A-10C improvements on USAF - Page 3 - ED Forums
 


Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 10-03-2019, 04:00 PM   #21
Kirk66
Member
 
Kirk66's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: N38-45.967, W089-37.853
Posts: 129
Default

18 is an odd number, considering GBU-39s are always carried by a BRU-61 rack, which can hold up to 4 GBU-39s (or GBU-53s pretty soon). So depending where you load the BRUs, with 5 loaded your SDB loadout would be 20 weapons; I doubt the weight of 2 extra SDBs (about 500lbs) would make a difference to the Hog...

I'm lucky to have a lot of experience working with SDBs (in real military fighter sims, not IRL, unfortunately); fun to use and yes if you have the time and sensors it's easy to target everyone individually - but they are SLOOOW! Take forever to get to the target!

Vulture
Kirk66 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-04-2019, 09:08 PM   #22
A2597
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Posts: 249
Default

I'd pay for an A-10C upgrade/module...
Give us the option of flying with or without the upgraded stuff.



Also raise the price of the A-10 module, new sales get both the old and the new.
A2597 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-05-2019, 04:45 PM   #23
Emu
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 1,121
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kirk66 View Post
18 is an odd number, considering GBU-39s are always carried by a BRU-61 rack, which can hold up to 4 GBU-39s (or GBU-53s pretty soon). So depending where you load the BRUs, with 5 loaded your SDB loadout would be 20 weapons; I doubt the weight of 2 extra SDBs (about 500lbs) would make a difference to the Hog...

I'm lucky to have a lot of experience working with SDBs (in real military fighter sims, not IRL, unfortunately); fun to use and yes if you have the time and sensors it's easy to target everyone individually - but they are SLOOOW! Take forever to get to the target!

Vulture
Maybe it means that's the maximum number of targets that can be aimed at in one drop???
Emu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-07-2019, 01:26 PM   #24
Kirk66
Member
 
Kirk66's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: N38-45.967, W089-37.853
Posts: 129
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Emu View Post
Maybe it means that's the maximum number of targets that can be aimed at in one drop???
Possible but unlikely, I routinely target 20 (5xBRU-61s) GBU-39s in an F-15E; all on individual targets. I think it's a typo ;^)

Cheers,

Kirk
Kirk66 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2019, 01:02 AM   #25
SkateZilla
Moderator/ED Testers Team
 
SkateZilla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Virginia Beach
Posts: 18,539
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by A2597 View Post
I'd pay for an A-10C upgrade/module...
Give us the option of flying with or without the upgraded stuff.



Also raise the price of the A-10 module, new sales get both the old and the new.
Wont Happen, the Current DCS:A-10C Suite is Vastly Outdated even before these upgrades were announced.
__________________
Windows 10 Pro, HAF922, Ryzen 2700X @ 4.6Ghz, 32GB DDR4-3200 GSkill,
2x R7970 Lightnings Crossfired @ 1.1/6.0GHz, Creative XFi Plat. Fatal1ty Champion,
3x ASUS VS248HP + Hanns·G HZ201HPB + Acer AL2002 (5760x1080+1600x900+1680x1050)
TM Warthog HOTAS, TM MFDs, CH Fighterstick, Pro Throttle, CH Pro Pedals, TrackIR4 Pro
SkateZilla is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-18-2019, 11:08 PM   #26
Kev2go
Senior Member
 
Kev2go's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Canada
Posts: 2,711
Default

because the USAF does have a point.


In this day and age of modern precision guided muntions and newer avionics the old days of Slow and low being a necessity for ground attack are over.



A10 is too vulnerable for modern conflicts in a contested environment against a neer peer adversary. It simply found a new life as a COIN aircraft in low intensity conflicts purely because its the cheapest fixed wing aircraft to operate that is currently in USAF inventory.

Sure ground attack was always going to be inherently dangerous, but since A10 is no longer in production, there is no way to sustain attrition rates in such a potential conflict. They are non replaceable if lost in combat.

But you know what would be even more cost effective than the A10 for bombing Jidadi Joe and his Toyotas? or also filling CAS in low threat environment?

a A29 Super tucano or modernized OV10 bronco.

people like McCain or indivuduals like Pierre SPrey were literally living in the past in their idea of what a CAS attack jet should be in the 21st century.
__________________





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 01:39 AM.
Kev2go is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-19-2019, 01:54 AM   #27
AeriaGloria
Senior Member
 
AeriaGloria's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2018
Location: LA
Posts: 1,009
Default

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
AeriaGloria is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-20-2019, 10:58 AM   #28
TLTeo
Member
 
TLTeo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Posts: 602
Default

To be fair, one could argue that using pretty much any modern Western jet except (off the top of my head) the Harrier, A-10, AMX and L-159 (and possibly the T-X program proposals?) is way overkill for COIN type missions.

Last edited by TLTeo; 10-20-2019 at 11:01 AM.
TLTeo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-20-2019, 03:45 PM   #29
Emu
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 1,121
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kev2go View Post
With the day and age of modern precision guided muntions and newer avionics the days of need Slow and low being a nessesity for ground attack is over.

A10 is too vulnerable for modern conflicts in a contested environment against a neer peer adversary. simply found a new life as a COIN aircraft in low intensity conflicts purely becuase its the cheapest Fixed wing aircraft to operate.

But you know what would be even more cost effective than the A10 for bombing Jidadi Joe and his Toyotas? or also filling CAS in low threat environment?

a A29 Super tucano or modernized OV10 bronco.
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.

Last edited by Emu; 10-20-2019 at 03:55 PM.
Emu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-21-2019, 01:27 AM   #30
Kev2go
Senior Member
 
Kev2go's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Canada
Posts: 2,711
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.

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.
__________________





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 01:37 AM.
Kev2go 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 12:09 PM. vBulletin Skin by ForumMonkeys. Powered by vBulletin®.
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.