5 ms·

The A-10 is obsolete. Its airframe literally can’t hold the power systems required to support modern defensive and offensive capabilities. It would get wrecked

The A-10 is obsolete. Its airframe literally can’t hold the power systems required to support modern defensive and offensive capabilities. It would get wrecked against any modern air defense environment. It was designed for the threat environment from half a century ago with no upgrade path. F-15 and F-18 are not better at air superiority. The latest flavor of F-15 can still hold its own against other 4th gen aircraft but it will struggle against 5th gen aircraft. This has been demonstrated many times. The F-35 can carry much more weapons payload than any of the 4th gen aircraft you mention and has more range. That on its own is a huge win, stealth and sensors notwithstanding. You don’t seem to understand the criteria against which military aircraft are judged.

rnk 4y ago
Yet we keep using the a-10 to fight against non-modern air defenses over and over again. It has a use. If ukraine had them, would russia be able to shoot them all down? The answer should be yes, but russia should have waxed ukraine theoretically.
- XorNot 4y ago
  Russian AA is killing Ukrainian Migs very well when they're not careful. No one is flying over Ukraine very much because both sides have AA dominating all engagement altitudes.
- fnrslvr 4y ago
  I don't think you understand the kinds (and volumes) of SAM firepower a Soviet hangover can leave you with. Ukrainian skies are the most dangerous skies in the world right now, for both sides.
  - rnk 4y ago
    I wasn't trying to say that a10s should be used in Ukraine (because they'd be shot down). But a10s are still really useful in many other circumstances, most recently when fighting countries without air superiority. So if the us fights China, it doesn't seem like they'd be that useful because the us might not have air superiority and it won't be a tank war.
Dalewyn 4y ago
>The A-10 is obsolete. Its airframe literally can’t hold the power systems required to support modern defensive and offensive capabilities. It would get wrecked against any modern air defense environment. It was designed for the threat environment from half a century ago with no upgrade path. Yet we keep flying it in the face of repeated attempts to retire it, with the USAF even going on the record that the A-10 will be kept in inventory "indefinitely"[1]. The A-10 is clearly not obsolete and continues to proudly serve the USA and its friends and allies, and enjoys much adoration from its pilots, mechanics, infantrymen, and civilian fans. >F-15 and F-18 are not better at air superiority. The latest flavor of F-15 can still hold its own against other 4th gen aircraft but it will struggle against 5th gen aircraft. This has been demonstrated many times. The F-15 has suffered no airframe loss to enemy combat action in its entire service history, that is a feat not easily met. The USAF even went as far as to procure new F-15s, the -EX model, because F-35 production wasn't keeping up. As for the F/A-18, the Hornet boasts superior flight range and payload capacity besides being significantly cheaper, to say nothing of its proven air superiority and multirole capabilities. >The F-35 can carry much more weapons payload than any of the 4th gen aircraft you mention and has more range. That on its own is a huge win, stealth and sensors notwithstanding. That is patently false. The F-35 must sacrifice what little stealth it has to carry more payload, otherwise it can only carry a small handful within its internal weapon bays. Even accounting for carrying payload on its wing pylons, it still can't hold a candle to the other fighters; the F-15EX in particular can carry patently ridiculous payloads. As for range, it pales in comparison to air superiority fighters (eg: F-15C/D/E/EX, F-22) or 4th gen naval fighters (the F/A-18C/D/E/F). [1]: https://archive.ph/20170912212105/http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/defence/a10-warthog-a-badass-plane-with-a-big-gun-saved-from-scrapheap/news-story/fe24d72a11c0da2b5e467833d6c0602c https://archive.ph/20170912212105/http://www.theaustralian.c...
- cturner 4y ago
  > The USAF even went as far as to procure new F-15s, the -EX model, > because F-35 production wasn't keeping up. Is that the reason? I thought it was the need to counter the Chinese strategy of mass producing fighters with an idea of overwhelming western fighters through sheer weight of number. F35 is weak on per hour running cost and uptime per unit, and loses to the F15 variant if you are looking to scale. The f35 can operate in a similar role to an e8 alongside a mix of cheaper aircraft.
Maursault 4y ago
> You don’t seem to understand the criteria against which military aircraft are judged. FYI your argument was going so well until you employed this fallacy. What GP does or doesn't understand is entirely irrelevant, not to mention that mind-reading is forbidden, not really, but it is also fallacy. Only what is stated is relevant. Now if you'll just accept this, I actually do not want to argue. I was hoping you would not mind answering my questions, because I do not understand. > It would get wrecked against any modern air defense environment. Obviously, we have a modern air defense, and the F-35 and F-22, among other elements, are a part of it. Who else does? Russia? North Korea? China? I'm just curious who threatens our 50 year old technology. IOW, besides our allies, who has 4th and/or 5th gen aircraft that we need to shore up against and not let them wreck our jalopies? > The latest flavor of F-15 can still hold its own against other 4th gen aircraft but it will struggle against 5th gen aircraft. This has been demonstrated many times. same question, who, other than our allies, is operating 5th gen aircraft that we should be concerned about? I'm not making any point. I really don't know. Appreciated.
- jandrewrogers 4y ago
  No one is operating 5th gen aircraft that the US should be concerned about. Many countries are operating air defenses that the US should be concerned about. The 5th gen aircraft have credible, but not perfect, defense in-depth against the current generation of air defense platforms, whereas the 4th gen aircraft do not (though they may gain it at some point). In the specific case of the A-10, it was designed for a world that had extremely primitive sensor systems that couldn’t even reliably lock onto a plane when looking straight at it. We aren’t in that world anymore. Not only is the terminal guidance sophisticated and reliable but the warheads are designed specifically to destroy aircraft like the A-10. Everyone has had 50 years to work on that problem. Modern Russian and Chinese systems effortlessly deal with an A-10; it lacks the power systems to support modern counter-measures against modern systems. It isn’t upgradable like that because that wasn’t a design objective. Modern military aircraft like the F-35 have critical combat roles that don’t involve dogfighting. Their sensor suites and processing capabilities are at least as important as any other particular feature, and other aircraft don’t have that. Their systems can measure and exploit their environment to an astonishing degree.

rnk 4y ago

Yet we keep using the a-10 to fight against non-modern air defenses over and over again. It has a use. If ukraine had them, would russia be able to shoot them all down? The answer should be yes, but russia should have waxed ukraine theoretically.

XorNot 4y ago
Russian AA is killing Ukrainian Migs very well when they're not careful. No one is flying over Ukraine very much because both sides have AA dominating all engagement altitudes.
fnrslvr 4y ago
I don't think you understand the kinds (and volumes) of SAM firepower a Soviet hangover can leave you with. Ukrainian skies are the most dangerous skies in the world right now, for both sides.
- rnk 4y ago
  I wasn't trying to say that a10s should be used in Ukraine (because they'd be shot down). But a10s are still really useful in many other circumstances, most recently when fighting countries without air superiority. So if the us fights China, it doesn't seem like they'd be that useful because the us might not have air superiority and it won't be a tank war.

Dalewyn 4y ago

>The A-10 is obsolete. Its airframe literally can’t hold the power systems required to support modern defensive and offensive capabilities. It would get wrecked against any modern air defense environment. It was designed for the threat environment from half a century ago with no upgrade path. Yet we keep flying it in the face of repeated attempts to retire it, with the USAF even going on the record that the A-10 will be kept in inventory "indefinitely"[1]. The A-10 is clearly not obsolete and continues to proudly serve the USA and its friends and allies, and enjoys much adoration from its pilots, mechanics, infantrymen, and civilian fans. >F-15 and F-18 are not better at air superiority. The latest flavor of F-15 can still hold its own against other 4th gen aircraft but it will struggle against 5th gen aircraft. This has been demonstrated many times. The F-15 has suffered no airframe loss to enemy combat action in its entire service history, that is a feat not easily met. The USAF even went as far as to procure new F-15s, the -EX model, because F-35 production wasn't keeping up. As for the F/A-18, the Hornet boasts superior flight range and payload capacity besides being significantly cheaper, to say nothing of its proven air superiority and multirole capabilities. >The F-35 can carry much more weapons payload than any of the 4th gen aircraft you mention and has more range. That on its own is a huge win, stealth and sensors notwithstanding. That is patently false. The F-35 must sacrifice what little stealth it has to carry more payload, otherwise it can only carry a small handful within its internal weapon bays. Even accounting for carrying payload on its wing pylons, it still can't hold a candle to the other fighters; the F-15EX in particular can carry patently ridiculous payloads. As for range, it pales in comparison to air superiority fighters (eg: F-15C/D/E/EX, F-22) or 4th gen naval fighters (the F/A-18C/D/E/F). [1]: https://archive.ph/20170912212105/http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/defence/a10-warthog-a-badass-plane-with-a-big-gun-saved-from-scrapheap/news-story/fe24d72a11c0da2b5e467833d6c0602c https://archive.ph/20170912212105/http://www.theaustralian.c...

cturner 4y ago
> The USAF even went as far as to procure new F-15s, the -EX model, > because F-35 production wasn't keeping up. Is that the reason? I thought it was the need to counter the Chinese strategy of mass producing fighters with an idea of overwhelming western fighters through sheer weight of number. F35 is weak on per hour running cost and uptime per unit, and loses to the F15 variant if you are looking to scale. The f35 can operate in a similar role to an e8 alongside a mix of cheaper aircraft.

Maursault 4y ago

> You don’t seem to understand the criteria against which military aircraft are judged. FYI your argument was going so well until you employed this fallacy. What GP does or doesn't understand is entirely irrelevant, not to mention that mind-reading is forbidden, not really, but it is also fallacy. Only what is stated is relevant. Now if you'll just accept this, I actually do not want to argue. I was hoping you would not mind answering my questions, because I do not understand. > It would get wrecked against any modern air defense environment. Obviously, we have a modern air defense, and the F-35 and F-22, among other elements, are a part of it. Who else does? Russia? North Korea? China? I'm just curious who threatens our 50 year old technology. IOW, besides our allies, who has 4th and/or 5th gen aircraft that we need to shore up against and not let them wreck our jalopies? > The latest flavor of F-15 can still hold its own against other 4th gen aircraft but it will struggle against 5th gen aircraft. This has been demonstrated many times. same question, who, other than our allies, is operating 5th gen aircraft that we should be concerned about? I'm not making any point. I really don't know. Appreciated.

jandrewrogers 4y ago
No one is operating 5th gen aircraft that the US should be concerned about. Many countries are operating air defenses that the US should be concerned about. The 5th gen aircraft have credible, but not perfect, defense in-depth against the current generation of air defense platforms, whereas the 4th gen aircraft do not (though they may gain it at some point). In the specific case of the A-10, it was designed for a world that had extremely primitive sensor systems that couldn’t even reliably lock onto a plane when looking straight at it. We aren’t in that world anymore. Not only is the terminal guidance sophisticated and reliable but the warheads are designed specifically to destroy aircraft like the A-10. Everyone has had 50 years to work on that problem. Modern Russian and Chinese systems effortlessly deal with an A-10; it lacks the power systems to support modern counter-measures against modern systems. It isn’t upgradable like that because that wasn’t a design objective. Modern military aircraft like the F-35 have critical combat roles that don’t involve dogfighting. Their sensor suites and processing capabilities are at least as important as any other particular feature, and other aircraft don’t have that. Their systems can measure and exploit their environment to an astonishing degree.