Yeah, sure. And I wonder what that Jordanian F-16 pilot who was burned alive would have said to that.
The F-16 is a pretty, but fragile, little jet, but it's no A-10.
How about improving(!) the A-10 instead of scrapping it for a lesser replacement?
Exactly.
The Jordanian pilot should -in a SANE world- be a warning to the Airforce perfumed handkerchief wavers that this is a BAD idea.
But..you and I both know that will never happen.
“How about improving(!) the A-10 instead of scrapping it for a lesser replacement?”
Your Congress has removed that option from the table. The Air Force has been ordered to choose between funding combat air support squadrons to maintain A-10 squadrons or F-16 squadrons, but not both at the same time.
The Air Force has the responsibility for providing air superiority or air supremacy to keep enemy fighters from shooting down A-10 attack bombers. Fewer F-16 air superiority fighters and fighter-bombers means fewer or no air superiority aircraft to defend the A-10 attack bombers form losses of their pilots, aircraft, and missions. Although the F-16 is a less capable attack bomber than the A-10, it can at least perform the CAS mission as an attack bomber and defend itself in addition to performing the air superiority mission necessary to conduct CAS missions at all.
At this point you and the Air Force must choose which compromise to take, or you must help the Air Force by compelling Congress to remove the need to make such a compromise at all.