10 hours ago, busdriver said:

Hogs have a BFM requirement now.

The RTM is a zero sum game, put something in, you must take something out.

True, I would just try to make accomplishing those beans as easy as possible to accomplish, there is a bit of pencil whipping to that I’ll admit but with everything trade offs, compromise, risk acceptance, etc… are facts of life.

RTM adjustment isn’t that onerous. Starts with DOC statement - primary vs. secondary missions. You make CSAR, CAS, SCAR (e.g. Counterland) primary missions and OCA/DCA secondary. Secondary missions do not need to get much love on the RTM. Good example is F-35 can knock out all CAS reqs in a 2 week training phase per year. Similarly, ANG vipers in this hypothetical could do about 4 weeks of A-A focused training and call it good for the year.

Just to clarify for the heavy guys: Fighter RTMs all have 96 sorties. So two sorties per week, over a 48 week training year. So they calendar determines the size of the pie. It was a big "ah-ha" moment for me when I figured that out.

48 minutes ago, brabus said:

Similarly, ANG vipers in this hypothetical could do about 4 weeks of A-A focused training and call it good for the year.

That's about what we were talking about at ACC back then.

Interesting read

https://theaviationist.com/2026/08/12/brrrrt-acts-plan-to-save-the-a-10s/

Just buy Superhornets and replace the venerable Hawg

15 hours ago, Clark Griswold said:

Interesting read

https://theaviationist.com/2026/08/12/brrrrt-acts-plan-to-save-the-a-10s/

Just buy Superhornets and replace the venerable Hawg

Why Superbugs over a Block 70/72 Viper or Eagle EX?

3 hours ago, StoleIt said:

Why Superbugs over a Block 70/72 Viper or Eagle EX?

Block 70/72 Viper - Gas, weapons load, cost ($80M).

Eagle EX - While they can carry bomb, they are mainly missile trucks and they are expensive ($97M each).

Superbugs are oddly cheaper ($73M each).

8 hours ago, ClearedHot said:

Block 70/72 Viper - Gas, weapons load, cost ($80M).

Eagle EX - While they can carry bomb, they are mainly missile trucks and they are expensive ($97M each).

Superbugs are oddly cheaper ($73M each).

Block 70/72 Vipers have conformal fuel tanks.

5 hours ago, Sua Sponte said:

Block 70/72 Vipers have conformal fuel tanks.

And STILL don't have enough gas...

Maybe the superbug is better than the Viper or 5EX, but in the world we live in that production line is done. So the only new build options are the OA-1K, F-35, F-16V, or F-15EX.

Also, not seeing how an upgraded Viper with conformals and 2-3 bags would be fuel limited compared to an F/A-18E/F.

On 8/13/2026 at 12:15 PM, StoleIt said:

Why Superbugs over a Block 70/72 Viper or Eagle EX?

https://www.twz.com/a-10-pilots-compelling-case-for-replacing-warthogs-with-super-hornets

I found BURT’s argument persuasive and before I had read it I thought the Rhino was probably the right aircraft for the AF’s attack mission set with self escort capes.

Just my two cents but I think a carrier suitable jet would have the trade space in weight / structural strength for mods to optimize for Attack while retaining true self defense capabilities.

Delete or mod carrier landing gear, wing folding, etc… and methinks you could get more gas, armor, redundant or extra systems, etc…. also, with the original baseline Rhino being a carrier based fighter, it probably would be well suited for land based ACE expeditionary ops with mods, already has an APU for instance and has demonstrated road based dispersal ops.

Edited 8 hours ago8 hr by Clark Griswold