3 ms·
>Actually, the A-10 is "broke" in the sense that it can no longer perform its mission in a modern air defense environment. I'm sure that the A-10 can still per
by bubuga 10y ago
>Actually, the A-10 is "broke" in the sense that it can no longer perform its mission in a modern air defense environment.
I'm sure that the A-10 can still perform its mission in a modern air defense environment, mainly due to the fact that the bulk of today's missions involve an enemy with limited resources, limited industrial capabilities, and limited technical skills.
> The current fleet is also old and wearing out.
I'm sure the US is quite capable of putting up a military aicraft program for a mark 2 version of the A10 thunderbolt, one which is focused on tackling the maintenance/cost issues of the current version and even increase the reliability of the whole airframe. The last four decades in the aviation field were very fertile with regards to technical progresses.
- vonmoltke 10y ago> I'm sure that the A-10 can still perform its mission in a modern air defense environment, mainly due to the fact that the bulk of today's missions involve an enemy with limited resources, limited industrial capabilities, and limited technical skills. To answer both you and robotresearcher, the US has not faced an opponent with a modern air defense system since Vietnam. The closest was Serbia, and NATO specifically held off on low level missions for a while there because of the Serb AD network. > I'm sure the US is quite capable of putting up a military aicraft program for a mark 2 version of the A10 thunderbolt, one which is focused on tackling the maintenance/cost issues of the current version and even increase the reliability of the whole airframe. The last four decades in the aviation field were very fertile with regards to technical progresses. That's basically what I said in the next sentence. I'm not sure what your point is here.