Hawg

Combat bursts are a big depends. I have shot 50 rounds on a pass, or 200 during OEF sorties. It depends on the target and desired weapons effects of the ground commander. What ultimately kills targets are bullet density, which will depend on slant range. As a current F-35 guy who flew A-10s for 8.5 years, the lack of visual, flexible, forward firing ordnance is what makes me the most nervous about this new platform. The 18 year old on the ground with a rifle needs to be the focus, and how we best support their objectives.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Grumble

What about loiter in the JSF, never mind all the other others.

Could the A-10 shoot HEI?

Hawg

In a closer CAS fight, inside 150NM, you can get about 1 hour of loiter time from the jet.

The A-10 has been shooting hundreds of thousands of these HEI rounds for decades, http://fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/pgu-13.htm


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

SayAlt

Seriously, what is this "head-to-head" boondoggle supposed to prove?

There is no way the F-35 is going to match the A-10's performance in a CAS role, and no way the A-10 will match the F-35 in an ACM role.

I get it that the F-35 is intended ("designed") to be a multi-mission platform from the get-go, unlike the A-10. I get it that the F-35 supposedly incorporates all kinds of new gee-whiz gear the A-10 doesn't have. It is also my understanding that the F-35 costs assloads more $$ than the A-10 and.....factoring in cost and budget overruns....it would've been FAR more cost effective to keep the A-10 than continue development of the F-35.

Oh yeah, also that nobody has taken on an F-15 in actual combat and won. Ever. (Which is not to say it wouldn't happen going forward from present, just that it hasn't yet...which is incredible given it's length and breadth of service). And now we have the F-22, which by some accounts is equal to 4-5 F-15s.

What am I missing??

This comment right here tells you everything you need to know. As a current F-35 guy and given the political ramifications surrounding the F-35 program, Hawg can't speak freely and ya gotta read between the lines. Noting that, it ain't hard to decipher the message.

Slim11

I was never the "18-year-old on the ground with a rifle," but was on the ground. Should we ever meet, I owe you more than a couple of beers!

EasternATC

This idea is anathema to Welsh, Carlisle, and co.

Hawg

First round is on me, I can't imagine what it's like to be on the ground during a troops-in-contact situation.

badflaps

If all this is true, how did the Marines get sucked in?

hindsight2020

The Marines? Sucked in? LOL They're the ones who precipitated the entire fraud, waste and bridge to nowhere in the first place, by peddling that idiotic VTOL mission requirement for this Joint disaster. This thing was already a pork barrel civilian employment boondoggle, but it was the Marine requirement that brought it to the epic level.

7 Things The Marines Have To Do To Make The F-35B Worth The Huge Cost

BeatNavy

Yup. Can't think of one scenario where VTOL capability has been or could be of any real benefit. I think carrier groups and land based fighters/attack aircraft, as well as attack helos, provide solutions to every situation where air support is needed. f35 could have potentially been a much better plane if that requirement wasn't there.