5 ms·

>> however we still have the F-22 as our air superiority fighter which is still believed to be better then anything out there I'm just going to leave this here

by turar 13y ago

>> however we still have the F-22 as our air superiority fighter which is still believed to be better then anything out there I'm just going to leave this here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UBKvlLzGkvU http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UBKvlLzGkvU

s_q_b 13y ago
There's also this: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/11/13/olsen_raptor_case_gets_to_court/ http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/11/13/olsen_raptor_case_ge... And the fact that the F-22's stealth coatings, even if they work, ablate in rain. http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/11/f-35-gets-stealthier/ http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/11/f-35-gets-stealthier... And of course the ludicrous idea that the F-35 can replace the A-10 Warthog in combat. http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2012/01/a-10-f-35-air-force-budget http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2012/01/a-10-f-35-air-force-... The A-10 problem bugs me more than the others. The A-10 is a proven warplane that ground troops count on for cover. The F-35 doesn't have the capability to fulfill its role, which could place our troops in greater danger.
- VladRussian2 13y ago
  >The A-10 problem bugs me more than the others. The A-10 is a proven warplane that ground troops count on for cover. The F-35 doesn't have the capability to fulfill its role, which could place our troops in greater danger. It is hard to beat A-10 in its role, instead i think something new will be developed on the edge of its envelope, specifically on the low end - big RC planes (mid-size VTOL drones carry-able by one Hummer) with Hellfires/etc controlled by the troops who need the cover - that would provide more prompt (though less powerful) air support than calling in for big guys help and waiting for it to appear.
- spartango 13y ago
  It's strange...I love the A-10, both its rugged design and its crazy anti-tank capability. Keep in mind that retirement plans for the beast are slated for 2028, and all plans to retire it sooner have been shot down. That's 52 years of service, which is a solid service lifetime. But that said, I think there's a decent argument that can be made for phasing it out given current operational needs: The A-10 was originally designed in the Vietnam-era as a close air support(CAS) aircraft for conventional wars, armed with a payload of unguided bombs and shells to destroy tanks. Helicopters at the time couldn't carry these types of anti-armor heavy weapons, and strike aircraft like the A-1, A-6, and F-4 couldn't survive anti-aircraft fire at low enough altitudes to put their bombs on target. In CAS roles, missing the target meant killing friendlies, obviously unacceptable. Thus, the A-10 was built like a beast so that it could survive SAM/AAA fire at the low-altitudes needed to deploy these weapons accurately. Over time, however, CAS munitions have evolved with guidance, from missiles like the AGM-65 and Hellfire, to laser-guided (GBU-27) and GPS-guided (JDAM) bombs. These have longer ranges and thus don't require the carrier aircraft to be nearly as survivable. The A-10s resistance to AAA and small arms fire seems less relevant. This suggests that the A-10 may be less necessary for strike roles, even if it carries them out admirably.
  - TsiCClawOfLight 13y ago
    It will be necessary when vietnam happens all over again because of jamming and we need 'analog' weapons.
  - SEJeff 13y ago
    You know, I was a UAV pilot (look up shadow 200 3rd Stryker brigade combat team, second infantry division) an targeted for many A10 strike missions around Tall'Afar, Mosul, and Samarrah in Iraq around '03-04. The A10 was fantastic for taking out large weapons caches or convoys. Sure it can take out tanks and such, so why not keep them around. I speak from experience that in today's insurgent and less conventional warfare, I'd rather target for an A10 than a Harrier. Besides, it is hard to beat the sound of that main gun firing. Nothing like it in the entire us military.
- jfb 13y ago
  It's hard to envision a conflict where the A-10's advantages over the F-35 are dispositive, given that there aren't divisions of Warsaw Pact T80s massed on the German border any more.
zobzu 13y ago
its not like if the F22 didn't have supermanoeuvrability - it does. but then again, when was the last important dog fight ? yea..

by turar 13y ago

s_q_b 13y ago

There's also this: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/11/13/olsen_raptor_case_gets_to_court/ http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/11/13/olsen_raptor_case_ge... And the fact that the F-22's stealth coatings, even if they work, ablate in rain. http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/11/f-35-gets-stealthier/ http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/11/f-35-gets-stealthier... And of course the ludicrous idea that the F-35 can replace the A-10 Warthog in combat. http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2012/01/a-10-f-35-air-force-budget http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2012/01/a-10-f-35-air-force-... The A-10 problem bugs me more than the others. The A-10 is a proven warplane that ground troops count on for cover. The F-35 doesn't have the capability to fulfill its role, which could place our troops in greater danger.

VladRussian2 13y ago
>The A-10 problem bugs me more than the others. The A-10 is a proven warplane that ground troops count on for cover. The F-35 doesn't have the capability to fulfill its role, which could place our troops in greater danger. It is hard to beat A-10 in its role, instead i think something new will be developed on the edge of its envelope, specifically on the low end - big RC planes (mid-size VTOL drones carry-able by one Hummer) with Hellfires/etc controlled by the troops who need the cover - that would provide more prompt (though less powerful) air support than calling in for big guys help and waiting for it to appear.
spartango 13y ago
It's strange...I love the A-10, both its rugged design and its crazy anti-tank capability. Keep in mind that retirement plans for the beast are slated for 2028, and all plans to retire it sooner have been shot down. That's 52 years of service, which is a solid service lifetime. But that said, I think there's a decent argument that can be made for phasing it out given current operational needs: The A-10 was originally designed in the Vietnam-era as a close air support(CAS) aircraft for conventional wars, armed with a payload of unguided bombs and shells to destroy tanks. Helicopters at the time couldn't carry these types of anti-armor heavy weapons, and strike aircraft like the A-1, A-6, and F-4 couldn't survive anti-aircraft fire at low enough altitudes to put their bombs on target. In CAS roles, missing the target meant killing friendlies, obviously unacceptable. Thus, the A-10 was built like a beast so that it could survive SAM/AAA fire at the low-altitudes needed to deploy these weapons accurately. Over time, however, CAS munitions have evolved with guidance, from missiles like the AGM-65 and Hellfire, to laser-guided (GBU-27) and GPS-guided (JDAM) bombs. These have longer ranges and thus don't require the carrier aircraft to be nearly as survivable. The A-10s resistance to AAA and small arms fire seems less relevant. This suggests that the A-10 may be less necessary for strike roles, even if it carries them out admirably.
- TsiCClawOfLight 13y ago
  It will be necessary when vietnam happens all over again because of jamming and we need 'analog' weapons.
- SEJeff 13y ago
  You know, I was a UAV pilot (look up shadow 200 3rd Stryker brigade combat team, second infantry division) an targeted for many A10 strike missions around Tall'Afar, Mosul, and Samarrah in Iraq around '03-04. The A10 was fantastic for taking out large weapons caches or convoys. Sure it can take out tanks and such, so why not keep them around. I speak from experience that in today's insurgent and less conventional warfare, I'd rather target for an A10 than a Harrier. Besides, it is hard to beat the sound of that main gun firing. Nothing like it in the entire us military.
jfb 13y ago
It's hard to envision a conflict where the A-10's advantages over the F-35 are dispositive, given that there aren't divisions of Warsaw Pact T80s massed on the German border any more.

zobzu 13y ago

its not like if the F22 didn't have supermanoeuvrability - it does. but then again, when was the last important dog fight ? yea..