>>The A-10C upgrade pretty much makes the whole 'the USAF hates it'
>>argument moot. It extends the service life to at least 2028, and
>>possibly longer. The F-35 is 'supposed' to replace it, but it's dirt
>>cheap to operate the A-10 in comparison, so odds are probably good
>>it'll be around for a long time.
>
>The USAF's been grumbling about getting rid of the A-10 for years.
>The reality is that there simply is no aircraft, either in service or
>on the drawing board, which can match or surpass it. It's pretty much
>like the B-52: Every aircraft that will "replace" it has either been
>canceled or proved too expensive to buy in sufficient quantities.

Well, again, there's always a difference between the top levels and what the dude actually flying and employing with it want. Remember, the last couple top dogs in the USAF leadership were F-15 and F-16 jocks. I think the Hog's position is secure, except it is starting to get on up there. The BUFF, as amazing a machine it is, is also getting old, but by the time it DOES finally retire, it's going to be pushing 80 or 90.

However you slice it though, that IS impressive. And personally, I think the psychological value alone warrants keeping a couple Hogs and BUFFs around even past the retirement date...just because :)

But the reason I mentioned the Skyraiders and the A-26s before - those things were in the boneyard, for years even, and Vietnam showcased a need for slow and low, reliable and durable CAS platforms - the kind of thing the SAC-driven USAF of the late '50s and '60s WASN'T building...

FTW, we stick artillery pieces on C-130s though, can't be that...

...except maybe by slinging some paladins underwing a C-5 or something :p