• Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?

    Go here:

    Edit Account Details and Profile

A-10's For The Marine Corps

Birdog8585

Milk and Honey
pilot
Contributor
Can someone tell me why the Marine Corps never solicited (at least to my knowledge) the A-10 as a cornerstone aircraft for our CAS missions? I found an article a long time ago on G2mil. I don't agree a lot with the author on many of his other rants, but on this one he seems to have a point (point #3). http://www.g2mil.com/Carriers.htm Can anyone weigh in on why not, other than political reasons? Consider this as well - http://www.warthogpen.com/A-10C.html
 

Morgan81

It's not my lawn. It's OUR lawn.
pilot
Contributor
Probably one of the cases were it's easier said then done. I like how that article says all the A-10 "[FONT=Arial, Helvetica]should only require folding wings, a tail hook, and a catapult attachment point" [/FONT]to get it carrier-capable. Even I know that's an especially shortsighted look on something that would be way more complex.
 

sodajones

Combat Engineer
It's one of my favorite aircraft and I often wondered why the Corps never picked these up since it gives ground pounders wet dreams
 

Swanee

Cereal Killer
pilot
None
Contributor
Probably one of the cases were it's easier said then done. I like how that article says all the A-10 "[FONT=Arial, Helvetica]should only require folding wings, a tail hook, and a catapult attachment point" [/FONT]to get it carrier-capable. Even I know that's an especially shortsighted look on something that would be way more complex.


I would think those three things would be a starting point in a design, not an add on.


Not to mention the fact that the Air Force isn't going to give up their stash of A-10's any time soon. They are spending a lot of money to keep them going.
 

FlyinSpy

Mongo only pawn, in game of life...
Contributor
A better question than asking why the Marines don't have them is why the Army doesn't have them.

Because the Army has said, very specifically, "we don't want them." I worked on the Army Staff (DAMO-ZM) back in 1994-95 during the Commission on Roles and Missions debate, and the AF was looking to dump the A-10s and the CAS mission entirely. An informal proposal was made "we'll give the A-10s to the Army", at which time the Army formally said "Not only no, but hell no - we don't have the infrastructure nor budget to support such a platform."
 

Cron

Yarr
A better question than asking why the Marines don't have them is why the Army doesn't have them.

I believe this goes back to the National Security Act of 1947, which specifies the roles of each military branch. Essentially, the Army is not allowed have fixed-wing tactical aircraft.
 

FLYTPAY

Pro-Rec Fighter Pilot
pilot
None
I believe this goes back to the National Security Act of 1947, which specifies the roles of each military branch. Essentially, the Army is not allowed have fixed-wing tactical aircraft.
Learn something new every day, I thought it was because they did not want to be cool. :)
 

Uncle Fester

Robot Pimp
None
Super Moderator
Contributor
This has come up on AW before. I believe the answer is that it'd be technically feasible to make the Hog boat-capable - there's no show-stoppers in terms of weight, approach/stall speeds, etc, though there's a hell of a lot more to it than just bolting on a hook and launch bar and adding hinges to the wings. It'd essentially require a complete redesign and ground-up rebuild of an airplane that, though undeniably tits, is still a 30+year-old tank plinker. The Mahreens need their new airplanes to do more than that nowadays.

To sum up: possible, but too hard, and more trouble than it's worth.
 

Harrier Dude

Living the dream
^^^What he said.

Would it be cool? Yes.

The only viable way for us to do it would be to take them as-is and be constantly land based, like our F-18D's and Prowlers.

While cool and very capable (especially in this narrow set of current circumstances in Iraq), it's still an old aircraft with a ton of bolt-on upgrades.
 

Clux4

Banned
^^^What he said.

Would it be cool? Yes.

The only viable way for us to do it would be to take them as-is and be constantly land based, like our F-18D's and Prowlers.

While cool and very capable (especially in this narrow set of current circumstances in Iraq), it's still an old aircraft with a ton of bolt-on upgrades.

Thought the same thing. It is not like the Prowlers and 18 D's not getting in the fight. Considering the fact that the JSF is not coming out any time soon, we will continue to use the what we have and make mission.

A-10's would have been a good idea when they came out. As it is, those things are getting old and the Airforce has no replacement. Wait... maybe the 3JSF. Well, we are getting something like that, so no need.

What we really could look at is the AC-130 gunship. We do not have to worry about shipboard operations because there is no need.

"Fly slow, fly low, bring hell "
 
Top