A-10 Warthog

[Kirkhill]

Other, low and slow options

U.S. Navy MH-60s, Air Force F-16s Will Soon Fly With New C-UAS Missiles - Naval News

Derivatives of the AGR-20F FALCO air-to-air missile are being rapidly prototyped to fulfill the urgent low-cost engagement requirement for one-way attack drone swarms numbered in the hundreds.

www.navalnews.com

An MQ-9 can do this for cheaper.

How many APKWSII per MQ-9B?

 

[Halifax Tar]

An MQ-9 can do this for cheaper.

But does it go

 

[ytz]

Other, low and slow options

U.S. Navy MH-60s, Air Force F-16s Will Soon Fly With New C-UAS Missiles - Naval News

Derivatives of the AGR-20F FALCO air-to-air missile are being rapidly prototyped to fulfill the urgent low-cost engagement requirement for one-way attack drone swarms numbered in the hundreds.

www.navalnews.com

How many APKWSII per MQ-9B?

Enough. And it hangs out on the scene for hours more. It's so cheap to operate that 24/7 coverage can be provided too. Something that would be difficult with the A-10.

As long as A-10s are available, burn the flight hours I guess. But the mythology around this thing is getting to be as bad as the Gripen Bros.

It's not the 80s. If we want an unsurvivable aircraft to deliver CAS, there's drones, gunships and attack helos. There's a lot more options. And they tend to bring more persistence or firepower. Or in the case of the Spectre both.

If you want to see a modern example of providing CAS without the A-10, here's a famously lopsided event:

Battle of Khasham - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Kirkhill]

Not dead yet?

A-10 Warthog Being Tested With Aerial Refueling Probe Bolted Onto Its Nose

Beyond a win for the A-10, putting refueling probes on USAF tactical jets could be a boon of the service's Agile Combat Employment strategy.

www.twz.com

And the neat bit about this is that it is the Air Force exploring the means to keep the A-10 in the fight.

Why was the Warthog there in the first place?

Is the Air Force rediscovering "low and slow"?

High and fast can be better done by vehicles that don't have to worry about pilots blacking out, oxygen systems that fail and ejector seats for the 99th percentiles.

Meanwhile the Army is asking for low and slow support against tanks. The SF types want them to deal with insurgents and terrorists. The Navy apparently finds them effective against boats in swarms. They are also effective against swarms of low and slow Shaheds.

And they keep pilots gainfully employed yanking and banking.

And if pilots are going to be yanking and banking in rifle range then they are probably better of sitting in a titanium bath tub.

 

[ytz]

Not dead yet?

A-10 Warthog Being Tested With Aerial Refueling Probe Bolted Onto Its Nose

Beyond a win for the A-10, putting refueling probes on USAF tactical jets could be a boon of the service's Agile Combat Employment strategy.

www.twz.com

And the neat bit about this is that it is the Air Force exploring the means to keep the A-10 in the fight.



Is the Air Force rediscovering "low and slow"?

High and fast can be better done by vehicles that don't have to worry about pilots blacking out, oxygen systems that fail and ejector seats for the 99th percentiles.

Meanwhile the Army is asking for low and slow support against tanks. The SF types want them to deal with insurgents and terrorists. The Navy apparently finds them effective against boats in swarms. They are also effective against swarms of low and slow Shaheds.

And they keep pilots gainfully employed yanking and banking.

And if pilots are going to be yanking and banking in rifle range then they are probably better of sitting in a titanium bath tub.

I struggle to see why autonomous and RPAS can't do a lot of this in a few years. Even just ideas like handover where CCA shows up overhead and JTAC gets to start directing it using his tablet.

Sure. Keep the current fleet in while they have Airframe hours. But next gen is debatable.

 

[YZT580]

I struggle to see why autonomous and RPAS can't do a lot of this in a few years. Even just ideas like handover where CCA shows up overhead and JTAC gets to start directing it using his tablet.

Sure. Keep the current fleet in while they have Airframe hours. But next gen is debatable.

that's because you are in love with shinny and new and fail to see any value in ideas from the past. As someone much wiser than you or I once said: "Progress, far from consisting in change, depends on retentiveness. When change is absolute there remains no being to improve and no direction is set for possible improvement: and when experience is not retained, as among savages, infancy is perpetual. Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.

 

[Brad Sallows]

that's because you are in love with shinny and new and fail to see any value in ideas from the past. As someone much wiser than you or I once said: "Progress, far from consisting in change, depends on retentiveness. When change is absolute there remains no being to improve and no direction is set for possible improvement: and when experience is not retained, as among savages, infancy is perpetual. Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.

Absurd. Any person can reasonably learn enough from first principles in one lifetime to not have to rely on any accumulated wisdom/knowledge.

 

[Kirkhill]

I struggle to see why autonomous and RPAS can't do a lot of this in a few years. Even just ideas like handover where CCA shows up overhead and JTAC gets to start directing it using his tablet.

Sure. Keep the current fleet in while they have Airframe hours. But next gen is debatable.

They probably can.

But will they keep pilots yanking and banking?

 

[YZT580]

Absurd. Any person can reasonably learn enough from first principles in one lifetime to not have to rely on any accumulated wisdom/knowledge.

And I say bullfeathers: such an arrogant statement. I would never have expected it from anyone on this forum simply because if you can't learn from others and from other's experiences (history) what is the point of even reading these pages at all? Everything that you know is founded upon previous knowledge. Every invention since the wheel has built upon what someone else has done.

 

[Brad Sallows]

And I say bullfeathers: such an arrogant statement. I would never have expected it from anyone on this forum simply because if you can't learn from others and from other's experiences (history) what is the point of even reading these pages at all? Everything that you know is founded upon previous knowledge. Every invention since the wheel has built upon what someone else has done.

Surely it was obvious that I'm pulling the tail of people who deprecate accumulated wisdom/knowledge?

Or are you now pulling mine?

 

[YZT580]

Surely it was obvious that I'm pulling the tail of people who deprecate accumulated wisdom/knowledge?

Or are you now pulling mine?

Whoops. I take most things seriously and you did express yourself so well.