I’m not defending this guy’s sleazy tactics, but when was the last time you got drunk at your job interview?

Huh, I stand corrected. Looks like you pull out the second seat, and the plane holds 5 paratroopers (original spec called for 6). And by comparing it to the ST, I didn’t mean it copied the ST, just that it’s a similar size and function. The OV-10 is a Vietnam war era recon plane. The ST is a superior aircraft for a…

Yeah, drones are the future for sure, just not yet. The technology needs a couple of decades of maturity. And I wonder how much the USAF will really want to get rid of pilots once Russia and China deploy communication disruptors that prevent drone piloting.

Yeah, landing the F-35B on dirt is absolutely a last resort. All the crap kicked up when landing vertically on an unfinished surface would damage the stealth coating and require a million dollars in repair work.

I agree that the Super Tucs are a great plane. And I agree for a CAS platform, two pilots is the superior configuration. However, they cost $20M each, (which is how much it cost per A-10 back in the 1980s), aren’t as well armored or built with redundant systems as an A-10, and don’t pack the same punch. I’d love to…

As in, “paring knife”

Will Russia sell the USA the Su-25?

Since 2003 we’ve lost 31 Kiowas, 29 Apaches, and 7 Super Cobras. In the same period we lost only one A-10.

The A10 is such a great plane cant they just make a modern day version of it?

IIRC most of that stuff is boron impregnated and a bitch to work with.

A10's have never come out to play until air superiority is established. Full stop.

This applies to any aircraft in inventory except perhaps the B-2 or F-22. At least the A-10 has the ability to fly at 200' and stay below radar coverage.

It’s true what you say. The stats I’ve seen show that the A-10 did 25% of CAS and other aircraft (B1, F16, F15) did the rest. All that being said, there’s only one aircraft that can reliably provide low-level CAS in a fluid firefight at “danger-close” distances in tight coordination with the JTAC while providing…

We’ve lost 29 Apaches since 2003 in combat theaters, in that same time we lost only one A-10.

Could we build a better CAS aircraft? Sure, but it would cost many times the amount required to simply maintain the A-10 and provide little real-world advantage. I think the idea of a prop-driven CAS aircraft is great, but the A-29 is too light and small, and still costs $20M a pop. We’d need to develop something…

We don’t need to build a better Warthog. The current plane is just fine. We have 350 of them in inventory, and the last time one was shot down was 1994. Upgrades and maintenance (for a pittance vs. developing a new aircraft) can keep them flying until 2050.

The A-10 will never be used for CAS support in actual war.

The Super Tucano is a nice plane, but as a complement to the A-10. It has a different role, especially with its dedicated target/weapons officer. He could mark the targets, and the A-10 could take them out. The SC just doesn’t have the firepower of the A-10, as cool as they are.

The F-35B only has a loiter time of 10 or so minutes, just like the Harrier it replaces. There’s a cost to VTOL, and it’s the fuel cost to take off and land. The F-35B has an additional cost: the extra weight it needs to haul around in the form of that stupid lift fan. In addition, it still can’t take the punishment…

You can keep maintaining and upgrading the A-10, easily through 2050. And it’s cheaper than developing an equivalent CAS airframe from scratch. Yes we’ll have to replace them at some point, but they still have a lot of life left in them. And it’s literally the only airframe that can reliably perform low-level CAS and…