A 10 warthog defeated. Good night sweet prince

a reply to: MrsB00mQu35t

and pulling the man out of the killzone then completely invalidates the PURPOSE of war....

think about it....if you've got R/C toys, and the enemy has R/C toys, then it's not a war anymore, it's about who's bestest at flying/driving their R/C toys....they have competitions like that all the time, all over the world.

but then you have the situation where they're using their R/C toys to drop bombs on civilians...whoops, so much for nobody having to die...

it'd be great if the nations of the world could settle their differences by getting together, and racing some R/C trucks around a dirt track...but unfortunately, the world doesn't work that way....

The House vote was 300-114 to block the retirement of the A-10, KC-10, and U-2 in next years budget.

a reply to: Zaphod58

sweet....good news, man...

sometimes, they do the right thing...

a reply to: totallackey

Many of those people using 'em pray for that, too. Don't think otherwise.

The A10 is a beast. The Air Force has never exactly been enamored of it. It wasn't sexy, or supersonic. ...and now they're going to replace it with a whizbang gadget that has no range. Can't loiter. Can't carry the same arsenal.

The lessons of Vietnam are being forgotten.

a reply to: seagull

They were forgotten years ago. That -117 that was shot down in 99 flew the same route several nights in a row prior.

a reply to: Zaphod58

The Air Force is so in love with their little black boxes, and other whiz bang gadgetry, that they've forgotten that it's the kid in the cockpit that is the most important factor.

I'm old enough to call a twenty year veteran pilot a kid...

The A10 is the perfect, or close to it, close support aircraft. Right up there with the Douglas Skyraider "Sandy"...

There's nothing in the inventory future or present that can replace it. Drones? Too remote. Too hands off.

War should be bloody. War should be hands on. That helps to make it something to be avoided. Or, at the least, short as possible.

Maybe the reason it's dragged on as long as it has, in both Afghanistan, and Iraq, is that it's become too remote, too video gamey.

ROBIN OLDS THEY DIDN'T LISTEN!
I still say turn the entire CAS mission (and budget) over to the Army,to include DRONE missions as well.Let the Airforce bomb when needed and get busy in space. Things are going to get hot up there eventually.

a reply to: cavtrooper7

I'll go along with that.

It's my understanding that the Army absolutely loves the Warthog.

a reply to: seagull

The F-16 was the beginning of the falling apart of the current air force. Pierre Sprey frequently brags about the Fighter Mafia, and how good the F-16 is, and how useless stealth is.

The Fighter Mafia also made sure to establish a tradition of the CSAF coming up through fighters. That has fostered the current thinking of "if it ain't a fighter, it ain't crap".

a reply to: Zaphod58

Exactly.

That line of thinking makes it amazing that the plane lasted as long as it did...

The Fighter Mafia: Forgetting the lessons of the past, one conflict at a time...

a reply to: Daedalus
Ah but then it's an infrastructure ,populous thing.Breaking their stuff and killing people sucking down Redbull. Deniable,anonymous really and oh so clean to the attacker.

a reply to: seagull

TBH, I'm shocked they finally got the new tanker done, and are buying a new bomber. I thought for sure they'd kill them for more F-35s using the excuse that what we have is working fine, and can be maintained.

How can anyone not like this ugly beauty of a plane?



I could watch A-10's all day and never get tired of them.

a reply to: tsurfer2000h

They're more fun to handle on the ramp.

Here you go enjoy the ride...

The A-10 could take more damage then any fighter plane ever will.

It has two hydraulic systems with a manual reversion cable control system to back up the two hydraulic systems.

This gives the plane three separate control systems in case of damage.

The engines are bypass turbofan engines and the bypass area of the engine helps protect the turbine section from damage.

The plane is also heavy armored to protect the pilot and major systems from damage.

The A-10 cost 1/4 of the price of a fighter plane to operate and can operate 5 to 6 flights a day unlike a fighter plane that only can fly 2 to 4 without maintenance stops.

In the first gulf war a number of A-10s took hits from surface to air missles and flew back to base.

It would not surprise me if Israel does not buy some of the A-10s for there force.

books.google.com...

originally posted by: yuppa
I swear. That really makes me angry. What are they going to use to replace it? Apaches? HA! dont make me laugh! the F-35? not likely. No the Soldiers are going to be left out in the cold this time.

Please feel free to post your respects.

why would you be angry over such trivial stuff ? A10 are not survivable on modern battlefield filled with large calibre AAA and MANPADS. Even the AH64 and the rest of Army Choppers wont be on the FLOT because they are even in worse danger than A10..

against real enemy with full anti air support and missiles, american will lose.. so why worry ?

a reply to: milomilo

um....you are quite incorrect...

plus....the A-10 hasn't been defeated...look earlier on this page, or on the page before this one..

originally posted by: Daedalus
a reply to: milomilo

um....you are quite incorrect...

plus....the A-10 hasn't been defeated...look earlier on this page, or on the page before this one..

an airplane who was originally designed to kill soviet hordes in the cold war days , cannot survive a modern battlefied where the enemy got anti aircraft weapons in abundance. If your enemy is an underarmed freedom fighters or unarmed civilians then yes this aircraft is good enough to kill them. If your enemy is a profesional army with modern mobile ADS, you wont see A10 or AH64 or AC130 or UAV in the front lines , because the enemy will detect and shot them down (remember Khafji and the downing of an overconfident Spectre AC130 just by 1 missile ? imagine if dozens of missiles track and hit your air support assets in the 1st day of war)..

get your mind out of the aircraft fanboyism and think analytically.. consider these scenarios :

- American troops and leaders accostumed to uncontested troop insertion via UH60 and fast Helo Medevac. How would they cope with an enemy that contested the air above the battlefield ? this is not an insurgent enemy armed with AK47.. The bad habits of taking for granted the battle taxis ( helos and medevacs ) will be the undoing of american soldiers in the future conflicts. Read the slaughter / massacre of Israeli overrated naval commandos (Flotilla 13) in Lebanon by hezbollah , they underestimate the hezbolah holy warriors and forgot that the enemy can also 'think' and 'devise' a scheme to ambush these so called israeli super soldiers..

- American troops and leaders accostumed on having total air superiority and continuous air support and become dependent on air support to break up enemy attacks while never actually do the classic fire and maneuver against enemy insurgents. The result in the future ? total shock and demoralization when the enemy can also hit them via gunships and airstrikes and deny the skies from US fighters by using theatre wide SAMs.. Recent example : Wanat slaughter and French Para Slaughter. A highly motivated freedom fighters easily killed many american and french soldiers because they are immobile and hunkering down waiting for air support to save them. In the case of French , the taliban even approached within hand-to-hand range and drag the french wounded then slit their throat.

- American troops and leaders accostumed on having on call artilery / indirect fire support. When is the last time US soldiers fight an enemy that have real artilery ? only in vietnam theatre of war. How can the US soldiers cope mentally with suddenly be a target of massive Rocket attack like GRADS or even worse ? a GRAD salvo (40 rocket per lauchers) can easily destoy a US armor convoy and killed everyone in it..


You see, the next war wont be against unarmed / underarmed freedom fighters.. it wont be like Iraq where US forces killed almost 2 MILLION INNOCENT CIVILIANS without getting hauled to warcrime tribunal.. It will be a total suprise to the overconfident american..

Heck, the US military wont even won a land war against IDF.. the US wont even won a land war against JSDF..

a reply to: milomilo

all i got from that post is that you have no clue what you're talking about...

the A-10 was designed to kill tanks....and it's very good at it....it wasn't designed to kill "soviet hordes"

and the rest of it? nonsense.

the A-10 is a very important tool, that is used in concert with other tools, to achieve the desired effect...that being victory..

remove that tool, and you limit your options..