Comments by "Titanium Rain" (@ChucksSEADnDEAD) on "Why are we so obsessed with the A-10 Thunderbolt?" video.

  1.  @wetlettuce4768  Boeing got a massive payday from the contract to make new wings.
    4
  2.  @elitedima9672  "lost" - it went 17:1 in Red Flag, I call that a win.
    3
  3.  @elitedima9672  "Stealth technology is exaggerated." - and yet both Russia and China is implementing it. "Serbians shot down F-117" - due to 1) careless flight planning making the F-117 flights predictable 2) short engagement distance 3) bomb bay that was stuck open and broke stealth 4) lack of RWR, the pilot only knew he was targeted when he saw a missile breaking through the clouds. The fact that the feat hasn't been replicated ever since is a testament to how difficult it was. "Russian advancement in radar technology" - radar technology is a very broad statement. Stealth aircraft redirect some radar energy due to their angular faces and absorb some radar energy in their coating. You cannot detect energy that doesn't bounce back. Unless the Russians have managed to break the laws of physics, "radar technology" is just simply too vague. "infrared search and tracking systems" - stealth aircraft have reduced IR signature compared to conventional aircraft "electronic counter measures" - Is this a joke? If you beam anything at an aircraft you have signed your own death warrant because you never know if a flight is carrying missiles that can home-on-jam. "F-35 is supposed to replace A-10 warthog, which means it is mainly designed for ground-attack purpose" - the F-16, F-15 Strike Eagle, B1, etc already largely replaced the A-10, which receives less and less CAS missions. Neither the F-16 or the F-15 were designed mainly for ground-attack purpose so your argument doesn't even make sense and I don't even understand what you're trying to say. Your first link: it wasn't a "dogfight test". It was a flight test using an old version of the software. Those test results helped refine the control software so that the plane doesn't bleed as much energy when coming in and out of high AoA maneuvers. Your medium links are for War is Boring, which is as credible as Buzzfeed. Please. Real exercises show that the F-35 wipes the floor with the competition. Meanwhile salty soyboys write disparaging articles on their glorified blogs. Who do I trust? The powerful aircraft capable of destroying anything in it's way? Or the Buzzfeed rejects passing themselves off as military analysts?
    2
  4.  @Lonewolfmike  "It does matter when it takes forever to turn your aircraft" - you're confusing turn radius for turn rate. "The A-10 has a much tighter turn radius than an F-35 could ever dream of and that is fact" - And the F-35 is a better plane and that's a fact. There's facts to support any argument you want, what matters is correctly using them in context. Within context, turn radius is not that important. You could probably get a better turn radius out of an acrobatic biplane. So what? "a tighter turn radius means more to troops on the ground than all the fancy electronics an F-35 has" - bullshit lol. With all the friendly fires involving A-10s they should be worried about the man in the sky accurately telling friend from foe and not how many feet it takes to make a turn. If the guy up there takes a tight turn to then blast you to bits by mistake because his situational awareness is lower, electronics start to make a whole lot of sense. "an F-35, to my knowledge has not been used for close ground support." - and the F-22 has never shot an air target down. So what? "And the A-10 had been PROVEN to be of great help to ground troops" - it also has been proven to be worse than the F-16, F-15 Strike Eagle, F/A-18, etc. "Watch this and you will see why an A-10 is so much better at ground support" - Really, a history channel documentary? Not to beat a dead horse by questioning the History Channel's accuracy (because that is a concern) but right from the gate they interview Pierre Sprey, who is considered a lunatic and a paid shill who has appeared multiple times on RT aka Putin's propaganda machine (not saying "MuH RuSsiA" but if Putin doesn't want the US to trust the F-35, it's because it's an amazing aircraft). He also got demolished in a debate with 'Chip' Burke, former pilot and JTAC who both flew the top fighter aircraft in USAF inventory but also fought on the ground with special operations teams. The rest of the documentary is basic-bitch information for any newcomer to aviation. Sorry, but a History Channel documentary that seems to have been made at least 15 years ago isn't the best source to state your case when real world combat records prove that the A-10 is hopelessly outdated and has been on life support for too long.
    2
  5.  @cattraknoff  bullshit lol then why is the F-16 one of the best planes ever built?
    1
  6.  @Lonewolfmike  you do realize short wings don't mean much when the fuselage provides lift as well, right?
    1
  7. Considering it's mostly been replaced by the F-16, Strike Eagle, B1, etc it shouldn't be that hard of a question to answer.
    1