~~~~~~~~~~~
The "Money Quote":
"In other words, the test was designed by someone with a vested financial interest in the F-35 program, rather than by people whose primary interest is its performance in combat."
~~~~~
Note to POTUS & CIC Trump:
Posted on 10/25/2018 9:05:55 AM PDT by C19fan
The US Army wants the F-35 to support its ground troops.
It’s that simple. We hear volumes of information about the Marine Corps vertical-take-off-and-landing F-35B, Navy carrier-launched F-35C and Air Force F-35A - but what does the Army think of the emerging Joint Strike Fighter?
Does the Army think the 5th-Gen stealth fighter would bring substantial value to targeting and attacking enemy ground forces in close proximity to advancing infantry? What kind of Close Air Support could it bring to high-risk, high-casualty ground war?
(Excerpt) Read more at nationalinterest.org ...
The F-35 is such a screwup they couldn’t even correctly designate it the F-24.
None of those are as important in aiding an assault as hang time.
I can’t find any reference to stall speed on this thing. Can it return to vtol in flight and fire in that mode?
Apparently the Generals at the Pentagon have forgotten about counter battery tactics. Once the enemy fires one artillery or mortar round, the exact location of that weapon will identified in under one minute.
Bad mistake!
No, the CSA wants the F-35. I wonder what the juicy piece of pie will be that he collects in his new retirement job.
1) The A-10 does not have a titanium hull only the cockpit area has a titanium tub.
2) The F-35 could not survive a hit that disables it's engine. When the engine goes down, the plane goes down.
3) All F-35s don't have hover capability, only the F-35B USMC version does. The hover capability isn't very useful in a hot ground support zone where low and slow isn't healthy. However the Marines have learned from the Harrier that VIFFING is a valid air to air combat maneuver.
On the plus side, I think the F-35 is going to evolve into a battlefield management asset much like a JSATRS. It can designate and manage targets for other assets to hit while it is high and relatively safe.
It is much to valuable to be placed in the environment where the A-10 works generally though. Wartogs rule below 250 feet.
This can’t be true.
They never do ...
of course, the army doesn’t operate a-10s, and won’t operate f-35s. having said that, it’s always been the air force that despised the a-10 because it wasn’t sexy.
you gotta wonder what’s happening behind the curtain to get the army CoS to say that.
It’s the physics! F35 low aspect airfoil and wing, A10 high aspect airfoil and wing. You can’t fool Mother Fluid Dynamics.
It’s like using a race car to plow your field.
Really.
What the armchair generals here don't understand is that the Warthog's 30mm cannon is only useful in a low-threat environment. In a near-peer war, the A-10 wouldn't last more than one pass over a troop concentration.
The F-35 can carry the Small Diameter Bomb inside of its bomb bay, which are laser and GPS guided. The F-35's outstanding situational awareness means that the pilot can much more easily discern friendlies from foes from a much higher, and safer, altitude.
And its built in laser designator means that from that higher, safer altitude, the F-35 can send those Small Diameter Bombs exactly where they need to go, even with friendlies in contact with the enemy.
The A-10 has its place in Afghanistan, and it should not be retired. However, in a shooting war against Russia or China, I'd rather be providing close air support from the F-35 than the A-10.
They’ve been insisting they don’t want the A10 since before it was complete. Yet here it is, still the best damn ground support aircraft ever.
~~~~~~~~~~~
The "Money Quote":
~~~~~
Note to POTUS & CIC Trump:
So maybe the answer is both aircraft. Currently the Air Force owns the A-10, and I don’t know why.
Looks like the Army isn’t thinking straight, and the Marines may not have the funding (when do they ever, all they do is most of the work).
It’s an expeditionary weapon. It’s a flying tank that takes ground.
They Army’s job is to HOLD ground once taken. The Air Force doesn’t have a job any other service couldn’t subsume, except maybe ballistic missiles.
Give all those out dated A10’s to the Marine Corps. They will know what to do with them!!!
So says Army field grade REMFs whose only view is out of a window in the Pentagon.
I’d like to see a two-seater version of the F-35, with the back-seater able to control a lower-flying companion drone with gun and air-to-ground missiles. The F-35 can stay high, away from most anti-air systems, while the back seater sees through the drone’s high-resolution cameras using a virtual-reality helmet.
The F-35 can take out more equipment and emplacements the the A-10.
Precision and cluster bombs are the key.
VIFFING looks neat at air shows but just about the last thing you want to do in a hostile air environment is lose air speed and energy.
It wasn't used in the Falklands or either Gulf War.
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.