Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Nypsy on September 04, 2013, 01:01:07 PM
-
I get Boeing's news releases, I just got this one about the A-10...
Boeing to Build 56 Additional A-10 Wings for US Air Force
Will keep aircraft operating through 2035
ST. LOUIS, Sept. 4, 2013 – Boeing [NYSE: BA] will continue improving U.S. Air Force A-10 Thunderbolt II mission readiness, and decreasing maintenance costs, through a follow-on order for 56 replacement wings for that aircraft.
Boeing is on contract to build up to 242 wings, including these, at its plant in Macon, Ga. Refitting the fleet with new wings will improve the mission availability of A-10s by an estimated 4 percent and will help save the Air Force an estimated $1.3 billion in maintenance costs during the next 30 years.
This latest order is valued at $212 million. Including this agreement, the Air Force has ordered 173 wings. The efforts of Boeing, its suppliers, and the Air Force will allow the A-10 fleet to operate into 2035.
The A-10 is a twin-engine jet designed for close air support of ground forces. It can be used against all ground targets, including tanks and other armored vehicles.
A unit of The Boeing Company, Boeing Defense, Space & Security is one of the world's largest defense, space and security businesses specializing in innovative and capabilities-driven customer solutions, and the world’s largest and most versatile manufacturer of military aircraft. Headquartered in St. Louis, Boeing Defense, Space & Security is a $33 billion business with 59,000 employees worldwide. Follow us on Twitter: @BoeingDefense.
# # #
Contact:
Michelle Shelhamer
Global Services & Support
Office: +1 314-232-3329
Mobile: +1 316-259-2649
michelle.m.shelhamer@boeing.com
-
Is it a new design for the wing or just a newly manufactured wing?
-
It says "replacement wings" so I guess it's just a new production run of wings to swap out the old fatigued ones on the aircraft. We did the same with our F-16 fleet a couple of years ago; gave them 4,000 more hours.
-
Now if they could only ditch the 1960s engines. Updated and up rated engines would greatly increase their mission endurance, TO performance, and sustained maneuverability.
-
retire them
-
retire them
No :cry
Such a sexy. Ird
-
It's a beautiful thing... in the dark ;)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c0tUAbpMFcE
-
Now if they could only ditch the 1960s engines. Updated and up rated engines would greatly increase their mission endurance, TO performance, and sustained maneuverability.
The first engine shipped in 1971.
They are rated for 2,000 hours "on wing" time and have been updated several times during their history to improve durability and longevity.
With over 13 million flight hours, these engines are some of the most reliable and durable engines, currently, in the air.
This is speculation, on my part, but they still seem to have a really good power to weight ratio as well.
What engine would you replace them with?
-
It's a beautiful thing... in the dark ;)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c0tUAbpMFcE
study sim, zzzzz
-
retire them
Why?
Is there another aircraft that we have in inventory that can do they job they do?
-
Not an aircraft to my knowledge that is more appropriate for today. No one is going to go at it against us in the sky ground pounders are always needed. So the a10 will always be too. And I only like a few jets-sr 71 f18and a10. All for their beauty and grace in flight.
-
It's a beautiful thing... in the dark ;)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c0tUAbpMFcE
We make the green formation lights for them. :)
(http://files.air-attack.com/MIL/a10/a10night_20120727.jpg)
-
Why?
Is there another aircraft that we have in inventory that can do they job they do?
Sure there are. all those F-35s are going to replace them... :rofl
-
The first engine shipped in 1971.
...
What engine would you replace them with?
I should have 1960s technology.
The civilian variant CF34 is still in production and has a large range of variants. AF has proposed re-engine programs several times.
-
A-10s have had a bad track record for friendly fire. Even though an Apache blew up a Bradley in the first Gulf War, being able to get in close with a powerful camera (not to mention a 30mm cannon, albeit nowhere near the lethality of the A-10s) drastically reduces the friendly fire incidents.
The Battle of Nasiriyah shows what can happen when A-10s and friendly vehicles end up in the same target box. The A-10s just don't have the optics to identify a friendly vehicle quickly and efficiently in the fog of war. The book "Ambush Alley", with first person narratives of the Marines in the battle claims that 20 Marines and at least 3 AAVs were destroyed by A-10s. An official investigation after the battle showed a lower number of Marines and AAVs destroyed, though it was hard to determine since both flight data tapes from the two A-10s involved were accidentally lost or taped over.
Anyhow, the Longbow Apache has excellent cameras/flir and a very cool fire control radar that can even positively ID a camel (not to mention tell the difference between a BMP and an AAV).
-
Why?
Is there another aircraft that we have in inventory that can do they job they do?
see
A-10s have had a bad track record for friendly fire. Even though an Apache blew up a Bradley in the first Gulf War, being able to get in close with a powerful camera (not to mention a 30mm cannon, albeit nowhere near the lethality of the A-10s) drastically reduces the friendly fire incidents.
The Battle of Nasiriyah shows what can happen when A-10s and friendly vehicles end up in the same target box. The A-10s just don't have the optics to identify a friendly vehicle quickly and efficiently in the fog of war. The book "Ambush Alley", with first person narratives of the Marines in the battle claims that 20 Marines and at least 3 AAVs were destroyed by A-10s. An official investigation after the battle showed a lower number of Marines and AAVs destroyed, though it was hard to determine since both flight data tapes from the two A-10s involved were accidentally lost or taped over.
Anyhow, the Longbow Apache has excellent cameras/flir and a very cool fire control radar that can even positively ID a camel (not to mention tell the difference between a BMP and an AAV).
Thanks
-
A-10s have had a bad track record for friendly fire. Even though an Apache blew up a Bradley in the first Gulf War, being able to get in close with a powerful camera (not to mention a 30mm cannon, albeit nowhere near the lethality of the A-10s) drastically reduces the friendly fire incidents.
The Battle of Nasiriyah shows what can happen when A-10s and friendly vehicles end up in the same target box. The A-10s just don't have the optics to identify a friendly vehicle quickly and efficiently in the fog of war. The book "Ambush Alley", with first person narratives of the Marines in the battle claims that 20 Marines and at least 3 AAVs were destroyed by A-10s. An official investigation after the battle showed a lower number of Marines and AAVs destroyed, though it was hard to determine since both flight data tapes from the two A-10s involved were accidentally lost or taped over.
Anyhow, the Longbow Apache has excellent cameras/flir and a very cool fire control radar that can even positively ID a camel (not to mention tell the difference between a BMP and an AAV).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pCUgBwdqwak
Friendly fire occurs at 7:10
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pCUgBwdqwak
Friendly fire occurs at 7:10
wow. what negligence.
-
The first engine shipped in 1971.
They are rated for 2,000 hours "on wing" time and have been updated several times during their history to improve durability and longevity.
With over 13 million flight hours, these engines are some of the most reliable and durable engines, currently, in the air.
They shared a similar engine GE TF34 to the Navy's S-3 Viking. My father served 20 years in the Navy, Serving aboard 5 different carriers. After he became an officer in the early 80s he took a cruise on the Nimitz with VS-38 and the World famous Red Griffins.
After he retired we moved to the Eastern Panhandle of West Virginia, which is not to far from the Fairchild plant in Hagerstown, MD. I remember seeing A-10s every once in a while. One time I saw one very low while tubing on the Potomac River. Another time my dad and I were driving home and heard them closing relativley low. My dad turned to me and said "S-3 Vikings" and overhead passed a pair of Thunderbolts. Your ears never forget I suppose. :lol
-
I have a feeling that this is a political discussion in the making...
I think the A-10 should be kept in service, it's a great looking plane and a great weapons platform.
wow. what negligence.
Question, are you just going to bash this plane and piggy back off of other peoples posts, or are you going to come up with an original idea to support your inexplicably pessimistic outlook on this situation?
In the pilots defense, no friendlies were called at that position. They saw a vehicle that they suspected posed a thread to their safety. If I was in that situation I would have done the same thing.
-
I have a feeling that this is a political discussion in the making...
I think the A-10 should be kept in service, it's a great looking plane and a great weapons platform.
Question, are you just going to bash this plane and piggy back off of other peoples posts, or are you going to come up with an original idea to support your inexplicably pessimistic outlook on this situation?
In the pilots defense, no friendlies were called at that position. They saw a vehicle that they suspected posed a thread to their safety. If I was in that situation I would have done the same thing.
POPOV 35 attacked before getting 100% confirmation from the controllers, and even with POPOV 36's remarks about being unsure. It was a mistake, yes, but they could've prevented it had POPOV 35 not been so anxious to score some kills. I don't feel any hate towards the guy but that was just carelessness.
-
Don't overlook that the updated A10Cs are capable of carrying the same litening and sniper targeting pods as some of the fast movers.
-
Question, are you just going to bash this plane and piggy back off of other peoples posts, or are you going to come up with an original idea to support your inexplicably pessimistic outlook on this situation?
In the pilots defense, no friendlies were called at that position. They saw a vehicle that they suspected posed a thread to their safety. If I was in that situation I would have done the same thing.
see
POPOV 35 attacked before getting 100% confirmation from the controllers, and even with POPOV 36's remarks about being unsure. It was a mistake, yes, but they could've prevented it had POPOV 35 not been so anxious to score some kills. I don't feel any hate towards the guy but that was just carelessness.
+1
-
I can believe the bit about needing new wings for existing airframes. There are quite a few A10 fuselages in the DM AFB boneyard missing their wings after they were pulled to use as replacements.
As far as friendly fire is concerned, that is a situation that has happened ever since the invention of ranged weapons and will happen again as long as people continue to engage in warfare. To sit in judgement from the safety of your home keyboard is rather hypocritical, particularly if you have never even served anywhere.
There is a ton of difference in using a hovering platform at 25' altitude vs one that is moving about 400 MPH in a much more vulnerable altitude in the arena with modern radar guided guns as well as missiles. It's not a video game with instant zoom and "god's eye" cameras available to look over the battlefield. Nothing in either system can instantly define what is a red target vs a blue target and placement of troops / equipment in a fluid environment is never predictable all the time. Even the vaunted IFF can falter. Those folks do the best job they can and have an enviable record in regards to friendly fire, more so than ever before. People and machines are fallible.
There simply is no other airframe in the AF inventory that can do the same job of close ground support as the A10. Many of the blue suiters have zoomie fixation and forget that there is more to the conflict than simply airspace control and fast but limited ordinance delivery. Combat takes time and if you can't loiter while the situation develops, you reduce the impact you have on the battle field.
-
Well, their "enviable record" might not sound so enviable if you ask their allies. Especially the British who have been on the receiving end all too often. Among NATO troops friendly fire is almost synonymous with trigger happy Americans.
-
This isn't new.
At Hill AFB in Utah have been replacing A-10 wings for at least 4 years, probably longer.
To suggest retiring them is ludicrous, no other aircraft comes close to filling the mission profile the A-10 does, plus with the updated wings they have better payload and are good for several thousand more flight hours.
-
This isn't new.
At Hill AFB in Utah have been replacing A-10 wings for at least 4 years, probably longer.
To suggest retiring them is ludicrous, no other aircraft comes close to filling the mission profile the A-10 does, plus with the updated wings they have better payload and are good for several thousand more flight hours.
About 15 years ago they were talking about replacing the A-10 with the F-16C. Supposedly, specially equipped (gondo's for tanks) F-16C could go low and slow and carry the same arms as the A-10 and be able to dogfight if necessary. I guess that won't happen. :)
-
I think having something like that would work much better if the two units can operate side by side. Versatility in your weapons is never a bad thing. I would suspect that would be financially improbably though.