OOOOH! Skyraiders ARE THE BOMB! Fly slow, carry lots of ordnance and LOTS of fuel. Now yer talkin'. If only the Skyraider was as heavily armored as an A 10. I have seen A 10s RTB with damage so severe you could not believe they kept it in the air. Talk about bulletproof.
The Army almost GOT the A-10 the first time the Air Force wanted to get rid of it (after the failure of the Warsaw Pact and the Soviet Empire retrenchment). The Army _almost_ talked Congress into authorizing it to be turned over to them, but the Air Force dragged its feet because it has never wanted the Army to have any fixed wing aircraft of ANY sort. Then came the dramatic success of The Highway of Death in GW-I and the Air Force had its rock-star (albeit an unwanted "rock-star") to crow over (and fund-raise with). If it weren't for that itsy-bitsy "Army Fixed Wing Phobia" that afflicts almost all Air Force generals when they pin on their stars, the A-10 would have been "relegated" to the ground-pounders, where it belongs, a long time ago. I am terribly uneasy about arming drones and using them in combat. We've already had at least one high-tech drone spoofed and captured by the Iranians; imagine a flight of armed drones being hacked and turning on their putative controllers. Or imagine an enemy with a way to spoof IFF to consider friendly air and ground forces as targets. I'm not particularly happy with the armed drones we have now; I'd just as soon see a living, breathing pilot with a finger on the trigger of any weapon aimed at anyone.I think this is the key - both of those groups should be in the same branch. Give the A-10s to the USMC and/or Army Aviation.
“PLA writings emphasize the necessity of ‘destroying, damaging, and interfering with the enemy’s reconnaissance … and communications satellites,’ suggesting that such systems, as well as navigation and early warning satellites, could be among the targets of attacks designed to ‘blind and deafen the enemy’,” read the report.
“PLA analysis of U.S. and coalition military operations also states that ‘destroying or capturing satellites and other sensors … will deprive an opponent of initiative on the battlefield and [make it difficult] for them to bring their precision guided weapons into full play’.”
Fewer Generals, More Warthogs!
Here's another reason drones flown from CONUS, or even beyond Line Of Sight, are probably a REALLY bad idea:
Pentagon: China Developing New Anti-Satellite Weapons, Jammers - USNI News
Also, it implicates a weak link in the GPS chain - the satellites.