Posted on 10/06/2021 11:04:27 AM PDT by Onthebrink
Marine tactical aircraft have to be carrier capable. Technically, a C-130 is carrier capable. Not practical but it’s been done.
The Hog, despite its robust design, is not.
The grunts’ greatest friend.
11B40
Maybe it’s time to consider a CAS command. We did it with Space Command, why not for the dirtbellies?
You take ALL the A10s, ALL the Harriers, All the OV10Broncos or whatever is serving today as FACs [hell, bring back the A1Skyraider], ALL the AC130 Spookies, ALL the helicopters & Ospreys, and a smattering of Air Controllers. Perhaps even all the artillery...
Give them their own Command. That would cut the red tape. They can bicker over the need for supersonic CAS if they need to bicker, but in the meantime our guys have their butts covered.
A B-1B is at least as effective at taking out an armored advance (cluster bombs), and at CAS with JDAMs.
And is not at risk from shoulder fired missiles.
I’m old enough (and a zoomie) to have been part of the original OT&E of the A-10 on the Nelliis Range complex. (R63 @ ISAFAF)
The v1.0 was a POS.
Powder residue from the gun fogged the canopy and caused engine failures (as In multiple). First gun run mission had to fly back with an escort as the pilot could not see forward...
The gun jammed (al a la M-16) repeatedly and at the most embarrassing times. Hit a target with a dumb bomb? What a joke.
Now, a jillion bucks later and two cockpit upgrades, it does OK for an obsolete air-frame.
Please note it was intended for use in RVN, then later, against Soviet armor columns. The ZSU-23-4 is called an A-10 killer for a reason. ((https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HaYCjfvHIsQ)
Any time these aircraft have gone after a fixed site with defenses, they have been *badly mauled*.
But ya, against a bunch of camel jockeys with Aks, they are a killer-diller combo....
YMMV
.
Would you say there’s a need for a supersonic CAS airframe that can land on postage stamp improvised airfields and thrown-together cargo ship aircraft carriers?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawker_Siddeley_P.1154
The A-10’s main mission now is airborne observation (OA-10). Kind of doing the mission of the OV-1 Mohawk and the OV-10 Bronco army aircraft from the Vietnam-era. Which is why its numbers are down from 715 airframes built to something under 280 remaining, of which about 173 have new wings.
Sure, in a permissive environment it can put a lot of lead on target. But I think the USA is going to take a breather from those sorts of wars. And if the next big war is in the Pacific the ‘Hog will not be involved at all.
The Marines Corps budget can’t support the A-10. The Corps often operates in sub-squadron detachments and from ships. The A-10 wasn’t conceived for that.
Better: make the Air Force junior to the Army and Navy. Have the Theater Commander have the job of doing the service evaluations of the Air Force generals assigned to his area of operations, and he will do it according to how well they support the people on the ground.
The purpose of the Air Force is to support the ground forces.
The purpose of fighters is to clear the airspace so that CAS can operate.
The purpose of fighters is to clear the airspace so that CAS can operate.
***And to achieve air superiority over enemy territory, allowing bombers unfettered interdiction access. I have heard several times an unverified rumor that the F117 flew 2% of the missions in Gulf War I but hit 45% of the targets.
I met a Tomcat driver who volunteers at a local Air Force museum. I hope some day to met an A-10 pilot.
B-17 worked ok but it took until late 1942 when the 5th Airforce in the Pacific figured out how to do low level skip bombing with them. At high level trying to hit ships was a waste of effort. As far as I know they never hit a ship that way
False on two counts
No A-10 has been shot down. Show the shoulder fired missiles is not a serious threat.
A A-10 30mm round costs $100
A Jdam costs $25,000 just for the assembly. then you got to buy the bomb for $12,000 each
A CBU costs $14,000 per unit.
If there is another “big war” the A-10 is going to be doing exactly what it was created to do. Killing enemy armor in Taiwan or Korea
Apparently the AF propaganda is strong on this thread
Explain all the F-15 and F-16 losses? Funny thing, almost the exact same number as the A-10s while being a whole lot less effective, and a whole lot more expensive, when used in the close air support role
As far as I know they never hit a ship that way
There won’t be any mass tank attacks in the next war. Lightweight missiles kill armor, smart munitions delivered by arty can kill an entire tank battalion. Tanks now are back to a basic infantry support role. Exploitation will be done by fast, light vehicles.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.