The USAF has issued an RfI for the re-winging of additional A-10 aircraft, despite stating that it wishes to retire the aircraft at the earliest opportunity. Source: US DoD
The US Air Force (USAF) has issued a request for information (RfI) to industry for the re-winging of an undisclosed number of Fairchild-Republic A/OA-10A Thunderbolt II close air support aircraft.
The RfI, which was posted on the Federal Business Opportunities website on 17 September, is to gather comments and potential sources for production of new wing assemblies for the A/OA-10A to support operational requirements through 2021.
Final vendor RfI responses are expected by close of business on 2 November, with an Industry Day to be held at Hill Air Force Base in Utah on 17 November.
WNU Editor: This plane refuses to die.
1 comment:
Combat Tanks
GFAS/MAWS/DIRCM Pod
Hellfire/Brimstone replacement of Maverick
APKWS replacement of the GAU-8
Scorpion HMDS
Integrated Cockpit with Large Format AMLCD displays.
Radar Pod
New Engines
Second Seat
Are the resulting capabilities to be gained from adding these upgrades to the A-10 worth it for 300 airframes which are going to be 40+ years old when the mod starts in 2020? Maybe.
But only if you acknowledge that the F-35 is never going to be viable as a multiservice, standardized, airframe and LM will not build a microlot for SEAD/DEAD because they cannot recover their R&D investment in doing so.
So that you can fold up the JSF and remission it's funding to pay for this.
That said, the make or break on a justifiable A-10 update is simply this: How serious are we about moving into a Pacific Pivot? If you operate in a maritime environment you need a CVTOL/STOVL landing mode as well as certain changes to enable long range acquisition and sorting of everything from carriers to small boats in a mixed/dense neutral traffic environment. i.e. You need radar.
A midweight AShM like ANL/Sea Venom would also be nice.
That combination of basing mode and sea search not PGU-13/14 dominance of the nose volume means we would be better off going with a new design rather than pushing to keep a system which is biased towards an anti armor CAS dedication centered around 1970s technology base capabilities (pre small PGM, pre ubiquitous MANPADS etc.).
Post a Comment