3 ms·
> the F-35 is inferior to the A-10 for the specific application of close air support The A-10 is defenseless against modern air defense systems; it wouldn't ge
by forapurpose 8y ago
> the F-35 is inferior to the A-10 for the specific application of close air support
The A-10 is defenseless against modern air defense systems; it wouldn't get within 100 miles of the battlefield against a sophisticated enemy; it would be merely a flying coffin for the pilot.
Against unsophisticated enemies, such as ISIL, a drone could do the job, based on what I understand. The F-35 could too, though it's an expensive option.
- Latteland 8y agoAnd of course it turns out we use A10s frequently right now, so it's fantastic that we have them. We need more. They are cheap. We need a variety of different airplanes for different scenarios.
- forapurpose 8y ago> we use A10s frequently right now, so it's fantastic that we have them We use them because we have them. Lots of people use high-carbon emissions cars and planes, and Facebook, but I'm not sure it's fantastic that we have them.
- SFjulie1 8y agoYou must have missed the part where a 50k$ Czech passive radar is defeating the F35 stealth capability. Problem of EM sensors is most often then not, are active (especially radars and IFF), they broadcast or ping signals thus leaving quite a huge EM signature that can be pinpointed precisely with 3 antennas.