Posted on 08/13/2019 2:56:43 PM PDT by jazusamo
Stealth is designed to penetrate air defenses. On a battle field a close air support stealth doesn't give you sh*t the enemy can see you. I would rather have a plane that can take punishment and kick their ASSES!
The go-fast boys in the USAF have always hated the A-10.
CC
“...the airframe itself can easily last another 30 years with updates to the electronic hardware, software, and engines.” [wildcard_redneck, post 33]
The airframe might last, but the avionics are already obsolescent. And they cannot be upgraded. Digital MIL STD bus systems are on all recent combat aircraft; the few subsystems on the A-10 were stand-alone. Remaking the entire aircraft would be needed, which would cost more than a new design.
Communications systems are incompatible with the new networked systems concept. It isn’t that new, but it’s been taking extra-long to implement because of resistance from people who don’t understand it. And it isn’t inexpensive either, which rubs Americans the wrong way: we want national defense but still believe it can be done on the cheap.
Usually see a pair of A-10s from MANG at Martin’s (home of the B-26) flying in formation when we’re golfing on Wednesdays.
On the 4th of July, they were putting on a show. Lower than usual, doing wing overs and rolls and other cool things. Must have gotten permission to show the taxpayers what they were paying for.
My MIL asked me if they were drones. “I’ve never seen a drone.”
No, Ma, they’re not drones. Now make me a pie.
“It would seem to me that at a cost of another billion or so, the rest of the fleet could be upgraded.”
Probably a lot less. Jigs & fixtures are in the initial price, so your only looking at additional material plus some marginal labor.
“...Speed is the opposite of loiter time...” [Hieronymus, post 29]
“...best attack plane ever...” [Steve Van Doorn, post 31]
Actual results in Afghanistan do not support Steve’s assertion.
The A-10 performed the smallest percentage of close support sorties, of all US combat aircraft in theater. It was also the slowest, the least responsive, and the least effective all-weather platform. This transpired in part because there were not that many sent into action, compared to F-18, F-15, and F-16.
The B-52H was second-best, and the B-1B came out best. Their loiter times outdid all the smaller machines by several multiples. Same for their weapons loadouts, in terms of weight & numbers of individual munitions.
The B-1B negated Hieronymus’ assertion, because of its variable-geometry wings. With wings swept full forward, it could loiter at relatively low airspeeds well away from immediate engagement spots, but when called on, the wings could be swept all the way aft and the machine would dash to the vicinity of the ground unit requesting support, in a very short time.
Both the B-52 and the B-1 outmatched the A-10 in flexibility, in part because of their crew size. Sufficient warm bodies to reprogram target data as needed, navigate, dodge threats, and put more munitions down on target.
The A-10 was severely limited because the pilot had to do it all. And its engagement capabilities were severely limited at night and in bad weather. The latter might be improved a little by adding enhanced vision systems, but nothing can be done to add crewmembers.
A-10s in pairs fly overhead here at Lake of the Ozarks.
Whiteman AFB is their base in Missouri.
A-10s in pairs fly overhead here at Lake of the Ozarks.
Whiteman AFB is their base in Missouri.
Actually stealth is marginally useful where radar guided missiles are concerned (SAMS or AAMS). Stealth can prevent a missile lock. It’s been reported that an F-18 in an exercise “survived” to the merge against some F-35’s but couldn’t lock-up the F-35 and so lost in the knife-fight phase.
It will be legendary some day. Collect everything about it that you can.
Don’t forget the P-47 Thunderbolt “Jug” built by Republic. Great Ground Attack Plane.
It was a tough bird with Armor protecting the Pilot and other vital parts.
They saw duty in Korea.
Welcome to the club.
The A-10's low wing is to allow for landings with collapsed main landing gears. Notice they're in wing pods and the tires are exposed. The wing also somewhat shields the engines from ground fire at certain angles while the A-10 approaches.
And the twin rudders and elevator prevent a ground based IR lock onto the engines.
Republic strived to do everything right.
we have the good fortune to live in an area used for flight training, and aircraft tactical training for a couple of AF units.
We live up on a hill, at the head of a seven mile long valley, with pronounced ridges to the East and the West. We see fighters about three or four times a week, engaged in dogfights, chases, and what I can only imagine are strafing runs up the valley, terminating just a couple hundred feet above our pastures. This has been going on for all the years we’ve lived out here, to the degree that our horses are no longer spooked.
Best one, though, was a couple years back. We regularly see A10’s. But, on this instance, the attack was three of the great beasts, abreast, flying up the valley directly toward us. Impressive. Low and slow, but unstoppable. Low enough that we could wave at the pilots.
Love it!
I’d guess that the USMC (which has 4 Air Wings, counting the Reserves) would be delighted to have these CAS assets!
I say this as a former USMC pilot, Forward Air Controller and Air Liaison Officer. (and a ‘snuffie’ in the mud in Vietnam, who LOVED CAS!)
Thank you—I am learning form both and I really enjoy FR threads where several knowledgeable people bring forth the best in eachother.
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.