US Air Force plans to abandon A-10, KC-10 and F-15 aircraft

In terms of funding cuts, on the one hand, and the need to preserve current contracts, on the other, the United States Air Force plans to write off the entire fleet of KC-10 tankers and A-10 attack aircraft, sources close to the US Air Force report.

F-15 fighters may also be charged. In addition, the United States Air Force may refuse to purchase new combat search and rescue helicopters worth 6,8 billions of dollars.

These options are still being discussed, but now we can estimate the scale of the decisions that the Air Force commanders will have to take in anticipation of the planned funding cut over the next ten years.

“Only by disbanding the entire fleet, can you achieve any tangible savings,” commented the situation in the Air Force Times, Chief of Staff of the Air Force, General Mark Welsh. "You can write off the plane, but you can save a lot more if you abolish the entire infrastructure that runs on the Air Force."

Congress will undoubtedly scrutinize the proposals to reduce fleet, especially in the part of the cancellation of 340 A-10 attack aircraft, more than half of which are registered with the US Air Force National Guard. Last year, the Air Force’s proposal to eliminate five A-10 squadrons met stiff resistance from Congress and state governors.

As for tankers KS-10, designed on the basis of the passenger airliner McDonell Douglas DS-10, according to the USAF, their number now totals 59 pieces.

On the agenda is also a possible reduction of the fleet of Eagle F-15 fighters. The Air Force is armed with about 250 of these aircraft, which, together with the F-22 Raptor, form the basis of an arsenal for air combat.

“The Pentagon has repeatedly stated that it wants to get rid of weapons intended for combat only in airspace. Now strange and dangerous things are happening with the budget, so the Air Force can finally get what they want, ”said Richard Aboulafia, an analyst from the consulting company Teal Group, which is engaged in the analysis of the aerospace industry. He notes that A-10 is not particularly effective both for fighting rebel units and for fighting in the framework of the “Turning Point - Asia” tactic, which leaves these aircraft out of work. ” .

"To wage a land war is not very good news. But it seems, judging by the budget, the Pentagon has moved away from this strategy. This is a convenient opportunity for the Air Force to save money and declare victory in this confrontation, ”continues Aboulafia.

Writing off the F-15 will reduce the cost of repairs and upgrades. The released funds can be used to force the supply of the F-35 fighter-bomber.

Rebecca Grant, a former Air Force officer, president of IRIS Research, commented: “This is a desperate step, but risks are present in any of the scenarios. It is possible that it is better to write off the F-15 now than to get the weapons we need with a delay of several years. ”

Comments

[svp67]

US Air Force plans to abandon A-10, KC-10 and F-15 aircraft

Here's what to think - it's time to refuse ....

[T-100]

Let them cut their entire defense industry and defense industry

[Algor73]

They do not cut their military-industrial complex and defense industry, they purposefully go to the intended goal - to create modern air forces of a certain type, writing off obsolete equipment.

[alone]

Quote: Algor73

They do not cut their military-industrial complex and defense industry, they purposefully go to the intended goal - to create modern air forces of a certain type, writing off obsolete equipment.

something, but they don’t suffer from hatred. To the regret, of course.

[roial]

Unlike us, they conserve their decommissioned equipment, rather than cut it. Their storage base This is really a storage base, not a cemetery like ours.

[Evgeny_Lev]

We know, we know.
And to you in an independent, generally high will soon, as the Latvians under the protection of the Germans will walk on the ground.

[Civil]

F-35s are already entering the army

[Lord of the Sith]

I put you a little +. Since the Americans have quite extensive air and tank cemeteries. In the search engine, I think you will find a lot of photos. And there are not gliders of the 30s lying there, but the equipment of the 60-70s.

[Geisenberg]

Quote: roial

Unlike us, they conserve their decommissioned equipment, rather than cut it. Their storage base This is really a storage base, not a cemetery like ours.

A desert in California where 364 days a year are sunny ??? Do not call the cemetery, it remains a cemetery. Usually, everything that gets there goes into parts, less often buy empty cases. In general, the news is good, A-10 will reduce the world will become cleaner - amers will stop using radioactive waste instead of armor-piercing shells.

[roial]

Well, do not tell me, on the network you can find quite a bit of information about the fact that amers sold to someone a batch of aircraft taken from this storage base. That and the spare parts are the right thing, but look at what we are doing at the storage bases - sheer shabby, and theft

[Ustin]

They will not cut it, but as usual they will sell it, well, and the proceeds will be dumped into R&D. The scheme is verified ...

[AVV]

All US Air Force needs to be eliminated! It's easier! And we better !!!

[ElektriK123]

Why is it better for us? Better let the Chinese saw, otherwise they seem to be preparing for a war with us.

[yanus]

Hmm, sharp decisions. Especially in terms of A-10

[Lord of the Sith]

On the A-10 since 2010, there has been talk.

[komsomolets]

The day has begun well today, such good news. Just writing off will not be enough, they still need to be cut. I’m ready to borrow tools, I’m not sorry for anything good.

[alexng]

Decommissioned workaholic and replace with a booty named clumsy ax. Class! Something in the world got messed up for a long time and the reason for this is cheap loot.

[Samy]

Yes, they will not cut them. In Nevada, for storage, and all .... If necessary, they got it, and dust was blown off to third countries.

[Russ69]

Quote: yanus

Hmm, sharp decisions. Especially in terms of A-10

Just started to upgrade them, and to the scrap ...
We need a couple more sequestration budget and US aviation, will be reduced by half, if not more.

[Aaron Zawi]

Quote: Russ69

Just started to upgrade them, and to the scrap ...
We need a couple more sequestration budget and US aviation, will be reduced by half, if not more.

it was originally about 50% of the fleet A-10. In general, the more advanced the machines, the less they are in service.

[spirit]

nonsense! and who will fight with them? f22 which they are afraid to once again send to a hot spot?

[Bigfoot_Sev]

weird. A-10 then why. good plane. he doesn’t seem to have a replacement yet.

= ^ _ ^ =

[Gav-111]

That is why we should welcome such intentions.

[No_more]

Drones come out more profitable, for the execution of a poorly organized and poorly armed enemy, that’s replaced. And against a serious opponent who has a decent A-10 air defense (especially able to protect equipment on the march) are not effective.

[Lord of the Sith]

I add, the A-10 often participated in friendly fire on their own.

[Bigfoot_Sev]

not a weapon kills. kills a man.
it’s dishonest to write off it on a plane.

= ^ _ ^ =

[Bigfoot_Sev]

Quote: No_more

Drones come out more profitable, for the execution of a poorly organized and poorly armed enemy, that’s replaced. And against a serious opponent who has a decent A-10 air defense (especially able to protect equipment on the march) are not effective.

Well, the devil knows him. maverick how much can you spit? wiki says. that on 28. well let it lie. I read about 12 miles somewhere on their forums. it's 20 kilometers. with activation in the target area - this, IMHO, is not bad.

= ^ _ ^ =

[Aaron Zawi]

The fact is that the transition of the US military infrastructure from BV and Europe to the Pacific Ocean is already clearly visible. T / e on the confrontation with China. It means maintaining the viability of obsolete equipment, which cannot be applied in the light of new threats, simply not nationally. It is clear, however, that in the event of a collision with China, there will be no talk of any landing, for military operations are possible only in the air and at sea.

[yanus]

Quote: Aaron Zawi

It means maintaining the viability of obsolete equipment, which cannot be applied in the light of new threats, simply not nationally. It is clear, however, that in the event of a collision with China, there will be no talk of any landing, for military operations are possible only in the air and at sea.

Since they will fight at sea, naturally refueling and fighter aircraft with a large radius need to be cut. They do not need nafig in collisions on the ocean))

[Scoun]

Quote: yanus

Since they will fight at sea, naturally refueling and fighter aircraft with a large radius need to be cut. They do not need nafig in collisions on the ocean))

I agree with Aron
Do you think that flying a few hours with refueling across the ocean flying to the F-15 to gain air supremacy and then flying back .. is that reasonable?
More than sure of the Americans in the first place the use of the Navy - Aircraft, missiles, UAVs and the use of missiles by DA bomber aircraft.

[Scoun]

Quote: Aron Zaavi

The fact is that the transition of the US military infrastructure from BV and Europe to the Pacific Ocean is already clearly visible.

If viewed in this "vein", it is very similar, especially since they declared the Pacific region a priority.

[rolik]

Quote: Aron Zaavi

for hostilities are possible only in the air and at sea.

And when the Chinese landed on the coast of mattress, A-10 would be very useful. Although if the Chinese landed, then the A-10 will not help either.

[0255]

And when the Chinese landed on the coast of mattress, A-10 would be very useful. Although if the Chinese landed, then the A-10 will not help either.

then the Americans will need tactical nuclear weapons))) how is the F-35 doing with nuclear weapons? Or will the US have to be content with the old B-52?

[yanus]

Quote: 0255

How is the F-35 doing with nuclear weapons?

for tactical nuclear weapons carrier F-16

[0255]

for tactical nuclear weapons carrier F-16

perhaps the Americans will have to use on their territory not only tactical, but also strategic nuclear weapons to defend against Chinese landing. The Chinese with MANPADS, RPGs and unlicensed copies of the AK-47 will take in numbers, even if the Americans collect all their A-10, B-2, B-52, F-15E, F-16 and F-35 with Abrams tanks and helicopters "Apache" in the bargain.

[rolik]

Quote: 0255

then the Americans will need tactical nuclear weapons)))

God forbid from this, the Chinese will answer the same. As a result, the universal scribe.

[0255]

God forbid from this, the Chinese will answer the same. As a result, the universal scribe.

but the Chinese will magically solve the problem of overpopulation, regardless of whether they manage to conquer the United States

[rolik]

Quote: 0255

but the Chinese will magically solve the problem of overpopulation,

Yes, God bless them and the Chinese, they feed on cockroaches)))) A complete and hopeless bummer (as they said in one film) will come to all normal people living on our planet. And it’s insulting to understand)))

[clidon]

Of course, the F-35 will be the carrier of tactical ammunition. This will be the main machine of the US Air Force and NATO.

[clidon]

The Chinese will not land. They are not suicides. Such a landing requires a powerful ocean fleet, which the Celestial Empire does not yet possess and will not possess in the near future. So this is a good plot for a Hollywood action movie.

[rolik]

Quote: clidon

. So this is a good plot for a Hollywood action movie.

So .... urgently patent the plot))))

[0255]

The Chinese will not land. They are not suicides. Such a landing requires a powerful ocean fleet, which the Celestial Empire does not yet possess and will not possess in the near future. So this is a good plot for a Hollywood action movie.

So .... urgently patent the plot))))

Americans are attacked only by aliens, or Russia / USSR, sometimes North Korea So such a plot will not work

[Gur]

Oh, it means they started to count money, apparently not everything is so cloudless

[komsomolets]

But isn’t the KS-10 useful for fighting over the Pacific Ocean? And the F-15s are robust cars. Once the F-14s were also decommissioned, although there is no end to work.

[Aaron Zawi]

Quote: komsomolets

But isn’t the KS-10 useful for fighting over the Pacific Ocean? And the F-15s are robust cars. Once the F-14s were also decommissioned, although there is no end to work.

So this is a process. If a gradual write-off is announced, then this may stretch for 5-10 years.

[komsomolets]

But seriously, the Americans are far from fools to know something, if only Russia does not need to monkey-live its own mind, right Aaron?

[bif]

The assassination of the F-15, now the only full-fledged "workhorse" alongside the already buried F-14, is reminiscent of a sepoku for the US Air Force.
The main thing for what? - The released funds can be used to boost the supply of F-35 fighter-bomber... good luck.
As the saying goes "Cut Shura, cut, they are golden" !!!

[0255]

Once, the F-14 was also decommissioned, although there is no end to work for them.

F-14 crashed due to engines, were too heavy for carrier-based. For the bombing of banana republics from which the United States is recapturing oil, the F / A-18 is enough.
From the F-14 they tried to make a competitor to the F / A-18E and deck versions YF-22 and YF-23 (the Americans had such an idea, the program was called NATF - Navy Advanced Tactical Fighter). As a result, both the deck F-22 and the upgraded F-14 with engines from an ATF fighter were abandoned.

[bif]

Quote: 0255

From F-14 they tried to make a competitor to the F / A-18E and deck versions YF-22 and YF-23

Either you made a DESCRIPTION, or your conclusions are not true in the root.
of f-14 could not make a competitor DEFAULT, tk. it appeared earlier than all of the above and has been actively disposed of since the beginning of the 2000's.
Another question is that after its removal from service (the last flight in 2006), they did not find a full replacement ...
There were even interesting offers from senior officials and senior officers to buy Su-33 from the Russian Federation to replace the f-14, but politics and pride did not allow, therefore, from the f-18 Hornet modernization began to make the f-18E \ F (Super Hornet) ...

[clidon]

There were even interesting proposals from senior officials and senior officers to buy from the Russian Federation the Su-33 to replace the f-14

Unless in the form of a joke or is it just another bike. How could the Su-33 be seen as a replacement for the F-14? Especially in the 90s, when his fate was not yet determined, and the production was just what ended?
The F-14 was destroyed by the disappearance of the main enemy, against whom it was actually created - the "hordes" of Soviet bombers with anti-ship missiles. And as a universal machine, it was too expensive to operate and excessive.

[bif]

Quote: clidon

Is it in the form of a joke or is it just another bike

CAN DISCUSS)))
Robert W. Kress and retired Admiral PaulGillicrist.
An article from the February issue of FLIGHT magazine for 1999 year.
"What could be more ironic ... Soviet fighters for the American fleet?" Bob Kress, former Grumman's lead engineer for advanced programs and chief engineer of the F-14 program and retired rear admiral, former naval fighter pilot Paul Gilikrist makes a compelling case .... http: //suavia.info/page/ 22 /
I recommend it, it raises the mood "at once"!

[clidon]

There is a group of pensioners-trolls who write for a popular magazine, not "high officials" and "high-ranking officers." )) This is from the category "let's buy Russian ejection seats", and does not smell of any formality.

[bif]

and here it can’t be official, but I said that there was an OFFER ... and about pensioners-trolls, well, the troll student knows better, as the odd one says, an eccentric sees from afar.

[clidon]

Judging by the boorish hitting you go out schoolboy? This was not an OFFER from officials (high officials, senior officers), but an ARTICLE which was placed by retirees in the popular MAGAZINE. If you do not see the difference, then I can only sympathize with you.

[0255]

of f-14 could not make a competitor DEFAULT, tk. it appeared earlier than all of the above and has been actively disposed of since the beginning of the 2000's.

The following options have been developed or are being researched that were not built in series:
"Tomcat" 21 - a multipurpose fighter, investigated by the company in 1988-1991 on its own initiative, and proposed as an alternative to the carrier-based NATF version of the ATF (F-22) ground-based fighter. In addition to the improvements planned for the Quickstrike, it is planned to install new flaps, enlarged slats and wing roots with additional fuel tanks placed in them;
ASF-14 is another alternative to the deck-based version of the NATF ATF ground-based fighter (F-22). It is intended to use equipment and engines designed for the ATF aircraft.

in early 1992, the U.S. Navy resumed research on new F-14 variants (F-14A ++ and F-14A / B +) as an alternative to the F / A-18E. The reason is the high development cost of the F / A-18E. There are also fears that the F / A-18E aircraft will not be effective enough as an interceptor: it was assumed that it would be armed with AAAM long-range air-to-air missiles, but in early 1992 the development of this missile was canceled. About 14 previously built F-14A aircraft can be modified in the F-250A ++ or F-14A / B + variant.

source http://paralay.com/f14/f14.html, article from the book "Modern fighters", M. A. Levin and V. E. Ilyin,
1994 year.
So I'm not mistaken

There were even interesting proposals from senior officials and senior officers to buy the Su-33 from the Russian Federation to replace the f-14, but politics and pride did not allow it, so the f-18E \ F (Super Hornet) was made from the f-18 Hornet by modernization. ..

I know that. The Chinese are not copying it very much, so it would still go to our overseas "partners". So let them suffer with the F-35

[bif]

proposed researching new F-14 options it was supposed that he would
those. an article about what COULD BE ... subject to the successful further modernization of the f-14 ... It turns out that the competitors should have been a modernized Tombcat, and not "in service."
Those. as the saying goes, "if the grandmother had eggs, she would be a grandfather."

[Gur]

On the one hand, they are beginning to save on the Air Force, and on the other, they are ready to start a new war in mine through the war, and they wanted to write off the extra money for the defense industry, which means that the price of peace in Syria is to write off planes

[brabbiseWess]

I will not say that it is solid, but I’m not sure that this is true.

[Vitaly Anisimov]

They are lying! They write off (or rather they will sell it to their satellites ..) Amer never saves on armaments. Especially in the last decade .. The printing press, like military factories, is operating at high revs .. They are being prepared hard!

[chunga-changa]

Cutting old planes means buying new ones. Decommissioned f-15, ks-10 is mkdonelDouglas, purchased f-22,35 lockheed. Lockheed tears competitors like a tusik hot-water bottle, I think decent means are paid to lobbyists. A sort of grin of capitalism, as they say, nothing personal, only business.

[0255]

Cutting old planes means buying new ones. Decommissioned f-15, ks-10 is mkdonelDouglas, purchased f-22,35 lockheed. Lockheed vomits competitors like an ace heating pad

already Boeing, not McDonnell Douglas

[smiths xnumx]

The first combat use of the A-10 attack aircraft occurred during the 1991 Gulf War. In total, 144 aircraft of this type were involved in the operation, performing approximately 8100 sorties with a loss of 7 aircraft (on average, one loss per 1350 sorties). In one departure, a pair of Thunderbolts destroyed 23 Iraqi tanks and damaged 10; while hunting for launchers of the Scud A-10 tactical missiles, 6 stationary, 3 temporary and 3 mobile launchers were destroyed in one night. During the fighting, attack aircraft shot down two Iraqi helicopters (Mi-8 and presumably MBB Bo 105).
In Operation Desert Storm, the A-10 was also demonstrated for the first time. One of the Thunderbolts suffered severe wing damage; According to the ground technician, "No other plane would return to base."
Severe damage to the tail of the A-10A as a result of non-contact detonation of the warhead of the Igla-1 MANPADS missile. The plane has been repaired. Gulf War, 1991.

From airbases in Italy, the Thunderbolts took part in the NATO military operation against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia in 1999. There were no losses, but Worthog’s high survivability was again confirmed when on May 2 this type of aircraft made an emergency landing at Skopje Airport (Macedonia) on one engine. The second engine was completely shot and later shown on Yugoslav television.

A total of 2003 A-60 attack aircraft took part in Operation Freedom of Iraq in March – April 10. One plane was shot down on April 7 at the Baghdad International Airport. Another Thunderbolt suffered severe damage (one engine was damaged, hydraulic system failed, hundreds of holes in the wing, plumage and fuselage of the aircraft), but the pilot, Captain Kim Campbell, managed to land the aircraft successfully at the air base. After the completion of the main phase of hostilities and with the beginning of the partisan war, the A-10 continued to be used in Iraq.
Damage sustained by Captain Kim Campbell’s plane over Iraq.

[rolik]

Quote: Kuznetsov 1977

The first combat use of the A-10 attack aircraft occurred during the Gulf War

No one says that the plane is bad, a good car. And the beginning of the Thunderbolt line was laid by Russian inventors Alexander Cartvelli and Alexander Seversky. True, the first Thunderbolt (R-47) was created to accompany the flying Fortresses.

[V. Tarasyan]

Well, actually between the R-47 and A-10 the difference is significant. These are completely different machines, both in purpose and in design. What they have in common is that the name is the same and that both are low-winged. Although both cars turned out to be quite successful for their requirements.

[rolik]

Quote: V. Tarasyan

Well, actually between the R-47 and A-10 the difference is significant.

Well, actually everyone knows that the first Thunder is a fighter, the second is a ground attack aircraft. But, with the fighter, the history of the aircraft with the name Thunderbolt began.

[V. Tarasyan]

To be honest, I just don't understand how the story of the attack aircraft of the same name can begin with a fighter. So we can say that the history, for example, of the Varyag missile cruiser began with that very heroic cruiser, which does not surrender to the enemy. There is nothing in common between them, not a single technical solution in the new ship came from the old one. There is only one similarity between them, that both are warships (I almost wrote that they sail on the sea, but the sailors, to put it mildly, will laugh at me for this ) Inheritance implies some kind of continuity of technical solutions, but in this case I never see it once. Although, maybe, in this case, I am engaged in literary studies, but this, apparently, is an imprint of the profession.

[b-612]

"..but the pilot, Captain Kim Campbell, managed to successfully land the plane at the airbase." oh how!)

[Lord of the Sith]

A-10 107 Including all losses (including combat) for the entire period of operation.

http://www.airwar.ru/history/locwar/lamerica/poteri/poteri_usa.html

[fastblast]

good car a-10

And what options in the future can come to replace, is there information?

[Lord of the Sith]

But they all unify and want only the F-22 and three variants of the F-35

[0255]

good car a-10
And what options in the future can come to replace, is there information?

F-35V was supposed to replace the A-10, but this idea was abandoned. Although the Pentagon, in any case, will force the US Air Force to purchase a new flying iron. Yes, and the A-10 has probably already exhausted the resource, yet the planes are no longer new.

[fastblast]

Guys thanks!
In general, I plan to replace multi-purpose ones.
They certainly know better there, maybe it will be more rational.

[Vorkot cat]

Americans will certainly not cut planes.
It's not in their style, very dogmatic, but there are buyers, all of South America flies on decommissioned US planes, you don’t have to go far

[USNik]

He notes that the A-10s are not particularly effective for combating rebel units ...

Well, yes, of course, the F-35 will cope with slippers much faster, cheaper and more efficiently ...

[Bort radist]

We went through this, your turn, gentlemen.
And the news is not in the topic, but the winged ones will look here.
The Lyulka Research and Development Bureau developed, manufactured and tested a prototype of a pulsating resonant detonation engine with a two-stage combustion of a kerosene-air mixture.In the future, on the basis of new technologies, engines can be created for space rocket systems and combined power plants of aircraft capable of flying in the atmosphere and beyond.
According to the design bureau, the new engines will increase the thrust-weight ratio of aircraft by 1,5-2 times. In addition, when using such power plants, the flight range or the mass of aviation weapons can increase by 30-50 percent. In this case, the specific gravity of new engines will be 1,5-2 times less than that of conventional reactive power plants. ITAR-TASS.
http://www.city-n.ru/view/329833.html

[Vorkot cat]

These developments in the USSR have been conducted since the 60s, so there is nothing surprising.

Science - Respect)

[New Russia]

"write off the entire fleet of KC-10 tankers and A-10 attack aircraft" Idiots solution subsonic attack aircraft are always needed and will be needed for many more decades

[aszzz888]

Sorry, who will be needed?

[New Russia]

To everyone who is going to fight)

[pinecone]

The final decision has not yet been made. The machines are tested, "run-in", so it is quite possible that some of them will remain in service.
To the author. With regard to aviation technology, it is customary for us to say the park, and not the fleet.

[ka5280]

When 16 trillion of debt, then it's time to think about saving.

[January]

Would close half of the military bases abroad - that would cut the budget by half

[New Russia]

Do you really believe that they are fighting out of stupidity or is this not part of a big plan?) No one is going to close anything to us instead of stupid and thoughtless hysterics "the Americans are to blame for everything" we need to understand the obvious plan that the next target will be Russia with its millions of Wahhabis migrants and think that do with it

[Lord of the Sith]

By the way, there are about 800 of them.

[clidon]

In a crisis, their programs are reduced by almost everything, except, perhaps, the Chinese. And even that is possible because they do not particularly advertise their plans.
The write-off of the F-15C and KS-10 is not too surprising - the former have sequestered more than once, due to the obsolescence of the airframe, the latter are also quite a logical candidate. But the A-10, despite the age, is quite necessary for the Air Force and peppy horse. Which was very in demand in local conflicts.
However, this is all just plans so far, who and how many really will be cut when they say that the lobbyist battles in Congress will rattle off about this.

[0255]

and they probably have the Aurora bomber instead of the A-10, which supposedly flies at a speed of M = 6 ... 7

[clidon]

This bike is probably 25 years old. )

[0255]

This bike is probably 25 years old. )

I know that this is an ancient bike, I'm joking))) instead of A-10 they will use, most likely, F-35, maybe even UAVs

[darksidewarrior]

The budget allocated for disposal will be sawn.
the budget allocated for the purchase of F-35 will be ..... sawn.
they’ve been sawing their economy for a long time, and it’s more profitable for sawmills than ours.

[gameover65]

a campaign with people they have a specific crisis. they switch to UAVs from the fact that they cannot recruit people with a certain IQ in flight schools. pilots are retiring, and there is no one to replace. here and write off planes. they simply solve the issue of money - they turn on the machine. it's harder with people.

[0255]

a campaign with people they have a specific crisis. they switch to UAVs from the fact that they cannot recruit people with a certain IQ in flight schools. pilots are retiring, and there is no one to replace. here and write off planes. they simply solve the issue of money - they turn on the machine. it's harder with people.

we can agree with this statement

[clidon]

What makes you think that there’s a crisis with people? UAV is the ability to conduct operations without losses, reduce the cost of a combat unit.