Question: Could You Make a ‘Stealth’ A-10 Warthog Flying Tank?

Article Summary: The idea of a stealthy A-10 Warthog seems contradictory, given the plane’s signature mission of close air support (CAS), requiring visibility and durability in hostile fire. However, evolving technology and tactics raise intriguing possibilities.

Key Point #1 – Modern stealth aircraft, like the F-35, equipped with advanced sensors, precision-guided munitions, and cannons, may achieve similar battlefield effects from safer distances.

Key Point #2 – The A-10’s proven role in suppressive area fire could theoretically be replicated by stealth platforms delivering long-range precision attacks. Ultimately, the future of CAS may depend on balancing vulnerability, precision, and survivability, prompting a strategic rethink on whether stealth and speed can replace ruggedness and visibility.

Stealthy A-10 Warthog? Why It’s Not as Crazy as It Sounds

The idea suggested by some that there could someday be a “stealthy” A-10 Warthog variant would seem like an absurd contradiction, as the aircraft flies low and slow in sight of enemy ground troops, delivering critical life-saving air fires in support of advancing infantry. 

This basic concept would make the idea of “stealth” for an A-10 somewhat of an oxymoron or contradiction in terms, as the entire aim of stealth technology is to ensure an aircraft is not “seen” by an enemy forces’ line-of-sight or radar. 

An A-10, however, is known as a flying tank, intended to operate within view of both friendly and enemy forces and “absorb” massive amounts of incoming small arms fire with its titanium hull. 

The A-10 Warthog or Flying Tank

The A-10 is also designed with built-in redundancy, meaning it has multiple similar systems and components to help ensure the aircraft can fly even when part of the aircraft is damaged by enemy fire. 

There is a famous story of a Gulf War pilot who explained to me on the 25th anniversary of the Gulf War that he was able to fly and land an A-10 with one wing after the other had been shot off by enemy fire.

The entire premise of the A-10 and the components with which it has been built center upon the clear recognition that the aircraft will operate while “in view” of enemy forces to a large extent. The large piece of “heavy metal” flying in close proximity to advancing ground troops would be nearly impossible to hide from enemy view. 

However, the concept of a stealthy A-10 or A-10-like capacity aligns very closely with Air Force deliberations about the future of the Close Air Support (CAS) mission.

What if a faster, higher-altitude stealthy aircraft could operate with the sensing, targeting, and weaponry to blanket ground areas with suppressive and precision fires while flying at safer stand-off ranges? 

Newer sensing technologies and aircraft weapons applications are now positioned to survey ground movements, target specific enemy areas, and potentially blanket them with fire. In the case of the F-35, it seems it would pertain to the range of its side-mounted 25mm cannon. 

Area Attack? 

Could the aircraft attack enemy ground forces with this cannon as an area attack weapon while remaining undetected or less detected by enemy ground forces?

This is a critical question, as a central element of the A-10 is to not only deliver precision air-to-ground rocket fire with weapons such as the Maverick but also provide suppressive “area” fire across enemy ground formations to enable friendly troops to maneuver into position and close with an enemy.

Clearly, an F-35 could attack with precision air-to-ground rockets and bombs, but could it get close enough to spray or blanket areas with small arms or cannon fire like an A-10 can?

Could it go fast enough to fire upon enemy positions without being targeted successfully by RPGs and incoming enemy ground fire? This seems to be an operative question, mainly because it is not clear if an F-35 or 4th-generation fighter is built with any ability to survive small arms fire.

In recent years, this debate has occupied a central resting place in the hearts and minds of Air Force weapons developers, ground forces, and even members of Congress wrestling with the question of how and when to divest the A-10.

These tactical scenarios have, for years, informed the debate about the CAS mission and the aircraft best suited to perform successfully in combat. Some have argued that there is no substitute for the life-saving “flying tank” capabilities fundamental to the A-10.

A U.S. Air Force A-10 Thunderbolt II flies a presence patrol over the U.S. Central Command area of responsibility, Feb. 26, 2025. The A-10 aircraft is employed throughout the region to bolster regional security and counter the growing threats of adversarial unmanned aircraft systems and other emerging threats. (U.S. Air Force photo by Staff Sgt. Jackson Manske)

In contrast, others have argued that high-speed 4th and 5th-generation fighter jets are better positioned to succeed with the CAS mission in a modern threat environment where enemies operate with longer-range, more precise ground-to-air fire.

Would an A-10 Warthog be far more vulnerable today than it may have been in previous years due to the arrival of new kinds of ground-to-air munitions? Answers to these unknowns seem critical to this question, yet there is a clear conceptual foundation or framework for the issue.

A U.S. Air Force F-35 Lightning II aircraft, assigned to the 34th Expeditionary Fighter Squadron, flies over the U.S. Central Command area of responsibility, Jan. 07, 2019. The Lightning II is a fifth-generation fighter, combining advanced stealth with fighter speed and agility that provides U.S. Air Forces Central Command lethal war-winning airpower. (U.S. Air Force photo by Senior Airman Brandon Cribelar)

If a stealthy, fast, high-altitude fighter jet can “blanket” and “cover” areas of enemy forces while remaining out of view, then perhaps an F-35 or 4th-gen aircraft might be better suited for the task.

However, this would require long-range targeting and various guided and unguided munitions to achieve an A-10-like tactical effect.  

About the Author: Kris Osborn, Defense Expert 

Kris Osborn is the Military Technology Editor of 19FortyFive and President of Warrior Maven – Center for Military Modernization. Osborn previously served at the Pentagon as a highly qualified expert in the Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army—Acquisition, Logistics & Technology. Osborn has also worked as an anchor and on-air military specialist at national TV networks. He has appeared as a guest military expert on Fox News, MSNBC, The Military Channel, and The History Channel. He also has a Masters Degree in Comparative Literature from Columbia University.