We must be the only country in the world that names military bases after people who committed treason.
>>And, seriously, BOEING is doing this?
Building a wing designed by someone else 50 years ago might be the only thing they can successfully pull off right now.
I’ve been told shepherding new weapon systems gets you promoted. Figuring out how to fight with what you have gets you time in grade.
Ironic! Yesterday, in a small central Wisconsin town west of Oshkosh, I attended a Memorial Day ceremony in the high school gym. I was seated next to a retired Marine – a brute of a man w/ a lot of tattoos, including his rank and dates of service (1986-2010). I was wearing a hat saying USAF retired. He noticed me and at the completion of the ceremony, he turns to me and says, "Welcome back ‘brother.’ " We exchanged pleasantries and so I asked him what he did in the Corps; his answer, “Infantry.” I then asked if he knew what an A-10 airplane was. His answer … “Hell yeah!” He said, “We called them Angels from on high.” True story. That’s all I needed to hear to know that MY time helping bring the A-10 online so many years ago was worth it and that my current opinion is valid. The A-10 is still a viable ‘toy’ in our arsenal of weaponry.
“Boeing’s just happy to have the work” – ha ha! The real lesson here is that Boeing has effective lobbyists. Congress didn’t decide of their own volition to force the A-10 extension on the Air Force; they were “educated” by people with a vested interest in the business, like company and employee union lobbyists. BTW, I love the A-10 and am not sad to see it keep flying.
Don’t care since there are now countermeasures specifically for the A-10.
In the words of th elatest Top Gun; it’s time to let it go.
Exactly, screw the country, get all you can.
I don’t see any reference to “racist” in this discussion that didn’t originate with those defending “woke”. So those comments are the intellectual equivalent of, “Well, he hit me first.” “No, I didn’t, you got in my way.” “MOMmmm…”
Grow up, guys. And learn to edit your comments to omit what you obviously know to be political signal words. There are plenty of fora where that sort of thing is allowed.
This ain’t one of them.
The USAF has “learned” that lesson in WWII, Korea, and Vietnam. But quickly forgets it.
Exactly. However the last numbers I saw put the A-10 at something like $6K per hour while the F-35 was working on getting DOWN to $35K per hour.
If I were in charge, I would pull the avionics out of a couple, send them to China, and in 6 - 8 weeks, start taking delivery of new airplanes. 
“One of their knocks on the A-10 is it “can’t operate in a contested environment”, but an AT-6 or an AT-29 will magically be able to do so? Gimme a break.”
There was the same argument in the 80s when I flew the Hog. The reality is, nothing is coming out of a modern contested battle unscathed. But personally, I would rather in an airplane that was designed to take hits and still bring me home.
What worked well in training for the high threat arena in the 80s was a joint A-10/Helicopter attack. Helicopters unmask and shoot. A-10s pop and shoot while bad guys are trying to shoot helicopters, who are now hiding. They move, and unmask to shoot while bad guys try to shoot the A-10s. Rinse, Repeat.
I cannot count the number of times I have not had to buy a drink all night once the guys who are current or former Army or Marines learn I was an A-10 pilot.