Posted on 04/09/2015 10:24:33 PM PDT by sukhoi-30mki
It’s wrong to compare the F-35 with any other asset that was designed to perform a specific mission: this is, in simple words, what a U.S. F-35 pilot said in an interview he gave to the Danish website focusing on military topics Krigeren.
Interviewed at Luke Air Force Base, by Christian Sundsdal, Maj. John Wilson, an F-35 pilot with an F-16 background clearly explained something that is quite obvious to everyone: an A-10 Thunderbolt II will always be better in CAS than the F-35 because it was designed to perform that kind of mission. Similarly, an F-22 will always be better than the JSF in air-to-air combat, because it was designed for that role. However, the F-35 is better in all the other missions.
For sure, aircraft designed for a specific role are going to be more effective in that one than other multi-role platforms. The problem in this case is that the F-35 is going to replace these assets, even though many believe this is not cost-effective, and could even cost some human lives as far as CAS missions, with Troops in Contact is concerned.
Furthermore, according to Wilson, once all the limitations are removed and it can carry weapons, the F-35 will be as capable as the F-16 in the CAS role.
According to Wilson, the majority of CAS missions that have been flown in Iraq, Afghanistan or elsewhere, were flown by Predators, F-15E Strike Eagles, F-16s and F-18s.
“The A-10s make up a very small percentage [and the fact that] every JTAC or guy on the ground that has been saved, has been saved by an A-10, that’s just not true” Wilson says.
“If the guys on the ground are concerned about that…I’d say they shouldn’t be. They should only be concerned that the pilots of whatever aircraft it is, is properly trained and doing his job, dropping the right bomb, on the right target, at the right time.”
Wilson admits the aircraft is expensive, but he says that maintaining several different types in service is even more costly.
True, I actually don’t advocate getting rid of a-10. F-35 would fall out of skies at much higher rate being assigned to the same mission.
“I still maintain that the F-35 cannot fulfill the mission of the A-10. The F-35 is not the be all do all is is promoted to be.”
Whether it can or not, what does that have to do with the retirement of the A-10? If you don’t retire the A-10, which of the other squadrons are you going to retire instead, the entire fleet of B-1 bombers, the remaining B-52 bombers, the F-15 fighters or fighter-bombers, some more of the F-16 fighters or fighter-bombers, the AWACs, the air refueling squadrons, or some other squadrons?
My fiancée is a former USAF A10 Avionics tech, on the Pave Penny laser targeting system before the current LANTIRN equipment was standardized. Yes, she has flown in an A10 during a range gun run pass. No it was not a two-place aircraft.
the shape of the A-10 is dictated by its mission. The square wings are designed for optimized lift at low speed. The placement of the engines is designed for survivability.
Wrapping the F-117 shape around it makes the aircraft unable to perform its role.
Well, I really only know what the Air Force and Army people tell me first hand. Are you telling me the Air Force is keen to keep the A10? I’ll believe that Air Force pilots who fly it are, but not the Air Force Officers who run the Air Force.
“Well, I really only know what the Air Force and Army people tell me first hand. Are you telling me the Air Force is keen to keep the A10? I’ll believe that Air Force pilots who fly it are, but not the Air Force Officers who run the Air Force.”
How CAN THEY??? What do you expect them to do? Do you expect them to say we don’t like our budgets, so we’re going to overthrow and retire Obama and Congress with a military dictatorship right here and right now to dictate a new budget just to keep every one of our present air squadrons in operations? The Air Force Chief of Staff is a former A-10 pilot with 1,000 hours in the A-10 and loves the A-10. nonetheless, he has been ordered to make a choice which is going to result in reducing the Air Force budgets by one trillion dollars in the next ten years. Now how do you expect him to comply with his orders from the White house and Congress without retiring the A-10 and without retiring some other very badly needed air squadrons after the retirement of the A-10 squadrons? Why would you choose to abuse these Air Force officers for doing what their orders from the civilians are compelling them to do against their own better judgment?
I’m not saying that the A-10 should not ultimately be retired. All planes become outdated sooner or later. However, the A-10 is a special purpose aircraft and until something better is designed its should remain and then finally phased out. The F-35 has not filled that niche.
United States Air Force a division of Lockheed Martin.
Titanium bathtub
Wings
Engines whose shape provides lift
BFG
Done.
“I’m not saying that the A-10 should not ultimately be retired. All planes become outdated sooner or later. However, the A-10 is a special purpose aircraft and until something better is designed its should remain and then finally phased out. The F-35 has not filled that niche.”
No one is saying anything different, not even the Air Force Chief of Staff who is ordering the retirement of the A-10. What the Air Force Chief of Staff is saying is that the Air Force has been ordered to cut one trillion dollars in spending by retiring aircraft and squadrons; and because the A-10 is a one role aircraft, it must be sacrificed before sacrificing the multi-role aircraft and squadrons in further upcoming budget cuts. Instead of heaping abuse and maligning the motives and reputations of these Air Force officers, they need your sympathy and understanding for the thankless task they are being compelled to do, and they need your help in restoring the budget appropriations which would make such dangerous sacrifices and choices unnecessary.
You should also note there already has been a desire in the Air Force to design and produce an improved successor to the A-10 and its singular focus on the CAS mission, but the current and future cutting of the military and naval budgets by one-third in the next ten years makes such a concept aircraft an impossibility. If it were to be attempted, it would necessarily be compromised with a directive to design it as another multi-role aircraft to satisfy the budget concerns.
Or, we could just mount the GAU-8 30mm gun in a B52....
I presume you know who Hubert Fauntleroy Julian was? Former commander of the Imperial Ethiopian AF, among a great many other things....
Nah, that’s already been done with the AC-130 Spooky.
“Some recent news for you.”
Nothing new about it. We’re already discussing it elsewhere on FR. You’re readin’ slow...ya gotta keep up with the tempo, ya know....
The Army just needs to adopt A10-style drones. Then the USAF can drop this horrible, horrible tactical mission they’ve been saddled with and obviously want no part of.
“The Army just needs to adopt A10-style drones. Then the USAF can drop this horrible, horrible tactical mission they’ve been saddled with and obviously want no part of.”
Due to budget restrictions, the Air Force pilots are already being badly overworked to pilot the existing drones. As a consequence of this budget cutting and overtasking a severe pilot and crew retention problem has developed. The trainers have been sucked into operational duties to fill the gap in trained personnel, which has worsened their retention as well and bottlenecked their training of replacements. The Army has the same budget problems as the Air Force and cannot sacrifice its other critical missions either to embark on a drone mission large enough to replace A-10 support or even to supplement the overused Air Force assets. The time has come to recognize that the Congressional budgeting is now cutting into the sinew and bone of the armed forces to the point where their combat efficiency is going to be in grave doubt.
I don't believe that for a second. Not while sinkholes like the F35 charge ahead and forcing women into Infantry and Special Forces roles is the top priority for the brass. Hell, we had a commander drop a quarter-million on getting a command-wing bathroom installed near her office b/c walking an extra 100 feet was just too much for her.
The military is the epitome of "penny wise and pound foolish." We can't get paper towels for the bathrooms, but we can waste huge amounts of money on abandoned desktop PC virtualization projects.
“I don’t believe that for a second.”
Fine, you can “believe” anything you want; but until you can find the means to reduce the Air Force budget by one trillion dollars in the next ten years without retiring mission critical air and missile squadrons, you’re only using empty talk. So, what is it going to be, retire one-third of the F-16 aircraft and squadrons, the entire force of B-1 strategic bombers, AWACs, air refueling, or some other aircraft?
Apparently getting the budget straight means killing the cheap, effective A10 and lurching forward with the F35 boondoggle. But I guess that’s just empty talk, too.
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.