Posted on 01/29/2015 7:15:03 AM PST by Reverend Saltine
I am...a fan of the A-10 Warthog. I believe in the mission, and I believe that there is no other weapons platform out there that can do the job the A-10 does, with the same efficiency, effectiveness, and confidence that it provides to our troops on the ground. It’s big, ugly, and slow. It’s also rugged, durable, and extremely deadly. The Air Force likes new toys. Other than the venerable B-52, the A-10 is the oldest plane in the inventory. The F-35 was not built solely for the specific mission of ground support as was the A-10. The F-35 is the new F-16, or so goes the argument. It can do many things well, not just one. But the price tag is enormous. This is one time, I believe, that the USAF has it wrong. I am usually in favor of new technology. Battlefield innovation is a bad thing to lag behind in, but some innovations like the old F-111 never lived up to the hype. Is the F-35 an effective weapons system? It still might be, but it is not a “low cost” version of the F-22, and the jury is still out. The original idea was to match up the F-22 Raptor and F-35 Lightning II and repeat the success of the F-15 Eagle and F-16 Falcon. Then they tried to add the flexibility of the F-4, and it all went to hell. After over a decade of development and prototypes, cost estimates per unit have ranged from over $98 million...to $178 million for a standard A model to $337 million for the Navy version. The bottom line is that the cost per copy has risen exponentially higher than planned, and there simply will not be as many airplanes as originally planned. That changes the argument.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
My thought exactly!
The USAF/USN F35 is an F117, F16, F18 replacement...
USMC F35 is an F18, AV-8 replacement...
[NOTE: Some F18s, not all, like the Growlers and other unique mission aircraft.]
I keep trying to find the SOURCE of the original claim that the F35 is actually/factually/functionally capable of being an A10 replacement.
I don’t believe that anyone in aviation or the F35 program truly believes this to be the case. Bean counters are notorious for being ideologically blinded and extremely stupid.
If sequestration gets taken care of [stopped], I am of the opinion that this whole issue goes away. As it is, sequestration is still with us and the DoD is going to keep getting hammered whilst the gibsmedats keep getting fat, drunk, pregnant and stoned.
Something that tries to do EVERYTHING, usually ends up doing nothing well.
But the Navy has thought of that too! They are getting rid of the Greyhound COD cargo machine for V-22s with a smaller cargo bay and shorter range!
Thanks for a GREAT laugh
As is the C-130, the UH-1 and a few others.
Hilarious! Thanks. Love the Navy SEAL comment.
Funny, at the time I was more afraid of getting lit up by one of them in my '89 GMC than anything the Iraqis had.
“If saving soldier’s lives on the battlefield is the goal, then the A-10’s end is premature.”
It’s not the goal, sadly.
Thanks for your service. My Brother in law was in Khafji (USMC TOW Platoon). Spent his 21st birthday taking artillery fire.
It appears that the Pentagon brass are attempting to do the same thing to the F-35 as they did to the F-15. If I understand it correctly, the F-35 won't even have an operational gun for several years. How can that be an effective ground support aircraft?
I understand bias, however, let’s try to keep things in perspective when comparing aircraft to aircraft...even if they’re ~40 years apart in design.
There are other notable differences between the two to include; stores weight, internal fuel quantity and the mission systems capability of each aircraft...
The F16 gives up 2 wing stations to 370g fuel tanks and a centerline station for either fuel or EW pod.
The F35 does neither...~18k in internal fuel to the F16s ~7k and EW capability is integrated into the aircraft’s avionics & mission systems.
In addition, the F35 has EOTS for precision [not GPS] guided weapons...read F117 type or better capability.
So from a performance point of view, yes, the F35 is lacking...but again, what are we really trying to compare?
Performance [speed] or actual capability to kick the doors down [stealth/accuracy]?
If one has worked around “fighters” for any length of time, there are always going to be trade offs in certain areas.
I should have remembered the C-130 - it’s the “Traditional Waring Family Airplane” ... my father worked on them, and I’ve also worked on them.
The V-22 … another billion dollar boondoggle. The V-22 came out of the failed hostage rescue mission in Iran, where the range of the naval helicopters necessitated a plan involving an improvised re-supply/staging base within the country, which plan failed for several reasons. As a boutique platform, the V-22 would give the President some options. But, as a do-everything platform, it is enormously expensive and not very good at anything.
Does this stealth argument also apply to the F22 [it does]?
If so, why aren’t folks getting their panties in wad over this as well vs. the persistent ire towards the F35?
This isn’t just about the F35, it’s about our entire capability to wage and WIN war...on land, sea and air.
The procurement process is corrupted all the way to DC...
I’m out...damn...I should know better than to even look at these threads...the amount of ignorance that is present is just too much to overcome or even contemplate.
Officer careers are made in the procurement of new programs not the maint of perfectly good assets.
Thats all you need to know
” The procurement process is corrupted all the way to DC...”
100%
So basically, the movie Man of Steel, where they shoot up the bad guys with an A-10 Warthog is no longer possible? Thanks a lot for nothing!!!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.