F-15E pilot recommended A-10 for this fight

[leafer]

What makes you think A-10 would not have the same problem? I mean, you have a 2 crew plane where the only job of the WSO is to look through the targeting pod and make sense of the situation.

Why would an A-10, flying above 15000ft (or any deck specified by the ROE) not face the same problem?

 

I'm just an armchair pilot, man. I'm pretty awesome with the A-10C, but still... :D

 

Did anyone not hear the bit where the pilot said "trigger happy"?

[Winfield_Gold]

Just because the A-10 can fly slower and stay on station longer, does not mean it is a better cas asset when troops are under fire.

 

For example, you would actually be surprised how many cas missions were cancelled in Afghanistan using Apache's. Mainly because they either were not able to determine the enemy from the friendly troops or because firing on the enemy meant that friendly troops could also be compromised from air attacks. Most of the time, the choppers where used as a deterrent in the hope the enemy would break off contact. This is an aircraft that can hover and has basically the same thermal imaging vision that the A-10C has.

[Winfield_Gold]

UAVs are the key for ALL situations in our days..:music_whistling:

Extreme situational awareness plus LOW COST.

What is better, 20 UAVs or 1 f15e in the air? (the same cost)

Heavy electronic warfare?

Pre programed uav flight plans can deal with it easily.

If they cannot, f15es cannot do it aswell.

 

In my poor opinion, with our current technology, developing a human flown war aircraft is a no go.

The future is in the UAVs and lasers:smilewink:

 

I agree, not much point spending millions on a human controlled cas plane when 2 or 3 drones at 1\8 the cost could do the same tasks.

[Darkwolf]

Another F15 vs A10 thread. . . . .

 

Why keep A10 when you have army aviation ?

 

[MudRat02]

I agree, not much point spending millions on a human controlled cas plane when 2 or 3 drones at 1\8 the cost could do the same tasks.

 

Safe to assume you know very little about CAS.

 

A drone performs many missions well, but is not capable of executing CAS to the same standard as a manned jet.

[GripenNG]

Safe to assume you know very little about CAS.

 

A drone performs many missions well, but is not capable of executing CAS to the same standard as a manned jet.

 

Have an UCAV actually flown CAS missions to this date? To my knowledge they only fly FAC(A) and Pinpoint Strike missions.

[PFunk1606688187]

I have yet to see a UAV that can mount a 30mm cannon with 1150 rounds. Might seem a silly thing to say, but what other weapon can be used so close to friendlies once they're almost getting overrun, or need constant reattack?

 

JDAMs are pretty precise, but you'd still never use them precisely 100m from friendlies.

 

I get it, UAVs and advanced sensor packages are the future, but that future is hardly realized. Til it is, the hole is pretty obviously there once the A-10 goes permanently off station.

[Winfield_Gold]

A-10's have proved successful against 1960's technology. Russia has indeed sold quite a bit of equipment since the 1960's to many countries around the world. If there is a war between 2 countries, chances are a majority of the weapons used would be both American engineered and Russian Engineered.

 

Let's see how is fares against technology developed in the last 20 years. Russia has come along away since the early 90's. Like any good business, you never sell off your assets with the latest technology. Hence, the A-10 has proven itself against old inferior weapons.

 

In Iraq (1st Gulf War) the tanks it destroyed were mostly abandoned, once the bombs started falling, the Iraqi's didn't bother shooting back, they surrendered themselves to the first nato forces they came across. Yes the A-10 proved itself in the 1st gulf war with out a doubt if you read the hype and how many mechanized vehicles it blew to bits. Due to the sanctions placed on Iraq, they had very few weapons left, especially in the way of armour. By the time the 2nd Iraq conflict came about, there were very few tanks for it to kill other than the odd ZSU and what not. Yes it proved itself in the 2nd Iraq war (or so you are lead to believe)

 

In Afghanistan however, how many tanks have you seen the a-10 blowing up? how many mechanized vehicles have you seen the a-10 blowing to bits? Most common SAM's are unguided RPG's, Afghanistan rebels can't afford the decent Russian weapons with latest technology. If Russia went to war with the west, and considering Russia's technology in this day and age, the A-10 would be useless as troops would not be as close together fighting on the ground as they were against the Taliban in Afghanistan. Russian fighter jets and missiles would not allow the A-10 to get any where near close enough to be useful. So what is a 30mm Cannnon with 1150 rounds good for in a battle where both super powers are evenly matched?

[ENO]

This argument is as played out as Lambo doors.

[MudRat02]

Have an UCAV actually flown CAS missions to this date? To my knowledge they only fly FAC(A) and Pinpoint Strike missions.

 

If you check out JP 3-09.3 there is a section with planning consids for the use of unmanned platforms in CAS. They have some very handy capabilities (some of which are in that document). Point of note, they are of course subject to the same procedures as manned platforms, however armed UAS are NOT allowed to prosecute a type 1 attack.

 

That's not insignificant, some would do well to note.

Edited April 16, 2014 by MudRat02

[Exorcet]

I have yet to see a UAV that can mount a 30mm cannon with 1150 rounds. Might seem a silly thing to say, but what other weapon can be used so close to friendlies once they're almost getting overrun, or need constant reattack?

 

What about micro JDAM's? 20-50 lb bombs each with their own targeting ability. Maybe even give them chutes and let them loiter individually.

 

We don't have any now, but it sounds like something within reach of current technology.

[4c Hajduk Veljko]

What about micro JDAM's? 20-50 lb bombs each with their own targeting ability. Maybe even give them chutes and let them loiter individually.

Just do a quick Google search and take a look at what human pilots could not distinguish between the decoys and real targets during NATO military use over Yugoslavia. Let a lone a little camera in the bomb, with an intelligence of a cockroach, dangling left and right on the chute ... That thing could be fooled with very simple decoys.

 

Take a look at this new decoys.

 

Edited April 16, 2014 by =4c= Hajduk Veljko

[DUSTY]

What about micro JDAM's? 20-50 lb bombs each with their own targeting ability. Maybe even give them chutes and let them loiter individually.

 

We don't have any now, but it sounds like something within reach of current technology.

 

Well there is the GBU-39 Small Diameter Bomb (SDB) although that's 250lbs not 50. Surely they would easily integrate onto unmanned platforms down the track.

[NineLine]

They are talking about a strike close to friendlies, so you have the eyes on the ground spotting as well... not all the scenarios are the same to the ones you go on about.

 

Just do a quick Google search and take a look at what human pilots could not distinguish between the decoys and real targets during NATO military use over Yugoslavia. Let a lone a little camera in the bomb, with an intelligence of a cockroach, dangling left and right on the chute ... That thing could be fooled with very simple decoys.

 

Take a look at this new decoys.

 

[DUSTY]

Just do a quick Google search and take a look at what human pilots could not distinguish between the decoys and real targets during NATO military use over Yugoslavia.

 

This... Again? :huh:

 

 

:D

[NeilWillis]

The most effective way to get down and dirty in the combat zone has always been toe to toe. That's what the A10C does better than any other assets. It has armour, it has the bite of a Rottweiller, it can hang around, and it is crewed by experienced professionals.

 

Obviously, it is time some bureaucrat spoilt the party. Why keep a proven asset in the air when you can have some new toys. After all, the F35 is a cheap, proven, effective package - isn't it?

 

Actually, why not just get rid of all human intervention and let robots fight it out. They could even televise the wars, and hold them in a huge warehouse somewhere so no one will get hurt!

 

It all makes perfect sense to me!

[blkspade]

Its logical that the CAS role entails a high probability of having to provide support to troops in close proximity to the enemy. In these situations a cannon produces the least amount of collateral damage. Then I guess it makes even more sense to have something that is designed to fly and maneuver at a slow enough speed to easily surveil an area and employ said cannon, while still being fast enough to not be greatly threatened by small arms fire. To me that sounds like the exact reason you'd want the A-10 over the F-15E, or an attack chopper.

[4c Hajduk Veljko]

They are talking about a strike close to friendlies, so you have the eyes on the ground spotting as well... not all the scenarios are the same to the ones you go on about.

"20-50 lb bombs each with their own targeting ability", that was what I responded to.

 

Having eyes on the ground is very different scenario.

[Exorcet]

"20-50 lb bombs each with their own targeting ability", that was what I responded to.

 

Having eyes on the ground is very different scenario.

Well the eyes on the ground is implied here, and for a close in weapon like this (which is why the warhead is so small) you should probably take advantage of that.

 

The weapons would necessarily need to acquire the enemy on their own. Friendly ground troops could illuminate targets, or even illuminate themselves and the bombs would mark out a safe zone where they are not to go rather than follow that signal.