The French tried that, and so did we until after the early part of the North African campaigns of WW-II. It didn't work out so well. Violates the "Concentration of force" principal, as scarce assets are put out in penny lots all over the battlespace.
But like artillery, you can put smaller aircraft, like helicopters or very light fixed wing birds, at lower levels, because you can have more of them. And you often must, just because they have relatively short legs. You don't have Pallidans at company or battalion level, and you wouldn't have these drones at that level either.
And what would you do with the BUFFs, the Bones, and the B-2s, not to mention the KCs, AWACS, C-17s and C-5s.
The Air Force does a lot more than shoot at stuff on the ground.
US troops have not had to face hostile air power since the creation of the US Air Force. There's a reason for that. :)
“US troops have not had to face hostile air power since the creation of the US Air Force. There’s a reason for that. :)”
Yup. USAF should be — and mostly wants to be — concerned with control of the air space. They seriously kick @ss in that arena.
Ground support should be a Marine and/or Army matter. Let’s be honest, the USAF really doesn’t care about the warthogs, they’re just stuck with them because they are such an effective platform, and even our dumbed-down populace knows it.
The division should be on mission lines: Air superiority? Give the USAF their toys and training, and they’ll own the air. Ground support? That’s a ground-pounder job once the USAF does theirs.