But have you had a B-1B Gunship?! The mind boggles…
So, one of the suggested replacements for the A-10 is the Super Tucano. That ought to work out well.
I am far from an aviation expert, but the Super Tocano doesn’t seem to have the “beef” around it like the A-10 or Skyraider. I also wonder what the payload capacity is compared to either of the previous ones I mentioned?
From what I read the Super Tacano is more cost effective and has a better loiter time since it is not a jet engine, but armament is limited, so although it can hang around, once it runs out of stuff to drop its bye bye…
This might work in a low intense and limited conflict, but with ZSU and Manpads around it might not last.
I was always stunned by the idea of A-10s being somehow obsolete. It fills so many roles effectively.
Also every time a group of combat vets gets rescued by an A-10 their advocacy grows. I know they requested AC-130s in Somalia, but I think several A-10s might have cleared the roads and gotten everyone home after the initial contacts. They could have easily knocked out militia strong points and taken pressure off of pinned down groups.
Much as I love UH-60s, A-10s could have saved the day and those agile “brrrrp” gun platforms are a lot harder to take down with RPGs. I also think every time a Chinook tries to do a hover rescue of some SEAL group in places like Afghan mountains, a handful of A-10s flying close support would be worth the expenditure of tax payer dollars.
We do too much “glam rock” shit, especially when it comes to Navy dudes, and a couple A-10s playing “angry hornets” might have gotten most of Marcus Luttrell’s guys off that damn mountain. I don’t know what it costs to fly A-10s but it can’t be much worse than waiting for AH-64s that are in high demand while A-10s are sitting somewhere dormant.
Imagine if we have that available to get to benghazi.
The A-29 Tucano is supposed to fill a role called “Armed Overwatch”. It’s not in the A-10’s ZIP code as far as range, armament, or ability to absorb damage. But it’s probably a lot cheaper to operate.
Indeed. On the surface seems like a dumb idea, but once you consider how fast it can get there, how long it can loiter, etc, having a few of those in the inventory might make sense.
That far more absent than not observation has always made me shake my head.
In it’s envisioned role of attacking the hordes of Soviet tanks pouring through the Fulda Gap in a WWIII scenario, it’s hard to theorize how the aircraft would have done. Certainly would’ve knocked out a lot of tanks, but probably would have taken horrendous losses in return.
I posted a thread on here not terribly long ago about all the aircraft that SOCOM was evaluating, the Super Tucano being one. A variant of the old venerable OV-10 Bronco another. Those aircraft are to fill a niche in the SOCOM community, I don’t think they would replace the A10 for the mortals not in special operations.
The Q I had was, would 30mm projectile used take out Soviet main battle tanks? Maybe they would have a that time? Today, not being an expert, I’m wondering if it would be effective at all for that use, at least as it applies to the 30mm cannon aspects. Troop carriers, etc, no doubt, but modern main battle tanks?
I read an article in the early 90s I think it was, looking at the conclusions of several war gaming studies, said that NATO aircraft would suffer 70% losses if the Soviet Union invaded Western Europe.
People that I talked to who were there at that time expected to do that job said they were all well aware of that and they were at best there to slow them down at best and where not expected to survive long. It did not seem like any of them had an illusions about the outcome of that early contact.
Yes, that’s what the 30mm cannon it carries was designed for, i.e. their depleted uranium composition. I’ve seen films of the A-10 making gun runs on old tanks on some range somewhere; it ate them up. Gotta figure too that they would be making a downward impact, not allowing the tank to have the advantage of it’s armor plates (designed to fight other tanks).
Remember, tanks usually have less armor on top to save weight–their primary design threat is other tanks not Death From Above, which they rely on regimental AAA/missile carriers or aircover to counter. IIRC, a large part of the Hog’s design spec was directly intended to counter the ZSU-23-4… also, that “U-channel” tailgroup design was selected specifically to “box in” the exhaust and reduce IR signature from below.
The 30mm DU round fired out of the A-10 would defeat most if not all Soviet MBTs (Late 1970s thru 1980s) of the period when hit from the sides, top, and rear. All lighter targets including BMPs and BTRs could be killed everywhere including frontally. Modern day, I would still put my money that the 30mm DU round would defeat most of likely targets on the battlefield with the exception of late model T-72, T-80s, and T-90s which have heavy armor plus reactive armor.
The standard “combat mix” for the A-10 (back in the day, anyway) was API (DU) and HEI in a 5-to-1 ratio. Not sure that API is even an inventory item any more due to it’s toxicity and political implications. Heck, at one time there was even an HEI/TP mix (for whatever reason).
Not just the aircrew. The tankers were well aware that they wouldn’t be coming home in the event either. In the early 80s I spoke to a guy who was a long term tanker (at that point he was in the NG but had done a good stint of RA as a tanker as well) and he said they figured they would last something like 3 rounds – meaning they would get to fire about 3 main gun rounds before they were hit and killed.
I spent the entire 80’s in Germany, about 22 miles from the border. We weren’t a “Border Cav” unit, but we took our turns up at Camp Harris.
I was in a unique position because I Gunned the S-3’s Tank. We all had clearances and special duties.
When they told me I would command the tank that covered our brigades bridge across the river I was a little surprised at 23 that’s a heavy responsibility.
When they told me the bridge was marked and the math had been done and the explosives were on site, well, I took it a lot more serious.