Comments by "Gort" (@gort8203) on "The A-7D Brake Scandal" video.

USAF certainly preferred the F-105 over the A-7 for strike, but it ended up preferring the A-7 over the A-1 for Close Air Support, which is what it was bought for at the insistence McNamara to make the Army happy. The F-106 was not really an alternative to the F-4. The F-4 was adopted by USAF to fill an urgent need for a new tactical fighter. As a dedicated bomber interceptor for ADC the F-106 was unsuited for a role for which the F-4 was ready.
4
@georgeburns7251 I don't believe USAF seriously considered acquiring the F-5 for service as a tactical fighter. They did the Skoshi Tiger combat evaluation to demonstrate its capability to the foreign market for which it had been developed. The F-5A was barely supersonic when clean, and it was no competition for the A-7 in terms of range, payload, or avionics. USAF already had one lightweight fighter with limited range and payload and I doubt they wanted another one. I'm sure there were pilots in the air force who wanted the F-5 instead of the A-7, but I have never heard that the service wanted that. Can you point to documentation?
4
@privatepilot4064 The plane must have been quite a dog with the TF-30 because even with the TF41 I'm told its thrust/weight was not very impressive.
3
@jcheck6 There is no comparison between the A-7 and the F-20, which are different types from different eras. You can compare the F-20 with the F-16, and when you do the reason for the F-20 not being wanted becomes evident.
1