The Harrier is the perfect target for IR missiles. Although, the A-10with its huge, plainly sticking out engines is too, it can take the hits and go on unaffected, while the harrier would go down. AH-64s and AH-1Zs have a better chance, but still cant take as much fire as the A-10, and are helicopters, which are more vulnerable. Now with the PE upgrade, the A-10C can now use the JDAM, WCMD, etc. as well.
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Strike Aircraft Comparisons
Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
-
Originally posted by helloThe Harrier is the perfect target for IR missiles. Although, the A-10with its huge, plainly sticking out engines is too, it can take the hits and go on unaffected, while the harrier would go down. AH-64s and AH-1Zs have a better chance, but still cant take as much fire as the A-10, and are helicopters, which are more vulnerable. Now with the PE upgrade, the A-10C can now use the JDAM, WCMD, etc. as well.
Here's some pix of an A-10 that had a run-in with SAMs(as in more than one) and still made it back to base:
Port Stb. engine pod:
Fuselage damage:
Stab Damage:
Some other battledamaged A10s:
(there are literally dozens of such pix on the photos section of my website, www.a-10.org )
(There should be about a dozen BD'd A10s in this post, if they're not showing up now try back later or go right to the link i provided, for whatever reason they're not all displaying properly for me)Last edited by Bill; 14 Mar 06,, 15:11.
Comment
-
Originally posted by M21SniperYou know not what you say.
I will forgive your ignorance. You have never had the opportunity to witness for yourself what kind of adversary an A-10 is.
Even in exercizes, it becomes readily apparent the first time you face A-10s in armored vehicles that you are absolutely at their mercy.
On top of that the A-10s ability to withstand battle damage is the stuff of legend.
When used in it's element for it's intended role, the A-10 is one of the most efficient and dominant killing machines ever designed.
It's far preferable to not get hit in the first place, meaning don't fly low - the A-10's bread-n-butter.
What happens when it's raining with low cloud cover? Does the A-10 have a radar with a high-res SAR mode? No. Terrain following radar? No. Radar? No.
Does the A-10s go deep to hit strategic targets? Can it perform SEAD? Can it carry a recc pod? Does it carry any cruise missiles? Can it carry and use a BVR AAM? Anti-ship missiles? Can it carry nukes?
All no.
Gr4s can carry up to 18 Brimstone anti-tank missiles, so they're no slouches when it comes to killing armor.
The A-10 takes almost twice as long to get to the target and back, meaning fewer daily sorties and thus fewer aimpoints hit.
The A-10 is a CAS bird with limited interdiction capabilities.
OTOH, the Gr4 can do it all.Last edited by B.Smitty; 14 Mar 06,, 14:13.
Comment
-
Originally posted by B.SmittyThe A-10s ability to taking battle damage is overrated, IMHO. Even if it does limp home, it's going to spand days or weeks or longer being repaired, and every day it sits out is two or more sorties lost.
Originally posted by B.SmittyIt's far preferable to not get hit in the first place, meaning don't fly low - the A-10's bread-n-butter.
Originally posted by B.SmittyWhat happens when it's raining with low cloud cover? Does the A-10 have a radar with a high-res SAR mode? No. Terrain following radar? No. Radar? No.
Does the A-10s go deep to hit strategic targets? Can it perform SEAD? Can it carry a recc pod? Does it carry any cruise missiles? Can it carry and use a BVR AAM? Anti-ship missiles? Can it carry nukes?
All no.
Yes A10s perform SEAD. A10s have performed SEAD in COMBAT(used extensively in the role during ODS as a matter of fact).
Would you call "SCUD HUNTING" in W.Iraq 'going deep to hit a strategic target'? I would.
LASTE is a radar operated system. I bet you don't even know what it does though, lol. Because of LASTE the A-10 has the most accurate and most employable gun system of any fighter in the world.
Oh, btw....the A10 is(or at least was at one time) cleared for the B61 nuclear gravity bomb.
The Hog also performs FAC-A and CSAR too(and not just performs, but is almost TOTALLY ideal for those two roles). Should we hold it against the Tornado that it can't do either (anywhere near) as well as the Hog?
The topic is best strike aircraft. Shooting at ships is an entirely different kind of mission. Akin to saying the F15E is the better strike plane because it's a highly capable dual role A2A fighter as well.(BTW, in close and down low an A10 will outturn an F16C, and would run circles around a Tornado). I would not want to be on a ship shot full of A10 fired Mavericks and 30mm APDS rounds though. You?
If there's low cloud cover the A10 can simply fly under it. As you've seen, the A10 is fully capable of flying BELOW treetop level. :)
The A10C has all the latest passive sensor systems available.
There is simply no need for radar on a the Hog. The USAF operates the JSTARS, so if bad weather radar cueing is the order of the day, the A10 is still 100% mission capable even in zero visibility.
Originally posted by B.SmittyGr4s can carry up to 18 Brimstone anti-tank missiles, so they're no slouches when it comes to killing armor.
The A-10 is a CAS bird with limited interdiction capabilities. OTOH, the Gr4 can do it all.
The A-10 being low and slow has the ability to persist and put EYEBALLS on the actual target, making pass after pass to ensure that the target is destroyed or suppressed, even in the face of intense AAA and SAM fire.
As far as 'doing it all', perhaps you will point me to the Tornado IDS sqns with an air superiority misison. How about the Tornado Sqn with a FAC-A role. The Sqn with a CSAR role?
Oh......right.......they don't exist, becuase the Tornado can't 'do it all'.
Perhaps you can show me the pix of Tornados operating from rough unprepared forward airstrips like A10s routinely do?
LOL...
Can a Tornado give close escort to air assault forces like this A10 is doing?
No.
OA-10A providing close escort and defense suppression for MH-60 PavehawkLast edited by Bill; 14 Mar 06,, 15:07.
Comment
-
Originally posted by M21SniperLook at the pix above. LOL......A Tornado would've been toast. In fact, during ODS, the Tornado proved to be EXTREMELY vulnerable to ground fire, suffering the 2d highest loss rate of any type used in the war.
Originally posted by M21SniperThe hog is fully capable of medium-alt ops like every other US combat aircraft.
Originally posted by M21SniperYes A10s perform SEAD. A10s have performed SEAD in COMBAT(used extensively in the role during ODS as a matter of fact).
Originally posted by M21SniperWould you call "SCUD HUNTING" in W.Iraq 'going deep to hit a strategic target'? I would.
How many airfields did A-10s hit? How many bridges? Command and control targets?
Originally posted by M21SniperLASTE is a radar operated system. I bet you don't even know what it does though, lol. Because of LASTE the A-10 has the most accurate and most employable gun system of any fighter in the world.
Originally posted by M21SniperTrying to compare the CAS 'abilities'(cough, cough) of the Tornado IDS to the A-10 is LAUGHABLE.
The Gr4 has greater range and swing wings, so my guess is it's competitive with the A-10 for loiter performance, and it can get to and from the CAS orbit twice as fast as the A-10.
Brimstone is better than Maverick for tank plinking. It's all weather, is designed to do mutiple shots per pass, and you can carry more per pylon. How many Mavericks does an A-10 typically carry? 4-6? The normal Brimstone loadout on a Gr4 is 12.
The only thing the A-10 has is the gun. And if MANPADS are a threat, the gun is just worthless extra weight.
Originally posted by M21SniperThe A-10 being low and slow has the ability to persist and put EYEBALLS on the actual target, making pass after pass to ensure that the target is destroyed or suppressed, even in the face of intense AAA and SAM fire.
Originally posted by M21SniperAs far as 'doing it all', perhaps you will point me to the Tornado IDS sqns with an air superiority misison. How about the Tornado Sqn with a FAC-A role. The Sqn with a CSAR role?
Comment
-
Originally posted by B.SmittyThe Tornado losses in ODS were due to bad tactics. Strap a JP-233 to an A-10 and have it overfly a heavily defended airfield at a wheezy 340kts and see how many of them survive. At least the Tornado could whiz past at Mach 1+.
And the fact is that a lot of the hits that downed those Tornadoes would not have killed an A10.
If left to use tactics well suited to the A/C, an A-10 would be an extremely effective platform for shutting down airfield.
The problem with the IDS is the JP.233, which DEMANDED that attack profile be used. It wasn't a tactical issue at all, it was an EMPLOYMENT issue.
So the fact is that the weapon the IDS was DESIGNED AROUND leaves it very vulnerable to ground fire.(the old W.German MBB MW-1 had the same problem)
Originally posted by B.SmittyFully capable(of medium alt ops)? It's only now getting targetting pods. It still doesn't have a radar.
The A10 does not need a radar, the USAF operates JSTARS and the A10 has a datalink.
Originally posted by B.SmittySure, it can kill the odd ZSU-23, but does it carry an ARM? No.
The A10 has been used extensively in the SEAD role in REAL COMBAT.
Originally posted by B.SmittyI'd call Scud hunting a job that could've been done by a biz jet.
The A10s scud hunt ops were strategic deep strike missions by any reasonable definition of the term.
Originally posted by B.SmittyHow many airfields did A-10s hit? How many bridges? Command and control targets?
Originally posted by B.SmittyOh please. Can LASTE generate a SAR image?
Nothing that i can think of.
CAS sorties have almost nothing to do with having a radar anyway. They are visually cued/radio controlled missions.
Originally posted by B.SmittyDoes it allow an A-10 to fly a terrain following profile in any weather? Can it even detect airborne targets? No. LASTE is only useful for gun runs and dropping dumb ordinance.
So again, no need for radar.(Though the cancelled LANTIRN NAV pod would have given that capability anyway).
Originally posted by B.SmittyThe Gr4 has greater range and swing wings, so my guess is it's competitive with the A-10 for loiter performance, and it can get to and from the CAS orbit twice as fast as the A-10.
The A10 does not require as many man-hours of maintenance between sorties and operates much closer to the front because of it's rough field capabilities, so sortie rate actually HEAVILY favors the A10 over the Tornado.
The A10 can STAY in orbit about 5x longer than a tornado, and make about 4x the passes on a single tank of gas.
Originally posted by B.SmittyBrimstone is better than Maverick for tank plinking.
Originally posted by B.SmittyIt's all weather, is designed to do mutiple shots per pass, and you can carry more per pylon. How many Mavericks does an A-10 typically carry? 4-6? The normal Brimstone loadout on a Gr4 is 12.
It's also faster.
The Brimstone is a superior anti-armor munition only in your obviously deluded mind.
And you may have not realized it, but the A10s gun can load can typically kill 10-12 tanks on one ammo load(typical 2sec burst per tank), PLUS the A10s mav loadout(normally 4, but as many as 12), PLUS the 2 CBUs and 2 Mk82s the A10 typically carries.
For raw armored killing power the A10 has no fixed wing peer, period.
Originally posted by B.SmittyThe only thing the A-10 has is the gun. And if MANPADS are a threat, the gun is just worthless extra weight.
The fact is that in actual combat the A10 has proven nearly invulnerable to MANPADs(and even heavy SAM) fire.
Originally posted by B.SmittyNaked eyeballs on target is hugely overrated. Give me the second crewman and the targetting pod on the GR4, looking down from the safety of altitude any day.
Or is it based on nothing in particular besides the warm fuzzy the Tornado gives you when you look at it on a poster?
The FACT is that the Mk1 eyeball is the single most effective combat sensor ever devised.
Ask ANY military man on this board if you don't believe me.
You know you're the only guy i have ever run accross that has ever tried to even remotely compare the Tornado IDS to the A10 as a CAS asset.
LOL, i gotta say man, i'm pretty amazed you would go down this road. It's so obviously a dead end... ;)
Originally posted by B.SmittyThere's nothing stopping a GR4 from being used for FAC-A or CSAR, they just aren't.
LOL...Last edited by Bill; 14 Mar 06,, 15:47.
Comment
-
Originally posted by M21SniperI would say that low altitude front line CAS with a gun is every bit as dangerous(if not moreseo) than attacking airfields. Yet the A10 had a fraction of the loss rate of the Tornado.
When Tornados switched to medium altitude LGB strikes their losses went way down.
Originally posted by M21SniperAnd the fact is that a lot of the hits that downed those Tornadoes would not have killed an A10.
Originally posted by M21SniperIf left to use tactics well suited to the A/C, an A-10 would be an extremely effective platform for shutting down airfield.
Originally posted by M21SniperThe problem with the IDS is the JP.233, which DEMANDED that attack profile be used. It wasn't a tactical issue at all, it was an EMPLOYMENT issue.
So the fact is that the weapon the IDS was DESIGNED AROUND leaves it very vulnerable to ground fire.(the old W.German MBB MW-1 had the same problem)
Originally posted by M21SniperCommand and control..who knows? Airfields are not the A10s tasking. I suspect it hit exactly as many of each as it was asked to.
Originally posted by M21SniperWhy would i want that? A10 has a datalink to JSTARs. What does it need it's own radar for?
Originally posted by M21SniperCAS sorties have almost nothing to do with having a radar anyway. They are visually cued/radio controlled missions.
Originally posted by M21SniperThe A10 does not require as many man-hours of maintenance between sorties and operates much closer to the front because of it's rough field capabilities, so sortie rate actually HEAVILY favors the A10 over the Tornado.
Originally posted by M21SniperThe A10 can STAY in orbit about 5x longer than a tornado, and make about 4x the passes on a single tank of gas.
Originally posted by M21SniperThe Maverick is also all-weather, has double the range(at least- its probably closer to triple the range), and has a warhead 7-12x larger(165lb HEAT or 300lb Blast-Frag).
Originally posted by M21SniperIt's also faster.
Originally posted by M21SniperThe Brimstone is a superior anti-armor munition only in your obviously deluded mind.
Originally posted by M21SniperAnd you may have not realized it, but the A10s gun can load can typically kill 10-12 tanks on one ammo load(typical 2sec burst per tank), PLUS the A10s mav loadout(normally 4, but as many as 12), PLUS the 2 CBUs and 2 Mk82s the A10 typically carries.
Originally posted by M21SniperThe fact is that in actual combat the A10 has proven nearly invulnerable to MANPADs(and even heavy SAM) fire.
http://afhra.maxwell.af.mil/wwwroot/...s1990_2002.pdf
Table I: USAF Manned Aircraft Combat Losses 1990-2002
17 Jan 1991 F-15E AAA Night
19 Jan 1991 F-15E SA-2E Radar Night
19 Jan 1991 F-16C SA-6 Radar Day
19 Jan 1991 F-4G AAA Night
19 Jan 1991 F-16C SA-3 Radar Day
31 Jan 1991 AC-130H SA-16 Infrared Day
2 Feb 1991 A-10A SA-16 Infrared Day
13 Feb 1991 EF-111A (maneuver) Night
15 Feb 1991 A-10A SA-13 Infrared Day
15 Feb 1991 A-10A SA-13 Infrared Day
19 Feb 1991 OA-10 SA-9 Infrared Day
22 Feb 1991 A-10A SA-16 Infrared Day
27 Feb 1991 OA-10A SA-16 Infrared Day
27 Feb 1991 F-16C AAA Day
2 Jun 1995 F-16C SA-6 Radar Day
27 Mar 1999 F-117 SA-3 (Radar?) Night
2 May 1999 F-16CG SA-3 (Radar?) Night
So of the 17 USAF aircraft lost in that period, 6 were A-10s, all were downed by SAMs, half by MANPADS.
35% of USAF combat losses were A-10s.
Toss in another A-10 lost to a MANPADS in OIF.
I'd HARDLY call that invulnerable.
Originally posted by M21SniperYou know you're the only guy i have ever run accross that has ever tried to even remotely compare the Tornado IDS to the A10 as a CAS asset.
Originally posted by M21SniperThink it has anything to do with the the fact that they're ill-suited for the role?
Comment
-
Originally posted by M21SniperLook at the pix above. LOL......A Tornado would've been toast. In fact, during ODS, the Tornado proved to be EXTREMELY vulnerable to ground fire, suffering the 2d highest loss rate of any type used in the war.
The hog is fully capable of medium-alt ops like every other US combat aircraft.
LOL. wow, i have hardly seen you be so wrong on so many things all at once.
Yes A10s perform SEAD. A10s have performed SEAD in COMBAT(used extensively in the role during ODS as a matter of fact).
Would you call "SCUD HUNTING" in W.Iraq 'going deep to hit a strategic target'? I would.
LASTE is a radar operated system. I bet you don't even know what it does though, lol. Because of LASTE the A-10 has the most accurate and most employable gun system of any fighter in the world.
Oh, btw....the A10 is(or at least was at one time) cleared for the B61 nuclear gravity bomb.
The Hog also performs FAC-A and CSAR too(and not just performs, but is almost TOTALLY ideal for those two roles). Should we hold it against the Tornado that it can't do either (anywhere near) as well as the Hog?
The topic is best strike aircraft. Shooting at ships is an entirely different kind of mission. Akin to saying the F15E is the better strike plane because it's a highly capable dual role A2A fighter as well.(BTW, in close and down low an A10 will outturn an F16C, and would run circles around a Tornado). I would not want to be on a ship shot full of A10 fired Mavericks and 30mm APDS rounds though. You?
If there's low cloud cover the A10 can simply fly under it. As you've seen, the A10 is fully capable of flying BELOW treetop level. :)
The A10C has all the latest passive sensor systems available.
There is simply no need for radar on a the Hog. The USAF operates the JSTARS, so if bad weather radar cueing is the order of the day, the A10 is still 100% mission capable even in zero visibility.
Trying to compare the CAS 'abilities'(cough, cough) of the Tornado IDS to the A-10 is LAUGHABLE.
The A-10 being low and slow has the ability to persist and put EYEBALLS on the actual target, making pass after pass to ensure that the target is destroyed or suppressed, even in the face of intense AAA and SAM fire.
As far as 'doing it all', perhaps you will point me to the Tornado IDS sqns with an air superiority misison. How about the Tornado Sqn with a FAC-A role. The Sqn with a CSAR role?
Oh......right.......they don't exist, becuase the Tornado can't 'do it all'.
Perhaps you can show me the pix of Tornados operating from rough unprepared forward airstrips like A10s routinely do?
LOL...
Can a Tornado give close escort to air assault forces like this A10 is doing?
No.
OA-10A providing close escort and defense suppression for MH-60 Pavehawk
lol yeah but one problem.....its flown by american pilots wouldnt trust them to have 'fixed eyes' as u put it on me..! lol
bad enough enemy trying to kill me....let alon having blue on blue by the yanks..! lol
Comment
-
Originally posted by B.SmittyHmm. I'd have to disagree with you there. In most cases, front-line CAS areas have already been worked over by a LOT more strike sorties than the airfields hit by Tornados.
Originally posted by B.SmittyPlus, CAS means the enemy is in contact with friendly ground forces, so they're probably a wee-bit distracted.
The reason i bring that up is to illustrate the point that when a CAS aircraft begins attacking ground targets the vast majority of the time it will be the enemy ground forces main focus of fire.
Originally posted by B.SmittyWhen Tornados switched to medium altitude LGB strikes their losses went way down.
Originally posted by B.SmittyMaybe, maybe not. At 340kts, an A-10 would've been under fire for a LOT longer.
For pointy nosed jets they take such a huge turning radius to get back on target that it obviously is going to take more time per run. The A10 is also FAR better suited to taking advantadge of terrain masking than the Tornado.
Originally posted by B.SmittyExcept for the fact that it takes so freakin long to get there and back.
Originally posted by B.SmittyYes, however the Brits recognized the foolishness of this approach and switched Tornados to med-altitude LGB strikes. It's a fault of the munition, not the aircraft.
Originally posted by B.SmittyFor the same reason EVERY other significant strike aircraft has one, because JSTARS can't be everywhere.
Because radars are irrelevant to CAS, and the A-10 was specifically designed to fill that(as well as the battlefield interdiction) role.
One simply does not make a radar-only drop in close proximity to friendly forces. It is just not done.
In the rationale of the USAF a radar would've simply been waste of valuable internal space, as well as greatly complicating the design(ie $$$$$). For CAS i agree, but for tactical battlefield interdiction i did not.
However, now that JSTARs(and Longbow Apache) is on the scene, a radar is absolutely unneccesary for the A10.(And i have to point out that JSTARs actually does cover a massive area of the battlefield)
Originally posted by B.SmittyBecause it can't generate high-res SAR images for every strike sortie.
Originally posted by B.SmittyBecause IR goggles and FLIR aren't good enough to safely fly a terrain following profile in real bad weather.
If the weather is that bad that a Sniper pod A-10 can't function(and that is BAD), then there isn't going to be anything in the way of ground combat ops going on either in almost all cases.
Originally posted by B.SmittyYes, but this is the best STRIKE aircraft, not the best CAS aircraft. CAS is just one type of strike mission.
Originally posted by B.SmittyYou don't always have forward airfields.
Originally posted by B.SmittyAnd the A-10 actually requires a LONGER runway than an F-teen or Tornado.
Originally posted by B.SmittyDo you have a source to back that(A-10 loiter time) up?
Feel free to take it up with the real experts:
http://forum.a-10.org/
Originally posted by B.SmittyMavericks carried by A-10s are normally IIR right?
Originally posted by B.SmittyIIR has issues in bad weather. Brimstone uses a MMW seeker, which doesn't.
And let me ask you a question you've obviously put no thought into.
What does a Tornado armed with all those radar guided brimstones do when the target is a grid square(which is the vast majority of the time), not a vehicle? I would call that a MAJOR drawback of the radar guided brimstone(and longbow hellfire).
You see, it's always a matter of compromises with these things.
I would of course add that intergrating longbow hellifre(and even a longbow radar pod such as that used on the AH-1Z) into the Hog would be no real feat if someone wanted to. Apparently no one in power thinks it's worth the effort.
Originally posted by B.SmittyWho cares? IIR Mavericks and Brimstones are fire-and-forget, so what does it matter if it takes a tad bit longer for the Brimstone to hit its target?
Originally posted by B.SmittyCan IIR Mavericks be launched indirectly, without the aircraft first seeing the target? No.
Originally posted by B.SmittyCan an A-10 launch all of it's Mavericks in a single salvo?.
Originally posted by B.SmittyA Gr4 with Brimstones can do both.
Originally posted by B.SmittyThat's 12-18 shots in a single pass.
Originally posted by B.SmittySure, in a benign environment, the gun is a good thing. But add a significant MANPADs threat, and its value rapidly diminishes.
Originally posted by B.SmittyInvulnerable?
Any objective study of the a-10s combat record will bear out that statement.
Originally posted by B.Smittyhttp://afhra.maxwell.af.mil/wwwroot/...s1990_2002.pdf
Table I: USAF Manned Aircraft Combat Losses 1990-2002
2 Feb 1991 A-10A SA-16 Infrared Day
15 Feb 1991 A-10A SA-13 Infrared Day
15 Feb 1991 A-10A SA-13 Infrared Day
19 Feb 1991 OA-10 SA-9 Infrared Day
22 Feb 1991 A-10A SA-16 Infrared Day
27 Feb 1991 OA-10A SA-16 Infrared Day
So of the 17 USAF aircraft lost in that period, 6 were A-10s, all were downed by SAMs, half by MANPADS.
Originally posted by B.Smitty35% of USAF combat losses were A-10s.
Originally posted by B.SmittyI'd HARDLY call that invulnerable.
That is just a fact.
Originally posted by B.SmittyI'm saying the Tornado has SIGNIFICANT CAS capabilities.
Originally posted by B.SmittyOTOH, the A-10 is wanting as a general-purpose strike aircraft. The USAF recognizes this, and uses F-15Es and F-16s for these jobs instead.
Every role that's been thrust upon it has been handled quite nicely by the Hog.
- CAS
- Anti-Armor
- Precision Strike
- FAC-A
- CSAR
- Gunship Escort
- SEAD
- Tactical battlefield interdiction(which btw is the Tornado IDS's real strength)
- Counterbattery
The A-10 has done ALL of those missions in combat, and done them all quite well.
Your statement is therefore completely erroneous. The A-10 is an excellent all around strike aircraft.
It's also done deep strategic strike, but even i will agree that it is way out of it's element there. It still can do it, just not particularly well.
Both the Tornado IDS and the A10 do many things well. But the A10 utterly dominates in a couple of mission roles, whereas the Tornado dominates in no mission role.
To me, the A10 is the best plane on that list.Last edited by Bill; 14 Mar 06,, 18:36.
Comment
-
Originally posted by M21SniperNot neccisarily. In many cases(such as on the defensive or in a meeting engagement) the enemy force may not have been hit at all.
Originally posted by M21SniperNot neccesarily. The A10 can turn around and put its nose on target between runs much faster. At low altitude an A10 can outturn any fixed wing bird in the US/NATO inventory but the F22.
Turning back into the target after the first pass, after the waking up the defenses, would've been an extremely bad idea.
A-10s aren't going to outturn a missile or or AAA and making sharp turns just bleeds airspeed and leaves it hanging over the target.
I stand by my original assertion - A-10s doing JP233 runs over the targets hit by Tornados would've fared worse.
Originally posted by M21SniperThat is more than balanced by the fact that it takes a lot less time to turn an A-10 around, and it is generally going to be a lot closer to the front.
Originally posted by M21SniperJust be thankful the IDS never had to operate over Europe against the WP and employ the JP.233. The entire IDS force might've been wiped out in a matter of a couple days were that the case.
Originally posted by M21SniperBecause radars are irrelevant to CAS, and the A-10 was specifically designed to fill that(as well as the battlefield interdiction) role.
Originally posted by M21SniperWho cares? With a 10 digit grid and JDAM or WCM/CBU(wind corrected dispenser cluster bomb, i cant remember the actual acronym, sorry) it doesn't even need to see the target anymore.
Originally posted by M21SniperIf the weather is that bad that a Sniper pod A-10 can't function(and that is BAD), then there isn't going to be anything in the way of ground combat ops going on either in almost all cases.
Originally posted by M21SniperYep, and we have to look at how each is fought, and how it is used as part of a team. With the full support of the USAF(JSTARs, EA-6, U-2, F-15C, etc, etc) an A-10 in USAF service is simply a more effective overall performer than a Tornado operating as part of a UK only force.
Sorry, didn't realize that was part of the original question. I thought we were just talking about the aircraft themselves.
Originally posted by M21SniperIn the last five military campaigns the US has fought the early siezure of FOBs has been a key campaign goal in all of them.(OSF, OJC, ODS, OEF, OIF).
And how many strike sorties took place BEFORE those FOBs were taken?
Originally posted by M21SniperA MMW radar which can be jammed AND tracked.
Originally posted by M21SniperWhat does a Tornado armed with all those radar guided brimstones do when the target is a grid square(which is the vast majority of the time), not a vehicle? I would call that a MAJOR drawback of the radar guided brimstone(and longbow hellfire).
You realize Tornados can carry other munitions, right?
Originally posted by M21SniperDid you not bring up antishipping missions? The faster the missile, the more likely it is to get through.
Brimstone speed - up to mach 1.3 to 1.5 - 1600km/h to 1800km/h
Originally posted by M21SniperNope. But then, an IIR mav can't be jammed either, and an IIR mav doesnt tell the enemy you're coming either.
Originally posted by M21SniperDont believe the hype. Manufacturers sales brochure claims like that rarely live up to the test of reality. I am sure that in a perfect test environment a Tornado can do exactly what they claim, just as i am equally sure that in real combat the opportunity to do so will almost NEVER occur.
Originally posted by M21SniperI seem to recall using a qualifer. Ie, "Virtually invulnerable".
6 aircraft shot down by SAMs in ODS hardly qualifies them to use the term "invulnerable".
The F-117 is "nearly invulnerable". The A-10 is not.
Comment
-
Originally posted by B.SmittyNaked eyeballs on target is hugely overrated. Give me the second crewman and the targetting pod on the GR4, looking down from the safety of altitude any day.
Confirmed A-10 kills in ODS:
Tanks 987
Artillery 926
APCs 501
Trucks 1,106
Command Vehicles 249
Military Structures 112
Radars 96
Helicopters (Air to Air) 2
Bunkers 72
Scud Missiles 51
Anti-Aircraft Artillery 50
Command Post 28
Frog Missiles 11
SAMs 9
Fuel Tanks 8
Fighters (Air to Ground) 10Last edited by Jimmy; 14 Mar 06,, 19:50.
Comment
-
Originally posted by B.SmittyTurning back into the target after the first pass, after the waking up the defenses, would've been an extremely bad idea.
It's what Hogs do.
Originally posted by B.SmittyA-10s aren't going to outturn a missile or or AAA and making sharp turns just bleeds airspeed and leaves it hanging over the target.
Seriously, you should go to my board and talk to some of the A10 pilots. Almost all of them have fought in real battle, most in 3 wars, and they would happily give you a real education, cause you are way the hell off in left field.
Originally posted by B.SmittyDo you have any data to back that first part up? What's the average turn around time for an A-10? Tornado?
http://forum.a-10.org/
Ask.
Originally posted by B.SmittyDo you always have a 10 digit grid?
Originally posted by B.SmittyBut strike sorties still fly even in this type of weather(in conditions so bad even the vehicles are not moving).
The A10 is as all weather as the next plane when it's operating as part of the USAF team.
Originally posted by B.SmittyAh, ok, so now you're saying the A-10 needs the rest of the USAF to be a better strike aircraft than the Tornado in UK service.
Sorry, didn't realize that was part of the original question. I thought we were just talking about the aircraft themselves.
Part of the reason the A10C didnt include any radar was because its pretty much unneccesary nowadays with JTIDS, JSTARS, and all the other high tech acronyms we got. ;)
Originally posted by B.SmittyYou forgot OAF, where no forward bases were siezed.
Originally posted by B.SmittyAnd how many strike sorties took place BEFORE those FOBs were taken?
Originally posted by B.SmittyIIR munitions can be jammed as well.
Originally posted by B.SmittyWhat's an A-10 with a load of IIR Mavericks going to do?(if the target is not vehicles)
Originally posted by B.SmittyYou realize Tornados can carry other munitions, right?
I assure you that a Tornado IDS with 12 brimstones will not have much else in the way of ordnance aboard. That pretty much leaves the gun if the target is not something the Brimmies can lock on to(which would most often be the case).
Originally posted by B.SmittyMaverick speed - 1150km/hr
Brimstone speed - up to mach 1.3 to 1.5 - 1600km/h to 1800km/h
Originally posted by B.SmittyWhere'd you get the idea that IIR can't be jammed or countered? We've been doing it for years against IIR guided SAMs.
Tanks cannot jam Maverick IIR missiles any more than they can jam Javelin IIR missiles.
Originally posted by B.SmittyWell, in this day and age, it seems less likely that either will face massed armor formations.
[QUOTE=B.Smitty]Acutally, the exact statement was, "The fact is that in actual combat the A10 has proven nearly invulnerable to MANPADs(and even heavy SAM) fire."
Originally posted by B.Smitty6 aircraft shot down by SAMs in ODS hardly qualifies them to use the term "invulnerable".
The F-117 is "nearly invulnerable". The A-10 is not.
Considering how many hits theyve taken in combat, and how many of them have made it home, and how many of those have returned to combat in a matter of days, i feel the term "nearly invulnerable" is appropriate.
A battleship is 'nearly invulnerable' too, but they still get sunk if you pound them enough... ;)Last edited by Bill; 14 Mar 06,, 20:39.
Comment
-
Originally posted by JimmyAs the man said, you know not of what you speak. The people on the ground whose lives depend on CAS, and who do the BDA, disagree with you. I talked to an ALO just 2 days ago, and the A-10 is the master of battlefield support from the air.
Confirmed A-10 kills in ODS:
Tanks 987
Artillery 926
APCs 501
Trucks 1,106
Command Vehicles 249
Military Structures 112
Radars 96
Helicopters (Air to Air) 2
Bunkers 72
Scud Missiles 51
Anti-Aircraft Artillery 50
Command Post 28
Frog Missiles 11
SAMs 9
Fuel Tanks 8
Fighters (Air to Ground) 10
Heh, that's quite a list Jimmy. :)
Last edited by Bill; 14 Mar 06,, 20:43.
Comment
-
Originally posted by M21SniperThat's what Hogs do. It's how they make their living. They get in close, low and slow, and root out the enemy making pass after pass until nothing is left alive or they're out of bullets.
It's what Hogs do.
Originally posted by M21Sniper
Originally posted by M21SniperThe A10 does not require as many man-hours of maintenance between sorties and operates much closer to the front because of it's rough field capabilities, so sortie rate actually HEAVILY favors the A10 over the Tornado.
Originally posted by M21SniperThe A10 can STAY in orbit about 5x longer than a tornado, and make about 4x the passes on a single tank of gas.
I don't think so. You made the assertion, you find the evidence.
BTW, Tornados don't have thrust reversers for nothing. They were designed with short and rough field capabilities in mind. And I'm guessing, with swing wings, a higher Th/Wt, and thrust reversers, a Tornado can takeoff and land with a larger warload and carry it further, faster than an A-10 from a short runway.
Originally posted by M21SniperThe A10 is as all weather as the next plane when it's operating as part of the USAF team.
Originally posted by M21SniperWell you have to look at how they're used and supported in the real world. It's not like the two planes just exist in a vacuum.
The quesiton wasn't, "What air force flying X aircraft is the superior striker?"
Jaguars, Mig-27 and Mirage V are used by many nations. Which nation do we choose to represent their team capability?
Originally posted by M21SniperNot by tanks. Aint nothing in a US or Soviet Mech inf or Armor company that can jam an IIR maverick. Least nothing that i know of.
Your original assertion was that Brimstone can be jammed, making them inferior to IIR Mavericks. By what?
Originally posted by M21SniperI realize they carry a lot less than the A10. And i also realize you're the one that brought up packing 12 brimstones.
Or did you mean they carry less variety?
Tornado IDSs can carry dumb bombs, Brimstones, Mavericks, Storm Shadows, Taurus, Apache, cluster bombs, Enhanced Paveway IIs and IIIs (combo GPS/INS/SALH), ALARM, HARM, Kormoran AShMs, Nukes, Sidewinders, plus JP233 and MW-1.
Sounds like a greater variety than what A-10s carry to me.
Originally posted by M21SniperTanks do not have chaff/flare dispensers. Tanks are also much slower, much less agile, and generally much hotter targets.
Tanks cannot jam Maverick IIR missiles any more than they can jam Javelin IIR missiles.
Comment
Comment