T-toad is a GREAT SEAD platform!

[Frostie]

Your supposed to treat it like all other guns--as if it were your life.

Just like GTA Take it, Hold it, Love it.:gun_smilie:

Who needs guns when you got women. Or is that the other way round.:)

 

And yes give me an F-16 over these anyday.

[jpm1]

 

Again wrong. Aerial refueling and a reasonable sortie rate accomplishes the same thing where your rudimentary runway will eventually reduce sortie rate due to FoD and potential resupply issues..

 

i didn't knew one could weapon reload while in the air

 

 

 

I'd call an A-10. Why? Big gun, big bombs, accurate ability to employ both - AND the ability to employ precision munitions as well as better ability to coordinate with the FAC.

 

in Lock on the A-10 can carry 6 different types of weapons the SU-25 23 i don't talk of the SU-25T which can carry extra TV guided and SEAD missiles i don't say Lock on reflects the reality at 100% but i suppose it gives a quite accurate idea . i don't say neither the SU-25's better (even if i fly it a lot not to say always )

[GGTharos]

i didn't knew one could weapon reload while in the air

 

You can't yet, but the USAF is looking into it. Seriously ;)

However, the point is you can base your fighter farther away, and until they have to reload weapons, they can remain on station for HOURS waiting on you to call for help. Su-25 can't do that.

 

 

 

in Lock on the A-10 can carry 6 different types of weapons the SU-25 23 i don't talk of the SU-25T which can carry extra TV guided and SEAD missiles i don't say Lock on reflects the reality at 100% but i suppose it gives a quite accurate idea . i don't say neither the SU-25's better (even if i fly it a lot not to say always )

 

The A-10's primary - and only - precision munition, in LO, is the AGM-65, in 'small' and 'large' warhead variants. You can use it on armor, you can use it to demolish buildings.

That takes care of anything resembling Vikhr/Kh-25.

The A-10 uses 80mm rockets, IIRC, but nothing bigger (I don't recall ZUNI's being used, although they can be).

There's practically no difference in bomb carrying ability; they both carry different types of bombs. A cannister is pretty much equivalent to a CBU anyway - it does make a difference when it comes to deployment altitude though.

 

The Su-25 has an interesting selection of large rockets, where the A-10 will prefer to use bombs or mavericks.

There's no equivalent to the Kh-29 except a large bomb on the A-10's side.

 

In the end, the armament types are not terribly different on the surface, but you'll find a lot more 'bunker busting'/demolition guided weapons for the Su-25 than the A-10A ... the new mavericks come closer to the demolition duty however.

[ThunderChief]

I think the weak points the A-10 has compared to Su-25T would be compensated by F-16s or F/A-18s in a real scenario.

As the A-10 is only deployed by USAF there its no suprise it lacks capabilities like precision standoff weapons which other planes can deliver.

I think in the longrun the UCAVs will take over the AFAC and CAS role as they have a higher loiter time and are not restricted by ROE. Anyway in certain situations the A-10 will still be the best aircraft to do the job.

[hitman]

The A-10 does have standoff capabilities...armed with a sniper pod or LANTIRN pod or as such, can drop precision guided munitions at a decent altitude. Its just slower in this aspect than its intended mission.

[jpm1]

 

 

[RedTiger]

The camo scheme on the first one is a hoot! Sometimes here in Texas you'll see a guy who has decided to put a camo scheme on his truck for hunting purposes. But instead of going and getting a pro job with maybe Mossy Oak, he decides to whip out a can of paint and do it himself. The results are not too far off from the first Frogfoot! :D