It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Speculation on what an A-10 Replacement would look like

page: 1
5
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 3 2016 @ 03:10 PM
link   
Yes, yes, this is everyone's favorite F-35 hating blog. They do love the Hog though and have an article up about what a replacement A-10 would look like.

There are a few concerns I have with the design proposed. While what is talked about certainly works as a drop in replacement for the A-10, the problem is the battlefield coming up, especially on the high end, is going to be different than when the A-10 went into production.

Here are two of my concerns:

1. The A-10 has short legs. It needs to have a longer range (since being able to hit an airfield 150 nm away is pretty 'easy' these days for the high end adversaries. It also needs longer on station time.

2. Should it be manned at this point? The longer on station times get pretty difficult in a one seater like that and the weapons on the battlefield are getting more brutal for aircraft.

What do the others think?




posted on Feb, 3 2016 @ 03:17 PM
link   
a reply to: anzha

You make good points, however, why use a $100,000,000 airframe to attack fighters with mostly 50s and 60s technology?

It is a retarded gamble.

I say just keep the hog for now, because it still has a place in all but the most modern theaters.



posted on Feb, 3 2016 @ 03:21 PM
link   
a reply to: Sargeras

For now, I agree.

However, like the B-52, at some point, the air frame must be replaced and it takes time to do the development and manufacture. The 'normal' was supposed to be 15 years. That means we start today and end up with operational planes in 2031. ugh. I think we can accelerate that, but...

I do NOT think a $100M airframe is a good idea for the A-10. The article suggests a target price of $20M. However...

DARPA did do the PCAS; however, that's only part of what's needed. The original intent was an unmanned A-10...



posted on Feb, 3 2016 @ 03:25 PM
link   
The A-10 is a beast.

It was conceived and designed to fight WW-III in Europe against waves of Soviet Armor. One things for sure, it packs one hell of a wallop when it opens up. Sounds pretty terrifying when it belches glowing hot death from above too.

Anything that comes along imho, wont give the enemy the pucker factor like what the A-10 does.



posted on Feb, 3 2016 @ 03:27 PM
link   
a reply to: anzha

Well that could work, add more fuel by taking out the pilot, go all fly by wire, maybe a point defense laser for AA missiles.

No risk to human life, we already own a bunch of them....

But the refit costs alone.... Probably better off just building a new model like you said in your op...

I just love the ugly ol hog, just like the BUFF!

2 of the most beautiful ugly things that ever flew!
edit on 3-2-2016 by Sargeras because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 3 2016 @ 03:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: SLAYER69
The A-10 is a beast.

It was conceived and designed to fight WW-III in Europe against waves of Soviet Armor. One things for sure, it packs one hell of a wallop when it opens up. Sounds pretty terrifying when it belches glowing hot death from above too.

Anything that comes along imho, wont give the enemy the pucker factor like what the A-10 does.


It is just that sound of the Avengers cannon!!!

BRUUUMP!!!!

Just damn!!!!



posted on Feb, 3 2016 @ 03:35 PM
link   
a reply to: SLAYER69

I don't think we ought to just dump the A-10.

However, the A-10 was designed for the 1970s WWIII, not a clash with a first rate adversary in the 2020s or on. Tech has marched on. There's no way it could or should be built as a stealth aircraft (it'd be too fragile and expensive then).

And as I noted, the Hog, while awesome, has short legs. As the article notes, the A-10 could use an engine upgrade as well: the hog is seriously under powered and that's from the pilots themselves.

AA is not something I'd suggest for the Hog From Heck, btw. That'd slowly turn it into an F-35 all over again. It's a mud mover.



posted on Feb, 3 2016 @ 03:45 PM
link   
Unmanned would be better....
With a longer linger time over target FOR SURE.....
I would like to see swarms of cheap tank killers, possibly even dropped from the belly of a B2 or buff...completely AI and focussed on the sillouettes of opposing armour....
Now that's stopping power.....



posted on Feb, 3 2016 @ 04:37 PM
link   
a reply to: SLAYER69


Anything that comes along imho, wont give the enemy the pucker factor like what the A-10 does.

And the psychological effect of the weapons systems needs to be taken into consideration. As I understand it, the friendlies on the ground also feel an enormous sense of relief when the hear the Warthog unleash Hell on the enemy.

-dex



posted on Feb, 3 2016 @ 05:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: DexterRiley
a reply to: SLAYER69


Anything that comes along imho, wont give the enemy the pucker factor like what the A-10 does.

And the psychological effect of the weapons systems needs to be taken into consideration. As I understand it, the friendlies on the ground also feel an enormous sense of relief when the hear the Warthog unleash Hell on the enemy.

-dex


Boosts our moral, and drains theirs dry!



posted on Feb, 3 2016 @ 10:02 PM
link   
The design philosophy was born of the Cold War of massed Soviet armour attacks and its survivability at low level from the Ju87 and il2.Today its close in Insurgency attacks and IED Ambushes,not massed armour or large convoys.Armed drones or UAV,s that hover close to squads and provide overwatch is the future..A10,s overhead will always be a psychological weapon against Insurgence,same as Ah-64,s or C130 Gunships as "fingers of god",hit from afar..silently and deadly.



posted on Feb, 7 2016 @ 02:59 PM
link   
Admittedly a little of topic (apologies) - but saw this superb model of the A-10 flying at Elvington a few years ago. It was powered by a jet engine and even as a model, it looks awesome



posted on Feb, 7 2016 @ 07:42 PM
link   
Question is its not the A10 that makes it such a weapon its the GAU-8/A Avenger.So what is in the pipeline to replace that as a weapon?



posted on Feb, 10 2016 @ 12:21 AM
link   
a reply to: Blackfinger

I'd argue it's the combination of the two. The gun is unreal and the platform that carries it only has one purpose. It's a perfect case of form following function.

What do we need?
- two engines for survivability - Check
- Shielded as much as possible by planes surfaces to make them harder to hit/lock onto - Check
- Armoured - Check.
- BFG - Check,

Glad they went with the A10, not the A9. It has nowhere near the same visual impact.




posted on Feb, 10 2016 @ 12:50 AM
link   
Unmanned A-10 concept (USAF)




posted on Feb, 10 2016 @ 12:55 AM
link   
a reply to: anzha

If any of the UFO chatter holds water we need a fighter capable to enter space and able to land on eart without the suport of a saturn 5 rocket attached to it....




posted on Feb, 10 2016 @ 01:03 AM
link   
a reply to: zatara

I thought the Black triangles covered that pretty well.
ALL they need to do is strap a particle beam to that puppy and WHO needs smaller craft?



posted on Feb, 10 2016 @ 01:20 AM
link   
a reply to: clay2 baraka

Interesting concept but I'm not sure if UAV'S are at the CAS level yet. Anyone else know more on that subject?



posted on Feb, 10 2016 @ 08:18 AM
link   
a reply to: Bfirez

Not with the cross global communication lag they currently have. Maybe if the controller was local to the theater of operation.



posted on Feb, 10 2016 @ 10:16 AM
link   
a reply to: Sammamishman

Which was the point of DARPA's PCAS...




top topics



 
5
<<   2 >>

log in

join