Military AI Works

I'm just baffled why they are so quick to give up a plane that's paid for and has been vital to the types of wars we've been in the last few decades, im still waiting for someone like the Air Combat Command four star to be like "WTF OVER!?"

Everyone's so fast to blame the Air Force and it's decision makers, but like I said before it's not their fault it's the people who are leading this country's government making those USAF leaders have to make tough choices.

Imagine you got a paycut tomorrow, you would have to make those same choices regarding all of your bills and expenses too....

Love the A-10, but when you have to choose between funding an old aircraft that has very high upkeep costs versus funding a new aircraft with "all the bells and whistles", it's not hard to see why the A-10 is going to get the raw end of that deal.

Same thing that killed the Tomcat....ironically, the Tomcat is the ideal platform for what the Navy consider's it's future "War Scenario" (China).

The Tomcat had the loiter ability the Hornet/Superhornet do not....and the Navy already recently admitted that in a war with China situation they can't get the Carriers safely close enough to launch strikes

Because China has a nasty missile nick-named the carrier killer the DF-21D. It is a nasty little bugger.

MIKE JG wrote:Love the A-10, but when you have to choose between funding an old aircraft that has very high upkeep costs versus funding a new aircraft with "all the bells and whistles", it's not hard to see why the A-10 is going to get the raw end of that deal.

The A-10 has always gotten the short end of the stick... it's not the first time the AF has tried to kill it off in favor of shiny objects. As long as the A-10 can't do fancy thrust vector manuvers for the generals, it will get shafted... even if it is the best thing on the battlefield.

I seem to recall that the last time the Air Force tryed to dump the A-10, the Army said they would take them. That of course raised a bit of a stink.