Bill Blocks A-10 Retirement

[Indus Falcon]

House Spending Bill Blocks A-10 Retirement
Jun. 20, 2014
By BRIAN EVERSTINE

A pair of US Air Force A-10 Thunderbolts fly near a KC-135 Stratotanker during an aerial refueling mission. (Tech. Sgt. Jeff Walston/Air Force)
The US House of Representatives on Thursday evening, during deliberation on the fiscal 2015 defense spending bill, voted to block the US Air Force’s plan to cut the entire A-10 fleet.

The chamber approved the an amendment, offered by Rep. Candice Miller, R-Mich., that would prohibit the Defense Department from using money to divest, retire, transfer or place in storage any A-10 aircraft, along with blocking the department from preparing to cut any of the aircraft.

The vote is the latest in a month long battle between the Defense Department and Congress on the future of the aging, popular aircraft. The Air Force has said it would save about $3.7 billion by cutting all 283 of the attack aircraft.

The service’s plan would replace the A-10 mission in Air National Guard and Air Force Reserve units with F-15, F-16 or C-130 missions. Active-duty units at Davis-Monthan Air Force Base, Arizona, and Moody Air Force Base, Georgia, would not get a replacement mission.

Air Force Secretary Deborah Lee James told reporters Wednesday that while the A-10 is a “terrific aircraft,” it is a single-mission aircraft whose mission can be covered by other aircraft. The service still has time to convince Congress that its plan is the best course of action, she said.

“We have to continue to get our message out, we need to continue to explain that we have to move on, that we have these other missions that we need most of the units to do with other aircraft,” James said. “They’re more enduring, they’re more important for our future, and if you do not agree with us, Congress, at the end of the day, please give us the money.”

The proposal has met harsh opposition since it was first introduced, with opponents in both the House and Senate vowing to block it.

The House already approved the fiscal 2015 National Defense Authorization Act, which included an amendment to block the A-10 retirement plans. Language in the bill states that the U.S. comptroller general would make multiple certifications and complete studies on the impact of retiring the A-10.

The Senate Armed Services Committee, in its markup of the authorization bill, also prohibits the retirement of the A-10, along with plans to cut any Airborne Warning and Control Aircraft.

The House on Thursday also approved an amendment from Rep. Jon Runyan, R-N.J., that blocks any funds from being used to cut KC-10 Extender refueling aircraft. The service has said it would need to cut all KC-10s if forced to make extensive budget cuts under continued sequestration.

Runyan said on the floor that the retirement of the KC-10 would be “completely unacceptable” before the next-generation tanker, the KC-46A Pegasus, comes on line in 2017.

House Spending Bill Blocks A-10 Retirement | Defense News | defensenews.com

 

[nomi007]

why Pakistan is not asking them for 24-36 a-10 for close air support

 

[Indus Falcon]

why Pakistan is not asking them for 24-36 a-10 for close air support

They could very well lease it to us if they don't want to sell it!

 

[T90TankGuy]

These A10 are close to retirement . Why would Pakistan want them? plus setting up the infrastructure for this aircraft its self would be expensive and time consuming.

 

[Indus Falcon]

US House approves defence spending bill, blocks A-10 retirement
By: Stephen Trimble
Washington DC
4 hours ago


The US House of Representatives voted on 19 June to block a US Air Force proposal to retire the Fairchild Republic A-10 attack fighter next year.

By approving the A-10 amendment filed by Representative Candice Miller by a 300-114 vote, the full membership of the House also thwarted a previous vote by the defence appropriations committee to retire the close air support specialist.

Miller added the amendment to the House version of a $491 billion Fiscal 2015 defence appropriations bill, which members approved on 20 June by a 340-73 vote.

Miller, who represents a district that includes an A-10 base, defended the A-10 as ideally suited to the close air support mission.

“The air force wants to save money, but they don’t have an adequate follow-on at this time, and, with what’s happening in Iraq and the Middle East, eliminating the A-10 is the absolute wrong move,” Miller said as she introduced the amendment.

It was not clear if the House added funds to cover the roughly $900 million cost of operating the A-10 fleet each year. The overall House bill adds only $200 million to the funding level requested by the Obama Administration, which had omitted funding for the A-10.

The House also passed an amendment that blocks the air force from retiring the Boeing KC-10 tanker fleet in Fiscal 2015.

As the debate over defence appropriations heads to the Senate, the House version of the bill shows that strong support remains for new acquisition of military aircraft despite an trend of overall declining spending.

In February, the Obama Administration submitted a budget proposing to retire the A-10, the Bell Helicopter OH-58D and the Lockheed Martin U-2 fleets. The House version of the bill would rescue the A-10 and U-2 fleets from the boneyard next year, but allow the army’s armed scout helicopter to retire.

The Obama Administration also proposed trimming next year’s lot of F-35s from 42 aircraft to 34, but the House version of the bill would split the difference and buy 38 aircraft.

The House version also would buy 12 Boeing EA-18Gs next year, overturning the Pentagon’s decision to mothball the production line.

Manned and unmanned surveillance aircraft fleets also won support in the House version. The bill would double the number of General Atomics Aeronautical Systems MQ-9 unmanned air vehicles to 24 and raise the number of acquired Northrop Grumman E-2Ds by one to five.

US House approves defence spending bill, blocks A-10 retirement - 6/20/2014 - Flight Global

 

[Indus Falcon]

Older News but interesting figures!! Post#5 has the latest news on funding by program.

House Panel Approves Massive Pentagon Spending Bill
Jun. 10, 2014 - 05:59PM |
By JOHN T. BENNETT

WASHINGTON— A US House panel on Tuesday approved $570 billion in Pentagon spending for 2015, but became the first committee to support retiring the A-10 fleet.

After several hours of debating and voting on amendments, the House Appropriations Committee easily approved a $491 billion defense appropriations bill and a separate $79.4 billion overseas contingency operations (OCO), or war funding, section.

That matches the Obama administration’s request for both when the spending level of a separate military construction bill — which the full House already has approved — is factored in.

In a major victory for the Pentagon and US arms makers, the bill proposes $63.4 billion for weapons research and development, nearly $370 million above the 2014 enacted amount and $171 million more than the administration sought.

Aided by $2.1 billion worth of items the committee identified within the Pentagon’s spending request that it could avoid funding, including $592 million that the Pentagon overestimated it needed for civilian personnel costs, it was able to overturn some proposed weapon system cuts and add funds for platforms the military did not request.

Case in point: electronic warfare aircraft for the Navy.

The sea service’s 2015 request did not ask for any E/A-18G Growler electronic warfare jets, but the full panel signed off on its Defense subcommittee’s proposal to shift $975 million for 12 Growlers the Navy publicly admitted it really wanted but excluded from its request.

The committee shot down an amendment, offered by Rep. Jack Kingston, R-Ga., that would have blocked an Air Force plan to retire its A-10 fleet to cut costs. It was defeated, with 13 yays and 23 nos, via a show of hands.

It would have proposed transferring from other parts of the Air Force’s operations and maintenance account $339.3 million “for sustainment of A-10 aircraft operations.”

The vote made HAC the first congressional defense panel to endorse the service’s A-10 retirement plan.

The panel’s bill, which should be on the House floor before the chamber’s annual August recess, would provide the Pentagon $91.2 billion to send to arms manufacturers. That would be $1.6 billion more than the Obama administration requested.

Specifically, it calls for $5.8 billion next year to buy 38 Lockheed Martin-made F-35 fighters, four more than requested.

Following the lead of the House and Senate Armed Services committees, the House Appropriations defense subpanel wants to maintain an 11-aircraft carrier fleet. It found $789 million to shift toward refueling the USS George Washington, which would keep that number of flattops in the active rotation.

In another win for Boeing, the bill includes $1.6 billion for the Air Force’s KC-46A aerial tanker program.

In addition to the aerial tanker and F-35, the bill would fund the Air Force’s new long-range bomber program, the Navy’s unmanned carrier-based drone aircraft initiative, the sea service’s next-generation submarine, the Army-Marine Corps Joint Light Tactical Vehicle effort, the Navy’s P8-A multimission maritime aircraft initiative and the RQ-4 Triton drone aircraft program for the Navy and Air Force.

During hearings this year on the 2015 defense spending request, senior civilian and uniformed officials said ongoing sequestration cuts would make the military less ready to conduct missions around the world.

Panel Chairman Hal Rogers, R-Ky., said the legislation contains funds to address those worries by proposing to purchase weapons needed by US troops.

To that end, “the bill includes an additional $1.2 billion to fill readiness shortfalls, [and] $721 million to restore unrealistic reductions in the president’s request to facility sustainment and modernization,” according to a committee summary of the bill.

The amendment also would slap limitations on the use of American dollars to buy Russian-made helicopters unless senior US national security officials certify that Russian leaders have ceased doing things like sending arms to Syria’s military. It also would limit use of the funds for the Rosoboronexport-made choppers until Russian forces have withdrawn from Crimea, as well as other measures.

The committee killed an amendment offered by Rep. Jeff Fortenberry, R-Neb., that would have prohibited any Pentagon funds from being spent to arm rebel forces in Syria next year.

Opponents of the measure argued it would have tied President Barack Obama’s hands to respond in any fashion to the years-long and bloody civil war there.

Members approved the $79.4 billion OCO amount, but Democrats joined Republicans in criticizing the Obama administration for being months late in sending the actual war-funding request to the Hill.

The White House said late last month it was “finalizing” that request, but it has yet to tell lawmakers when it should arrive.

The committee also killed an amendment offered by Democratic Rep. Shelia Jackson-Lee of Texas that would have required regular reports from the executive branch detailing each US action under the post-9/11 authorization of military force (AUMF).

Opponents of the measure, like Defense subcommittee Chairman Rep. Rodney Frelinghuysen, R-N.J., argued it would have given US foes such as al-Qaida “a roadmap” of American counterterrorism tactics. Lee shot back that it would not have done so because it could have been classified.

She also expressed disappointment with her colleagues, saying Congress too often “abdicates” its war powers to the executive branch.

The bill could be on the House floor next week, but a final decision on timing has not yet been made.
House Panel Approves Massive Pentagon Spending Bill | Defense News | defensenews.com

 

[Indus Falcon]

Update on the bill that was actually passed:

US Congress Passes $570 Billion Defense Bill

 

[GreenFalcon]

Update on the bill that was actually passed:

US Congress Passes $570 Billion Defense Bill

Wow, is that the most Defense budget by any country?

 

[Indus Falcon]

Wow, is that the most Defense budget by any country?

Yes, it is. Btw it does not include the intelligence agency budgets which is a couple of billions each.

 

[GreenFalcon]

Yes, it is. Btw it does not include the intelligence agency budgets which is a couple of billions each.

Wow if only that money would reach the poor and needy, the world would be a better place

 

[Kompromat]

Regan offered Pakistan A-10s but at that time we didn't need them. If we could get up to 25 A-10s, it will be a gigantic edge in WOT.

 

[Luftwaffe]

No need to retire all A-10s should cut the Numbers from some 350 to 8 Squadrons around 150 that would be sufficient until F-35s arrive to replace them completely.

 

[Indus Falcon]

Regan offered Pakistan A-10s but at that time we didn't need them. If we could get up to 25 A-10s, it will be a gigantic edge in WOT.

If I'm not mistaken it was at the cost of the F-16's; i.e. a reduction in the number of vipers?

 

[Kompromat]

If I'm not mistaken it was at the cost of the F-16's; i.e. a reduction in the number of vipers?

Pakistan didn't need A-10s, we needed something to shoot down Soviet, Afghan and Indian jets. PAF when it received F-16s had technological dominance in the region.