Fake or real news???
We need about 800 new A-10s.
I am philosophically opposed to multi-mission weapons. I believe they tend to suck in multiple ways.
If you want a close support aircraft, build a close support aircraft. That’s what we did with the A-10. It has been fantastic for 40 years. The Air Force has hated it for 40 years.
If you want an air superiority aircraft, build an air superiority aircraft. That’s what we did with the F-22. It was fantastic. So the Air Force killed it.
The F-35 has been bad from Day One. So the Air Force is desperate to keep it at all costs. Hey ... it’s multi-mission!
how in the hell do you spend $100million on ONE AIRPLANE??????????????????????
You could have 100 times as many a-10’s for that
I don’t know much about the F-35, but I would assume that the technology in it is superior to the Warthog. I do know the Warthog is a tough ole girl and can take a lot of abuse and keep on flyin’. Maybe some pilot out there can shed some light on this.
Longest article ever. Still dont know where and when. The A10 will win, as usual, most likely
Why not deploy a squadron of each to Jordan and let them run raids over ISIS, and compare results?
Fake. The USAF just recently announced they were going to upgrade the entire fleet of A-10’s.
[snip]
In January 2015, USAF officials told lawmakers that it would take 15 years to fully develop a new attack aircraft to replace the A-10;[121] that year General Herbert J. Carlisle, the head of Air Combat Command stated that a follow-on weapon system for the A-10 may need to be developed.[122] It planned for F-16s and F-15Es to initially take up CAS sorties, and later by the F-35A once sufficient numbers become operationally available over the next decade.[123] As of 2015, the US Air Combat Command is considering developing a replacement aircraft.[124][125] In January 2016, the USAF revealed it was “indefinitely freezing” plans to retire the A-10 for at least several years. In addition to Congressional opposition, its use in anti-ISIL operations, deployments to Eastern Europe as a response to Russia’s military intervention in Ukraine, and reevaluation of F-35 numbers necessitated its retention.[126][127] Retirement has been deferred until 2022 when F-35s are to begin replacing it on a squadron-by-squadron basis.[128] In March 2016, the Air Force revealed it had begun studying future CAS aircraft to succeed the A-10 in low-intensity “permissive conflicts” like counterterrorism and regional stability operations, admitting that the F-35 is too expensive to operate in day-to-day roles; everything from low-end AT-6 Wolverine and A-29 Super Tucano turboprops and the Textron AirLand Scorpion as more basic off-the-shelf options to more sophisticated clean-sheet attack aircraft or “AT-X” derivatives of the T-X next-generation trainer as entirely new attack platforms are being considered.[123][129][130]
In October 2016 Air Force Material Command brought depot line back up to full capacity and prepared to re-wing the fleet.[131]
[snip]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairchild_Republic_A-10_Thunderbolt_II
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/usaf-to-continue-a-10-warthog-wing-production-421567/
http://www.boeing.com/defense/support/a-10-wing-replacement-program/index.page
“The issue is with what the Department of Defense officials call the ‘brains’ of plane, also known as the Autonomic Logistics Information System (ALIS). A Government Accountability Office report says a failure ‘could take the entire fleet offline’ because there is no backup system.”
uh, so hasn’t EVERY alien-invader science fiction movie for the last 50 years shown that if you take out the centralized control of the “mother ship”, the mother’s duckling warships become helpless, either falling out of the sky or becoming helpless targets for the inferior earthling warships?
Just watched a show about the development of the F-16.
They recently had a Dogfight exercise against the F-35.
The F-35 lost handily. It couldn’t shoot down one F-16, but the F-16 could shoot down the F-35 with ease.
If the F-35 is supposed to attack other Fighters from miles away utilizing Missiles and its Stealth capabilities, why are they bothering fitting a Gun on it, ground attack?
Absolutely ridiculous using the $100 Million F-35 in a Ground Attack role. They might as well resurrect the P-47 if they kill off the A-10.
It was really neat to see it going down the runway, seeming way to slow to take to the air, have the gear retract from under it while it remained at the same level above the runway then do a hard bank as it began its climb.
If the replacement for the A-10 has a pilot’ seat (or any current generation combat aircraft for that matter), we are doing it wrong.
This is silly.
Once the deep penetration aircraft like the F-35 have taken out all air defense, and while the F-22 is flying for air supremacy, you can bring in the A-10 and B-52 and B-1B with heavy ordnance to take out armor and troop formations.
For congress to dictate a “fly off” between two aircraft with entirely different missions is nothing but absurd.
Also, the F-35 in a ground attack role can probably take out as many tanks as a single A-10 due to it’s precision weaponry.
6-8 at least.
I’m rooting for the A-10 a truly frightening aircraft...
well, some old cars ARE better than some new ones....?