A Guide to an Air Force: F-Series Version

[Die Erworbenen Namen]

The A10 is 11.8 MILLION DOLLARS! THAT IS DAMN CHEAP! COMPARE TO THE F-35 WHICH IS 130 MILLION DOLLARS THE A-10 IS NOT EXPENSIVE

Because it has almost no use...

[The Predator Federation]

The A10 is 11.8 MILLION DOLLARS! THAT IS DAMN CHEAP! COMPARE TO THE F-35 WHICH IS 130 MILLION DOLLARS THE A-10 IS NOT EXPENSIVE

Because it has almost no use...

Excuse me?

[Die Erworbenen Namen]

Because it has almost no use...

Excuse me?

It is literally the most useless plane in the entire American Arsenal. It excels at only one area of combat, and that area is already being taken by MRFs and strategic bombers. It can only attack ground targets, and lacks the ability to fight air targets. If paired up against an MRF, the MRF would destroy it completely, while still being able to pack a punch. Not only that, but the A10 is the LARGEST RADAR CROSS SECTION OF ANY FIELDED OFFENSIVE AIRCRAFT. It has no stealth, and limited defenses. It's 11.8 million for a reason.

Can the A-10 exceed Mach 2? No. Can the A-10 engage in air to air combat, while still being able to engage ground forces? No. Can the A-10 be launched from a carrier, and at the same time be STOL/VTOL? No. Can the A-10 preform multiple roles? No. Can the A-10 be stealthy? No.

It only engages ground targets at a limited range, and it's out of use now, really. It has only one use, and while that's pretty damn cool, that's ALL it has.

[The Predator Federation]

Excuse me?

It is literally the most useless plane in the entire American Arsenal. It excels at only one area of combat, and that area is already being taken by MRFs and strategic bombers. It can only attack ground targets, and lacks the ability to fight air targets. If paired up against an MRF, the MRF would destroy it completely, while still being able to pack a punch. Not only that, but the A10 is the LARGEST RADAR CROSS SECTION OF ANY FIELDED OFFENSIVE AIRCRAFT. It has no stealth, and limited defenses. It's 11.8 million for a reason.

Can the A-10 exceed Mach 2? No. Can the A-10 engage in air to air combat, while still being able to engage ground forces? No. Can the A-10 be launched from a carrier, and at the same time be STOL/VTOL? No. Can the A-10 preform multiple roles? No. Can the A-10 be stealthy? No.

It only engages ground targets at a limited range, and it's out of use now, really. It has only one use, and while that's pretty damn cool, that's ALL it has.

Here's a story, one time an A-10 crew saved British and American Marines from being BOMBED ON by a B-1B Lancer

The A-10 is designed to support ground troops and has a good job in doing so, Sure it doesn't have range but neither does the F-35 Lightning II. There also exists something called AERIAL REFUELING! Ever heard of a KC-10 buddy?

The A-10 is not a multirole plane it's job is to disorient the enemy on the GROUND and destroy it, The A-10 may not be stealthy but when you put on stealth you sacrifice low cost, low maintenance, and high sortie rate. I don't care if the A-10 can't exceed mach 2 the F-22 probably can't either and neither can the Rafale but they're all useful aircraft. Supercruise is more important than dash speed anyways... The A-10 is slow because it's designed to spot enemy soldiers and vehicles. The A-10 may have a high radar cross section but I don't think it's going to be in a field chalk full of SAMs, Not to mention there are countermeasures and the PK on an IADS is ridiculously low. It is lowered even more by the addition of electronic warfare and flares.
Oh yeah your top dash speed doesn't need to meet mach 2 in order to have even adequete acceleration, but that doesn't matter when you have a ground attack plane which is made slow so it can spot ground targets

[Die Erworbenen Namen]

Prove that. Where did an A-10 crew do that, under what circumstances? Hmm? Btw, an F-35 few could do the same thing easily.

First of all, the F-22, F-35, and that plane you said? They all go past Mach 2. Get your facts straight.

You can fly any other plane at that speed. And you know what? The F-35 would do a better job, not get hit, AND be more precise. Who needs a plane that can be destroyed easily, but only performs one role, when there are MANY OTHER PLANES THAT CAN DO THAT AND MUCH MORE.

The F-35 has a pretty damn good range. It's also stealthy. It's also able to engage both AIR AND GROUND TARGETS, by ACCELERATING after slowing down to engage.

Get your facts straight before you blabber about something you don't know.

[Padnak]

Until the F-35 runs out of fuel, can't carry enough ordinance and catches fire...

[Die Erworbenen Namen]

Until the F-35 runs out of fuel, can't carry enough ordinance and catches fire...

It's still more useful than the A-10

[The Macabees]

Great guide, Vancon. Someone may have suggested this earlier, but I'd love to know what some common ratios between types of aircraft are in RL militaries.

[Vancon]

Great guide, Vancon. Someone may have suggested this earlier, but I'd love to know what some common ratios between types of aircraft are in RL militaries.

Do you mean fighter pilots to crews or something else? I'm slightly confused.

[Padnak]

Until the F-35 runs out of fuel, can't carry enough ordinance and catches fire...

It's still more useful than the A-10

But not nearly as useful as an F-15

[The Macabees]

Do you mean fighter pilots to crews or something else? I'm slightly confused.

Or, how many fighters to multirole fighters to bombers, etc, modern militaries have, to give players who haven't developed a specific doctrine some idea on how to organize their air forces.

[Vancon]

Do you mean fighter pilots to crews or something else? I'm slightly confused.

Or, how many fighters to multirole fighters to bombers, etc, modern militaries have, to give players who haven't developed a specific doctrine some idea on how to organize their air forces.

Ok then, I can lok into that. I have no numbers on hand but it wouldn't be too dificult to find out some basic amounts. You'll have to give me some time though because I've got a couple other things that I'm working on/ should be working on at the moment.

This guide was meant to tell people what thee is in an air force, and also what you need, with emphasis on need v. want and pricing. The next one will have it's own them, and so will the one after that. If all goes according to plan, I'll have 4 of these guides:
F-series
MiG/Su
EU
J-series

[Organized States]

It's still more useful than the A-10

But not nearly as useful as an F-15

Agree to disagree Pad. The F-35A is a useful aircraft for doing the same thing that the Strike Eagle and the F-16 do.

The F-35A is made for our generation of pilots. That's why it's technology oriented. The MMD in the cockpit, just screams giant Ipad.

[Vancon]

Ratios for USAF fighters compared to bombers: 9:1 (fighters:bombers)

Total pure fighters: 1492
Total pure bombers 162

A few multiroles were mixed according to the site that I got my numbers from, but no biggie.

So ya.

As for Fighters to trainers....
Total pure trainers: 1167
Total pure everything else: A lot
I'm not gonna add up the entire US airforce numbers, but just know that it would be give or take 1:2, using T-38 Talon v. F-16 Fighting Falcon as an example.

As for ground crews, it's somewhere between 1:6-1:8 pilots to workers.

[The Macabees]

Awesome job finding that info. It helps a lot!

[Vancon]

Awesome job finding that info. It helps a lot!

Anything else? :3

[Die Erworbenen Namen]

But not nearly as useful as an F-15

Agree to disagree Pad. The F-35A is a useful aircraft for doing the same thing that the Strike Eagle and the F-16 do.

The F-35A is made for our generation of pilots. That's why it's technology oriented. The MMD in the cockpit, just screams giant Ipad.

I have to say that the Next Gen fighters, and the midway fighters, are the more useful ones. They're also just easier to control, better at what they do, and even more. I mean, look at the F-35A Headgear! An HUD appears on the glass of the helmet, and can lock on in a 180 degree angle, just by LOOKING AT THE PLANE.

[The Predator Federation]

Prove that. Where did an A-10 crew do that, under what circumstances? Hmm? Btw, an F-35 few could do the same thing easily.

First of all, the F-22, F-35, and that plane you said? They all go past Mach 2. Get your facts straight.

You can fly any other plane at that speed. And you know what? The F-35 would do a better job, not get hit, AND be more precise. Who needs a plane that can be destroyed easily, but only performs one role, when there are MANY OTHER PLANES THAT CAN DO THAT AND MUCH MORE.

The F-35 has a pretty damn good range. It's also stealthy. It's also able to engage both AIR AND GROUND TARGETS, by ACCELERATING after slowing down to engage.

Get your facts straight before you blabber about something you don't know.

https://medium.com/war-is-boring/a-10s- ... 8367f4fd0e

[The Predator Federation]

Prove that. Where did an A-10 crew do that, under what circumstances? Hmm? Btw, an F-35 few could do the same thing easily.

First of all, the F-22, F-35, and that plane you said? They all go past Mach 2. Get your facts straight.

You can fly any other plane at that speed. And you know what? The F-35 would do a better job, not get hit, AND be more precise. Who needs a plane that can be destroyed easily, but only performs one role, when there are MANY OTHER PLANES THAT CAN DO THAT AND MUCH MORE.

The F-35 has a pretty damn good range. It's also stealthy. It's also able to engage both AIR AND GROUND TARGETS, by ACCELERATING after slowing down to engage.

Get your facts straight before you blabber about something you don't know.

Ha sure when the F-35 doesn't explode when it's struck by 14 AK-74M rounds

[The Predator Federation]

But not nearly as useful as an F-15

Agree to disagree Pad. The F-35A is a useful aircraft for doing the same thing that the Strike Eagle and the F-16 do.

The F-35A is made for our generation of pilots. That's why it's technology oriented. The MMD in the cockpit, just screams giant Ipad.

I am really sorry but I have to disagree,
While 5th generation fighters such as the F-35 and F-22 have good technology and air to air ability the F-35 isn't really a plane for payload (internal payload)
The F-35A and F-22 are not designed to be rugged aircraft, They're designed to strike with precision. The F-22 of course taking care of targets in the air and the F-35 making quick precision strikes on hostile targets.

The A-10C is designed to be lightweight, versatile, mission ready, and rugged. Or in your case the A-10E... Not to mention they built the plane around the 30mm cannon

[Die Erworbenen Namen]

Prove that. Where did an A-10 crew do that, under what circumstances? Hmm? Btw, an F-35 few could do the same thing easily.

First of all, the F-22, F-35, and that plane you said? They all go past Mach 2. Get your facts straight.

You can fly any other plane at that speed. And you know what? The F-35 would do a better job, not get hit, AND be more precise. Who needs a plane that can be destroyed easily, but only performs one role, when there are MANY OTHER PLANES THAT CAN DO THAT AND MUCH MORE.

The F-35 has a pretty damn good range. It's also stealthy. It's also able to engage both AIR AND GROUND TARGETS, by ACCELERATING after slowing down to engage.

Get your facts straight before you blabber about something you don't know.

Ha sure when the F-35 doesn't explode when it's struck by 14 AK-74M rounds

It doesn't. If you want to post another stupid comment like that, maybe you should realize that it wasn't the PLANE that saved them, but the pilot, which is a whole other thing. Anyone could have done that. And the F-35 would've also been able to provide expert attacks like that.

Not only that, but you fail to realize that the A-10 is NOT lightweight, versatile, or as rugged as you think. The only rugged area is around the PILOT, which isn't that much. 30mm cannon pretty much rules out light weight. Maneuverable? Not at all. The A-10 was designed to fire bullets into tanks, while the F-35 could fire a missile at the same target, with much more accuracy, much more actual danger to the tank, and have a much better chance of destroying it, and still have time to hit ground targets with cluster bombs. And the best part? No one sees it coming. And once more, the F-35 CAN have an internal payload, AND an external payload. The F-22 and F-35 HAVE TO BE RUGGED. They go at speeds that would rip apart the A-10. Not only that, but it has to withstand the heat of the friction, as well as the stress of being flung, literally, off a carrier, as well as landing. It also has to preform well at high speed maneuvers, something the A-10 can't do.

And on the same note, it can be out fitted with Electronic Warfare, which can actually jam radar, and, among other things, make it easy to hit it's target. It can also fly at low speeds, like the A-10, and it holds more fuel, while having a more fuel efficient engine. Not to mention, then, that the F-22 and F-35 are STOL, meaning they can land on runways the A-10 couldn't, and they are, in fact, easy to operate.

It's a shame they retired the F-117, because that plane had good use.

[Transnapastain]

You are the biggest fu**ing dumbas* I have ever met

*** Warned for flaming ***

You're really going to need to figure out how to express your opinion and disagree with another user without resorting to flaming. That, or figure out how to walk away from your keyboard to avoid emotional outbursts.

[Padnak]

Not to defend the A-10 too much, but it can actually out turn a number of fighters...

[Organized States]

Not to defend the A-10 too much, but it can actually out turn a number of fighters...

At low level however. They turn like a pig above 10,000 feet.

[Die Erworbenen Namen]

Not to defend the A-10 too much, but it can actually out turn a number of fighters...

At low level however. They turn like a pig above 10,000 feet.

And above a certain speed.