Photos of US Air Force A-10s in action capture Warthog strafing runs and the bullet-riddled aftermath

Despite the power of the plane's weapons, the Air Force is planning to retire the A-10, which is over 40 years old

GIVE THEM TO THE UKRAINE

Lauren Frias
Thu, December 21, 2023 

US Air Force pilots recently practiced strafing runs in the A-10 Thunderbolt II, a close-air support plane also known as the Warthog.


The training took place at Grand Bay Bombing and Gunnery Range near Moody Air Force Base in Georgia.


Photos show the A-10 performing flight maneuvers and deploying flares.

US military photos from a recent training exercise captured US Air Force A-10s in action, showing a bit of what the attack aircraft sometimes described as a cannon with wings is capable of.

In early December, Air Force pilots practiced strafing runs with A-10 Thunderbolt II close-air support aircraft, also known as the Warthog. The ground-attack planes are known for their powerful cannon and, in some cases, the unique shark-inspired nose paint.

Strafing runs train pilots to attack ground targets using mounted automatic weapons. In the case of the A-10, the plane's GAU-8 Avenger 30 mm cannon can fire nearly 4,000 rounds a minute.

Photos from the recent training exercise show A-10s from the 74th Fighter Squadron flying above Moody Air Force Base in Georgia, deploying flares, executing gun runs, and performing impressive flight maneuvers.

Some of the A-10s that participated in the training featured a fearsome paint job on the nose of the plane resembling a shark.

A US Air Force A-10C Thunderbolt II pilot deploys flares to intercept enemy heat-seeking missiles.US Air Force photo by Tech. Sgt. Devin Boyer/DVIDS

Not all A-10s get to sport the shark teeth war paint. Only planes that are part of the 74th, 75th, and 76th Fighter Squadrons have the shark nose art. It's a design specifically tied to the history of the squadrons.

"There are other A-10 units that have nose art, but not the iconic shark face," an A-10 pilot and commanding officer of the 74th Fighter Squadron previously told Business Insider's Ryan Pickrell.

The A-10 is a dedicated close-air support plane built to take out ground targets, including tanks.

A US Air Force A-10C Thunderbolt II pilot deploys flares near Moody Air Force Base, Georgia.US Air Force photo by Tech. Sgt. Devin Boyer/DVIDS

The aircraft was first introduced in the 1970s and was built with Soviet armor, considered to be a threat to Western Europe during the Cold War, in mind.

The gun is so loud that pilots have to wear two layers of ear protection to muffle the sound of the plane's cannon.

A US Air Force A-10C Thunderbolt II pilot conducts strafing runs over Grand Bay Bombing and Gunnery Range near Moody Air Force Base in Georgia.US Air Force photo by Tech. Sgt. Devin Boyer/DVIDS

The seven-barrel cannon on the A-10 is famous for the "BRRRT" sound it makes when fired, and it can be something of an intense experience for pilots.

An A-10 pilot previously told Business Insider it "feels like driving over railroad tracks" when the gun is fired. "You're sitting right on top of the gun," he said, "so it shakes the whole airplane."

The attack aircraft carry a little over a thousand rounds, which are fired in short yet devastating bursts.

A photo from the recent training of a bullet-riddled cargo container on the ground is evidence of the A-10's power.

A cargo container is covered with bullet holes at Grand Bay Bombing and Gunnery Range near Moody Air Force Base in Georgia.US Air Force photo by Tech. Sgt. Devin Boyer/DVIDS

The plane fires armor-piercing depleted-uranium rounds.

Alongside the GAU-8 Avenger cannon, the A-10 carries rockets, missiles, and bombs. The plane also has defenses, such as flares that can be used to intercept enemy heat-seeking missiles.

A US Air Force A-10C Thunderbolt II pilot deploys flares over Grand Bay Bombing and Gunnery Range.US Air Force photo by Tech. Sgt. Devin Boyer/DVIDS

But the A-10 may not be flying for too much longer.

A U.S. Air Force A-10C Thunderbolt II flies over Grand Bay Bombing and Gunnery Range.US Air Force photo by Tech. Sgt. Devin Boyer/DVIDS

Despite the power of the plane's weapons, the Air Force is planning to retire the A-10, which is over 40 years old, because the aircraft "does not deter or survive against our pacing challenge, and we need to move forward," the military branch said in a past request to Congress, referring specifically to the threats posed by China.

The Air Force is looking to the new F-35A Lightning II to perform key A-10 missions like close-air support, but there are some questions as to whether or not it fully meets expectations there. For now, the Warthog is still flying, but its days are numbered.

A-10s Brandish Intriguing Mix Of Weapons In Middle East

Joseph Trevithick
Wed, November 8, 2023

New pictures show A-10s that recently deployed to the Middle East with interesting ordnance loads.

Though the U.S. Air Force's A-10 Warthog ground attack jets look increasingly to be in the twilight of their careers, they are still being sent to places where they could find themselves in harm's way. Last month, a group of Warthogs touched down in the Middle East as part of a surge in U.S. forces into the region in response to the eruption of the latest Israel-Gaza conflict. Newly released pictures now offer an interesting look at the weapons loadouts on some of these jets as they sit ready to respond to contingencies.

One of the armed A-10s seen in the new pictures. USAF

U.S. Air Forces Central (AFCENT), the service's top command in the Middle East, posted the pictures of the A-10s belonging to the 354th Fighter Squadron loaded with a variety of live ordnance online earlier today. The Pentagon announced the 354th's Warthogs had arrived at an "undisclosed location" in the Middle East on October 12.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5RUpWsSdXiE

The new images show four A-10s all with the same basic warload.

Each Warthog has a pair of AIM-9M Sidewinder air-to-air missiles on a twin-rail launcher on the outboard pylon under its left wing. This is something these jets routinely carry for self-defense.

Moving inboard, under the left wing, each one also has a seven-round 70mm rocket pod loaded with what looks to be laser-guided Advanced Precision Kill Weapon System II (APKWS II) laser-guided rockets with M282 warheads.

The seven-round 70mm rocket pod can be seen here just inboard of the two AIM-9M Sidewinders under the left wing of this A-10. USAF

70mm rockets with the APKWS II guidance kit, which goes between the warhead and the motor, are longer than typical unguided types and protrude from the front of standard pods as a result. The M282 warhead has a very distinctive yellow base color with a red band around the front.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V092M25KeUA

A graphic showing various standard 70mm (2.75-inch) rocket warheads in U.S. military service, including the M282 with its distinctive markings, as well as the APKWS II guidance kit. US Army

The M282 is a specialized penetrating warhead with the ability to punch through some armor and reinforced structures. As such, these rockets would give each A-10 a valuable precision-strike capability for engaging light vehicles, even some armored ones, as well as hostile forces inside buildings or behind other kinds of hard cover. APKWS II is extremely accurate. It can even be used to take out individuals in doorways and windows if the targeting sensor permits such clear imagery.

On the opposite station under the right wing, the A-10s have LITENING advanced targeting pods, as can be seen in the picture below.

USAF

The LITENING pod has electro-optical and infrared full-motion video cameras, as well as a laser designator and laser range finder. It can also determine the specific coordinates of a point on the ground, which can then be programmed into GPS-assisted precision-guided munitions. Altogether, the pod can be used to spot, track, and prosecute targets on the ground, as well as just for general surveillance.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wCA5xmYeQC8

On the inboard stations under both wings of all of the A-10s are special racks holding four GBU-39/B Small Diameter Bombs (SDB). These are 250-pound class small glide bombs with GPS-assisted guidance packages and pop-out wings that can hit stationary targets "in excess of 40 nautical miles" away, depending on release altitude and other factors. SDB gives A-10 crews a standoff attack capability. This can drastically improve their survivability and also increase their flexibility in various engagement circumstances.

Some of the Small Diameter Bombs (SDB) on one of the A-10s. USAF

Though the SDB has been in U.S. service for many years now, this is a very recent addition to the A-10's already very diverse arsenal, with the final integration work only wrapping up earlier this year.

An A-10 seen carrying eight SDBs during a test in the United States earlier this year. USAF

The exact SDB variants loaded onto the Warthogs are unclear – the markings near their tails are deliberately blurred out in the pictures – but it is possible that one or more could be GBU-39A/B types. Also known as the Focused Lethality Munition (FLM), this is a version of the SDB specifically designed to help reduce collateral damage. Even standard SDBs offer benefits in this regard over larger precision-guided bombs, while still offering the ability to penetrate inside some types of hardened structures as seen in the video below.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zfRWh2FTZks

The four armed A-10s from the 354th Fighter Squadron seen in the new pictures all also have a pair of 500-pound class Joint Direct Attack Munitions (JDAM) on stations under their fuselage. JDAMs also come in other weight classes, but they are all modular GPS-assisted precision-guided weapons that are constructed using various kinds of standard dumb bombs as their 'warheads.'

A full look at the LJDAM on one of the A-10s. The tail of the other JDAM loaded on this aircraft is just visible to the right. USAF

The noses of the JDAM, in front, and the LJDAM, behind, are visible here. USAF

It is not immediately clear what bombs form the cores of the JDAMs on the Warthogs at the undisclosed location in the Middle East. However, each pair includes a Laser JDAM (LJDAM) variant. LJDAMs have a laser seeker on the nose in addition to the standard guidance package in their tail, and therefore have the ability to engage moving targets, as well as stationary ones.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IwmEA7RIRaQ

Between the SDBs and the JDAMs, each one of these A-10s has a good mix of additional options for engaging enemy vehicles and other forces, including targets inside buildings or out in the open, with precision.

When it comes to the A-10 it would be remiss to not mention its iconic integral 30mm GAU-8/A Avenger cannon, which can fire up to 4,000 rounds per minute, or almost 70 rounds every second. The magazine for this gun, which can hold up to 1,350 rounds, typically contains a mix of different rounds that offer armor-piercing and high-explosive-incendiary efforts. One known mixture is five armor-piercing rounds to every high-explosive-incendiary one. Another is called the “urban mix” and has a 2:1 blend of high-explosive incendiary rounds and training practice shells (which can still do a lot of damage when they smash into a target).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F9rmAgHK-4s\u0026t=83s

Not knowing where the 354th Fighter Squadron's Warthogs are currently located, it is hard to say what potential contingencies they might be best positioned to respond to with these loadouts. It is no secret that Iranian-backed groups in Iraq and Syria have been launching an increasing number of rocket, drone, and other indirect fire attacks on American forces in both of those countries, which have already led to dozens of injuries.

The U.S. Air Force has now carried out two rounds of retaliatory airstrikes against Iranian-linked targets in Syria, the second of which came just today. However, all of those strikes have been carried out by fast-moving combat jets like the F-16C Viper and the F-15E Strike Eagle.

A-10s might be better suited to responding to any attempts by Iranian-backed groups to launch more concerted attacks on American forces in the region. Depending on where they are based, the Warthogs could also be used to help respond to maritime threats in the region, especially swarms of small crewed or uncrewed boats. The jet's APKWS would be ideal for engaging those threats. Its gun would be useful, as well.

Whatever the case, the deployment of these A-10s comes as it looks more and more likely that the Air Force will finally retire the type for good by the end of the decade, if not sooner. The service has tried on many occasions to get rid of the Warthogs since they first entered service in the 1970s, something that long ago turned into a major saga. Part of that story includes a highly controversial fly-off against the F-35A Joint Strike Fighter between 2018 and 2019. Details about that comparative testing remain murky even after the recent release of a heavily redacted report, as you can read more about here.

Whatever the case, the A-10s from the 354th Fighter Wing, including the ones we've now seen with their live ordnance loads, are now among various forward-deployed U.S. military assets in the Middle East that could be called upon if the Israel-Gaza conflict expands into a larger regional conflagration.

Contact the author: joe@thedrive.com

A-10 Vs F-35 Close Air Support Flyoff Report Finally Emerges

LONG READ

Joseph Trevithick
Wed, November 1, 2023 

A heavily redacted copy of the final report on a controversial flyoff between the A-10 Warthog and F-35 Joint Strike Fighter has finally been released.

A report on the controversial close air support-focused flyoff between the A-10C Warthog and F-35A Joint Strike Fighter that took place between 2018 and 2019 has finally emerged. The declassified review, which was only completed last year and has been essentially buried until now, is heavily redacted and raises more questions than it provides answers in many areas. However, it does still offer valuable details that have not previously been made public even as the U.S. Air Force looks to retire the last of the Warthogs no later than the end of the decade.

A US Air Force F-35A drops a 2,000-pound-class Joint Direct Attack Munition (JDAM) during an evaluation in 2017 unrelated to the flyoff against the A-10. USAF

Project on Government Oversight (POGO), an independent nonprofit, obtained a declassified copy of the report via the Freedom of Information Act and litigation against the U.S. government and published it this week, along with its own analysis. The document, which was produced by the Pentagon's Office of the Director of Test and Evaluation, or DOT&E, is dated February 2022. The comparative testing ran from April 2018 to March 2019. The flyoff was only conducted to meet a demand from Congress that had been included in the annual defense policy bill, or National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), for the 2017 Fiscal Year.

An A-10 fires its famous 30mm GAU-8/A Avenger cannon during training. USAF

One of the things that is immediately unclear from this report is why it took nearly three years to produce this final product in the first place or why its core findings were never announced publicly or even distributed to stakeholder communities in the military. It is The War Zone's understanding that very few people had previously seen any portion of this document, or details from it, and that it was not provided to members of the A-10 community or F-35 communities. In essence, it has been effectively 'buried.'

The unredacted portions do contain a useful overview of how the flyoff was planned and ultimately conducted. The Joint Strike Fight Operational Test Team, or JOTT, led the comparative testing, which was conducted as part of the larger F-35 Initial Operational Test and Evaluation (IOT&E) process. All test sorties were staged from Edwards Air Force Base in California and consisted of mock missions conducted over ranges at Naval Air Weapons Station China Lake, also in California, as well as Yuma Proving Ground, an Army facility in neighboring Arizona.

The flyoff focused on the relative abilities of the A-10C and the F-35A to perform three distinct mission sets: close air support (CAS), airborne forward air control (FAC[A]), and combat search and rescue (CSAR). Unclassified official definitions of those mission sets from the reports are reproduced below.


DOD via FOIA/POGO

DOD via FOIA/POGO

DOD via FOIA/POGO

The ability of the A-10 and the F-35 to perform each of the three mission sets was judged on a variety of factors, but the report lists two critical metrics for each one. For CAS this was targeting time and engagement time. When it came to FAC(A) the focus was on brief generation time and correlation time. Lastly, coordination time and recovery time were the primary measures of performance with regard to CSAR. Unclassified definitions of these timing metrics are shown below.

DOD via FOIA/POGO

Test sorties were conducted under conditions meant to simulate "low-threat 'permissive' and medium-threat 'contested' environments," according to the report. "High-threat missions were not included in this comparison test because the F-35A, along with the F-35B and F-35C, is being thoroughly evaluated during F-35 IOT&E in high threat scenarios versus modern, dense SAM [surface-to-air missile] and fighter aircraft, missions for which the A-10C was not designed."

Specific details about what types of threats were presented during the low or medium-threat test sorties in the flyoff, or how they were represented, are limited in the unredacted sections of the report. It does say that the "contested environment scenarios included a limited set (in numbers and capabilities) of surface-to-air missile (SAM) threats, and no airborne threat[s]." There is also a mention of simulated shoulder-fired surface-to-air missiles, also known as man-portable air defense systems (MANPADS). No mention at all is made in the unredacted portions of the report about electronic warfare threats, which are another major source of concern for the U.S. military, especially in future higher-end conflicts.

The U.S. military has multiple ways of simulating a diverse array of mock air defenses for testing and training purposes, including real examples of threat systems obtained through various means, high-fidelity mock-ups, and emitters designed to mimic various types of radiofrequency emissions.

A-10s and F-35s involved in the flyoff flew a combined total of 117 and a half flight hours across 69 sorties. A full breakdown of sorties and flight hours, as well as when and where those test runs occurred, across the three mission sets is seen below.

DOD via FOIA/POGO

Nowhere in the unredacted portions of the report is any definitive statement about whether the A-10 or the F-35 was deemed to be superior for conducting any of the three missions in either permissive or contested environments. The first bullet point in the executive summary, which might offer a broad general conclusion about the results of the flyoff, is entirely redacted.

"The F-35A was able to conduct all three missions in both low- and medium-threat environments," according to the report. In addition, the Joint Strike Fighters "often conducted suppression/destruction of threat air defense systems in contested environment to proceed in the assigned mission."

There is no similar unredacted statement about the A-10's overall adequacy to perform CAS, FAC(A), or CSAR missions.

A partially redacted section strongly indicates the flyoff concluded that more F-35 sorties than A-10 sorties would be needed to prosecute the same number of targets in permissive environments. This makes sense given the Warthog's substantially larger payload capacity. However, this portion of the report also notes that "the number of sorties necessary to complete the same mission objectives in contested environments would depend on air defense suppression plans."


A table listing various competitive capabilities between the F-35A and the A-10C at the time of the flyoff. DOD via FOIA/POGO


DOD via FOIA/POGO

The unredacted portions of the report also acknowledge significant limitations in the comparative testing that was conducted, and more can be inferred from other information provided.

For one, the flyoff team did not follow the approved test plan, did not fly all of the originally planned sorties, and did not ensure there were matching sorties for all test events that were conducted. All of the test sorties were supposed to be in matched pairs (one A-10 sortie and one F-35 sortie with as close to the same parameters and conditions as possible), the point of which was to provide equivalent data sets for analysis. As can be seen in the breakdown earlier in this piece, A-10s flew more CAS and FAC(A) sorties than F-35s did, and Warthogs had more total flying time during testing relating to those mission sets, as well as CSAR.

More details breakdowns of the test sorties across the three mission areas are provided below.

DOD via FOIA/POGO

DOD via FOIA/POGO

DOD via FOIA/POGO

"The comparison test was adequate to compare the mission effectiveness of each aircraft in a limited set of operationally-representative conditions, even though the test team did not conduct the test completely in accordance with the DOT&E-approved test plan," the report insists. "The data collected are sufficient to inform the conclusions in this report and fulfill the requirements of the NDAA."

"The sample sizes available for analysis provide sufficient data to draw the conclusions in this report," it adds. "The gaps do not detract from the value of the data for the measures used to compare the two aircraft."

No further justification for this is provided in the unredacted portions of the report.

In addition, the report acknowledges a lack of relevant specialized training requirements for F-35 pilots relating CAS, FAC(A), and CSAR mission sets at the time of the flyoff.

"To minimize the impact of this training shortfall on the comparison test, F-35A pilots previously qualified for FAC(A) and CSAR in the A-10 or other aircraft were used when possible, which was the ‘majority of the trials," according to the report. "Much of the F-35A pilot light hours were in aircraft other than the F-35A (primarily F-16 or A-10), while A-10C pilot light hours were primarily in the A-10."

An A-10 Warthog, at bottom left, flies together with, at top, left to right, an F-16C Viper, an F-35A Joint Strike Fighter, and an F-15E Strike eagle. USAF

It is worth noting here that making use of F-35 pilots with previous A-10 experience would seem to be a logical course of action that could also help preserve the specialized skill sets and knowledge base found in the A-10 community as those aircraft are retired. However, there are serious potential pitfalls in such a strategy, especially given the steps the Air Force is (or isn't) taking now.

"The common misconception between USAF leadership and we, the A-10C community, is that we are ready to die on the hill to keep the A-10 alive forever. The reality is quite the opposite," Patrick “BURT” Brown, an A-10 pilot and Air Force weapons officer, wrote in a piece earlier this year for The War Zone. "What we care about most is keeping the corporate knowledge of counter-land tactics, techniques, and procedures (TTPs) alive regardless of the airframe. Presently, the threat of that knowledge dying off is very real given that the A-10C is being divested with no plan for follow on aircraft."

"Within the USAF, the A-10C community is the only one that still produces Forward Air Controllers (Airborne), known as FAC(A)s," Brown added. "This is a troubling data point not because FAC(A) missions have been on any recent Air Tasking Orders (ATOs), but because it signals that the USAF is willing to let that skill set die with the A-10C."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JDc5NoQAD_A

"The skills learned and honed by practicing the FAC(A) mission set are invaluable in any counter-land operation. The F-35 could do this mission, but they don’t. The F-16 has done this mission, but they don’t today," he continued. "Between all the other high-end missions they must maintain proficiency in, CAS and other counter-land competencies are now relegated to 'just-in-time' training for the USAF’s multi-role fighter communities."

POGO's Dan Grazier has echoed many of these points, as well.

"The fight to save the A-10 has always been about preserving the institutional knowledge of the community rather than keeping one aircraft program flying," Grazier also told The War Zone. "That being said, the problem with making sure most of the F-35 pilots were A-10 veterans was that most F-35 pilots don't train for the attack role now."

"This was supposed to be an operational test," he added. "Operational testing is supposed to be done using the typical operator rather than specialized test pilots so you see how the aircraft being tested works in the hands of the people who will actually fly it in combat. That didn't happen in this case."

The A-10 seen here, serial number 80-0149, was sent to the boneyard at Davis-Monthan Air Force Base in Arizona in April. USAF

The unredacted portions of the test report highlights a number of other areas where just how operationally representative the flyoff appears limited.

"The overall environment chosen by the test team for the comparison test was a simplified representation of typical combat environments," the report says. The use of relatively basic mock targets positioned in largely flat and open locales, even those meant to simulate enemies in built-up urban areas, is something that had already come up back in 2017 when the first details of the flyoff emerged, also through POGO. Concerns were raised even then about whether this could give F-35 pilots an unfair advantage given that the targets would be easier to spot, even from higher altitudes.

All Joint Strike Fighters have a built-in, but increasingly Electro-Optical Targeting System (EOTS) that is based on technology now approaching two decades old. An Advanced EOTS is expected to be added to F-35s that receive the Block 4 upgrade package, but A-10Cs are flying now with more capable podded targeting systems. This means the level of detail in the targeting system video is inferior on the F-35 compared to the A-10C with updated targeting pods.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YbV9479GoB4

A-10s typically fly a very low altitudes, and are much slower than F-35s, both of which can be beneficial for finding and engaging threats that might be more concealed. A partially unredacted section also indicates that there might be added value in the Warthog's tactics when it comes to the employment of GPS-assisted precision-guided munitions.

"The test team did not record the slant range to the target with the generated coordinates, so ts effect cannot be directly assessed. Even so, tactics typically caused A-10C pilots to fly closer to the target than F-35A plots, which could explain some of the difference in the measured location errors," the report says, though the context is not entirely clear. "Target location error only affects the use of GPS-aided weapons. In any case, the location error is sufficient to cue another CAS aircraft's targeting pod."

The GBU-39/B Small Diameter Bombs seen loaded on this A-10 are among the GPS-assisted precision-guided munitions the aircraft can carry today. This is a relatively new addition to the Warthog's arsenal. USAF

The report also says "time-on-station can be a key contributor to the overall success of each of these mission areas [CAS, FAC(A), and CSAR]," another area in which the A-10 excels, at least in lower-threat environments.

Furthermore, despite being an evaluation of performance in missions directly related to personnel on the ground, "there were no live ground forces maneuvering or operating in conflict against each other on any mission, primarily due safety to range restrictions," according to the report. Only one day of testing, part of the CAS portion of the flyoff, involved the use of real, but inert ordnance, as well. In all other instances, the ordnance the A-10s and F-35s employed was entirely simulated.

The A-10 can be loaded with a much more diverse array of munitions and other stores, including multiple types of precision-guided missiles, rockets, and bombs, than any F-35 variant, on top of the Warthog's aforementioned greater payload capacity. A-10s can carry far more ammunition (up to 1,174 rounds) for their iconic 30mm GAU-8/A Avenger cannons. F-35As have a built-in 25mm GAU-22/A cannon feeding from a magazine with a maximum capacity of just 182 rounds. F-35B and C variants have no internal guns, but can be armed with a podded GAU-22/A with a smaller magazine.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F9rmAgHK-4s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wMd2gys1n8E

An unrelated section of the flyoff report also notes that F-35s cannot carry different ordnance on their underwing pylons and their internal weapon bays at the same time for unclear reasons. The use of those underwing stations also negates the Joint Strike Fighter's stealthy characteristics. The A-10 is well known for its ability to carry mixed ordnance loads on individual sorties, which offers more flexibility for engaging different kinds of targets.

This picture of an inverted A-10 highlights its ability to carry a wide array of different stores on a single mission. USAF

The report also highlights the limited ability of the F-35A, at least at that time, to communicate directly with personnel on the ground. Ostensibly to create an even playing field, voice communication was therefore utilized almost exclusively during the comparative testing.

This, in turn, appears to have put A-10C drivers at a disadvantage in some situations since they were not allowed to use their very capable digital communications capabilities while also lacking modern enhancements found on the Joint Strike Fighter that are designed to help reduce pilot workload.

"This limitation likely slowed down A-10C performance timelines in CAS and FAC(A) roles in comparison to the F-35A," the report notes.

Back in 2017, when reporting on the initial details about the flyoff from POGO, The War Zone had specifically highlighted the A-10C's extensive ground-support-focused communications capabilities, particularly the Remotely Operated Video Enhanced Receiver (ROVER) system. ROVER, which has been continuously improved upon since it was first introduced in the early 2000s, allows equipped aircraft to pump sensor feeds straight to JTACs and other personnel down below in near real-time, significantly improving coordination.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DuR99AZAbCM

The F-35 Joint Program Office has since taken steps to integrate a ROVER-like video data link onto the Joint Strike Fighter. However, it is not immediately clear how far that work progressed in recent years and how many, if any, F-35s now have this capability.

Inversely, "A-10C pilots reported a significantly lower workload than F-35A pilots in the task-intensive FAC(A) mission." The reasons for this are not clear from the unredacted sections of the report.

Regardless, an unredacted portion of the executive summary included a recommendation to "improve digital communications, video data link capability and interoperability with 4th generation aircraft," as well as "fix the F-35A gun" and "develop training programs to further improve F-35A effectiveness in these missions."

Accuracy issues with the F-35A's 25mm cannon, which persisted at least into 2020, are well known. That same year, it emerged that certain jets were experiencing worrisome cracking as a result of using the gun at all. The full extent to which this issue may have been mitigated since then is not immediately clear.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AJhTDzeMYkI

POGO says separate documents it has reviewed show that the Air Force still does not have CAS-focused or related specialized training requirements for its F-35A pilots and is not expected to put them in place in the coming year, either.

Altogether, "you can't really consider this [flyoff] as a close air support test because there weren't really any friendly troops. If the tests had been done at [U.S. Marine Corps Base] Twentynine Palms or the [U.S. Army's] NTC [National Training Center], the JOTT could have incorporated real maneuver units performing realistic combined arms scenarios," POGO's Grazier told The War Zone. "That would have greatly increased the rigor of the entire endeavor by making the pilots distinguish between friendly and enemy troops. At NTC, they could have incorporated Soviet-era equipment. The JOTT could have crafted scenarios where the role players on the ground worked to camouflage their positions."

In addition, "rather than observing actual hits or misses, officials judged the results based on cockpit video and self-reported outcomes by the pilots and participants on the ground," Grazier separately noted in his own separate analysis of the report. "This created an opportunity for officials to manipulate the results based on desired outcomes and operator bias."

Grazier further raises the point that it is very curious that unspecified "range safety restrictions" are repeatedly cited in the report as the reason why the scale and scope of the comparative testing were curtailed in many regards despite inert training munitions only being used in one day's worth of testing.

What type of inert muntions were utilized during flyoff is unknown. The picture here shows an A-10 dropping a string of small inert training bombs during unrelated training. USAF

It is worth pointing out here that the U.S. military's current definitions of CAS include missions wherein aircraft are directed to targets by controllers who do not have direct visual confirmation of them. In many ways, this seems to have been the primary type of CAS reflected in the flyoff.

This kind of 'remote' CAS often blurs the line between that mission set and interdiction, a technically different mission type that is more focused on engaging enemy forces before they reach friendly units. This is also a reality that predates the flyoff.

“It is sometimes the case that sorties tasked for [close air support] may wind up supporting strikes that look more like interdiction, or vice versa," a spokesperson for the U.S. Air Force's top command in the Middle East told this author back in 2015 specifically about A-10 strikes against ISIS in Syria.

A pair of A-10s in Iraq in 2007. USAF

This all may well speak to how the Air Force envisions providing CAS in a future conflict, especially to forces on the ground in high-threat environments. There are also potential pitfalls to relying on this kind of air support, as has been shown on multiple occasions, even with platforms more specifically suited to these kinds of missions.

In 2014, an Air Force B-1B bomber infamously killed five Army soldiers and an interpreter in a botched CAS strike during a firefight in Afghanistan. The incident was blamed in part on degraded communications and the inability of the bomber's targeting pod to see infrared strobe lights marking friendly positions.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4BL6oe335Bk

The following year, also in Afghanistan, one of the Air Force's AC-130U Spooky special operations gunships mistakenly destroyed a hospital operated by international nongovernmental organization Doctors Without Borders. That incident also stemmed in large part from a breakdown in communications between the gunship and controllers on the ground, the latter of whom were not in a position to see the actual intended target. A near real-time video link on the AC-130U was also notably non-functional at the time, preventing the crew from directly sharing imagery of what they were looking at before the strike was authorized.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qPdYjVYhhAk

"As someone who has a great deal of experience in combined arms training, I much prefer to have aviation support destroy targets before I can see them. That helps ground forces generate tempo in a running fight," POGO's Grazier, a retired Marine officer who served tours of duty in Iraq and Afghanistan, told The War Zone. "I have had aircraft drop close enough to my position to feel the effects of the blast. I've even had brass fall into my tank from a helicopter firing on a target as they flew overhead. I was glad they had trained to the most difficult and delicate scenario."

Without being able to see the full flyoff report it is hard to truly assess the results and the justifications for those conclusions. At the same time, it has long been hard to give the Air Force the benefit of the doubt when it comes to the A-10, an aircraft the service has been actively trying to rid itself of since it first entered service in the 1970s.

The War Zone has detailed the many known instances in the past of the Air Force deliberately hamstringing the A-10 fleet and manipulating data to present it in an especially poor light. It is also known the service buried a set of requirements it had drafted regarding a dedicated A-10 replacement.

It is no secret that the Air Force did not want to conduct the flyoff at all, with then-Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. Mark Welsh publicly describing it as a "silly exercise." The Congressional mandate for comparative testing had come after a scandal in which another Air Force general had suggested to his subordinates that defending the A-10 to members of legislators was tantamount to treason. Before that, the Air Force had also suppressed a short official documentary that presented a very positive picture of the A-10.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HpCvySLGuOA

At the same time, it is increasingly hard to argue that the utility of the A-10, especially in higher-end conflicts, is steadily diminishing, despite the substantial upgrades it is still receiving. There are already growing questions about exactly how the U.S. military will conduct CSAR at all in high-threat environments where stealthy aircraft like the F-35 are expected to operate. The Air Force has notably truncated its purchase of HH-60W rescue helicopters for this reason and is now exploring various alternatives to traditional CSAR.

The comparative test report notes that A-10 and F-35 pilots involved in the flyoff repeatedly raised the idea of using F-35As to escort A-10Cs on CSAR missions. CSAR force packages have included fighter cover since before the Warthog entered service and this particular pairing could make good sense. Stealthy F-35As would be capable for neutralizing aerial threats and hostile air defenses in support of the mission, as well as just providing critical situation awareness, all thanks in no small part to their extensive sensor fusion and electronic warfare capabilities. Still, whether this would all be enough to adequately execute CSAR missions in a high-threat scenario is questionable and give the A-10s a decent chance of surviving is variably debatable, depending on the scenario.

The A-10 community is otherwise very actively looking for additional ways it can contribute in higher-end conflicts, including as launch platforms for decoys to help clear the way through enemy air defenses.

A pair of ADM-160 Miniature Air-Launched Decoys (MALD) on an A-10 during a fit check. Michigan ANG

All of this is becoming increasingly moot as the Air Force is now pushing ahead with plans to retire the entire A-10 fleet by 2030, if not before then. After years of pushback from Congress, lawmakers now look to be more inclined to finally let the Warthog go. Whether the contents of this report, which should be available to legislators in full, have any impact on their views remains to be seen.

In addition, U.S. Special Operations Command is now moving forward with its own plans to acquire dozens of dedicated light attack aircraft specifically to perform close air support, armed overwatch, and other related missions in permissive environments. Though the total number of OA-1K Sky Warden aircraft that are expected to eventually enter service will be much smaller than the size of the A-10 fleet currently, this could help make up for some of the resulting capability shortfalls.

The OA-1K Sky Warden. Air Tractor

A big question that remains is what the Air Force will or won't do in the end to preserve the institutional knowledge that the A-10 community has built up over the years.

"If the services are going to be stuck relying on the F-35 to fill the attack role, the best solution would be to assign an adequate number of squadrons to specialize entirely on the mission," POGO's Grazier told The War Zone. "HQ Air Force should transfer all transitioning A-10 pilots to those squadrons to concentrate their knowledge that they then pass on to the newly assigned attack pilots and issue appropriate Ready Aircrew Tasking Memorandums."

"That is not happening," he continued. "The Air Force isn't even pretending to train F-35 pilots for the role now so accumulated attack pilot knowledge will very rapidly evaporate."

We will have to wait and see whether or not more details about this flyoff might now begin to emerge with the final release of at least a portion of the final test report. Regardless, the A-10's career with the Air Force looks to be ever more firmly coming to an end.

Contact the author: joe@thedrive.com

WW3.0

China says ‘stop groundless hype’ about naval deployment to Middle East


October 23, 2023


A general view of naval weaponry on a Task Group 162 Chinese warship on July 4, 2023 [PIUS UTOMI EKPEI/AFP via Getty Images]

Amid growing speculation that China has deployed six warships to the Middle East while Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza risks spiralling into a wider regional war, the spokesperson for the Chinese Embassy in Washington, Liu Pengyu, has called for an end to “groundless hype” about the move.

The six warships, including a guided-missile destroyer, have been operating in the Middle East since last week as part of a joint exercise with the Royal Navy of Oman.

“The fleet of the Chinese People’s Liberation Army Navy set sail for an escort mission and is paying friendly visits to relevant countries,” Liu told Sputnik yesterday, stressing that, “The relevant parties should respect the facts and stop groundless hype.”

A report by Israel’s Ynet News yesterday notes that, “It is still unclear whether this task force is returning to China or staying in the region. The concerns that have arisen on social media since this morning appear to be excessive and reflect a heightened sensitivity in Israel.”

READ: Israel’s actions in Gaza ‘beyond scope of self-defence’

Meanwhile, Washington is deploying the USS Dwight D. Eisenhower aircraft carrier strike group to the Persian Gulf amid an escalation of attacks on US forces in the region by Iranian-backed resistance groups in Iraq and Syria. Furthermore, the Houthi-led forces in Yemen claimed to have successfully targeted Israel, despite reports of their missiles being intercepted by a US Navy guided-missile destroyer, the USS Carney.

The USS Gerald R. Ford carrier strike group is currently positioned in the Eastern Mediterranean as a deterrent to any third parties that might consider joining the conflict against Israel, according to the Pentagon. Washington is concerned primarily about Hezbollah.

The Lebanese resistance movement has been stepping up attacks against Israeli military positions across the border. It claims to have killed 40 Israeli occupation soldiers and destroyed 10 Merkava tanks and four troop carriers since 7 October, the day when Hamas-led Operation Al-Aqsa Flood was launched.

China's PLA deployed six warships in Middle East amid Israel-Hamas war: Reports

 22 Oct 2023, 

The development comes at a time when the US has sent USS Gerald R Ford, its most advanced carrier, along with a battle group to the sensitive West Asia region.

 A Chinese warship fires towards the shore during a military drill near Fuzhou near the Taiwan controlled Matsu Islands that are close to the Chinese coast, China, April 8, 2023. REUTERS/Thomas Peter/File Photo (REUTERS)

China's People's Liberation Army (PLA) has deployed six warships in the Middle East as tensions escalate in the region due to the ongoing war between Israel and Palestinian militant group Hamas, reports said.

The six warships, which include the Zibo, a Type 052D guided-missile destroyer, the frigate Jingzhou and the integrated supply ship Qiandaohu, were part of the PLA's 44th naval escort task force that recently took part in a joint military exercise with Oman

The warships left the Muscat shores on October 14 for an undisclosed destination, the Chinese state media reported.

The development comes at a time when the US has sent USS Gerald R Ford, its most advanced carrier, along with a battle group to the West Asia region. Washington is also assisting Israel with A-10 Warthog and F-15E attack planes, along with the latest munitions as the Benjamin Netanyahu-led regime continues its offensive on Gaza.

Meanwhile, Chinese President Xi Jinping on October 19 reiterated Beijing's long-held view that supports the creation of a sovereign state of Palestine. This is "the fundamental way" out of the war, the state media reported him as saying.

“The top priority now is a ceasefire as soon as possible, to avoid the conflict from expanding or even spiraling out of control and causing a serious humanitarian crisis," Jinping said.

The war erupted on October 7, hours after fighters of Palestinian militant group Hamas raided locations in southern Israel, and fired hundreds of rockets. The Hamas attacks, according to the Israeli government figures, have claimed the lives of over 1,400 persons, including soldiers and civilians. The attack, claimed the Hamas leadership, was in retaliation to the “killing of civilians and worshippers" in Jerusalem and rest of West Bank in recent months, and the raids carried out by Israeli forces at Al-Aqsa mosque – the third-holiest site in Islam.

Israel has, since October 8, snapped the food, water and fuel supplies of the besieged Gaza Strip, which has a population of 2.2 million. The country has launched a spree of bombings over the past two weeks, which, according to the Gaza Health Ministry, has killed over 4,300 persons including more than 1,400 children.

OVERPRODUCTION IS CAPITALI$T CRISIS

Why Dusty Military Boneyards Have Become a Purgatory for Expensive  U.S. Aircraft

Kyle Mizokami
Fri, September 15, 2023

• The concept of a warplane “boneyard,” where old planes go when they retire, is actually pretty rare.

• While the Pentagon maintains the world’s largest boneyard, the concept is relatively unknown to other countries.

• Most countries fly planes until they are no longer useful, but America’s four air forces retire planes that are still useful all the time.

---

The “boneyard” is a macabre term that has come to stand for places—that are usually dry and dusty—where airplanes are sent to wait. Sometimes, the planes are waiting to fly again; sometimes the planes are waiting to go to the scrapyard. But by and large, the military aircraft boneyard is an American phenomenon, in which a combination of geography and the world’s largest air force creates a stable supply of planes that the U.S. government isn’t quite sure what to do with. Here’s everything you need to know about them.

End of Life


Most aircraft at Davis Monthan, including these A-10 Warthogs, are shrink-wrapped to keep the elements out.Getty Images

Military aircraft have varying lifespans. In wartime, the life of a fighter, bomber, or transport plane could be measured in minutes, as attrition grinds down a fighting air force. Warplanes have always been semi-disposable assets in wartime; until as recently as Vietnam, air armies have fully expected to lose planes in combat.

Peacetime is a different story. The use of steel and aluminum over wood and fabric dramatically increased the service life of warplanes, to the point that almost all eventually become technologically obsolete long before they become worn out by the stresses of flight operations. The average U.S. Air Force aircraft is about 30 years old, and the service must contend with eight fleets over the age of 50.

All of this means that warplanes can last for decades, and then remain structurally viable for several decades more. Entire fleets of airplanes have received mid-life updates designed to increase their service lives: the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet is receiving the vital Block III upgrade, the A-10 Warthog fleet received new wings, and the F-16 Fighting Falcon is in the process of getting a radar makeover. The potential for upgrades, combined with plane fleets that keep flying for decades or more, make it worthwhile to keep old planes around …for a little while, anyway.

Rich Country Problems


The B-52 Stratofortress bomber, “Wise Guy,” tail number 60-034, as it appeared before a 2019–2021 refurbishment that returned it to active flying duty.U.S. Air Force

The U.S. military, including the Air Force, Navy, Marine Corps, and Army, currently operates about 13,000 aircraft of all types. This runs a broad gamut from fighter jets like the F-22 Raptor and F-35 Lightning II to planes like the C-17 transport and Guardrail intelligence-gathering aircraft. The worldwide fleet is adding and subtracting planes every day. Some aircraft are cut because they are worn out, others succumb to budget cuts. All are still useful as scrap, but many are a little more useful than that, ranging from still being flyable to having useful parts, such as ejection seats, that can still be harvested from an unflyable plane.

Since World War II, the U.S. military has used the southwestern desert to keep planes in a post-retirement holding pattern. At Davis-Monthan Air Force Base in Arizona, thousands of aircraft sit awaiting their eventual fate. The lack of rainfall and humidity slows their deterioration in the outdoors, making recovering parts and equipment decades after retirement a viable proposition. Some planes eventually re-enter service: in 2021 the B-52H bomber “Wise Guy” rejoined America’s bomber fleet after a lengthy refurbishment, though it may have had a scorpion or two hiding in the wheel wells.

The bottom line is, the United States is a rich enough country to avoid cutting up planes for scrap value as soon as they leave service, wisely keeping them around just in case.

The Rest of the World

A collection of military hardware at Moscow’s Central Aviation Museum, including a Mi-24 Hind-A attack helicopter, S-75 Dvina surface-to-air missile and launcher, and Sukhoi Su-7 fighter.Getty Images

Other countries, even NATO allies, have relatively few aircraft and retire planes in much smaller numbers. The United Kingdom, for example, has only 142 fighter jets, while France has 266, and Germany has 209. These fleets are relatively small, grow slowly, and planes are retired infrequently. These countries also lack the arid conditions to store jets in good condition. In Europe, the closest thing to a boneyard is the private fighter jet collection of vintner Michel Pont.

Russia has the capacity to store warbirds, but most of the fleet was likely cut up for scrap during the 1990s and 2000s. One location with military aircraft is the Central Aviation Museum outside of Moscow. Aside from the usual Mikoyan-Gurevich and Sukhoi jets, the museum hosts a Tu-22 “Backfire” bomber, Mi-26 “Halo” heavy lift helicopters, a Mil V-12 twin-rotor superheavy helicopter, Yak-28 “Brewer” attack jets, and at least one intact Yak-38 “Forger” vertical takeoff and landing fighter. Zhukovsky International Airport is another location with a mix of well-known and not-so-well-known aircraft, including the experimental Sukhoi Su-47 Berkut (“Golden Eagle”) swept-wing fighter and the MiG 1.44 prototype fighter.

China’s air forces, the People’s Liberation Army Air Force and People’s Liberation Army Navy Air Force, have undergone rapid expansion over the past two decades. China is known to have held onto large numbers of J-6 fighters, and there are suggestions the planes are being modified to act as unmanned aerial vehicles. There is the China Aviation Museum north of Beijing with a modest collection of 20th-century Chinese warplanes. China does not appear to have an official boneyard of Chinese air power, but if it exists it is probably in the hot, dry, Xinjiang province.

LA REVUE GAUCHE - Left Comment: Search results for PERMANENT ARMS ECONOMY 

A-10 pilot reveals what it was like trying to land an attack aircraft that was literally falling apart around her

Ryan Pickrell
Mon, December 19, 2022 

Capt. Taylor "Petrie" Bye standing in front of her A-10 attack aircraft

Courtesy photo

In spring 2020, Capt. Taylor Bye's A-10 attack aircraft started falling apart on a training flight.


She had to land with no cockpit canopy, panels falling off, and landing gear up.


Bye spoke to Insider about the experience and what it was like getting back in the air afterwards.

The last thing any pilot wants to see is their plane falling apart while they are trying to fly it, but that was the nightmare scenario US Air Force A-10 attack aircraft pilot Capt. Taylor "Petrie" Bye found herself in.

On April 7, 2020, a routine training flight suddenly was anything but when the 30 mm GAU-8/A Avenger cannon on Bye's A-10C Thunderbolt II malfunctioned during a gun run at Grand Bay Range at Moody Air Force Base in Georgia.


Problems with the powerful gatling gun triggered a series of catastrophes that ultimately forced her to land her plane with no cockpit canopy, missing panels, and landing gear up.

This 75th Fighter Squadron pilot talked to Insider about the skillful flying and impressive crash-landing, for which she received not one but two prestigious service awards.
'Never been so focused on a landing in my entire life'

Bye's A-10 sits on the runway after making an emergency landing on April 7, 2020 

at Moody Air Force Base, Georgia.US Air Force photo by Andrea Jenkins

When Bye attempted to fire the cannon on a strafing run, she heard a troubling pop. Then a light came on warning her that the gun was "unsafe." Concerned, she quickly climbed to a safer altitude to assess the situation.

Looking over the gauges that relay critical aircraft health information, "everything showed me that my jet was still flying and functioning like normal," she said, adding that her "immediate response was, 'Ok, good, I'm not going to fall out of the sky.'"

But while the plane could fly, it was not in great shape. Further assessments with the help of her wingman found that some exterior panels were either missing or hanging off the aircraft, indicating that the gun malfunction had caused damage.

Bye began making preparations to land the plane, which is when she discovered another problem. Part of the plane's landing gear was inoperable, making a safe landing impossible.

"When it happened, I didn't panic. I didn't freak out. I didn't fear for my life because I knew that I had the training," she recalled. "My adrenaline was up. I could tell my heart was racing. And I consciously knew that it was a severe situation, but there wasn't ever panic."

"I think my body just went into survival mode," she said, explaining that the extensive emergency response training that all Air Force pilots receive kicked in, helping her remain calm in a difficult situation.

After going over possible options with support personnel, Bye made the decision to belly land the plane, something the aircraft was built to be able to do if necessary but is still a risky move.

In that moment, the cockpit canopy on Bye's aircraft suddenly separated with what she described as a loud pop followed by an even louder rush of wind that sounded like roaring thunder. As Bye lowered her seat to shield herself from the wind blast, she knew that she needed to act.

"It is time to get this jet on the ground," Bye remembered saying over the radio, her mind made up. "My jet was literally falling apart around me," she recalled, adding that she "didn't want anything else to come off."

Bye, 75th Fighter Squadron pilot and chief of standardization and evaluation, poses on the flight line.US Air Force photo by Airman 1st Class Briana Beavers

Though the Air Force does not train its pilots to do this, Bye was not completely unfamiliar with this kind of landing. Not only did she know another pilot who made a gear-up landing, but during her first operational assignment as an A-10 pilot at Osan Air Force Base in South Korea, she belly-landed a jet in a simulator.

That said, pulling something like that off in a simulated training environment is quite different from having to do it in the real world, when life and limb are on the line.

"When I made the decision, I knew it was just like, this is game time," Bye remembered thinking at the time. "I have to do this, and I only get one shot at it."

"I'll be honest with you, I have never been so focused on a landing in my entire life," she said, recalling "there was hardly anything familiar about that approach and landing."

She received guidance from her wingman, director of operations, and others, helping her avoid various potential hazards, but nothing really looked or felt the way it normally would, making landing a challenge.

"About to touch down, that was the first time I realized that it was actually a pretty dangerous and severe situation," she said.

It wasn't until she was back on the ground though that it crossed her mind that "something absolutely terrible could have happened," she said. In flight, there simply wasn't time for that kind of thinking.

Observers told Bye that when her plane touched down, sparks went flying. Unsure if the fuel lines were still intact, she got out as fast as possible once the aircraft slid to a stop, executing emergency egress procedures.

Back on the ground after that rough landing, "it took me a while actually to process what was happening," Bye said. "My adrenaline was still up for like the rest of the day, and I did not really sleep because I was just trying to process it," she recalled, "but it didn't really hit me initially."

"It didn't really truly hit me until almost a year later when I was unfortunate enough to listen to the tape," she said, explaining that "hearing my voice when my canopy blew off actually caused a significant emotional event. I was like, 'Wow, that was actually kind of traumatic.'"
'Meant to be in the Air Force'

Bye stands next to a training aircraft.Courtesy photo

When talking to Bye about her military service, it is very clear that this 29-year-old pilot from North Carolina is all in for the US Air Force, but her first choice, which was inspired by her grandfather's service in World War II, was actually the Navy.

"I wanted to fly an F-14 Tomcat, and I wanted to take off from of a carrier," she said, recalling learning about the jet from a recruiter. "It is a very classic, like 'Top Gun'-type pipe dream, but that's what originally got me started wanting to fly."

Aside from the fact the Navy stopped flying Tomcats, swapping them out for Hornets, there was another problem. "The Navy did not want me," Bye said. "It turned out I wasn't meant to be in the Navy. I was meant to be in the Air Force."

Bye commissioned into the Air Force in 2015 straight out of the United States Air Force Academy, where she first flew.

The first aircraft she flew was a small Cirrus SR22, but "flying did not come natural," Bye said, explaining that although the program offered cadets the opportunity to fly solo, she "did not show the skill required" to do so during that program.

Her first ever solo flight was in a DA20 in Colorado during Air Force pilot training, and the experience, she said, "was so much fun."

"It was so cool to be in the Rockies and getting to fly around by myself. It was so surreal and gave me so much confidence," she said. "It is so funny saying that now because I fly solo every day, but back then, when I hadn't done it before, it was just, I don't know, my adrenaline had never been higher in my life."

Bye's interest in the A-10 began when she was a student at the United States Air Force Academy Preparatory School, where she first learned about this "awesome" plane "that was just like a tank killer." Later, at the academy, a professor who had worked as an engineer at Edwards Air Force Base in California when the aircraft was first going through testing furthered that interest.

But what really sold her on the A-10 was a mentor, now a senior leader at Moody who flew the A-10. "He told me so many war stories," she said. "And the ones that stuck out to me were when he got to talk with the guys on the ground that he helped protect."

"The rush of emotions I felt listening to him, I was just like 'Yep, that is what I want to do,'" Bye said. "Like shooting the gun is cool, but supporting the men and women on the ground who are in a lot more of harm's way than I am, that was how I wanted to serve."

"As a cocky cadet, I was just like, 'Yeah, I want to go fast. I want to blow things up.' But that was really when I found what I wanted my career to be, just serving the men and women on the ground," she said.

The A-10 was first introduced in the 1970s and is the first Air Force plane that was specifically built for close-air support missions and engaging ground targets, including tanks and other armored vehicles. In conflicts, the A-10 has been a saving grace for troops on the ground.

Bye said that she still gets excited about dropping weapons, firing the plane's powerful cannon, and flying, even if she sometimes wishes her slower-moving close-air support plane could fly a little bit faster, but that essential support mission is "absolutely" what she loves most about the jet.
'Can't imagine flying anything else'

Bye sitting in the cockpit of an aircraftCourtesy photo

The unfortunate incident in spring 2020 could have easily shaken Bye's confidence in herself as a pilot, as well as in her plane of choice, but she was back flying a week after the accident.

"When it first happened, I, of course, started Monday night quarterbacking myself, asking: What could I have done better? What did I do wrong? Did I cause it to happen?"

As these questions swirled around, Bye reached out to other pilots in her community who had been through stressful events, and they provided the support and reassurance she needed.

Bye is the only female A-10 pilot in her squadron, but, she explained, "it is not very often that I actually think about the fact that I'm the only woman. I've been incredibly blessed with the people that I work with, and I never feel isolated."

Talking about when she first got back into a plane after the incident, Bye said, "I was nervous in the sense of like, I did not want that to happen again, but it also built my confidence so much."

"I was like, 'Bring it on. If I can land gear up, I can handle whatever this flight is going to bring,'" she said. "I'm not saying I wasn't nervous. I definitely was nervous, but it wasn't enough to keep me out of the cockpit."

She also said that the unusual incident gave her added confidence in the A-10, a tough jet built to take a beating.

"That situation actually just showed me how reliable the jet is," Bye said, explaining, "Yes, something went wrong, but it was still reliable. The jet was put together well enough that I was able to land it in the condition it was in. If anything, it gave me more confidence in the jet."

She said that she still loves the A-10, telling Insider, "I can't imagine flying anything else."

In November 2021, Bye flew her mishap A-10, tail No. 995, for the first time since the Air Force maintenance and repair teams finished putting it back together.

Reflecting on her many unique experiences, she said, "I didn't know that I would love flying, but I love it. I think being a fighter pilot is absolutely the coolest job in the world."

Editor's note: This post was first published on December 14, 2021

https://plawiuk.blogspot.com/2022/12/a-10-why-thunderbolt-is-flying-tank.html

https://plawiuk.blogspot.com/2022/12/us-pilots-are-testing-aging-10-warthog.html

LA REVUE GAUCHE - Left Comment: Search results for A-10