100% A-10 can loiter ~1hour, the F-35 can do what, one PASS?
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
They would have to reconstitute and restart the F-22 line. We are not smart enough to mothball that stuff for a rainy day.
They would have to reconstitute and restart the F-22 line. We are not smart enough to mothball that stuff for a rainy day.
100% A-10 can loiter ~1hour, the F-35 can do what, one PASS?
The A-10 for CAS. By a lot.
The F-35 for everything else.
But IMHO the F-22 would kick the F-35’s tail in “everything else.”
That’s not the test. It’s ability to provide CAS and SAR.
The hog WAS designed for that.
If the AF wants to get rid of the A10, the Army should insist on their transfer...
So could a run of the mill F-16. I think what they mean is, can the F-35 Porkdodo linger over a battlefield and provide CAS the way a 'Hog can. The mission is, provide CAS.
“guess who wins...”
Sort of like expecting a Don King boxer to lose.
Clusterf*ck, including massive cost overruns.. Almost as if the whole thing was by design as part of the overall weakening of America. It doesn't even LOOK menacing. The F-16, F/A-18, F-22 and even the A-10 (with mouth painted on) LOOKS menacing.
A lot of things the A-10 can accomplish, can be done even better by an AC-130 Spectre. It is very vulnerable to anti aircraft but I have read that the A-10 is also despite all that armor.
Look Ma! Flying turds!
The F-35 will either miss the enemy, or hit our troops, as it zooms by on its single pass ever ten minutes or so.
Good points.
“Now we’re potentially in a dogfight for which the F-35 is not designed.”
I thought they were just talking about ground support tests.
Not that it doesn't happen
I just never hear of it ... and if it DOES occur, I don't think it's enough to support a completely new airframe
From what I see ... the A-10 is the perfect platform to work with/from
Build the same thing with more modern materials, but keep the Hog.
The A-10 can be based from a rough airfield that is only minutes from take off to targets. The airfields can be shifted constantly, even landing on roads etc. A C-130 is not nicknamed “Fat Albert” for nothing. Great if you own the entire battlespace above the treetops, but terrible if an enemy has manpads. Sitting ducks, then.
They were desperate to find a plane the 35 could at least outrun.
This isn’t A-10 fighting the F-35, it is both planes accomplishing the same missions and seeing which has the advantage. I wonder if the F-35 could even beat the A-1 Spad.
“I thought they were just talking about ground support tests.”
I was riffing on the near uselessness of having a huge technical advantage, beyond visual range shoot-down capability, and not being politically allowed to use it.
I sometimes wonder how an updated Skyraider would do. they had a really good lift capacity and were really tough from what I have read.
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.