Video Above: U.S. Army AI Uses Human Brain as a Combat "Sensor"
Long-revered by ground troops as a “flying-tank,” the combat proven A-10 has been indispensable to ground-war victory. Its titanium hull, 30mm cannon, durability, built-in redundancy and weapons range has enabled the aircraft to sustain large amounts of small arms fire and combat damage - and keep flying.
Given these factors, and the A-10s long and distinguished record of accomplishment in war, some might wonder why the U.S. Air Force is still moving quickly to retire the classic aircraft.
An A-10 Warthog prepares to take off from Al Asad Air BaseWhile specifics informing many Air Force decisions of this kind are likely not available, the service has long maintained that the F-35 is well positioned to pick up the Close Air Support Mission.
F-35 Close Air Support: Advantages
Upon initial examination, some might regard a stealthy, 5th-Gen F-35 as ill-equipped or at least not-suited for close air support. However, a closer look does seem to uncover a handful of advantages.
- Long-range F-35 sensors could enable the aircraft to see and destroy enemy ground targets with precision from much higher altitudes and much farther ranges than an A-10 could.
- The speed of an F-35, when compared to an A-10, would potentially make it better able to maneuver, elude enemy fire and get into position for attack.
- Like the A-10s 30mm gun, the F-35 has its own 25mm cannon mounted on its left wing which could attack ground forces.
- Given its sensor configuration, with things like a 360-degree Distributed Aperture System with cameras, the F-35 brings a drone-like ISR component to air-ground war. This could help targeting, terrain analysis and much-needed precision attacks as US soldiers fight up close with maneuvering enemy ground forces.
- An F-35 might be better positioned to respond quickly to enemy force movement.
A CF-6 operational check flight out of Fort Worth, TX.- In the event that enemy air threats emerge in a firefight, an F-35 could address them in a way an A-10 could not, obviously.
- An F-35 would be much better positioned to locate enemy long-range fires points of combat significance and destroy hostile artillery, mortar or long-range-fires launching points.
- Finally, while the A-10 has a surprising wide envelope of weapons, an F-35 could travel with a wider range of air-ground attack weapons - armed with advanced targeting technology.
- Also, fighter-jet close air support is by no means unprecedented. F-22s were used against ISIS, F-15s were used against insurgents in Iraq - and the F-35 recently had its combat debut in Afghanistan.
F-35 Close Air Support: Unknowns
There are, however, some unknowns likely to be informing the current analysis.
- How much small arms fire could an F-35 withstand?
- Could it draw upon an A-10-like “hovering” technology to loiter near high-value target areas?
- To what extent could it keep flying in the event that major components, such as engines or fuselage components, were destroyed in war?
- How much could A-10 weapons and targeting technology be upgraded?
-- Kris Osborn is the President of Warrior Maven and The Defense Editor of The National Interest --
Kris Osborn is the defense editor for the National Interest. Osborn previously served at the Pentagon as a Highly Qualified Expert with the Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army—Acquisition, Logistics & Technology. Osborn has also worked as an anchor and on-air military specialist at national TV networks. He has appeared as a guest military expert on Fox News, MSNBC, The Military Channel, and The History Channel. He also has a Master's Degree in Comparative Literature from Columbia University.