Posted on 01/21/2015 12:39:22 PM PST by McGruff
There are fair numbers of videos of A-10’s on YouTube. Search “A-10” or “warthog”.
It is effective for many reasons; in short, it is incredibly rugged and can fly with about 5/8 of the plane destroyed. This gives the pilots lots of confidence to get in close. And then there’s that gun, 1 round from which can knock out a tank. The rounds are supersonic which means the targets never hear them coming (as if that would make a difference) Multiple rounds from that thing can simply obliterate anything. The plane is one of the most perfect storms of design objectives in that it is a work of art in terms of pure destruction.
Yeah, go look at some YouTubes of it. Of course the Air Force hates it because they only cost a few million each instead of tens or hundreds of millions each.
I had my own private little air show out here in the country a couple years back. Something looked like a modified crop duster made several passes next to my backyard and did 180’s around the church steeple turning within the length of the short parking lot. He was flying with no mufflers and it sounded hopped up. I was impressed and thought it would make a perfect small assault plane. I don’t think it was an Air Tractor crop duster (50 cal.)either.
It's built to be shot up but to keep on keepin' on.
There are many reasons why MANPADs don’t work well against the Hawg.
For starters, A-10s carry a large complement of flares which produce an IR signature stronger than the jet’s engines. Flares are one of the oldest counter-measures against heat-seeking missiles, but they have been updated, along with the dispenser, so the jet can dispense them at the right interval (and in the right number) to steer the missile away from the fighter.
Secondly, the A-10 flies low enough that it often blends in with surrounding terrain. In a desert area with sand dunes, rocky outcroppings and even mountains, the background terrain may appear “hotter” than the aircraft, and the missile seeker can’t distinguish the A-10 from a nearby dune, ridge, or elevated peak.
Third, many of the jihadists are still using first/second generation MANPADs, namely the SA-7/14 missiles that first appeared more than 40 years ago. All of the problems listed above are especially evident when you’re trying to use one of the old MANPADs against a low-flying target. And making matters worse, the oldest of the MANPADs can only be employed against a receding target. So, you’ve got to let the A-10 make his strafing run, the jump up and employ your weapon while the Hawg is puking flares. And that’s about the time his wingman rolls in Mohammed’s position.
Additionally, all MANPADs are limited by battery life. The first time you squeeze the trigger, the battery is activated and it powers up the seeker. With the older MANPADs, you have a very narrow window to lock on and engage the target before the battery goes dead. Less of a problem with the newer shoulder-fired SAMs, but every MANPAD gunner has to be cognizant of how much time they have left on the battery; once it dies, the weapon is useless until a new battery is installed.
And did I mention the pucker factor goes way, way up when you’re a jihadist going beak-to-beak with an A-10? A lot of terrorists have tried that little stunt, and the vast majority have suffered the consequences: DBDU, a.k.a. death by depleted uranium.
The titanium “tub” that surrounds the pilot does not make the A-10 impervious to MANPADs, but it does allow the Hawg to take more battle damage and make it back home. A good example is the A-10 that then-Captain Kim Campbell brought back, after being hit by AAA fire over Baghdad.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kim_Campbell_%28pilot%29
Very few jets can take that kind of damage and land safely.
However, since you brought up contracts and Congress, let's discuss that. Of course those jobs that production brings also comes with heavy, heavy political and lobbying pressure. The A-10 is complete, but it is also very old. So if the Air Force is looking to the future, it has to have a replacement. We have KC-135s in service that were produced in the 1950s! We have B-52s that have been flying since before JFK was shot.
Sequestration took so much money in FY13 that they had to dip into Operations and Maintenance because the procurement dollars were "fenced" by legality and could not be touched. So you are correct that they have had almost 2 years to correct that, and they haven't.
But still, that does not mean that Sequestration and the other cuts are not a reality. To argue against that is to simply pound the table and ignore the facts.
IF Congress wants the F-35 (which they enormously do), and IF they still want the military to pay this "bill" while not touching entitlements, then something has to give.
That "something" for the Air Force is the A-10 and KC-10.
Again, that is an often repeated myth and is not at all true.
That is because the overall Federal budget is nearly 2/3rds mandatory Entitlement spending, which are exempt from cuts.
My personal dream team
The AC 130 flying high and setting down a curtain of lead
Wart hog flying a bit lower, busting up artillery, tanks and troops plus overall impact analysis
That is simply Bovine Scatology.
Brave Air Force pilots have been putting themselves on the line to provide CAS in WWII, Korea, Vietnam, Grenada, Desert Storm, Bosnia, Iraq, and Afghanistan.
Not only have many of them been killed or wounded in the endeavor, but many have take prisoner, and suffered torture and years of deprivation.
It seems as if Free Republic has its share of people who repeat myths over and over again, believing that in the process of repetition they become reality.
Peace through victory.
Victory through superior firepower.
“So, you’ve got to let the A-10 make his strafing run, the jump up and employ your weapon while the Hawg is puking flares. And that’s about the time his wingman rolls in Mohammed’s position.”
If two of them get on you, they can literally have a gun from one of them constantly on you, if they want. Its beyond scary to think of them working you over. Not to mention that after every pass starting with the first one, your combat effectiveness drops by an order of magnitude.
If I were a ground pounder the A-10 is exactly what I want overhead up close and personal not at 10k feet
Yes, an electric motor and a few other gadgets ...
“I never said “F-35 replaces everything.” And yes, the F-35 does not have the same proven capabilities of the F-16”
You didn’t, the USAF did. They want it to replace everything from the F-18, to the F-16, to the F-15, to the Harrier, to the A-10, etc etc. The list goes on.
And it should trouble anyone that it cannot stay in the sky with an F-16, go as fast, turn as well, carry the load, or be maintained as easily, run on fuel that isn’t too warm, etc. The thing is a total moonpig. Its ONLY hope is to be networked and to win BVR. If it ever gets inside 10 miles, it cannot win against a 15 or 16. Hell, it doesn’t even have a bubble canopy. Its a razorback!
Its not about proven ability, its about can it TODAY or in any visible tomorrow defeat what it is intended to replace. That’s a very small baseline.
And if the air force has a smaller budget, then they need to run the F-16 and 15s that are fine. The F-35 really fits in nowhere. And its only calling card, stealth and networking will be EASILY defeated. This is beyond question with the explosion of computer power at the exponential rate. All radars already “see” stealth planes, they just don’t “know” they do due to too little computer power to understand the signal fast enough. Processing power grows faster than changes can be made in airframe design. So then we will be stuck with a low performing airframe that can carry almost nothing, and is no longer stealthy.
And at that moment, he will wish he was not in the slowest, highest wing loaded fighter, that cannot turn or accelerate, and has a very limited load. The will wish he was in an F-15SE.
The 15SE is the only beast that makes sense. And keeping the warthog.
And age of a plane means very little. It is hours, and the kinds of hours, and the SLEPS that tell the story. The B-52s and 135s really do not need a replacement. Neither the warthogs. I really cannot believe that after the last 25 years of experience, and with the wars we are in. That its even a question to keep the A-10.
That we even have to argue it shows how dismal condition our Air Force has fallen. And yes, it is the USAF, none less that SecAF is out bragging how she tried to make it go away, and is sure she can succeed in a few more years.
“It’s the right tool for the job. Has there been any convincing testimony or information otherwise?”
It’s not. An Apache is a preferable alternative for very close support (slower and lower, sees the friendlies better). Also, the 30mm anti-armor cannon is not optimal for killing terrorists and their camels - the ammo is far more expensive than need be. It is far more expensive than the 30mm explosive round fired by the Apache.
When it’s less close air support (situations such as portrayed in the broken arrow scene in “We Were Soldiers”) the F-16s and other jets can do fine. Troops now have laser designators that give GPS coordinates that can be directly loaded into the GPS guided bombs. Even B-52s and B-1s can provide support that way.
The A-10 is obsolete as a tank-buster against first or second tier opponents, and it’s the wrong weapon for CAS. It is a good source for pork in certain congressional districts, though.
“What else produces a “Highway of Death” in an armored tank advance?”
F-16s, F-18s, F-15s, F-111s, B-52s and Apaches. Completely obsolete (and retired) Navy A-6s made it possible when they blocked the highway by cluster-bombing a lead convoy. A-10s were there too, but the outcome would have been the same if they’d been replaced by F-16s.
Here’s a decent video about the HoD:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hhmXleZXAr0
Plenty of good jet footage there, and an appearance by an A-10. As an aside, it’s a shame cluster bombs have been dropped from the inventory...
You are not seriously suggesting that the USAF is as focused on CAS today as they were in WWII? In Korea? In Vietnam? And you mention Desert Storm. The Air Force was already moving to retire the A-10 but desert storm saved it from the scrap heap.
That was the first “OMG this thing is really a monster” moment.
And it really isn’t even an argument that the USAF is annoyed by having to do close support. Read their own material, they simply don’t believe in it, believing in interdiction. They know they have to provide it on some level, but insist they can do it with the least capable machine ever fielded. One that is specialized in stealth, and in its ability to network with other fighters to defeat enemy defenses.
In short, nothing to do with CAS. And none of the 35s capabilities help it fight an ISIS or Taliban threat.
The pilots are brave, but there is a reason coming out of Vietnam that the F-4 was replaced with 15s and 16s AND A-10s.
The F-4 was meant as a gunless interceptor. It survived combat with regular fighter only through the skill of our pilots. And as CAS, there were FAR better choices.
The USAF is headed back down century series road metaphorically. It will again soon find it has machines that aren’t that good air to air after stealth is gone, and that it is very poor in CAS.
Men will die because their CAS runs out of ordinance. 11 hard points, a huge gun, and long loiter really do matter to grunts.
The better question is why the Air Force would rather see the warthogs bulldozed than see US Army flying fixed wing mud fighters. They Apaches are extremely vulnerable and cannot do the CAS role alone. The Air Force leaders are about turf, politics, and procurement. And little else.
About the only plane with more awesome conventional firepower than the ‘Hawg might be the AC-130 Spectre.
But I suspect the jug-eared sodomite in the WH will try to kill it, too!
Karbala 2003. 31 Apaches attacked Iraqi positions and were wiped out. 29 machines were damaged and one shot down. The unit was out of action for a solid month.
That battle proved the Apache cannot operate in the same role as an A-10. Nowhere close in firepower, loiter, or ability. The Apache is good when you are killing tanks in Europe, or hunting down individual savages with not much more than a belt fed machine gun. All those hellfire videos in Iraq are an example of what its good at.
But its dead wrong to pretend CAS is most effectively done be an Apache. It can do some things, and not others. That’s why the Corps has jets AND Cobras. They would never dream of making their wing an all Cobra CAS solution. Hellfires and 30mm cant do it all.
That bars offensive aircraft such as the A-10. The Army does have numerous fixed wing aircraft for ECM and RF intelligence uses as well as specialize small transports. However, their total fixed wing airfleet is quite small compared to the other services...
The Air Force as a department has been seriously compromised by Political Correctness and an Anal Mentality.
The A-10 is a flying tank and it was designed specifically to take out enemy ground forces. Where I come from, ISIS, with its tanks and pickup trucks with heavy cannons/MGs, is the perfect target for the A-10.
Now we have this stupid broad as Secy AF and she’s going to do Obie’s bidding like a good little asskisser. I’m not sexist, I just look at the women Obama has put into high places and I can’t find a successful one in the bunch.
By the way, women flew the A-10 in Iraq and at least one pilot was killed when the plane hit high tension wires. Let the women pilots of the A-10 talk about the qualities of the plane for desert warfare, not some ass-sitting political appointee.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.