Not to mention the JTACs, PJs, CSAR crews, all those airmen who drove convoy duty in Iraq...

Thanks to modern IADS and MANPADs, the A-10 IS technically unfeasible. MANPADs are the reason A-10s don’t go into Syria.

The A-10 was never retired. When the sequester hit back in 2013, the AF budget was slashed dramatically. Something had to go, and the A-10 is a redundant system (it only provides roughly 20% of all ground attack missions, the rest of the fleet can - and already is - doing the same thing). Now that the defense budget…

Saving the A-10 was a political/money thing that was ran from Congress. Certain legislators with A-10 bases in their home districts didn’t want to lose them (JOB$)

Congress sets the budget.

Please. It took the Army 20+ years and over $20B to field a Kiowa replacement. RAH-66, then ARH-70, then finally they decided, “screw it, let’s just use AH-64Es.” Billions spent, but at least Rucker got a couple of RAH-66s to put on display. Not to mention the billions spent on camouflage that doesn’t work anywhere…

I wish I could like this comment more.

Kinda hard for A-10s to attack anything in Syria since we pulled them from that theater months ago due to the MANPAD threat.

Kinda hard for A-10s to attack anything in Syria since we pulled them from that theater months ago due to the MANPAD threat.

Yup. It’s all in the avionics. It’s why the UAE’s Block 60/61 F-16s are so much more expensive than the Block 40/50s.

And coming in 2017....

What does the force structure of NATO allies have to do with anything regarding the F-22? You’re not making any sense.

We also have a larger economy and more defense treaty agreements than the UK, Germany or France has. You’re making an apples to oranges comparison.

Who said anything about Taiwan? China can’t get along with any of their neighbors and there’s been an increase in the amount of disputes over islands, not to mention the China’s construction of man-made islands in shipping lanes and claiming that are as their territory. We’ve got defense agreements with at least half…

That’s what they said 10 years ago, then in 2011 they flew the first one when Robert Gates visited. Low rate initial production is already underway.

J-20 is no longer in the prototype stage, it has entered into low rate initial production. Aside from the quantitative advantage the other side would have in such a situation, they would also have the advantage of operating within their own IADS umbrella.

They should wait a year or two, and then fire the Secretary and Chief of Staff of the Army.

Procurement decisions made today will affect the military for decades to come.

What is the maneuver penalty/g-limit for this bad boy?

Thank you for your input. Thank you for kicking ass.