USAF Finally found a way to get rid of the A-10

[ClearedHot]

USAF Open to sending A-10s to Ukraine

[Karl Hungus]

Just think how many 11Fs that frees up to work the staffs, 365s to the Deid/Korea, RPAs, etc.  Brilliant move.

[dream big]

4 hours ago, Karl Hungus said:

Just think how many 11Fs that frees up to work the staffs, 365s to the Deid/Korea, RPAs, etc.  Brilliant move.

And backfill the mass exodus from Laughlin! 

[TreeA10]

I don't think the 30mm API can be sold/given due to nuclear non-proliferation agreements and you aren't punching many holes in a T-80 with TP ammo.

I'm not sure of the threat environment but flying the Hawg without SEAD assets would definitely not be something I would want to do. Knock the radar threats back and you might be able to put a workable plan together. 

[uhhello]

The new arrival ramp at AMARG would take out 95% of the world's air components.  It's pretty impressive lately. 

[nsplayr]

This is some high-level pentagon fuckery as a way to can the A-10, frankly I’m impressed 😆

I hope the Ukrainians get some aircraft and deliver that sweet, sweet brrrrt to the Russian invaders, but also that we keep the best ones in our own inventory for a while longer.

[Clark Griswold]

Article didn’t say but have the Ukrainians even asked for them? Seems like they want long range surface to surface missiles, artillery, drones, SAMs and whatever MiGs we can get for them from other nations.

As to the Hog operating there, is there any area close to their FLOT that they could operate without being in the sweet spot of double digit Russian SAM?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Pitt4401]

Plot twist--the Ukrainians don't want the A-10.  

https://www.airforcemag.com/ukraine-says-it-needs-fast-and-versatile-aircraft-not-the-a-10/

 

[hindsight2020]

2 hours ago, Pitt4401 said:

Plot twist--the Ukrainians don't want the A-10.  

#oof. 11Bs to Hawg bois:

 

[SpeedOfHeat]

5 hours ago, hindsight2020 said:

#oof. 11Bs to Hawg bois:

 

Except when the A-10 goes away, the pilots will all go to F-35.  (*Or a tour at UPT/IFF, and then F-35.)

But 11B's will still be 11B's.

[di1630]

Plot twist--the Ukrainians don't want the A-10.  
https://www.airforcemag.com/ukraine-says-it-needs-fast-and-versatile-aircraft-not-the-a-10/
 

Yeah sure, outdated mig 29s slinging dumb bombs would be much better.

Hogs would probably be better than anything they have but like 99% of air forces out there, they want fast/loud jets vs the MQ-9s and light attack they truly need.

[Clark Griswold]

Yeah sure, outdated mig 29s slinging dumb bombs would be much better.

Hogs would probably be better than anything they have but like 99% of air forces out there, they want fast/loud jets vs the MQ-9s and light attack they truly need.

I think given the density and overlapping WEZs of SAMs on both sides plus MANPADS is making a very quick ingress then quicker egress after weapons were released a premium vs persistence / redundancy / a really big gun on your jet

High speed and low altitude, guessing both sides are flying 500 KTAS below 100’ AGL to try to avoid / defeat the threat while using ECM, decoys, countermeasures

https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidaxe/2022/06/24/russian-jets-are-flying-so-low-to-dodge-ukrainian-air-defenses-that-theyre-running-into-the-ground/amp/

I’m assuming CAS that is performed to any extent (majority I assume is being done by the Russians) is likely a quick dash, pop up, attack then scoot for reattack one more time

Wiki says a Hog C clean at seal level will go 381 kts, with stores that’s gotta be way lower, no spear thrown at the hog but it’s not a Ferrari

The better gift horse IMHO would be
F/A-18C models we are divesting as we supply MiGs plus a shit load of other gear


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[nsplayr]

35 minutes ago, Clark Griswold said:

Wiki says a Hog C clean at seal level will go 381 kts, with stores that’s gotta be way lower, no spear thrown at the hog but it’s not a Ferrari

Looking up from my MQ-9 GCS with the plane doing like 150 KTAS for a 6-9 hour transit…

[Majestik Møøse]

On 7/23/2022 at 12:06 PM, Clark Griswold said:

Article didn’t say but have the Ukrainians even asked for them? Seems like they want long range surface to surface missiles, artillery, drones, SAMs and whatever MiGs we can get for them from other nations.

As to the Hog operating there, is there any area close to their FLOT that they could operate without being in the sweet spot of double digit Russian SAM?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Depends if you’re a Flat Earth kinda guy

[Danger41]

23 hours ago, SpeedOfHeat said:

Except when the A-10 goes away, the pilots will all go to F-35.  (*Or a tour at UPT/IFF, and then F-35.)

Damn, thoughts and prayers to those dudes.

[di1630]

High speed and low altitude, guessing both sides are flying 500 KTAS below 100’ AGL to try to avoid / defeat the threat while using ECM, decoys, countermeasures

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I haven’t heard how well the Ukrainian AF is doing but there is no better platform for doing all of the above than the hog which can survive the low alt man pad/aaa threat and go low to mask (ie what it was designed to do)

500+ knots is rarely any more survivable than 325 knots (that’s the real level A/S when loaded down) vs a Mach 3+ missile.

And at sone point to deliver weapons, the jet needs to unmask again, speed and hot exhaust is not helpful here

[Clark Griswold]

14 hours ago, di1630 said:

I haven’t heard how well the Ukrainian AF is doing but there is no better platform for doing all of the above than the hog which can survive the low alt man pad/aaa threat and go low to mask (ie what it was designed to do)

500+ knots is rarely any more survivable than 325 knots (that’s the real level A/S when loaded down) vs a Mach 3+ missile.

And at sone point to deliver weapons, the jet needs to unmask again, speed and hot exhaust is not helpful here

 

From what I've read, they've (the Ukr AF) have done okay but for the most part when there have been openings where manned fix wing strike can occur or where they accepted the risk and flew the mission(s) both sides have been wary and wisely IMHO, have been reluctant to risk difficult to replace manned platforms when the threat is very potent from their opponent.

The Ukr AF lack of SEAD (and Russia) seems to be keeping assets (particularly manned assets) from being used how we (the US with Western Allies) would use them for attack missions.

https://www.rusi.org/explore-our-research/publications/rusi-defence-systems/getting-serious-about-sead-european-air-forces-must-learn-failure-russian-air-force-over-ukraine

500 kts may be not much more survivable than 325 kts but for delivering what kind of weapons and what standards of ROE?  They could have requested the Hog but didn't as they are fighting right now, I think you've got a point as the inherent effectiveness of the Hog at these missions but I'll also take the Ukrainians at their word and if they say they don't want the Hog, I think it is for good reasons.

The Russians have been losing the Su-25 in some numbers, not a perfect analog to the Hog but similar:

https://www.businessinsider.com/soviet-su25-ground-attack-aircraft-takes-heavy-losses-in-ukraine-2022-4

Edited July 25, 2022 by Clark Griswold

[Lawman]

From what I've read, they've (the Ukr AF) have done okay but for the most part when there have been openings where manned fix wing strike can occur or where they accepted the risk and flew the mission(s) both sides have been wary and wisely IMHO, have been reluctant to risk difficult to replace manned platforms when the threat is very potent from their opponent.
The Ukr AF lack of SEAD (and Russia) seems to be keeping assets (particularly manned assets) from being used how we (the US with Western Allies) would use them for attack missions.
https://www.rusi.org/explore-our-research/publications/rusi-defence-systems/getting-serious-about-sead-european-air-forces-must-learn-failure-russian-air-force-over-ukraine
500 kts may be not much more survivable than 325 kts but for delivering what kind of weapons and what standards of ROE?  They could have requested the Hog but didn't as they are fighting right now, I think you've got a point as the inherent effectiveness of the Hog at these missions but I'll also take the Ukrainians at their word and if they say they don't want the Hog, I think it is for good reasons.
The Russians have been losing the Su-25 in some numbers, not a perfect analog to the Hog but similar:
https://www.businessinsider.com/soviet-su25-ground-attack-aircraft-takes-heavy-losses-in-ukraine-2022-4

I think a lot of our belief in the effectiveness of CAS is misconstrued by the success of what we can do with AirPower in COIN fights we’ve been in.

Even in the opening phases of OIR we didn’t face the kind of threat systems out there, nor did we try and execute against an enemy that enjoyed camouflage and terrain advantage (because it’s the wide open desert). This scenario provides extremely limited opportunity to develop the situation and game plan with a ground force because you can’t risk the exposure and they don’t have the datalinks and 10 digit grids we’ve grown comfortably accustomed to.

So if anything your limited ordnance would be best spent on trying to hit those HPTL items that the GMLRs can’t get to. That’s gonna require mission planning and support that probably doesn’t exist in any robust fashion on either side over there anymore. Either that or you keep them back as an augmentation to your ground fires hurling ordnance the way we’ve seen some of their aviation doing with toss bombing and massed rocket salvos…. Or you’re a permanent reserve to counter attack the Russians doing some sort of uncoordinated element thrust. Great.. we don’t need a Hawg to do that, I’m fact its probably a logistical intensive way to do that compared to other means.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Clark Griswold]

18 hours ago, Lawman said:

I think a lot of our belief in the effectiveness of CAS is misconstrued by the success of what we can do with AirPower in COIN fights we’ve been in.

Even in the opening phases of OIR we didn’t face the kind of threat systems out there, nor did we try and execute against an enemy that enjoyed camouflage and terrain advantage (because it’s the wide open desert). This scenario provides extremely limited opportunity to develop the situation and game plan with a ground force because you can’t risk the exposure and they don’t have the datalinks and 10 digit grids we’ve grown comfortably accustomed to.

So if anything your limited ordnance would be best spent on trying to hit those HPTL items that the GMLRs can’t get to. That’s gonna require mission planning and support that probably doesn’t exist in any robust fashion on either side over there anymore. Either that or you keep them back as an augmentation to your ground fires hurling ordnance the way we’ve seen some of their aviation doing with toss bombing and massed rocket salvos…. Or you’re a permanent reserve to counter attack the Russians doing some sort of uncoordinated element thrust. Great.. we don’t need a Hawg to do that, I’m fact its probably a logistical intensive way to do that compared to other means.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Concur with that idea 

Related idea to that one (US dominance and use of Airpower causing an overreliance and assumption we will always achieve it and use it as we have previously used it to achieve objectives and finally victory):

https://warontherocks.com/2022/06/in-denial-about-denial-why-ukraines-air-success-should-worry-the-west/

Bremmer and Grieco at WOR have an interesting and I think prescient idea on what we need to consider is realistically possible when faced with capable adversaries, our model that has worked well in previous conflicts is at an end methinks

[Lawman]

Concur with that idea 
Related idea to that one (US dominance and use of Airpower causing an overreliance and assumption we will always achieve it and use it as we have previously used it to achieve objectives and finally victory):
https://warontherocks.com/2022/06/in-denial-about-denial-why-ukraines-air-success-should-worry-the-west/
Bremmer and Grieco at WOR have an interesting and I think prescient idea on what we need to consider is realistically possible when faced with capable adversaries, our model that has worked well in previous conflicts is at an end methinks

I can guarantee you the ground side of this discussion just assumes air will be there and make their problems go away.

They do not believe anything can stop aviation and act shocked as hell when suddenly the threat causes even a pause much less losses (reference the SA-6 launch in Syria last spring and resultant restrictions that went in place).

I’ve routinely had to 3rd grade explain to a GFC who doesn’t want to apportion anything to SEAD, “No I can’t just kill the ADA… he’s designed to murder me. So I’m gonna need some of those big boom boom guns to make him at least put his head down for a minute.”


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Marco]

Anyone seen Rainman?  

 

Bueller, er, Rainman? Raaiinnmmmaannn?

[Clayton Bigsby]

yeah he ragequit a long time ago

[ClearedHot]

[Clayton Bigsby]

Posted this in the Russo/Ukrainian shenaniganz thread awhile back

[VMFA187]

On 7/24/2022 at 2:53 PM, Clark Griswold said:

The better gift horse IMHO would be
F/A-18C models we are divesting as we supply MiGs plus a shit load of other gear


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The Hornet is a great CAS platform, but I wouldn't want to operate one over there. 

 

On 7/25/2022 at 7:33 PM, Lawman said:

I think a lot of our belief in the effectiveness of CAS is misconstrued by the success of what we can do with AirPower in COIN fights we’ve been in.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Concur. CAS is a hell of a lot less effective when you're ingressing from a CP/IP at 480KGS, popping, attempting to slew the TPOD as you establish 30* NH only to roll in 2-3" later, and have <6" in the dive to locate the target. 

Pretty easy when all you have to say is "captured, strike posture set" and hear "push when able."