Comments by "Comm0ut" (@Comm0ut) on "Finally! The Air Force received its New Super Light Attack Plane" video.

  1. What does the contract INCLUDE? This may be incredibly difficult for those outside aviation to understand but aircraft require long term maintenance, support, spare parts and more. It's not like Bubba buying a bass boat.
    6
  2. Brazil is not a stable partner. Nothing below the US/Mexico border is stable. Tucano is fine to hand to client nations who are going to lose them anyway, but not for long term US use.
    5
  3. They fly very different roles at very different costs. A-10 was a flak sponge back in Desert Storm where I worked next to them at KKMC. This is 2024 not 1974.
    5
  4. They have nothing in common. Why do people who haven't a clue about either system have opinions?
    4
  5. This may be incredibly difficult to understand but this SOCOM bug smasher is not used in a fighter role. Other turboprop aircraft like Pilatus Porter do yeoman service in the roles it is intended for.
    2
  6. I defy you to articulate a modern mission case justifying that. "It looks cool" is not one.
    1
  7. It's pathetic clickbait for military illiterates. Check the wetodation level in the comments for proof.
    1
  8.  @jamescook7713  I quite enjoyed working on them but it makes zero economic sense to retool (there is no tooling) to make an aircraft modern drones render obsolete. Manned FAC/attack systems are helpless against MANPADS and, much worse, require CSAR to rescue downed aircrew. Aircrew should either be at home station or replaced by automated systems. Manned aircraft have absurd cost disadvantages over drones. These little shitboxes are for specialty work which doesn't justify new build manned airframes.
    1