Wallet out... Question.

[Orwell]

I think I wanna buy...

 

But I'm concerned about no standoff weapons.

 

Is the jamming on the A10 so good as to allow it to get close enough to AA/SAMs to engage with Mavs easily?

[kengou]

A-10 isn't a SEAD aircraft. It can tackle some mid-range SAMs like SA-8, SA-13, SA-15. With pop-up attacks from very low level it might have a chance against other advanced SAMs too, but it'll be very dangerous. I wouldn't buy the A-10 if you expect to go SAM hunting with it. It isn't designed to fight in such dangerous contested airspace.

[BuzzU]

In real life, the Hogs have fighter escorts to take care of SAMs and other bad guys.

[Faelwolf]

Currently in R/L the hog is being used for CAS for counterinsurgency operations, which is a low threat environment even by today's standards. The idea it was designed for low threat environments is a myth though, as the original strategic planning allowed for the A-10's to all be destroyed within 72 hours in the event of a full-scale war with the Soviet Union in Europe. They were intended to disrupt the initial attack by destroying tanks, troops, and equipment on their initial thrust into western Europe, (primarily tanks) and buy time for a NATO response. That war never came, and the mission for the A-10 evolved as warfare evolved. It became a premier platform for the small proxy wars and insurgencies we have today.

Also at the time of it's development, SAM technology was a lot different, and while it was to be the sacrificial lamb, it would have survived a lot longer on the battlefield than it would today, and was designed for low level flight and the use of terrain masking to avoid SAMs. What would be considered a high threat environment then would be a moderate threat environment today. Let's not forget this aircraft is over 40 years old. It has received numerous updates, but it's base design and primary mission, to attack ground targets in an AO with active air defenses, has remained the same. The tactics for destroying SAM sites has also remained the same for the A-10, pop up attacks using terrain masking. However, in modern planning, more capable SEAD aircraft are sent in first, and the A-10 is only expected to handle short-mid range SAM sites that may have been overlooked, if at all.

As an example of it's use on a modern full war battlefield, and what we could have expected from it in the 80's in a war against the Soviet Union, take a look at both of the Gulf wars, where we were squared up against a country using 70's/80's Soviet equipment. Granted, the training and tactics of the Iraqis were sub-par, but the technology was the same, and we could extrapolate a rather positive outcome. The Russians took note, and it's reflected in their current TO&E.

[Ziptie]

I think I wanna buy...

 

But I'm concerned about no standoff weapons.

 

Is the jamming on the A10 so good as to allow it to get close enough to AA/SAMs to engage with Mavs easily?

 

The ALQ-184 jammer pod works great on the A10C I / II. You still need to know what you are doing, if you are going to get up close and personal with SAMs. AA is not a problem, again if you know what you are doing. As others have stated - A10C's will have most SAM threats cleared by other aircraft in real life, apart from manpads or any "surprise" threats that have either moved into the AO - or been sneaky enough to avoid detection (rare to be fair). That being said, I've taken out many SA-10 sites and other "deadly" SAM threats without assistance. It's easier with a true SEAD flight accompanying you.

 

 

The question(s) should be:

 

Do you want to acquire a module that is exceptionally detailed in the systems, integration of those systems?

 

Do you want to acquire a module that "can" take quite a bit of study, training, and practice of what you've learned in study and training - to use that major weapon system effectively?

 

Do you want to acquire a module that is incredibly rewarding to fly, and a module that truly feels like you are flying the aircraft (lack of FBW)?

 

 

 

If you answered yes to any of those three questions - I'd say you would be happy with your decision to purchase.

 

If you answered yes to all of those questions - welcome to the early steps of becoming a Hog driver - a journey filled with many different types of mission.

 

 

 

Cheers,

 

Ziptie

[Kippy]

The A-10 does lack competitive standoff weapons like the JSOW and HARM. The effective range of these weapons is partially determined by the altitude and speed of the launch platform. The A-10 is not an aircraft that can throw standoff fastballs from 28,000 feet busting Mach. Put simply, the Air Force thinks (rightfully so) that throwing HARMs on the A-10 would be a waste. It may potentially increase survivability of the A-10 in a higher threat environment, but that's not really where the Air Force is wanting or finding the A-10 to operate today.

 

The Maverick does have the range to be competitive with the SA-8, SA-13, SA-19, and even the SA-15 (if you want to watch your missile be shot down). The Maverick theoretically has the range to take a crack at an SA-3 using Force Correlate to help produce a lock at range, but in the real world FC is kind of a crapshoot and is hardly ever used.

 

Interestingly, the APKWS MPP warhead has proven itself to be quite capable of standing off with systems like the SA-13 and ZSU-23-4 in some test sorties I've flown. It wasn't designed with this exact mission in mind, but it can fit the bill.

 

In the A-10 you won't be competitive with systems like the SA-11, SA-6, and especially the SA-10. That's just something you have to accept.

 

A point to mention on SHORAD - it exists to destroy and deter hostile aircraft. If it is possible to achieve your mission objective without using up munitions shacking air defenses, by all means do that. If you spend a good chunk of your playtime and munitions hunting down the ZSU-23s as opposed to the armor they are protecting, they are in effect accomplishing their mission to at least some degree. Instead, save those Mavericks and guided bombs for the mission target, and keep your maneuvers outside of the threat envelope. Hard decks are your friend in threat environments.

[Dragon1-1]

Ideally, SEAD flights would account for the flak, but it's not always possible. I actually found it more practical to kill off the SHORAD, particular when I'm not just sniping tanks (which is indeed best done with guided weapons). Sometimes, you'll have to clear the way to go in with the gun on softskins or infantry. I've won a gun duel with a ZSU once or twice, but it's not for the faint of heart. :) Didn't have the opportunity to try APKWS for that, but I'd expect to be a far better choice against SHORAD than Mavs, if only because you can take a lot more of them.

 

Fun story: I once bombed a SA-15. With CBU-97s from the A-10A. :) Of course, that was basically required knowing where it was, approaching below treetop level, and pickling off the bombs "by feel", at an altitude just high enough for them to work. SA-15 can't kill you if it can't see you, and it's got a (short) minimum range. It took a few attempts, though, if your nerves fail and you pull up at any point when the SAM is alive, you're toast.

[Deezle]

IME the jammer pods are total junk. They will let you get slightly closer, so the threat can more easily kill you :rolleyes: Haven't hung that dead weight under my aircraft in years.

[QuiGon]

IME the jammer pods are total junk. They will let you get slightly closer, so the threat can more easily kill you :rolleyes: Haven't hung that dead weight under my aircraft in years.

 

For some SAM systems this slight difference in engagement range can make the difference you need to get in range for your own weapons ;)

[Ziptie]

IME the jammer pods are total junk. They will let you get slightly closer, so the threat can more easily kill you :rolleyes: Haven't hung that dead weight under my aircraft in years.

 

Are you using the Z axis for the jammer to start and stop jamming? Are you using the correct setting (SAM1, SAM2)? I only ask, because when I use the jammer - you can literally watch the incoming missile go "stupid" - in combination with countermeasures of course....

 

Cheers,

 

Ziptie

[BuzzU]

 

Are you using the Z axis for the jammer to start and stop jamming? Are you using the correct setting (SAM1, SAM2)? I only ask, because when I use the jammer - you can literally watch the incoming missile go "stupid" - in combination with countermeasures of course....

 

Cheers,

 

Ziptie

 

If the jammer is working as it should. You shouldn't have a missile coming at you unless you turned it on after the missile was fired. Your countermeasures probably saved you.

[Ziptie]

 

If the jammer is working as it should. You shouldn't have a missile coming at you unless you turned it on after the missile was fired. Your countermeasures probably saved you.

 

I don't turn it on until the missile fires.

 

 

Cheers,

 

Ziptie

[BuzzU]

 

I don't turn it on until the missile fires.

 

 

Cheers,

 

Ziptie

 

 

 

I'm used to flying fighters. I don't fly the Hog much and had to go research the jammer on it. You seem to be using it the way we're supposed to. It's not the best jammer we get in DCS.

 

Carry on.

[Deezle]

 

Are you using the Z axis for the jammer to start and stop jamming? Are you using the correct setting (SAM1, SAM2)? I only ask, because when I use the jammer - you can literally watch the incoming missile go "stupid" - in combination with countermeasures of course....

 

Cheers,

 

Ziptie

I know how the controls and settings work. Since I haven't tried it in years, I just set up a quick test against a Tor, with no jamming it fired on me at 8 miles, with jamming (SAM2) it fired at 6.9. Jamming by itself, without chaff, didn't appear to disrupt the missile guidance at all. Perhaps when used with chaff it works better than just chaff or jammer by themselves? I maintain an extra 2 AIM-9s is more useful in a typical MP threat environment.

 

If I find myself messing with the bull where I shouldn't be, I'd much rather terrain mask to get close to my target than using a jammer up high to get slightly further into the threat envelope without a good place to hide.

[Ziptie]

I know how the controls and settings work. Since I haven't tried it in years, I just set up a quick test against a Tor, with no jamming it fired on me at 8 miles, with jamming (SAM2) it fired at 6.9. Jamming by itself, without chaff, didn't appear to disrupt the missile guidance at all. Perhaps when used with chaff it works better than just chaff or jammer by themselves? I maintain an extra 2 AIM-9s is more useful in a typical MP threat environment.

 

If I find myself messing with the bull where I shouldn't be, I'd much rather terrain mask to get close to my target than using a jammer up high to get slightly further into the threat envelope without a good place to hide.

 

 

In conjunction with countermeasures it will certainly have a greater chance of defeating the incoming threat - but it does work without deploying countermeasures as well. Best option is #1, both. I take the low altitude tactic most of the time when entering an area with SAM threats, as it's much easier to drive them into the ground or use terrain to mask and defeat them. But everyone has their own style, and you do you sir.

 

 

Cheers,

 

Ziptie