Continuing relevance of the A-10 Warthog today and tomorrow?

About time that the A-10 got the Small Diameter Bomb added to its arsenal of weapons. :cool:
 
This is obviously a very abbreviated way to summarize serious events but almost every “we were outmanned and outgunned” story of the last 20+ years has a happy ending (relatively speaking) when the FAC arrives and saves the day.
 
OK. I guess it's an armed stealthy cargo/tanker? Something like an AC-130U with jets, guns and huns...
 
More proof as the adage goes 'War is to important to be left up to soldiers (in this case airmen).

Until the AF has a clue/plan for CAS and $ more for their replacement plan the A-10 should stay.
A 57' wing span is hella bomb truck for stand in and stand off missiles. Likewise, DEW pods can well manage non-permissive environments even to he point where A-10 could be tasked as a primary SEAD platform.

Naysayers are Thomson Twining it.. "Lies, Lies Lies, yeah".
 
Foo Fighter said:
Considering the cost of new wings, why not install newer engines too?
Click to expand...
What with?

The USAF doesn't like the TF34 engine because it's unique so they also have to pay for 100% of the maintenance training and spare parts. And all of that gets wrapped up into the A-10 specific part of the operational budget.

Fair enough, nobody likes that.

But what engine would you use to replace it? You cannot use an engine too much heavier due to weight and balance issues, it needs to be within a couple hundred lbs. You also need to use a turbofan that is in current use with the US military, to take away that complaint from the USAF. Ideally more than just the USAF, so that they can share the cost of the schools with another service.

A TF34 weighs 1500lbs. A CFM56-7B as used in the P8 Poseidon weighs almost 5400lbs, way too heavy. The RR BR700 as used in the B52 reengining weighs 3600lbs.

What engine in use with the US military weighs less than 1700lbs and generates more than 9500lbs thrust?
 
GTX said:
Well worth the watch:

View: https://youtu.be/jBzNKS-1ztU
Click to expand...
Setting aside the “popular zeitgeist”, pseudo intellectual beard, glasses, hand gesturing and funny accent, buying into his vehicle kill and attrition facts seem fraught, as the A-10 has always faced cultural bias. Pro f-35 commentators pick their facts. Every tank hit by a 30mm in the frontal glacis will also be likely hit elsewhere on the vehicle thus disabling the vehicle, for instance. Comparing a bomb’s damage to an autocannon rd’s destructive power is riduleous on its face.

The A-10 has not received the upgrades necessary to enhance the best night, all weather, low altitude infiltration flight and automated accuracy technology, because of AF cultural bias against. Unfortunately much of the AF commentary etc. can not be trusted. Available wide area RSTA threat geolocations (23mm or higher) so safe A-10 attack routes can be easily be calculated.

The 30mm cannon is a straffing psychological weapon to prompt tank crews to unas… their vehicles and adversary overruns of US units detered. Troops testimony on how there unit’s lives were saved by the sound of A-10 approaching can be trusted.
 

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom