A10's to be sold on?

[glad rag]

Gift then to the US Army...

[melmothtw]

That won't happen for a number of reasons, not least of which is that if the army is operating one fixed-wing CAS platform then why should it not operate all of them?

Turkeys don't vote for Christmas, and the USAF isn't going to cede one of its core missions to the army.

[KenV]

pr00ne,

There's more to an aircraft's gun than just its calibre. Your comparing the A-10's to "other 30 and 25/27mm cannon equipped aircraft" shows you don't understand that.

Excellent point. I'd like to add to that. There's more to CAS than just strafing. Strafing is just ONE way to do CAS. There are many more. And with the advent of precision guided munitions (both unpowered bombs and powered missiles) strafing is often a secondary method of providing CAS. So while the A-10 is the premier strafing platform with the capability to use many other CAS weapons, many other aircraft are excellent platforms for those other CAS weapons.

[melmothtw]

Agreed, and with 11 hardpoints under which to hang such precision-guided munitions (compared to 9 for the F-15E), the A-10 has few peers in that regard either.

[barit1]

Production tooling

Megan - Thank you for the great quote. Much more competent than the brief I had worked from.

[Danny42C]

Giant Warthogs et al.

megan,

The A-36 looks to be a very versatile and useful bit of machinery indeed. But in truth I never knew of the type until now. Did they ever try to replace the Allison with the "Packard Merlin", as was done with the P-51 Mustang, from which it was derived? Seems to be the: "...dive bomber, low altitude attack fighter..." of Col Wolfe's wish list. Maybe he was not as confused as I at first thought!

Wiki tells me that the Army Air Corps had them only in Dinjan (Assam). A rough calculation shows this to be some 250nm N and 120nm E of Khumbirgram, (EDIT: Faint boyhood memory of Pythagoras works this out out as 302 miles),which was as far North as we got in Assam, so it was understandable that we knew nothing of them and never came in contact.

As for the VVs, it seems an intricate story, but briefly, they came in two guises: the A-31 and A-35. The essential difference was that the A-31 had zero angle of incidence (the AAC wanted nothing to do with them, but asked for a redesign with a 4º angle - which made it a better aircraft but a worse dive bomber - and it had a 0.50 Browning in the back, replacing the 2x 0.300/0.303 Brownings in all the earlier Marks) . Then they turned that down, too, and never used it operationally.

They were mostly palmed off (L/Lease *) to all and sundry. The RAF got the lion's share of the A-31s (VV Mks.1-III, plus some Mk.IVs [A-35] which went to UK for conversion to TTs). The Aussies got Is and IIs, and Mk.IVs, but AFAIK, only we (in Burma) and they (in New Guinea) operated the Is and IIs. (and nothing else). I believe the Free French got some IVs in N.Africa, others went to Brazil.

All gone now save one (the Camden Museum specimen), which the Museum stoutly maintains to be a Mk.I, whereas it is manifestly a Mk.IV (see the huge 0.50 in the back!) Chugalug and I spent quite some time on this Thread long ago, investigating the beast.

* Not all - we actually bought the first few batches (@ $68,000 ea.) before L/Lease kicked in.

Danny42C.

[topgas]

Up around Imphal/Kohima it was not so simple, as in the ferocious close combat in the last battles, we dare not go for troops as they were so closely intermingled, but helped by destroying roads and bridges which the Jap needed to get up his supplies.

Danny, slight thread drift, but I would like to thank you on behalf of my late stepfather Col (later Brig) Hugh Richards, who was Garrison Commander during the battle. As you know, it was so finely balanced that any action to disrupt the Japanese attack could have swung the result. Sadly he didn't talk much about it and I didn't at the time know what questions to ask.

[megan]

Did they ever try to replace the Allison with the "Packard Merlin"

Hi Danny. No, in fact the low altitude people preferred the Allison, as it had better fuel consumption and was a far more robust engine than the Merlin. In fact, when the production switched to the Merlin version, there was an attempt by some to keep the Allison version in production, but to no avail. The RAF were still operating Allison versions in the European theatre right to the end of the war.

Should you like to send me a PM with your email address I can send you a lengthy report re the Allison in the low level role (USAAF report based on the RAFs experience).

[Danny42C]

Giant Warthogs.

megan,

Many hares running now! If they were happy with the Allison, then well and good. But in the NE Burma/China theatre you had to take into account the "Hump" (the Ta Liang Shan range - 18,000 ft. and lousy weather on top). The Merlin would be a much better engine for that (and what's all this about the Allison being more reliable than the Merlin? - you'd raise a few hackles with that!) And, to anticipate the next question, the GMC product (Merlin 266 in the Spit XVI) was reckoned to be every bit as good as the Derby one.

And it is nice to hear the Nakajima Ki-43 "Oscar" being given some credit at last. So it could dance round the A-36 just as easily as it did round the Hurricane IIC - what's the use of 4x20mms if you can never bring them to bear? - (it was not until we got the Spitfires out there that we could deal with them on equal terms).

Almost unknown at the time, and quite forgotten now, this terrestial cousin of the more well known and glamorous marine "Zero" was just about as good. Fortunately, the Jap Army Command out there could think of nothing to do with it except to send it on "hit and run" LL opportunity-target raids (rather like the FW190s in UK post BoB). If they had only lifted their eyes to the skies, they would have seen richer pickings - boxes of six lumbering VVs slowly climbing to 12,000 en route to do them mischief.

Just one pair, properly handled, would be enough to take out all six VVs in short order, as we'd decided to stick together under attack, (rather than break out in all directions, dive for the deck and run home). The three "Bettys" en route to Calcutta one night stuck together in this way (in the vain hope of beating him off) when F/Sgt Pring found them with his Beaufighter, so he got three kills in 15 seconds and a well-earned DFM. Luckily for us, the idea never occurred to the Jap Army, so I'm still here.

Thank you for your kind offer, but as I already have more reading to catch up on than time left, I must regretfully decline.

Danny42C.

Ars longa, vita brevis.

[KenV]

deleted due to post to wrong thread.

[KenV]

Agreed, and with 11 hardpoints under which to hang such precision-guided munitions (compared to 9 for the F-15E), the A-10 has few peers in that regard either.

The Super Hornet has 11 hardpoints if you count the wingtip stations. And the BONE can carry WAY more than the A-10 AND it has better endurance. The point is, the CAS equation is far more complex and includes far more variables than just which has the best gun system and/or the most hardpoints. Sensors, comm systems, datalinks and more also come into play. I think its short sighted to assume that USAF would have to abandon CAS if they get rid of the A-10.

[melmothtw]

All fair points KenV, though I'm not sure you can count wingtip stations for the CAS role - and, of course, the A-10 has 1,700 rounds of depleted uranium 30 mm to back up what's carried on the 11 hardpoints.

What you say about 'sensors, comm systems, datalinks and more' is all valid. The A-10 is no different from any other aircraft in service though - if you don't invest in it, it will drop-off the capability curve. The fact that Boeing is offering to modernise the platform for potential international operators shows that they at least see a future in the airframe.

The BONE (not heard it called that before) is a very different aircraft designed for a very different mission, though that doesn't detract from its CAS capabilities.

I don't think anyone is suggesting that the USAF won't be able to do CAS without the A-10, I think the point is that they'll not be able to do it as well. Retiring the A-10 will be a retrograde move, notwithstanding the CAS-capabilities of other platforms in the inventory.

[Rotate too late]

Been underneath both when they dropped through my level! I'd reiterate the point that sometimes precision isn't what's needed. A place called murder wall needed hoofing and actually to lay down the area with PWay from BONE B-one (geddit?) was not as effective as the 30mm strafe 20 minutes later. Area weapons still have a place, it's not the corner of the wood I wanted, it was the whole f-ing forest!!! I'm still struggling to see why we lost 500 pound dum bombs then immediately put pave ways into the mix doing the same job for more money....as for Brimstone!!

[megan]

and what's all this about the Allison being more reliable than the Merlin?

That's what the RAF told the USAAF Danny. The report goes to some length explaining the whys and wherefores. Too lengthy for here.

[Heathrow Harry]

there si also the question of costs - some of those precison weapons are seriously costly - whereas 50 or so shells ..................

The question is wo would be interested AND be allowed to buy A10's .....

Israel maybe, Poland, Turkey, Saudi, S Korea looks about the limit to me

[West Coast]

Add in many who are a short drive away from a mechanized army such as the Ukraine...

[Danny42C]

megan,

Wiki tells me much more than I previously knew before about the P-51. Seems that it was first built on contract for the wartime British Purchasing Commission (like the Vultee Vengeance), and later adopted by the USAAC. We called it the "Mustang", and used it for the low and medium level roles to which it was restricted by the limited height capability of the Allison engine.

The installation of the "Merlin" in the P-51B/C transformed it into a world-beater; its pilots reckoned it as good as (or better) than the Spitfire (hotly disputed by the Spitfire people - I cannot comment as I never flew a Mustang - but then, as an old Spitfire hand, can anything be better than a Spitfire?) Though I must admit that its much longer range made it far superior as an escort. (Was it Goering, who in the last days in Berlin said, that when he saw the "red noses" of the P-51 escort over Berlin, he knew the war was lost!) The P-51D, with the Packard Merlin, was just the icing on the cake.

"That's what the RAF told the USAAF, Danny". Their informant was talking through his hat, IMHO. Which British aircraft ever used them? (if you count out the original batch).

Danny42C.

[Wander00]

For true story on the P51/Merlin read biography of ACM Sir Wilfred Freeman

[megan]

Their informant was talking through his hat

Danny, I'm afraid I was at cross purposes in talking about Allison engined aircraft rather than the A-36 in particular. The Brits never used the A-36, other than one test aircraft given them. Wing Commander Peter Dudjeon a former Mustang1/1A CO performing "Rhubarb" raids was the man.

Seems that it was first built on contract for the wartime British Purchasing Commission

Yes, actually the British wanted to buy more P-40s, and asked NAA to licence build them, but NAA came back and said they could build a better aircraft, with the Mustang being the result. The British paid the hard coin to have the aircraft designed, built, and bought 620 prior to lend lease kicking in. Without the British there would have been no Mustang.

The Mustang was to replace the P-40 in the low level role with the Army Cooperation Command, so the performance of the Allison was no handicap. The Spitfire was the Air Ministry designated high altitude fighter.

what's all this about the Allison being more reliable than the Merlin?

More robust Danny, not more reliable. The RAF removed the automatic boost control on the Mustangs. This allowed a sea level full throttle 72", rather than the take off 45.5" or 56" war emergency. And they ran at 72" for up to 20 minutes in combat. The bearing life was 1,500 hours vice 5 to 600 hours on the Merlin.

Mustang racers at Reno invariably use Allison connecting rods in their Merlins. They have a much larger cross section, and a better bearing design than the stock Merlin rods. These Merlins are putting out as much as 3,600 HP at 140 to 150".

[Danny42C]

Giant Warthogs

megan,

Your: "More robust Danny, not more reliable. The RAF removed the automatic boost control on the Mustangs...etc." Point taken ! But then, I believe the Spitfires were then built for an expected service life of six months, so it would make no sense to put in an engine designed to run forever.

And:

"These Merlins are putting out as much as 3,600 HP at 140 to 150". (Inches Hg?). But for how long?

On the "Gaining a RAF Pilot's Brevet...." Thread (Advt: currently in the doldrums on Page 2 of "Military Aviation") two of my old Posts may be of interest as relevant:

P.354/#7076: "Finally they overrode the ABC ("pressing THE Tit"), giving +9lb (say 48in) - IIRC - and sat back. It ran for 72 hours more before it blew up. Or so the story went". (These would be Merlin IIs and IIIs, '40 vintage, so a bit before the A-36's time)

P.157/#3131: "One of my (Mosquito) rides was a little too exciting for comfort. Half way down the runway on take-off, at full power, the auto boost limiter on the No. 2 failed. The sudden surge of extra power on that side swung the nose hard left just as we were leaving the ground, and although the vet pulled the offending engine back at once, we were left heading for the Fort, now far too close to dodge. It looked as if my short and not particularly glorious career was about to come to an abrupt end".

Happy days!

Danny42C