US Air Force prepares to transfer A-10 Warthog’s combat search-and-rescue role to advanced jets such as the F-35

The US Air Force is moving to retire most of its A-10 Thunderbolt II fleet and shift key missions such as combat search and rescue to newer aircraft like the F-35A and F-16. The transition marks the end of an era for a jet that became synonymous with low-level rescue support and close air protection for troops on the ground. It also raises hard questions about how the service will recover downed aircrews in future high-threat wars where survivability and speed matter as much as firepower.

What happened

The Air Force has begun an aggressive drawdown of the A-10, cutting roughly half of the fleet in recent budget cycles while keeping a smaller number in service for a few more years. Officials have argued that the aging airframe, which first flew in the 1970s, is increasingly vulnerable to modern air defenses and too expensive to upgrade for a fight against near-peer adversaries. As part of that shift, the service is reallocating missions that the A-10 long dominated, including close air support and on-call overwatch for rescue forces, to multi-role fighters and bombers.

In public plans, the Air Force has laid out a path to retire entire A-10 squadrons and consolidate remaining jets at a few locations. Reporting on the drawdown describes how the service is cutting the fleet roughly in half while still refusing to eliminate it entirely, a compromise that keeps some aircraft available for training and limited operations but signals a clear endgame for the type. Analysts note that this approach allows the Air Force to free up maintenance and manpower for newer platforms such as the F-35A while managing political resistance in states that host A-10 units, as detailed in coverage of why the service is cutting half the.

The A-10’s exit coincides with a broader rethinking of combat search and rescue. For decades, the Air Force relied on a mix of A-10s, HH-60 Pave Hawk helicopters, and specialized HC-130 aircraft to locate and recover downed pilots. That model assumed the United States could establish air superiority and operate relatively slowly over the battlefield. New planning documents and interviews with senior officers describe a transition toward faster, stealthier aircraft that can survive inside heavily defended airspace and share targeting data in real time.

As part of that shift, Air Force leaders have signaled that the F-35A, upgraded F-16s, and even bombers like the B-1B will carry more of the burden for escorting rescue helicopters and suppressing enemy threats around a rescue zone. The A-10’s trademark role of orbiting low and slow over a survivor’s location, visually scanning for threats and talking directly to ground forces, is expected to be replaced by higher-altitude tactics that rely on sensors, datalinks, and precision weapons.

Inside the rescue community, this transition has sparked concern about the future of dedicated combat search and rescue units. A detailed examination of Air Force planning describes an uncertain future for, with questions about how many specialized helicopters and crews the service will retain and how much of the mission will shift to general-purpose fighters. Some veterans worry that without aircraft like the A-10, which were often held in reserve specifically for rescue support, the mission could lose priority amid competing demands on multi-role jets.

Why it matters

Combat search and rescue is one of the most politically sensitive missions any air force performs. The ability to retrieve a downed pilot under fire is both a moral obligation to aircrews and a strategic signal to adversaries that the United States will go to great lengths to recover its people. The A-10’s retirement, and the decision to rely more heavily on advanced fighters, directly affects how credible that promise looks in a future conflict.

The A-10 earned its reputation in part because of its performance in rescue-related operations in Iraq, Afghanistan, and earlier conflicts. Its long loiter time, heavy armor, and powerful GAU-8/A cannon allowed pilots to fly close to the ground, visually identify threats, and engage enemy forces near friendly troops or isolated survivors. That profile made the aircraft a favored partner for HH-60 crews, who depended on the A-10’s ability to suppress enemy fire during a recovery. Detailed accounts of the aircraft’s service life describe how the A-10 became a fixture of close air support and rescue escort missions, particularly in its final days as faced retirement.

Advanced fighters like the F-35A bring different strengths. Their stealth, sensor fusion, and long-range weapons allow them to detect threats and strike from distances that older aircraft could not manage. In a high-end conflict against an adversary with integrated air defenses and modern fighters, those attributes can be the difference between a successful rescue and additional losses. Advocates for the transition argue that an F-35 orbiting at altitude, sharing data with other aircraft and ground forces, can coordinate a rescue package more effectively than an A-10 flying low into a dense threat environment.

Critics, however, question whether multi-role jets will be available and configured for rescue support when needed. The F-35 fleet already faces intense demand for strike, air defense suppression, and intelligence-gathering missions. If those jets are tasked across a broad range of roles, rescue planners worry that combat search and rescue could become an afterthought rather than a dedicated capability. A detailed analysis of Air Force rescue planning notes that the service is trying to adapt combat search and rescue to a high-end fight, but also highlights concerns that the mission might lose focus as aircraft like the F-35 take on more diverse tasks.

Recent operations underscore how demanding rescue missions can be even without a near-peer adversary. In one high-profile incident, US forces deployed fighter jets and rescue aircraft to search for a missing MQ-9 Reaper drone that went down near Iran. Officials described how fighters were launched to secure the area and deter interference while recovery efforts were underway, illustrating the complexity of coordinating air cover, surveillance, and potential ground forces in contested airspace. That operation, which involved US fighter jets, offered a glimpse of the kind of rapid, multi-platform response the Air Force expects to rely on more often as it phases out specialized aircraft.

The shift away from the A-10 also has implications for training and culture. A-10 pilots spent their careers focused on close air support and rescue-related missions, building deep expertise in working with ground forces, joint terminal attack controllers, and helicopter crews. As those pilots transition to other aircraft or retire, the Air Force must ensure that the knowledge they accumulated does not disappear. Integrating that experience into F-35 and F-16 squadrons requires deliberate training programs and doctrine updates, not just new hardware.

There is also a broader strategic signal. Retiring a beloved and highly visible aircraft like the A-10 can be read by allies and adversaries as a statement about how the United States expects to fight. The move suggests a bet that future conflicts will demand stealth, networking, and long-range precision more than armored survivability at low altitude. If that bet proves correct, advanced jets could make rescue operations more effective by reducing exposure to enemy fire. If it is wrong, and future wars still require aircraft to fly close to the ground under heavy fire, the absence of a purpose-built platform like the A-10 could be felt sharply.

What to watch next

The next few years will reveal whether the Air Force can translate its vision for high-end combat search and rescue into reality. Several key developments will shape that outcome. First, the pace of A-10 retirements will determine how much overlap exists between old and new approaches. A gradual drawdown that keeps some A-10 units active while F-35 and F-16 squadrons refine rescue tactics would give the service more time to adapt. A faster retirement schedule would force a quicker handoff and leave less room for experimentation.