The A10 is an obsolete aircraft. It has found a role against weaker enemies, but in a peer-to-peer conflict, the aircraft is not survivable. At this point, it’s not worth the costs to keep it around. It shouldn’t be replaced with a one-to-one aircraft. It’s role of close-ground support where the craft flies just 200 feet above the ground is not survivable in modern combat against peer-to-peer competitors.
It may be worth keeping around while the US industrial base takes forever to build new aircraft. It can fight drones in the meantime and even launch long-range missiles from the air. In a fight against China, the US will need all the long-range air missile launchers it can get.
The MQ-9 Reaper drone was great when the enemy didn’t have anti-air capabilities, but when they do, the slow, loud, and radar-visible drone is easily shot down.
The A-10 can do one thing really well–blowing up stuff on the ground. But, it can’t do much else, and is only brought in after the most threatening air-to-air threats are destroyed or suppressed. The military would prefer to have more general and advanced craft than one with such a narrow use. Congress has kept it alive because it is popular and gives their constituents jobs. A major advantage of the A-10 is its cheaper to fire.
The Air Force has a doctrine where it should spread out planes and move which bases they fly from so it’s harder to take them out. The US apparently wasn’t practicing that doctrine, and is paying for it.
It is more expensive to move maintenance teams around or have different teams available at multiple bases.
US loss multiple planes in Iranian strike in Saudi Arabia, likely with help from Russian intelligence. The US did not learn or implement the lessons from Ukraine regarding drones and protecting planes on the ground. The US looks like Russia losing expensive aircraft on the ground. The US is losing planes, people, radars, and facilities, and so far has gotten nothing from Iran. Iran shows no sign of giving in, and if they don’t, then the US lost expensive equipment, munitions, and lives for little gain. The US is showing that it is not ready for the new change in warfare.