Retiring the A-10

[para bellum]

Nope, the first shots were Hellfire missiles fired from Apaches that knocked out surveillance radars that were positioned along the border.

Yes, see my post #20.

 

[toobfreak]

Air Force officials have said they want to replace the A-10 with the F-35

That's bullshit. No way the F35 can do everything the A10 can do. And the A10 is cheap to make. This is just another excuse for wanting to spend a lot of money.

Someone needs to tell the military they get no F35s. They have enough. They can get some new warthogs or NOTHING.

 

[Vrenn]

What upgrades were those?

You are just looking for another "Gotcha". Since the 90s, the T-72 has been able to track and fire on aircraft at lower altitudes just like the abrams and about all other BMTs.. Now, take your gotcha and cram it up your ........

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

It mounts a 12.7mm anti-aircraft machine gun. In other words, it is the same caliber and fires essentially the same as the US M2 .50 cal.

Obviously, something that would devastate an A-10. Because we all know that an M2 can take out an A-10 with ease.

Uhhh...I didnt ask you I asked vrenn.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

You are just looking for another "Gotcha". Since the 90s, the T-72 has been able to track and fire on aircraft at lower altitudes just like the abrams and about all other BMTs.. Now, take your gotcha and cram it up your ........

No,I'm actually curious.

 

[Mushroom]

The last US aircraft was retired 28 years ago.

Last in service with the military. The US still uses them to this day.

And there is no reason why an updated version could not be made.

 

[Mushroom]

Uhhh...I didnt ask you I asked vrenn.

He will never give you a straight answer. He will just spin in circles and insist that it has the capability to shoot down an A-10. Without ever actually saying what it is they can use to shoot one down.

Which is exactly what he did. It mounts a 12.7mm gun, so basically the same "air defense" as an M1 Bradley. And as air defense other than against helicopters, the M2 was obsolete by WWII.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Last in service with the military. The US still uses them to this day.

And there is no reason why an updated version could not be made.

What the heck do we use them for? When did the production line close?

 

[Vrenn]

It mounts a 12.7mm anti-aircraft machine gun. In other words, it is the same caliber and fires essentially the same as the US M2 .50 cal.

Obviously, something that would devastate an A-10. Because we all know that an M2 can take out an A-10 with ease.

True it does carry a 12.7 (equal to the M2) and can easily penetrate the A-10. But the same can not be said about the A-10 penetrating the T-72. The 30mm GUA8 can penetrate sometimes from the rear but not from the sides or the front. While the 12.7 gun is aimed Mark one Eyeball, the big 125mm is using thermal imaging. And as cool as those two engines on the 10 run, they still throw off enough heat to be tracked that way. And while it takes a few 12.7 rounds, it only takes one 125mm to anywhere on the A-10 to make it a big wreck in the sky. The last thing an A-10 would do is a frontal attack where his ammo won't penetrate the tanks armor and he would be flying directly into some really nasty things.

The good news is, that's not how the A-10 would attack a T-72. He would probably use his mavericks or hellfires from any angle. At that point, both of those could have been fired from any number of aircraft instead with the same results.

 

[Mushroom]

What the heck do we use them for?

NASA uses them for various missions. As does the US Forest Service and CalFire for observation aircraft for fighting fires.

 

[westwall]

True it does carry a 12.7 (equal to the M2) and can easily penetrate the A-10. But the same can not be said about the A-10 penetrating the T-72. The 30mm GUA8 can penetrate sometimes from the rear but not from the sides or the front. While the 12.7 gun is aimed Mark one Eyeball, the big 125mm is using thermal imaging. And as cool as those two engines on the 10 run, they still throw off enough heat to be tracked that way. And while it takes a few 12.7 rounds, it only takes one 125mm to anywhere on the A-10 to make it a big wreck in the sky. The last thing an A-10 would do is a frontal attack where his ammo won't penetrate the tanks armor and he would be flying directly into some really nasty things.

The good news is, that's not how the A-10 would attack a T-72. He would probably use his mavericks or hellfires from any angle. At that point, both of those could have been fired from any number of aircraft instead with the same results.

No, the 12.7 can NOT easily penetrate the A-10. Where do you come up with this nonsense?

And correct, ONE round from the GAU 8 can't penetrate the front of the T-72.

But 80 of them REMOVE the front end of a T-72.

Once again, you seem to really not know the subject too well.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

NASA uses them for various missions. As does the US Forest Service and CalFire for observation aircraft for fighting fires.

You didn't answer the rest of my post.

 

[Vrenn]

He will never give you a straight answer. He will just spin in circles and insist that it has the capability to shoot down an A-10. Without ever actually saying what it is they can use to shoot one down.

Which is exactly what he did. It mounts a 12.7mm gun, so basically the same "air defense" as an M1 Bradley. And as air defense other than against helicopters, the M2 was obsolete by WWII.

So, you are trying to answer for me. I knew something was wrong when I actually agreed with you about something.

So the M2 is no longer applicable. LOL, it's still being used as well as the 7.62 and 20mm on various aircraft. And if you go to attack a convoy, chances are you are going to have to fly through a barrage full of all 3 of those. The new ATs may have all 3 loaded at any given time. And in attacking a lightly armed convoy, it can equal the damage done by the GAU-8. In that sutuation, the GAU-8 is more than a little overkill. A M-2 is not.

I can tell neither of you have ever flown into an "Alley" of fire where most of it is from 12.7s and 20mm. Case in point was a few areas round Vietnam, Laos and Combodia and Bagdad.

 

[AZrailwhale]

It mounts a 12.7mm anti-aircraft machine gun. In other words, it is the same caliber and fires essentially the same as the US M2 .50 cal.

Obviously, something that would devastate an A-10. Because we all know that an M2 can take out an A-10 with ease.

Uhh if I remember correctly the A-10’s critical systems were armored to be proof against 23mm cannon fire. It could fly with one entire engine or tail fin shot off and could safely land with its hydraulics shot out because the wheels protruded when retracted. Unlike most Air Force aircraft, it was designed to take battle damage and still bring its pilot home unhurt.

 

[Vrenn]

No, the 12.7 can NOT easily penetrate the A-10. Where do you come up with this nonsense?

Take on round into each intake and the job is done.

And correct, ONE round from the GAU 8 can't penetrate the front of the T-72.

One 125MM HE round certainly can. A A-10 will not even attempt to attack a tank from the front or sides.

But 80 of them REMOVE the front end of a T-72.

And how many passes is he going to get to get those 80 hits? Maybe 10 or 15? Standard method of using a A-10 against a tank is to withdraw and use your Mavicks or Hellfires.

Once again, you seem to really not know the subject too well.

Wow, Westshroom speaks again.

 

[westwall]

Uhh if I remember correctly the A-10’s critical systems were armored to be proof against 23mm cannon fire. It could fly with one entire engine or tail fin shot off and could safely land with its hydraulics shot out because the wheels protruded when retracted. Unlike most Air Force aircraft, it was designed to take battle damage and still bring its pilot home unhurt.

Correct. One took a huge amount of fire from a ZSU 23/4 and was still able to fly home. Any other aircraft would have simply disintegrated.

 

[westwall]

Take on round into each intake and the job is done.



One 125MM HE round certainly can. A A-10 will not even attempt to attack a tank from the front or sides.




And how many passes is he going to get to get those 80 hits? Maybe 10 or 15? Standard method of using a A-10 against a tank is to withdraw and use your Mavicks or Hellfires.




Wow, Westshroom speaks again.

Wrong. They can continue to fly with damaged fan blades. BZZZZZXX.

Good luck hitting a flying object with the 125. They can't even hit targets on the ground moving one tenth the speed.

The A-10 can attack from any angle and destroy whatever it hits. Like I said, the 80 rounds from the one second burst simply disappears whatever it hits. No tank on Earth can survive it.

Yet again you show how ignorant you are about the subject.

 

[Mushroom]

You didn't answer the rest of my post.

When the production ended does not matter.

The oldest OV-10 ever built is newer than the newest B-52.

 

[Mushroom]

Uhh if I remember correctly the A-10’s critical systems were armored to be proof against 23mm cannon fire. It could fly with one entire engine or tail fin shot off and could safely land with its hydraulics shot out because the wheels protruded when retracted. Unlike most Air Force aircraft, it was designed to take battle damage and still bring its pilot home unhurt.

I am aware of that, which is why I had the laugh smiley at the end.

The very idea that a 12.7mm/.50 cal is a serious threat against an A-10 is laughable in the extreme.

 

[westwall]

When the production ended does not matter.

The oldest OV-10 ever built is newer than the newest B-52.

A friend flew OV-10's in Vietnam, and he loved it, but he says they are a great COIN aircraft, but lousy as a dedicated CAS aircraft. Far too vulnerable to MANPADS.