A10 Warthog, pretty cool video

I haven't been following the debate. Is it close to being phased out for economic, political, or tactical reasons? The soldiers in the video seemed to suggest it was ambiguous.
 
Last edited:
Thought they wanted to phase it out in part to justify the trillion $ bill for the F-35 that's yet to actually surpass 40 year old fighters.
 
Thought they wanted to phase it out in part to justify the trillion $ bill for the F-35 that's yet to actually surpass 40 year old fighters.
Click to expand...

DOD gonna DOD as usual.
Click to expand...

Military industrial complex gonna military industrial complex, as always.

Nobody gets rich flying a 40 year old plane.
 
Thought they wanted to phase it out in part to justify the trillion $ bill for the F-35 that's yet to actually surpass 40 year old fighters.
Click to expand...

In fairness to the F-35A , they were testing it in dogfighting against the F-16 when the F-35 did not have all of its sensors nor the use of its stealth capabilities. Certainly there is a worry. Will the F-35 fare like the F-4 without guns against the Mig-21's in Vietnam? Or will the capabilities of the F-35 stealth and communication-wise be far superior to the T-50 or the J-20 to negate any maneuverability/speed superiority they may have. While certainly the project has some serious problems, I am not sure it could not become a useful platform like the V-22 or the Harrier. The role of the A-10 will likely be replaced with drones anyway. No need for a sturdy airplane when you can have relatively cheap manless drones firing hellfires at targets. Its not like the A-10 would do well against an integrated air-defense like the Russians would have, which was the enemy that was the primary reason for it existing.
 
Last edited:
Also, the JSF35A was not painted yet.
Click to expand...
You mean with its radar absorbent paint?????(I know you don't mean that, but it wasn't).
I know it is excessively overpriced and has not shown it can be a successful platform, but like it or not it is going to be the next primary combat aircraft of the air force, navy, and marines, so we better hope it doesn't completely suck. Like chris petersen!
 
Last edited:
Thought they wanted to phase it out in part to justify the trillion $ bill for the F-35 that's yet to actually surpass 40 year old fighters.
Click to expand...

In fairness to the F-35A , they were testing it in dogfighting against the F-16 when the F-35 did not have all of its sensors nor the use of its stealth capabilities. Certainly there is a worry. Will the F-35 fare like the F-4 without guns against the Mig-21's in Vietnam? Or will the capabilities of the F-35 stealth and communication-wise be far superior to the T-50 or the J-20 to negate any maneuverability/speed superiority they may have. While certainly the project has some serious problems, I am not sure it could not become a useful platform like the V-22 or the Harrier. The role of the A-10 will likely be replaced with drones anyway. No need for a sturdy airplane when you can have relatively cheap manless drones firing hellfires at targets. Its not like the A-10 would do well against an integrated air-defense like the Russians would have, which was the enemy that was the primary reason for it existing.
Click to expand...

Tactical fighter superiority guy...
 
Thought they wanted to phase it out in part to justify the trillion $ bill for the F-35 that's yet to actually surpass 40 year old fighters.
Click to expand...

In fairness to the F-35A , they were testing it in dogfighting against the F-16 when the F-35 did not have all of its sensors nor the use of its stealth capabilities. Certainly there is a worry. Will the F-35 fare like the F-4 without guns against the Mig-21's in Vietnam? Or will the capabilities of the F-35 stealth and communication-wise be far superior to the T-50 or the J-20 to negate any maneuverability/speed superiority they may have. While certainly the project has some serious problems, I am not sure it could not become a useful platform like the V-22 or the Harrier. The role of the A-10 will likely be replaced with drones anyway. No need for a sturdy airplane when you can have relatively cheap manless drones firing hellfires at targets. Its not like the A-10 would do well against an integrated air-defense like the Russians would have, which was the enemy that was the primary reason for it existing.
Click to expand...

The F16 was flying with exterior fuel tanks and the F35 was flying clean, but still.

And the A10 hasn't been replaced in the close air support role in Afghanistan yet despite DOD having intended that to have happened years ago, but still.

But, but, but. Sacred cows for $1,000 Alex.
 
Thought they wanted to phase it out in part to justify the trillion $ bill for the F-35 that's yet to actually surpass 40 year old fighters.
Click to expand...

In fairness to the F-35A , they were testing it in dogfighting against the F-16 when the F-35 did not have all of its sensors nor the use of its stealth capabilities. Certainly there is a worry. Will the F-35 fare like the F-4 without guns against the Mig-21's in Vietnam? Or will the capabilities of the F-35 stealth and communication-wise be far superior to the T-50 or the J-20 to negate any maneuverability/speed superiority they may have. While certainly the project has some serious problems, I am not sure it could not become a useful platform like the V-22 or the Harrier. The role of the A-10 will likely be replaced with drones anyway. No need for a sturdy airplane when you can have relatively cheap manless drones firing hellfires at targets. Its not like the A-10 would do well against an integrated air-defense like the Russians would have, which was the enemy that was the primary reason for it existing.
Click to expand...

The F16 was flying with exterior fuel tanks and the F35 was flying clean, but still.

And the A10 hasn't been replaced in the close air support role in Afghanistan yet despite DOD having intended that to have happened years ago, but still.

But, but, but. Sacred cows for $1,000 Alex.
Click to expand...
The F-35 greatest strength is not its dogfighting ability but, according to the propaganda department at Lockheed Martain, its stealth and information warfare capabilities. And if the stealth capabilities and information warfare are not to negate its inability to dogfight then it would pose a serious problem. But it is handicapping the F-35 by not considering its stealth characteristics and (supposed) information warfare, which were not apparently being looked at in those tests, so much as whether it could fly within its expected G envelope, as far as I can tell. Maybe those things are not as valuable, but just going off dogfighting seems to be unfair to me. There are apparently other tests where 3 F-16 lose to 3 F-35, and test that show a flight of F-35 defeat a flight of Su-27 before they get into dogfighting range (whether that is true or not depends on how effective its stealth and information sharing capabilities are). I honestly don't know enough about the tests to say one way or another, but I am hoping the F-35 will, eventually, be an improvement (although maybe not worth its obscene price tag) once its stealth capabilities and information warfare are fully implemented.
The A-10 is an excellent plane, but I do not know how successful it would be fighting an enemy with a modern air defense system and it is aging (how many combat planes last 35 years? not many, which is testament to how great the A-10 is). I would think you would need to neutralize that system first (look at how effective the Russian's were in Ukraine and grounding the Ukrainian Su-25's and Malaysian 777s). You will at least need planes to eliminate that threat or which can fly capably within that threat.
Again maybe the F-35 is a piece of shit but unfortunately it is going to be the primary fighter jet for the US and many NATO countries. If it does suck, we better just hope there isn't a major war in the next 25 years.
TL, DR:
Pray to God the F-35 doesn't suck
 
Last edited:
Nobody dogfights anymore. First person to see the other plane wins in modern aerial combat. By "see" I mean radar. Best radar + lowest radar cross section = win.

That said, F35 is still dogshit for what we are paying for it.
 
It's sad that they're trying to phase this plane out.
Click to expand...

Have to.

It's too effective and to expensive to supply the entire world.

Easier and cheaper to achieve battle fairness if we just shut em down.
 
Nobody dogfights anymore. First person to see the other plane wins in modern aerial combat. By "see" I mean radar. Best radar + lowest radar cross section = win.

That said, F35 is still dogshit for what we are paying for it.
Click to expand...

The future in air superiority is going to be 'drone beehives.'
 
Nobody dogfights anymore. First person to see the other plane wins in modern aerial combat. By "see" I mean radar. Best radar + lowest radar cross section = win.

That said, F35 is still dogshit for what we are paying for it.
Click to expand...

The future in air superiority is going to be 'drone beehives.'
Click to expand...

Swarm drones are the shit.
 
Imagine... #ubermilitary

gamers all sign into the drone battle off their smart phone app... on demand.

real time. real drone. real shit. #modernpatriotism
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top