- 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: House votes to save A-10 fleet
Posted on 12/2/14 at 4:26 pm to son of arlo
Posted on 12/2/14 at 4:26 pm to son of arlo
Apaches are only better if you have enough of them to have them on site for each fire mission at all times.
In the real world, Warthogs are faster, bring 4 times more armament to bear, easier to keep combat ready, and are far less vulnerable to fire than Apaches.
In the real world, Warthogs are faster, bring 4 times more armament to bear, easier to keep combat ready, and are far less vulnerable to fire than Apaches.
1
Posted on 12/2/14 at 4:46 pm to Volvagia
quote:
Apaches are only better if you have enough of them to have them on site for each fire mission at all times.
In the real world, Warthogs are faster, bring 4 times more armament to bear, easier to keep combat ready, and are far less vulnerable to fire than Apaches.
Do you think Barry and Congress thinks about the real world? The warthog was a fine airplane, and perfectly suited to its purpose.
Posted on 12/2/14 at 5:11 pm to Ace Midnight
quote:
or limit them solely to Air/Space Superiority - it's all they care about anyway.
You left out the EM spectrum. Zoombags are better equipped to handle that as well.
Posted on 12/2/14 at 5:51 pm to son of arlo
quote:
How many acres of shrink-wrapped Phantoms at DM? I wonder why we keep them. I'm sure we could put the titanium to better use. We'll never resurrect a F-4C and put F-100 engines in them. It's all a waste of tax payer money.
LINK
Since 1995 about 230 of the 700+ phantoms produced have been converted to drones for use in missile testing.
This post was edited on 12/2/14 at 5:52 pm
Posted on 12/2/14 at 6:04 pm to EA6B
quote:
Since 1995 about 230 of the 700+ phantoms produced have been converted to drones for use in missile testing.
Yep. My oldest called me from the Tyndall flightline telling me the Phantom with my name on the canopy rail was #2 inline as a target. Sad, funny, and weird all in one moment. F-4s were too expensive. Using them as drones was a waste.
Posted on 12/2/14 at 7:37 pm to upgrayedd
turn them loose
Posted on 12/2/14 at 8:32 pm to Volvagia
quote:I'm pretty sure anyone who isn't a general or a Lockheed stockholder gets pissed at the F-35
I get pissed at the very mention of the F-35 and I'm just a military hardware/tech enthusiast
Posted on 12/2/14 at 10:37 pm to wickowick
Go Warthogs!
Posted on 12/3/14 at 2:18 am to wickowick
frick that POS F-35
Posted on 12/3/14 at 2:20 am to GetCocky11
quote:
The Air Forces recommends to cut a plane. Congress says that they will not cut it.
Issue is no one in the AF other than a few generals want to scrap it. A-10 pilots were pisseddddd
quote:
I wonder with Congressman's district produces the plane.
Its more the bases where the A-10 squadrons are at. Like AZ, GA.
This post was edited on 12/3/14 at 2:25 am
Posted on 12/3/14 at 2:24 am to StraightCashHomey21
Bring the Bronco out of mothballs, mount that 20mm turret back on it with 2.5in rockets and some Hellfires, upgrade the avionics and slap some five bladed props on that bitch. As much as I love the Hog, the OV-10X would be absolutely bad arse for our boys on the ground. Tons of loiter time, huge amount of fire power, dual role observer in the rear (think indirect artillery spotting too).
Quick little fact, hunter killer teams of OV-10A's and D's ran a TON of missions in Iraq the first go round. D's would paint the targets, while the A's carried the firepower to include AIM-9's.
Heck, even a Super Tucano would be a hoot to see in action
Quick little fact, hunter killer teams of OV-10A's and D's ran a TON of missions in Iraq the first go round. D's would paint the targets, while the A's carried the firepower to include AIM-9's.
Heck, even a Super Tucano would be a hoot to see in action
This post was edited on 12/3/14 at 2:35 am
Posted on 12/3/14 at 2:37 am to son of arlo
quote:
Yep. My oldest called me from the Tyndall flightline telling me the Phantom with my name on the canopy rail was #2 inline as a target. Sad, funny, and weird all in one moment. F-4s were too expensive. Using them as drones was a waste.
Nah, don't feel too bad. My old M981 FIST-V was rolled into the impact area as a target at JBLM. Luckily I saw her getting de-milled right before she was towed out and blown to smithereens.
I was lucky enough to see some RoK F-4's on the flightline at K2 airbase a couple of years ago. Was really cool to see them in active service still.
This post was edited on 12/3/14 at 2:39 am
Posted on 12/3/14 at 2:44 am to NWarty
What is really crazy about the F-35 is China hacked into lockheed servers and stole the blueprints.
Then bam look what we have in no time
All that money we dumped into it, just to be stolen and modified.
Then bam look what we have in no time
All that money we dumped into it, just to be stolen and modified.
Posted on 12/3/14 at 5:18 am to NWarty
quote:
Bring the Bronco out of mothballs
Dear mom, your son is dead.
He bought the farm today.
He crashed his OV-10 on Ho Chi Mihn's highway.
It was a rocket pass, and then he busted his arse.
mmm mmm mmm
Posted on 12/3/14 at 5:37 am to NWarty
quote:
Was really cool to see them in active service still.
Out with the old. In with the new. They were a nightmare to maintain. Maybe a nice grouper is sitting at the controls of 67-249 right now at the bottom of the GOM. Posted on 12/3/14 at 5:39 am to boosiebadazz
cut was caused by the sequester. Many of the generals didn't want to cut the A10 but had to cut somewhere.
Posted on 12/3/14 at 5:51 am to son of arlo
quote:
Was really cool to see them in active service still. Out with the old. In with the new. They were a nightmare to maintain. Maybe a nice grouper is sitting at the controls of 67-249 right now at the bottom of the GOM.
Yep. Plus that sucker didn't have the range or maneuverability of the F-14,15,or 16's. The platform was just getting old and expensive to keep. I would imagine (don't know for a fact) that the RoK is using a lot of spare parts from US planes that were decommed.
Back to the Hog. When I was in OTS back in the 80's those pilots put together a short film about it being so slow its speed was timed with a calendar. Freaking hilarious. It'd be a shame to get rid of it. Hardest plane we have to bring down and could stay on site for a while and deliver some serious ordnance. I can see why the army wanted it so bad, but never understood the force's insistence on keeping on with it. IMHO only, if the grunts want to do all the close air support, more power to 'em.
Have a great day!!
Posted on 12/3/14 at 6:36 am to Topisawtiger
quote:
When I was in OTS back in the 80's those pilots put together a short film about it being so slow its speed was timed with a calendar. Freaking hilarious.
I've heard it said that warthog drivers got a one hour block of academic instruction where all they heard was A-10 jokes. This was so they could keep a straight face at the bar. My personal favorite is "A-10s don't actually fly. They're so ugly the ground rejects them."
In a sane world, we should make a new batch and give them to the Army. Who's better to fly them than a pilot who knows what's going on down there? Don't need stealth. Doesn't need to go any faster. Update the avionics but keep it basically the same. Eliminate the EOY "spend down" and we might be able to pay cash for them.
Posted on 12/3/14 at 7:13 am to son of arlo
quote:
In a sane world, we should make a new batch and give them to the Army. Who's better to fly them than a pilot who knows what's going on down there? Don't need stealth. Doesn't need to go any faster. Update the avionics but keep it basically the same. Eliminate the EOY "spend down" and we might be able to pay cash for them
I'm with you on that. I remember having my CO come to me at the end of the FY and tell me I had to spend every penny left in my budget or we would only be given what we spent this year. Never seen so many pencils, calendars, and sticky pads in my life. Sometimes the force was just plain stupid. But I missed it terribly for several years after I retired. Oh the good ole days!!!
Posted on 12/3/14 at 8:05 am to Topisawtiger
quote:
Sometimes the force was just plain stupid.
I had just returned from Squadron Officer School and was eager to flex my new found writing skills, so I wrote a letter to the Wing Commander.
Problem: Phantoms smoke like a sumbitch and the enemy can see us coming from 30 miles away.
Solution: Install a $100 mod per engine and turn up the EGT.
Benefits: We can kill more enemy because they won't be able to run too far after they see us.
How: Flying one less hour this calendar year would result in $12k savings. That's more than enough to retrofit all 46 Phantoms.
My Sq Commander said my heart was in the right place, but things just didn't work that way. Welcome to the kafkaesque world of govt budgeting.
Page 3 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News