Video: Mini-documentary of the A-10 in support of Afghanistan war released

[6915THESS]

A #mini-documentary was posted on YouTube, which was previously held from the general public viewing, shows the United States #Air Force, #A-10 Thunderbolt, or as airmen have called it, the A-10 Warthog, in action during the 2014 war in Afghanistan and features interviews of the men who flew the plane in those missions to provide ground support for American and allied troops.

Mini-documentary of the A-10 in support of Afghanistan war released

 

[Daryl Hunt]

A #mini-documentary was posted on YouTube, which was previously held from the general public viewing, shows the United States #Air Force, #A-10 Thunderbolt, or as airmen have called it, the A-10 Warthog, in action during the 2014 war in Afghanistan and features interviews of the men who flew the plane in those missions to provide ground support for American and allied troops.

Mini-documentary of the A-10 in support of Afghanistan war released

What none of these show is that the A-10 frequently operates with one or two AC-130s. The A-10 flies around and reeks havoc where the enemy can see them, darting in and out. Meanwhile, the real fire power sits above sound and site range and systematically destroys anything that it's authorized to fire on including truck, tanks, buildings. The AC is also very effective in quickly hitting running targets individually. The A-10 gets all the headlines. The AC doesn't want those headlines. Watch the gun footage. If it appears to move in a counter clockwise motion, that isn't an A-10. The A-10 will show the target getting larger and in a straight line. The AC is in an orbit. It's hard to tell the difference between the 25s and 30s on the Gunship from the 30 mil on the A-10 for impact. But you will be able to tell when the 105 mm goes off. It's a much larger boom and can take out entire buildings with one shot. The A-10 is regular Air Force but the AC is Special Operations.

 

[6915THESS]

A #mini-documentary was posted on YouTube, which was previously held from the general public viewing, shows the United States #Air Force, #A-10 Thunderbolt, or as airmen have called it, the A-10 Warthog, in action during the 2014 war in Afghanistan and features interviews of the men who flew the plane in those missions to provide ground support for American and allied troops.

Mini-documentary of the A-10 in support of Afghanistan war released

What none of these show is that the A-10 frequently operates with one or two AC-130s. The A-10 flies around and reeks havoc where the enemy can see them, darting in and out. Meanwhile, the real fire power sits above sound and site range and systematically destroys anything that it's authorized to fire on including truck, tanks, buildings. The AC is also very effective in quickly hitting running targets individually. The A-10 gets all the headlines. The AC doesn't want those headlines. Watch the gun footage. If it appears to move in a counter clockwise motion, that isn't an A-10. The A-10 will show the target getting larger and in a straight line. The AC is in an orbit. It's hard to tell the difference between the 25s and 30s on the Gunship from the 30 mil on the A-10 for impact. But you will be able to tell when the 105 mm goes off. It's a much larger boom and can take out entire buildings with one shot. The A-10 is regular Air Force but the AC is Special Operations.

That is true but it was a short documentary though.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

A #mini-documentary was posted on YouTube, which was previously held from the general public viewing, shows the United States #Air Force, #A-10 Thunderbolt, or as airmen have called it, the A-10 Warthog, in action during the 2014 war in Afghanistan and features interviews of the men who flew the plane in those missions to provide ground support for American and allied troops.

Mini-documentary of the A-10 in support of Afghanistan war released

What none of these show is that the A-10 frequently operates with one or two AC-130s. The A-10 flies around and reeks havoc where the enemy can see them, darting in and out. Meanwhile, the real fire power sits above sound and site range and systematically destroys anything that it's authorized to fire on including truck, tanks, buildings. The AC is also very effective in quickly hitting running targets individually. The A-10 gets all the headlines. The AC doesn't want those headlines. Watch the gun footage. If it appears to move in a counter clockwise motion, that isn't an A-10. The A-10 will show the target getting larger and in a straight line. The AC is in an orbit. It's hard to tell the difference between the 25s and 30s on the Gunship from the 30 mil on the A-10 for impact. But you will be able to tell when the 105 mm goes off. It's a much larger boom and can take out entire buildings with one shot. The A-10 is regular Air Force but the AC is Special Operations.

That is true but it was a short documentary though.

When those two work together, things go boom in the daytime. The A-10 operates as much of a bullet magnet and can't just come in on his target straight on. He'll dive, climb, bank, jink and try to keep his speed up. The AC is doing the bulk of the killing at a safe altitude to avoid AA and shoulder fired weapons which is has some defenses against but he can get hit. The AC can also take a tremendous amount of punishment but why do that when you have your little Wasps along for the trip.

I have seen some of the Hup Hup A-10 videos and most of them show the counter clockwise rotation that an A-10 cannot physically do. The problem with that A-10 in Afghanistan is that in order to take off from those elevated runways, it needs to lighten it's weapons load and drop some fuel. The USAF have know all along that the A-10 is woefully under powered for it's intended mission in the Middle East. It's designed for lower runway altitudes. The other problem with the A-10, when it goes BBBRRRRTTTTT the bird slows down because of the muzzle pressure. Again, it doesn't have enough juice to accelerate and extend out safely with much of a load. It's designed for when the USSR existed and the Nato tanks were severely out numbered. That isn't the case anymore. But it's paid for and you dance with the fat lady that brung ya'.

 

[harmonica]

I just saw an documentary on the PG1 air campaign...they said the Iraqis feared the A 10 the most because of it's 'accuracy'

I was in the USMC and for some reason we had one fire at the range we were firing at
I don't recall much except the sound of the gun

 

[Daryl Hunt]

I just saw an documentary on the PG1 air campaign...they said the Iraqis feared the A 10 the most because of it's 'accuracy'

I was in the USMC and for some reason we had one fire at the range we were firing at
I don't recall much except the sound of the gun

The problem I have is that it is given credit for the AC-130 that is the primary CAS platform. At the very start of the Iraq War, the opening shots were done by an AC-130 who took out some pretty nasty things so that the Spec Ops could go in and neutralize Iraqis that were waiting on our forces hidden. Had the A-10s flown in, they would have been cut to pieces. As would have the Attack Choppers as well. The A-10 has it's uses but it's not the panacea that some people think. It's very limited in what it can be used for. It's used because it's paid for and all that pilot training would be just wasted if you kept it on the ground.

Maybe the reason that the Iraqis didn't fear the ACs as much was that they never saw them, never heard them. Things just started blowing up like buildings, trucks, tanks, APCs and even individual running troops. But it left the Mosques untouched right next to the real bad guys.

Had we went to war with the USSR in the 80s, the A-10 would have been priceless against Soviet Armor. If the US had completely gotten air superiority. In the 80s, it was push comes to shove if that would have happened. The AC-130 could also not have operated until the superiority happened. It would have primarily been a Fighter War for the first few weeks regardless.

 

[harmonica]

I just saw an documentary on the PG1 air campaign...they said the Iraqis feared the A 10 the most because of it's 'accuracy'

I was in the USMC and for some reason we had one fire at the range we were firing at
I don't recall much except the sound of the gun

The problem I have is that it is given credit for the AC-130 that is the primary CAS platform. At the very start of the Iraq War, the opening shots were done by an AC-130 who took out some pretty nasty things so that the Spec Ops could go in and neutralize Iraqis that were waiting on our forces hidden. Had the A-10s flown in, they would have been cut to pieces. As would have the Attack Choppers as well. The A-10 has it's uses but it's not the panacea that some people think. It's very limited in what it can be used for. It's used because it's paid for and all that pilot training would be just wasted if you kept it on the ground.

Maybe the reason that the Iraqis didn't fear the ACs as much was that they never saw them, never heard them. Things just started blowing up like buildings, trucks, tanks, APCs and even individual running troops. But it left the Mosques untouched right next to the real bad guys.

Had we went to war with the USSR in the 80s, the A-10 would have been priceless against Soviet Armor. If the US had completely gotten air superiority. In the 80s, it was push comes to shove if that would have happened. The AC-130 could also not have operated until the superiority happened. It would have primarily been a Fighter War for the first few weeks regardless.

I'm guessing there were a lot more A-10s and they are more accurate
I believe the 130s are accurate, but they are more of a saturation weapon where as the A-10 will hit on first pass first shot
...yes they would be more fearful since you could see and hear the A-10s
also, the A-10s will make ''long'' attack runs and then ''long'' go arounds--very unnerving

exactly what I thought before searching:

According to an Iraqi captain captured by American forces on 24 February 1991, the single most recognizable and feared aircraft at low level was the A-10. Not only did the actual bombing run of the A-10 evoke terror, but also the plane's ability to loiter around a target area prior to its attack caused additional anxiety, since Iraqi soldiers were unsure of the chosen target.

2951st CLSS A-10 ABDR

I'm guessing A-10s did more tank/vehicle/etc killing than the 130s

 

[harmonica]

A-10s

lew almost 8,100 sorties, it maintained a mission capable rate of 95.7 % --- 5 % above its peacetime rates. Despite numerous hits and extensive damage, the A-10 proved it could do a variety of missions successfully.

Appendix - Air Force Performance In Operation Desert Storm | The Gulf War | FRONTLINE | PBS

 

[harmonica]

page 75 says there were:
132 A-10s
8 AC 130s
https://www.gao.gov/archive/1997/ns97134.pdf
according to the numbers, the Iraqis saw a lot more of the A-10s

 

[harmonica]

page 376 gives AC 130:
CAS and AI
61 sorties vs over 8000 for the A-10
other sorties:
40
https://media.defense.gov/2010/Sep/27/2001329816/-1/-1/0/gulf_war_air_power_survey-vol5.pdf

 

[Daryl Hunt]

I just saw an documentary on the PG1 air campaign...they said the Iraqis feared the A 10 the most because of it's 'accuracy'

I was in the USMC and for some reason we had one fire at the range we were firing at
I don't recall much except the sound of the gun

The problem I have is that it is given credit for the AC-130 that is the primary CAS platform. At the very start of the Iraq War, the opening shots were done by an AC-130 who took out some pretty nasty things so that the Spec Ops could go in and neutralize Iraqis that were waiting on our forces hidden. Had the A-10s flown in, they would have been cut to pieces. As would have the Attack Choppers as well. The A-10 has it's uses but it's not the panacea that some people think. It's very limited in what it can be used for. It's used because it's paid for and all that pilot training would be just wasted if you kept it on the ground.

Maybe the reason that the Iraqis didn't fear the ACs as much was that they never saw them, never heard them. Things just started blowing up like buildings, trucks, tanks, APCs and even individual running troops. But it left the Mosques untouched right next to the real bad guys.

Had we went to war with the USSR in the 80s, the A-10 would have been priceless against Soviet Armor. If the US had completely gotten air superiority. In the 80s, it was push comes to shove if that would have happened. The AC-130 could also not have operated until the superiority happened. It would have primarily been a Fighter War for the first few weeks regardless.

I'm guessing there were a lot more A-10s and they are more accurate
I believe the 130s are accurate, but they are more of a saturation weapon where as the A-10 will hit on first pass first shot
...yes they would be more fearful since you could see and hear the A-10s
also, the A-10s will make ''long'' attack runs and then ''long'' go arounds--very unnerving

exactly what I thought before searching:

According to an Iraqi captain captured by American forces on 24 February 1991, the single most recognizable and feared aircraft at low level was the A-10. Not only did the actual bombing run of the A-10 evoke terror, but also the plane's ability to loiter around a target area prior to its attack caused additional anxiety, since Iraqi soldiers were unsure of the chosen target.

2951st CLSS A-10 ABDR

I'm guessing A-10s did more tank/vehicle/etc killing than the 130s

You would be right. The AC was busy taking care of Spec Ops doing CAS in the opening days. Meanwhile, the A-10 was chasing Scud sites which most of them were decoys.Meanwhile, the Bombers were hitting with carpet bombing with 500lders, the F-16 was hitting them with 1000lbers as was the F-15E. Even the F-18 was getting it's licks on Armor. In the Carpet bomb areas, they carpet bombed, left a corridor open, caught the next corridor. It was so bad that many Iraqi Tankers were throwing open there hatches and trying to surrender to anyone that looked American in a Pickle suit. Some even tried to surrender to the Press. There were some that didn't and the M-1As took care of that chore for the most part. Ground Troops also got a little blood as well. Again, you are giving credit to the A-10 when they did very little in the Process.

BTW, the Apaches were chasing radar sites at the time which I find damned foolish but they got away with it. The Army never have figured out the mission for the Apache. The Marines have for their Cobras though. And the Cobra was busy as well reeking havoc. I had to feel sorry for the Marine Riflemen and the Army Infantry. They were advancing so fast that the supply lines couldn't keep up with them. I guess doing without food for a couple of days makes an American Ground Troop a bit cranky.

You seem to think that the A-10 won it all. Actually, they were only a small part of it. The Bulk of the Armor kills goes to the Bombers. Yes a bit unconventional but it was something that the Iraqis never figured on. Neither the AC or the A-10 had many Armor kills during the opening days. The A-10 was hunting Scud sites while the AC was doing CAS.

 

[harmonica]

I know some Apaches opened the war by destroying radar so that non-stealth air could get through undetected
whatever else they did, I'm sure Horner knew what he was doing

it looks like the A-10s did much more than the AC 130s

 

[Daryl Hunt]

page 376 gives AC 130:
CAS and AI
61 sorties vs over 8000 for the A-10
other sorties:
40
https://media.defense.gov/2010/Sep/27/2001329816/-1/-1/0/gulf_war_air_power_survey-vol5.pdf

Let's take a look at the data.

The Bulk of the Scud sites taken out both real and decoys were done by the A-10. It's primary mission in the early days was to kill Scuds. It did a good job of it. Over 8000 sorties for the whole 6 weeks. Back then, the A-10 had a fantastic turnaround rate. It was fairly new. It had all the mods and TCTOs done it by then as well making it a fantastic flyer. But it was heavily loaded. It gave up fuel to haul weapon load. It gave it only about 150 mile radius combat range. Had they used it for CAS, it would load light on weapons and heavy on gas to get that 1 hour out, 4 hours of loiter time with 15 minutes actual combat time. And then a couple or three hours to turn the bird around. Meaning, in a flying day, it might make 2 missions regardless. It doesn't have the power to get off the ground with both a full fuel load and weapons load. It has always needed bigger motors. The charts shows sortie rates. Not number of Armor killed.

Now, let's look at the AC-130. He can stay aloft for about 8 hours including combat time. Basically has unlimited range over the Battle Field in comparison with every other attack or fighter bird. He has enough ammo onboard to keep killing for hours. Like the A-10, the AC was given a different mission other than going after regular army and armor.

In later days, the A-10 went to CAS flights. When it did, one AC-130 was lost. 4 A-10s were lost. Both types were lost to IR Sam sites. There were 167 A-10s and only 4 AC-130s. Per AC, both ended up flying about the same when you figure in the actual combat times they spent actually fighting. In fact, the time that a AC-130 could stay in the battle, it was worth about 6 A-10s in time over the battle. When you figure on the amount of ordinance placed within 10 feet of the intended target, the AC gets WAY over the top of that because he isn't BRRRRTTTTTing, he's doing really short bursts on his Gats and singles out of his 40 and 105 with pin point accuracy. You can't get the A-10 into that game. If he is going for endurance then he has to take two hard points for drop tanks and carry fewer weapons due to his weak engines. If you are going for heavy weapons, he is a direct out, do 15 minutes of fighting and then head straight home because he won't have the fuel to do anything else. CAS is for endurance while going after regular targets is for weapons load. In the 70s, 80s and 90s, the A-10 was extremely important. But in the 21st century, everything it does well or even average can be done by other more numerous AC. There are only 186 A-10s left in the inventory now. If you look at that A-10s at DM, most already have had their wings removed and installed on the Existing A-10s in service. If they had put bigger motors on it in the first place, it might still be a great bird and they could have built even more. But they never did and knew it all long. And that is sad, really sad. Makes Military Leadership an Oxymon.

The A-10 has contributed very well. But so has every other Aircraft type right down to the lowly Tramp and Trash Hauler.

 

[Tax Man]

The warthog or an SR71 Black bird!!!

 

[Daryl Hunt]

I know some Apaches opened the war by destroying radar so that non-stealth air could get through undetected
whatever else they did, I'm sure Horner knew what he was doing

it looks like the A-10s did much more than the AC 130s

Horner did the unexpected. It was a high stakes gamble and it paid off. Had they been spotted, I won't go into that because they weren't.

The A-10 flew many, many more sorties. It's turn around rate was near the top of non bombers. There were 167 A-10s involved. But there were only 4 AC-130s. What the AC did was allow the A-10 to go scud hunting while the AC handled the CAS. Both jobs got done. Neither bird has anything to be ashamed about. But the fact remains is, the AC is a dedicated CAS bird that can be used for other missions like taking out entire concrete reinforced Warehouses in a matter of seconds without taking out the Mosque only a few feet away. I can say this, they want more AC-130s but those are really expensive puppies to have. In 2001 dollars, the cost is over 190 million per bird. The J model is the cheapest one at a steal of about 120 million. The original cost of the A-10 was only 12 million. You lose one, that is the cost lost since none are going to be made. The real loss is the Pilot. If you lose an AC you just lost at the minimum of 190 mil plus at least 14 crew. For many things, the A-10 is more cost effective but it's numbers are going down fast. Meanwhile the AC numbers are going up a little each year.

Many of the flights and fights of the AC isn't on your list. The missions are Spec Ops and won't be. While the A-10 could do the job, the problem is, the Spec Ops mission is too far away to use them. And the A-10 will give it away that the mission is about to start. Yes, it's considered CAS but for Spec Ops.

 

[harmonica]

looks like the F16s are the only aircraft that had more AI sorties than the A-10

so the A10s contributed a lot

 

[BlackSand]

A #mini-documentary was posted on YouTube, which was previously held from the general public viewing, shows the United States #Air Force, #A-10 Thunderbolt, or as airmen have called it, the A-10 Warthog, in action during the 2014 war in Afghanistan and features interviews of the men who flew the plane in those missions to provide ground support for American and allied troops.

Mini-documentary of the A-10 in support of Afghanistan war released

.​

Pfft ...
SAS soldier cut head off jihadi with a SPADE after running out of ammo

That guy earns his man card ... ​

.​

 

[Daryl Hunt]

looks like the F16s are the only aircraft that had more AI sorties than the A-10

so the A10s contributed a lot

The Sorties only tells the launches. Not what it did while on the mission. It's pretty meaningless. The problem the A-10 has is it's range, speed and more. If you load it out to do an actual bombing and strafing mission, the range is shortened due to him having to exchange fuel for munitions. The real problem with the A-10 is that he has very weak engine power. As a Tank Killer, he could lower his available external stores to get the range since his primary weapon would be his gun. Would have been devastating against massed tanks in Europe. But by 2001, many things had changed and they were looking for other missions for it. So they sent it out on a Scud and Surface to Air Destroy Mission where his gun was not the primary weapon. Hence, the loss of 4 in the opening days. That's dangerous work. He had to fly more sorties per day while looking for the targets with limited range. Luckily, he could operate from dirt runways if they were prepared and the support people were available on location. A lot of Ifs there. The A-10 was given a very dirty and dangerous job and it did the job. He was playing "Shoot me so I can shoot you" games with some mighty nasty things. There were better Aircraft for the job but we only had X amount of assets. Using either the A-10 or the AC-130 prior to cleaning out those Surface to Air weapons is damned dangerous so the loss of Aircraft happens. The F-15E would have been much better at the job but the F-15E was stretched mighty thin as was the F-16. The F-18 also got hit from those same assets. Welcome to war.

To say that any one Aircraft was more important than another is just playing political favorites. And the A-10s conception was political and economic from the very beginning. It still is today. If you removed the PR factor (whether real or perceived) the A-10 would have been completely gone out of the inventory by 2001. As it stands now, due to the airframes aging, it's not going to make it past 2023. That still gives it 5 decades and there are very few aircraft that have that kind of life. In 2003, it was already 30 years old. Outside of the engines, it was built right enabling it to make it to the end of life cycle. It's time to stop trying to find missions for it and move on to Fighters that can adapt in the air.

 

[harmonica]

looks like the F16s are the only aircraft that had more AI sorties than the A-10

so the A10s contributed a lot

The Sorties only tells the launches. Not what it did while on the mission. It's pretty meaningless. The problem the A-10 has is it's range, speed and more. If you load it out to do an actual bombing and strafing mission, the range is shortened due to him having to exchange fuel for munitions. The real problem with the A-10 is that he has very weak engine power. As a Tank Killer, he could lower his available external stores to get the range since his primary weapon would be his gun. Would have been devastating against massed tanks in Europe. But by 2001, many things had changed and they were looking for other missions for it. So they sent it out on a Scud and Surface to Air Destroy Mission where his gun was not the primary weapon. Hence, the loss of 4 in the opening days. That's dangerous work. He had to fly more sorties per day while looking for the targets with limited range. Luckily, he could operate from dirt runways if they were prepared and the support people were available on location. A lot of Ifs there. The A-10 was given a very dirty and dangerous job and it did the job. He was playing "Shoot me so I can shoot you" games with some mighty nasty things. There were better Aircraft for the job but we only had X amount of assets. Using either the A-10 or the AC-130 prior to cleaning out those Surface to Air weapons is damned dangerous so the loss of Aircraft happens. The F-15E would have been much better at the job but the F-15E was stretched mighty thin as was the F-16. The F-18 also got hit from those same assets. Welcome to war.

To say that any one Aircraft was more important than another is just playing political favorites. And the A-10s conception was political and economic from the very beginning. It still is today. If you removed the PR factor (whether real or perceived) the A-10 would have been completely gone out of the inventory by 2001. As it stands now, due to the airframes aging, it's not going to make it past 2023. That still gives it 5 decades and there are very few aircraft that have that kind of life. In 2003, it was already 30 years old. Outside of the engines, it was built right enabling it to make it to the end of life cycle. It's time to stop trying to find missions for it and move on to Fighters that can adapt in the air.

you have to measure it somehow

 

[Daryl Hunt]

looks like the F16s are the only aircraft that had more AI sorties than the A-10

so the A10s contributed a lot

The Sorties only tells the launches. Not what it did while on the mission. It's pretty meaningless. The problem the A-10 has is it's range, speed and more. If you load it out to do an actual bombing and strafing mission, the range is shortened due to him having to exchange fuel for munitions. The real problem with the A-10 is that he has very weak engine power. As a Tank Killer, he could lower his available external stores to get the range since his primary weapon would be his gun. Would have been devastating against massed tanks in Europe. But by 2001, many things had changed and they were looking for other missions for it. So they sent it out on a Scud and Surface to Air Destroy Mission where his gun was not the primary weapon. Hence, the loss of 4 in the opening days. That's dangerous work. He had to fly more sorties per day while looking for the targets with limited range. Luckily, he could operate from dirt runways if they were prepared and the support people were available on location. A lot of Ifs there. The A-10 was given a very dirty and dangerous job and it did the job. He was playing "Shoot me so I can shoot you" games with some mighty nasty things. There were better Aircraft for the job but we only had X amount of assets. Using either the A-10 or the AC-130 prior to cleaning out those Surface to Air weapons is damned dangerous so the loss of Aircraft happens. The F-15E would have been much better at the job but the F-15E was stretched mighty thin as was the F-16. The F-18 also got hit from those same assets. Welcome to war.

To say that any one Aircraft was more important than another is just playing political favorites. And the A-10s conception was political and economic from the very beginning. It still is today. If you removed the PR factor (whether real or perceived) the A-10 would have been completely gone out of the inventory by 2001. As it stands now, due to the airframes aging, it's not going to make it past 2023. That still gives it 5 decades and there are very few aircraft that have that kind of life. In 2003, it was already 30 years old. Outside of the engines, it was built right enabling it to make it to the end of life cycle. It's time to stop trying to find missions for it and move on to Fighters that can adapt in the air.

you have to measure it somehow

I really don't know how on this one. The A-10 started the battle out seeking Scud Sites. We do know that many of them were not real scuds. We don't really know how many were real. With the short flight time and range of a fully armed A-10, he would be making a huge amount of individual sorties with most not panning out. Some would. Then there is the utter confusion of battle. I doubt if all the records of all the AC are that accurate since there were so much going on at the same time. It's easy to list losses and air kills. It's easy to keep track of armor kills. But it's not so easy on when a bird is seeking a specific target which are allusive at best. So I give you this one.