The same argument sorta with the F117A....brilliant subsonic aircraft, but you have to do the upfront damage with destroyer and sub launched cruise missiles taking out forward radar support systems to make them effective. Given mobile radar is already gone, I'd love knowing an A10 had my back.CID1990 wrote:The only problem with the A10 is that you need total command of the sky for it to be effective. If the enemy has any air superiority platforms able to operate freely the warthog dies.
I've seen the A-10 in action many times in the desert. Timidity never seemed to be an issue.93henfan wrote:The A-10 is an excellent platform. The only problem we had with it when training in the desert was getting the timid (perhaps by doctrine) Air Force pilots to work at near danger-close range. They refused to work as close to friendlies as Marine pilots.
The ones I read my 9-line briefs to did not like where I wanted them to drop. So we let them do what they wanted further away. I worked with them twice. Perhaps they are more motivated when real lives are at stake? I don't know. I got out in 2000.CitadelGrad wrote:I've seen the A-10 in action many times in the desert. Timidity never seemed to be an issue.93henfan wrote:The A-10 is an excellent platform. The only problem we had with it when training in the desert was getting the timid (perhaps by doctrine) Air Force pilots to work at near danger-close range. They refused to work as close to friendlies as Marine pilots.
93henfan wrote:The ones I read my 9-line briefs to did not like where I wanted them to drop. So we let them do what they wanted further away. I worked with them twice. Perhaps they are more motivated when real lives are at stake? I don't know. I got out in 2000.CitadelGrad wrote:
I've seen the A-10 in action many times in the desert. Timidity never seemed to be an issue.
America hater.That was indeed the impression I got of them.SeattleGriz wrote:93henfan wrote:
The ones I read my 9-line briefs to did not like where I wanted them to drop. So we let them do what they wanted further away. I worked with them twice. Perhaps they are more motivated when real lives are at stake? I don't know. I got out in 2000.
CID1990 wrote:The only problem with the A10 is that you need total command of the sky for it to be effective. If the enemy has any air superiority platforms able to operate freely the warthog dies.
Thanks, Einstein.mrklean wrote:CID1990 wrote:The only problem with the A10 is that you need total command of the sky for it to be effective. If the enemy has any air superiority platforms able to operate freely the warthog dies.
That can be said about most Attack Aircraft. A-6, A-7, F-111 and the F-117 they ALL need Fighter escort.
If you knew the price tag for what is really necessary to do what you propose, you'd shit your pants...mrklean wrote:I say keep the F-15. F-16 and A-10. Give them a new face lift and upgraded tech and keep kicking azz.
I dont know why you try to explain this to himCol Hogan wrote:If you knew the price tag for what is really necessary to do what you propose, you'd **** your pants...mrklean wrote:I say keep the F-15. F-16 and A-10. Give them a new face lift and upgraded tech and keep kicking azz.
Service Life Extension Programs (SLEPs) end up costing so much that you have to question its value...
I'm not arguing for the F-35...but the F-16s are developing bulkhead cracks...the F-15s have already started breaking up...and there is nothing you can do to reduce the radar cross-section of either aircraft...
There is a reason we buy new cars...instead of doing Cuba and keep rebuilding old technology...
As a weapon system, the A-10 is the best in it's class...∞∞∞ wrote:I have a friend who worked on A-10s, among others. He absolutely hated them. He said the time he spent on the aircraft was pretty obscene and this was a few years ago (he's not in the military anymore).
