Nope, that's just not true; and here's the counterexample:
“Old fasioned” is a cheap shot and is irrelevant.
The A-10 is a remarkably capable CAS platform that no other jet can match when it comes to ordinance load, the gun and (most importantly) loiter time. The JSF, touted as LO, is not if it is kitted out for the CAS role. And it does not have loiter time like the A-10.
A 30MM from an A-10 is far superior to any gun theu put on the JSF. . .30MM on the JSF is NOT the same round and can't do the gun mission very well. . .must close with the tgt in order to be effective and the guns mil dispersion is in excess of the A-10, meaning less bullets on tgt.
A-10 30MM can penetrate an inch and a half of armor at 8,000’. . .can the JSF?
Strap a CAS load on the JSF and it is no longer LO. .so why pay for a capability you don't need?
“Speed is Life” is the mantra of fighter pilots that fly A/A. Speed in not necessarily life for fighter pilots that fly dedicated CAS. You have to find the tgt, aim, get clearance from the JTAC, and then fire on the tgt and be ready for a re-attack (adjusting the fire to the next tgt or to refine your aim); the speed of the A-10 makes that doable, whereas JSF engagement speeds this capability is degraded. . .no matter how much magic connectivity you have. Pickling a JDAM or SDB on GPS coordinates is great, but to stay around for immediate reattacks (where you truly are effective) and do those re-attacks with the gun, connectivity and GPS is not gonna help you.
So, what is your considered opinion based upon flying the CAS mission? What about calling in CAS? Let's see if they match mine.
The unit cost of the platform has to figure into every mission profile. Would you jeopardize a very expensive high tech aircraft going into a high risk environment when a relatively inexpensive capable alternative was available?
Nope, that's just not true; and here's the counterexample:
It has been said, that quality trumps quantity. But it is also said, that quantity has a quality of its own.