Air vs tanks

[HoYa]

I'm trying to master the A10a, but with a lot of difficulty.

 

When I try flying a mission, I'd like to use Mavericks to kill the anti-air units then roll with bombs or gun for tanks. But how can you tell them apart? The mav screen shows only dark or light dots with little to no shape.

 

Any help is appreciated.

[razo+r]

Zoom in with the Maverick screen

 

You can do that with " ' " and " ^ ", or refere to the ingame settings

 

also, Zoom in on the Missile screen, might help a bit

[HoYa]

Done it, still can't tell what I'm shooting at,other than they are bad guy vehicles

[razo+r]

how far away are you?

[GGTharos]

You can't, unless you get closer. That's all there is to it. Yes, target identification a very real issue and this is why modern aircraft are equipped with pods that sport powerful telescopes.

 

Real maverick footage:

 

I'm trying to master the A10a, but with a lot of difficulty.

 

When I try flying a mission, I'd like to use Mavericks to kill the anti-air units then roll with bombs or gun for tanks. But how can you tell them apart? The mav screen shows only dark or light dots with little to no shape.

 

Any help is appreciated.

[ricktoberfest]

I use the target pod to acquire targets then push them to the maverick for take down. The TGP has much higher zoom levels

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[GGTharos]

Yep, but he's flying an A-10A. No pod.

[esb77]

If you don't have an EO system with high resolution and zoom, for example in the Su-25 and the A-10A, you have to use other methods to deal with air defenses.

 

You can stand off using the Mavs for everything, and just accept really high munition costs and low kill numbers as the price of safety.

 

You can send a wingman in ahead to bait the air defenses, and target the ones that shoot. The downside is that this is hard on wingmen and you may run out of them pretty quickly.

 

You can go in and bait the air defenses yourself, but this is risky, and it forces you to fly with a light load.

 

You can go in using terrain masking, make one high speed pass while popping countermeasures, and then run for safety.

 

Extreme high altitude attacks might also work against AAA and short range SAMs, but without the wind correction function of the A-10C DCS module accuracy is likely to be poor at best for the unguided munitions.

 

You can use the mission editor to throw in a SEAD flight ahead of you in single player missions.

 

 

You can have a JTAC call the targets for you. This involves either some moderately complex scripting in single player, or a JTAC slot and a player willing to be a JTAC in multiplayer.

 

There are probably a few others that I'm not thinking of at the moment.

[ricktoberfest]

Yep, but he's flying an A-10A. No pod.

 

 

 

Didn't see that, you're right.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[razo+r]

1. no, from the rate of fire yes, but not from the caliber, MiG-15 got 37mm

 

2. I'm pretty sure those tanks need more than just 17-25 rounds

[razo+r]

better just post a screenshot of the ammo counter before and after the destroyed tank, tracks are inaccurate at the moment...

[razo+r]

just tried myself and a T-90 just lost one milimeter of his healthbar with 20-30 rounds from the front

 

from the rear, he lost more health but still no kill with 20-30rounds, from 0.5 miles

Edited February 19, 2017 by razo+r

[Fri13]

All russian tanks can be killed by powerful GAU-8/A gun, if they are hit from the top, rear or side, with between 14-28 hits. T-90 has been destroyed with 28 rounds, T-80U with 21 rounds, T-72B with 19 rounds and T-55 only with 14 rounds. See pictures.

 

But just wait until ground units gets proper modeling for an armor and you can't anymore anything else than lucky mobility kills or radio/prism destruction with GAU to MBT, pesky as T-55. Reactive armors would blow up but that's it really.

 

So now enjoy from a OP cannon effectiveness in aircrafts, and prepare to launch multiple mavericks towards more modern MBT.

[razo+r]

Do you have any data/proof that it is realistic?

[razo+r]

A-10A is not realistic, except flight model, like all FC3 planes.

 

Damage model is not really realistic, otherwise they wouldn't redo it.

 

The other one is only focused about itself and not tolerated to discuss about it due to forum rules.

 

A-10C is sure more realistic, but the damage that weapons do not always

[Fri13]

I think that MBT`s are balanced now, and GAU-8/A is not OP...it is just the powerful gun ever put in plane, and its main objective is to destroy tanks and other armored targets. Dont forget, that GAU-8/A API shells are PGU-14/B which contains depleted uranium (DU) and they have great armor piercing abilities. Game is realistic, I just attack MBT`s from the top where armor is thin, and also there are fuel tanks, which can be easily set on fire and the tank will just explode.

The GAU-8 has in 30 degree angle about a 80mm penetration at 300m distance.

Not enough to destroy anything as even the fuel compartments are armored, sealed and separated so you can't just "blow the MBT".

 

For every other tank than MBT it is very destructive weapon as other tank types ain't armored and protected so well. But even straight downward from 90 degree angle you likely don't get even a single penetration to destroy the MBT.

 

You will get mobility kills, that is what counts.

And why it was planned to be effective against thousands of T-55 MBT as you fire bursts and destroy tracks, wheels and maybe set engines on fire if not just make them cut.

 

That is reason why Mavericks exist so you can do the impact against MBT as the cannon ain't enough.

 

To stop a MBT platoon, all you need to do is to get 30-50% mobility kill on it and that platoon cant anymore operate and complete its tasks expected from a MBT platoon and is forced to withdraw or at least stop there.

 

But to destroy even T-55 never less T-72... It is just not enough really.

 

But destruction ain't needed really. Just render the MBT incapable to continue and it is enough.

Lots of fragile elements outside of its armor and hull, from radios to cameras and prisms.

 

Why realistic situation is to come in future for DCS when we get those status elements to ground vehicles so a vehicle can lose a track, lose an engine, lose the vision or radio capability (commanding) etc.

 

So benefits will be that you can do more effectively CAS, but you can't destroy MBT like now.

[razo+r]

Definitly not with the GAU 8, from A-10 yes

 

Dumb bombs, LGB, CBUs, Mavericks, HE shells, SABOT shells, other shells, HARM, Tomahawks, CALCM and much more...

 

From a report: "A -10 The Air Force deployed 144 A-10s into the AOR. Air superiority

allowed innovative employment of A-10s in a variety of

roles. Primarily killing tanks in an interdiction role, the A-10

proved its versatility as a daytime SCUD hunter in Western Iraq,

suppressing enemy air defenses, attacking early warning radars,

and even recorded two helicopter kills with its gun -- the only

gun kills of the war. While the A-10 flew almost 8,100 sorties, it

maintained a mission capable rate of 95.7% -- 5% above its

peacetime rates. Despite numerous hits and extensive damage,

the A-10 proved it could do a variety of missions successfully."

 

source: http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a235941.pdf

 

So I'd say most of them were killed by the maverick, not with the GAU-8

 

And for addition: http://www.2951clss-gulfwar.com/statistics.htm

 

987 tanks were destroyed by the A-10, most of them probably by mavericks or other weapons, but not with the GAU-8

Edited March 1, 2017 by razo+r

[Fri13]

So simply put.... GAU-8 vs MBT is very overestimated combination for destruction capability.

For mobility kills... Likely a good change (mobility kill is as effective as you will knock target from attack and defense and you will make it easy target for your ground troops).

 

But that cannon does deserve a "tank killer" nick name as there is no tanks other than MBT that can withstand it, meaning all IFV and such tanks are easily destroyed.

 

But when you consider that even .50cal penetrates M2 Bradley front armor with AP ammo, it is not so much nick name. But the firing rate and spread is that makes it so fearsome cannon that has more effective firepower than any other.

 

Just wait that DCS gets the realism update and A-10 pilots starts having more challenge flying.

[razo+r]

I didn't say none of them was destroyed by gun. A-10s destroyed according to those stats only 987 tanks, most of them with bombs or mavericks.

 

The gun didn't really destroy them, but made them combat ineffective or so (MBZs) maybe they did destroy something like an IFV or APC with gun, but idk...

 

I don't have to convince you, you can believe and think whatever you want, but facts are facts...

[Dino Might]

Make sure you have a zoom view axis assigned, and use that. I find that I can spot and identify what type of ground unit I am fighting outside of its engagement range, except for long range SAMs. For SA-8s and IR SAMs, the zoom view is generally enough to spot them.

 

The way zoom view works is slightly unrealistic, but mimics the use of binoculars, which A-10A pilots did use in operation.

 

Also, make sure to orbit the target area long enough to get different viewing angles on hard to identify targets. Learn the silhouette of an SA-8 vs SA-9 and Shilka. Beyond doing that, you need a TGP with the C model.

 

----

 

Against tanks, you will have a tough time killing them with the gun. You need to attack rear quarter and above to hit where their armor is weakest. Even then, it will take a lot of rounds (~200 minimum). I recommend using GBUs, LGBs, or Mavericks on the tanks.

 

Gun is great vs Shilkas. Those are very weak skinned; however, break-off before you hit slant range of 1.3-1.4 miles. They will gun you down easily if you get too close. You only need a few dozen hits on the Shilka to knock it out, so shoot from range and bracket the Shilka between the HE and the API CCIP dots.

 

Gun is also good vs SAMs, but you need to be very careful about your engagement. Either terrain mask and pop-up attack, or get another aircraft in the area to distract them. Once the Osa or Strela is looking at the other aircraft (see their missile doors rotating to align with the friendly), then run in and gun them down quickly. Keep your airspeed high and dump countermeasures on egress, or if they end up firing on you when you are running in. If they turn and fire on you before you can shoot, break off and get behind a hill ASAP.

 

You can also hit SA-3 track/search radars by staying very low (<100 ft AGL) with Mavericks.

 

SA-6s will kill you all the time, everywhere. Avoid them, unless you can perform a pop-up attack on the SA-6 radar.

 

----

 

Lastly, if you like the A-10A and can afford it, get the A-10C. It's a whole new world with the TGP and CDU. You will LOVE it!

Edited March 7, 2017 by Dino Might

[Fri13]

You cant convince me that all of thousand Iraq MBT`s was destroyed only by bombs and Maverick`s, not by gun...

Tanks.... Doesn't mean all are MBT. A IFV is a tank as well. A MT-LB is a tank. Even a 2S3 Akatsiya is a tank.

 

Lots of tanks can be destroyed by a 30mm cannon or with a 20mm cannon.

 

But if you can do it safely from a 3-4km altitude out of harms way.... No reasons to go to MANPADS reach.

[Dino Might]

You cant convince me that all of thousand Iraq MBT`s was destroyed only by bombs and Maverick`s, not by gun...

 

Check whether these were destruction kills or mobility/firepower kills (incapacitated). It is difficult to destroy a tank with the GAU-8, even the old T-55s, but the ability to incapacitate it is fairly good. A lot of those "kills" were probably ruled as such by crews abandoning the vehicle after tracks and optics were destroyed, or turret systems were disabled.

[Fri13]

No, MTLB is not a tank, IFV is not a tank and Self-propelled artillery like 2S3 is also not a tank. They are totally different types of military machines.

If you want to think so....

Tank ain't synonym to MBT, that is a Main Battle Tank, not THE Tank.

 

Main Battle Tank has specific requirements. Just like a "light tank", "medium tank" and a "heavy tank" and even "super-heavy tank" had.

Then were "tank killers" and "artillery tanks", "support tanks" and "engineering tanks" and all other kind tanks, including "anti-air tanks" and "infantry tanks"

 

Since the first tanks, they have been classified to be a tracked, armored and armed vehicles. Armament from machine gun to cannons was requirement.

 

At different eras classification for different kind tanks has changed, and latest really is "MBT" that fills role of multiple other previous tanks classes.

 

This is one reason why "armor" is a better definition for armored vehicles as it includes tracked as wheeled armored vehicles with or without weapons.

 

A "tank" is just a classification for very wide variety of different kind tracked, armored and armed vehicles, not just for MBT.

 

And again that definition is changing when a new gen tanks are coming in use with universal platforms, Merkava/Namer and T-14 and T-15 Armata etc.

 

Just thinking "a tank" means only a MBT is very unspecific way.

When a next gen MBT comes out... Or what ever comes 2050... Can't we anymore call todays MBT as "a tank" at all and that is then reserved what ever then is in use? As M4 sherman or a T-34 or even PT-76 ain't by todays standards on level of MBT... Yet all are tanks...

[msalama]

They are totally different types of military machines.

 

Indeed. They're classified as AFVs, not tanks, whatever Fri13 claims up there.

[Fri13]

Indeed. They're classified as AFVs, not tanks, whatever Fri13 claims up there.

AFV includes all tanks and all others armored fighting vehicles.

 

It is even broader (higher) classification than a tank is.

 

History cant be changed that tanks are armored, tracked and armed with at least machine gun. As well definitions and classification ain't absolute and same vehicle change its definition by as small changes as removing the weapon or changing it to something else.

 

A tank is tank, but it is very broad definition and includes all kind vehicles.

 

A-10 is a "tank killer" by its cannon, as it literally can penetrate most tanks armor from any direction. But it cant do it at all so to modern MBT (Main Battle Tank).

 

GAU-8 is a cannon solely by its caliber, but it is as well a gatling type and autocannon. Remove the automatic firing and it is just a cannon.

Rheinmetal 120mm is a cannon, just cannon even if would be fitted with autoloader. But 8f someone would make it automatic so it could fire like a GAU-8 it would become autocannon, but not gatling gun, unless someone puts few pipes to rotate.

 

Different calibers, different capabilities, same main class but still different by definitions.

 

Still the point is what a A-10 GAU-8 can do, and what it cant do. And claiming only a MBT is a tank is stupid and ignorant.