F15E, F16C, F35A even strategic Bombers are capable of such a mission when equipped with PGMs either gravity or propelled and guidance targeting systems. F35 has a growing list of munitions for this mission set from SDB to JAGM to JDAM to JSOW.
Devil is in the details. Capable of proudly hovering beyond the reach of MANPADs over the ME with its crystal clear skies? Yes, but, frankly speaking, any bayraktar can do the same for a fraction of the price - it's only a matter of carrying capacity. The recent Karabakh war has shown that such CAS(and battlefield observation) ends the moment weather becomes bad.
War, however, doesn't stop the moment weather becomes bad - and you're simply protecting a few lives(pilots') at the expense of many others.
Are advanced aircraft capable of using their advanced guidance systems through simple overcast? For the most part, no. And overcast in ETO is >>half a year.(where I live there are easily ~200 cloudy days per year).
They, of course, still can do the mission (there is a cockpit and they're fairly maneuverable) - but on the same conditions as a dedicated subsonic ground pounder.
If the skies are clear - both are equal, but ... high-level opponent has all the means to take down something flying high&fast. To a large degree, it's actually simpler:
-clear LOS up high (may matter less against western armed forces, but with Russian and now more and more Chinese ones - it does);
-significant loss of performance of high-performance a/c due to large suspended storage(or numerically insufficient storage for 5th gen fighters);
And so on. This is the reason why CAS mission is performed only after AD degradation/suppression.
Are advanced aircraft capable of maintaining their situational awareness if datalinks are down or there is no tactical network in the first place(CSAR)?
Again, sure, but to a large degree, this SA will be through the eyes of the pilot - because eyes are still surprisingly good for wide views.
Furthermore (also relevant for CAS) - the very nature calls for fine precision of mission. Friendlies and hostiles may very well be just over the fence, and there may be no stable datalinks and such.
The point is, to do those tasks in less than ideal conditions - modern fighter still finds itself restricted to comparable fight modes to a CAS plane, and their survivability in this situation can be maintained to a very similar degree through the very same measures(EW, decoys, ground masking, and so on). It is simply more limited at going even lower, is less nimble and more vulnerable.
When we're talking planes of the same generation(F-16:A-10) - it's pretty straightforward: loaded A-10 has more survivability
over the battlefield: far more countermeasures, more durable, lower IR signature, survivable design; on the other hand, CAS-loaded F-16, with its glorious drag index and G restrictions, is still obviously much faster, but not much beyond that.
Same is true for new and emerging methods of a/c protection - say, DIRCM turrets, or active standalone decoys.
That's
on top of providing worse quality of CAS in the first place.
When we're talking about different generations... well, while this isn't exactly fair (5 decades between introductions), but fact remains - comparative studies of CAS platforms remain unpublished. With the strength of the F-35 push (especially in the previous decade), no wonder why, and who could've suppressed their findings.
But all of this is, strictly speaking, secondary.
More importantly - USAF fighter communities aren't exactly dedicated specialists. This isn't an insurmountable problem - marine air goes over that(by making all combat pilots ground-pounding specialists, and specifically designing a chain of command), but subservience to lowly grunts is the worst fear of the USAF, much more than maintaining a dedicated fleet of attack aircraft. For this reason alone - A-10 will live through 2020s and even much of the 2030s.
Perhaps then drones will finally be able to overtake it (but I personally would've gone for optional manning instead).
But vs an armored regiment of the Soviet Union in the Cold War equipped with Air defense systems it was going to take heavy losses. ZSU 23, Buk, Tor, Tunguska, Pantsir would have chewed up the Hogs like bacon.
There is no Pantsir in armored regiments.
But worth pointing out, that out of that list, A-10 protection either protects it against them to some degree, or those systems don't care about your altitude at all - making CAS-loaded F-16 essentially just as vulnerable.
That isn't about A-10
not being outdated - it is. To a similar degree to F-16. But it isn't about it not being outdated - it's about the mission. Unless there is suitable replacement - even next gen of general-purpose planes struggle to displace older, but dedicated planes and a dedicated pilot community.
