The AF generals do not give two shits about the ground troops

And the fact that they’re continually trying to kill it

What’s the problem?

More powerful engines?
More fuel?
Durable airframe with more ordinance capacity?
You got it!!!

A10 will survive in theater much better than an A29

In SE Asia we had a mix of B-52s, F-105s, A-1s, OV-10s, AH-1s, F-4s, F-100s, A-4s, A-6s...it was a plethora of air-to-ground aircraft. Look how that turned out. COIN is not determined by air power. Never has, never will be. If anyone tells you differently, they’re an idiot. COIN is a LONG, bloody and EXPENSIVE…

trying so hard to put the old girl out to pasture, rather prematurely I might add

A-29B is better suited for the COIN air support role in a permissive environment than a UCAV. We would have a few squadrons of those by now if certain Congressmen hadn’t put their reelections in front of our security needs.

Air Force has been trying to kill it ever since.

Somewhere after WW2 and the Korean war, the U.S. military became infatuated with high tech, ridiculously expensive platforms

What's the first thing they'll do with this in the field? Disable the "password" or whatever they use to secure it with because no one wants to deal with that shit when they're taking fire. And what a great time to NOT have security, but when you're most likely to be overrun.

data links and computer systems that could be jammed, infiltrated, hijacked or hacked by a capable foe. That is precisely why a low-down and fairly simple form of CAS have to remain in America's quiver.

The blue shadowed area on the right is puzzling although you can see multiple aircraft tracks inside of it. This could denote open ranges for use under visual flight rules, although I am not certain about this.

We had plenty of A-1s, OV-10s and AH-1s in Vietnam. Air power, be it a supersonic bomber or a a twin-engine observation aircraft, does not determine the outcome of a COIN.

The US has historically NEVER been good at COIN. This is not the fault of the Army or the Air Force, this is a due to the civilian leadership and…

Marines were VERY adamant about getting the F-35B. They flat out rejected the Super Hornets on purpose so as to not risk the F-35B procurement. Marine OAS Air is purposefully putting all their eggs in the F-35B basket.

The Air Force is trying to distance itself from anything that can do a job cheaply

Because everything that makes that Super Eagle a Super Eagle - the avionics, the FBW, the built in IRST, the TV - makes it almost as expensive as an F-22, but it'll still be just as vulnerable to SAMs as 35 year old legacy Eagle would be.

Edit: I don't think you can put F119 engines in an F-15, the engine bay in the…

Democrats didn't kill it, Secretary of State Robert Gates did because he kept telling us that the F-35 was soooooo much cheaper and could do the same job as the F-22 just as well as the Raptor could.

Air power, be it a supersonic bomber or a piston-engine open cockpit biplane, doesn't determine the outcome of a COIN.

This program was notoriously bungled by the Air Force and the DoD, and what should have been a high-priority, rapidly procured capability, turned into just another big stumbling defense program, with losing contractors challenging the winning contractor decision time and time again.