No more windshields for you!!!
Posted on 01/24/2021 8:55:55 AM PST by Onthebrink
Ammunition at a couple of bucks a round is more cost effective than a half million dollar missile, especially for close-up work.
The F-14 Tomcat with Phoenix had a 125 mile standoff range IIRC. They terminated it.
No more windshields for you!!!
180 rounds is probably. 2 second burst.
Yeah, I suppose - but it's also the last time "missiles only" was tried and it got a lot of our highly-trained aviators killed and several millions dollars worth of our aircraft scattered all over the rice paddies.
The lesson is still valid: guns work well close-in, always work while there's ammo in them and never lose IR of radar lock or just launch and go the wrong way.
Better question is why do we need pilots?
I guess that would work OK, but it takes a really good sight and they squirm a lot on the pylons.
Weapons are most effective when they are used according to their strengths, rather than their weaknesses. The P-40 performed well against the Zero when it dove down from height, sprayed the target, and then broke off the fight. Dogfighting the Zero was a losing proposition. When the P-40 pilots were ordered to dogfight Zeros, they generally lost.
If the F-117 Nighthawk was ordered into a daylight mission over contested territory, it would face a much greater chance of being shot down. As long as a senile president doesn’t order the F-35 pilots to do stupid things it will probably be an amazing weapon’s system. There is precedent for presidents micromanaging wars. Vietnam, for example, where LBJ himself ordered particular missions and managed them to the minutest detail. That probably lost us more than a few planes as LBJ’s objectives were political rather than military.
But we were told the A-10 was no longer needed because the F-35 would perform CAS in its stead. Bill of goods: what the idiots purchased with our taxpayer money.
The gun was part of the Air Force variant from day 1 at the insistence of the of the fighter mafia.
Regardless, that was no "change in mission". It's more analogous to a belt and suspenders design approach to all contingencies of air combat.
Whether protecting the Area Defense Intercept Zones (ADIZ), knocking down a plane with a dead crew before it reaches a populated area, etc., there are times when you want a controlled shoot.
After watching Azerbaijan/Armenia fight, I agree, the real question is do we need pilots?
A tactical “Stealth Bomber” will be a stealth X-47 type drone that drops a drone swarm that flies to the targets, paints it with a LASER while 3 minutes later, Hypersonic missiles launched from standoff distance rain down on them.
A pilotless fighter would be smaller, fly further, turn tighter and be cheaper than piloted planes and kids with poor fitness and bad eyesight, but videogame skills to pilot them are plentiful.
Weapons system are all about politics and not about winning. They always are, until you lose, and THEN we rethink things.
You sound like one of the experts that gave us the original design of the F-4 Phantom. Everyone knew by the late 1950s that guns on airplanes were obsolete. Until Viet Nam proved otherwise.
the f35 has much less than 1000 rounds
still, better to have it
consider the f35 was originally sold/touted in part to be able to replace the a10
180 rounds
dont think so
Not my words but the Pentagons......you need to work on your reading comprehension before commenting....
Bait and switch, baby.. 180 rounds! That 25mm probably has less than one second of trigger time available.
The F35 is a unique aircraft and like someone else said above, I believe it has received a lot of unfair criticism given the capabilities.
The Israeli Air Force is so happy with theirs they want more of them. That “endorsement” means more to me than what some pundit thinks. Our pilots seem to be pleased with it also.
The Pentagon always oversells the next big thing as the replacement for everything and they have long wanted to get rid of the A10.
It is irreplaceable for the mission it does in a low threat environment. However, it will not be nearly as effective in a high threat environment against near peer adversaries. It’s no knock on the plane... it remains my favorite as an Army veteran, but MANPADS all over the battlefield with better AA guns and SAMS changes the game.
Wasnt knocking the f35
I was more critical of the people that believed it could replace the a10
Right now nothing replaces the role of the a10
These aren’t your M2 Browning machine guns that were mounted on P-51’s or P-47’s. These are rotary cannons that can empty their drums in 2 seconds.
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.