The Air Force’s decision to award the contract to Fairchild Republic—which went on to build the A-10 Warthog—proved to be one of the greatest decisions Pentagon acquisitions experts have ever made.
In the aftermath of the Vietnam War, the United States military realized it needed to have a dedicated Close-Air Support (CAS) warplane. During the Vietnam War, multiple jets were available to conduct CAS mission sets.
Platforms, such as the F-100 Super Sabre or the F-105 Thunderchief often filled this role. But these systems were not designed to be CAS warplanes. Thus, they often struggled in this role. And the military’s A-1 Skyraider, while somewhat better than the other planes, was aging and nearly obsolete by the war’s end.
As a result of this realization, the United States Air Force initiated the A-X Program. In that program, the Fairchild Republic YA-10 was pitted against the Northrop YA-9. Their head-to-head evaluation in 1972 would determine the Air Force CAS doctrine.
After reviewing their performance in the Vietnam War, one of the conclusions for the Air Force was that the use of multirole warplanes to conduct CAS missions was ineffective. Planes not designed specifically for this purpose often caused greater losses—both from anti-aircraft systems and from small arms fire on the ground—than they were meant to prevent.
The Air Force’s A-X Program
As part of the A-X Program, the Air Force set out a list of parameters for a warplane specifically devoted to CAS. Among those requirements were a 4,000-foot takeoff distance, a 16,000-pound external load, a 285-mile mission radius, a top speed of 460 miles per hour, a unit cost of $1.4 million (around $11.3 million in today’s dollars).
Most importantly, the A-X Program required the warplane to be built around a potent 30mm cannon that was designed specifically to tear apart Soviet armor. At this time, many in Washington assumed that the Cold War would turn hot at any moment, and they wanted the Air Force ready to meet the challenge of a Soviet Union that was on the move. The plane’s core mission was to annihilate Soviet Army tanks invading Western Europe.
Six defense contractors submitted proposals. On December 18, 1970, the Pentagon selected Northrop and Fairchild as the final two contenders who would build prototypes. Northrop proposed the YA-9 while Fairchild sold the Air Force on the YA-10 (the future A-10).
Northrop’s YA-9 vs. Fairchild’s YA-10
The YA-9 and YA-10 embodied two fundamentally different approaches to the A-X requirements. For Northrop, their YA-9 was a conventional, shoulder-wing monoplane with a sleek, aerodynamic profile reminiscent of an oversized jet trainer. Powered by two Lycoming YF102 turbofan engines, each delivering 7,500 lbs of thrust, it prioritized maneuverability and simplicity. Its high-mounted wings housed self-sealing fuel tanks with foam to reduce fire risk, and its cockpit was encased in an aluminum “bathtub” (intended to be titanium in production) for enhanced pilot protection.
Northrop’s YA-9 featured a large cruciform stabilizer for low-level stability and split ailerons that doubled as airbrakes, enhancing control during strafing runs. Its offset nose gear accommodated a centerline cannon—initially the 20mm M61 Vulcan. But inevitably, the 30mm GAU-8 Avenger, which was still in development, would be installed on whichever of the two planes the Air Force chose.
Fairchild’s YA-10A took a very different—and highly unconventional—approach. The plane was officially designated the “Thunderbolt,” but its ungainly appearance led pilots to call it the “Warthog” instead—and the latter name stuck.
The plane featured twin General Electric TF34 turbofans, each producing 9,065 pounds of thrust and mounted high on the rear fuselage so as to shield them from ground fire and debris ingestion. YA-10’s titanium-armored cockpit and redundant hydraulic systems underscored its focus on durability. Like the YA-9, the YA-10 would carry an M61 Vulcan autocannon during testing, but its overall design was tailored to better integrate the GAU-9, with a layout optimized for low-speed, low-altitude, tank killing.
From October 10 until December 9, 1972, the two prototypes faced off against each other in a rigorous evaluation. More akin to a competition between the two planes as opposed to an evaluation, the systems challenged each other for supremacy at the Air Force’s Joint Test Force at Edwards Air Force Base. The YA-9 first flew on May 30, 1972, followed by the YA-10 on May 10, with second prototypes joining later.
123 total flights of the YA-9 were conducted, with a similar number of flight tests of the YA-10. The evaluations assessed the planes on their maneuverability, weapons delivery, survivability, and rough-field capability.
The YA-9 Was More Elegant—But the YA-10 Was Stronger
Both aircraft met the A-X specifications, but their specific strengths diverged. That was entirely because of the design philosophies that undergirded the YA-9 and YA-10.
Northrop’s YA-9 impressed all the testers with its strafing accuracy, thanks largely to its side-force control system, allowing lateral movement without banking. This was ideal for tracking targets. All the test pilots noted how the YA-9 had fighter-like handling and stability. The YA-9 was also lighter than the YA-10 by about 2,000 pounds. What’s more, the YA-9’s aerodynamic efficiency suggested lower maintenance costs. Yet, the plane’s low-mounted engines risked ingesting debris on rough fields, while its high wings complicated rearming because ground crews struggled to easily access hardpoints.
Fairchild’s YA-10 was slower than the YA-9, reaching a top speed of only 420 mph versus the YA-9’s 523 mph. But the YA-10’s survivability was infinitely better than was the survivability of the YA-9. Indeed, the YA-10’s loiter time was significantly longer, meaning more air support could be delivered—perhaps making the difference between victory and defeat on the ground. Pilots noted that the controls of the YA-10 were more sluggish than the fighter-like controls of the YA-9, but this had the advantage of contributing to a more stable flight profile. In short, YA-10 effectively prioritized troop support over agility—and that was the whole point of the plane.
YA-10’s cannon placement was also key to its CAS mission set. And the YA-10’s high engines and long landing gear ensured that these birds could conduct a variety of operations from underdeveloped, forward airbases.
Fairchild designed the YA-10 with a low-wing configuration, which meant that ground crews could rapidly rearm and reequip the bird. This was a practical advantage the YA-10 had over its Northrop competitor, especially considering that the A-X program intended for the warplane that won the bid to be forward-deployed in combat zones.
The Warthog Wins the Race
On January 18, 1973, the Air Force declared the YA-10 the winner. The plane’s use of the proven TF34 engine, already in service with the S-3 Viking, reduced development risk compared to the untested YF102 of the YA-9. The smaller firm, Fairchild Republic, was much more thorough in its testing program, ensuring that their YA-10 model was much closer to the A-X production standards than was Northrop’s YA-9.
The Air Force’s decision to give the A-X bid to Fairchild Republic proved to be one of the greatest decisions Pentagon acquisitions experts have ever made. The YA-10 became the A-10 Thunderbolt II (or Warthog), and would go on to become one of the Air Force’s most storied planes, serving in every conflict from the Desert Storm to the present. A rugged, purpose-built survivor, the YA-10 was the embodiment of the A-X program—whereas the YA-9 was a great plane not built to specifications.
About the Author: Brandon J. Weichert
Brandon J. Weichert, a Senior National Security Editor at The National Interest as well as a contributor at Popular Mechanics, who consults regularly with various government institutions and private organizations on geopolitical issues. Weichert’s writings have appeared in multiple publications, including the Washington Times, National Review, The American Spectator, MSN, the Asia Times, and countless others. His books include Winning Space: How America Remains a Superpower, Biohacked: China’s Race to Control Life, and The Shadow War: Iran’s Quest for Supremacy. His newest book, A Disaster of Our Own Making: How the West Lost Ukraine is available for purchase wherever books are sold. He can be followed via Twitter @WeTheBrandon.
Image: Wikimedia Commons.
