|
|
|
|
|
|
by crypto5
3378 days ago
|
|
|
> Did you just say we need a $1.5 trillion dollar fighter to fight goat herders? ISIS doesn't have an air force. ISIS potentially can have/get manpads, and MANPADS can have big advancements in foreseeable future.
Also US can face contested environment in operations similar to Kosovo war, operations in Libya, Iraq, Panama, where local army had more advanced SAMs in possession with needs to suppress them. > We literally have zero need to protect power across the globe. Our presence in the middle east is extremely costly and counterproductive to our security. This is question of policy, and is a mess for me. I am not going to speculate about this. > And the F-35 is guaranteed to be terrible at close air support. No F-35 pilot is going to slowly loiter their supersonic within visual range of their targets and without doing that they can't see exactly what they are shooting. The main weapon for ground support planned to be SDB2. Also optics/targeting system is presumably much more advanced on F-35 comparing to A-10. |
|
|
The SDB2 costs quarter million a pop, and the F-35 is still 5 years away from being able to field one. If used in standoff mode the F-35 is a poor choice, not only can drones deliver the SBD2, B1 can carry more than 20x more of them and loiter far longer. If used in the other modes the A-10 could be adapted to carry twice as many, deliver them just as effectively and with its huge big gun and ability to safely loiter close offers a much better follow up punch.