The A/OA-10 Thunderbolt II is the first Air Force aircraft specially designed for close air support of ground forces. They are simple, effective and survivable twin-engine jet aircraft that can be used against all ground targets, including tanks and other armored vehicles. The A-10/OA-10 have excellent maneuverability at low air speeds and altitude, and are highly accurate weapons-delivery platforms. They can loiter near battle areas for extended periods of time and operate under 1,000-foot ceilings (303.3 meters) with 1.5-mile (2.4 kilometers) visibility. Their wide combat radius and short takeoff and landing capability permit operations in and out of locations near front lines. Using night vision goggles, A-10/ OA-10 pilots can conduct their missions during darkness. Thunderbolt IIs have Night Vision Imaging Systems (NVIS), goggle compatible single-seat cockpits forward of their wings and a large bubble canopy which provides pilots all-around vision. The pilots are protected by titanium armor that also protects parts of the flight-control system. The redundant primary structural sections allow the aircraft to enjoy better survivability during close air support than did previous aircraft. (U.S. Air Force Photo by Senior Amn. Greg

Yes, it’s ugly. Truly ugly. But it’s ugly in a way that strikes fear in the hearts of America’s enemy. The A-10 Thunderbolt II is still the most effective close air support and ground attack weapon in the world.

And that’s why Congress shouldn’t allow the Air Force to retire the reliably deadly “Warthog.”

As the Daily Caller reported last week, “lawmakers agreed Tuesday in the annual defense bill to preserve another year of funding for the A-10 and called the Air Force’s attempt to sideline the aircraft ‘misguided.’

A document from the House Armed Services Committee argues the A-10 is invaluable, evidenced even more so by its recent deployment against Islamic State in Iraq and Syria as part of Operation Inherent Resolve.”

As that document states, “Rigorous oversight, endorsements from soldiers and Marines about the protection only the A-10 can provide, and repeated deployments in support of OIR have persuaded many members from both parties that the budget-driven decision to retire the A-10 is misguided.”

The Air Force’s bean counters say the A-10 is too expensive to operate, and that it can be replaced by fighter jets such as the F-16, F-15E, and, eventually, Lockheed Martin’s (LMT) new F-35 fighter.

But as the Bloomberg news service points out, “The A-10, originally intended to destroy Soviet tanks, is better suited to close-in missions than fighters designed for air-to-air combat. A titanium “bathtub” that wraps around the bottom of its cockpit gives the Warthog better protection against ground fire. It can fly as slowly as 300 knots (345 miles per hour) without risk of stalling, compared with 450 knots for an F-16 or F-35.”

And its fearsome Gatling gun provides unmatched firepower.

Defense analyst Tony Carr wrote recently that fighters – particularly the F-35, the A-10’s intended replacement – are not an effective substitute for the A-10.

“As it stands, the F-35 will, by 2020, have zero capability to stop an armored vehicle, zero capability to illuminate or mark a target and a very modest ability to engage a moving target,” Carr wrote. “It’ll also have only a razor thin ability to strafe targets close to friendly forces. Upon making its vaunted debut, the F-35 won’t even have the CAS (close air support) weapon and sensor capability legacy fighters had by the middle of the last decade. That’s right – we’re breaking the bank to pay for something that will have less capability.”

Carr has a better plan.

“Keep and modernize the A-10,” he recommends. “Reduce the size of the F-35 purchase in order to free up the necessary resources. Field the F-35 when it’s mature and actually represents a gain in capability over legacy systems.”

One of the A-10’s most staunch defenders is retired Air Force Col. Martha McSally, now a Republican member of Congress from Arizona.

“It might not be pretty, but the A-10 is our most capable close air-support aircraft, and its arrival on the battlefield signals survival for our troops and annihilation for our enemies,” she wrote in TheNew York Times recently.

Let’s save the A-10.