The Accurate Reloading Forums THE ACCURATE RELOADING.COM FORUMS Other Topics Aviation The A-10: What a conceptGo | New | Find | Notify | Tools | Reply | |
| The A-10: What a concept | Login/Join |
one of us |
http://www.apacheclips.com/boa...F-35-Cant-Replace-It I remember seeing A-10s pop up out of nowhere on training flights in Nevada south of Fallon. Amazing ships! There is hope, even when your brain tells you there isn’t. – John Green, author | ||
|
One of Us |
Keesler AFB, In the butt hole of mississippi. there were shanty's with walls lined with newspaper right outside the base. I was in class there right after basic. A buddy just got his pilots license. we were up over the gulf with a few A-10s flying around. I don't have pics because I went from boot camp at Lackland right to Keesler (by bus  ) | |||
|
One of Us |
thanks for posting that this ship has had a special place in my world for 4o years all true Anyway it matters not, because my experience always has been that of---- a loss of snot and enamel on both sides of the 458 Win---- | |||
|
| One of Us |
an A-10 is a crop duster for very large battlefield pests. It is also an aircraft the Air Force never wanted and they tried multiple times to cancel it and delete it from inventory. The USMC actually was investigating if it could be built or rebuilt with folding wings for carrier operations. If I provoke you into thinking then I've done my good deed for the day! Those who manage to provoke themselves into other activities have only themselves to blame. *We Band of 45-70er's* 35 year Life Member of the NRA NRA Life Member since 1984 | |||
|
one of us |
The A-10 is a great flying machine, but it is not well suited to the modern battlefield. It was forced onto the USAF because of congressional politics. John Farner If you haven't, please join the NRA! | |||
|
| One of Us |
That it is not suited to the modern battlefield is hyperbole that has been used as an argument against it since the idea was still nothing more than a concept scribbled on a napkin with a felt tipped pen. it has consistently defied the arguments against it for all that time. The USAF didn't want it because it doesn't fit with their Buck Rogers/Robin Olds fantasies. It does an important job that anything faster and more glamorous can't do. the ARMY wanted the aircraft and so the USAF resisted it for that reason. Congress ended the debate by telling the USAF to take their institutional attitude and cram it. If I provoke you into thinking then I've done my good deed for the day! Those who manage to provoke themselves into other activities have only themselves to blame. *We Band of 45-70er's* 35 year Life Member of the NRA NRA Life Member since 1984 | |||
|
| one of us |
You big bore guys should be buying them up !  Just right with a 30mm which will take out any mastadon, and any of those megasaurus things ! | |||
|
| One of Us |
Close air support is supposed to be one of the he jobs of the airforce. Close means supporting troops with accurate fire and bombing of the enemy in contact with our troops on the ground. The Marines do it with the Harrier, the Airforce with the A10. The Army uses helicopters. No other aircraft can carry the load, loiter, or absorb battle damage like the A10. For us dirt soldiers it is the best reason for the Airforce to exist. It is a wonderful machine. Jerry Liles | |||
|
| one of us |
Concept of a tank killing aircraft, built around a gun always sent shivers up my spine. First trip to Vegas they were still a novelty, got to watch a couple fly off from Nellis. Gotta believe without the depleted uranium projectiles, just another slow ground attack aircraft. Grizz Indeed, no human being has yet lived under conditions which, considering the prevailing climates of the past, can be regarded as normal. John E Pfeiffer, The Emergence of Man Those who can't skin, can hold a leg. Abraham Lincoln Only one war at a time. Abe Again. | |||
|
| One of Us |
Depleted uranium is just a cheap substitute for tungsten The Depleted uranium is denser and through the government selling it to themselves is cheaper than other materials When I worked for Allied-Signal's Metglass division in the mid 80's the "guys next door" were working on sintered mixtures of other metals that were harder and less prone to spalling before penetration, and thus were able to penetrate better under most circumstances Though without the uranium which is pyroporic most of the rounds using other metals (Denser solid tungsten) lost their incendiary effect but penetrated better the fun one was a sintered mixture of Tungsten & Zirconium it had a sustained burn of about 15min. Somewhere around here I have a PGU-14/B API Armor Piercing Incendiary [DU] projectile (assembled into a previously fired 30x173mm casing) which you can find pictured as a complete round HERE: http://fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/pgu-14.htm The GAU-8A cannon can also use conventional HE projectiles as well as HEAT-type rounds and against targets other than main battle tanks the difference in effectiveness is not material If I provoke you into thinking then I've done my good deed for the day! Those who manage to provoke themselves into other activities have only themselves to blame. *We Band of 45-70er's* 35 year Life Member of the NRA NRA Life Member since 1984 | |||
|
| one of us |
Mr. De Groot post aroused my curiosity about the 30 mm so among other things I found this blurb which is interesting, at least to me....
xxxxxxxxxx When considering US based operations of guides/outfitters, check and see if they are NRA members. If not, why support someone who doesn't support us? Consider spending your money elsewhere. NEVER, EVER book a hunt with BLAIR WORLDWIDE HUNTING or JEFF BLAIR. I have come to understand that in hunting, the goal is not the goal but the process. | |||
|
| One of Us |
the 30mm cannon on the apache is an entirely different weapon system. The General Electric GAU-8A cannon of the A-10 is a far more powerful cannon, with much greater velocity, accuracy, range and rate of fire than the lighter Hughes M230 "Chaingun" cannon of the AH-64 Apache which uses the smaller 30 x 113 mm round If I provoke you into thinking then I've done my good deed for the day! Those who manage to provoke themselves into other activities have only themselves to blame. *We Band of 45-70er's* 35 year Life Member of the NRA NRA Life Member since 1984 | |||
|
| One of Us |
  | |||
|
| one of us |
http://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.c...loying-to-1640395280 Another chance to show the AF brass that the A-10 really works .  | |||
|
| one of us |
Sheer genius! There is hope, even when your brain tells you there isn’t. – John Green, author | |||
|
| One of Us |
I think for non armor targets 2X or 4X SUU 23 pods would make it a strafer without equal. | |||
|
| one of us |
You talk as though you're an expert on USAF weapon systems. I spent 20 years working on and around all sorts of USAF fighter aircraft, including the A-10. In 1990 at an overseas temporary base I sat in and listened to a very concerned Gen Horner as he expressed his grave concern for the survivability of the A-10, concerns that proved true in the ensuing combat. The A-10 suffered far greater damage and losses when compared to the F-16s which can neutralize armor far more effectively with far less danger to the crew than the A-10. You claim the U.S. Army "wanted" the A-10; can you cite a reference? I doubt it. As I said, the only reason the A-10 was produced was because of congressional politics. In the words of Elmer Kieth, "Hell, I was there." Were you? John Farner If you haven't, please join the NRA! | |||
|
| One of Us |
As I recall Gen Horner's son flew the A10 in the first Gulf War. Well as a dirt soldier I can say an A10 makes me feel a lot better than an F16 that comes and goes and is almost too far away to be seen. The F16 is a wonderful airplane and the men that fly and maintain it are superb, however, for close support from a GI point of view, it doesn't hold a candle to the A10. Same thing happened during Nam. The fast jets came in blew things up and left. The WWII and Korean War left over Skyraider was the plane that stayed and provided the loiter that was so comforting and helpful to the grunts. Tank plinking isn't the same thing as close support and anyone who flies close support is going to be down where the grunts are and it isn't safe for anyone down there. Just think of the A10 as a flying AFV and a damned good one. We respect the F16 but we love the A10 it's an airplane that just about deserves a CIB. Jerry Liles Army wanted the A10? You bet your bippie this Army Doggie did. Jerry Liles | |||
|
| One of Us |
If the first thing an air force general thinks about is his own men and aircraft, he does not have his mind on the mission or the ground troops he is supposed to protect. | |||
|
| one of us |
Jerry, I'm sure you understand the modern battlefield is much changed from the Vietnam war. Stingers hadn't be invented yet. MPAD devices consisted of SKS and AK rifles. Any Army attack helicopter is a more versatile and survivable platform than an A-10. Sure, attack helicopters can't carry as much punch, but are deployed in far greater numbers. SR4759, your comment is absolutely correct, but I assure you it doesn't apply to Gen Horner. A finer leader of men will not be found. John Farner If you haven't, please join the NRA! | |||
|
| Powered by Social Strata |
 | Please Wait. Your request is being processed... |
|
The Accurate Reloading Forums THE ACCURATE RELOADING.COM FORUMS Other Topics Aviation The A-10: What a concept
Visit our on-line store for AR Memorabilia