GAO: Better Information Needed to Support Air Force A-10 retirement

One way to interpret the GAO's intent there (not necessarily my stance on the matter, just how I'm interpreting GAO's position):

The people who send the A-10s out to do their thing may recognize situations when it is useful as they arise, but fail to consider them when listing out requirements for a replacement. The concern then would be that once the A-10 is retired and the decision makers run into a situation they failed to recall when dropping the A-10 that is now without a suitable system to resolve.

I know a lot of the things I've done in past jobs were routine - I did them without thinking about it. Had I trained a replacement, I'd have been hard pressed to ensure I covered everything they'd need unless I made a point to start recording what I was doing and creating a list.

The prior system in place wasn't sufficiently good, and it needs to be remedied now before continuing. Had it been considered when the A-10 was new, all the better, but it's too late now.


If my interpretation is correct, then I think the GAO's stance is a stretch - I'd like to think war is not sufficiently routine here, and that it is sufficiently studied that there's no meaningful chance of forgetting something. However, it's not completely without merit.

/r/LessCredibleDefence Thread Parent Link - gao.gov