17 ms·
New reporting that an A-10 ~was also shot down~ has also gone down (unconfirmed if it was shot down) https://www.nytimes.com/live/2026/04/03/world/iran-war-tru
by fooey 6mo ago
New reporting that an A-10 ~was also shot down~ has also gone down (unconfirmed if it was shot down)
https://www.nytimes.com/live/2026/04/03/world/iran-war-trump-oil https://www.nytimes.com/live/2026/04/03/world/iran-war-trump...
> A second Air Force combat plane crashed in the Persian Gulf region on Friday, and the lone pilot was safely rescued, according to two U.S. officials who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss operational matters. The A-10 Warthog attack plane went down near the Strait of Hormuz about the same time that an Air Force F-15E was shot down over Iran, the officials said. In that incident, one crew member was rescued and search-and-rescue operators are looking for the second airman. Officials provided scant details about the A-10 crash, including how and where it happened.
there's some additional osint rumor mill that a blackhawk helicopter involved in rescue operations was also shot down but claims that crew been recovered
- gpderetta 6mo agoWhat are A-10s doing there? There isn't yet any ground operation, right?
- alfalfasprout 6mo agoWell, A-10s are well suited for strafing runs, etc. Presumably they'd be sent in if the area they're entering is presumed safe. That clearly didn't pan out. The reality is avoiding a ground operation was probably the wrong move at this point (ignoring the spicier broader debate of if the whole Iran campaign was the right call or not) It's really hard to truly guarantee surface to air capabilities are gone when you're relying purely on sat images + aerial surveillance (and obviously this carries risk). Iran has fairly portable SAM systems that are public knowledge.
- ifyoubuildit 6mo ago> ignoring the spicier broader debate of if the whole Iran campaign was the right call or not How spicy of a debate is that really? How many people outside of the admin and the dwindling hardcore trump base actually thought this was a good idea?
- IncreasePosts 6mo ago[flagged]
- i_love_retros 6mo agoBringing democracy and freedom to the world by bombing school children. God bless America!
- orthoxerox 6mo agoThe tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of school children.
- IncreasePosts 6mo agoIn line with that logic, how is Ukraine protecting its freedom by bombing an ice rink in belgorod?
- wat10000 6mo agoAttacking your attacker defends your freedom. Spontaneously attacking another country does not protect their freedom.
- stackghost 6mo agoThe A-10 carries AGM 88 anti-radiation missiles, and while it's a slow aircraft it can still passably perform SEAD with the AGM 88.
- elictronic 6mo agoManpads (man portable air defense) works just fine.
- stackghost 6mo agoI'm not sure that I understand what you are implying.
- beedeebeedee 6mo agoThat A-10’s can’t suppress manpads
- stackghost 6mo agoWell, they absolutely can with a BRRRRT, but if you mean "AGM 88 HARMs are a poor weaponeering choice against a Misagh-3", then sure, no argument here. But a dude on a hilltop with a shoulder tube is not the only type of air defense. I'm not sure why any of this is relevant. The question I was responding to was about why A-10s are even in-theatre, given there's no boots on the ground yet. The answer to that question is "they're probably doing SEAD". They might also be there to hit Iranian naval drones, though I doubt it'd be effective in that role.
- elictronic 6mo agoTo my understanding blowing up drone boats designed to destroy shipping.
- thinkcontext 6mo agoThey were largely being used for maritime patrol against fast boats. I saw a newsblurb a couple days ago that more were being sent to the region.
- jabwd 6mo agoThe A-10 is a horrible friendly-fire as a service. Might as well use the thing as a bomb truck while you are still forced to keep it in service because certain brain cell lacking individuals think brr is good.
- AdrianB1 6mo agoCheaper to operate than any fighter, longer endurance, good for patrolling over the Strait. Filling the gap between helicopters and fighters with a big, but cheap cannon.
- benjiro3000 6mo ago[dead]
- kackerlacker 6mo agoThis is exactly the situation I think of when I hear news of rescue missions. Running a rescue in a place with functional air defense is a recursive rescue problem that could quickly get out of control.
- zabzonk 6mo agoThe US did it all the time in Vietnam.
- jwilber 6mo ago…against the viet cong, where the biggest risk was the pilot getting pierced from small arms fire (in addition to the helo going down from pilot error). Quite different from the anti-air weapons modern day Iran possesses.
- Edman274 6mo agoAre you aware that hundreds of American fixed wing aircraft were lost to surface to air missiles in North Vietnam? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._aircraft_losses_to_missiles_during_the_Vietnam_War https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._aircraft_losses_t...
- jwilber 6mo agoAh yeah, well I didn’t know it was that high! But I’m responding to the rescue mission comment, which, since Vietnam, have overwhelmingly employed helicopters (Huey’s then, Black Hawks today). But machinery aside, the larger point is that air operations will likely go worse here than they did in Vietnam, unfortunately for both sides.
- bigyabai 6mo agoOr a MiG-17 that could outrate your F-4/F-105 at every subsonic flight regime.
- greedo 6mo ago
- YZF 6mo agoYour link and your quote does not say the A-10 was shot down though.
- Qem 6mo agoIt's on NYT site now.
- edaemon 6mo agoTheir point is that the NYT says it crashed, the cause isn't clear.
- malfist 6mo agoDo A-10's normally crash? Or is there reason to believe that an A-10 flying in hostile territory was downed because it was shot?
- YZF 6mo agoMy comment was re: stating it as fact which is misleading. Beliefs or guesses are not facts. Military airplanes do crash, there are lots of crashes every year: https://www.defenseone.com/threats/2025/11/military-aircraft-crashes-skyrocketed-2020-2024-new-data-shows/409649/ https://www.defenseone.com/threats/2025/11/military-aircraft... At war there's a lot more pressure on ground and air crews that can lead to more mistakes. Also the mission would be flown closer to the limits vs. training. So... We don't know? If your question is whether that's a good guess/greater than zero probability then sure. Is it a certainty? No. The Iranians will claim they shot it down. The Americans may or may not admit and if they deny then people will say they're lying.
- dylan604 6mo agoIt's an airplane. It is as susceptible to doors not being bolted on as much as a civilian flight. Maybe actually a higher chance of some benign mechanical issue as it is well known that air crews are often overworked with little to no sleep with the high tempo of sorties in these types of missions. Lots of historical examples of US military aircraft crashing from mechanical issues and not being shot down
- rurp 6mo agoOn top of these cases there is all of the aircraft that has been destroyed while grounded. The high tech AWACS getting blown up was a big hit, among others. The losses are likely much worse than we know since the military has been trying to keep a lid on most of them.
- ttul 6mo agoNot to mention the multiple THAAD radars taken offline. Those are $500M assets - and only 8 exist in the world. 24,000 precise transceivers all liquid cooled… not available on Amazon for next day deliver either.
- FlyingBears 6mo agowe have likely moved on from this to satellite as a stop gap.
- nradov 6mo agoMoved on how? Satellites are useful for launch detection and cueing but as far as we know there isn't a satellite constellation capable of tracking airborne targets with enough precision for targeting. And the military couldn't really keep such satellites secret: the emissions would be impossible to hide.
- bijowo1676 6mo agoa single AN/FPS-132 radar costs $1.1 bln, not $500m. And Iran stuck 17 of the CENCCOM sites hosting radars of all kinds across Qarar, Bahrain, Iraq, UAE, Saudi, Jordan, Israel, etc). Total cost is so much bigger, it is staggering. The whole CENTCOM is blind basically, as well as Iron Dome which relied on these radars - all blind now, in addition to long-range early nuke detection to protect CONUS is also blind. in addition to cost, they all require Rare Earth Minerals, and China has banned the export of these (they own like 99% of the market). So not only CENTCOM is blind and incurred damage in high single digit billions, but also will be unable to repair the damage any time soon (probably for decades) even if the funding were made to be available Government obviously pretty silent on all these failures and media doesn't want to dig and ask hard questions Sources: https://www.nytimes.com/2026/03/03/world/middleeast/iran-strikes-us-military-communication-infrastructure-in-mideast.html https://www.nytimes.com/2026/03/03/world/middleeast/iran-str... https://responsiblestatecraft.org/iran-radars-airstrikes/ https://responsiblestatecraft.org/iran-radars-airstrikes/
- PearlRiver 6mo agoI always wondered why China doesn't flood foreign war zones with weapons to field test their fancy new gear against the USAF. Seems like a no-brainer.
- greedo 6mo agoThey sell them. Military gear (at least aircraft and missiles) aren't cheap like an AK47. They have enjoyed watching India and Pakistan in their latest air battles. Lots of operational intel gleaned from that.
- roncesvalles 6mo agoThey do. India-Pakistan was basically a field trial of Chinese AD. It failed miserably but the Chinese blame operator error (which is still valuable info; there is no reason to assume a PLA ground operator would be more competent than a Pakistani one).