America’s Toughest, Ugliest Warplane Is Going Back Into Battle

I think an issue that's still up in the air is how you do CAS in a hot fire zone. High-speed jets are terrible for CAS, since they fly past the hot zone too quickly to be of much use. On the plus side, they don't get shot up much. A-10s are better for the CAS role but, of course, they are going to take fire because it's pretty hard to suppress all ground fire. Apaches are even more vulnerable. F/A-18s are good for CAS in general but A-10 still has the edge against armor.

So, I guess my stance would be: A-10 if facing armor, F/A-18 if you just need CAS and you're not going up against armor.

 

I have read that for every hour of flight, the F-35 will need 60 hours of maintenance. This is the plane which is proposed as a successor to the A-10. I hope reason prevails, with the A-10 being kept on the roster, for the plane is a proven thing that has a higher number of flight hours than maintenance hours.

 

The A-10 speaks:
http://up-ship.com/blog/?p=27379
Scroll down there and learn about how the P-51 Mustang was almost bright back as a tank buster http://www.aviastar.org/air/usa/piper_pa-48.php

Osprey did some tests
http://aviationweek.com/defense/osprey-fires-guided-rockets-and-missiles-new-trials

 

^ You're spamming random links again. None of those have anything to do with the discussion.

 

The Marine Corps do receive excellent air support from the marine air wings. The Navy has it' own fixed wing air force for naval operations. The Army should get the A-10 and AC-130 which are used for ground operations anyway.