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.

 

Greatest Ground Attack Aircraft - Ever?

page: 2
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 26 2005 @ 09:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by Jezza
A-10,
TORNADO
F-18
F-16
F-111's FOREVER


I appreciate a person that likes the F-111. Personally I'm a fan of the FB-111, as it was capable of dropping everything up to and including 2x B61 freefall nuclear bombs in the bay. And the afterburner was always a sight to behold.

And Fritz, I hate to tell you this but helicopters ARE aircraft. Remember the rule, all helicopters are aircraft but not all aircraft are helicopters.




posted on Jul, 26 2005 @ 11:42 AM
link   
LOL, well I'd just call in a BUFF with a mixed load of JDAM's, CBU-87 CEM and the CBU-97 SFW ( both CBU's types fitted with the WCMD of course ). I'd be very surprised if an ant survived.



posted on Jul, 26 2005 @ 12:19 PM
link   
Rogue1,

The problem with that generally excellent idea is threefold:

1. As others have mentioned, if the 'frontal' area is contested (i.e. unreduced air or surface to air threats) you can't keep an aluminum cloud formation hanging around for kicks. It's just too high a valued asset.

2. You're gonna suck gas from every refueling asset in the theater to stay on station for any given length of time (I think some of the longer OEF missions out of Diego were on the order of 15-19hrs).

3. There aren't enough of them to form multiple CAS stacks of loiter. A Single BUFF may well be a functioning airborne arsenal ship in terms of total loadout but 'what if' you have 10-20 SOF teams in-country. ALL commited to monitoring and interdiction of road routes down into a high risk APOD/SPOD area where your main force is urgently trying to debark and get stood up as a fighting force.

One BUFF may command an area 20nm across (approximately 3-8 minutes flying time, depending on the turns needed) but if there are in fact multi-pronged attacks coming down not one or two but a dozen roadways you cannot play Khafji over here while 100nm /over there/ somebody gets a free ride down mountain pass #3.

Far better it is to have ten planes, each with a 16th the potential BUFF weapons load (5 vs. 80 thousand pounds), and /ten more transiting in/.

Because, particularly with the WCMD based munitions (CBU-104/105 IIRR) where you don't need but a single drop to get multiple kills, the shorter the radius that a continuous streaming rotation can create from 'somewhere close off the coast'.

The faster you will refresh depleted munitions vice fuel shortfalls.

Certainly a 700nm radius from a CVSF is better than 1,200-2,500nm from someplace like Diego or England during the transit from which a strategic platform may well spend 10 hours just getting there and back again to regenerate.

These are not the days of the Megafortress.


KPl.



posted on Jul, 26 2005 @ 12:27 PM
link   
No one mentioned the B52? I would call in a B52, but fritz said fighter-bomber so I don'ty know if a strict bomber counts?

[edit on 26-7-2005 by warpboost]



posted on Jul, 26 2005 @ 12:31 PM
link   
I posed [what I laughingly thought] was an overly simplistic scenario that even you armchair warriors could not fcuk up!

How stupid could I have been to have imagined that I would get a straight answere to a simple question.

All I asked was what ground attack aircraft would you use to destroy the 'hypothetical' reinforced motor rifle company on the valler floor.

I said you had no arty support - and in my army, that includes missiles because they form part of the Brit Royal Artillery.

I never mentioned ship or submarine launch cruise missiles and I know that helicopters are aircraft - actually their called 'rotary' wing aircraft. And YES! I do know that because I am an 'All Arms Recognition Instructor' and have been since 1987.

TO THELOT OF YOU!

[edit on 27-7-2005 by Thomas Crowne]



posted on Jul, 26 2005 @ 12:56 PM
link   
I think you're getting worked up over nothing. And I believe we have answered your question very well. So what exactly is the problem?

BTW, I thought it was a good topic. Oh well.

[edit on 7/26/2005 by CyberianHusky]



posted on Jul, 26 2005 @ 01:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by fritz
I posed [what I laughingly thought] was an overly simplistic scenario that even you armchair warriors could not fcuk up!

How stupid could I have been to have imagined that I would get a straight answere to a simple question.

All I asked was what ground attack aircraft would you use to destroy the 'hypothetical' reinforced motor rifle company on the valler floor.

I said you had no arty support - and in my army, that includes missiles because they form part of the Brit Royal Artillery.

I never mentioned ship or submarine launch cruise missiles and I know that helicopters are aircraft - actually their called 'rotary' wing aircraft. And YES! I do know that because I am an 'All Arms Recognition Instructor' and have been since 1987.

TO THELOT OF YOU!


And your not an armchair warrior cooking up imaginary scenarios on the internet
Your going to have a heart attack if you get that worked up over a stupid post on this forum.



posted on Jul, 26 2005 @ 03:32 PM
link   
Does anyone have the slightest idea what ch1466 is trying to say. It looks like he swallowed the Air Force abbreviations handbook and a copy of a Starwars script and puked up the result.

"If you designate your SPG4 spiral and integrate it with your YAG P4, you would have a viable threat interrogator for only a fraction of the cost of a Stigwhomper".

Plain English award witheld.



posted on Jul, 26 2005 @ 11:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by ch1466
Fritz,

>>
Following my not-so-successful 'Greatest Tank - Ever?' and 'Greatest Fighter
Aircraft - Ever?', I thought I'd ask you the following question:

You are a member of a squad or platoon - dug in on the forward slope of a long valley.
>>

Infantry do not face armor alone.


Infantry do face armour alone. Look at Arnhem. Look at the Mitla Pass.

I'll take Puff the Magic Dragon, thanks.

If it's got to be fast, I'll take GR Harrier.

If it's got to be slow and small I'll take Skyraider.

If it's got to be old I'll take Typhoon.

If it's got to be older I'll take Sopwith Salamander.

I kind of like the flying Russian tank seen in the wierd aircraft thread, can I have two of them deploy to my valley?



posted on Jul, 26 2005 @ 11:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Winchester Ranger T
Does anyone have the slightest idea what ch1466 is trying to say. It looks like he swallowed the Air Force abbreviations handbook and a copy of a Starwars script and puked up the result.

"If you designate your SPG4 spiral and integrate it with your YAG P4, you would have a viable threat interrogator for only a fraction of the cost of a Stigwhomper".

Plain English award witheld.


"It's not impossible, I used to bullseye whomprats back home in my T-16, they're not much bigger than two metres."



posted on Jul, 26 2005 @ 11:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by Winchester Ranger T
Does anyone have the slightest idea what ch1466 is trying to say. It looks like he swallowed the Air Force abbreviations handbook and a copy of a Starwars script and puked up the result.

"If you designate your SPG4 spiral and integrate it with your YAG P4, you would have a viable threat interrogator for only a fraction of the cost of a Stigwhomper".

Plain English award witheld.


I second that!!
I couldn't comprehend much of what he said in that tank thread also!!



posted on Jul, 26 2005 @ 11:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by Ezekial

Originally posted by Daedalus3
Most damage I think for size is the A-10 obv.

But lets talk about survivability against dedicated interceptor a/c
IMO the story would be a bit different then.

My personal favorite is the Jaguar


You wanna talk about survivablility? Oh man, the Thunderbolt has that in the bag. I suggest you search these and other sources for how strong the A10 is and how much punishment it can take before going down.


I think you misinderstood me..
I'm talking about the A2A defensive capabilites of the A-10.
I thought the A-10 was more or less dedicated anti-groundd stuff and not that much a "fighter-bomber" in essence.

How would an A-10 fare against a simple MiG-21 equipped with the Phzatron radar and the R-73 missile?
Better than a Tornado?

I ask this because at the onset of the 65 Indo-Pak war, many of the Hunter hawker(Brit) and Mysteres(French) fighter bombers were kind of swatted by dedicated a2a interceptors like the F-86,F-104,Mirage-III (multirole) because of lack of fighter escort



posted on Jul, 27 2005 @ 12:16 AM
link   
Gee, fella, no reason to get so mad! Here, I'll give you the answer to what A/C I'd use against ground forces: A-10 Warthog. The darned things move like mosquitos, are tougher than a battle axe, and by the time they get through chewing up all the ground equipment and part of the soldiers, the battle will be less dramatic.



posted on Jul, 27 2005 @ 04:08 AM
link   
Winchester,

I don't reiterate entire posts without reference.

Make up a list of points or acronyms that Google won't explain for you and I will try to explain in better, more explicit detail what I meant.

In general terms, successful CAS comes down to two principles: COE and COP. Contempt Of Engagement and Continuous Overhead Presence.

Many's the time that airpower 'coulda, shoulda, woulda' saved the day, except it was off fighting some other war that an interdiction minded general thought was more important than the lives of men commited to foolhardy engagements like Arnhem and Mitla.

At other points, it was the ability of the enemy to either make the direct support mission untenable for loss rates and/or the assistance of weather plus terrain that made the ground attack mission unworkable.

Moscow 1941 and Dien Bien Phu come to mind here.

In this case, having a Contempt Of Engagement means you DO NOT fight the way your enemy /defends/ best. Right over his head using low laydown and gunnery passes.

It also means the forces you are working with _NEVER_ Bleed For Dirt.

Bleed for time. Bleed for lives. Bleed for victory. But never, ever, /ever/ tie your foot to a staked rope as a function of saying "From here I shall not be moved...".

Because the dirt can't be grateful and modern mechanized troops won't move you, they will mow you down where you stand or go around and leave you a useless landmark-not-line in the sand.

The A-45CN UCAV, with the correct set of weapons (WCMD-SFW, GBU-39/40, JCM and LOCAAS), has the potential to be the ultimate CAS machine because it is so cheap and so enduring that no manned platform can match it for numbers of sorties generated over multiple CAS needs.

Even as it is so stealthy and so capable of standoff attack (25nm for the SDB, 100nm for the LOCAAS) that it cannot be pushed off station by conventional radar defenses, let alone battlefield handhelds or light guns.

It also has 4" capable SAR radar (able to literally track foot traffic moving target indications on a 'pixel to pixel' basis) so you need never fear losing contact with the enemy due to meteorologic extremes (the sandstorm during OIF grounded the A-10 fleet more effectively than a fleet of MiG-29 or Su-27's could have...).

People look at CAS and they think Stukas or Typhoons or Sturmovhiks. Such 'schlact' or slaughter based attack forms sapped the Luftwaffe of 15-20% of it's strength during the Blitzkrieg, /before/ the Battle Of Britain.

If we were to take such a method as standard in a hot-war today, we would lose upwards of 60-65 out of 320 A-10s in just a few days.

That is NOT the way you win a war. Nor even how you want to /plan to fight it/.

Because the A-10 is slow getting from base to any fight more than about 50-100nm away and if you lose that many planes (whether or not they are 'strong' enough to bring their pilot's back) you will have that much harder a time trying to generate missions for the 10-20 other ongoing CAS actions that an 'all infantry' (Airborne or Mountain troop) force would have to have constantly available if fighting armor without arty.


KPl.


P.S. Puff The Magic Dragon is a singular nickname given to the AC-47 of Vietnam fame. As the first of the line, it had only 3 or 4 7.62mm miniguns and as such would be able to do next to nothing to a modern mechanized force, even if they didn't shoot it down within seconds of arrival (only about a 5-7,000ft AGL orbit height).

P.P.S. The A-10 has only one ACM trick, that being a 7G bleeddown bat turn which it accomplishes in about 1,500ft and 180`from a start of 300 knots. At the end of which it is doing about 150-170knots and only able to sustain a further 3G. i.e. it goes from aggressive to strafe rag in one 'first -is- last best move' maneuver. As such, it is utterly worthless as an ACM platform in comparison with the PAIR of F-16s (MiG-29, Mirage 2000 etc. etc.) likely working it over from well above using double attack or loose deuce methodology _and radar quick lock_ to BnZ it to death.

OTOH, the Hog's max rated turn /radius/ is not all that much better than the -rated- (18-20dps) that an F-16 (Su-27, Eurofighter etc. etc.) can sustain basically forever at 9Gs, below 10,000ft. So, though the A-10 will never play the vertical the Vipers can play a low fight with nearly equal competency if they have to (say to avoid a radar defense)

To which I would add the lack of ranged gunfire tracking (though the updated IFFC HUD symbology is better as a fire funnel) and the inability to cue the Sidewinder seekers cripples the jet as a missileer. This is particularly important if it's the /other guys/ IADS you're playing over because the closer you come, the more you have to worry about the S2A threat.

Indeed, the only reason the A-10 gunned helicopters in Desert Storm was because every time a pilot uncaged his 9Mikes, they buzzed away merrily, looking down at all that hot sand. Utterly unable to lockup even a firmly HUD-centered target. In turn, going for the glory kill with the GAU meant penetrating the trashfire (shoulderlaunch SAM and antiaircraft artillery under 57mm) floor EVERYTIME.

Thus, a week after the first helo shootdown, the A-10 force had lost 3 aircraft trying to be Red Barons (and ending up Snoopy'd) and were promptly FORBIDDEN USE OF THE GUN ON ANY TARGET until just before Desert Saber.

Do not mythicize the A-10 Thunderbolt.

It was a bad design from the beginning as a SEA 'AX' Jet-Skyraider (All slow mover CAS/COIN platforms were largely invalidated by the appearance of SA-7). And when 'modified' for use against Warsaw Pact tanks in Europe, it came to the fight without an autopilot, moving map, INS or means of assuring terrain clearance in the bad weather which is _typical_ for the region throughout late winter and spring. Even as it's scenemag Mavericks were min-range blinded by daily occurences of mist and haze.

Worse, it _remains_ utterly unsurvivable and /unuseful/ today as a high altitude PGM shooter that hasn't got the thrust or the wings (too fat for their limiting Mach, too draggy to work slow) to stay out of trouble. And only a few LITENING pods to cue the use of dumb-LGB.

The A-10 is a PR poster child for the lie that is told so often people actually start to believe the hype.

[edit on 27-7-2005 by ch1466]



posted on Jul, 27 2005 @ 08:07 AM
link   
Greetings,

I Don't always agree with you Ch1466 but, damm some fine posts.


You have voted ch1466 for the Way Above Top Secret award. You have one more vote left for this month.

- Phil



posted on Jul, 27 2005 @ 12:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by drfunk
Ju-87 Stuka dive bomber and the Il-2 shturmovik. Nothing else comes close to the legendary status of these planes


[edit on 26-7-2005 by drfunk]


Agree on the Il-2 but the JU-87 was crap!

Great against kids & women but screwed against decent fighters (withdrawn from BoB) and very vulnerable in the dive to well-drilled troops armed with rifles! Even in secondary theatres it was obsolescent by '42. If it had faced decent opposition in '39/40 they'd be dotted all over Europe in little heaps

BTW Greatest ever Hawker Typhoon/Tempest series

www.aviation-history.com...

The one you'd want on your hill? a Harrier or a Skyraider/spad dropping 'Nape&snake'

[edit on 27/7/05 by CTID56092]



posted on Jul, 27 2005 @ 02:56 PM
link   
Personally, if I was on the ground dug in with the choice of ANY ground attack aircraft.........

It would be anything that wasn't being flown by an American Pilot. Don't get me wrong, I'm not anit-American, but the Yank's don't exactly have a good track record of 'friendly fire' !

Look at the recent Gulf conflicts. A Canadian Medical Unit, An American convoy with Russian dignatories (hmm conspiracy here), a Britsh Tornado aircraft. . . .. the list goes on.


Until the US rules of engagement change, I'd take my chances without.



posted on Jul, 27 2005 @ 05:35 PM
link   
WW2 TYPHOON
THUNDERBOLT
MOSQUITO
MUSTANG
CORSAIR
:pbtime:



posted on Jul, 28 2005 @ 12:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by ch1466



P.S. Puff The Magic Dragon is a singular nickname given to the AC-47 of Vietnam fame. As the first of the line, it had only 3 or 4 7.62mm miniguns and as such would be able to do next to nothing to a modern mechanized force, even if they didn't shoot it down within seconds of arrival (only about a 5-7,000ft AGL orbit height).


Nope.

Puff carried a sting in his tail in the form of a 105mm Howitzer. And he most definitely wasn't a DC3 Dakota.

BTW, Mechanised infantry is M113s and Bradleys (or BMDs and BMPs or Stormers, Strikers, Spartans and Warriors) and grunts on the ground. A gatling gun will do plenty against grunts, leaving you to take the wheels and tracks with your Carl Gustav.

Mechanised Infantry is not MBTs. It's not even Scorpion and Scimitar light tanks.

Hell, at 6,000 rounds a minute you can take refuge inside an aluminium M113 if you want, I'll be digging a hole underneath it to hide in.



posted on Jul, 28 2005 @ 12:38 PM
link   
Howlrunner,

>>
Nope.

Puff carried a sting in his tail in the form of a 105mm Howitzer. And he most definitely wasn't a DC3 Dakota.
>>

www.1stcavmedic.com...

www.diggerhistory.info...

www.centercomp.com...

But the real relevance is that AC-47 was Puff and/or Spooky while the AC-119 was Stinger or Shadow

www.centercomp.com...

And the AC-130A-H was Spectre before once again adopting Spooky for the U-boat.

Puff has never been applied to the AC-130 as a legitimate nick, not least because the _Spectre_ was not in existence at the time the name was coined.

As a function of equipment, the AC-47 was originally a 1964 conversion program, the 105mm howitzer adopted under Pave Aegis for the AC-130E didn't come along until about 1971, only a year shy of our departure from SEA.

www.afa.org...

>>
BTW, Mechanised infantry is M113s and Bradleys (or BMDs and BMPs or Stormers, Strikers, Spartans and Warriors) and grunts on the ground. A gatling gun will do plenty against grunts, leaving you to take the wheels and tracks with your Carl Gustav.
>>

That's a fallacy akin to saying that the 3rd and 4th _ID_ 'are not tank divisions'. Mech infantry is worthless on it's own because it lacks the ability to saturate an area with heavy MG and main gun fires, either in suppression of threats beyond the reach or armor of the IFV/APCs. Or when other tanks are known to be operating in the area.

'A Gatling Gun' is an invention of the mid 1800s. The _Rotary Gun_ which operates on a principle /similar to but not identical to/ Dr. Gatling's weapon, comes in calibers ranging from 5.56mm to 30mm. Each with ballistic properties all it's own. Just 'being a gat' doesn't say much to lethality.

>>
Mechanised Infantry is not MBTs. It's not even Scorpion and Scimitar light tanks.
>>

What a stunning piece of insight to go with your prior statement.

A Bradley or Warrior could deal with a Scorpion or Scimitar. So could an M901. An Australian FSV/MRV effectively is in fact BOTH a Gavin /and/ a Saladin/Scimitar respectively.

The difference between a dedicated light tank and an IFV/APC is what the troop compartment can spit out to cover you _away from_ the center-mass target cluster of the vehicles themselves. i.e. MANPADS teams.

Indeed, the BSFV/Linebacker mod even brings Stinger under armor so 'there is no waiting' to set up a covered air defense for an infantry assault.

>>
Hell, at 6,000 rounds a minute you can take refuge inside an aluminium M113 if you want, I'll be digging a hole underneath it to hide in.
>>

Aluminum is neither more nor less of a superior ballistic protection than 'gatling gun' is a definition of penetration of same. Thickness, hardness and inclination angle determine protective capabilities.

And all 'battle taxis' are rated to 7.62mm AP in all arcs as this is the median baseline of infantry (LMG/SAW) support weapons which they _must_ withstand while deploying as well as supporting their own troops.

The 113 in particular is frontally rated to 12.7mm with 14.5mm protection available through bolton appliques.

Put another way, that Dakota is also 'an aluminum box' of vastly thinner skin (got a screwdriver and a strong arm?).

Indeed, when we /tried/ to send AC-47s into both Laos and Southern North Vietnam to shut down their supply efforts, these aged crates were shot down at such a rate, 'just like a Stuka', that they were ultimately withdrawn to more conventional, in-country, firebase/airbase/MSR overwatch.

Not least because over the Plain Des Jars they were _utterly_ reliant on C-130 Blind Bat flareships to give them a 'chandelier' to work under so that not even 'the cover of night' could mask their presence.

Now, if I can cite a historical casepoint where by _unarmored truck columns_, fully linearized in roadmarch, can engage an orbiting PTMD gunship, killing it with ease.

WHY do you think a dispersed, escorted (including dedicated ADV in hilltop overwatch) and generally wary-of-U.S.-airpower battlefield formation of professional killers in AFVs of -any- kind are going to do /worse/?

Keeping in mind that the SA-7 didn't come online until about 1970 or so and so the poor schmucks who were fighting Puff back in 65-66 were shooting back at an aircraft orbiting above them at about 5,000-7,500ft with nothing more extravagant than optically aimed tubes in the range 14.5-37mm.

Don't be suckered into the PRBS about gunships either. They are strictly limited tools both in numbered inventory count (I think we have 13 AC-130Us and another 10 or so H's) and suitable mission roles to instances where the enemy air defense reaction is virtually non-existent.

Such is NOT apt to be the case if you are facing off with a motor rifle company.


KPl.


P.S. Hi Phil! Thanks for the compliment, I don't know what this 'award' is about but if you nominated me, I'm grateful. :-)




top topics



 
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join