No announcement yet.

Random Thoughts on the Mighty Hog - Part 2

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • From RIA Novosti :

    Russia to keep upgraded Su-25 strike aircraft until 2020
    16:34 | 20/10/2008

    MOSCOW, October 20 (RIA Novosti) - Russia will keep a modernized version of its Su-25 strike aircraft in service with the Air Force until 2020, an aircraft industry official said on Monday.

    The Su-25 Frogfoot is a single-seat, twin-engine combat aircraft developed by the Sukhoi Design Bureau to provide close air support for ground troops.

    "Considering the fact that Russia is not planning to develop a new strike aircraft in the near future, we will continue to upgrade outdated Su-25s into a modernized version, Su-25SM, until 2020," said Yakov Kazhdan, general director of an aircraft maintenance and repair plant in the Moscow Region.

    The Su-25 aircraft has been in service with the Russian Air Force for more than 25 years. In 1999, Russia adopted a program to upgrade part of its aging Su-25 fleet. The Air Force received the first six modernized Su-25SM planes in December 2006.

    The Su-25SM version features the Panther fire-control system with the Kopyo-25 radar in a rebuilt nose and the Glonass satellite navigation system. It also has a redesigned cockpit with a new HUD and two large color LCD monitors.

    "Thanks to thorough modernization, the combat capabilities of the aircraft have increased threefold," Kazhdan said.

    The Su-25SM can carry more than 4,000 kilograms (8,800 pounds) of weaponry, including R-73M2 (AA-11 Archer) short-range air-to-air missiles and can provide close infantry support regardless of weather conditions or time of day.

    The Russian Air Force is planning to equip at least two air regiments with Su-25SM planes in the future.



    • Su-25TM

      The frog prince

      Sukhoi spawns another variant of its Su-25 Frogfoot, despite its near-demise following the collapse of the USSR

      by Alexander Velovich / MOSCOW
      SOURCE:Flight International

      WHEN the SUKHOI DESIGN bureau's project to upgrade its Su-25 Frogfoot design stopped, following the collapse of the Soviet Union, the programme appeared to be going the same way as many other air force developments - nowhere.

      This has not proved to be the end of the line for the Frogfoot, however. The Russian air force's frontal-aviation ground-attack units still need an all-weather attack aircraft, fulfilling the roles carried out by the Sukhoi Su-17 Fitter and Mikoyan MiG-27 Flogger.

      Sukhoi, with funding from the air force, followed the T-8M with work on the T-8TM. (The Su-25TM, now referred to as the Su-39, was previously known as the Su-34. The Su-34 designation is now given to the Su-27IB strike variant of the Flanker.) Beyond the impish sense of humour exhibited by Sukhoi chief Mikhail Simonov, the numerical designator reveals little. The aircraft will be given an "official" Sukhoi number only if, and when, it enters air force service.

      The T-8TM modification, is intended to further advance the Frogfoot's modernisation, by providing a day/night, all-weather, attack capability, using radar and imaging infra-red (IIR) sensors, as well as incorporating new air-to-surface and air-to-air weapons.

      Sukhoi chief designer Vladimir Babak is confident that the air force will continue to support the Su-25TM. "We have modest financial needs because we had completed the bulk of the flight tests before money became a problem [on the Su-25T], and everybody was working at full strength," he says.

      The Su-25T development effort seems to have focused on improving the basic Frogfoot's ground-attack capability, with a dedicated anti-armour system through the Shkval (Squall) nose-mounted television-sighting system and the Vikhr (Whirlwind) laser-guided anti-tank missile.

      Sensor pods, intended to improve the aircraft's all-weather capability, were included as part of the programme, but development of some of the sensor equipment encountered difficulties. Only the Mercury low-light-level TV pod was successfully produced.

      A pod mounted 8mm-band radar, developed by Leninets in St Petersburg, and an imaging-infra-red pod were also under development. The IIR pod has been referred to as Khod in some Polish publications.

      The Mercury pod works by using electronic enhancement of a TV picture, allowing identification of a bridge-sized structure in a clear, almost moonless, night at 6-8km (3-4nm) or a boat at 6-7km, while a tank can be identified at a range of 3km. This performance is said to be adequate, in providing a 24h attack capability, against some classes of targets, with guided and unguided weapons.

      The Su-25T was marketed with the Mercury pod when it was first shown at an international air show in Dubai in 1991.

      Experiments with the IIR system proved to be less successful. Babak says that its performance depended largely on atmospheric humidity, but it did not meet specification, so development efforts were dropped.

      Babak claims that Sukhoi has finally found an indigenous Russian manufacturer of an IIR system based on new-generation components, and a system meeting the requirements is promised to be ready for flight tests in 1997.

      He reveals that the fate of the 8mm-waveband radar was also determined by the collapse of the Soviet Union because the manufacturers of its major components are based in Ukraine, and the Russian air force felt that it "...could not proceed with development with a foreign component-supplier". St Petersburg-based Leninets said at the time of the Soviet collapse that it would take another two years to develop a system from Russian-built components. Babak estimated that, even with a new digital computer and new software, it would take at least four or five years to develop.

      Sukhoi needed a quicker solution and so approached Russian radar manufacturer Phazotron, which was developing the Kopyo (Spear) radar for Mikoyan MiG-21 Fishbed upgrades.

      The Kopyo could provide an all-weather attack capability with a set of mapping modes, including Doppler beam-sharpening to 0.45° (1:10) and synthetic-aperture radar (SAR). In the SAR mode, with a resolution of 30 x 30m in azimuth the mapping range provided is several dozen kilometres. A group of tanks can be detected at 25km and a port crane or a dock at around 100km.

      An important addition is the capability to detect naval targets such as missile boats (at 75km) and destroyers at the maximum range of 200km - in the latter case the range is limited mostly by the radar horizon.

      The radar is mounted in a pod on the fuselage centreline station. It has a 500mm-diameter flat antenna with scan of +40° in azimuth and +20° to -60° in elevation.

      Babak says that four sets of Kopyo radars have been produced: one for the test stand at Moscow's GosNIIAS avionics and weapons-integration research institute, two destined for the MiG-21 upgrade and one which is being fitted into a container developed for the Su-25TM.


      Flight tests of the pod-mounted Kopyo will begin in May. Phazotron chief designer Yuriy Guskov believes that these will not take long, as the design incorporates components, technology and software already proven in the N-010 Zhuk radar developed and tested for the MiG-29M.

      The Kopyo, is a radar developed for a multi-purpose fighter, and it brings a new dimension of air-to-air and anti-ship utility, to the Su-25TM. Detection range for a fighter-size target is 57km in head-on conditions and 25km in tail-on circumstances. Multiple-target track-while-scan mode and a load of four Vympel R-77 (AA-12 Adder) active-radar air-to-air missiles (AAM) would provide the Su-25TM with considerable anti-aircraft capability.

      A pair of extended-range Vympel R-27ER (AA-10 Alamo) semi-active AAMs may help the aircraft to win a duel by offering higher average speed and longer engagement range than that of standard Western Hughes/ Raytheon AIM-7 Sparrow medium-range missiles. Four R-27R missiles may also be carried under the Su-25TM's wing.

      For close-range engagements, the Su-25TM may carry a pair of infra-red-guided Vympel R-73s (AA-11 Archers) or Molniya R-60s (AA-8 Aphids).

      At 5,000ft (1,500m) and 250kt (460km/h) indicated airspeed the Su-25TM, even with a 1.5t bomb load and 50% of fuel reserves, has a turn radius of 570m, making it a slippery foe in a turning fight. Naval pilots flying the Su-27K (Flanker D) have gained experience of the Frogfoot's turning ability in dissimilar combat exercises against Su-25UTG naval trainers.

      Integration of the Kopyo radar will also enable the Zhvezda Kh-31A (AS-17 Krypton) and Kh-35 (AS-X-20 Kayak) anti-ship missiles to be employed. Both weapons have active-radar seekers and carry 90kg and 145kg warheads, respectively. While the ramjet-powered Kh-31A offers a higher average speed of 1,360-1,550kt (2,500-2,900km/h) and a range of 50km, the turbofan-powered Kh-35A can be launched at 130km range, but has a subsonic speed of 470-520kt.

      After production of the Su-25 in Tbilisi, Georgia, had stopped, Sukhoi arranged co-operation with the Ulan-Ude plant in Siberia. In 1995, the first Su-25TM assembled there was exhibited at the Moscow International Air Show. This year, another two or three aircraft will join the flight test programme.

      The Su-25TM builds on the considerable work put into the Su-25T programme. Flight tests of the Su-25T (T for tank-killer) began as far back as 1984. Combat experience gained in missions over Afghanistan prompted several design refinements. The first was to enhance combat survivability. To complement the polyurethane foam in the fuel tanks, adjacent fuselage compartments were filled with elastic porous filler. This outside filler was intended to prevent the impulse splash of fuel out of the tanks if hit by a bullet or shell.

      A gap between the fuel tanks and air intakes was also introduced, to reduce the possibility of fuel getting into the engine inlets following combat damage. The central part of the fuselage was strengthened and, in addition to a cockpit welded from titanium plates, more armour was added to protect the avionics bay, fuel-feed tank and fuel pipes.

      The design modifications, which were intended to improve the aircraft's combat survivability, accounted for 7.5% of the standard take-off weight. The weight increase is justified by the design bureau's view that it enhances the aircraft's survivability by a factor of four to six.

      This latter figure has been proved, not only by tests and modeling but by combat experience, claims Babak. The aircraft is intended to be able to be flown after having been hit by a burst of cannon shells, or a Stinger shoulder-launched surface-to-air missile.

      The Su-25T was developed from the two-seat Su-25UB trainer airframe, substituting the rear cockpit with another equipment compartment and adding 1,000kg of fuel capacity in the central fuselage tank. The four inner-wing pylons are wet and can accommodate 800litres of fuel or 1,150litres in external fuel tanks.

      Low-altitude combat-mission radius, with a standard bomb load of 2t, is 400km. At cruise altitude, the mission radius with the same bomb load is increased to 630km.

      To compensate for the increase of 2t in maximum take-off weight, the R-195Sh engines were up-rated by 10%, to 44kN (9,900lb) thrust each. The take-off run and landing roll, even on unpaved airstrips (for which the Su-25T is fully cleared), do not exceed 600-700m.

      While a Su-25 pilot, can use only his own "MkI Eyeball" for detecting and identifying a target, the Su-25T was designed to have the Shkval TV-sighting system with a 10° field of view and 23x magnification. The Shkval I-251 was developed by Krasnogorsk OMZ, a manufacturer of Zenit cameras. Images from the scanning optical head are displayed on the IT-23VM cathode-ray tube in the right upper corner of the instrument panel.

      On average, the Shkval offers a threefold increase in identification range of ground targets, compared with pure visual conditions. A house can be identified at 15km range, a tank at 8-10km and an Apache-class helicopter at 6km. An automatic image-correlator ensures tracking of a target against ground, sea or sky background. The optical system has three-axis stabilisation and tracking angles of +15° to -80° in elevation and +35° in azimuth. A laser-range finder/designator follows the target with a laser beam through the same optical system, providing range for weapon firing and target-illumination missile guidance.

      According to Babak, automatic procedures for attacking a target illuminated by laser from a ground-based fire controller have been developed, tested and proved to be very efficient. A portable laser illuminator, compatible with the Shkval has been developed by NPO Polyus, the leading Russian laser manufacturer.

      The major weapon for the Su-25T is the Vikhr laser-guided beam-riding anti-tank missile. Two loads of eight missiles, are normally intended to be carried. Vikhr engagements start from a range of 8-10km, allowing several targets to be designated in a single pass. The missile's tandem warhead is designed to defeat 1,000mm of armour.


      Although the Su-25T can carry and use ordinary semi-active laser-guided missiles such as the Zhvezda Kh-25ML (AS-10 Karen), Molniya Kh-29L (AS-14 Kedge) and S-25L guided rocket against hardened targets, the Vikhr is more effective in engaging armour.

      The Vikhr missile can also be used to engage helicopters and aircraft. During tests, the missiles proved to be capable of destroying even a Tupolev Tu-16 Badger drone.

      Su-25T navigation consists of an air-data system; twin inertial-navigation systems; the A-312 RSBN radio-navigation system, combining TACAN and instrument-landing system functions; the A-723 long-range radio-navigation Loran/Omega system; ShO-13A Doppler ground-speed sensor; and RV-21 radar altimeter.

      For the Su-25TM, it is planned to add a satellite-navigation system, further improving accuracy of the navigation system to some 10m from the current 100m.

      To reduce pilot workload, the auto-pilot has several modes of automatic trajectory-control, providing altitude and heading stabilisation, automatic route navigation through programmed way-points and approach to target area, repeated approach to a designated target and automatic landing.

      Considerable work also went into improving the aircraft's defensive aids. Babak says that the highest priority was put on countering the threat from portable surface-to-air missiles such as the US Stinger or Russian Strela and Igla.

      The aircraft has an UV-26 dispenser with 192 chaff or flare cartridges, but even this stock of flares can protect the aircraft only for a limited time. In addition, the aircraft has an electro-optical jammer at the base of its fin.

      The jammer is based on a powerful cesium lamp, which has an energy consumption of 6kW and creates amplitude-modulated infra-red emissions for use as a decoy. To improve the jammer's operational effectiveness, attempts were made to reduce the aircraft's infra-red signature by a factor of three to four.

      Additional air intakes were added on the upper surface of the aft section of the engine nacelles, ducting cool air to the nozzles, reducing their temperature threefold.

      A circular centrebody was introduced in the engine nozzle, to shade the turbine blades and reduce the infra-red signature even more. Babak says that the price paid for these is not high, raising fuel consumption by only 2-3%, while the result is extremely effective.

      The radar-warning receiver (RWR) on the Su-25T is a new design with digital signal processing. It covers the 1.2-18GHz waveband, with +30° elevation and 360° azimuth coverage. When analysing radar threats, the RWR indicates their priority and advises a pilot on defensive manoeuvres. The RWR is also used for cueing the seekers of anti-radiation Raduga Kh-58 (AS -11 Kilter) missiles, four of which can be carried. This allows the Su-25T to be used in the defence-suppression role, as well.

      A pod-mounted active-radar jammer may also be carried under the outer wing pylons covering +60° in azimuth forward and rearward and +30 in elevation. A wide variety of jamming techniques includes high-frequency noise, and spurious range signals can be generated .

      Export opportunities for the Su-25TM are related mostly to those countries, which already operate Russian-built aircraft. The Su-25 has been exported to Bulgaria, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Iraq and North Korea.

      Priced at about $15 million, the Su-25TM presents a highly cost-competitive attack aircraft - on paper, at least. It remains to be seen whether Sukhoi can replicate its recent export successes with the Su-27 Flanker with its uglier sibling.

      Additional reporting by Douglas Barrie



      • A-10c + ljdam

        From :

        The "Hog" drops in on history
        by Master Sgt. Joy Josephson
        46th Test Wing

        11/14/2008 - EGLIN AIR FORCE BASE, Fla. (AFNS) -- The A-10 Thunderbolt II, nicknamed the Warthog and known for its close-air support superiority and the ability to carry large and varied ordnance, is now on its way to delivering a new capability to the warfighter.

        A pilot from the 40th Flight Test Squadron at Eglin Air Force Base, Fla., with support from people with the 46th Test Wing, Boeing and a host of other units, flew a quick yet historic mission early in November. For the first time, a guided bomb unit-54, the Laser Joint Direct Attack Munition, or LJDAM, was dropped from an A-10C.

        "There is a strong need to destroy moving targets in the AOR," said Capt. Kirt Cassell, the lead A-10C flight test engineer. "The Laser JDAM has shown to be very effective at destroying moving targets on other (aircraft) and Air Combat Command (officials) wanted to bring that capability to the A-10C for an upcoming deployment."

        Captain Cassell and team members from the 40th FTS began planning this test mission in early October. That's a short timeline for a test mission, according to Captain Cassell. Plus, the team was challenged with ensuring the LJDAM worked correctly. To do this, the plan was to drop the bomb on a GPS target and then lase the weapon to another target downrange.

        "The test was very successful!" Captain Cassell said. "The weapon functioned properly and released successfully, impacting the target almost exactly where the laser spot was located. We were able to demonstrate that the GBU-54 can successfully be integrated and dropped from the A-10C."

        Maj. Matthew Domsalla piloted the historic mission. He's been flying the A-10 for more than eight years and knows that this added capability will make the A-10C even more lethal and more valuable to warfighters needing some firepower assistance.

        "The LJDAM provides the pilot the ability to update the targeting if the target moves while the weapon is in flight," he said.

        The A-10C has already demonstrated tremendous capability in supporting the war on terrorism. According to Lt. Col. Evan Dertien, the 40th Flight Test Squadron commander, putting this bomb on the aircraft "will give the A-10 an outstanding precision targeting capability that will help the Air Force continue to provide precision engagement."

        And while making Air Force history is a great feeling for the 40th team, Colonel Dertien says the rewards of a successful test are more far reaching.

        "When the weapons are proven in combat and you get feedback from the deployed flying units that a capability worked as expected and made a difference in the fight, that's the big payoff," he said.

        The next step for the A-10C and LJDAM is to undergo operational tests to develop tactics and techniques for employing the weapon. If those tests prove to go as well as the first, Eglin's test team may have their feedback as early as January. The goal is to have this new precision capability deployed to the area of operations by early 2009.



        • It has always been a contest between the mud movers and the fast movers. In Vietnam there was a serious proposal to field that Grumman Ag Cat as a coin A/C bu a USAF general said that he didn't want to be known as the man who brought the biplane back into the Airforce. That Grumman would have been as great as the Henschel 123. One thing that the A 10 has over almost everything else in the current inventory is that it does not fly like the T 38, It flies like an A 10, no fly by wire crap, wear and corrosion may stain the paint but they don't cause her to stop flying. We need to build more birds and to keep a line available to replace losses as needed.


          • Soviet aircraft losses in Afghanistan

            Again, I realized this thread hasn't been updated for years, but while reading Part One, I came across some errors and thought I might as well correct these inaccuracies.

            1) First error in this post :

            Originally Posted by Shipwreck

            2. The operational experience of the Su-25 in Afghanistan (60,000 combat sorties, 118 planes involved of which 23 were lost, giving an average of 2,800 sorties for every Su-25 lost) clearly showed how ESSENTIAL said agility was in this specific environment. To a lesser extent, Chechnya 1&2 very much confirmed this.
            Of the 23 Su-25 lost by the Soviets in Afghanistan, 9 were destroyed on the ground in June 1988. Another Su-25 piloted by Alexander Rutskoy was shot by a Pakistani F-16 on 08/04/1988.

            If you recompute the data excluding these specific losses, that's an average of 4,615 sorties for every Su-25 lost.

            2) Second error in this post :

            Originally Posted by Shipwreck

            From the spring of 1985 onwards, the Mujaheedins started to have a huge number of AAA tubes in various calibers (12.7mm, 14.5mm, 23mm). As a matter of fact, nearly 40% of the 333 Hinds lost by the Soviets in Afghanistan were shot down by AAA.
            Actually, "only" 74 Hinds were lost by the Soviets in Afghanistan, 333 being the total helicopter losses.
            Last edited by SW4U; 02 Dec 17,, 22:45.


            • Originally posted by Shipwreck View Post
              Originally Posted by M21Sniper
              Velocity for the A-10's GAU-8/A PGU-14 HVAPDU ammunition is 1,066 m/s (3,500fps) with a 390 gram projectile.
              PGU-13/B HEI :
              * projectile mass : 367 grams
              * muzzle velocity : 1,021 mps
              * muzzle energy : 191,288 joules

              PGU-14/B API :
              * projectile mass : 426 grams
              * muzzle velocity : 990 mps
              * muzzle energy : 208,761 joules

              Different ballistics for PGU-13/B and PGU-14/B means that for a given fire-control solution that puts the latter on target, PGU-13/B will fall short.
              GD-OTS actually studied an improved PGU-13/B HEI that offered a better ballistic match with the PGU-14/B API.

              Improved PGU-13/B HEI :
              * projectile mass : 419 grams
              * muzzle velocity : 1,013 mps
              * muzzle energy : 214,982 joules

              PGU-14/B API :
              * projectile mass : 426 grams
              * muzzle velocity : 990 mps
              * muzzle energy : 208,761 joules

              The improved PGU-13/B HEI also extended the 2-meter MPI radial miss distance from 1,420m to 2,970m, i.e. a 110% increase vs the original PGU-13/B.

              It's not clear what the status of the improved projectile might be (I'm not even sure prototypes were tested).
              Last edited by SW4U; 02 Dec 17,, 23:47.


              • In the spirit of this thread :

                A-10 Warthog drops 2,000-pound bunker-buster on ISIS sniper nest in Raqqa
                Published: August 31, 2017

                IRBIL, Iraq — Proving it’s not too old for new tricks, an aging A-10 attack plane dropped a bunker-busting bomb for the first time in combat earlier in August against an Islamic State target in Syria, defense officials said.

                Despite efforts to put it out to pasture, the 1970s-era A-10 Thunderbolt II, known affectionately as the “Warthog,” has been a workhorse in the U.S.-led anti-Islamic State coalition since November 2014.

                A dozen A-10s based at Incirlik Air Base in Turkey average 750 strikes a month against ISIS, according to an Air Force video that showed a combat-effective 2,000-pound, GPS-guided GBU-31 version 3 being loaded onto one of the airframes for the first time, alongside a general-purpose variant.

                On Aug. 8, an A-10 dropped the bunker-buster on a building in the ISIS capital of Raqqa, where enemy snipers were targeting coalition troops and partnered Syrian Diplomatic Forces, a U.S. Air Force Central Command spokesman said.

                “The weapon was selected for its ability to penetrate deeply into this particular structure,” Air Force Capt. Jose Davis said via email.

                The 74th Fighter Squadron “Flying Tigers” deployed a dozen A-10s from Moody Air Force Base, Ga., to Turkey in July in support of the ISIS fight.

                Regarded as “flying tanks,” the aircraft is beloved by ground forces for unmatched close air support capabilities, but the Air Force has said it can’t afford to maintain both the Warthogs and the multi-role F-35 meant to replace them. Lawmakers have fought to keep them flying into the next decade.

                There are currently no A-10s supporting U.S. forces in Afghanistan in their dual missions of fighting terrorists and supporting Afghan forces, but defense officials are reportedly mulling a deployment of the aircraft under President Donald Trump’s new South Asia strategy, which would also add thousands of troops to the fight there.

                Though the A-10’s first combat use of the bomb came this month, the bunker busters have already been used extensively against ISIS militants by other aircraft, Davis said — more than 7,500 have been dropped so far. Air Force F-15 and F-16 fighter jets and B-52 and B-1 bombers can also employ the bomb, which is accurate to within 10 feet “every day and in every condition.”

                Senior Airman Joshua Coll, a weapons lead crew member who loaded the bombs, says in the Air Force video that he feels “absolute satisfaction” seeing the planes go out with bombs he loaded and return without them.

                “That means that hostile targets died,” Coll said. “That means that we got the mission done.”

                Coalition air support has proven critical in fighting ISIS, especially in its urban strongholds, where the group is dug in for a fight against U.S.-backed Iraqi and Syrian forces. That airpower is now heavily focused on helping Syrian Democratic Forces retake Raqqa, the capital of ISIS’s self-proclaimed caliphate and the coalition’s top priority now, where fighting is in its third month.

                ISIS’s defenses have included underground tunnel systems and networks of passageways linking whole blocks of concrete houses, concealing fighter’s movements and protecting deadly arsenals. Snipers hidden inside multi-story concrete buildings have wrought havoc on civilians as well as combatants.

                But the jihadis lack any serious anti-aircraft capability, allowing coalition aircraft to loiter unmolested for long periods over their targets. The militants have used heavy machine guns on occasion to try and engage the circling warplanes and drones, but these have generally kept well above the automatic weapons’ maximum range. ISIS did manage to shoot down a low-flying Russian Mi-25 gunship in Syria last year, but this was accomplished using an anti-tank missile — a hit not likely to be repeated soon.

                The GBU-31 version 3 helps the coalition take out “exceptionally difficult targets like bunkers or deeply buried or hardened facilities ISIS may use in support of its war machine,” while minimizing unintended collateral damage, Davis said.

                It pairs a joint direct attack munitions, or JDAM, guidance kit with a bomb body that has a one-inch-thick casing made of a single, high-strength piece of forged steel and can penetrate up to six feet of reinforced concrete, according to an Air Force fact sheet. A delayed-action fuse then detonates 550 pounds of high-explosive Tritonal.

                The version 3 is “a less explosive weapon and more of a penetrating munition,” Davis said. In both penetrating and general-purpose variants, the GBU-31 “has proved effective in surgical and precision strikes against the enemy.”

                Monitoring groups, however, have criticized the coalition’s use of such massive bombs in dense urban areas. A July Amnesty International report said coalition and Iraqi forces used explosive weapons unsuitable for Mosul, where militants used civilians as human shields and prevented them from fleeing.

                In one case in March, the U.S. dropped a 500-pound bomb GBU-38 bomb, containing the equivalent of 190 pounds of TNT, on a house where two snipers were firing on Iraqi forces. The blast caused secondary explosions, killing more than 100 civilians trapped inside the building — one of the deadliest civilian casualty incidents in recent years.

                Amnesty said planners should have known better than use such large ordnance. U.S. officials have re-jected Amnesty’s charges, arguing that planners apply a rigorous process to ensure strikes meet a minimum requirement for proportionality and necessity.


                • Originally posted by Shipwreck View Post
                  In theory, the Hog is able to operate from *unimproved surfaces* and using this capability was apparently considered during ODS.

                  In practice, with the exception of some very limited tests carried out during its development, the Hog was rarely (if ever) operated from such austere locations and forward operating locations for the A-10 in Europe tended to have long runways.

                  On Jul. 16, 2015, two U.S. Air Force A-10s belonging to the 75th Fighter Squadron, from Moody Air Force Base, performed austere landing operations at the National Training Center at Fort Irwin, California.


                  • Landing does not mean operating.

                    A C-130 conducted landing operations on a CVN. Doesn't mean they can operate from one


                    • Originally posted by Gun Grape View Post
                      Landing does not mean operating.

                      A C-130 conducted landing operations on a CVN. Doesn't mean they can operate from one
                      The C-130 did it only once, whereas the A-10 has done it, well, many times...

                      An A-10C Thunderbolt II from the 190th Fighter Squadron at Gowen Field, Idaho, takes off from Nellis Air Force Base, Nevada and proceeds to an austere landing site at Delmar Lake Bed near Alamo, Nevada Jan 26, 2016. Pilots from the 190th FS performed landings during both day and night sorties to qualify on the unique ability of the A-10. (U.S. Air National Guard video by Tech. Sgt. John Winn/Released)


                      • A-10 titanium bathtub

                        Some years back, I visited the Cradle of Aviation Museum in Long Island (website), which has one titanium bathtub on display.

                        I was able to take detailed measurements with a tape, but I don't feel comfortable sharing the details on a public forum (even though I've come across the numbers here and there on the net).

                        Below are excellent pictures (not mine) of the titanium bathtub (info is not classified AFAIK) :

                        Overview :
                        Click image for larger version

Name:	c8d65c6466bebe3191c9ef08909bd4d4.jpg
Views:	2
Size:	142.1 KB
ID:	1471907

                        Overview (b&w) :
                        Click image for larger version

Name:	A-10_bw_Page-3-1.jpg
Views:	2
Size:	31.6 KB
ID:	1471919

                        Forward Bulkhead :
                        Click image for larger version

Name:	A-10_Fwd Bhd_6110495700_a8d014a819_b.jpg
Views:	2
Size:	330.3 KB
ID:	1471908

                        Side of bathtub (part of the outer fuselage) :
                        Click image for larger version

Name:	A-10_Side_6109949895_53c475e14d_b.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	206.3 KB
ID:	1471909

                        Inside the bathtub (with joystick & HUD) :
                        Click image for larger version

Name:	A-10_Inside_6109948971_253f498ed7_b.jpg
Views:	2
Size:	361.4 KB
ID:	1471910
                        Last edited by SW4U; 05 Dec 17,, 22:18.


                        • A-10 titanium bathtub

                          Pilot perspective from inside the bathtub :
                          Click image for larger version

Name:	A-10_Pilot Perspective_6109947723_c79be3963a_b.jpg
Views:	2
Size:	350.7 KB
ID:	1471920

                          Curved portion of the bathtub serving as part of the fuselage :
                          Click image for larger version

Name:	A-10_Curved_6109946779_b0b3b0d9b6_b.jpg
Views:	2
Size:	342.5 KB
ID:	1471911

                          Titanium bathtub next to the aircraft :
                          Click image for larger version

Name:	A-10_Aircraft_6109946055_1141249994_b.jpg
Views:	2
Size:	350.8 KB
ID:	1471912

                          Forward bulkhead :
                          Click image for larger version

Name:	A-10_Fwd Bulkhead_6109945047_27d1ed7fd3_b.jpg
Views:	2
Size:	305.0 KB
ID:	1471913

                          Titanium bathtub :
                          Click image for larger version

Name:	A-10_Bathtub_6110488998_4d65eab23e_b.jpg
Views:	2
Size:	291.9 KB
ID:	1471914
                          Last edited by SW4U; 05 Dec 17,, 22:12.


                          • A-10 titanium bathtub

                            Left side :
                            Click image for larger version

Name:	A-10_Left_6110488254_a35d978f58_b.jpg
Views:	2
Size:	352.1 KB
ID:	1471921

                            Aft bulkhead :
                            Click image for larger version

Name:	A-10_Aft Bhd_6110487508_af5fb0b265_b.jpg
Views:	2
Size:	328.0 KB
ID:	1471915

                            Demarcation from straight plate to curved plate :
                            Click image for larger version

Name:	A-10_Demarcation_6109941927_f068be3013_b.jpg
Views:	2
Size:	264.9 KB
ID:	1471916

                            Why it's called bathtub :
                            Click image for larger version

Name:	A-10_Bathtub_6110486040_27f814b2c1_b.jpg
Views:	2
Size:	328.1 KB
ID:	1471917

                            Aft portion :
                            Click image for larger version

Name:	A-10_Aft Portion_6110485466_37472afe47_b.jpg
Views:	2
Size:	362.1 KB
ID:	1471918
                            Last edited by SW4U; 05 Dec 17,, 22:14.


                            • Those are pretty cool pictures, thank you for sharing!


                              • Originally posted by SW4U View Post
                                The C-130 did it only once, whereas the A-10 has done it, well, many times...

                                An A-10C Thunderbolt II from the 190th Fighter Squadron at Gowen Field, Idaho, takes off from Nellis Air Force Base, Nevada and proceeds to an austere landing site at Delmar Lake Bed near Alamo, Nevada Jan 26, 2016. Pilots from the 190th FS performed landings during both day and night sorties to qualify on the unique ability of the A-10. (U.S. Air National Guard video by Tech. Sgt. John Winn/Released)
                                Actually the c-130 did 29 touch-and-go landings, 21 unarrested full-stop landings, and 21 unassisted takeoffs at gross weights of 85,000 pounds up to 121,000 pounds.

                                As far as "Unique to the A-10" they must only talking about USAF planes. Or they forgot Harriers operating during ODS from a soccer stadium. Or F-18s operating from the austere/Expeditionary landing field at 29 Palms during just about every CAX since the 90s.