> The problem with the A10 is if you don't expect soviet tanks to pour across Germany there's no point in a giant flying gun.
You should check out some videos on YouTube of the A-10 in action in Afghanistan and Iraq - particularly the ones from soldiers on the ground. It’s a devastating and effective weapon. The only thing that delivers comparable capabilities is the helicopters (and maybe the AC-130), but none of them have a gun like the A-10.
I’m not military, but know plenty of people who are (and I’ve read a lot about this). My understanding is that ground forces love the A-10 for what it can do for them. They can communicate with it and give the pilots precise instructions about where to deliver the rounds. Drones can’t do that.
Ground troops do love the A-10 but there's plenty of reasons the brass has decided to retire it.
The A-10 was specifically made for CAS against Soviet armor. It's essentially a 30mm cannon with wings. The nature of warfare has made that role much less feasible, though; armor is more effective, anti-aircraft weapons are more deadly, and detection methods are more accurate. There isn't a lot of room for big, slow, low-flying planes like the A-10 in modern warfare.
Nowadays it obviously isn't used against mass formations of Soviet armor. Drones are capable of delivering the same kind of support that the A-10 is used for, just not necessarily the drones the US military uses today.
The thing is it was ineffective against Soviet Armor within a few short years it reached active service. It's 30mm was of little to no effectiveness against T-72's. It would instead have to use it's Maverick missiles against tanks. But at that point why not use something which can carry more Maverick's instead of a flying 30mm?
> They can communicate with it and give the pilots precise instructions about where to deliver the rounds. Drones can’t do that.
That isn’t true. We can target with laser precision from the ground, using a drone as the weapons platform. The A-10 was great at making a big mess (like an artillery barrage, but calling in drones can unleash hellfires with the accuracy of hitting a Honda Civic.) Drones can also stay on station for 12+ hours and you don’t have to wait for them to show up.
All the drones I’ve seen have relatively limited weapons capacity. Nothing close to the A-10. I do agree this is probably the future, but we’re not there yet.
You should check out some videos on YouTube of the A-10 in action in Afghanistan and Iraq - particularly the ones from soldiers on the ground. It’s a devastating and effective weapon. The only thing that delivers comparable capabilities is the helicopters (and maybe the AC-130), but none of them have a gun like the A-10.
I’m not military, but know plenty of people who are (and I’ve read a lot about this). My understanding is that ground forces love the A-10 for what it can do for them. They can communicate with it and give the pilots precise instructions about where to deliver the rounds. Drones can’t do that.