A-10C vs L-39ZA

Which aircraft will have you learning more about air warfare and ground attack tactics?

Many of my friends say get the A-10C. It is a versatile and capable ground pounding platform, I give it that. But I already have a few modern day AG platforms including the less useful(?) A-10A... and A-10C is a bit bland.

L-39ZA has its own following and is used at least in some kind of insurgency missions in multiplayer. Not sure if the add-on campaign is as good as it claims to be. No flares is the great weakness of this aircraft. The power level is limited so it fits in interesting scenarios... maybe together with mig-15 and sabre? It's supposedly quite fun to fly and operate, it's claimed to be agile as well.

I fly the C , and it is Very agile , and otherwise a delight to fly .

Hands down, the Hawg is the better choice.

One is a dedicated Air-to-Groung Attack aircraft and the other one is a trainer with limited weapon capabilities.

I am not saying the L-39 is not a good jet for what it is, but in terms of attacking and supporting ground targets... there is no comparison.

The L-39 is a fun jet to fly around in, do training and formation.

The A-10s is for people who like taking on Su-27 in MP with just AIM-9s and out turning them xD

It depends on whether you want to learn NATO or Eastern Block instrumentation. Isn't a very straightforward choice based on that alone?

Depends on what you plan on using it for, if you want to do simple one and done bombing runs or some light CAS and stay on station for 15 or so minutes then I'd say the A-10 is a bit overkill, The A-10 is a jet you'd use for loitering around and picking off targets slowly or as needed by a JTAC. Personally I'd say go for the L-39 for a change of pace from the modern jets, where you're eyes are glued to an MFD most of the time. IMO the A-10C is a tad too slow which makes long range missions a little boring, the F/A-18C doesn't have nearly as much gas but the aerial-refueling helps break up the monotony of longer flights.

So yeah, I guess my vote goes to the L-39, mainly because you said you already had modern fighters and I assume this would include either the Harrier or the Hornet and I think these jets are similar ENOUGH to the A-10 functionally that you wouldn't be missing out on anything significant.

Basically, with the A-10C you can destroy just about anything on the ground, in almost any quantity, using such a wide variety of ordinance and tactics that it really leaves you feeling like you're the Sorceror's Apprentice and the tanks are brooms.

"Which aircraft will have you learning more about air warfare and ground attack tactics?"

Even the slightest effort in researching would answer your question. The A-10C is an actual warplane... the L-39 is a basic trainer. That pretty much tells you all you need to know as far as capabilities go.

As to which you should get, that's going to be subjective. Which do you like better? That's the one you should get.

there is only the Hawg! all else is just eye candy :)

Which aircraft will have you learning more about air warfare and ground attack tactics?

First major choice is East vs. West and metric vs. imperial.

If you don't really care about that, the Albatros is a great trainer and will LEARN you a lot, especially because you can't rely on electronics to help you out. It's very satisfying to take out targets with this aircraft.

A lot of people seem to focus purely on raw capability but to me that's one of the things that DCS is NOT about, because it's a sandbox, so you can create missions that you like to fly.

As for which aircraft is better: the L-39 was exported to over 30 countries and approx. 2,900 were built. The A-10 was never exported and "only" 716 were built (acc. Wikipedia). :smilewink:

Which aircraft will have you learning more about air warfare and ground attack tactics?

TL;DR:

The A-10C

Detail:

L-39ZA

The L-39ZA has a great flight model and is ideal for learning or improving basic flight skills, it's one of my favourite modules.

Without a moving map, ins/gps, etc. you're navigating using visual clues (landmarks, bridges, etc.) and route timing (F10 map or NS430 are options but IMHO defeat the reason to use the L-39 over another module) or ADF/RSBN.

However, it's not the best suited for learning 'modern' ground attack tactics and AFAIK IRL, is a stepping stone to learning more combat capable aircraft, such as the MiG-29, etc..

Weapon loadout is light and it lacks RWR or countermeasures. Even with a FAC/JTAC smoke mark, you'll be within lethal range of most adversaries (Shilka, manpads, etc.) before you've acquired them.

A-10C

I don't enjoy the A-10C as much as the L-39 but there's no denying it's a capable aircraft that gets the job done.

There's a good selection of DCS missions and training materials based off real world use.

It's systems are harder to learn, but it's easier to fly and weapons very effective once learn't.

AV-8B

It might be worth considering the AV-8B as it's similar in capability to the A-10C. However although I enjoy the Harrier, it not as 'finished' a product.

Many of my friends say get the A-10C. It is a versatile and capable ground pounding platform, I give it that. But I already have a few modern day AG platforms including the less useful(?) A-10A... and A-10C is a bit bland.

Your friends are right :D A-10C is just completely different beast from A-10A. It can do down & dirty ground attacks - but the actual strength lies within the targeting pod and being able to deliver ordance with pinpoint accuracy from higher altitudes. HOTAS system is fairly complicated - but once you get it figured out, it's very versatile.

I'd say the only thing against A-10C - which strangely enough is one of it's strong points too - that it is slow. And it feels even more so after a module such as the Viggen... :megalol:

But as an answer to your question - you feel more interested towards the L-39, so I think that's the only correct choice in this situation :)

neither ( These planes are two polar opposites anyways)

F/A18C

Youl get a modern fighter with both A2A and A2G out of it, and in future even greater versatility and lethality in both aspects as it progresses out of EA.

A10C yoy already say seems bland ( it seems like you really need to be sold on it) but L39ZA doesn't have much usability besides counter Insurgency ops < Trainer purposes, or Aerobatics flying. Even as far as performance; whilst agile feels under-powered even knowing its a subsonic trainer Jet. Either korean war era F86F or Mig15Bis will still offer significantly greater acceleration and top speed to work with, which still makes them more fun for casual zipping around.

Depends. If you're into counterinsurgency ops, as I am, get the L-39ZA since it's a great COIN platform. SAMs getting thrown into the mix however? Get the Hog.

Both are great AC so it's a matter of survivability, and that depends on enemy strength and composition. I strongly prefer the Albie myself, but that's just me.

Depends. If you're into counterinsurgency ops, as I am, get the L-39ZA since it's a great COIN platform. SAMs getting thrown into the mix however? Get the Hog.

 

Both are great AC so it's a matter of survivability, and that depends on enemy strength and composition. I strongly prefer the Albie myself, but that's just me.

Depends on the level of counter insurgency.

As shown in Soviet war in Afghanistan and more recently in Syria. Manpads are are still prevalent. ( technical arent your biggest aa problem). In mid east some militias have bee n known to operate tanks. Old t55 or t62s but tanks nontheless

L39 has no countermeasures dispenser system. No missile warning system. It doesnt have much chance against one. And even in counter insurgency having a TGP is still an indispensable tool. So even for COIN the a10 is the desired tool for the job.

We wont get a true modern COIN aircraft until the razbam super tucano

While I consider the L-39 to be the more "fun" aircraft, for learning air to ground combat tactics, especially the more modern ones, A-10C is ahead by a long, long shot. Having a targeting pod, especially an advanced one, makes a lot of difference. So does a well integrated and advanced navigation system. In the future the Hornet and Harrier will also have such functionality, but it will take a while until they are feature complete.

There are many other aircraft with which you can learn the basics of unarmed ground attack tactics like you can with L-39.

So I guess I will be echoing the majority in suggesting the A-10. Really depends on what you are looking for to be honest. While I believe the L-39 is more fun, it just won't be cutting it against higher threat environments. L-39 being more fun is, admittedly, subjective. But A-10's superiority in ground attack is not.

It's been said enough but I'll chime in anyway... the A-10c is infinitely more capable than the L-39. That being said the L-39 is a lot of fun, is much easier to learn, and has multicrew. If you want to do air to ground the A-10 can't be beat, but the L-39 is worth picking up too, especially since its on sale right now.

Never claimed the Hog wasn't a more capable CAS platform. No-one in their right mind would. But the Syrian Air Force still thinks the ZA has its uses in a low-threat / small arms environment:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aero_L-39_Albatros#Syria

And that's exactly what I'm trying to recreate in my own missions, because flying the Albie is just tremendous fun and I personally grew weary of the Hog anyway a long time ago already. Now I'm not saying the L-39 should be anyone's first DCS purchase because fighting in it can indeed be hard, but it's a great AC for sheer stick-and-rudder work nevertheless; and some of us, like myself, just prefer low-tech stuff anyway.

Or in other words: yeah, it's a trainer, but not only :)

While I consider the L-39 to be the more "fun" aircraft...

Exactly. Grew tired of the Hog's point-shoot-fire-forget-rinse-repeat method a long time ago already myself and much prefer getting up close and personal with the Albie now. YMMV, but at least consider getting it during a sale or something and see for yourselves.

I can guarantee you most A-10C drivers won't be able to hit a thing with bombs in a L-39ZA. :) Because L-39 requires finesse and piloting skill. Something the A-10C doesn't. The A-10C requires avionics knowledge and that's mostly it.

It's quite hard to master bombing, rockets and gun runs in an L-39. But it's immensely satisfying when you finally get it right. You will need to learn the bombing profiles, cockpit procedures, working with your gunsight and actually FLYING the airplane. Which will make you appreciate how DCS models things.

I'd say you give L-39ZA a try. It's a very interesting aircraft which will give you an experience very different to A-10C.

It may look like I am criticizing the A-10C, but let me assure you that isn't the case. Those are very different aircraft and of course the A-10C is more capable. I have and love both. (meh, I buy all DCS modules on day-1)

I can guarantee you most A-10C drivers won't be able to hit a thing with bombs in a L-39ZA. :) Because L-39 requires finesse and piloting skill. Something the A-10C doesn't. The A-10C requires avionics knowledge and that's mostly it.

 

It's quite hard to master bombing, rockets and gun runs in an L-39. But it's immensely satisfying when you finally get it right. You will need to learn the bombing profiles, cockpit procedures, working with your gunsight and actually FLYING the airplane. Which will make you appreciate how DCS models things.

 

I'd say you give L-39ZA a try. It's a very interesting aircraft which will give you an experience very different to A-10C.

 

It may look like I am criticizing the A-10C, but let me assure you that isn't the case. Those are very different aircraft and of course the A-10C is more capable. I have and love both. (meh, I buy all DCS modules on day-1)

Of course most pilots wouldnt. The reality even if you can do a perfect manual bombing run on the practise range wont necessarily guarantee it in a real world scenario.

In actual real world situation you most often wont because targets are defended by aaa or by guided types and you are forced to jink to avoid being hit ruining your ideal bombing run. Something the usa learned the hard way in vietnam

Never claimed the Hog wasn't a more capable CAS platform. No-one in their right mind would. But the Syrian Air Force still thinks the ZA has its uses in a low-threat / small arms environment:

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aero_L-39_Albatros#Syria

 

And that's exactly what I'm trying to recreate in my own missions, because flying the Albie is just tremendous fun and I personally grew weary of the Hog anyway a long time ago already. Now I'm not saying the L-39 should be anyone's first DCS purchase because fighting in it can indeed be hard, but it's a great AC for sheer stick-and-rudder work nevertheless; and some of us, like myself, just prefer low-tech stuff anyway.

 

Or in other words: yeah, it's a trainer, but not only :)

 

 

 

Exactly. Grew tired of the Hog's point-shoot-fire-forget-rinse-repeat method a long time ago already myself and much prefer getting up close and personal with the Albie now. YMMV, but at least consider getting it during a sale or something and see for yourselves.

Because Syria is a poor country. Theu have to make do with what they have. They still use mig21 and mig23mla for both a2a and a2g ffs. They use the l39 because that's the best they can already have and can afford for coin. And they have displayed dont care about collateral damage, so in that case PGM arent really #1 priority. ( dropping unguided bombs in urban centers)

With the A-10, despite having counter measures and MWS, MANPADS are not your concern. In most scenarios today you have air superiority, just drop precision munitions on them from 18.000 ft.

With the A-10, despite having counter measures and MWS, MANPADS are not your concern. In most scenarios today you have air superiority, just drop precision munitions on them from 18.000 ft.

Just because they have been used like that in iraq and Syria doesnt mean they always will be.

In close air support situation the certainly have provided gun runs below 10,000 feet when deployed in Afghanistan.

Against a war against any conventional forces they need to adapt to flying under the radar. Sure SEAD will deal with the long range threats but they wont guarantee all destruction of mobile tracked air defenses like the tunguska or sa15. Which are meant to cover mechanized units directly at the front lines.

As a virtual pilot you can fly how you want. Despite the high tech advantages nothing stopping you from using a10 as a dumb bomber or to use it s gun for low level strafing runs

Neither, consider the Su-25T perhaps? Simple but effective.

And it's free... bonus.

Both of you are right and this is a simulator:

Noone with a brain under the skull and being able to use both would prefer an l-39 over an a-10c for A-G IRL.

But we are in a simulator, and you can build your missions with whatever target and air defence you want.

In this setting trying to learn manual A-G procedures with a l-39 can be very rewarding (and can master your virtual flying skills as a side effect).

I have both a-10c and l-39. Sincerely, I've used only l-39c just for flying around since IMHO is one of the most beautiful plane to fly in DCS, but I've tried blind bombing with f-5 that has similar equipment than l-39za, and I can assure you that when you manage to hit a target just choosing the correct altitude and speed, set the gunsight correctly, dive with the correct angle and hit the release button at the right moment, that can be a lot more rewarding than precisely hit a tank with a targeting pod and LGB from 18000 ft (even if - for instance - a-10c is IMHO the best DCS module and I like it very much).