Comments by "Geoffrey Lyons" (@granatmof) on "Why the Air Force is Screaming to Retire the A-10 Warthog" video.

  1. So kill counts would be exaggerated due to poor visual ability etc. No need to attribute to maliciously bad reporting what can easily be explained by bad data. All air units did so because identifying a dead tank or armor is a bit difficult. Plus if you hit a tank carrying troops on top and you see smoke and bodies you'd think the tank is dead. All that to say though the F111 Aardvark had about twice the kill numbers of the A10 assuming the same discrepancies in reporting. The downside though was the F111 accounted for a much large fraction of maintenance and support hours. It was a robust plane for it's role as a low altitude supersonic medium range attack craft. Honestly the extended range and capacity is something they need to be eye for the NGAD programs for the AD Nad Navy. External fuel pods will just increase radar cross section, and larger payload and loiter time means more forward command and control.
    14
  2. Lasers are coming for drone defense.
    7
  3. Reportedly from other channels, some enemies in the GWOT would notice when US aircraft would take cover due to the incoming A10 and would take cover themselves, undermining the efficacy of the A10. Honestly great coverage. it included everything I was familiar with. Not sure if I missed you talking about the 2016 upgrade resulted in removing g the ruggedness. The A10 now needs paved air fields to prevent damage to the more sensitive sensors. The cannon is out of date for armor. But the number of hard points for missiles can't be understated. Compared to the 4 missiles of the F35, the Maverick has stupendously more.
    1