Giving A-10 Warthogs To Ukraine Isn’t Off The Table

Giving A-10 Warthogs To Ukraine Isn’t Off The Table

USAF / Staff. Sgt. Daniel Snider

Top U.S. Air Force officials have left the door open to the possibility of transferring some of the iconic Warthogs to Ukraine.

BY JOSEPH TREVITHICK JUL 20, 2022

THE WAR ZONE

Secretary of the U.S. Air Force Frank Kendall did not outright reject the idea of transferring A-10 Warthog ground attack jets to Ukraine when asked about that possibility earlier today. His comments came after Chief of Staff of the Air Force Gen. Charles Q. Brown said separately that the Ukrainian Air Force will eventually have to start moving away from their Soviet-era combat jets and that whatever comes next will “be something non-Russian.”

Kendall and Brown both made their comments at the annual Aspen Security Forum today. The conference opened yesterday and is set to run through the end of the week. To date, only the U.S. Air Force has operated A-10s, an iconic close support aircraft known primarily for its massive GAU-8/A Avenger 30mm cannon and heavy armor.

“What is it that the Air Force … needs to let go of?” The Washington Post‘s David Ignatius, who served as the moderator Kendall’s talk at Aspen, asked the Air Force Secretary.

“The venerable A-10 … is not a system that we are going to need against the kinds of adversaries we’re concerned about most now,” Kendall responded, in part. 

In its most recent budget request for the 2023 Fiscal Year, the Air Force asked for authority to retire 21 Warthogs during that period. These aircraft have certainly proven to be useful in the past two decades or so when supporting low-intensity combat operations in permissive environments, but there are increasing questionsabout their utility in any future higher-end conflicts in contested airspace.

“A parenthetical thought. Why don’t we give those A-10s to Ukraine?” Ignatius then asked after Kendall finished with his full answer to the initial question.

“General Brown addressed that question this morning about what fighters Ukraine might be interested in. That’s largely up to Ukraine. … Older U.S. systems are a possibility,” Kendall said in response. “We will be open to discussions with them on what their requirements are and how we might be able to satisfy them.”

The US would be open to discuss giving its A-10 “Warthog” ground attack aircraft to Ukraine, the US Secretary of the @usairforce has indicated. Frank Kendall listed the ageing warplanes as among those the Air Force will be ditching to focus more $$ on modern programmes. 1/

·

Asked if the US could give the A-10s to Ukraine, the @usairforce Secretary Frank Kendall tells #AspenSecurity it is largely up to Kyiv and its needs: “We will be open to discussions with them on what their requirements are and how we might be able to satisfy them” 2/2

“I can’t speculate what aircraft they may go to,” Gen. Brown had said when he was asked a question about U.S.-based training for Ukrainian pilots during his own separate talk at Aspen. “It’ll be something non-Russian.”

Brown did note that European offerings, as well as American ones, could be possibilities.

Last week, members of the U.S. House of Representatives voted to include approval for funding for the training of Ukrainian fighter pilots in a draft of the annual defense policy bill, or National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), for the 2023 Fiscal Year. That legislation still needs to be finalized, then reconciled with a separate version now advancing in the Senate, before Congress can put it to a final vote, after which it could go to President Joe Biden’s desk to be signed into law.

Kendall and Brown’s remarks today are notably different from the responses they gave to questions about sending A-10s to Ukraine in March, where both individuals more pointedly stressed that there were no active plans to do or even discussions about the possibility of such a transfer.

“I’m not aware of any current plan, or even any discussion of a current plan to field or provide A-10s to the Ukrainians,” Kendall had told reporters at the Air Force Association’s Air Warfare Symposium, according to Breaking Defense.

“I’m not aware of any discussions or plans inside the United States Air Force to provide A-10s to Ukraine,” Brown said at the same event.

The matter of sending A-10s, as well as other western combat jets, to Ukraine has certainly been raised multiple times since Russia launched its all-out invasion in February. So far, the Biden administration has resisted these calls, which have come from members of Congress, Ukrainian officials and members of that country’s military, and the general public, among others. U.S. authorities have typically cited concerns about how such deliveries could escalate the conflict and increase the risk of spillover outside of Ukraine.

That attitude has been steadily changing in recent weeks, including with the transfer of High Mobility Artillery Rocket Systems (HIMARS) along with precision-guided rounds and plans to send medium-range National Advanced Surface to Air Missile Systems (NASAMS). The potential delivery of systems like these to Ukrainian forces had been seen as totally off-limits just a few months ago.

On Monday, Ukrainian Defense Minister Oleksii Reznikov Tweeted out that he had spoken with U.S. Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin and that his American counterpart had “some very good news, but details will come a little later.” This, of course, could just be a reference to the U.S. government’s new pledge today to send more HIMARS, which have had a notable impact on the conflict already.

Not long ago, the very idea of sending A-10s to Ukraine, or anywhere else, would have been a largely moot conversation. Congress has for years blocked the Air Force from divesting any of its Warthogs, with legislators continually demanding assurances first that the service will not lose critical close air support capabilities as a result of any decision. This long-standing position is now softening. The current version of the House’s NDAA acquiesces to the Air Force’s proposal to retire 21 A-10s in the coming fiscal year. The Senate Armed Services Committee announced on Monday that theirs does, too.

Other potential political hurdles look to have disappeared, as well. In 2003, the Air Force argued against a potential lease of A-10 aircraft to the Colombian Air Force in part because of concerns about blowback from the State Department, which had asked about acquiring a fleet of Warthogs for conversion into armored platforms to spray herbicides in support of counter-narcotics operations in Latin America.

By all indications, the State Department’s Air Wing, a large if obscure organization that you can read more about here, looks to have moved beyond any interest it might have had in using A-10s for this purpose. It acquired a number of former U.S. military OV-10 Broncos and converted them into armored spray aircraft before divesting them in favor of modified commercial crop dusters.

Of course, whether or not Ukraine receives any A-10s still very much remains to be seen. The concerns the Air Force has about the Warthog’s vulnerabilities in environments full of higher-end air defenses apply to the conflict in Ukraine, where aircraft on both sides face significant threats on a daily basis. At the same time, the A-10 was built to survive heavy battle damage and be fixed quickly and returned to service. They can also operate from austere airfields with a relatively small footprint. These characteristics all suit Ukraine ideally. It’s also worth noting that the Ukrainian Air Force is still flying far less capable Su-25 Frogfoots – a very rough Soviet-era counterpart to the A-10 – on missions daily.

Both American and Ukrainian officials would have to decide how other factors, such as training and logistical requirements, might play into the practicality of transferring any number of A-10s, as well as what weapons would be available to them if they were supplied to Ukrainians. The aircraft has some sensitive systems that would likely need to be removed prior to such a transfer, as well.

With regards to training demands, “thanks to prior military exchange programs, Ukraine already has a small number of pilots trained to fly the A-10,” retired Air Force Gen. Philip Breedlove, who served for a time as head of U.S. European Command (EUCOM), and Kurt Volker, a former U.S. Special Representative for Ukraine Negotiations, wrote in an op-ed that the Center for European Policy Analysis think tank published in MarchThe War Zone has not been able to confirm this.

All this being said, if any A-10s do eventually appear in the skies over Ukraine, it could well help put the debate about their ability to operate in higher-end threat environments to rest for good, for better or worse. At the same time, foisting A-10s off to Ukraine could finally give the Air Force brass the cover it needs to draw down the fleet once and for all.

Contact the author: joe@thedrive.com

………………………………

On FB page; Nova Odesa appeared the following (translation) :

🇺🇸 The United States is ready to discuss the transfer to Ukraine the legendary A-10 Thunderbolt II “Borodavočnik”
“Many decisions depend on Kiev and its needs, we are open to discussing the demands and how we can meet them,” U.S. Air Secretary Frank Kendall told a journalist who inquired about the possibility of transmitting aircraft data.
“Borodavočnik”) is an American single-engineered assault vehicle designed for the onslaught of land troops, defeating tanks, armored vehicles, other terrestrial purposes.
Serial production of the A-10 was completed in 1984 after building 715 aircraft.


https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairchild_Republic_A-10_Thunderbolt_II

10 comments

  1. As with everything else, it all depends on Biden. I would’ve given Ukraine the A-10s before the war already. They would’ve had a feeding frenzy along that stuck 40 mile convoy in the early part of the war, for instance. Thousands of vehicles and pieces of equipment would have been turned into junk by a single squadron by now.
    But, old sleepy has no inkling about military matters, and so he has no idea what value an A-10 has. He never served. While studying at the University of Delaware and Syracuse University, Biden obtained five student draft deferments, at a time when most draftees were sent to the Vietnam War.

    Liked by 4 people

  2. I agree the A10s should have already been given and would have made very quick work of many a rashist convoy. A-10s tend to move low and slow but as article mentioned they were built to survive heavy battle damage and be fixed quickly. Having a small footprint is also a plus. They would be a step up from the Frogfoot that I didn’t know the UAF has. Hope if provided they don’t strip them down too bad. For ground support they are very formidable. Having that wonderful sound of brrrrrrrrrrtt rain down on your enemies can be a real life saver. May the powers that be provide this and many other much needed aircraft to ensure that Ukraine is victorious.

    Liked by 4 people

  3. If the Gau-8 has been reinstalled (I understand that the 8s have been replaced by 20mm guns) then it would be ab excellent addition to the UAF, and a nasty one for the Orcs.

    Liked by 2 people

  4. I love the aircraft for its futuristic looks, but it is not what Ukraine needs.
    The U.S. only keeps them because the Congress likes brrrrrt. And yes, I am grateful of that, but that doesn’t make them less obsolete.

    I think they aren’t better than the SU-25, they are slow and not as manœuvrable and they fire inaccurately. The British army hates them as they lack precision and there are incidents with friendly fire. They have even requested not to use them anymore.

    I think F-16’s are much more useful and they can fulfill basically any role the A-10’s can, except for looking awesome.

    A-10’s aren’t suitable in area’s with heavy anti-air defences such as Kherson or the Donbas. Yes they are rugged, but only against small arms fire.

    I would say, keep the A-10’s just because we all love them despite its flaws and because they are feared, and give Ukraine some proper multirole fighters such as the F-16 which can be used for close air support just as well and have a greater chance of survival.

    The A-10 is too awesome to lose, so don’t use them for any adversary more dangerous than the Taliban or IS.

    The U.S. has plenty of mothballed F-16’s from the first generations and there are still existing production lines, so why bother giving them A-10’s?

    Like

Leave a Reply to RedSquareMaidan Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.