guess who wins...
Posted on 04/27/2016 3:58:00 PM PDT by Chode
WASHINGTON – A showdown might soon settle one of the U.S. military’s biggest air power controversies.
The high-tech and expensive F-35 Joint Strike Fighter will face off in upcoming testing with the Air Force’s aging close-air-support stalwart, the A-10 Thunderbolt II, the director of the Defense Department operational test and evaluation office said Tuesday.
The battlefield comparison “makes common sense” and will pit the two airframes against each other in a variety of war scenarios this year, Michael Gilmore said during Senate testimony.
The department is in the midst of developing the F-35 – the most expensive procurement program in its history – to take over the A-10’s four-decade-old role of supporting ground forces with its titanium armor and powerful nose cannon. But the move is opposed by infantry troops and members of Congress who believe the A-10 is uniquely capable of saving lives on the battlefield.
“To me, comparison testing just makes common sense,” Gilmore said. “If you’re spending a lot of money to get improved capability, that’s the easiest way to demonstrate it is to do a rigorous comparison test.”
The F-35 is being touted as the most advanced fighter jet in the world, a jack of all trades intended to take over a variety of roles from other aircraft, including the A-10 and the F-16 fighter jet. The Marine Corps declared its variant of the aircraft combat-ready last summer and the Air Force plans to complete its testing this year.
But its 15-year procurement quest has been riddled with delays, scandals and technical glitches. The F-35 program office is now trying to overcome a problem with the aircraft’s software system that caused the radar to blink out and require rebooting during flight.
The program, including production and maintenance, could ultimately cost taxpayers about $1.4 trillion and, despite promises of air dominance, the F-35 remains untested in real combat – especially the type typically waged by the 1970s-era Warthog.
The A-10, on the other hand, is now deployed in the war against the Islamic State group in Iraq and Syria and has built a devoted following among combat veterans. But the airframe is aging and the Air Force now plans to retire the Warthog and unshoulder the costs of upkeep by 2022.
Gilmore said the two aircraft will face off on close air support and combat search and rescue, as well as other missions.
“We’re going to do it under all the circumstances that we see CAS [close air support] conducted, including under high-threat conditions in which we expect F-35 will have an advantage and other conditions requiring loitering on the target, low-altitude operations and so-forth,” Gilmore told the Senate Armed Services Committee.
On paper, the F-35 faces some apparent challenges because it does not carry the firepower of the Gatling-style nose cannon or the ability to fly over targets for a long period of time compared to the Warthog.
“There are a lot of arguments that ensues over which aircraft might have the advantage, the A-10 or the F-35, but that is what the comparison test is meant to show us,” Gilmore said.
The controversy over whether the two aircraft will have similar capabilities became murkier in March when Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. Mark Welsh testified to the Senate committee that the F-35 would not replace the A-10.
During the hearing Tuesday, Sen. Kelly Ayotte, R-N.H., said the general’s earlier testimony appeared to contradict statements on the fighter jet program’s website and its longtime aim to take over the Warthog responsibilities.
The Pentagon’s top weapons buyer denied any contradiction.
“Both statements are correct. We will in fact replace the A-10s with F-35s, that is the plan,” said Frank Kendall, under secretary of defense for acquisition, technology and logistics.
But Kendall said there should be no expectation that the F-35 will perform in the same way as the A-10 on the battlefield.
“The A-10 was designed to be low and slow and close to the targets it was engaging, relatively speaking,” he said. “We will not use the F-35 in the same way as the A-10, so it will perform the mission very differently.”
tritten.travis@stripes.com Twitter: @Travis_Tritten
guess who wins...
The 'Hog wasn't made for air superiority or straight up dog fighting.
The AF is getting a new Chief of Staff. I guess we will see soon.
More than NOT REALLY...
Hussein retards running the show now....
I hate the F-35. Even the designation was screwed up.
ummm... it's not head to head one-v-one, it's how well they do in their mission profile
Maybe like a Corvette vs a Ferguson Tractor.
But we need just one winner.
Let’s see that Corvette gear down for pulling in a muddy field.
F-35s over the Florida Panhandle.
The deck will be stacked badly against the A-10. Bet on it!
The fight will be F-35 against Silkworm batteries
1500 km from the carriers.
Oh, is that beyond their range ... as planned?
“It could acquire the A-10 and launch radar guided air-to-air missiles from at least 50 miles away.”
Here is the fallacy about the ability to shoot out of sight targets. The military has had that ability for a very long time. But politically most leaders would not allow that for fear of shooting down a civilian target. Therefore the leaders will throw away the one advantage the US would have against most big league adversaries, technical superiority. You can bet no missiles will be launched without visual verification of the target. Now we’re potentially in a dogfight for which the F-35 is not designed.
Yeah the hog is for close air support of the infantry. Which we need. We also need dog fighters. Keep them both. Use right tool for each job.
I remember A-10s whipping F-16’s in 2v2.
Can the F-35 loiter and then blanket 100 square yards with 30 mm rounds in 3 seconds from 2,000 feet?
Men might get killed on the ground because of this decision, but the males in the Romney & Sununu families will be safe & sound.
will an F-35 make the enemy crap themselves if the see it approach?
You are correct, sir. However, history tells us that the last time that enemy aircraft attacked U.S. forces was the Korean War. We have enjoyed air supremacy since. Once you have that, A-10’s can do the prime principle of war better than anyone other machine, namely massing fire at the decisive place and time. And, they do it at a fraction of any aircraft, including the price of rebuilding all of the tools require to build more.
The real question is how do we maintain our air supremacy? The answer does not appear to be the F-35, it seems to be the F-22. My simple Infantry mind believes that we should build more F-22’s and more A-10’s in an upgraded version.
Didn’t an F-35 lose to an F-16? There’s a food chain theory afoot here.
How about testing the metric “minutes spent right above our troops giving them immediate on-call fire support per dollar spent.”
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.