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.
Not even as a joke does some WWII dogfighting gun beat the GAU-8. The A-10 is a high-redundancy delivery platform to put that fuckoff ridiculous weapon over a target. It spits so much lead that it out-thrusts the engines.
The truly noncredible replacement would be a GAU-8 mounted in a rotorcraft. The pilot noses down to get on-target, and the aircraft translates backwards and upward without altering trajectory.
So what you are saying is that rotorcraft with a GAU-8 should replace Starlink satellites over war zones?
Or the rockets to orbit them.