On June 25, 2015, the General Accounting Office the Force Structure: Preliminary Observations on Air Force A-10 Divestment report required by the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2015. A provision in the NDAA called for the GAO to conduct an independent study of the platforms used to conduct the Close Air Support mission in light of the recommendation of the Air Force to retire the A-10 fleet.
The reports confirms that “Air Force divestment of the A-10 will create potential gaps in CAS and other missions,” and will result “in an overall capacity decrease in the Air Force’s CAS-capable fleet.”
The report also confirms what A-10 supporters have said all along; the Air Force has little regard for facts and has misrepresented them because its priorities were “among other things, fifth-generation aircraft such as the F-35….”
According to the report, divesting the A-10 would increase operational risks well into the future.
The GAO does not make any recommendations in the report. According to the GAO, it will be “conducting a more-detailed assessment of A-10 divestment issues and report those results later this year.”
The divestment would interfere with critical JTAC training as well. “… the A-10 has been used extensively to support the training of Joint Terminal Attack Controllers (JTAC)—the individuals who request and control CAS strikes. A-10 divestment could therefore reduce the ability of JTACs to gain and retain their qualifications… DOD is also planning on increasing the proportion of JTAC training that can be performed on simulators.”
Senator John McCain (R-AZ) released statement on the report: “This report underscores the concerns I have been raising for years about the Air Force’s misguided attempts to prematurely retire this vital aircraft. The A-10 is the best close-air support weapon in our arsenal and is playing an important role in the fight against ISIS in Iraq and Syria and in NATO’s effort to deter Russian aggression in Eastern Europe. As the GAO confirms, any premature divestment of the A-10 would not only fail to achieve the Air Force’s purported cost savings, but also leave us with a serious capability gap that could put the lives of American soldiers in danger.”
The Air Force, according to the GAO, acknowledge that the report “fairly represented the Air Force’s budgetary decision to divest the A-10 fleet….” READ REPORT HERE.
Report highlights:
We found that the Air Force has not fully assessed the cost savings associated with A-10 divestment or its alternatives. However, in its fiscal year 2015 budget request, the Air Force estimated that divesting the A-10 would allow it to save $4.2 billion over its 5-year budget plan. Our analysis found that the Air Force’s estimated savings are incomplete and may overstate or understate the actual figure.
For example, A-10 divestment could increase the operational tempo of remaining CAS-capable aircraft, which could increase costs related to extending the service lives of those remaining CAS-capable aircraft. To the extent that this occurs, it would reduce the actual savings from the A-10 divestiture below the estimated $4.2 billion.
Alternatively, savings could be greater than $4.2 billion because the Air Force estimate did not include the costs for things such as software upgrades or potential structural enhancements that it could incur if it were to keep the A-10. In presenting its budget to Congress, the Air Force provided a number of alternatives to A-10 divestment that would also result in approximately $4.2 billion in cost savings. However, these alternatives were rough estimates that were illustrative only and not fully considered as alternatives to A-10 divestment, according to Air Force officials. Without a reliable cost estimate, the Air Force does not have a complete picture of the savings it would generate by divesting the A-10 and does not have a reliable basis from which to develop and consider alternatives to achieve budget targets or assess the impact on other missions such as air superiority or global strike.
The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016, which was passed by the Senate this month, includes a provision that would prohibit the Air Force from retiring any A-10s and fully fund the flight hours, pilot training, fuel, and operations for all A-10s for the next fiscal year.
Lt. Colonel (ret) Tony Carr, publisher of the popular military website John Q. Public said, “My question for the Secretary of the Air Force is ‘who is getting fired, and when?’ And if she’s not willing to hold her own people accountable, Congress should get involved. It’s clear from this report that the Air Force didn’t put the right level of responsible thought behind retiring the A-10 that it should have, and as a result, it dragged the airmen and Congress through a painful season of conflict for no good reason. The service was feeding stories to the media as though it had exhaustively studied retirement of the A-10, and we now know that never happened. It’s deeply dishonest.”
Former A-10 pilot Lt. Colonel (Retired) Thomas Norris stated, “The GAO report illustrates A-10 divestment would create critical gaps in numerous mission sets and common scenarios such as poor weather. This in combination with an inept and incomplete financial analysis by the USAF leads to a simple conclusion — the USAF’s actions are clear — purchasing billions of dollars of unproven technology is more important than the very people they are sworn to support and protect.”
Related articles:
“Experts” Make A-10 Fight Up Hill Battle
Senators join JTACs in A-10 fight