A-10 Warthog's Tusks Are Being Sharpened For A High-End Fight

Status
Not open for further replies.
That’s enough of the unsubstantiated accusations against USAF general officers.

Dredging up a 3 1/2 year old thread just to sling mud is distasteful.

Talk about the airplane if you like, but leave the baseless rants for social media.
 
Sure, if flown in a third world nation where we own the airspace. It's absolutely awesome in a very specific, very limited, set of circumstances that are unlikely to exist in any future fight. The fact that it spent 20 years flying in conflicts that lacked an air defense system has distorted everyone's view of the airplane. If you only had a minivan in a country without cars, you would think your minivan ruled the world. Fast, agile, capable of running away from anything. But when thrown onto the Nürburgring against a Porsche or BMW, you find out that it really sucks. That's it's hopelessly, hilariously, outclassed.

For real fighters, like the MiG-29, shooting down A-10s is like shooting fish in a barrel. So easy to kill the slow moving, low altitude target that can't shoot back. It's not stealth, it can't hide, it can't shoot back, it's slow. It's utterly vulnerable.

Look, the A-10 is slower, with a lower ceiling, than the P-51. If it's carrying bombs, it can't refuel at even medium altitude, which makes the tankers sitting ducks. If it's not carrying bombs, it's irrelevant.

In a high-end fight, the airplane is vulnerable, slow, short range, hard to refuel, and has little to no relevance. It's too vulnerable to modern air defense systems (that the Taliban lacked, and that we removed from Iraq) and too vulnerable 4th generation fighters (that we shot down over Iraq and that the Taliban lacked).

The A-10 guys know it, that's why they're testing upgrades and new missions in a desperate attempt to remain relevant for future conflicts.
Somehow it reminds me of the Junkers Ju 87 Stuka.
 
I think the military brass - having control of the skies - but terrible crap in the water - know the value of the “hang time” - and appropriately sized weapons the plane has been setup with. You know - like cheap rockets and rounds for cheap but lethal stuff that does billions in global damage
 
Iranian Shahed drones cost $35K to build and travel a little over 100mph. Were shooting them down with $1M patriot missiles and were running out. Could a A10 shoot down a Shahed drone? If so there not so obsolete at all.
 
Astro really doesn't like A-10's.
I just read that they are re-adapting them to combat swarms of drones. I would think they are certainly capable of that. The boots on the ground have always loved them.
 
It is close to being a flying tank. We will see its actual performance when it is used against a formidable enemy
If you aren’t familiat with Kim Campbell’s amazing heroism in the A-10, read about it here:

We were in different graduating classes at the Academy so our paths didn’t cross, but everyone knew her name then because she was the Cadet Wing Commander.
 
They’re old, slow, and outdated, but they are still cool. I see some almost weekly fly over my house.

I had a teacher who was involved with creating the ammo for these back in the 70’s. They were made out of depleted uranium. Interesting stuff.
That depleted uranium bores through tanks and shreds the occupants inside. Our troops on the ground learned quickly not to open those disabled tanks and it was too gross inside.
 
Astro really doesn't like A-10's.
I just read that they are re-adapting them to combat swarms of drones. I would think they are certainly capable of that. The boots on the ground have always loved them.
When under heavy fire - brrrrttt was music to the ears …
This is a unique phase of Epic Fury - the Apache is also hunting
 
When under heavy fire - brrrrttt was music to the ears …
This is a unique phase of Epic Fury - the Apache is also hunting
They are also the best FAC platform the USAF has ever had. Compare it to an old OV-10 bronco the FACs had in Viet Nam and as which one you’d rather have as your eyes on ears for CAS.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4wd
Astro really doesn't like A-10's.
I just read that they are re-adapting them to combat swarms of drones. I would think they are certainly capable of that. The boots on the ground have always loved them.
There's one unfortunate problem with that. Those small, low-tech short range drones spend most of their time flying over populated areas, which presents a serious issue when it comes to shooting them down via air to air. Just imagine what a 3 second blast from that 30mm cannon would do if unleashed above downtown Dubai.

Not good...
 
It's just another form of artillery. Time and technology move on.
So on the current mission - which is ending the terrorizing of the Strait - and resultant global economy with cheap drones wet or dry - what countermeasure assets did you order to replace it before retiring ?
 
Why do people so love tired iron that is past reasonable logistic support? Let's put P-47s up. They were good tank busters in their day when they were supportable.
 
Good Article in the WSJ.. The A-10 is a jobs program.

"Every day, teams of technicians at a vast Air Force base in Tucson, Ariz., tend to a fleet of attack jets the Pentagon has been trying to retire for more than a decade. They have picked replacement parts from the base’s famous “Boneyard,” where old military planes go for scrap, which stretches far into the surrounding desert.

The Air Force has said for years that the A-10 jets, nicknamed Warthogs for their bulky silhouette and toughness in a fight, have passed their prime and will be vulnerable in the wars of the future. The production line where they were made fell silent in the mid-1980s, and the average A-10 here is four decades old. Its job can be done by newer, more advanced planes, the Air Force says.


“The A-10, while it has served us well, is simply not a part of the battlefield of the future,” said Lt. Gen. Richard Moore, the Air Force’s deputy chief of staff for plans and programs.
Congress has other ideas. Bowing to members whose constituencies are dependent on the jet for jobs and the flow of federal tax dollars, it has instead insisted nearly all the planes keep flying at a cost of more than $4 billion over the past 10 years.
This kind of intervention is common—and is impairing the U.S.’s ability to respond to rapidly modernizing Chinese forces in a new era of great-power competition, say current and former senior defense officials and military analysts. ".....
If the US keeps fighting wars like Iraq, Afghanistan and now Iran, the A-10s will be very useful.
 
Astro really doesn't like A-10's.
I just read that they are re-adapting them to combat swarms of drones. I would think they are certainly capable of that. The boots on the ground have always loved them.
No serious, experienced campaign planner likes them.

It only does one thing.

As a campaign evolves, and mission needs shift, you have an airplane that is limited to one mission taking up the space that could be used by multi mission airplanes.

The Corolla analogy isn’t fair. Imagine instead a Corolla in taxi service that is limited to one passenger under 125 lbs and 25mph. And the taxi company wants to buy new Camrys. But the Corolla is legendary… so what?

Great for trips around the block. But not across town and not for the majority of passengers.

The A-10 is really good at one thing, but that thing is easily done, and often better done, by other airplanes.

Airplanes that can survive and defend themselves.

From a fighter pilot perspective, killing A-10s is fun because it’s so easy - that’s not the airplane to send in against an adversary with modern fighters.

The A-10 requires air superiority to survive and it doesn’t contribute to establishing air superiority.

Every time it excels in a permissive environment, it allows people to ignore its vulnerability, its cost, and its limitations.
 
Last edited:
There were previous negotiations to hand A10’s off to Jordan - so good chance those in the fight now will remain there …
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom