this post was submitted on 19 Aug 2023
148 points (96.8% liked)
NonCredibleDefense
3496 readers
1 users here now
Rules:
- Posts must abide by lemmy.world terms and conditions
- No spam or soliciting for money.
- No racism or other bigotry allowed.
- Obviously nothing illegal.
If you see these please report them.
Related communities:
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I know the A-10 is obsolete but why not let the brrrrrrrrrrrrrrt Horn of Warthog sound one last time. Let it do what it was bred to do at least once.
A-10s were...bred? 😳🥵
Giggity.
It wouldn’t survive long enough, unfortunately. Look at all the coverage of manpads and drones, so many anti-aircraft and anti-misfile systems. It really drives home the point that close in air support with a manned aircraft has become suicidal, even in an A-10.
I always wondered how an F-35 could replace the A-10 for ground support. Clearly it can’t but I believe the goal is precision attacks while staying at a safer distance.
Look at how Russia is using their Air Force. In general, staying out of range while shooting “precision” weapons.
F-16 has some really amazing capabilities but I hope they don’t try to use them for close support. Ukraine needs F-16s to bring the fight to the Russian Air Force. It’s no longer ok for them to fly 50 miles offshore to shoot missiles from any direction
I assume the hesitation was because Ukraine is obviously also interested in stopping Russian Air Force from shooting missiles 100 miles behind the lines … over or near Russian territory
As much as I love the Warthog, it's very slow & would be a sitting duck for MANPADs, s-300s & s-400s.
On the other hand, the F-16 was designed for SEAD.