Now playing
Now I know you don’t know what you’re talking about because not even A-10s go that low because you can’t point the nose down, get rounds off and recover. 100 feet or lower is helicopter territory.
TriggerTreats
TriggerTreats
A-10 guys like to go low for two reasons. Back in the 70s/80s, that was fine as it was under the radar coverage of most SAM sites and in places like Europe, you can use terrain masking to avoid any known emplacements. Your biggest risks came from that surprise mobile launcher/AAA/MANPAD in your route that you weren’t…
put a viper in that same situation (which is more effective for the troops on the ground) and you are going to loose even more of them more quickly. sure, it can stay high and fast.... where CAS looses much of its accuracy.
This site? A site that is - by the admission of the blogger - his own opinions? A site where he doesn’t actually do any journalism himself; instead finding articles that support his confirmation bias and opines about them here? A site where, whenever someone challenges him, instead of backing up his claims with…
If you’re getting shot up that much, you’re doing it wrong.
*SIGH*
OK, you’ve got 22 A-10s in your squadron and you have to meet an 48-sortie-per-day requirement.
Your mighty Hogs go out go low and slow, some get shot to shit and come home missing engines, half a tail, etc. You don’t have as many Hogs to send out, so the ones you do have, have to fly more sorties to keep up with…
I couldn’t find a specific reason for that, but my guess is budget and logistic constrains. No one needs dedicated planes when they can have something similar in a multirole fighter. Also, having the help of the US on their land, reduced the need even more.
I read that article. He’s wrong. About a lot of things, but in keeping with the points you brought up, A-10s DON’T do SEAD. It’s not at all equipped to counter aint-aircraft weaponry. It has ZERO SEAD/DEAD capability. It’s dependent on killing pop-up defenses before they can kill the A-10. And since the best tool the…
Please read me writeup linked in this piece above that shreds your statements to pieces
They’ve been able to adapt the B-52 to more missions and changing threats better. Originally, the B-52 was to penetrate Soviet airspace. When that became to dangerous, it became a standoff ALCM carrier. When nuclear arms reduction treaties took effect, the B-52 went back to being a conventional bomber.
A-10’s a…
I’m sorry, what were you were saying about “survivability?”
I no one told the guys at Seymour-Johnson, Lakenheath or Mountain Home that, because they’ve been doing it for over a decade.
Airframes can ( and have) been updated/upgraded
Oh yeah, the Saudis have a poor reputation in that regard and I’ve heard some horror stories out of Rucker and Vance about students from various Middle East nations just not giving a shit during their training flights and when they DO fuck up (which they do, a lot) they just dismiss it and say it’s all part of Allah’s…
Militarily, we’re not bad at them. Our military leadership learned the lessons of Vietnam and applied them well here, IMO.
The challenges were twofold:
Afghanistan is scarred by decades of war. It’ll take decades for them to recover and the presence of destabilizing elements only prolongs that. Can that be overcome?…
Everyone in the package was at altitude on the way home, taking turns hitting the tanker. There was a line/stack of thirsty aircraft. The A-10s couldn’t climb to the tanker track and requested that the tankers drop to their altitude. Tankers refused. The tankers weren’t going to tell everyone else who was already…
How many Soviet SAM sites were bases in West Germany?