Per my analysis the F4U outperforms the A10 in almost every important metric. A fancy cockpit does not make the A10 better and I would say the Corsair would outperform the A10 in a dogfight. There also cost, which adjust for inflation is much, much lower for the Corsair. Pilots can be trained quicker. I know the popular thing is to say the 30mm chain gun came first and the airplane second, which sounds good on paper, but means the aircraft is shit. Also, I rated max ceiling as neutral because who cares about max ceiling for an attack aircraft?
Please contact your congressional representatives and let them know that the F4U corsair should replace the A10 as a ground attack aircraft. Thank you.
Those extra 10mm in the A10 are very important, especially for supporting ground combat. It’s used to fire at heavily armored targets such as tanks. Also, the A10 's targeting system is more advanced and precise, though that could potentially be implemented on the Corsair. Regardless, the Warthog has better armor, making it more resilient to ground fire from the enemy. I believe that the A10 is better designed for ground combat support than the Corsair.
What congressional representatives are you contacting so that I can counter your arguments with them?
I recently spoke with the senator from Colorado and he’s definitely on our side