General Discussion

malthaussen

(18,573 posts)

16. It's a good thing we don't really need a military.

Reply to n2doc (Original post)

Tue Feb 25, 2014, 12:11 PM

Feb 2014

Seriously, some of the choices they've been making are idiotic.

-- Mal

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

46 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

DOD aims to scrap A-10 to keep F-35 alive in new budget [View all] n2doc Feb 2014 OP

Truly idiotic jsr Feb 2014 #1

k&r for exposure. n/t Laelth Feb 2014 #2

well of course anything sensible is out of the question librechik Feb 2014 #3

Best airplane the US ever produced, except maybe the B-17 Recursion Feb 2014 #4

yeah i gotta say as ugly as they are they look beautiful when you see them come in to support loli phabay Feb 2014 #19

Please mister, please don't play B-17! arcane1 Feb 2014 #29

lets not leave out the C-130 as a potential best DrDan Feb 2014 #45

There is no money in promoting and keeping a warplane that works. TxVietVet Feb 2014 #5

At least it's better than the Osprey. Hopefully. Recursion Feb 2014 #7

It works perfectly. arcane1 Feb 2014 #30

I think the term you're looking for is "corporatist fascism" Nuclear Unicorn Feb 2014 #37

Wouldn't the relatively low stall speed Enthusiast Feb 2014 #43

Love that plane... Lost_Count Feb 2014 #6

Dangerous as shit, as far as flyboy jobs go Recursion Feb 2014 #8

Probably more satisfying too... Lost_Count Feb 2014 #13

wonder why. Not. cali Feb 2014 #9

Typical. Scrap something that works and get something that doesn't. hobbit709 Feb 2014 #10

k&r appal_jack Feb 2014 #11

I can't imagine an F35 on the deck providing close air neverforget Feb 2014 #12

It won't be atreides1 Feb 2014 #14

As an ex-tanker, I love the A-10. Aristus Feb 2014 #15

It's a good thing we don't really need a military. malthaussen Feb 2014 #16

The Air Force wants to replace the A-10, the F-16, and some F/A-18s with three F-35 variants. Lasher Feb 2014 #17

The airforce is replacing some, the Navy and Marines the other Savannahmann Feb 2014 #25

This is a good conversation to have. Lasher Feb 2014 #40

Remember we cut the F-22's down to a handful clffrdjk Feb 2014 #46

This is a bad decision Gothmog Feb 2014 #18

We a ruled by morans. CFLDem Feb 2014 #20

If they were interested in reducing costs and increasing effectiveness, they should Egalitarian Thug Feb 2014 #21

Trillion Dollar Toy Octafish Feb 2014 #22

It's about the dumbest possible use of the money. Enthusiast Feb 2014 #44

I've heard that they're propping up the F35 because although the F18 is adequate in its current role Erose999 Feb 2014 #23

yup you basically want a flying tank, ie spooky. wonder if older style prop aircraft would work loli phabay Feb 2014 #24

The A-1 Skyraider was still in use in Viet-Nam Savannahmann Feb 2014 #27

Bring back the SPAD!!! SQUEE Feb 2014 #41

I read somewhere that the prop driven A1 Skyraider had the most sorties on any airframe used in 'Nam Erose999 Feb 2014 #28

what a misleading BS title Pretzel_Warrior Feb 2014 #26

The A10 isn't just a tank buster. Its one of the best aircraft we have for close air support. The Erose999 Feb 2014 #31

so what? It's old and outdated. I'd much rather bring to bear 21st century technology against Pretzel_Warrior Feb 2014 #32

Nice idea, except for the fact we don't have ANY F-35s in service friendly_iconoclast Feb 2014 #34

Except the A10 is not outdated. Especially considering that our future conflicts will most likely be Erose999 Feb 2014 #35

It remains the most effective close air support aircraft in US service Lurks Often Feb 2014 #36

If we don't need a tank-killer because we aren't killing tanks Nuclear Unicorn Feb 2014 #38

Speaking as an old time Army Grunt Bandit Feb 2014 #42

This is really going to piss off US Soldiers. MrScorpio Feb 2014 #33

The A-10 supports ground troops, which are Army or maybe Marines, amandabeech Feb 2014 #39