A-10 Warthog Replacement

Doesn't that severely reduce the amount of targets you can engage per flight?

Gun Pods.

Attached: Ju87G.jpg (640x360, 70K)

Two engines minimum I'd say.

Attached: 7167460481_bd594262dc_z.jpg (640x360, 79K)

whats a manpad?

Dude America drops JDAMs on any haji with an AK

Not really. Guns use up ammo at a staggering rate. The pilot gets about 10 seconds of burst at most. They exaggerate the amount of bullets they can fire in films. In reality the pilot has less than six two or thee second bursts before they run out.

Its what male vegans wear

All I know is that I’m glad they’re flying a above me. If the Air Force has a decent replacement, the fuck if

I think the soldiers like the A-10 because of the relatively large spread of the BBBRRRRRTTTT compared to a large bomb, the effectiveness of the large bomb is likely higher though.

Cluster munitions would probably close the gap quite a bit, but they leave lots of unexploded ordinance laying around and are likely a war crime.

Attached: 1463460600068.jpg (600x431, 101K)

Its pretty hard to replace the BRRRRT

Attached: 1384527444171.gif (450x253, 400K)

wtf you leaf faggots dont even have berts so stfu

Metal Storm could be developed into a pod system for mounting under wing if guns are thought needed on a mission.

Attached: Metal-Storm-Sentry-Gun.jpg (500x375, 23K)

Attached: 1471110718694.jpg (2048x1536, 220K)

a pretty neat idea, have they made a 20mm version?

youtube.com/watch?v=Saoj7382Upg
the OV-10 Bronco is better suited to blowing up guerillas, A-10 is a tank hunter

Considering that a two second burst is >100 rounds of 30mm that's a lot.

At the moment it's designed as a sentry system. I can't see any reason why the principle won't work on larger round calibers.

bestsnipers.info/1-million-rounds-per-minute-gun/

If you hit anything. I think the future is guided munitions.

Attached: 1483407851390.jpg (304x408, 15K)

Didn't the Bronco also serve as a spotter for artillery? Any new aircraft will be multi role. The days of specialist aircraft are long gone.

youtube.com/watch?v=wKlnMwuCZso

youtube.com/watch?v=zx_9_RgMPCE

youtube.com/watch?v=WYSlaqLeNPk

With HE ammo even the misses kill.

>tfw too young to fly Fireforce missions over Rhodesia

Why even live?

If you want to ruin someones wedding day, give me a Hellfire or Brimstone missile any day of the week.

Best Australian invention.

But I think there are issues with variable muzzle velocity because the bullets are stacked one after another, ie: the barrel gets longer after every shot.

A JDAM is a just regular dumb bomb fitted with a cheap kit that turns it into either a laser guided or GPS guided bomb.

I've seen numerous muj survive Hellfire attacks, especially because they do give you a bit of warning.

I've never seen a muj survive an A-10.

1. what isnt a manpad going to shoot down
2. has an A-10 ever been shot down by one
3. airplanes are vulnerable to manpads so we should just stop using them in wars

MAN Portable Air Defense

The Swedes make excellent Manpads.

Attached: 5fae3876f1871195a66695833ba00d08.jpg (1024x680, 146K)

A Mustang derived close air support like the super tucano would probably better the A10 in all honesty. The A10 was built to kill tanks decades ago. You could build a prop plane from the ground up with modern avionics to support infantry. It would have better loiter time, could escort osprey and you could slow it right to a crawl to put cannons on enemy infantry. You'd be essentially building a faster, sturdier helicopter.

it makes sense, prop planes cost less to maintain than jets and like you said lets kit it out with all the latest and greatest. Saving flight hours on the F22 and 35 should be a huge priority, it doesnt make sense to have a stealth jet doing CAS, but then again we are talking about the military

>half a tonne of titanium armor
I like this

I seem to recall a 40mm grenade variant, but it is not readily reloadable. The warthog can't be replaced in the current multi-role world, they won't spend money on a dedicated tank buster.

Attached: 73C1D359-BBFC-4A59-8870-22782AD41285.jpg (570x564, 76K)

Service costs are going to a major factor. This new generation of aircraft are aiming at reducing costs down to the low/mid hundreds of dollars from tens of thousands per hour for jets.

Don't mind me, just posting to show the danger of lamps. youtu.be/Po4mVsSvUds

You sir are full of bovine fecal matter! There's a reason akmed and abdul aren't dropping them out of the sky like a skeet shoot, the absolute psychos they have driving the beasts keep hitting them in the head with the underside! It's not just the airframe and the brrrrrrrtttttt it's the whole shebang from pilot selection to trigger squeeze.

>Tau technology
Ew, that's disgusting you fucking heretic.

ironic, because his webm is of an f/a-18 firing its cannon, and canada does have that airframe

>fire and forget missiles
those are rocket pods firing in your pic related, user

A combination of drones, apaches and other attack helis, and the F35 are more than sufficient to replace the A 10. It’s happening in waves right now.

Attached: 88770FB9-B2E1-44AD-8DAF-8729CCEAF77D.jpg (470x313, 28K)

>that cat's scream
Jesus Christ, that's fucking horrible.

Only thing that came to mind when i thought of places with guns that take up the majority of the fuselage. Maybe the fire raptor?

Attached: 93FE6976-D474-41E3-A2BB-7CB273505125.jpg (600x620, 68K)

I almost want to say keep the warthog until a drone replacement is available. you know as soon as this prop plane starts to enter the service in any sort of large numbers, the manufacturers are going to drop a UAV CAS on us, and the army and af are going to have to have it

I know. The aircraft also come equipped with laser guidance pods to acquire and designate targets for guided missiles to attack.

About 40 seconds actually.

Fuck no they couldn’t, A-10’s are the tanks of the sky. Should conventional war ever happen, they’ll make a comeback. I can see the logic for the current conflict, no point in wasting vulcan rounds on sand niggers

obviously the b2 bomber and f16 are more than adequate to replace the warthog.

A reminder that if not for WWII we probably would still have our own aircraft industries. But then the Soviet Union happened, and Mossad after that

Attached: Cuk 509w.jpg (478x271, 35K)

>Its pretty hard to replace the BRRRRT
>shows f18 to illustrate brrrrrrtttttt

They really do have enough ammo for multiple strafes, they’re heavy as fuck and for good reason

How much ammo do they carry?

Attached: 13871226.png (500x321, 101K)

>10 seconds of ammo
Maybe if you're in an air supremacy prop plane, grandpa. Would you build a plane around a gun and hang time for extended CAS and then forget to give it enough ammo?

except that's wrong you retard, even with air superiority the infantry of a modern force would have manpads that would fuck those things up

I was speaking generally. The A-10 has a massive magazine. Most fighters only carry a few hundred rounds.

In an age where PGM's are a thing, and the Russian air defenses being this good and selling the technology to foreign countries, stuff like the A-10 needs to employ standoff weapons in order to be effective. There is no room anymore for low level strike aircraft like the A-10 and SU-25, except to kill shitskins. Any county with anything resembling a modern ADN will effectively render these planes useless. They are only to be employed when the enemy ADN is disabled, in case of Russian air defenses this is going to be incredibly difficult. The USAF employs a strategy around working around the enemy ADN, not directly assaulting it. The A-10 has too little operational flexibility for this purpose. It is too slow and the service ceiling is too low.

>cat scream
what do I do with this massive erection?

Is it bad I had a sensible chuckle?
The cats ok now but it's scream and the girls reaction killed me

Navy SEAL want super Tucano to look out for them and able to standby up to 4 hours while A10 only standby up to 40 mins. Super Tucson is Built to fuck the sandniggers up while A10 built to fuck tanks and transport vehicles up.

I had a chuckle at it's flailing, but the moment it started with those torturous screams, my smile quickly dropped.

Off the top of my head, I think they carry 3700 rounds.

Can’t say but observing their practice drills (lookup the videos)erves as my testament. They make multiple passes. >implying ground forces wouldn’t be engaging other ground forces
>implying that they will be called in for firing solutions with active AAA
>implying they’ll fly in alone
>Implying they won’t utilize chaff and ECM
They’re support craft dipshit, the only reason they go unescorted is due to the fact that what we’re hitting now has no real means of posing as a threat. To think that they outfit any of our crafts with only gun and no defense suits is the most brainlet stretch of logic out there

>shouts "no! no! stop!" at an inanimate object
>cat is obviously stuck in the structure - goes and twists it sideways
God I hate kids

>DUDE LMAO BRRRRRTXDD

I think the A10 is a cool bird, but this meme is cringe. The moment the USSR collapsed the A10 was obsolete, and really its purpose as a tank hunter was rather lackluster in trials. The missile armament was nice, but the GAU was unreliable for any armor piercing except mixed results on rear armor. It was only ever planned to be used as clean up crew after air superiority was established. We've been tossing it at shitskins because it loiters a little better than F18s/F16s but it's not a whole hell of a lot cheaper to run, and its maintenance costs get worse every year since the US is the only country that uses the A10 and reliably advertises its incoming retirement, causing production lines for spares/new part procurement to shut down.

The F35 can target ground infantry and other targets with sea launched missiles. Guns are for old cunts living in the nostalgic Vietnam era. A10 runs in Ghan were rare. Expensive. Dangerous. Attack Drones can handle loitering

The US will never adopt turbo-prop ground attack aircraft.

The reason is because of strategy and world markets for aircraft. The US wants to sell you expensive, complicated aircraft like the F-35 that they can control via software updates.

If your country is in conflict with them, they can always push a software update to disable it, instead of shooting it down. They're also dependent on the United States, in terms of all special kinds of hardware components.

Turbo-prop aircraft are relatively low-tech. Almost every country, even Brazil, can produce them, and make the parts to maintain them.

If these simpler aircraft were to become popular, it denies many billions of dollars to the United States. Those dollars that would have been spent buying and maintaining expensive aircraft.

They also lose control of the aircraft. Countries would not be dependent on a single supplier. If the United States and its allies don't want to make parts, they could just make the parts themselves, or contract them out to Russia or North Korea.

If the US adopts these aircraft, it would be a sign for everyone to do the same, and that's the actual reason they won't do it.

the Russian ADF didnt shoot down a single missile keep that in mind. The A-10 or a CAS isn't going to employ standoff weapons that fucking pants on head retarded, we have bombers and fighters to fill that role. As stated earlier they are not going to go into an environment alone where they could be shot down, its going to be part of a larger package. The ADF are going to be rendered useless by the time the hog gets on scene

did the cat really ded?

Do heat seeking missiles hit detect these things?

not really

Except we sell cheap shit like trucks, tanks, artillery guns, and outdated planes to everyone too. Making highly efficient props will just open third world shithole markets too. Hell, we sell the T6 Texan trainer this plane might be based off of to foreign countries.

drones

>Is low level ground attack a viable tactic in the modern air defense environment?
Yes.
It's a level beyond air supremacy, it's air domination. When your enemy has no remaining air defenses and no aircraft, CAS is there to completely crush and push out enemy and help infantry complete their objectives.

Guns will always have a place imo as the only direct counter is armor, which is something MBTs sacrificed in order for speed and maneuverability and compensate with angles armor. The tops of these tanks will always be prone from easy penetration and missiles will likely have to pass through a defense barrier themselves. There are incredible amounts of ways to intercept a missile, the only way you can intercept a bullet is to kill/destroy what’s firing it. There is a reason that even sea craft still have projectile weapon systems on them

>drones
Are an absolute meme. They’ll be effective after complete air dominance has been established but will make retardedly easy targets to shoot down before then

mfw there will never be another sea battle where battleships slug it out for domination of the worlds oceans

Attached: reaction eminem colbert delete this.jpg (1024x682, 50K)

In a modern war the A-10 would be renamed "A-10 -Sitting Duck"

user was talking about adopting the platform.
The US never really cared about cheap and effective weapons systems because cheap is the antithesis of what the war factories want.

I don’t see why the Apache and black hawk can’t cover the role

Also Americans expect zero casualties on our side these days

It’s sad to seem them become obsolete so quickly, fucking sea marvels

A-10s are super outdated.
The kind of stuff we have now is nuts.

Attached: yuh.gif (320x269, 826K)

Helicopters are fragile to the point that ground fire from infantry can disable them

The future of the Air Force, in my opinion, won’t be in large high tec jets.

The future will be in small, cheep, reliable, and numerous aircraft.

There will always be a need for stealth bombers and fighter jets but I believe the next step is what I mentioned above.

Just my 2 cents.

Attached: 1E8577FD-EDF5-48AB-935E-E8B38A5F0EF8.jpg (1535x2048, 473K)

It's not getting replaced, they canceled the replacement plan a couple years ago.

planes can fly faster, farther, and carry more ordinance. also operating in high altitude enviornments (afghanistan) those choppers lose alot of power due to the fact the air is so thin up there.
naval battles went from the ironclads to nuclear carriers in the span of one lifetime
they are working on that now, and its cool AF also scary skynet type stuff darpa.mil/program/gremlins

"The opposite problem" he speaks of means that you have to have some built in heat mechanism to prevent ice buildup on the prop. This makes this plane INCREDIBLY vulnerable to manpads. Also, the lack of radar signature is a lie. These things have a massive radar signature, and they're slow. This-kills-the-crab.jpg. You can't entirely count on chaff to be able to stop manpads or radar guided missiles. The first time one of these inevitably gets shotdown there's going to be a review of the technology.

Hmm..
Q

A-10 does not need replacement. Leave my planefu alone.