A-10s out of retirement (again)?

[Boy_From_Brazil]

Is this the right aircraft for the job, given the threat environment?

I guess the A-10 can absorb a bit more battle damage and has better loitering capabilities than the Russian Frogfoot.

http://www.dodbuzz.com/2015/10/20/in-shift-pentagon-deploys-a-10s-to-fight-isis-in-syria/

[Herod]

Perhaps the only thing better than an old A10 is a new A10? Memo to Pentagon

[Rhino power]

A-10s out of retirement (again)?

They haven't actually been retired yet, so it would be quite difficult to bring them 'out of retirement (again)'...

-RP

[Valiantone]

I can't remember where I read it within the last week but the USAF have currently now planned a fly off with the A-10 vs the F-35 in 2018 too see if the new kid on the block can do what the older gen can do...


V1

[Herod]

My money's on the A-10.

[Rotate too late]

Herod,
You assume a fair fight old chum.....if it was, I'd also be sticking with the old dog, but.....:(

[Danny42C]

"An old dog for a hard road".

The old ones are always the best. :ok:

D.

[MPN11]

Any role for a wing of Hunter FGA9s?? :)

I'm with Herod ... A-10 in a straight fight, but that would never be allowed.

[skippedonce]

A straight fight? F35 fires AIM120 at 40NM; 'FOX 1 Kill' the A10.

[phil9560]

A straight fight? F35 fires AIM120 at 40NM; 'FOX 1 Kill' the A10.

A10 isn't a fighter.How the the F35 performs in close air or ground attack remains to be seen.

[West Coast]

Which mafia in the USAF that writes the parameters of said fly off will have a large say in the future of the A-10. Do I have to fight my way in in a high threat environment then switch gears for CAS...

You can see where that can go.

[skippedonce]

What West Coast said, in a 'straight fight'!:ok:

You have to find, identify and get to the target before you can do anything about it.

[Wensleydale]

Back in the days of the NFZ over Bosnia (1990s), I was chatting to a Lt Col from an air national guard unit which was flying operations from Aviano - they had recently turned in their A-10s and were now using ground attack F-16s. The Col's main concern was that the F-16 was much more complicated to operate and the part timers were having difficulty in maintaining their currency for combat (most of the pilots were ex-military but were now airline pilots with a hobby). I was left with the impression that they would prefer their A-10s back.

[Bob Viking]

Before being a smart arse I have to ask if your post was intended as a wah?

BV

[msbbarratt]

If the guys on the ground have got a decent selection of man carried SAMs then the A10 will have a hard time.

That's not the same as saying that "the F35 will be able to press home an A10esque attack when faced with SAMs". It can't, it doesn't have that gun.

The best A10 upgrade would be a stealthy A10. The F35 isn't one of those... Unfortunately the bean counters won't pay for a stealthy A10, which is odd because so far they're happy to fork out for a very expensive aircraft that's possibly too multi role for its own good.

These days a stealthy airframe must be a doddle to design and build, especially if it doesn't have to go very fast or carry an expensive array of avionics. Look what Lockheed managed to do for $30million in the 1970s!!!!

[Mr Optimistic]

Has there been any recent operational experience to inform this, there has always been clear air superiority hasn't there? Danger is it becomes hurricane versus stuka. Just a pax but have an aversion to 5g tungsten fragments and I don't see a flying battleship coming anytime soon!

[glad rag]

If the guys on the ground have got a decent selection of man carried SAMs then the A10 will have a hard time.



Hmm two high bypass, offset, obscured, pod mounted turbofans or a [already] maxxed out installed manpad magnet.....:hmm:

http://static4.uk.businessinsider.com/image/5621135edd0895d42c8b4698-1200/.jpg


http://img600.imageshack.us/img600/6673/jsff35raptoriibackengin.jpg

[Just This Once...]

Let alone where a contrast tracker such as the SA-8 is being used.

You can shape any assessment to meet the required answer.