I disagree, the A-10 puts on one heck of a yank and bank demonstration at air shows.
A-10 Warthog's Tusks Are Being Sharpened For A High-End Fight
- Thread starter BlueOvalFitter
- Start date
- Status
4wd
$50 site donor 2026
Well, they do operate similar to a crop dusterI disagree, the A-10 puts on one heck of a yank and bank demonstration at air shows.
A-10 over water? Any experience??
Hi.
Question if i may to those that know about these things.
The big gun was designed to kill swarms of Soviet Tanks as they tore through the Fulda gap in Germany. Would that gun even be effective against a modern main battle tank?
An example of a main battle tank being tough is a Challenger 2 taking 14 RPG hits and also a Milan ATGM hit without penetration.
Can that gun still fulfil its original purpose?
Thank you.
Question if i may to those that know about these things.
The big gun was designed to kill swarms of Soviet Tanks as they tore through the Fulda gap in Germany. Would that gun even be effective against a modern main battle tank?
An example of a main battle tank being tough is a Challenger 2 taking 14 RPG hits and also a Milan ATGM hit without penetration.
Can that gun still fulfil its original purpose?
Thank you.
I bet not every hit in every place would be a “kill”, but armor thickness varies and the top armor and over engine armor are the A10s target, and that gun a worry to any modern tanker still.
I’m pretty sure that the armor has gotten tougher. I hear it was more likely to disable weapons or sensors mounted on a tank than slice and dice the crew.
The talk about using cannon against drones is silly. It’s optimized to hit ground targets where it’s pointed at a downward angle of about 2°. However, it has been used to hit helicopters. Todd “Shanghai” Sheehy was credited with doing that. The fire rate would also be excessive.
Pretty sure a Javelin or Hellfire would be more effective.
True and the M1 Abrams gun has 40-50 times as much energy as a projectile from the A-10's gun. I'll bet tankers fear the Abrams.
Owen Lucas
$100 Site Donor 2023
- Joined
- Sep 5, 2021
- Messages
- 4,803
The Ukrainians have disabled Russian tanks with chain guns on the Bradleys.
Sounds like an unfair fight, but all they had to do was take out the optics or some sensors on top of the tank.
Let's say an A-10 vs our best armored tank? Maybe not, maybe after a few passes, I have no clue, but the tracks, optics, and various other bits would probably be toast.
Sure, so would a 2000 pound JDAM. The question was about the “big gun”.
If I remember correctly, less than 150 A10's had about a thousand kills of Iraqi T-72 and other Russian tanks during Desert Storm, so the Big Brrtt seems to work well enough against armor.
That was mostly Maverick missiles from higher altitude.
I've fired a Maverick before. The story going around was the Israelis didn't like them because they not only killed the tank, they destroyed it so completely there were no spare parts intact they could strip off of it to use on the captured ones in their inventory. I believe the story.
edyvw
$50 site donor 2026
Abrams proved as very poor choice in UKR.
The top is vulnerable as is in many other tanks. Currently best tank would be Leopard, but even they are too thin at the top. Pretty much drones eliminated tanks out of low intensity conflict unless there is huge armada moving forward.
A10 can put out of service ANY modern tank.
That is if one has air superiority as it is still slow bus roaming the skies. Considering new emphasis on anti aircraft guns of 20-30mm since drones became main weapons choice, A10 becomes big, slow target for new AA guns with state of the art targeting systems and IR missiles.
Sounds like an A-10 went down possibly as a result of enemy fire? This after an F-15E. Hope the missing crew member is OK. Seems the air defenses aren't as degraded as some suggested...
jeff
jeff
Link to A-10 downing?
Even a blind squirrel finds an acorn now and then. Considering the number of sorties and hours flown, I speculate our loss rate for Red Flag training exercises is about 4 times what it has been for this conflict. The fact that Iran is bragging about shooting down one aircraft, and the U.S. media is rending their garments and pouring ashes over their heads over the loss of one 30 year old aircraft speaks for itself.
They’re certainly not risking whatever military aircraft they still have by getting them airborne. But they still have mobile antiaircraft weapons that can be hidden. But they have to have them in the right places. So yeah they have to be fortunate to have them within range and prepped in time. And perhaps a lot of chutzpah where the US has been flying in broad daylight at lower altitudes.
I’m frankly surprised there have been so few shoot downs over Iranian territory. But it’s more asymmetric PR, where it’s a win when they can manage to take down an opponent that supposedly has superiority.
I do remember the AI generated video showing Iran using asymmetric warfare against a US Navy dressed in WWII uniforms and not firing a shot. And then a lot of people claiming it was realistic.
- Status
Similar threads
