Yuku free message boards

Michael Hoddy wrote:

---

1. Are you all telling me that we're going to start targeting insurgents driving around in pickup trucks with JDAMs or SDBs?


The F-35 is an F-16 replacement- it does the same sorts of missions. If mid-to-high altitude PGM-dropping is the mission that can replace the A-10, why isn't the F-16 replacing the A-10 in deployment?

1. Yes, or guns, and the F-35 will have one (25mm, though w/ limited ammo). If you read accounts of deployments of F-15's, 16's and 18's in WOT missions they use their guns a fair amount, and I've never heard of situations where even 20mm couldn't deal with the targets. Or, UAV's with even smaller PGM's than an SDB.

And the targets of the last few years are hardly shooting back at all effectively v jets (including A-10's). The effective enemy anti-air efforts have almost exclusively v helicopters often with RPG's (which aren't relevant to attacking jets) or MANPADS which have sometimes worked against fixed wing transports too, but hardly ever in the wars since 2001 tagged a fast jet. And, while A-10's and fast jets have shrugged off MANPADS hits, it's not likely in any given case with either one (especially advanced ones where the guidance system aims for the front of the plane). The main technique for both is stay out of enevelope as much as possible. That's why the A-10 needs the full PGM capability of A-10C, to remain effective and relevant; A-10's are definitely not the most capable CAS platform in the current environment, for lack of those capabilities. That PGM capability, and ability to receive automated target data will be the A-10's main 'weapon' for the rest of its career, the gun will be secondary as with other types.

2. They aren't buying new F-16's. Why buy new F-16's to replace A-10's? it's not like there's some big surplus of existing F-16C/D's with lots of airframe life. Upgrading A-10's makes more sense and is being done. But why develop a whole new A-10 type a/c? So next time around the fast jet (F-35) replaces that type, also makes sense IMO. Again the key capability for ground support is a linkage of data between ground (or UAV or other) observors' and the plane's GPS munitions in as quick and automated and foolproof a manner as possible, and in the other direction, direct linkage to the ground of the view from the plane's targetting pod, using pods that can see well from relatively high altitude. A secondary requirement is that plane have some sort of gun for very low collateral damage strikes; all the planes we're talking about do. Otherwise a plane of the A-10's particular characteristics has no advantage. If COIN missions were *all* you needed, then a simpler plane (still not necessarily of the A-10's particular characteristics) would be cheaper, and have no F-35. But as it is, a specific A-10 replacement would be a whole new program: not justified. But with the money (and new wings) the AF is putting into many A-10's, the replacement of A-10's by F-35's will probably be towards the end of F-35 production, still a long way away.

Joe