Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > PPRuNe Social > Jet Blast
Reload this Page >

USA Politics - Hamster Wheel

Jet Blast Topics that don't fit the other forums. Rules of Engagement apply.

USA Politics - Hamster Wheel

Old 4th Mar 2014, 22:57
  #18561 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: surfing, watching for sharks
Posts: 3,557
Yah, but could it scare a goat herder if said goat herder couldn't hear it coming?

Cause that's all it's good for so sayeth our resident expert of all things aviation.
West Coast is offline  
Old 4th Mar 2014, 22:59
  #18562 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Australia - South of where I'd like to be !
Age: 55
Posts: 4,244
" Cause that's all it's good for so sayeth our resident expert of all things aviation."


and guns
500N is offline  
Old 4th Mar 2014, 23:21
  #18563 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: surfing, watching for sharks
Posts: 3,557
How could I forget...
West Coast is offline  
Old 5th Mar 2014, 01:22
  #18564 (permalink)  
Dushan
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Originally Posted by brickhistory View Post

I'd argue that keeping the A-10 around is of more importance than providing social benefits for illegal aliens.
You are such a heartless warmonger, brick
 
Old 5th Mar 2014, 05:36
  #18565 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 665
John Boyd, (never one to mince words), said that the A10 was an orphan from the day it left the drawing board, at least in the eyes of the USAF fighter Generals. They hated the very concept of the aircraft and tried to bury it from Day 1 because it wasn't considered 'sexy' enough to be part of the USAF inventory. (I know that before the Iraq/Afghan wars, a posting to A10s was considered as a punishment tour. I'm not sure, but I think most of the A10s had been relegated to ANG units by the late 80s.)

If Boyd was even half right in what he said, those same generals (or the next generation of them) have, when told they must lose some assets as the US economises, put the A10 first on the list of what may go. (However, I accept that, given the type of role they flew, without a major upgrade programme - [and I don't believe there was one] - those airframes must be getting awfully tired.)

The A10 might have proven to be of very limited value in a war against an enemy with equal air assets, but in the type of war the USAF has found itself fighting over the last two decades, it has proven a near ideal weapons delivery system for supporting troops in close contact. It's long loiter capability - something the fast jets sorely lack - must have saved many a soldier's life and provided a sense of comfort to many an isolated small unit commander.
Andu is offline  
Old 5th Mar 2014, 06:37
  #18566 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Pasadena
Posts: 633
Yes, yes, yes… the A10 has been useful in Iraq and Afghanistan, attacking insurgents (as I think I initially noted), but it's not much use in Western/Eastern Europe.

You made the point yourself, 500N… it was slow because sensors weren't fast enough to keep up with quicker aircraft when it was designed.

Times have changed by 40 years, and they changed not long after it came into service, with lighter, more precise missiles like Hellfire, allowing helicopters to take over European tank shooting at the end of the Cold War.

Would grunts now prefer a loitering Predator or an A10 some minutes away?
Again, times change.
awblain is offline  
Old 5th Mar 2014, 06:50
  #18567 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Australia - South of where I'd like to be !
Age: 55
Posts: 4,244
AW

Grunts will take anything that is on offer, even if it is only a B1 Bomber doing a low level pass with no ordnance deployed !
500N is offline  
Old 5th Mar 2014, 09:57
  #18568 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Perth Western Australia
Age: 53
Posts: 809
Whats more survivable or likely to get hit with a manpad, A10 or Apache?
rh200 is offline  
Old 5th Mar 2014, 10:08
  #18569 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Pasadena
Posts: 633
You can offer them morale-boosting entertainment, but they still need ordnance deployed in some circumstances. Is that an A10-full, or a couple of missiles off a Predator? I guess it depends on those circumstances.

I think the A10's very fine for going after low-tech insurgents. I don't think it would last long over Ukraine.
awblain is offline  
Old 5th Mar 2014, 10:22
  #18570 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Pasadena
Posts: 633
West coast,

For massed onrushing Warsaw Pact armor in Europe, what was there available from the air in 1975? Not very much guided. From near the ground, just wire-guided missiles and a range of shells.

The A10 added a lot more in that world.

However, the rise of smaller, more precisely and securely guided missiles followed on along, and made everyone's life easier, as long as they weren't in a tank. Of course, the A10 can carry them too.

Would an unheard A10 frighten a goat herder?
After it fired on him, definitely yes. And it would if he got the chance to see it again. But there's a lot of things that an asymmetric force has that would frighten a goat herder.
awblain is offline  
Old 5th Mar 2014, 11:23
  #18571 (permalink)  
Hardly Never Not Unwilling
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: USA
Posts: 481
You may be a bit over your head, awblain, trying to debate the role, capabilities, and utility of the A-10 in today's world.

While anti-air capability has progressed, as you say, the A-10 is not more vulnerable than the Apache, which you would likely agree is a current weapon system.

Generally, the first order of battle is to suppress, defeat, and destroy the enemy's air defenses. Once that is achieved the A-10 is at home. Troops and supplies still move by convoy, and Afghan fighters still gather in numbers in rough terrain surrounding combat outposts in Afghanistan. The A-10 is lethal in each of those scenarios.

A single tanker can keep a flight of four A-10s on station for up to 8 hours. That puts a pretty good check on enemy ground operations in the vicinity.
BenThere is offline  
Old 5th Mar 2014, 12:06
  #18572 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Pasadena
Posts: 633
Yes, I agree. In a world where the enemy has no air defenses, the A10's fine, and its gun is a lot cheaper per shot that anything else you'd fire from above.

This discussion did kick off from the discussion of the Ukraine though, and touched on the A10's original purpose, where I still think it was overtaken by largely technological events.

I guess after the 1991 Gulf War ended without a long-term conclusion, there was always going to be the prospect of having another one along the same lines, and the A10 was indeed all bought and paid for, so perhaps it didn't need too much political support to keep it on the books.

An A10 is a target for less time than an Apache, but it can't hide so easily against background clutter, so I'm not sure how they would compare against a well-equipped crowd of its enemies.

I wonder whether the prospect of loitering drones being available overhead rather than an aircraft being minutes away has improved the lot of troops on the ground?
awblain is offline  
Old 5th Mar 2014, 12:32
  #18573 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Perth Western Australia
Age: 53
Posts: 809
I'm sitting here thinking there's some really well qualified people on the subject shaking there heads and going "Muppets".
rh200 is offline  
Old 5th Mar 2014, 12:36
  #18574 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Patterson, NY
Age: 62
Posts: 436
rh:

I think there is another word, aside from 'muppets' that some of us are uttering to ourselves whilst shaking our heads. Then again, it's hard to do battle with an arm chair war gamer.

Rangers Lead The Way.
rgbrock1 is offline  
Old 5th Mar 2014, 13:07
  #18575 (permalink)  
Hardly Never Not Unwilling
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: USA
Posts: 481
Gulf War I did end with a long term conclusion, but Iraq didn't keep up its end of the bargain.

The problem with drones for CAS today is, of course, very limited dynamic targeting, limited ordnance, lack of real time pilot judgment, and greater potential for collateral damage, among other shortcomings.

Last edited by BenThere; 5th Mar 2014 at 13:38.
BenThere is offline  
Old 5th Mar 2014, 14:01
  #18576 (permalink)  
Dushan
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Here comes another...

George P. Bush begins political career with win
 
Old 5th Mar 2014, 14:20
  #18577 (permalink)  

Aviator Extraordinaire
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Oklahoma City, Oklahoma USA
Age: 72
Posts: 2,394
The solution for the A-10, is to change the rules and give them to the Army. After all, the A-10 was orginally designed for the Army.

But the Air Force demanded that they should have them, because they didn't have rotor blades.


Well something like that.
con-pilot is offline  
Old 5th Mar 2014, 14:31
  #18578 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Newcastle/UK
Posts: 1,473
Didn't the whole Air Force belong to the Army once?
tony draper is offline  
Old 5th Mar 2014, 14:34
  #18579 (permalink)  

Aviator Extraordinaire
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Oklahoma City, Oklahoma USA
Age: 72
Posts: 2,394
Didn't the whole Air Force belong to the Army once?
Yup, till 1947 I do believe.
con-pilot is offline  
Old 5th Mar 2014, 14:34
  #18580 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Patterson, NY
Age: 62
Posts: 436
Yes it did Tony. Even during WWII it was known as the Army Air Force!

And before that it was the Army Air Corps.
rgbrock1 is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.