Jump to content

A-10 Being Retired


smnwrx

Recommended Posts

I'll take that argument and continue it with the vague scenario of 'lots of armor' :D

 

The F-35 can probably strike more armor than an A-10 in the same amount of time, given turn-around times.

The F-35 can strike armor where the A-10 cannot. Sure, less weapons to keep stealthy, but on the other hand, the A-10 couldn't go there.

The F-35 can probably discover armor where an A-10 can't.

The F-35 might not quite need absolute air superiority to do this job. At minimum it should be able to self-escort.

The F-35 can depart the field of battle post-haste.

 

For scenarios requiring a lot of loiter time, I agree with you, there's no real substitute for the A-10, though UAVs are starting to eat away at that.

 

Well after the F-35 is deployed to forward location we'll discuss again. Perfect example, the F-117 when deployed to Kuwait in the 90s...out of 10 ACFT only 2 were FMC at one time...the others hard broke because the nice advanced avionics didn't get along with the desert.

 

I work with a fellow crew chief in my reserve unit who works F-35s at Eglin for his civilian job, obviously I can't go into detail but we'll just say everything you hear publicly isn't close to true.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 326
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

New jet having trouble? Our gripens was grounded the other day because of atmospheric pressure being too high... :D (Caused the altimeters to cease operating.)

 

So I can see an argument for tried and true, but yeah, lol. :)


Edited by EtherealN

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Daniel "EtherealN" Agorander | Даниэль "эфирныйн" Агорандер

Intel i7 2600K @ 4.4GHz, ASUS Sabertooth P67, 8GB Corsair Vengeance @ 1600MHz, ASUS GTX 560Ti DirectCU II 1GB, Samsung 830series 512GB SSD, Corsair AX850w, two BENQ screens and TM HOTAS Warthog

DCS: A-10C Warthog FAQ | DCS: P-51D FAQ | Remember to read the Forum Rules |

|
| Life of a Game Tester
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't get this... The A-10 is the best CAS aircraft out there. It's not an Air to Air fighter. So why do all these people keep trying to compare it to one?

 

I don't see any aircraft replacing the A-10 in what it can do.

 

called a broken country cant afford it anymore , runaway banksters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah I'm not surprised. I wouldn't be surprised to see a new jet having troubles either though :)

 

New jet having trouble? Our gripens was grounded the other day because of atmospheric pressure being too high... :D (Caused the altimeters to cease operating.)

 

So I can see an argument for tried and true, but yeah, lol. :)

 

All I can say is it's not just "growing" pains of a new system but limitations that will be carried on it's entire lifecycle...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well after the F-35 is deployed to forward location we'll discuss again. Perfect example, the F-117 when deployed to Kuwait in the 90s...out of 10 ACFT only 2 were FMC at one time...the others hard broke because the nice advanced avionics didn't get along with the desert.

 

I work with a fellow crew chief in my reserve unit who works F-35s at Eglin for his civilian job, obviously I can't go into detail but we'll just say everything you hear publicly isn't close to true.

 

I guess the book I read about them in DS was wrong or my memory is wrong.

i7-4820k @ 3.7, Windows 7 64-bit, 16GB 1866mhz EVGA GTX 970 2GB, 256GB SSD, 500GB WD, TM Warthog, TM Cougar MFD's, Saitek Combat Pedals, TrackIR 5, G15 keyboard, 55" 4K LED

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I need, I need, I need... What about my wants? QuickSilver original.

"Off with his job" Mr Burns on the Simpsons.

"I've seen steering wheels / arcade sticks / flight sticks for over a hundred dollars; why be surprised at a 150 dollar item that includes the complexities of this controller?! It has BLINKY LIGHTS!!" author unknown.

 

 

These titles are listed in the chronological order I purchased them.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

paulrkiii no aircraft carries external fuel tanks into combat. If you really worked on military aircraft for 17 years you should know that.

I need, I need, I need... What about my wants? QuickSilver original.

"Off with his job" Mr Burns on the Simpsons.

"I've seen steering wheels / arcade sticks / flight sticks for over a hundred dollars; why be surprised at a 150 dollar item that includes the complexities of this controller?! It has BLINKY LIGHTS!!" author unknown.

 

 

These titles are listed in the chronological order I purchased them.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are aware of the fact that droptanks can be dropped, right? ;)

 

The problem with that on stealth aircraft is that the pylons would remain, thus the stealth aspect remains compromised even after the tanks are dropped.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Daniel "EtherealN" Agorander | Даниэль "эфирныйн" Агорандер

Intel i7 2600K @ 4.4GHz, ASUS Sabertooth P67, 8GB Corsair Vengeance @ 1600MHz, ASUS GTX 560Ti DirectCU II 1GB, Samsung 830series 512GB SSD, Corsair AX850w, two BENQ screens and TM HOTAS Warthog

DCS: A-10C Warthog FAQ | DCS: P-51D FAQ | Remember to read the Forum Rules |

|
| Life of a Game Tester
Link to comment
Share on other sites

paulrkiii no aircraft carries external fuel tanks into combat. If you really worked on military aircraft for 17 years you should know that.

 

Paulrkiii has been working with military aircraft for 17 years. Cali has been working F-16 Fuel systems for quite a while (now working on B-52s). I worked as an F-16 crew chief a long time ago. There are quite a few of us that work or have worked on military aircraft, and I can tell you that in most cases they will carry external fuel tanks, depending on the mission of course. Take some time to look up pictures and information before you try to discredit someone in the military community.

 

Tornado?

 

F-14s too. Pretty much every aircraft back to WWII would carry externals into combat. If they had to be dropped, they could be (hence the term External "Drop" tanks). If one fell off without a command from the cockpit, a TFOA (Things Falling Off Aircraft) report would be filled out by the flight crew.


Edited by hog_driver111th

A-10C - FC3 - CA - L-39 - UH1 - P-51 - Hawk - BS2 - F-86 - Gazelle - F-5E - AV8B - F/A-18C

i5-4590 - GTX 1060 - Oculus CV1 - TM:Warthog

[sIGPIC]http://forums.eagle.ru/signaturepics/sigpic9979_1.gif[/sIGPIC]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

F-14s too. Pretty much every aircraft back to WWII would carry externals into combat. If they had to be dropped, they could be (hence the term External "Drop" tanks). If one fell off without a command from the cockpit, a TFOA (Things Falling Off Aircraft) report would be filled out by the flight crew.

 

Good points. I like the TFOA report. :D

Always remember. I don't have a clue what I'm doing

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh well, if you're going to cut "500 billion" from your defence budget then get ready for much worse I'd say. This decision is based on pure costs, not on "Which platform is better". There are things both A-10 and F-35 do better but definitely not to the extend that one replaces other.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Erdem - it's 500 billion over 10 years, that is, 50 billion per annum. :)

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Daniel "EtherealN" Agorander | Даниэль "эфирныйн" Агорандер

Intel i7 2600K @ 4.4GHz, ASUS Sabertooth P67, 8GB Corsair Vengeance @ 1600MHz, ASUS GTX 560Ti DirectCU II 1GB, Samsung 830series 512GB SSD, Corsair AX850w, two BENQ screens and TM HOTAS Warthog

DCS: A-10C Warthog FAQ | DCS: P-51D FAQ | Remember to read the Forum Rules |

|
| Life of a Game Tester
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh well, if you're going to cut "500 billion" from your defence budget then get ready for much worse I'd say.
500 billion dollars in defense cuts is over 10 years period. That is not even a 10% of the defense budget which doubled since year 2000. So 10% cut over 10 years is not big deal at all.

Thermaltake Kandalf LCS | Gigabyte GA-X58A-UD3R | Etasis ET750 (850W Max) | i7-920 OC to 4.0 GHz | Gigabyte HD5850 | OCZ Gold 6GB DDR3 2000 | 2 X 30GB OCZ Vertex SSD in RAID 0 | ASUS VW266H 25.5" | LG Blue Ray 10X burner | TIR 5 | Saitek X-52 Pro | Logitech G930 | Saitek Pro flight rudder pedals | Windows 7 Home Premium 64 bit

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The F-22 drops them with their pylons.

 

You are aware of the fact that droptanks can be dropped, right? ;)

 

The problem with that on stealth aircraft is that the pylons would remain, thus the stealth aspect remains compromised even after the tanks are dropped.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D

I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Like with all things related to combat, the real answer is 'it depends'. You probably shouldn't be telling a person who's working with the aircraft what he knows or what he doesn't.

 

paulrkiii no aircraft carries external fuel tanks into combat. If you really worked on military aircraft for 17 years you should know that.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D

I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are you guys really wanna sell us F-35 as an A-10 replacement? I don't buy it!

 

On the other hand it is unsurprising that A-10 squadrons are decommissioned now that the campaigns in Iraq and Afghanistan are winding down. It just makes for a whole lot of sorties less to generate, just make the math and you will find that you have many airframes in excess.

It is only logical that they would prefer to retain more multi-mission aircraft such as the F-16 in readiness, they are going to upgrade about 200 of them to cope with the F-35 delays.


Edited by tflash
removed a bad joke

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

paulrkiii no aircraft carries external fuel tanks into combat. If you really worked on military aircraft for 17 years you should know that.

 

Wow that's new to me, I worked tank build up when I was in Alaska during exercises for nothing than!!! Curse the higher ups for tricking us into doing that. I already see a number of people told you, once again, yes they tank tanks into combat.

i7-4820k @ 3.7, Windows 7 64-bit, 16GB 1866mhz EVGA GTX 970 2GB, 256GB SSD, 500GB WD, TM Warthog, TM Cougar MFD's, Saitek Combat Pedals, TrackIR 5, G15 keyboard, 55" 4K LED

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

.....no aircraft carries external fuel tanks into combat.....

 

Seriously?

 

This poor Pilot is in for a helluva surprise then if he sticks his head outta the cockpit and looks down:

 

An-RAF-Typhoon-takes-off--007.jpg

Novice or Veteran looking for an alternative MP career?

Click me to commence your Journey of Pillage and Plunder!

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

'....And when I get to Heaven, to St Peter I will tell....

One more Soldier reporting Sir, I've served my time in Hell......'

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK I stand corrected. I had the right information just the wrong time period......

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drop_tank

The first drop tanks were designed to be discarded when empty or in the event of combat or emergency in order to reduce drag, weight, and to increase maneuverability. Modern external tanks are often (but not always maybe?)intended to be retained both in combat and in normal long-range flight, and only dropped in an emergency.

 

In my defense I did read information that stated they did not carry drop tanks into combat because of the increased possibility of fire. Maybe that was situational and I took it out of context. I know they carried them to GET to combat but not actually IN combat. We were discussing A-10 loiter times. Based on previous information I had I assumed no ground attack aircraft would carry external tanks to increase loiter time in a combat zone.

 

Apologies.


Edited by ZQuickSilverZ

I need, I need, I need... What about my wants? QuickSilver original.

"Off with his job" Mr Burns on the Simpsons.

"I've seen steering wheels / arcade sticks / flight sticks for over a hundred dollars; why be surprised at a 150 dollar item that includes the complexities of this controller?! It has BLINKY LIGHTS!!" author unknown.

 

 

These titles are listed in the chronological order I purchased them.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A-10s will only carry the externals for extended range relocation missions. Most other combat jets will carry externals on every mission unless the mission profile calls for the flight to go without.

A-10C - FC3 - CA - L-39 - UH1 - P-51 - Hawk - BS2 - F-86 - Gazelle - F-5E - AV8B - F/A-18C

i5-4590 - GTX 1060 - Oculus CV1 - TM:Warthog

[sIGPIC]http://forums.eagle.ru/signaturepics/sigpic9979_1.gif[/sIGPIC]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess the book I read about them in DS was wrong or my memory is wrong.

 

Everyone knows their record in Desert Storm, all i can talk to about 117s was what I saw first hand in 96 at al Jaber Kuwait....don't know if the hanger conditions were different or what the reasons were....

 

paulrkiii no aircraft carries external fuel tanks into combat. If you really worked on military aircraft for 17 years you should know that.

 

You are correct in the A-10s do not carry externals into combat but many other ACFT do....

 

How about this video from Afghanistan, I see drop tanks and it's in combat...

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What happen to a pilot when their aircraft gets send to bone yard? I'm guessing most A-10C pilots are in the middle or near the end of their flying career, so are they forced to fly helos or retired? I can't imagine the military wanting to spend money to put them in F-35s or even the F-15s.

ED have been taking my money since 1995. :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...