A-10C improvements on USAF - Page 4 - ED Forums
 


Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 10-21-2019, 01:45 AM   #31
Kev2go
Senior Member
 
Kev2go's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Canada
Posts: 2,714
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AeriaGloria View Post
McCain did have a point about the B-1 in that video. I’m a huge Bone fan, I have a family member that worked on the program after the merge, but we can all agree it is expensive. Using it for CAS is like shooting a depleted uranium shell at a snowflake. As you said, A-29 all the way. While I’m not holding out hope for A-10 functionality upgrade, it would be warmly received
The Idea with B1's filling CAS role, is situational. A B1 bomber can be called away from a much more distant airfield, has longer loiter time than a fighter or an attack jet like the A10, and can use its targeting sensors to drop laser guided munitions or GPS based ones.

Guess what even B52's have been used in the fight against ISIL. I was at an airshow in London Ontario that had a B52H on display, and i talked with the crew. The pilot told me that with such a bomber they arent going to carpet bomb such a group with unguided munitions like in Vietnam. Such an aircraft allowed America to project power over Iraq/Syria from very long distances from as far as GUAM . They used precision guided munitions like laser guided bombs or JDAM's to conduct strikes strikes against ISIL in the early days of the aerial campaign before Tactical Fighter Squadrons from the USAF could be deployed to region or before the USN deployed carriers close enough to strike with thier Hornets.
__________________





Build:


Spoiler:


Windows 10 64 bit,

Case/Tower: Corsair Graphite 760tm ,Asus Strix Z370- E Motherboard, Intel Core i7 8700k ( Noctua NH14S cooler),Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 32gb ram (2666 mhz) , (Asus strix oc edition) Nvidia Gtx 1080 8gb , Evga g2 850 watt psu, Hardrives ; WD 1TB HDD, Samsung evo 850 pro 1TB SSD, Samsung evo 850 pro 512 gb SSD


Last edited by Kev2go; 10-21-2019 at 01:53 AM.
Kev2go is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-21-2019, 09:15 AM   #32
Emu
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 1,123
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kev2go View Post
Gau8 is overrated. Even with DU shells you still need high angle top down attacks against engine deck or turret top. otherwise the armor will still withstand it. Gau8 will only shred with ease lightly armored vehicles like personnel carriers or IFV's.

Statistically speaking most of the A10's armor kills have been with the maverick missile, not with the Gau8.

reality is Gau8 should be treated as nothing more than a backup the same way the M61 vulcan on fighter jets is a backup to its a2a missiles.


helicopters are generally vulnerable, but not as much today but not for the reasons you think they are. the reason why stuff like the Apache is deemed survivable enough for Modern conflicts is because helicopters are employed differently. With the Longbow the idea was to fire radar guided missile against ANti tank from beyond cover to not expose oneself to protecting sam threats againt a neer peer foe.

Since 2012 Apache also have ability to take control of drones for laser designating targets, or using thier onboard weapons system further reducing the need for exposure, whilst also being able to cover more territory. Ah64E's in turn have further sensor overhauls, plus LInk 16 intergrated making them network centric, and able to better operate with other NATO aircraft, be it fixed wing or rotary, and not just US army Longbow's/Guardian's,

Standoff weaponry > Guns


because its better to have a missile jammed or just totally miss its target due to random failure then unnecessarily put additional risk to pilots lives just so they can get in close enough to shoot something with their gun.
Yeah, and there are a lot more APCs, IFVs and artillery unis than MBTs.

Unless you miss a MANPADS, SHORAD or guided AAA system.

SDB = standoff weapon.

Not if the enemy is about to take your airbase with tanks.
Emu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2019, 11:00 PM   #33
Boogieman
Member
 
Boogieman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Sydney
Posts: 130
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Emu View Post
Neither of those will survive an SA-6 hit though. Also, what kind of jamming and flares package do they have? Unfortunately Jihadi Joe is getting a little more sophisticated.

Equally, any case against the A-10 could also be made against attack helicopters too. If an A-10 is used in an environment and way where the enemy can easily shoot it down, then an attack helicopter would be even easier to shoot down.

The A-10 certainly shouldn't be used pre-SEAD during an offensive, nor should an attack helicopter (although it was during Desert Storm). But there is the post-SEAD environment and also the defensive battle. Some potential adversaries, not mentioning any names, have nearly 100,000 tanks, armoured vehicles and artillery units, and could easily produce way more in the event of a war. Is there a guided weapon for every single one in the event of an onslaught? What about if some miss, or get jammed, decoyed, active-killed or whatever? There's no jamming a GAU-8 and it's a good way of taking out anything less than the strongest MBTs, and can maybe mission-kill even those.
The problem against a peer threat is that it will be difficult to ever conclude that SEAD/DEAD has been effective enough to permit A10 operations. Russia and China have such ridiculous concentrations of highly capable and mobile GBAD systems that the GAU8 in particular is going to struggle to find relevance. I just don't see how you're going to use it without first accounting for the local population of Verba, Sosna, Strela, Derivatsya-PVO, Pantsir, Tor etc etc. (good luck with that )

When you include the fact that all of these systems are likely to be linked together and potentially sharing a common operating picture via the broader ISR network, you're looking at a system that is able to respond and "heal" itself in response to SEAD and DEAD strikes. I just don't see operating at the low altitudes GAU8 requires as a smart move in this environment. This is exactly where the Ukrainians got smashed by Russian GBAD systems ~5 years ago.

Last edited by Boogieman; 10-22-2019 at 11:32 PM.
Boogieman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2019, 11:53 PM   #34
Kev2go
Senior Member
 
Kev2go's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Canada
Posts: 2,714
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Emu View Post
Yeah, and there are a lot more APCs, IFVs and artillery unis than MBTs.

Unless you miss a MANPADS, SHORAD or guided AAA system.

SDB = standoff weapon.

Not if the enemy is about to take your airbase with tanks.
You are really grasping at straws here and ironically fail to notice what you say proves my point exactly.

Just because i don't name every type of ground threat outside of MBT's doesnt mean i think those are the only ground vehicle out there. And exactly why you want stand off weaponry as the first and foremost .... because you cannot guarantee you can hit every threat down to the last manpad., and therefore reduce the risk of getting hit by not getting as close.

All guided missiles can be considered standoff, just a matter of how much.

thats why using any guided muntion with standoff range> as opposed to using Gau8 to individually acquire each separate target with a single pass, and a altitudes low enough to not be attacked by manpads but anti air guns. and yes SDB's would be great at smashing anything from technicals to tanks thus still can be utilized against " an enemy that is about to take your airbase with tanks",


you can launch SDB's at multiple targets at once. with the upgrades the A10 is getting, it will be able to simultaneously launch up to 18 SDB at different targets. Depending on model SDB's can use either INS/GPS, Radar or IR seeker ( or combination of all of the above)




dunno about you but potentially wiping out entire armored tank company or over saturating thier mobile air defences with so many additional incoming targets to shoot down to prevent its own destruction or those advancing mechanized units, all within a single pass is quite a lethal capability. Technically more if you want to consider multiple attack runsif you recall the statement that the A10 can potentially carry up to 4 per hardpoint

So yeas SDB will still be a very welcome addition even for subsonic attack aircraft like the A10.
__________________





Build:


Spoiler:


Windows 10 64 bit,

Case/Tower: Corsair Graphite 760tm ,Asus Strix Z370- E Motherboard, Intel Core i7 8700k ( Noctua NH14S cooler),Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 32gb ram (2666 mhz) , (Asus strix oc edition) Nvidia Gtx 1080 8gb , Evga g2 850 watt psu, Hardrives ; WD 1TB HDD, Samsung evo 850 pro 1TB SSD, Samsung evo 850 pro 512 gb SSD


Last edited by Kev2go; 10-23-2019 at 12:08 AM.
Kev2go is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2019, 12:03 AM   #35
Kev2go
Senior Member
 
Kev2go's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Canada
Posts: 2,714
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Boogieman View Post
The problem against a peer threat is that it will be difficult to ever conclude that SEAD/DEAD has been effective enough to permit A10 operations. Russia and China have such ridiculous concentrations of highly capable and mobile GBAD systems that the GAU8 in particular is going to struggle to find relevance.[I]I just don't see how you're going to use it without first accounting for the local population of Verba, Sosna, Strela, Derivatsya-PVO, Pantsir, Tor etc etc. (good luck with that )
[/I]
When you include the fact that all of these systems are likely to be linked together and potentially sharing a common operating picture via the broader ISR network, you're looking at a system that is able to respond and "heal" itself in response to SEAD and DEAD strikes. I just don't see operating at the low altitudes GAU8 requires as a smart move in this environment. This is exactly where the Ukrainians got smashed by Russian GBAD systems ~5 years ago.
exactly



__________________





Build:


Spoiler:


Windows 10 64 bit,

Case/Tower: Corsair Graphite 760tm ,Asus Strix Z370- E Motherboard, Intel Core i7 8700k ( Noctua NH14S cooler),Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 32gb ram (2666 mhz) , (Asus strix oc edition) Nvidia Gtx 1080 8gb , Evga g2 850 watt psu, Hardrives ; WD 1TB HDD, Samsung evo 850 pro 1TB SSD, Samsung evo 850 pro 512 gb SSD

Kev2go is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2019, 02:42 AM   #36
Boogieman
Member
 
Boogieman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Sydney
Posts: 130
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kev2go View Post
exactly



You are quite welcome. Personally I am not optimistic about the A10's utility against a peer opponent in general. SDB helps when you know exactly where the GBAD threat is but the A10's sensor and countermeasures suites - in my view - simply don't cut it if you don't. Even when the bigger S300/400/500 and Buk type systems have been dealt with you could still have the smaller independent systems I listed earlier pop up and nail you fairly easily. Add enemy airpower to the equation and things get really dire.

Last edited by Boogieman; 10-23-2019 at 10:19 AM.
Boogieman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2019, 04:16 PM   #37
Emu
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 1,123
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Boogieman View Post
The problem against a peer threat is that it will be difficult to ever conclude that SEAD/DEAD has been effective enough to permit A10 operations. Russia and China have such ridiculous concentrations of highly capable and mobile GBAD systems that the GAU8 in particular is going to struggle to find relevance. I just don't see how you're going to use it without first accounting for the local population of Verba, Sosna, Strela, Derivatsya-PVO, Pantsir, Tor etc etc. (good luck with that )

When you include the fact that all of these systems are likely to be linked together and potentially sharing a common operating picture via the broader ISR network, you're looking at a system that is able to respond and "heal" itself in response to SEAD and DEAD strikes. I just don't see operating at the low altitudes GAU8 requires as a smart move in this environment. This is exactly where the Ukrainians got smashed by Russian GBAD systems ~5 years ago.
After the long range systems have been destroyed you can fly beyond the reach of the shorter range systems. An attack helicopter doesn't have that ability.

Last edited by Emu; 10-23-2019 at 04:20 PM.
Emu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2019, 04:20 PM   #38
Emu
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 1,123
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kev2go View Post
You are really grasping at straws here and ironically fail to notice what you say proves my point exactly.

Just because i don't name every type of ground threat outside of MBT's doesnt mean i think those are the only ground vehicle out there. And exactly why you want stand off weaponry as the first and foremost .... because you cannot guarantee you can hit every threat down to the last manpad., and therefore reduce the risk of getting hit by not getting as close.

All guided missiles can be considered standoff, just a matter of how much.

thats why using any guided muntion with standoff range> as opposed to using Gau8 to individually acquire each separate target with a single pass, and a altitudes low enough to not be attacked by manpads but anti air guns. and yes SDB's would be great at smashing anything from technicals to tanks thus still can be utilized against " an enemy that is about to take your airbase with tanks",


you can launch SDB's at multiple targets at once. with the upgrades the A10 is getting, it will be able to simultaneously launch up to 18 SDB at different targets. Depending on model SDB's can use either INS/GPS, Radar or IR seeker ( or combination of all of the above)




dunno about you but potentially wiping out entire armored tank company or over saturating thier mobile air defences with so many additional incoming targets to shoot down to prevent its own destruction or those advancing mechanized units, all within a single pass is quite a lethal capability. Technically more if you want to consider multiple attack runsif you recall the statement that the A10 can potentially carry up to 4 per hardpoint

So yeas SDB will still be a very welcome addition even for subsonic attack aircraft like the A10.
But what do you do if the enemy storms forward with tens of thousands of armoured vehicles after you've ran out of missiles and they're heading for your AFB, assuming the use of tactical nukes has been ruled out?

Last edited by Emu; 10-23-2019 at 05:12 PM.
Emu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2019, 06:01 PM   #39
Kev2go
Senior Member
 
Kev2go's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Canada
Posts: 2,714
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Emu View Post
But what do you do if the enemy storms forward with tens of thousands of armoured vehicles after you've ran out of missiles and they're heading for your AFB, assuming the use of tactical nukes has been ruled out?
Of course you grasp at straws again by presenting the most extreme scenario, and very unlikely in the exact circumstances you presented it with. Like lol !. Your gau8 wont save the day if there are still "10s,s of thousands of AFV,s"


When is the last time an american afb has been steamrolled by a mechanized force by " tens of thousands of armored vehicles" that they either failed to notice or was too large to repel( assuming the airfield is even worth holding by that point)

Oh right.....

Besides all afb,s are prime targets for air attacks. You can't hide such arields from aerial recon let alone satellites.

Chances are your afb is already bombed out to crap by the time any sizable mechanized forces are on its doorstep( assuming use of nukes is not permitted) , and if you still havent evacuated aircraft or personnel yet, then you have far bigger problems pertaining to ones in in command than whether or not guns can save your afb. The gau8 is nothing than a backup weapon ( which is overrated as it's not a railgun) , something I already said earlier and for use when applicable. So dont change your goalpost.


And for helicopter please stop trying to compare them to fixed wing aircraft, because they dont operate the same way.
__________________





Build:


Spoiler:


Windows 10 64 bit,

Case/Tower: Corsair Graphite 760tm ,Asus Strix Z370- E Motherboard, Intel Core i7 8700k ( Noctua NH14S cooler),Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 32gb ram (2666 mhz) , (Asus strix oc edition) Nvidia Gtx 1080 8gb , Evga g2 850 watt psu, Hardrives ; WD 1TB HDD, Samsung evo 850 pro 1TB SSD, Samsung evo 850 pro 512 gb SSD


Last edited by Kev2go; 10-23-2019 at 06:18 PM.
Kev2go is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2019, 08:36 PM   #40
Boogieman
Member
 
Boogieman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Sydney
Posts: 130
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Emu View Post
After the long range systems have been destroyed you can fly beyond the reach of the shorter range systems. An attack helicopter doesn't have that ability.
Only if you know where they are. Newer systems like the latest Tor and Pantsir variants can still reach pretty high up, especially against a slower target like an A10. It only takes one of those to pop up at your feet and you're toast.

I'd add that it's going to be really difficult to identify when the larger systems have been completely dealt with due to their mobility and their connection to other parts of the ISR network. What this adds up to is a situation in which the A10 is going to need to have its hand held by a lot of supporting assets (SEAD, fighter escort, EW etc etc) to have a hope of staying alive. Not ideal.

Last edited by Boogieman; 10-23-2019 at 09:56 PM.
Boogieman is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT. The time now is 12:20 AM. vBulletin Skin by ForumMonkeys. Powered by vBulletin®.
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.