End looms for US Air Force's 'Warthog' ground-attack jet
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
500N wrote
"The A-10 was designed with survivability with other factors such as placing the engines up and back. The Apache also seems to have been built with survivability.
Have any other aircraft been built like these"
Su-25 looks handy.
"The A-10 was designed with survivability with other factors such as placing the engines up and back. The Apache also seems to have been built with survivability.
Have any other aircraft been built like these"
Su-25 looks handy.
The Nylon bands are not exposed to heat very long....the time lapse from leaving the magazine entering the Barrel....and exiting the noisy end is....well....rather short you know!
.the time lapse from leaving the magazine entering the Barrel....and exiting the noisy end is....well....rather short you know!
Bas - one time 25pdr gunfitter. Just had a thought: there must be tons of the stuff scattered around historic artillery ranges - and, at todays prices
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Australia - South of where I'd like to be !
Age: 59
Posts: 4,261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Yes, just being Devil's advocate Luddite; certainly saves on copper"
I think you'll find the biggest saving is not the copper saved by putting
two plastic bands on the bullet but the amount of barrels saved from needing
replacement because of reduced wear.
I think you'll find the biggest saving is not the copper saved by putting
two plastic bands on the bullet but the amount of barrels saved from needing
replacement because of reduced wear.
ISTR that nearly all the panels on the A10 are reversible i.e. a starboard bit can also be fitted on the port side. Now that's what I call joined up thinking ...
Almost as if they did everything to run counter to everything else designed for flight.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Australia - South of where I'd like to be !
Age: 59
Posts: 4,261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes, probably, but what if it was a major selling point against the other aircraft.
Some business is better than none.
Also, battlefield damage repairs, 2 aircraft shot up on different sides,
makes it easier to replace and get one going and ship the other one back
to the US for repair.
Those photos of the soldiers repairing them are very interesting.
Some business is better than none.
Also, battlefield damage repairs, 2 aircraft shot up on different sides,
makes it easier to replace and get one going and ship the other one back
to the US for repair.
Those photos of the soldiers repairing them are very interesting.
But it seems to have been a mindset of design and build so pilot would have a pretty good chance of survival even after aircraft getting blasted to pieces.
It appears unique among what is flying today.
It appears unique among what is flying today.
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Pasadena
Posts: 633
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
4200 shots per minute (10 per second per barrel, 14ms/16m apart leaving the gun), 2.3-m long barrels and an 1100m/s muzzle velocity, the acceleration down the barrel is 26,000g for 4ms - there's a round in any one barrel for 4% of its time, and one in the gun for over a quarter of the time.
It's quite an impressive machine. Even more impressive on a ship under radar control dealing with incoming problems on a five second timescale - unless the problems have jammers, in which case lidar might still tip the scales in favor of the goalkeeper.
It's quite an impressive machine. Even more impressive on a ship under radar control dealing with incoming problems on a five second timescale - unless the problems have jammers, in which case lidar might still tip the scales in favor of the goalkeeper.
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Middle America
Age: 84
Posts: 1,167
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hmm, The Warthog may not be going away anytime soon, or at least quietly:
The Air Force's plans for the A-10 have brought together an unusual alliance of interests looking to protect the planes from Pentagon budget cutters. Opposition to the Air Force proposal is being led by Sen. Kelly Ayotte (R., N.H.), whose husband was an A-10 pilot who flew combat missions in Iraq. Joining Ms. Ayotte and more than two dozen other lawmakers is the Project on Government Oversight, a Washington-based nonprofit group that typically is a forceful advocate for defense cuts.
Ms. Ayotte temporarily blocked confirmation hearings for the administration's nominee to be Air Force secretary late last year until the Pentagon addressed some of her questions. She also ensured that the recently enacted National Defense Authorization Act, the bill that outlines defense policies, contained language preventing the Air Force from severely paring the A-10 fleet this year.
"Is the A-10 the best airplane to perform close air support? Absolutely," said Maj. Gen. Paul T. Johnson, the Air Force director of Operational Capability Requirements who has flown more hours in the A-10—about 3,000—than many other pilots working at the Pentagon.
Air Force officials acknowledge that getting rid of the A-10 could lead to higher deaths, longer battles and even defeat on the battlefield. "There's a risk that attrition will be higher than it should be—that's a clever way of saying more people will get hurt and die—and extreme risk is that you might not win," Gen. Johnson said.
"The Air Force is simply using sequestration and sensible budget constraints as an excuse to kill a system it never wanted in favor of the overpriced, behind-schedule, less-capable boondoggle that is the F-35" fighter jet, said Danielle Brian, executive director of the Project on Government Oversight.
Eliminating the Warthog—so named because of its ugly, snub-nosed design—is one way the Air Force is looking to deal with its need to trim more than $50 billion from its budget over the next five years as part of a broader congressional mandate that the Pentagon cut $500 billion over the next decade. Air Force officials say retiring the entire fleet of about 300 A-10s by 2020 would save a total of $3.7 billion.
Ms. Ayotte temporarily blocked confirmation hearings for the administration's nominee to be Air Force secretary late last year until the Pentagon addressed some of her questions. She also ensured that the recently enacted National Defense Authorization Act, the bill that outlines defense policies, contained language preventing the Air Force from severely paring the A-10 fleet this year.
"Is the A-10 the best airplane to perform close air support? Absolutely," said Maj. Gen. Paul T. Johnson, the Air Force director of Operational Capability Requirements who has flown more hours in the A-10—about 3,000—than many other pilots working at the Pentagon.
Air Force officials acknowledge that getting rid of the A-10 could lead to higher deaths, longer battles and even defeat on the battlefield. "There's a risk that attrition will be higher than it should be—that's a clever way of saying more people will get hurt and die—and extreme risk is that you might not win," Gen. Johnson said.
"The Air Force is simply using sequestration and sensible budget constraints as an excuse to kill a system it never wanted in favor of the overpriced, behind-schedule, less-capable boondoggle that is the F-35" fighter jet, said Danielle Brian, executive director of the Project on Government Oversight.
Eliminating the Warthog—so named because of its ugly, snub-nosed design—is one way the Air Force is looking to deal with its need to trim more than $50 billion from its budget over the next five years as part of a broader congressional mandate that the Pentagon cut $500 billion over the next decade. Air Force officials say retiring the entire fleet of about 300 A-10s by 2020 would save a total of $3.7 billion.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 33,056
Received 2,931 Likes
on
1,250 Posts
Quote:
other factors
ISTR that nearly all the panels on the A10 are reversible i.e. a starboard bit can also be fitted on the port side. Now that's what I call joined up thinking ...
other factors
ISTR that nearly all the panels on the A10 are reversible i.e. a starboard bit can also be fitted on the port side. Now that's what I call joined up thinking ...
Another cleverly designed aircraft was the Mooney, the rudder was the same as the elevators.
Both the Dakota, and 1900 have "semi-conformal wheels". The Budgie as I recall could swap elevators, and ailerons side/side. The Dash-8 the geardoors are the same as well I think. Reducing the spares pipeline always pays dividends
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: flyover country USA
Age: 82
Posts: 4,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Given V. Putin's recent ambitions regarding former eastern bloc states -
I bet that citizens of Poland, Hungary, et.al. might wish the A-10 was still within the NATO arsenal.
Maj. Jack Hudson, the AF Museum director and an A-10 pilot, recently spoke at an engineers' luncheon, and had great praise for the aircraft and weapon system.
I bet that citizens of Poland, Hungary, et.al. might wish the A-10 was still within the NATO arsenal.
Maj. Jack Hudson, the AF Museum director and an A-10 pilot, recently spoke at an engineers' luncheon, and had great praise for the aircraft and weapon system.
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: flyover country USA
Age: 82
Posts: 4,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Regarding maintenance & repair: Constant-chord "barndoor" wing means all ribs come from the same dies. Ditto the fuselage formers. Building new wings (per Boeing contract) is about as simple as a late-model airplane gets.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Australia - South of where I'd like to be !
Age: 59
Posts: 4,261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was reading somewhere about the A-10 and battle damage and apart from both sides being the same and wings described as above, instead of shipping some wrecks back to the US they made one working aircraft out of three damaged ones. I wish I could find the link again.
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Perth Western Australia
Age: 57
Posts: 808
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Given V. Putin's recent ambitions regarding former eastern bloc states -
I bet that citizens of Poland, Hungary, et.al. might wish the A-10 was still within the NATO arsenal.
I bet that citizens of Poland, Hungary, et.al. might wish the A-10 was still within the NATO arsenal.
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Why Congress May Let Air Force Retire The A-10
Image in original article too large to paste here
CAPITOL HILL: Aside from Sen. Kelly Ayotte, the reaction from Capitol Hill to the Air Force plan for retiring the ugly and beloved A-10 has been relatively muted and may remain so. Why would Congress, beloved for going slightly nuts whenever the military tries to retire a ship, aircraft squadron, or anything else that means jobs in their districts or states, not rail against this sweet plane going quietly into the night? They will be replaced at most A-10 bases by F-16s, C-130Js or KC-135s so few or no jobs or money will be lost.
The Air Force has crafted a plan in stark contrast to its efforts last year to trim assets. And the reaction to this one has, so far, been quite muted. The slide above, which depicts the shifts and their timing, was part of a detailed briefing to professional staff and Military Legislative Aides in the last week that included classified assessments of the various tradeoffs the Air Force considered to save the $3.7 billion the Air Force expects to save. Among the scenarios gamed: sending the entire B-1 bomber fleet to the boneyard; pushing 40 F-35 As to the far out years; and retiring 356 F-16s. The Air Force, Chief of Staff Mark Welsh told me after today’s House Armed Services Committee hearing, ran war games to assess the impacts of each action. The retirement of the A-10 fleet was found to be the least disruptive to America’s global capabilities.
Members did discuss the A-10 today at today’s House hearing, including Rep. Vicky Hartzler. Whiteman Air Force Base, home to an A-10 Reserve unit, sits in her district. She was not convinced by the Air Force’s arguments saying she did not ”agree that a B-1″ can do the same job as an A-10. The Air Force argues that precision weapons have replaced the need for the A-10′s depleted uranium cannon shells. Hartzler said she believes ground troops “want to see the A-10 coming over that horizon.”
Several other members voiced what sounded like pro-forma objections to the A-10′s retirements. When Welsh answered their objections they appeared to accept his explanations. Gen. Welsh brings a certain authority to the issue, having been an A-10 pilot himself.
Here’s how the transfers will work. In 2016, for example, the National Guard A-10 unit at Selfridge will switch to KC-135s. And Hartzler’s Reserve A-10 unit at Whiteman would receive F-16s from Hill. So the bases will switch missions and aircraft, but few people or money will be lost. Those are deals to which Congress may well agree.
Image in original article too large to paste here
CAPITOL HILL: Aside from Sen. Kelly Ayotte, the reaction from Capitol Hill to the Air Force plan for retiring the ugly and beloved A-10 has been relatively muted and may remain so. Why would Congress, beloved for going slightly nuts whenever the military tries to retire a ship, aircraft squadron, or anything else that means jobs in their districts or states, not rail against this sweet plane going quietly into the night? They will be replaced at most A-10 bases by F-16s, C-130Js or KC-135s so few or no jobs or money will be lost.
The Air Force has crafted a plan in stark contrast to its efforts last year to trim assets. And the reaction to this one has, so far, been quite muted. The slide above, which depicts the shifts and their timing, was part of a detailed briefing to professional staff and Military Legislative Aides in the last week that included classified assessments of the various tradeoffs the Air Force considered to save the $3.7 billion the Air Force expects to save. Among the scenarios gamed: sending the entire B-1 bomber fleet to the boneyard; pushing 40 F-35 As to the far out years; and retiring 356 F-16s. The Air Force, Chief of Staff Mark Welsh told me after today’s House Armed Services Committee hearing, ran war games to assess the impacts of each action. The retirement of the A-10 fleet was found to be the least disruptive to America’s global capabilities.
Members did discuss the A-10 today at today’s House hearing, including Rep. Vicky Hartzler. Whiteman Air Force Base, home to an A-10 Reserve unit, sits in her district. She was not convinced by the Air Force’s arguments saying she did not ”agree that a B-1″ can do the same job as an A-10. The Air Force argues that precision weapons have replaced the need for the A-10′s depleted uranium cannon shells. Hartzler said she believes ground troops “want to see the A-10 coming over that horizon.”
Several other members voiced what sounded like pro-forma objections to the A-10′s retirements. When Welsh answered their objections they appeared to accept his explanations. Gen. Welsh brings a certain authority to the issue, having been an A-10 pilot himself.
Here’s how the transfers will work. In 2016, for example, the National Guard A-10 unit at Selfridge will switch to KC-135s. And Hartzler’s Reserve A-10 unit at Whiteman would receive F-16s from Hill. So the bases will switch missions and aircraft, but few people or money will be lost. Those are deals to which Congress may well agree.