Slashdot Mirror
F-35 To Face Off Against A-10 In CAS Test
An anonymous reader writes: Lara Seligman from Defense News reports that the capabilities of the Joint Strike Fighter are to be evaluated for close-air support (CAS) missions. She writes, "To gauge the joint strike fighter's ability to perform in a close-air support role, the Pentagon's top weapons tester has declared the sleek new fighter jet must face off against the lumbering A-10. The Pentagon's Office of Operational Test and Evaluation plans to pit the full-up F-35 against the legacy A-10 Warthog and potentially other fighter jets to evaluate the next-generation aircraft's ability to protect soldiers on the ground."
I expect the A-10 will have a very strong showing, regardless of how they try to cripple it in the tests.
sounds like a comparison that the F-35 can't win. It is more expensive to fly, can't hang around for long period's like the A-10 and is relatively fragile by comparison. The only way I see the F-35 coming out on top is with some very carefully crafted scenarios to favour it and some creative weightings on victory conditions.
It's staged because the F-18 kicks the ass off the F-35, and the cost of operation of the F-35 sucks as well, even though we're stuck with it.
Just watch, the evaluation criteria will be designed to have the F-35 come out on top, even though it lacks the armor of the Warthog, which not only jeopardizes the crew but the astronomically expensive asset as well.
I suspect that as the article says, there will be pros and cons of each. Obviously the A-10 has been very successful in this role, while the F-35 benefits from decades of technology advancements.
The A-10 is robust. The F-35 gives the pilot a much better view the of entire situation. The A-10 can put a lot of fire down in a small area as it flies low and slow. The F-35 can start applying fire earlier, while it's still further away. The A-10 is a proven system that has stood the test of time. The F-35 doesn't have to run away when an old Russian surplus fighter is detected in the area.
I really like the A-10 and generally I appreciate systems that have stood the test of time - newer doesn't mean better (aka the fundamental belief that means I'm a conservative) .
ALSO, when improvements are made, when someone "does it better", that's also new. SOMETIMES the new thing IS better is significant ways. We'll see what happens in the testing.
The F-35 IS expensive _per_unit_. The A-10 does one job, and there are several other aircraft that do different jobs. So the A-10 sits on the ground while there is air-to-air taking place, waiting while another aircraft handles that. IF the F-35 does four different roles, replacing four different types of aircraft, that cuts the effective cost by 75%. It wouldn't be parked on the tarmac waiting for a time when CAS in needed with uncontested skies. It could, supposedly, when the skies while also bombing enemy airfields , then do close air support.
Let's see how it actually does in testing before we declare the result.
30 years from now, they'll give up on fixing it, and retire it.
"Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
200 years from now, we'll still be paying for it.
Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
What we SHOULD HAVE done, is to revamp that A-10 production lines, and just improved every system aboard, then called it the A-12. Maybe increase the engine power a few percent. Update ALL the electronics - radars, navigation, computing, everything. Install larger fuel tanks, since one of the more legitimate complaints is the A-10's somewhat limited range.
In short, we should have just rebuilt the A-10. The basic engineering was done long ago, and done right. The airframe is solid, so we should stick with it. Maybe structural members can benefit from the addition of carbon fiber? Do it. Maybe computer models show that the precise placement of structural members can be improved? Do it. Maybe some of those wires can be replaced with more efficient fiber optics? Do it. We're looking for improvements, so build them in. When all is said and done, we'll have an updated A-10, and everyone is happy.
"Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
You didn't read the rest of the story, which states "In order to make the comparison fair, the A10 will be fuelled with paraffin wax and weedkiller, have a large number of anvils bolted to it, and will be dragging a large boat anchor. 'We hope this at least evens the odds a bit so the F35 will look OK', a Pentagon spokesthing was quoted as saying".
Sadly the A-10 will still come out on top as it can probably run on paraffin. It's also maneuverable enough that the pilots will turn the boat anchor into a weapon and swat enemy fortifications with it just before purging the boiling wax on their position. And still have enough fuel to loiter longer than the JST.
From TFA:
"We're looking at all the missions and where it would make sense to do comparison testing and where it wouldn't, and we're going to be working with the services to develop that plan."
In other words, that's exactly what will happen; they just need to figure out the best way to rig this in the shiny new thing's favour.
F_35 CAS:
Solider: "You see that that little hut next to the big tree two klicks from our smoke?"
F-35 pilot:"Negative, I have no visual"
Solider:"You have to come down from 35k"
F-35 pilot:"Negative, I'm not authorized to operate below 15k".
A-10:
Solider: "You see that that little hut next to the big tree two klicks from our smoke?"
Target disappears in a cloud of smoke, debris, and body parts.
A-10 Pilot: "You mean that one?"
When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
The A10 isn't a plane. It's a tank they managed to make fly.
http://www.aircraftresourcecen...
Why compare the F-35, a fighter with the A-10 a ground assault craft, wouldn't it make more sense to compare a ground assault craft to its replacement ground assault craft?
B/c they're trying to use the F-35 as a replacement for the A-10, something it's not really designed to do. It would make better sense to have a new plane designed for it but they've already sunk so much into the F-35 JSF program that they're trying to justify it.
Truth is like the sun. You can shut it out for a time, but it ain't goin' away. - Elvis Presley (source: imdb.com)