A-10s Support 90 Pinned Troops

[3instein]

http://www.military.com/video/operations-and-strategy/afghanistan-conflict/a-10s-support-90-pinned-troops/2096116339001/

[KLR Rico]

Nice find. Love the hawg!

[Taproot]

Love the hawg!

 

I couldn't agree more. :)

[Speed]

Just think: with its more powerful gun (with more ammo, too!), lower cost, higher resistance to battle damage, and lower speed, the F-35A that will replace the A-10 will do this CAS job so much better!

 

/sarcasm off

[BoneSaw]

Just think: with its more powerful gun (with more ammo, too!), lower cost, higher resistance to battle damage, and lower speed, the F-35A that will replace the A-10 will do this CAS job so much better!

 

/sarcasm off

 

::sigh:::noexpression:

[joey45]

You need a dedicated A2G platform... NOT A STEALTH FIGHTER!

[marcos]

Wonder if this is the actual cockpit footage:

 

[X-man]

Wow! You guys really have it all figured out. If only the DoD was reading these forums! :P

[Phantom88]

Just think: with its more powerful gun (with more ammo, too!), lower cost, higher resistance to battle damage, and lower speed, the F-35A that will replace the A-10 will do this CAS job so much better!

 

/sarcasm off

:D You Funny:D

[Exorcet]

Just think: with its more powerful gun (with more ammo, too!), lower cost, higher resistance to battle damage, and lower speed, the F-35A that will replace the A-10 will do this CAS job so much better!

 

/sarcasm off

Why does the F-35 need A-10 levels of damage resistance, and Vmin? And what will the A-10 do if enemy fighters or heavy SAM's show up?

 

Also consider that the A-10 replacement is scheduled for 2028, which is 15 years from now. By then the A-10 would be old. Not just old as in technology, but old as in airframe. As time goes on CAS weapons get smaller and smarter; some time after the A-10 is gone the F-35 may be carrying the equivalent of a 30 mm in its weapons bays, perhaps even with 3 times the range and guided warheads that can turn away from friendly troops.

[GGTharos]

I'm thinking about how you thought about the troops getting there with all that A-10 air cover after the A-10's have blown up the S-300's, SA-11's and other fun things , not to mention enemy fighters.

 

/sarcasm off

 

The F-35 isn't built for Afganistan, it's built to deal with far more sophisticated foes.

 

Just as an F-15E can make insurgents hit the road, so can an F-35.

 

Just think: with its more powerful gun (with more ammo, too!), lower cost, higher resistance to battle damage, and lower speed, the F-35A that will replace the A-10 will do this CAS job so much better!

 

/sarcasm off

[pepin1234]

it's built to deal with far more sophisticated foes. Just as an F-15E can make insurgents hit the road, so can an F-35.

 

:megalol: That is true, but at the moment the F-35 is one of the biggest fail of the USA aviation. better redesign to and start again.

[marcos]

Just think: with its more powerful gun (with more ammo, too!), lower cost, higher resistance to battle damage, and lower speed, the F-35A that will replace the A-10 will do this CAS job so much better!

 

/sarcasm off

Serious question though. Could the GPU-5A be mounted on the F-35 centreline (with a sturdier mount obviously)?

 

Why does the F-35 need A-10 levels of damage resistance, and Vmin? And what will the A-10 do if enemy fighters or heavy SAM's show up?

Press '\' to bring up the radio menu and select 'SEAD'.

 

Of course we always send in ground forces before SEAD and air superiority have been achieved. That way they can get bombed and we can try figure out who's who from the air whilst dog-fighting at the same time.

Edited February 6, 2013 by marcos

[Speed]

Designing your entire air force to be able to dominate an enemy equipped with SA-11s and Su-27s is incredibly wasteful when the majority of conflicts an air force fights in pits its aircraft against enemies equipped with AK-47s or, at best, Zu-23s and a rare MANPAD. Even in conflicts where the enemy initially has sophisticated equipment, that equipment eventually gets destroyed.

 

We just need cheap, effective CAS aircraft.

Edited February 6, 2013 by Speed

[Sierra99]

Why does the F-35 need A-10 levels of damage resistance, and Vmin? And what will the A-10 do if enemy fighters or heavy SAM's show up?

 

Instead of asking

 

"Why does the F-35 NEED A-10 levels of damage resistance, and Vmin?" You should be asking "Why does the A-10 HAVE the levels of damage resistance, and Vmin it does?"?

 

The answer is simple...The A-10 was designed and optimized for CAS. The propeller heads sat down and looked at what kind of damage a CAS aircraft could expect to incur and built an aircraft that could sustain that kind of damage and more and still bring the pilot home. Damage resistance and Loiter time weren't a happy coincidence...They were design goals. Do you think just because we have a shiny new FighterCasStrikeAirSuperiority airplane the bad guys are going to change the way they try to shoot it down? Don't whine that the F-35 shouldn't be expected to take the same damage or loiter as long as the A-10...They should be striving to make a BETTER CAS aircraft... One that can take MORE damage than the aircraft it's replacing and loiter LONGER... Otherwise instead of buying NEW airplanes, put that money into the Airplane you already have. The Money will go farther.

 

And what will the A-10 do if enemy fighters or heavy SAM's show up?

 

If they do... the A-10 will do the same thing they do now...Do you think Enemy Fighters aren't a consideration now? Are enemy fighters going to more of a problem in 15 years?

 

Also consider that the A-10 replacement is scheduled for 2028, which is 15 years from now. By then the A-10 would be old. Not just old as in technology, but old as in airframe.

 

While the A-10 has been around for almost 40 Years, It is far from "old". I can name at least 4 airframes that are just as old (Or OLDER) as the A-10 that are expected to be used just as long. People born in the disposable generation don't understand preventative maintenance programs... And the "C" model is an example of how updating the Aircraft as times and equipment change is no real challenge.

 

If you can make an F-35 that meets the same design goals as the A-10, Great, Buy a thousand of them. If you can't...Well then then you need to start designing a new airplane. The CAS mission sure as hell aint going away and it's sure not going to get any easier on the aircraft or pilot.

[GGTharos]

Really? Where did it fail? You just babble on, sir. :megalol:

 

:megalol: That is true, but at the moment the F-35 is one of the biggest fail of the USA aviation. better redesign to and start again.

[GGTharos]

No, designing your entire air force to be able to dominate an enemy equipped with all that or better, is wasteful only if that enemy isn't going to happen ... ever.

 

That's the difference between the haves and the have nots when it comes to air forces.

 

I bet there will be some interesting replacement for the A-10 in a decade or so on the books ... either that or they'll decide that the very close CAS is best left to helicopters anyway.

 

Designing your entire air force to be able to dominate an enemy equipped with SA-11s and Su-27s is incredibly wasteful when the majority of conflicts an air force fights in pits its aircraft against enemies equipped with AK-47s or, at best, Zu-23s and a rare MANPAD. Even in conflicts where the enemy initially has sophisticated equipment, that equipment eventually gets destroyed.

 

We just need cheap, effective CAS aircraft.

[Mandrake5]

Can't help feeling that people are seriously missing the point of 5th gen tech. F35 won't have to take the punishment the A10 does because its radically advanced radar, sensor and weapons delivery systems will be exponentially more effective in spotting, sharing and neutralising threats, both on the ground and the air.

 

5th gen dumps all over ALL previous tech from an enormous height, but what baffles me is why some people can't/won't grasp this.....emotions clouding judgement perhaps, but why.....?

[X-man]

I like how the "A-10 mafia" gets winded up as soon as someone mentions the F-35 replacing the warthog.

[Exorcet]

Serious question though. Could the GPU-5A be mounted on the F-35 centreline (with a sturdier mount obviously)?

I'd think that wing mounted gun pods, or something similar could be developed if the need arose.

 

 

Press '\' to bring up the radio menu and select 'SEAD'.

 

Of course we always send in ground forces before SEAD and air superiority have been achieved. That way they can get bombed and we can try figure out who's who from the air whilst dog-fighting at the same time.

 

Well as long as SEAD is infallible and air superiority remains constant, then there is no worry. The A-10 is a successful CAS plane, but it's never actually been used in its intended role which is combat with an equal adversary to the US.

 

Instead of asking

 

"Why does the F-35 NEED A-10 levels of damage resistance, and Vmin?" You should be asking "Why does the A-10 HAVE the levels of damage resistance, and Vmin it does?"?

 

The answer is simple...The A-10 was designed and optimized for CAS. The propeller heads sat down and looked at what kind of damage a CAS aircraft could expect to incur and built an aircraft that could sustain that kind of damage and more and still bring the pilot home. Damage resistance and Loiter time weren't a happy coincidence...They were design goals. Do you think just because we have a shiny new FighterCasStrikeAirSuperiority airplane the bad guys are going to change the way they try to shoot it down? Don't whine that the F-35 shouldn't be expected to take the same damage or loiter as long as the A-10...They should be striving to make a BETTER CAS aircraft... One that can take MORE damage than the aircraft it's replacing and loiter LONGER... Otherwise instead of buying NEW airplanes, put that money into the Airplane you already have. The Money will go farther.

 

The F-35 is a better CAS aircraft. Not for Afghanistan, but for CAS against SA-XX SAM's and PAK-FA/Su-35 equipped militaries with high numbers of well trained personnel.

 

The A-10 was designed in the 70's and it was designed for performing CAS missions with 70's technology against 70's technology. 1970's CAS is not necessarily the best way to do CAS. You couldn't ID friendlies from any kind of distance, most bombs were dumb, and stealth aircraft were limited to very specialized roles.

 

Now we have the possibility of doing the same damage as the A-10 from 30,000 ft and 10 miles out instead of being at 5,000 ft and 2 miles out and that's without losing accuracy. The enemy also can potentially reach a lot farther and their mobile systems pack a bigger punch. Why should we bother doing things the A-10 way? Maybe CAS planes don't have to take any damage if they can detect and evade enemy defense. Maybe they don't need to fly low if friendly and enemy positions are available at any time, or at least from a distance. What bomber has had dozens of guns since WWII?

 

If they do... the A-10 will do the same thing they do now...Do you think Enemy Fighters aren't a consideration now? Are enemy fighters going to more of a problem in 15 years?

Relative to the A-10 yes they will be more of a problem, as they will be more capable. Also, while fighters are a problem now in the general sense, looking at the specific conflicts that the A-10 has participated in, it's clear that the A-10 has had it easy.

 

 

 

While the A-10 has been around for almost 40 Years, It is far from "old". I can name at least 4 airframes that are just as old (Or OLDER) as the A-10 that are expected to be used just as long. People born in the disposable generation don't understand preventative maintenance programs... And the "C" model is an example of how updating the Aircraft as times and equipment change is no real challenge.

2028 will be 55 years. How many tactical aircraft have lasted that long? Smaller more agile planes that undergo more stress in their operational lives will wear out faster and just become more expensive to maintain. This applies mainly to fighters, but the A-10 doesn't have it as easy as a transport or a bomber.

 

If you can make an F-35 that meets the same design goals as the A-10, Great, Buy a thousand of them. If you can't...Well then then you need to start designing a new airplane. The CAS mission sure as hell aint going away and it's sure not going to get any easier on the aircraft or pilot.

Exactly. It's not going to get easier, so we can't just hope that the same aircraft will be able to do the job forever. The F-35 has zero reason to meet the A-10's designs goals if it can fight in a way that's more effective.