Leaderboard

Alright... I'll come out of retirement for this one... been watching the discussion for awhile now, so I guess it's time to weigh in. Be careful where you get your sources from-- the "anonymous Hog Driver" quoted by The Aviationist in the 1945 article is a long-time F-16 pilot who only recently converted to the A-10... and is a big advocate of a particular unit converting back to Vipers in the near future. The discussion of the gun seems shocking to anyone who's never flown the A-10... ermahgerd.... you mean it's not good against armor in the face? As Paul Harvey so eloquently put it... and now, for the rest of the story... The study referenced here and many other places is based on the LAVP (lot acceptance verification program) that began in 1975. The study was written in 1979, but the bulk of LAVP occurred between 1978 and 1980. Why does that matter? Because the systems on board the A-10 at that time were DRASTICALLY different than what is on the aircraft now. The aircraft at that time were non-LASTE (Low Altitude Safety and Targeting Enhancement), meaning that the pilots essentially employed iron sights without the benefit of PAC (precision attitude control, which essentially ”locks” the primary flight controls to hold the pipper on the aimpoint and get better bullet density). In other words, the system has gotten BETTER over the years. MUCH better. Some quotes from the test: “Only 93 passes were made in high-rate due to restrictions; and all passes after November 1979 were further limited to low-rate, 1 second bursts. Although not ideal for bullet density, all ammunition fired for LAVP was pure API, not combat mix.” In other words, the results were limited by the test parameters of the time. Even given those constraints, “Of first importance, all the Pk’s were HIGHER than expected; and the low-angle were comparable to the high angle.” A final key note relates to the non-LASTE nature of the test: ”hits usually did not occur after the 25th round fired.” That’s a situation that has been rectified with modern upgrades to the airframe. As the text follows, “ LASTE enables burst length and density to INCREASE through the use of a constantly computed impact point (CCIP) and PAC“. In other words, the gun was good back then, it’s even better now. For the "shocking" part... ALL Hog Drivers are taught that we don't shoot tanks in the face if we can avoid it-- that's where the machines are designed to be the most effective in terms of armor, so naturally we train to hit them from the side, top, or rear. You don't always get that option in combat, so M or F kills are just as acceptable-- any EFFECT that degrades the enemy's ability to fight is a positive step in combat. If you think that Pk of 1.0 is widespread, you're watching too many movies and not spending enough time in the vault. Here's another kicker: the gun isn't the first choice against armor for many Hog Drivers. Gasp! The maverick missile, which was designed simultaneously with the A-X program as a PRIMARY munition for the new A-X, provides much better effects, some standoff, and precision capability. Given the right circumstances and approval, the Hog can sling six of those, rifling three on a single pass. Think about that-- a PLATOON or armor, completely wiped out by a single Hog on two passes. A 4 ship can render a battalion of armor combat non-effective on 2 passes with that loadout, and we haven't even gone to the gun yet. Now, back to the original discussion of the thread. Could the A-10 survive and be effective in Ukraine? Absolutely. In American hands, in the American way of major combat ops. Turns out, the Hog community has been training side by side with every aspect of the USAF in major exercises for the last 40 years. If the Hog was truly an unsurvivable liability as proven in every Red Flag and ME (now WSINT) vul, you bet your ass that Corporate Blue would have trotted those stats out immediately. I can recall many a RF vul thinking to myself as a Sandy One... "gawddamn... I'd have my hands full after this round..." ... and none of them were Hogs. Our way of fighting is an overwhelming, integrated approach to these kind of operations. Hogs might be slower, so we launch first, land last, and often times can make it happen without siphoning off tanker gas that the other guys need. If you haven't read many of the open-source articles written by some Hog Drivers that occasionally pop up, then you may not be familiar with the applications currently being explored out west-- adding SDB (16 per jet), MALD, and potentially JASSM to the Hog makes it an incredible support asset that makes 5th Gen even more lethal-- freeing them up to do their thing while the swine saturates the battlefield. And the kicker is that even once the Hog launches all that "new" stuff, depending on the loadout, she still has enough weapons to engage up to 20 targets. Each. Now, if you send the Hogs into a fight alone, with less-than-optimum weapons, without SA, without SEAD (neither side has dedicated SEAD/DEAD assets), without effective tactics (both sides are, shall we say, less than impressive), and without training (how long does it take to train up ANY pilot to this level of warfare), then the results will be predictable. And I'll throw it out here since it's been floated on other sites: you send the Ukrainians ANY of our fighters, give them minimal time to get fam'd with it, maybe don't provide them the best weapons we have, and the results will be the same-- disaster. Tactics, training, and operational integration are key to major combat ops. They don't have it, so it really doesn't matter WHAT weapon you put in their inventory.

I don’t know man, how many threads on Baseops lately have devolved into garbage political pissing matches. Was kinda nice to have one dedicated to other funny shit.

IMO, at this point, if she doesn't go to Taiwan now (for literally any reason) it will be such a PR victory for China. It will give them confidence that they can dictate US political travel in their AOR.

Wait, there was some sort of quote with that picture? Don’t let it hurt your feelings Francis, it is the interwebs.

Some of y’all have brain worms man. This obviously-photoshopped photo is pretty gross TBH and the Capitol police “let the Jan 6th insurrectionists in the building” 🤨??? Have you seen the extensive amount of video from that day? Be conservative, hate on AOC, make fun of Biden for being old, elect your guy next time, whatever. But try to be better than the people you loathe and retain some grasp on reality. Shitposting your way through life isn’t a good look. WTFO.

Read the room man...

My post was about the boobies guys, not the quote. Should have added that to the original post.

There were people on the news back in the 70s saying the same thing. Mandy is certainly from the city and she's not alone in her thinking. This is why the electoral college is important. There is no way big city voters should run the country.

Our country is where it is because Mandy votes.

Alternate angle of the incident. You know it’s legit because of his Republican “R” hat.

Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

What a Charming Undeniable Natural Talent.

edit: I went over to the money thread...time I'll never get back...and realized what Random Guy really is, so I'll stop feeding the troll.

Only if you're selling, now. Canada uses adjustable rate and intro-rate mortgages almost exclusively. The rate hikes are having much more immediate effects in Canada, and will profoundly impact the foreclosure and eviction statistics. Prices rarely stay above historical income ratios for long (for obvious reasons), so expect a big crash. And since, like here, there is political pressure to fix the "housing shortage," tanking the housing market is not going to cause much heartburn with the Fed, though that may change when the baby boomers see their only retirement plan (an overvalued home) vaporize.

Posting to publicly thank Jon and his entire Trident team for helping my wife and I land a home (twice!) in a particularly challenging market. Jon's assistant, Olivia, was superb. She authored/sent loan approval letters in a timely manner & as we found homes where we seriously considered making an offer, she rapidly got us the relevant loan information to help us make an informed decision. We finally landed a deal in the ~Mar timeframe. We discussed numbers on Fri & by Monday the Fed had raised rates. Despite the higher rates, Jon honored the lower figures we discussed. The combination of low rate, zero lender fees, & applicable lender credits meant in addition to 0% VA down, I would have next to zero closing costs. Equally impressive was Roy. Once we had a signed our offer, Roy helped navigate us through the various closing disclosures, VA paperwork, and loan requirements. When I had questions, Roy answered them swiftly & with sufficient clarity to aid two home-buying novices like me and my wife. Unfortunately, this particular deal fell apart over our appraisal. We spent the next 3 months looking for a home & utilizing Trident's services. Time & again we funneled Olivia various property addresses; she would give us the relevant numbers. When we put in offers that weren't accepted, the Trident team was empathetic & encouraging. Roy & Olivia both kept me informed of the rate landscape until we made our 2nd offer. Yet again: Trident rates soundly beat the market, low fees, and 0 down. It was a no brainer. Once we finally got to closing, duties transferred to Jen who completed this phenomenal quartet. She worked directly with me & our title company to finish all the closing documents. Suffice to say: we're thankful to be (finally!) out of the rental market and into a home. Jon, Olivia, Roy & Jen made the process seamless with minimal damage to the ol' bank account. If I'm ever in a position to buy a home again, I'm giving Jon a call. If you are considering a purchase, your search has ended. THANK YOU TRIDENT!!!!

Yeah, some insight from a guy in the squadron, each board member has about 25ish candidates to go through and call so I think they’re just making their way down a list.

How gunship guys eat popsicles...

The last RQ-4 Global Hawk left Beale recently.

When unarmed civilian parents are more willing to enter the building than tactically outfitted cops...I'd say the pussy label fits pretty well.

"Mandy" represents!

I think people misunderstand that CA natives don't want people moving there, and they use their legal system to intentionally restrict housing, driving up home prices to increase their own wealth, and make the people moving to the state miserable in the hopes they will some day go home. And it's working, inflow to CA was negative for the first time last year. Honestly, CA natives just want to go back to a state of 1900's rural beach property and empty land.

Nothing about liberalism is compassionate. Treating individuals as labour inputs cannot be compassionate given basic properties of a human being, like family, community. CA purposefully under supplies housing because they don't want to live in a populated area. They don't want coastal CA to be like Hong Kong. If you mean that low interest rates drives up housing prices--yes, it does. But ultimately banks create the money they issue to home buyers, so house prices reflect whatever banks are willing to create. That's accounting convention--houses are priced according to comparables rather than some other metric, which produces a pro-cyclical dynamic: the more banks lend, prices go up, the more collateral prices go up, the more banks can justify creating money (larger loans). When the income of households fails to cover the interest burden, households take on short term debt to pay off their interest burden, which makes the system more susceptible to short term changes in interest rates. But the bubble dynamics of housing are much more complicated than that today, because the financial instruments themselves (MBS) serve as collateral for other money creation. A house of cards within a house of cards within a house of cards. This is why the Fed has placed itself in as a dealer in money markets via the Standing Repo Facility and Bond Purchasing program. Its has woven a web of interrelated debt structures which everything depends on but can't sustain itself. This is why @Lord Ratner is talking about there being 'too much debt', which is generally correct but an oversimplification--the wrong kind of debt (the wrong kind of money). Debt is money. You can't just reduce debt, that reduces money--the deficit reduction we see happening now may reduce the money supply far below the required amount needed to sustain the private debt structure.

Everyone just be glad they don't own property in Canada:

Why is posting about financial systems trolling?