No that is precisely what they did the A-10 was designed around the gun though the gun designers where told: design a gun for a CAS aircraft specifically for tank killing.So the concept for the A-10 was around yes but the gun was the first thing to be designed.

The chamber that fires the shells is in the dead center of the airframe which actually makes the rest of the gun not dead center it is slightly to the port side of airframe if you see a head on shot you can see this from other angles it is not as clear.Of course today the GAU-8 is hardly ever used to kill armored vehicles and more often to attack soft targets so the favored load out is more high explosive incendiary rounds and less AP.Of course that was the entire idea of the A-10C upgrades was to make the plane more capable in roles beyond tank busting which is not as much of a need at the current time.

I have always felt from when it was first shown publicly that the F-35 was a joke a freaking multi billion dollar joke.I guess that is related to this thread but the damn F-35 is really pathetic if you ask me.I mean the thing is crap what does it have that nothing else can do?Stealth ability at the cost of being a piece of dog ****?Ridiculous it is just a program to keep Lockheed in business.

Always enjoyed seeing or hearing the A-10's fly overhead when I still lived near a base. We always knew when a deployment was coming up, as the local news would report about it. In most cases that meant that the local PD would be a man short for awhile; one of their officers was a pilot, you see. Got a lot of respect for folks who choose those risky lines of work. They're comprised of far better and more courageous stuff than I am. :salute:

The canopy in Oberon's picture looks pretty beat up. Is there a backstory to that, or just wear and tear? :ping:

Oh? What can't the F-35 do that the F-16 and F/A-18, which it is designed to replace, can?

It might not be worth the development cost and time, but the aircraft itself doesn't seem like a step backwards to me...

EDIT: Ah, should read the opening post. Didn't know the F-35 was supposed to replace the A-10 as well...

I will say that it has much lower range,is less maneuverable,and has a much lower payload and would often have to carry some load out externally meaning that its stealth gets compromised half the time thanks to that.

Not going to get into a discussion about it beyond that as you obviously have posted nothing else in this thread and are clearly a big fan of the F-35 and are o the hunt so to speak not taking that bait just because you are a fan boy don't assume that others are:03:.

I am not saying stick to older technology I am saying develop newer better airframes not ones that only gain one thing at the cost of others when one can develop something that is much less of a compromise.

I think it was a Martin-Baker job, it was donated to the museum by a collector...not sure the precise story behind it. Next time I'm there I'll have a look. :yep:

Well I can tell you that A1C Lott was one of the planes crew chiefs because you can see his or her name on the canopy.There likely is the rank and name of an NCO on the other side that would have been the lead crew chief.

:hmmm:

Fanboy? Hunt? A bit early for baseless accusations, I think. All I did was ask a question and state my opinion on the aircraft. I even said it might not be worth the development time and cost...

From what I know the F-35 variants are supposed to have more range than the aircraft they are designed to replace, a similar or bigger payload when using external ordnance, and better maneuverability in certain cases (At least compared to the F-16). I could be wrong, of course, but that's only the fault of my information...

Based on Wikipedia:
Combat radius/Ferry range:
F-15C: 1,061 nm (interdiction missions)/3,000 nm (with external tanks and CFTs)
F-16C: 294 nm/2,280 nm (with drop tanks)
F-35A: "over 590 nm on internal fuel"/ 1200 nm on internal fuel

Speed:
F-15C: hi-al Mach 2.5+ lo-al Mach 1.2
F-16C: at altitude Mach 2+ at sealevel Mach 1.2
F-35A: Mach 1.6+ (tested on Mach 1.53

Have to remember few things.
1. Its not clear (atlest to me) what is under F-15's wings/belly during interdiction missions? Are there any extra fuel tanks?
2. In case of speed it would be useful to know are those numbers got when aircraft is in clean configuration or with missiles, tanks etc. under wings?
3. You can always get figures favourable to your position. Its just matter of what you forget to mention... on your product or competitors.