F35 vs. A10?

[Smitty-48]

I simply deal with congress, they hold the purse strings, as to the Air Force, they are all in on the program, so all is well.

[Smitty-48]

Plus Japan is ordering 150 just to start, so they've tripled their order already.

China Seas cha-ching, thank you,come again.

[Speaker to Animals]

It has not even completed testing. The defects were so great it's YEARS behind schedule. Furthermore, to pretend as though the generals who are backing this program are not part of the Lockmart system is either naive or fucking dishonest as hell.

This is where I'm extremely skeptical.
The weapon system is not even completed testing and countries are basing defense on it. That sounds risky as hell, and frankly not too damn smart.

I take the OP as a question between using proven established weapons systems vs Unicorns and Rainbow fart promises.

Right off the bat it doesn't compare even if it works as advertised. Low munitions capacity. Weaker gun that is less accurate. Less range so less time supporting troops on the ground.


Best thing for the infantry would be to just transition the A-10 squadrons over to the Marine Corps and Army.

CAS is not really an Air Force priority, by any means.

[C-Mag]

The Air Force has also been trying to kill one of it's most effective and reliable weapons platforms for the last 25 years, the A-10. But the system is so effective, and so well suited for the warfare we have encountered thus far in the 21st C. that it won't go away.

That's not to say we won't need an F-35 in 2050, the nature of war may change in the next 30 years. But for now, there hasn't been a major dogfight where air superiority fighters were really needed in 50 years. There have hardly been any major tank on tank engagements in 50 years as well.

IMO, there should be no rush to adopt this weapon platform.

[Fife]

Both sides of this high-level dispute could use a refreshment break.

[Speaker to Animals]

An A-10 pilot can put rounds on a spot only a few meters in diameter. They can do it right next to American troops.

Lawn darts in CAS are dangerous. Ask the families of the Canadians that got smoked by an F-16 in Afghanistan how that strategy worked out.

[Speaker to Animals]

The more I think on it..

Move the AC-130 Specter squadrons over to the Army and expand them for use outside special operations.

Move the A-10 Warthog squadrons over the Marines.

Marines should continue using F-18 from the carriers if needed, and the A-10 from their air bases. That would give them pretty much everything they want.

The Army with their own AC-130s would be very effective. Those things are basically artillery platforms in the sky anyway.

Just order more A-10 Warthogs with maybe some better ECM and sitrep avionics.

[C-Mag]

It has not even completed testing. The defects were so great it's YEARS behind schedule. Furthermore, to pretend as though the generals who are backing this program are not part of the Lockmart system is either naive or fucking dishonest as hell.

This is where I'm extremely skeptical.
The weapon system is not even completed testing and countries are basing defense on it. That sounds risky as hell, and frankly not too damn smart.

I take the OP as a question between using proven established weapons systems vs Unicorns and Rainbow fart promises.

Right off the bat it doesn't compare even if it works as advertised. Low munitions capacity. Weaker gun that is less accurate. Less range so less time supporting troops on the ground.


Best thing for the infantry would be to just transition the A-10 squadrons over to the Marine Corps and Army.

CAS is not really an Air Force priority, by any means.

The Air Force lobbied hard and long to get control of the CAS mission from the MC and Army, even turned PJs into Air Combat Controllers(Fuckers stole my job) in the early 90s after the Soviets folded. The Air Force wanted that mission to stay relevant on the daily battlefield. But in their hearts, the AF is always biased toward shiny fighters. Same in the Navy, gotta be a Navy Pilot if you ever want to command a carrier group.

Main Battle Tank and Air Superiority Fighter sycophants are not dissimilar to WWI Officers who wanted to continue to use Cavalry Charges. MBTs and Fighters may once again fight it out in mass battles, but then again it might be AT-ATs or drones doing all the fighting.

[C-Mag]

Both sides of this high-level dispute could use a refreshment break.

I asked for the F-35 to make me a sammich, and all I got was a shitty energy drink

[Speaker to Animals]

This is where I'm extremely skeptical.
The weapon system is not even completed testing and countries are basing defense on it. That sounds risky as hell, and frankly not too damn smart.

I take the OP as a question between using proven established weapons systems vs Unicorns and Rainbow fart promises.

Right off the bat it doesn't compare even if it works as advertised. Low munitions capacity. Weaker gun that is less accurate. Less range so less time supporting troops on the ground.


Best thing for the infantry would be to just transition the A-10 squadrons over to the Marine Corps and Army.

CAS is not really an Air Force priority, by any means.

The Air Force lobbied hard and long to get control of the CAS mission from the MC and Army, even turned PJs into Air Combat Controllers(Fuckers stole my job) in the early 90s after the Soviets folded. The Air Force wanted that mission to stay relevant on the daily battlefield. But in their hearts, the AF is always biased toward shiny fighters. Same in the Navy, gotta be a Navy Pilot if you ever want to command a carrier group.

Yeah, I admit that was really fucked up and cynical. Then they tried to kill CAS. They just wanted the funding, not really the mission. Air Force actually looks down on CAS as a shit-tier mission when it is actually keeping our countrymen alive.