The F22 is still untested in battle, whereas the 15 has never lost an battle ever in it’s long lasting & storied term of service. The A10 is a specific battle built [ground assault], & a Grunt’s best friend from the air.
So that’s how santa claus delivers his goods in Afghanistan.
“The F22 is still untested in battle, whereas the 15 has never lost an battle ever in its long lasting & storied term of service.”
Like I said, I do not really know anything about air to air combat, but that doesn’t stop me from opening my mouth.
Yes, the 15 is great, but who have we fought? Not to take anything away from anyone (service people, designers, etc), and there is something to say about having the capacity to limit aggression, but we have not lost a US GROUND serviceman to enemy air assault since WWII. The F-15 came into service in 1976, I think; who did we tangle with who really had the air capability to threaten us? I’m certain we would have done well, but it like saying the heavyweight champ is the best though he may have gotten to his title by fighting no one of repute.
What I am saying is there is no one out there who can really threaten our air superiority. Yes, the Russians and Chinese might hurt us in the short run, but ultimately, I think, we would prevail. Yes, that prevalence might have much to do with the F-15, from what I know it is a great aircraft, but what we really need are more close air support (CAS) air craft. Read “Boyd” by Robert Coran (Heck, read anything by Robert Coran, great author) and hear how the Air Force is all about speed and payload (bombing) not serious CAS. They were getting rid of the A-10 when Iraq/Afghan happened. They still want to get rid of it because it was forced on them. They do not relish the CAS role, but it was what they need to embrace as their is much of a fighter/air-to-air role left.