Originally Posted by JamesNoBrakes

Every time I click this thread to see the updates, I wonder: Would I want an A10 scrambled to make some gun passes or one of multiple drones that are just orbiting overhead to nearly instantly drop a maverick/jdam/munition to a location? How valid is this close air support idea? Can it be done with AC-130s? Seems like the ability of a forward observer to call in an instant strike with a drone at nearly any time would be pretty powerful. The "drones" may have a ways to go, but they are being developed and implemented at a pretty astonishing rate.

Originally Posted by rickair7777

AC-130's are CAS platforms by definition...but they're also vulnerable if there's any mech/armor and associated ADA in play. Best used for suppression of light crunchies or insurgents.

Originally Posted by 5spot

Not sure you could buy another AIRWING worth of Super Hornets. At the end of the day once you bolt on all of the pieces it has a pretty fat bill associated with it. Will you not be flying the Super Hornet until at least 2030 time frame as it is? Are they not still being built? Look man I LOVE the hornet. It has and continues to be a game changer but we still need to evolve. Like I keep saying the F-35 costs a ton. But at some point the US Military will HAVE to spend the money on something new. No matter what, it will be expensive. The F-35C is meant to compliment an Air Wing, not take it over. I believe the current plan would put 1 F-35C squadron in each Air Wing and by the time the Super Hornet becomes obsolete they will have the F/A-XX ready to go. Besides, the USN continues to throw a **** ton of money at the Super Hornet.

Why don't you engage in debate and not question my "Intellectual Honesty". There is nothing I have said that is "sunshine" pumping. I guess I am giving you a point of view you do not like to hear. But in the end, I'd take the Block II super hornet over the F-35, for the next 5 years. After that, no way.

Originally Posted by John Carr

Wasn't it mentioned in another thread that IF (say AGAIN, IF) opponents in Afghanistan ACTUALLY had something other than undisciplined 7.62 (and 5.45) that the A10 may not fare so well? Or rather, NOT be as effective, have to operate higher, etc.

IOW, if (AGAIN, IF) there were actual air defense measures, the A10 may not be able to be as effective as it is now.

http://www.airlinepilotforums.com/mi...tention-4.html

Originally Posted by rickair7777

I didn't say the A-10 is the end-all/be-all to CAS in the future, but it's inherently more survivable than Spooky, which is a niche system (but useful in it's proper niche).

Originally Posted by USMCFLYR

The A-10 isn't always the most dominate or effective. Pros/cons of all platforms.

Originally Posted by USMCFLYR

You are right though - even a moderately robust air defense drives the tactics as seen in the first Gulf War; and you know what they expected would happen to the A-10s should they plug the gap against the red hordes!

Originally Posted by USMCFLYR

The A-10 isn't always the most dominate or effective. Pros/cons of all platforms. You are right though - even a moderately robust air defense drives the tactics as seen in the first Gulf War; and you know what they expected would happen to the A-10s should they plug the gap against the red hordes!

Originally Posted by bay982

Navy pointy-nose guy here, and current adversary instructor. Friend currently testing F-35 has nothing good to say. On top of continuous bad media news. On top of production in 46 states. On top of boatloads of industry lobbyists pushing it. At least it's only multiple years behind schedule and considerably more than 100% over budget. I feel as though military guys defending it are suffering from some sort of cognitive dissonance. It's nearly a patriotic duty to shout out political and corporate failure when it's this egregious. The most expensive weapons program in history. Doing it's part to bankrupt the country.