From: owner-skunk-works-digest@netwrx1.com (skunk-works-digest) To: skunk-works-digest@netwrx1.com Subject: skunk-works-digest V9 #54 Reply-To: skunk-works@netwrx1.com Sender: owner-skunk-works-digest@netwrx1.com Errors-To: owner-skunk-works-digest@netwrx1.com Precedence: bulk skunk-works-digest Tuesday, July 25 2000 Volume 09 : Number 054 Index of this digest by subject: *************************************************** RE: Fairchild Republic A-10 Thunderbolt II RE: Fairchild Republic A-10 Thunderbolt II RE: Fairchild Republic A-10 Thunderbolt II RE: Fairchild Republic A-10 Thunderbolt II *************************************************** ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 18:29:44 GMT From: "wayne binkley" Subject: RE: Fairchild Republic A-10 Thunderbolt II i am not 100% sure but i believe the army is prohibited by an agreement(which could be changed)or by law(much more difficult) from operating certain kinds of acft. whether the A-10 is one or not i do not know.the USAF wasn't very happy when the army got mohawks,and i was surprised to learn they were operating 4 engine turboprop acft(dehavillands(sp?)).this all goes back to the "middle" of the war in vietnam when the army turned over it's C-7 caribou's to the AF and the AF gave the army it's cargo helicopters(it kept rescue and "special ops).if any one can enlighten me on this subject,please do. wayne - ----Original Message Follows---- From: "Weigold, Greg" With inter-serice rivalries being what they are, would the Army or Marines be interested in used USAF planes? Greg W - -----Original Message----- From: Tom C Robison [mailto:tcrobi@ftw.rsc.raytheon.com] Sam wrote "Unfortunately, the USAF is trying to get rid of the A-10 because it doesn't want to perform the A-10's mission, but we can always use some serious tank-busters and CAS aircraft in the sky. The F-22 and JSF aren't going to be nearly as survivable as * the A-10 and yet they are going to be expected to perform the A-10's mission upon its retirement. Heck, a few 7.62mm (.30cal) rounds might be able to bring down or cripple an F-22 or JSF..." I've never understood the Air Farce's attitude on this. If they don't want to do the mission, why don't they give or sell the aircraft to the Army or the Marines? Tom ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 18:29:44 GMT From: "wayne binkley" Subject: RE: Fairchild Republic A-10 Thunderbolt II i am not 100% sure but i believe the army is prohibited by an agreement(which could be changed)or by law(much more difficult) from operating certain kinds of acft. whether the A-10 is one or not i do not know.the USAF wasn't very happy when the army got mohawks,and i was surprised to learn they were operating 4 engine turboprop acft(dehavillands(sp?)).this all goes back to the "middle" of the war in vietnam when the army turned over it's C-7 caribou's to the AF and the AF gave the army it's cargo helicopters(it kept rescue and "special ops).if any one can enlighten me on this subject,please do. wayne - ----Original Message Follows---- From: "Weigold, Greg" With inter-serice rivalries being what they are, would the Army or Marines be interested in used USAF planes? Greg W - -----Original Message----- From: Tom C Robison [mailto:tcrobi@ftw.rsc.raytheon.com] Sam wrote "Unfortunately, the USAF is trying to get rid of the A-10 because it doesn't want to perform the A-10's mission, but we can always use some serious tank-busters and CAS aircraft in the sky. The F-22 and JSF aren't going to be nearly as survivable as * the A-10 and yet they are going to be expected to perform the A-10's mission upon its retirement. Heck, a few 7.62mm (.30cal) rounds might be able to bring down or cripple an F-22 or JSF..." I've never understood the Air Farce's attitude on this. If they don't want to do the mission, why don't they give or sell the aircraft to the Army or the Marines? Tom ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 17:07:36 -0400 From: "Frank Markus" Subject: RE: Fairchild Republic A-10 Thunderbolt II This is a multi-part message in MIME format. - ------=_NextPart_000_000B_01BFF65A.D4CD7F30 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit The answer is almost certainly ‘yes.’ The Air Force has jealously guarded its role as the only service permitted to fly fixed wing aircraft for the Army. I have no doubt that the Army would willingly bear whatever burden required to get (back) into the close air support business. And they should. The contempt that the Air Force has for the close air support role is not merely evidenced in the decision to phase out the A-10 but also in the absurd decision to call the F-117A a “fighter” notwithstanding that it totally lacks any air-to-air armament. The A-10 was the last plane to carry the “A” (for attack) designation and I would not be surprised if it were the last ever. - -----Original Message----- From: owner-skunk-works@netwrx1.com [mailto:owner-skunk-works@netwrx1.com]On Behalf Of Weigold, Greg Sent: Tuesday, July 25, 2000 10:16 AM To: 'skunk-works@netwrx1.com' Subject: RE: Fairchild Republic A-10 Thunderbolt II With inter-serice rivalries being what they are, would the Army or Marines be interested in used USAF planes? Greg W - -----Original Message----- From: Tom C Robison [ mailto:tcrobi@ftw.rsc.raytheon.com] Sent: July 25, 2000 8:53 AM To: skunk-works@netwrx1.com Subject: RE: Fairchild Republic A-10 Thunderbolt II Sam wrote "Unfortunately, the USAF is trying to get rid of the A-10 because it doesn't want to perform the A-10's mission, but we can always use some serious tank-busters and CAS aircraft in the sky. The F-22 and JSF aren't going to be nearly as survivable as * the A-10 and yet they are going to be expected to perform the A-10's mission upon its retirement. Heck, a few 7.62mm (.30cal) rounds might be able to bring down or cripple an F-22 or JSF..." I've never understood the Air Farce's attitude on this. If they don't want to do the mission, why don't they give or sell the aircraft to the Army or the Marines? Tom - ------=_NextPart_000_000B_01BFF65A.D4CD7F30 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable RE: Fairchild Republic A-10 Thunderbolt II

Th= e answer is almost certainly ‘yes.’  The Air Force has jealously guarded its role as the only service permitted to = fly fixed wing aircraft for the Army.  = I have no doubt that the Army would willingly bear whatever burden required to = get (back) into the close air support business.  And they should.

 

Th= e contempt that the Air Force has for the close air support role is not = merely evidenced in the decision to phase out the A-10 but also in the absurd = decision to call the F-117A a “fighter” notwithstanding that it = totally lacks any air-to-air armament.  The = A-10 was the last plane to carry the “A” (for attack) designation and = I would not be surprised if it were the last ever.

 

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-skunk-works@netwrx1.com = [mailto:owner-skunk-works@netwrx1.com]On Behalf Of Weigold, Greg
Sent: Tuesday, July 25, = 2000 10:16 AM
To: = 'skunk-works@netwrx1.com'
Subject: RE: Fairchild = Republic A-10 Thunderbolt II

 

With inter-serice rivalries being = what they are, would the Army or Marines be interested in used USAF = planes? <= /p>

Greg W

-----Original = Message-----
From: Tom C Robison [mailto:tcrobi@ftw.rsc.raytheo= n.com]
Sent: July 25, 2000 8:53 AM
To: skunk-works@netwrx1.com
Subject: RE: Fairchild Republic A-10 Thunderbolt = II <= /p>



Sam wrote
"Unfortunately, the USAF is trying to get rid of the = A-10 because it doesn't
want
to perform the A-10's mission, but we can always use some = serious tank-busters
and CAS aircraft in the sky.

The F-22 and JSF aren't going to = be nearly as survivable as * the A-10 and yet
they are going to be expected to perform the A-10's mission = upon its retirement. <= /p>

Heck, a few 7.62mm (.30cal) = rounds might be able to bring down or cripple an
F-22 or JSF..."

I've never understood the Air = Farce's attitude on this. If they don't want to do
the mission,
why don't they give or sell the aircraft to the Army or the Marines? = <= /p>

Tom

 <= /p>

- ------=_NextPart_000_000B_01BFF65A.D4CD7F30-- ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 17:07:36 -0400 From: "Frank Markus" Subject: RE: Fairchild Republic A-10 Thunderbolt II This is a multi-part message in MIME format. - ------=_NextPart_000_000B_01BFF65A.D4CD7F30 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit The answer is almost certainly ‘yes.’ The Air Force has jealously guarded its role as the only service permitted to fly fixed wing aircraft for the Army. I have no doubt that the Army would willingly bear whatever burden required to get (back) into the close air support business. And they should. The contempt that the Air Force has for the close air support role is not merely evidenced in the decision to phase out the A-10 but also in the absurd decision to call the F-117A a “fighter” notwithstanding that it totally lacks any air-to-air armament. The A-10 was the last plane to carry the “A” (for attack) designation and I would not be surprised if it were the last ever. - -----Original Message----- From: owner-skunk-works@netwrx1.com [mailto:owner-skunk-works@netwrx1.com]On Behalf Of Weigold, Greg Sent: Tuesday, July 25, 2000 10:16 AM To: 'skunk-works@netwrx1.com' Subject: RE: Fairchild Republic A-10 Thunderbolt II With inter-serice rivalries being what they are, would the Army or Marines be interested in used USAF planes? Greg W - -----Original Message----- From: Tom C Robison [ mailto:tcrobi@ftw.rsc.raytheon.com] Sent: July 25, 2000 8:53 AM To: skunk-works@netwrx1.com Subject: RE: Fairchild Republic A-10 Thunderbolt II Sam wrote "Unfortunately, the USAF is trying to get rid of the A-10 because it doesn't want to perform the A-10's mission, but we can always use some serious tank-busters and CAS aircraft in the sky. The F-22 and JSF aren't going to be nearly as survivable as * the A-10 and yet they are going to be expected to perform the A-10's mission upon its retirement. Heck, a few 7.62mm (.30cal) rounds might be able to bring down or cripple an F-22 or JSF..." I've never understood the Air Farce's attitude on this. If they don't want to do the mission, why don't they give or sell the aircraft to the Army or the Marines? Tom - ------=_NextPart_000_000B_01BFF65A.D4CD7F30 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable RE: Fairchild Republic A-10 Thunderbolt II

Th= e answer is almost certainly ‘yes.’  The Air Force has jealously guarded its role as the only service permitted to = fly fixed wing aircraft for the Army.  = I have no doubt that the Army would willingly bear whatever burden required to = get (back) into the close air support business.  And they should.

 

Th= e contempt that the Air Force has for the close air support role is not = merely evidenced in the decision to phase out the A-10 but also in the absurd = decision to call the F-117A a “fighter” notwithstanding that it = totally lacks any air-to-air armament.  The = A-10 was the last plane to carry the “A” (for attack) designation and = I would not be surprised if it were the last ever.

 

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-skunk-works@netwrx1.com = [mailto:owner-skunk-works@netwrx1.com]On Behalf Of Weigold, Greg
Sent: Tuesday, July 25, = 2000 10:16 AM
To: = 'skunk-works@netwrx1.com'
Subject: RE: Fairchild = Republic A-10 Thunderbolt II

 

With inter-serice rivalries being = what they are, would the Army or Marines be interested in used USAF = planes? <= /p>

Greg W

-----Original = Message-----
From: Tom C Robison [mailto:tcrobi@ftw.rsc.raytheo= n.com]
Sent: July 25, 2000 8:53 AM
To: skunk-works@netwrx1.com
Subject: RE: Fairchild Republic A-10 Thunderbolt = II <= /p>



Sam wrote
"Unfortunately, the USAF is trying to get rid of the = A-10 because it doesn't
want
to perform the A-10's mission, but we can always use some = serious tank-busters
and CAS aircraft in the sky.

The F-22 and JSF aren't going to = be nearly as survivable as * the A-10 and yet
they are going to be expected to perform the A-10's mission = upon its retirement. <= /p>

Heck, a few 7.62mm (.30cal) = rounds might be able to bring down or cripple an
F-22 or JSF..."

I've never understood the Air = Farce's attitude on this. If they don't want to do
the mission,
why don't they give or sell the aircraft to the Army or the Marines? = <= /p>

Tom

 <= /p>

- ------=_NextPart_000_000B_01BFF65A.D4CD7F30-- ------------------------------ End of skunk-works-digest V9 #54 ******************************** To subscribe to skunk-works-digest, send the command: subscribe in the body of a message to "majordomo@netwrx1.com". If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe "local-skunk-works": subscribe local-skunk-works@your.domain.net To unsubscribe, send mail to the same address, with the command: unsubscribe in the body. Administrative requests, problems, and other non-list mail can be sent to georgek@netwrx1.com. A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "skunk-works-digest" in the commands above with "skunk-works". Back issues are available for viewing by a www interface located at: http://www.netwrx1.com/skunk-works/ If you have any questions or problems please contact me at: georgek@netwrx1.com Thanks, George R. Kasica Listowner