Right out of central casting and folding right in with much of the critique by Farley ... BEHOLD THE TONE DEAF SELF-REFERENTIAL GROUP THINK (in its natural habitat).
We talked specifically about the A-10, a weapon system I would dearly love to continue in the inventory because there are tactical problems out there that would be perfectly suited for the A-10. I have other ways to solve that tactical problem.Yes, the argument against the A-10 I have heard since I was an Ensign ... yet every single actual conflict we have we deploy almost every one and we never have enough to support our forces to the level needed. For goodness sake USAF - let's not let facts get in the way of our theories.
It may not be as elegant as the A-10, but I can still get the job done, but that solution is usable in another level of conflict in which the A-10 is totally useless.
Oh, and the idea that the Tiffany in price and robustness of a F-35 can do what the A-10 can is simply a professional untruth. We need to be building a modern A-10, not getting rid of the capability. All that will do is cause huge losses in attack helicopters and F-35 who try to "make it happen" when the A-10 isn't there.
If I do not keep that F-22 fleet viable, the F-35 fleet frankly will be irrelevant. The F-35 is not built as an air superiority platform. It needs the F-22.I am sure all the nations buying the "F"-35 are glad to hear that.
Yea ... the USAF; its a thing.
As a side-note, we'll have Farley on Midrats on 09 March to discuss his book - to mark your calendars!