AviationWeek:
As we know, the A-10 has lots of fans among the grunts and bootsonaground, but it's old and vulnerable to small missiles. It's good that they're thinking about replacements, but note that it's still going to need mostly "permissive environments" - i.e. the replacement will still be vulnerable to missiles.
Cheers,
Scott.
As the Air Force prepares to start sunsetting the beloved A-10 in fiscal year 2018, the service is still deciding on a path ahead for CAS. During a July 20 meeting, U.S. Air Force officials briefed outside stakeholders on the most recent thinking, detailing the possibility of pursuing two separate light-attack aircraft, potentially in parallel, to meet immediate and long-term needs.
The service officials detailed a possible “OA-X” for solely permissive environments, according to Mark Gunzinger, an analyst with the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments. OA-X would be a low-end, low-cost, non-developmental aircraft meant to augment the Air Force’s existing light attack capabilities, he said.
For OA-X, the officials said the Air Force would likely look to an existing airframe, such as the A-29 Super Tucano or the AT-6 trainer, for use in a low-threat battlespace, said Loren Thompson, an analyst with the Lexington Institute.
The Air Force does not see OA-X as a replacement for the A-10, but rather as a supplemental capability, Gunzinger stressed.
Simultaneously, the service is also looking into an “A-X2” as a long-term Warthog replacement, the analysts said. Ideally, A-X2 would be designed to operate in a moderate- to low-threat regime, meaning that it could fight in some contested conditions. The service officials left the door open as to whether A-X2 would be an existing airframe or an entirely new aircraft, but noted that affordability and speed to ramp would be critical.
As we know, the A-10 has lots of fans among the grunts and bootsonaground, but it's old and vulnerable to small missiles. It's good that they're thinking about replacements, but note that it's still going to need mostly "permissive environments" - i.e. the replacement will still be vulnerable to missiles.
Cheers,
Scott.