>> however we still have the F-22 as our air superiority fighter which is still believed to be better then anything out there
I'm just going to leave this here:
I'm just going to leave this here:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/11/13/olsen_raptor_case_ge...
And the fact that the F-22's stealth coatings, even if they work, ablate in rain.
http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/11/f-35-gets-stealthier...
And of course the ludicrous idea that the F-35 can replace the A-10 Warthog in combat.
http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2012/01/a-10-f-35-air-force-...
The A-10 problem bugs me more than the others. The A-10 is a proven warplane that ground troops count on for cover. The F-35 doesn't have the capability to fulfill its role, which could place our troops in greater danger.
It is hard to beat A-10 in its role, instead i think something new will be developed on the edge of its envelope, specifically on the low end - big RC planes (mid-size VTOL drones carry-able by one Hummer) with Hellfires/etc controlled by the troops who need the cover - that would provide more prompt (though less powerful) air support than calling in for big guys help and waiting for it to appear.
But that said, I think there's a decent argument that can be made for phasing it out given current operational needs:
The A-10 was originally designed in the Vietnam-era as a close air support(CAS) aircraft for conventional wars, armed with a payload of unguided bombs and shells to destroy tanks.
Helicopters at the time couldn't carry these types of anti-armor heavy weapons, and strike aircraft like the A-1, A-6, and F-4 couldn't survive anti-aircraft fire at low enough altitudes to put their bombs on target. In CAS roles, missing the target meant killing friendlies, obviously unacceptable.
Thus, the A-10 was built like a beast so that it could survive SAM/AAA fire at the low-altitudes needed to deploy these weapons accurately.
Over time, however, CAS munitions have evolved with guidance, from missiles like the AGM-65 and Hellfire, to laser-guided (GBU-27) and GPS-guided (JDAM) bombs. These have longer ranges and thus don't require the carrier aircraft to be nearly as survivable. The A-10s resistance to AAA and small arms fire seems less relevant.
This suggests that the A-10 may be less necessary for strike roles, even if it carries them out admirably.