EDIT: hahahaha great minds think alike!
EDIT: hahahaha great minds think alike!
Speaking of snow...
I grew up in a rural area on the Eastern Shore in Maryland, in some kind of Army / ANG training area. Low-level (sub 500 ft) passes by groups of A-10s were an almost daily occurrence. They would come over in some kind of criss-crossing zig-zag search pattern that involved lots of transitions and lock-to-lock vertical banking. It was cool to watch and I would always run outside to see it.
One day they noticed that my dog would chase them, barking her head off. After that they would always do an orbit or 2 of my house if they saw she was outside. So I saw a lot of this view:
This came to me while I was driving to work... 
4cylndrfury wrote:
Despite being employed by the very company which made this amazing gun, I cannot seem to find the drawings for that thing.
In reply to Flight Service:
Unless you shoot back. Then A-10s run away while other planes come in to deal with you.
Of course "the brass" are trying to kill it off. Its a 40 year old aircraft that was obsolete the day it entered service. Its poor performance means it is less effective than almost every other aircraft in the US military at performing its current job, Close Air Support. A-10s were kept out of Libya because they couldn't reliably penetrate the air defense network. A-10s are also really really slow. When your number of aircraft is limited, having the speed to get from a patrol zone or airbase to the ground troops in contact is paramount. A-10s do not do this. They are also hampered by night and bad weather, so you'll need to call F-16s then.
The GAU-8 Avenger is overrated. Yes, it is big. It is also heavy. The ammo takes up a huge amount of room, which could be used for other things like bombs or fuel or even a RADAR! Over 95% of targets killed by a A-10 are destroyed with laser guided bombs. Know what else carries laser guided bombs? Nearly everything else in the inventory. And when they do shoot stuff with the gun, most times another plane has to go a drop a bomb on it anyway because its hard to tell on a radar screen when a target has been riddled with holes.
The company that built it has been out of business for over a decade. Spare parts are getting short on the ground. Flying hours are already beyond the aircraft's life expectancy, meaning pilots are sitting in ticking time bombs. Currently, the only advantage that the A-10 offers the US is its slightly cheaper to operate per flying hour than other strike aircraft. But, as flying hours increase, maintenance costs will go up, and that cost savings starts to evaporate.
All for a plane past its prime.
Make it go away and bring on the F-35!
Stop bringing your "facts" and "maths" into this argument bout how grate Murica is!
ThunderCougarFalconGoat wrote: In reply to Flight Service: Unless you shoot back. Then A-10s run away while other planes come in to deal with you. Of course "the brass" are trying to kill it off. Its a 40 year old aircraft that was obsolete the day it entered service. Its poor performance means it is less effective than almost every other aircraft in the US military at performing its current job, Close Air Support. A-10s were kept out of Libya because they couldn't reliably penetrate the air defense network. A-10s are also really really slow. When your number of aircraft is limited, having the speed to get from a patrol zone or airbase to the ground troops in contact is paramount. A-10s do not do this. They are also hampered by night and bad weather, so you'll need to call F-16s then. The GAU-8 Avenger is overrated. Yes, it is big. It is also heavy. The ammo takes up a huge amount of room, which could be used for other things like bombs or fuel or even a RADAR! Over 95% of targets killed by a A-10 are destroyed with laser guided bombs. Know what else carries laser guided bombs? Nearly everything else in the inventory. And when they do shoot stuff with the gun, most times another plane has to go a drop a bomb on it anyway because its hard to tell on a radar screen when a target has been riddled with holes. The company that built it has been out of business for over a decade. Spare parts are getting short on the ground. Flying hours are already beyond the aircraft's life expectancy, meaning pilots are sitting in ticking time bombs. Currently, the only advantage that the A-10 offers the US is its slightly cheaper to operate per flying hour than other strike aircraft. But, as flying hours increase, maintenance costs will go up, and that cost savings starts to evaporate. All for a plane past its prime.
You are extremely wrong if you think the 35 will be a worthy replacement. The military didn't learn a thing from the F-111 debocle.
A specialized airframe will always best a generic one at its specific task.
In reply to ThunderCougarFalconGoat:
Since this is the hotlink thread, do I have to argue with pictures?
http://forum.keypublishing.com/showthread.php?113844-F-35A-for-Japan
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/3035572-DOT-amp-E-AF-IOC-Memo.html#document/p4/a316106
I think its pretty darn funny that a conversation about unfair stereotyping of Americans is followed by a series of pictures about a great big gun.
Just in case the Americans in the audience don't get it, a fairly typical stereotype of you is that you really, really like big guns.
Duke wrote: I grew up in a rural area on the Eastern Shore in Maryland, in some kind of Army / ANG training area. Low-level (sub 500 ft) passes by groups of A-10s were an almost daily occurrence. They would come over in some kind of criss-crossing zig-zag search pattern that involved lots of transitions and lock-to-lock vertical banking. It was cool to watch and I would always run outside to see it. One day they noticed that my dog would chase them, barking her head off. After that they would always do an orbit or 2 of my house if they saw she was outside. So I saw a lot of this view:
I had the exact same experience with the guys from Myrtle Beach AFB. Except for the part about the dog.
In reply to tuna55:
Note that I never said that the F-35 was the best plane in the world. Just that it is better to buy them instead of paying to maintain the A-10s.
Also, your graph is wrong in the first data table alone, so I'm not going to verify the rest of it.
Yeah, you lost all credibility when you brought up the F-35.
Beyond an overly optimistic engineering goal with a poor power to weight ratio, the exorbitant cost of entry and development. It has become the poster child of the military industrial complex's skill at fleecing the American tax payer via an incompetent and broken purchasing system at the Pentagon/DoD.
The best thing they could do is fire whoever keeps approving the extensions and budgetary increases and audit Lockheed and shut the thing down. Take what they have as lessons learned and start on another plane with more field serviceability and less tech testbed.
Between the just now going into full-service F-22 and drone tech, the F-35 was a bad idea from the "all in one" (This is a fluid interaction vehicle are you berkeleying kidding me? There is no such thing as an all in one for direct fluid interaction) mantra that never works.
As far as the A-10 yes it is old, but contrary to what you say it will still work. Ask any Gulf veteran.
In reply to Flight Service:
And that's how you argue on the internet. Someone takes a position you don't agree with, so you immediately claim their opinion is invalid. Bravos old chap.
You'll need to log in to post.
