I just don’t get the hate for the A10 by the airforce flyboys. It is one third to one fifth the cost of the F35. That pays for a hell of a lot of depleted uranium.
They aint sexy, unless you are ground pounder.
I’m with you on that. It doesn’t make a lot of sense.
It comes and goes in about 20 year cycles. It cycles between dedicated aircraft and designs so you end up with multiple types of aircraft and then it cycles back to we can do this all with one aircraft.
Right now, the generals are in favor of the universal air frame theory.
If the Air Force succeeds in replacing the A-10 with the F-35, the Army needs to start training its own fixed wing pilots again and procure their own replacement for the A-10. The F-35 simply is not as mission capable for the close air support role:
http://defensetech.org/2015/01/02/a-tale-of-two-gatling-guns-f-35-vs-a-10/
“That pays for a hell of a lot of depleted uranium.”
How much is Iran asking for it these days?
No it is better to be at 30,000 feet in mock dog fights in peace time and in war time shoot your stand off weapons. More glamorous and less dangerous.
It’s really simple: USAF jet jockeys don’t like to fly low or slow, and they love their bells and whistles. The A-10 is the antithesis of their multi-billion videogame-on-steroids planes reserved for a select few.
There are plenty of Flyboys who want to keep them, nay, increase their numbers and keep enhancing the airframe with newer components.
It is, after all, a bunch of AIR FORCE people who fly them and maintain them. Ask them, they love them!
It’s just the brass are politicians—or soon-to-bees, and the politicians are beholden to the lobbyists, and the lobbyist have the money to push them to the F-35.
They have to pay to play, and once you make General, you’re close to retirement and that high-priced executive job at a defense supplier...
But do not assume that everyone in the USAF hates the A-10. Too many are cowards to oppose the high-ranking haters, though.