McCain. We missed you sir! 👍
The problem is that the AF Generals want fast jets. The Knuckle Draggers of the Army & Marines want the A10. Close Air Support not Strategic Strike.
But what the a10 does could be qualified as a strategic strike. Especially when you look at its accuracy and effectiveness.
The A10 is one of the most precise weapons ever made, dude! " knuckledraggers " lol you sound like the guys who said the F4 does't need a gun because dogfighting is dead.
McCain: You can't use the F-16 for CAS because if you could, you would.
General: We are using the F-16 for CAS.
McCain: No you aren't.
Repeat several more times.
This comment. I'm really confused about why McCain posted this video? He isn't letting the person (an experienced F-16 pilot himself and AF CHIEF OF STAFF) who was called to testify speak at all? Then proceeds to insert anecdotal points about how the air force pilots he allegedly talks to all the time like the A-10. I don't understand why he didn't let Welsh, who's job it is to analyze this stuff and make decisions based on that, speak in any complete sentences. Makes him look like a child.
@@jamestwojames Welshs job is to make his superiors happy, not give the soldiers on the ground the support they want and need. The A10 was designed for CAS whereas the f16 is a multirole aircraft and simply cant put the same work in. It cant loiter for nearly as long either and cant make quick repeat passes like the A-10. Welsh isnt there representing the interests of soldiers, he might aswell be a lying ass politician at this point.
His argument wasn’t that the F-16 “can’t do CAS” it was that the A-10 does it better, so to correct your comment it would go
McCain: If the F-16 or F-15 does it just as good as the A-10 then you wouldn’t be using the A-10
General: We do use the F-16 and F-15 for CAS
McCain: But you still use the A-10
@Derek Mitchell I think you're wrong and McCain is gone now so... But you're entitled to your opinion.
Where is Senator McCain getting his information? Someone is giving McCain bad information. It is true the Army loves the A-10 but they don't know the problems it comes with. Everyone loves the airshow 30MM but the engines run great in cool, damp European air - not so good in hot, dry, sandy Afghanistan.
The general should have just said ok we can keep the A-10 but we need $25 billion more every year that we continue to use it or take that money out of the F-35 program. The next month the same general will have to explain to congress why the F-35 program is not progressing fast enough and when is the Air Force going to get rid of that money hog A-10 program.
F35 is a mistake. It can’t replace F16 and A10 considering how little it can carry if it wants to be stealthy
@@zard1214 false, without stealth basically you're basically making your aircraft a target in today's battleground unless it's some God damn 3rd world country full of men who's most advanced gun is literally a fuckin' Ak and has no access to AA
Well said, Sen. McCain
YESSSSSSSA10 FOREVER
you're the man Sen. McCain
No doubt that A-10s are the most capable and the most cost-effective assets in the AF, and there is no room for argument. But put if the AF should retire A-10s or not aside, McCain should let Gen Welsh finish his comment. It's unfair and disrespectful to cut in every time Gen Welsh tries to say something.
Sen. McCain has followed the journey of the A-10 since jump. For all these years, the Air Force has bad mouthed the A-10 while the Army praises it time & time again. I don't blame McCain one bit because "General Nuisance" sitting there was trying to feed them that same old worn out BS about the A-10. The Air Force wants to have bigger, faster & more powerful planes all shiny & new. Sen. McCain came as close to saying what I would have said, something like this, "OK, that's enough of your BS" & I would added "Kiss my butt".
The A-10 story is a painful illustration of just how much flag-rank military thinking is driven by ego, selfishness and greed and how little of it is relevant to war-fighting.
John was like i don't care what you say "do not retire the A-10 period!"
dont fix something that aint broke. the a10 should never be retired
This shows just how how out of touch brass is with what's actually happening. When SHTF, you want an A-10, Apache, or Specter to show up, not a flipping fighter jet. For the enemy on the ground, the A-10 (and AC-130) are the truly feared planes. The F-15, F-16, F-35, and B1B are all inadequate for CAS, where mission success can be the determining factor in whether your buddies survive or not. The A-10 was built with tons of titanium armor to be shot up to crap but remain operational and protect the pilot from harm. How on earth can a F-35 protect a pilot from harm and yield the same operational effectiveness of the A-10? The inability of the F-15 and F-16 (as great as they are for the tasks they were designed for) to perform certain types of CAS is well-documented, as is the higher chance of fratricide. If the Air Force hates the A-10 that much and cannot understand how it comes through as your Hail Mary when you need it, they should transfer them over to another branch to resume usage as the primary operator. Talk with anyone who has served on the ground and they'll tell you just how stupid-a-move retiring the A-10 will be.
"as is the higher chance of fratricide" You say that like the A-10 didn't cause more fratricide incidents than any other aircraft in Desert Storm.
@@chrisdoe2659 If that's true - it would be because of the mission they were flying where in because they were close to the ground they could conduct attacks closer to our own forces. Other aircraft wouldn't even try to make these attacks. And - what is your source for that?
.
@@BobSmith-dk8nwspotem gotem
can anyone tell me how many a-10 goht destroyd in cas missions, and how many f-16 in cas missions? there are more a-10s that goht shoot down with less missions then the f-16...
i would really like if they just don't buy anymore fighter jets WTF the A-10 is already doing fine
There is NO replacement for the A-10.The troops on the ground love to see the A-10 coming because they know the enemy is terrified of it and they know they will get the best coverage.
The A10 is like Obamacare, they have nothing to replace it
I respect Sen. McCain for setting his ass straight
Yeah sure, a politician knows better than an air force general how to use planes
THe A-10 is the best in close aircraft ever built for combat! Any flyer who's ever been in actual combat will tell you this! They can destroy anything on the ground with great accuracy with the greatest suitability of any aircraft ever built! It's cheap and lasts a very long time with minimal maintenance . THis general is a fucking bureaucrat looking for extensive funding for shit that doesn't even exist yet and has presented a vacant argument! He's obviously a Omonkey appointee!
Give them hell senator!
A-10 performs less than 20% of CAS sorties. F-15 and F-16 both perform CAS en masse and together do far, far more than the A-10. Even the B-1B does more CAS than the A-10!
Senator, this was just you bullying a General because you could. I don't think I heard a single full sentence from him because you kept interrupting and repeating assertions you had already made earlier, adding nothing and distorting the facts.
dude do you want to know why they do more sorties and also have less effective reports from troops on the ground?
they cant hang around the AO because of speed they zoom in drop bombs and zoom out meaning they cannot attack additional targets without going back to rearm which they have to do more of, the amount of ordance they carry which is limited especially considering they dont have effective anti personnel cannons, and overall they are more expensive in a CAS role because instead of using cannons they have to use big fuck off bombs that can be released on a limited amount of targets and thats where the budget comes in.
Mcain knew more about the capabilities of the CAS roles than the airforce general and because he was arguing against the continued production of the best CAS support weapon we have it makes him look pretty fucking silly and childish.
@@ddqwf well, reports say the opposite, most blue on blue were caused by A10s, the casualty rate for the A10 was higher compared to other aircraft and about the cannon argument...that's short bus thinking, it's very rare when an A10 has to do that, most of the time they just stay in the air and drop some bombs.
That platform is the most accurate most effective weapons platform that's out there I know he did this a while ago but I'm thankful he did.
RIP, our dear Senator McCain. You gave it all to our country until your last breath.
@Bill Jenkins; I agree with you. BLUF; the A-10 is very effective.
Very more like extremely
Since 1991, the Hawg has been proven to be not only the best aircraft in the Air Force, but in the world. I say hands down the best plane in the world. I am a fan of the F-35 and hope to fly either that F-35 or A-10.
SenatorJohnMcCain rest in peace. we will miss you.
You gotta love this guy , he really knows his shit.
Except that half of what the Senator argued was false - A-10's have only performed around 12-27% of fixed-wing CAS missions in Iraq, Afghanistan and Syria. The rest have been done with F-16s, F-15Es, F/A-18s and B-1Bs. The favourite asset of the most decorated / honoured US Army battalion in Afghanistan was the B-1B because it beat the A-10 in loiter time, payload and it delivered bombs where the Army wanted.
aviationweek.com/site-files/aviationweek.com/files/uploads/2015/03/CloseAirSupport_chart2B.jpg
www.airforcetimes.com/news/your-air-force/2016/03/24/air-force-f-16s-fly-the-most-sorties-against-isis-b-1s-drop-most-bombs/
www.washingtonpost.com/news/checkpoint/wp/2015/12/30/the-under-appreciated-workhorse-of-americas-air-wars-the-b-1-bomber/
Question to all servicemen that read this: If you want closer airsupport than a F15/16/35 can provide (fuel, speed, lack of ammo etc), why no one talks about helicopters like the Apaches? Not fast enough or are they easier to target from ground or whats the main disadvantage in helicopters doing CAS?
best speech I ever heard him say that's 100% true
AF pilots got into trouble for speaking to McCain about it. The AF wanted to retire the A-10 re-direct the money to the F-35 which they are now at 10 times the original cost.
Senator McCain is firing the General up and, yes, it can be seen as rude. However, the Air Force has a strange tendency to just want to shut down the A-10. It just seems like they don't get it and don't take their close air support responsibilities to the Army that seriously.
Does f16 go bbbbrrrrrrrrrtttttt!!
Nope, end of discussion
Its been three years since this clash between General and Senator, but the A-10 still stands strong.
Only rookies and small-timers judge equipment by how new it is.
The A-10 eats armor for breakfast and ground forces are eliminated as it can fly very slow to pick out targets !
GOD bless the A-10
I can look back on my career in DoD QA at Fairchild) (my first station after 8 years as as a Submariner; go figure), and smile knowing that the avionics for the A-10 was one of the first programs I worked on. Our training classrooms were at the Warfield ANG Base at Middle River, where 104th A-10 Fighter Squadron is. And before a Ravens game begins at home, a flight of A-10's from the 104th (about 10-15mi away) does a stadium flyover. I smile and salute each time I see them fly over.
The Baltimore Ravens?
@@tigeruntamed6036 Absolutely; have been an original Baltimore Ravens PSL owner/Season Ticket holder from the first day they arrived. The Raven in my avatar is actually a picture I took of "Rise", 1 of the 2 live Ravens mascots from the Baltimore Zoo that they bring around the sidelines before and during home games. Our seats are Front Row End Zone.
I ask cause I live in Maryland and I didn't know they did flyovers with A10s
@@tigeruntamed6036 The 104th MD ANG A-10 Fighter Squadron (175th Wing) flies out of Martin State Airport next to Lockheed-Martin in Middle River; they actually did flyovers on May 8th (they flew over us at 1400) to the Eastern Shore (I think). Lockheed-Martin there is also where my last assignment was before I had to retire on disability in '99.
They don't necessarily do flyovers every home game, but always on first home game, nationally televised games, postseason, etc. Here's a link to one, end of the NA: ua-cam.com/video/HvfP_UQ9W7o/v-deo.html
why are we argueing about the a10
and not the trainwreck that is the f35
Well said Mr. McCain. Well said.
Never mind the A-10c. John McCain is on target
A-10 was made specially for CAS. F-35 was made for being an allrounder for the "heavenly" JSF program, which is nothing half and nothing whole for needed tasks like CAS.
F-35 = F-105
The 105 was kind of a turd, but it was used pretty successfully.
If that is so then the USA is in for one hell of a ride, and paying heavily for it
Damn, Welsh got served big time. The moment he messed up was when he said, “I don’t want to retire the A-10, but the Air Force must get bigger to do its...”
McCain: “Don’t make me come down there and bitch slap you to the sand box! Proposal denied. Fuck off! NEXT!”
Surprising every time shits going down i see an A-10 flying circles raining steel on to the enemy
nothing can replace the brrrt
3:28 that’s all we needed
McCain is right on this one, How a Air Force 4 star General can say that the F-15, F-16 and F-35 can replace the A-10 is beyond me.
The A-10 is the coolest aircraft ever built, IMAO.
One important fact that they omitted is that the Air Force NEVER WANTED the A-10 to begin with & they have been trying to get rid of it since the beginning. It is the Army & other ground troops that want & love the A-10. When the first Gulf War was being planned in 1990, Gen. Norman Schwarzkopf, the chief of U.S. Central Command, had to fight the Air Force to send over a mere 174 A-10s for his use," Kaplan writes. "Yet in the course of the war, those A-10s knocked out roughly half of the 1,700 Iraqi tanks that were destroyed from the air... Even the Air Force brass had to admit the planes had done a good job, and they kept them in the fleet.
So, why do we still have b52s? or even b1s? The B52 is practically useless today, the b1 less so but still has a very limited role as compared to the A-10.
When did the B-1 start packing a
gau-8? Apparently it's a great weapon for CAS.
Most CAS missions use guided bombs because they are more accurate than gun runs. It turns out that a bomber is really good at dropping guided bombs.
The A-10 is the best close support aircraft ever. Wish we had purchased it in the uk
I would argue the Apache and other helicopters are better but it's certainly the best fixed wing aircraft.
Beyond my youth, I’ve come to respect the late Senator John McCain, he certainly was never a joke and given his POW status he was certainly a no bullshit man. I wish that he would’ve initially won the presidency over Obama and looking back on this, I wish I was old enough to vote for the man.
Speaking as someone who voted for Obama, I can tell you that Senator McCain would not have been in the position to shut down that general had he won the presidency. I actually considered the McCain vs Obama election to be a win/win situation, and (in an admittedly selfish act as an Arizonan) felt it would be more prudent to keep McCain as Senator. In this sense and a small number of others, it seems to have paid off.
The general could have responded that the F-15 and F-16 are able to use their higher speed to respond faster to CAS requests, meaning they don't need as many aircraft in the area. But this is only useful if the ordnance needed is smaller than that carried by an F-15 or F-16.
The other issue is that if the F-15 and F-16 were capable of doing the job, the general would have already rotated them out of the area. The Air Force hasn't.
Finally would be a case where cost would have come in. Essentially compare the cost to keeping X amount of A-10s in the area vs that same cost to keep F-15 and F-16 in an area, and see which does the better job.
+Todd Kes They don't need higher speed tho. A-10's already use incirlik afb which is close vicinity of the where the combat is going. you guys also had the plans of opening a new airway at the iraqi kurdistan for operations against isil.
and pretty much all the time us and coalition aircraft are patrollin syrian airspace armed with ground munitions.
please don't kill the a-10
a turk
One of the best presidents American never got. R. I. P. Senator McCain.
First the F-14 and now the A-10. They're determined to get rid of all the finest aircraft. Idiots!
What's amazing, is how casually they talk about abstractions like missions and sorties and financial efficacy when referring to killing people... Washington's deep military roots, black and gnarled, held in the light.
He's right about the A-10 though...
Thank you for doing this
McCain Defensively knows what he taking about, its surprising how a person like Welsh could ever get to such high position. He cut manpower in AF, now we facing the consequences and new Chief of Staff have to solve all this mess he left. I'm not a pilot or anything but you don't have to be one to understand that you don't need F35's to fight terrorist who don't have any air defense. RIP Sen McCain.
I don't think you realize that General Mark Welsh was an air force pilot flying the A10 and the F16, he has over 3400 hours in flight. He is a FOUR STAR GENERAL, he knows what the fuck he is talking about, he probably even knows better than YOU, YOU the UA-cam expert, you've probably watched MORE THAN 5 documentaries on the a10 and the army
John Mcain telling it like it is PERIOD
Fact: when the A-10 swoops above the field of combat, the enemy sees a pissed of dragon out to get them. And there not wrong.
Now I wonder if small superprops have that same effect?
i'm not aligned with any military organization, but if you're still using the a-10 which is x amount of years older than f-15s and f16s and they're cheaper than f35s, what's the counter argument for not retiring it? none. because the numbers reflect that operation costs, usability and effectivity by far they're the tools to be used. because if you got a biga$$ gun flying at a very controlled speed compared to a faster airplane but can't do what it's supposed to do and costs more, why use it.
A-10s are #1 "Ground Pounders" and #1 "Tank Busters" !!! Never meant for anything else !!! Soon as they figure out they cant replace the Armored Twin Engine A-10 with ANYTHING but another A-10... they'll make more or keep what they got, witch they're doing !!!
I'll give McCain a thumbs up on this one, he's right.
Question: Why is it that its the civilian people (senators etc.) who wants to keep the A-10 and not the Generals and Majors, despite the fact that there is no other weapon system out the today or in the near future that can perform the same tasks as the A-10? Surely the Army and Air Force should care for such a remarkable weapons platform that keeps their troops on the ground safe(r).
Long live mcain! NOTHING can replace the A-10 in close air support
What about an AC-130? What about an AH-64? What about literally anything that can carry guided bombs?
Ask any soldier caught in a firefight what aircraft they need for CAS & they'll scream " send a couple of A10's - now "...
This time mccain right. A a10 can attack a different targets heavily and accurately each 20 seconds. The brrrp on the enemy is devastating. Its the modern day Stuka.
Senator McCain; why don't you want to realize that the A-10C doesn't fill their corrupt pockets?
God Bless the A-10
KEEP EM FLYIN'