Well, we did build the F-22 as the air supremacy fighter. Sadly, the much maligned F-22 has actually been used in combat to bomb a ground target[1]. I find it interesting that the F-22 seems to have gotten over most of its teething problems, but the F-35 still cannot fire its gun (needs a new software)[2]. Even when it can fire its gun, it will only have ammo for 4 seconds of firing (2 bursts)[3].
I think the close combat air support / tactical role should be given back to the Army (changing Johnson-McConnell agreement of 1966[4] and Key West Agreement[5]) and the Air Force can deal with strategic bombing and air dominance.
The Air Force has been trying to get rid of the A-10 with various excuses, but the GAO recently said their budget reason were bunk[6]. They just don't want the job and their loiter time of their replacements is pathetic.
I think the close combat air support / tactical role should be given back to the Army (changing Johnson-McConnell agreement of 1966[4] and Key West Agreement[5]) and the Air Force can deal with strategic bombing and air dominance.
The Air Force has been trying to get rid of the A-10 with various excuses, but the GAO recently said their budget reason were bunk[6]. They just don't want the job and their loiter time of their replacements is pathetic.
1) http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/09/23/syria-a...
2) http://www.defensenews.com/story/defense/air-space/strike/20... http://www.dodbuzz.com/2015/01/08/pentagon-f-35-gun-will-fir...
3) http://defensetech.org/2015/01/02/a-tale-of-two-gatling-guns...
4) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johnson-McConnell_agreement_of...
5) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Key_West_Agreement
6) http://www.airforcetimes.com/story/military/2015/06/25/gao-r...