- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Looks like the A-10 is here to stay
Posted on 10/28/16 at 11:03 am to TennesseeFan25
Posted on 10/28/16 at 11:03 am to TennesseeFan25
quote:
the battlefield you're talking about is no longer the battlefield we are on
Maybe not, but it certainly could be at any time.
Posted on 10/28/16 at 11:07 am to Argonaut
With Eastern Europe becoming a potential hot zone again, aren't these types of aircraft becoming more valuable since they were designed for that AO?
Posted on 10/28/16 at 11:08 am to DownshiftAndFloorIt
quote:
The F35 is probably far superior from a capability standpoint.
In theory. Practice is a bitch, though. Plus the growing pains have been so significant for the F-35 that by the time they're all ironed out, it will be an obsolete platform.
quote:
F35 is definitely more athletic and far more advanced.
Doesn't do anything well at this point. Highly problematic (although I do think the worst problems are behind them, the cost to get to where we are today has been extraordinary - beyond the pale.)
quote:
The A10 is oldddddd
Tried and true. And it does 1 thing extraordinarily well (and nothing else).
quote:
Affordability and simplicity is part of supportability and the A10 kicks the F35's arse in that category.
Not even really a discussion. The F-35 must be considered, at best, an operational push. The A-10 has been a lifesaving gamechanger when it has been tasked for missions during it's operational history to date. Demonstrated performance of a platform like this must be recognized when comparing to the hugely expensive, "maybe so, if we ever get it to work right" boondoggle that is the F-35.
This post was edited on 10/28/16 at 11:09 am
Posted on 10/28/16 at 11:23 am to StraightCashHomey21
my fav fighter
Posted on 10/28/16 at 11:26 am to TennesseeFan25
quote:
on the battlefield with inferior CAS due to asinine bureaucracy. This isn't fricking call of duty, the battlefield you're talking about is no longer the battlefield we are on, and keeping fifteen sets of scalpels when a knife can accomplish that job and more doesn't make sense.
That is absurd. It currently does 3 things not only well, but about tGoat.
1.) CAS
2.) US morale when they arrive is boosted
3.) Enemy Morale when they arrive is all but gone
There's really not another weapon that our troops on the ground enjoy seeing arrive more than an A-10 and nothing that stomps the enemies morale more than the A-10. The F-35 and every other option can provide CAS, but with current stealth operation it simply will not be the morale changer like the A-10.
Posted on 10/28/16 at 11:31 am to Ace Midnight
Exactly, the A-10 does one thing well, very well, but it can't do that one thing without air supremacy. We can't gain air supremacy without the top fighters and bombers in the world, yet everyone wants to cut the F-35... we can't.
Posted on 10/28/16 at 11:32 am to cubsfan5150
quote:
can't gain air supremacy without the top fighters
So, we stopped buying F-22s (supposed to have gotten 300, bought ~187 or so), to buy the F-35 which ISN'T and WILL NEVER BE an air superiority/supremacy platform.
quote:
yet everyone wants to cut the F-35
Because it has been a prohibitively expensive failure to this point.
quote:
we can't.
Sunk costs fallacy.
Posted on 10/28/16 at 11:53 am to Ace Midnight
We're about to start buying a shite load more 22's
The F-35 will very much play a role in destruction of radar and missile sites... all part of air supremacy.
The F-35 will very much play a role in destruction of radar and missile sites... all part of air supremacy.
Posted on 10/28/16 at 11:56 am to Ace Midnight
And It's not just the F35, that's just the must publicly visible example. I get the idea of consolidating missions into one piece of hardware but when it's as cost prohibitive as the F35 or the USS Zumwalt, it just don't work.
You've got to have hardware that you can mass produce in large quantities and keep operational on the front line. That aspect of war has never changed throughout the history of mankind.
Grammer edit
You've got to have hardware that you can mass produce in large quantities and keep operational on the front line. That aspect of war has never changed throughout the history of mankind.
Grammer edit
This post was edited on 10/28/16 at 11:59 am
Posted on 10/28/16 at 11:58 am to DownshiftAndFloorIt
quote:
You've got to have hardware that you can mass produce in large quantities and keep operational on the front line. That aspect of was has never changed throughout the history of mankind.
Yeah, no different than Shermans/T-34s vs. Tiger tanks.
Posted on 10/28/16 at 12:06 pm to upgrayedd
As Josef Stalin said, "Quantity has a quality all its own."
Posted on 10/28/16 at 12:10 pm to cubsfan5150
quote:
We're about to start buying a shite load more 22's
I doubt the restart is much more than fantasy.
I've been hard on the F-35 because it's been run, from beginning to end, so poorly. At the end of the day, an F-22 costs just short of $70,000 per hour to operate. Reapers cost less than $5k per hour.
In 2011, just 1 bomb in 20 delivered by the USAF was via drone. In 2015, that rate topped 50% for the first time.
SO, the future is bright for drones. Manned aircraft? Not so much.
Posted on 10/28/16 at 12:12 pm to SoFla Tideroller
Yea and I think we're kind of in denial that we may have to fight like that again one day. We've got the best shite and the most shite, but I don't know that we can replace what we have at any appreciable rate if it starts getting shot up and worn out. Do I think Russia can field a squadron of Su-37's to dominate the sky and hold it for the duration of a war? frick no. They probably can't field and support one for more than a week. They probably could however put a shitpile of 1970's migs up and if they can build them as fast as we can blow them up, we'd have a problem.
Posted on 10/28/16 at 12:18 pm to baldona
quote:
The F-35 and every other option can provide CAS, but with current stealth operation it simply will not be the morale changer like the A-10.
Also, the 35 most certainly doesn't have the legs, either, so it can't loiter. And if its going to try that stealth stuff, then its worthless as CAS because of not being able to hang ordinance...and if it does hang ordinance then the stealth is gone.
Also, someone pull up the video of the 35 doing gun test
Posted on 10/28/16 at 12:20 pm to Ace Midnight
quote:
SO, the future is bright for drones. Manned aircraft? Not so much.
It all depends on who we're fighting... just like the future of the A-10.
Posted on 10/28/16 at 12:30 pm to DownshiftAndFloorIt
quote:
You've got to have hardware that you can mass produce in large quantities and keep operational on the front line.
They were worried about the drones' reliability at first. I was in Iraq when the Army had its first armed drone strike. I remember asking the operations people, "Any issues with flying them in the dust or other hairy issues?" They told me on some days, the Warrior Alphas (MQ-1B - a Predator variant) were the only things up.
Good times...
This post was edited on 10/28/16 at 12:31 pm
Posted on 10/28/16 at 2:17 pm to upgrayedd
Yes. Anyone that thinks they should go away doesn't understand their capabilities or war, maybe both.
Posted on 10/28/16 at 2:57 pm to StraightCashHomey21
I'll never forget that image of a whart hog returning from patrol during desert storm...MISSING A WING, bad arse plane, as a former army vet, the Apache does awesome providing security but no way do I ever want those tank killing A10s gone.....
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News