DUSTY

Could be a multitude of factors - this attack was during the opening hours of the air campaign which would have been understandably pretty hectic. The air war planners would probably build some redundancy into the targeting list by assigning the same target to two different flights, one as their primary target and one as their secondary target to hit if they had ordnance remaining. Looks like these guys were very unfortunate that both their TOTs were almost identical!

Well depending on the level of damage to your engine you can either attempt to relight it or secure it (shut down). In most cases in DCS A-10 if your engine gets hit it's best to secure the engine by following the checklists. That leaves you with a single engine (S/E) approach and landing which is a tricky task and takes practice to perfect. It would be a good idea to do some training in good weather conditions where you drop one engine to idle thrust to get a feel for single engine handling characteristics. The A-10C checklists give some good guidance for safely accomplishing single engine approach/landings. I use the v476th checklists for the A-10 which are publicly available and perfect for the sim. Point 10 states to review S/E go around (EF-37) and I'm not sure what manual that is referencing right now. Maybe someone else can chime in there? The below checklist for a S/E go around is a bit simplistic but covers the basics. If you do attempt a s/e approach, demonstrate good airmanship by salvaging a bad approach early and taking it around. Minimum s/e control speed can be >140KIAS depending on weight and drag of your current config - that means a late missed approach can be fatal (as you experienced). This is because the thrust asymmetry while at slower speeds will result in a yawing and secondary rolling motion that the flight controls are unable to counteract. During my multi engine training in Beechcraft Duchess' you were committed to a single engine landing below 400ft AGL, no doubt a similar limit would apply to the A10. Hope that helps.

These oddities aren't just for the Honeybadger, check out this M2000 flying around with only one wing. Pretty impressive for a delta-winged aircraft - especially doing only 138kts at some points!

Almost wish that wasn't an april fools joke, sounds like a lot of fun.

Yeah i can read it perfectly now, thanks - was wondering when they'd fix that.

Welcome to the forum MAVE94! Awesome screenshots!

Awesome work Eddie!

I would hope not, I asked back in 2015 and other who have asked in this forum since then have had replies yet my request was overlooked. Thanks BIGNEWY, will do!

This sounds really good, looking forward to trying it out.

This sounds really good Cribob!

Really hard to tell but my money is on 500lb GBU-38s judging by the size of the building and the fact that they dropped two per DMPI. Oh and it looks like a US Navy F/A-18 pod camera and they seem to rarely carry anything larger than 500lbers for the sorts of Offensive Air Support mission they are flying.

bump, please?

This is a god damn emotional roller-coaster: http://theaviationist.com/2016/03/24/us-air-force-retiring-a10-anyway/

Thanks Wavehopper, really appreciate your work! DUSTOFF!

Thanks for the info Vampyre, that would certainly make sense. It's interesting how the MK-7 has a yellow AND blue stripe on it. A conflict of sorts considering yellow indicates live ord and blue means inert training round.

Well I'll be damned, is that what I think it is on this F/A-18? A United States Navy F-18 Hornet aircraft flies over Iraq, March 3, 2016. The United States stands with a coalition of more than 60 international partners to assist and support the Iraqi Security Forces to degrade and defeat ISIL. Coalition forces fly daily missions in support of Operation Inherent Resolve.(U.S. Air Force photo by Staff Sgt. Corey Hook)

Holy crap, is that loaded on an A-10 Snoopy?! Here's an A-10 getting work done with the gun in support of OIR: [ame]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jA4dxpZPMrU[/ame] Pretty intense strike: [ame]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1NXSj4bf1hU[/ame]

Thank you! :clap:

Thanks for this, going to try tonight. Been a while since I've tried slingloading and I should probably walk before I run but what the heck! Cheers

Always love a bit of Hornet porn. Great work!

+1

Hey Jetguy, here's my humble opinion on your post hope you don't take offense! If you seriously want a weapon first fielded in the late 1960s to replace the awesome work ED has done on the latest SFWs I'd say you're mad!? :D Personally I'd rather ED prioritise about 16 million other things before implementing the mk-20. With the implementation of some Vietnam era aircraft by 3rd party devs you might still be in luck though. Not sure how you came to that conclusion, I don't think there is a single scenario where the mk-20 could not be outperformed by the CBU87/103,97/105. Please let me know if you can think of a scenario - I'd be genuinely interested. Mmmm, again I disagree. Depending very much on the scenario and the threats I love a good bit of 'tank plinking' from above the IR SAM/AAA MEZ with GBU-12s. If you put enough energy on the weapon, even if they run they are still doomed. Check out this awesome loadout below. Very recent image also! Pictured is an A-10C of the 75th Expeditionary Fighter Squadron "Tiger Sharks", 23rd Fighter Group, 23rd Wing (ACC), Moody AFB, Georgia, currently combat deployed to Incirlik AB, Turkey, in support of Operation Inherent Resolve (OIR). 87's are not designed to be used against think skinned targets, they are an area attack weapon designed with thin skin vehicles and infantry targets in mind. Also are you familiar 'Height of Function' (HOF) feature of these weapons? If not read on. Have you seen this video? It's a wonderful explanation of the SFW and I recommending watching if you're not fully familiar with the weapon: [ame] [/ame] Well to answer your question, probably simply because the weapon is outdated. Although there are still Mk-20s in the US arsenal (and I think the USMC have used them in training in the not too distant past) they have a horrific dud rate. Here's something you might find interesting: "Under the current policy issued by the US Department of Defense in July 2008, by the end of 2018 the US will no longer use cluster munitions that result in more than 1% UXO. Until 2018, use of cluster munitions that exceed the 1% UXO rate must be approved by the Combatant Commander. Also, military departments will initiate removal of all cluster munition stocks “that exceed operational planning requirements or for which there are no operational planning requirements” from active inventories as soon as possible, but not later than 19 June 2009. These excess cluster munitions will be demilitarized as soon as practicable. The only existing US cluster munitions that might meet the 99% reliability standard are CBU-97, CBU-105, and M898 SADARM Sensor Fuzed Weapons with self-destruct and self-deactivation mechanisms. According to Department of Defense statistics from 2004, Sensor Fuzed Weapons make up 3,099 of the 5,543,149 US cluster munitions." - http://archives.the-monitor.org/index.php/cp/display/region_profiles/theme/313 Cheers