Pentagon to test F-35 against A-10 in 'common sense' war scenario showdown

Stars and Stripes ^ | April 26, 2016 | By Travis J. Tritten

[Gamecock]

This is about close air support, not dogfighting.

[DesertRhino]

A-10 has about 5 times the gun ammo capacity of the F-35. And of course, a much bigger round.

this is a joke.

[Flick Lives]

“We will not use the F-35 in the same way as the A-10, so it will perform the mission very differently.”

The F-35 will perform close air support from far away.

[ebshumidors]

I remember having to tell the A-10’s where we were in OH-58’s so they could engage us at 4000 ft.

[bobby.223]

Pinging FR’s very own A-10 driver. What say you Hulka?

[DesertRhino]

“The F-35 for everything else. But IMHO the F-22 would kick the F-35’s tail in “everything else.””

The 35 gets its tail kicked by -everything-. Its a national embarrassment. It should be abandoned and the F-15se should be built.

[Svartalfiar]

“Both statements are correct. We will in fact replace the A-10s with F-35s, that is the plan,” said Frank Kendall, under secretary of defense for acquisition, technology and logistics.

But Kendall said there should be no expectation that the F-35 will perform in the same way as the A-10 on the battlefield.

“The A-10 was designed to be low and slow and close to the targets it was engaging, relatively speaking,” he said. “We will not use the F-35 in the same way as the A-10, so it will perform the mission very differently.”

Firstly, shouldn't 'under secretary' be one word? And no, the F35 won't be anything close to the same thing as the A10. The F35 will have the same 'CAS' style as the f16 - it'll come in for a quick bombing run, then throw up their deuces and maybe come back half an hour later. If you're lucky. The F35 isn't designed for CAS, can't perform CAS, and should fail this comparison easily. BUT, the Chair Force loves their fast-movers, so I'm sure the 35 will get a huge handicap and have the deck stacked in it's favor. The only competition the A10 will be allowed to win (to make it seem fair!) will be loiter time. No way they can fake a F35 win on that one.

[piytar]

Opinions differ on that. But your opinion is likely the correct one.

[ataDude]

Pure ground support? Warthog.

[Fraxinus]

The F-35 will perform close air support from far away.

Eek! If you are going to provide CAS from far away, go for an updated/improved B-52 and drop Laser Guided Bombs from over 35000 FT.

I also wonder what an updated A-1 Skyraider could do. Biggest problem with the original for use today is that it burned 100LL not JPA. That and the Navy's 1946 production dive bombers were worn out fighting over Vietnam.

[jim_trent]

My guess is that the F-35 will to better against supersonic tanks.

[Chode]

there's a scary thought...

[Chode]

[GingisK]

A lot of things the A-10 can accomplish, can be done even better by an AC-130 Spectre.

One can field a number of A-10s for the price of one Specter.

[Ouderkirk]

I’ll take what is A-10 for $100 Alex

[IronJack]

Talk about comparing apples and rutabagas! The F35 is a FIGHTER -- fast-mover, air-to-air capable, with some ground support ability but mostly designed to establish and maintain air superiority. The A10 is THE premier ground support aircraft in history! Nothing compares to the Warthog's ability to shred tanks, obliterate convoys, and drive enemy troops deep underground to escape its deadly nose cannon and missile payload.

It would be like comparing an Abrams tank to a Landing Craft.

[Retain Mike]

Yes, good point. I remember this article about Corsairs compared to jets in the Korean War. The jets flew in from Japan and flew back again if they did not immediately receive a target to hit. The infantry loved the Corsairs because they could linger over the area.

[Strac6]

Will they evaluate the number of maintain -ance. Hours the very high tech f 35 will take vs. The very simple and rugged a-10?

[Chode]

and it's the

[onedoug]

From my Vietnam tanker perspective, the A-10 has always seemed like a prime Army asset.