Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: GtoRA2 on July 09, 2004, 02:21:47 PM
-
I know they have tried and I keep hearing they are trying again. Have the done it?
-
Originally posted by GtoRA2
Is the Airforce killing the A10?
2047...
btw I think F/A-22 and F/A-35 should be put in low priority and the US Navy and Air Force put its huge resources on unmanned fighters/attackers and bombers.
:)
-
Conspiracy theory #32,492,343:
The motivating force behind the recent large scale increase in the number of multiplayer games played over the internet is because the military wants private industry to develop low-latency control technology that can be applied to unmanned fighter drones so the fighters of the future don't 'lag out'.
Also, the purpose of aimbots is the development of autonomous targeting solutions for cheap.
:D
-
You forgot to mention....
"... and to defend against the future threat of 20 ton Mechanized bi pedal infantry from Japan , the US Armed forces are developing their mechanized technology to meet the ever increasing threat in the robotics age"
:D
-
I saw an episode on the History Channel about the A-10 a hile back.
They commented that one of the reasons to get rid of the Warthog was because the newer updated computer parts did not fit into the frame or something along those lines.
-
When performing the FAC-A role (airborn foward air controller), you really need two sets of eyes to spot and identify targets. This is why the F-14 Bombcat outperformed the A-10 in accuracy during the 1999 air campaign.
-
Originally posted by Drunky
I saw an episode on the History Channel about the A-10 a hile back.
They commented that one of the reasons to get rid of the Warthog was because the newer updated computer parts did not fit into the frame or something along those lines.
I saw that too drunky. I think they were refering to the computer software framework, i.e. a 286 trying to run AH. The targeting software is so imbedded it would not be feasible to try to upgrade.
-
Ask any A-10 pilot, they'll tell you that the primary piece of equipment that they use is 2 x Mark 1 eyeballs, followed by the GAU8. The software is just extra.
-
Saw a documentary on TV about a woman A-10 pilot in Iraq. Was a neat show. Had no idea women were flying combat now.
;)
-
Originally posted by SunTracker
When performing the FAC-A role (airborn foward air controller), you really need two sets of eyes to spot and identify targets. This is why the F-14 Bombcat outperformed the A-10 in accuracy during the 1999 air campaign.
Sounds feasible, but there's a problem.
The A-10 is much more fuel effecient then the kitty, given it better loiter time.
It's also much better equiped to deal with ground fire and takes alot more punishment than the F-14.
I would guess it's low speed capability would also make it easier to pick out targets.
If I was a FAC, I'd want an A-10. If I was going into a dogfight, I;ll take the F-14
-
Another thing, the Bombcat might be good for taking out preplanned targets, but the gun on the A-10 gives it ultimate flexibility in terms of engaging 'targets of opportunity'.
A squad of US Marines is unlikely to be able to file a "TRF-883-A Ordnance Delivery Request" form a month before they find themselves cut off by enemy forces. That's when your A-10 clearly wins.
-
History will repeat itself in that the Air Force will learn again what happens when you have one aircraft filling many different roles.
-
Give the A-10 to the USMC.
-
The USMC would love them, but they don't fit in the hangars of the Marine carriers. If they modified the wings so they could fold, it would impact their effectiveness and cost too much.
Back in the 90s I guess they were doing takeoffs and landings from Marine carriers off San Diego to work out the idea, but it just didn't work out.
-
They keep on trying but unfortunetly for the Generals it's such a great plane and I can't remember the stats now but it was a big percentage of the bombs dropped on Iraq were from A10's as much as they go on about their latest toys and GPS bombs.
Most are still dumb bombs and alot from A10's. Hate to see the A10 go, great plane and one of few these day's with any "character" imho.
...-Gixer
-
The Air Force will keep the A-10 around as long as it serves a role that no other plane can fulfill. And then every time we think of replacing it, the Army and Marines offer to take them off our hands and we hold onto it so we can keep the glory. The JSF will make a great replacement for the F-16. But time and again they've proven that the F-16, no matter how hard they try, just isn't capable of fulfilling certain roles. Thus, the JSF will also be lacking in some capacities. The dedicated close air support / airborne forward air control role is one that requires low speeds and long loiter time, not to mention a lot of armor and ordinance, and a big freakin' gun. The A-10 has it, the JSF won't.
Maybe if the Army and Marines got together and put some money into R&D for a replacement, they'd get what they want....
-
http://www.globalsecurity.org/org/news/2003/030609-a-10-retire01.htm
here ya go