BRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRTTTTTTTTTTT

>The obnibus bill

Wtf I love the ombnibus bill now

Last time the USAF tried to kill the Hog the Army said they would take them. I'm fairly certain they pull this shit every few years to squeeze some more funding out of Congress.

The main gun has to be registered as a destructive device and a machine gun, and possibly so does every hard point that can carry ordinance. Aside from that I wouldn't be surprised if there were FAA rules about noise or laws forbidden civilian possession of a device with schematics that are still classified without the right contract. And to buy one you need an approved end use certificate.

Disgusting

The F-35 is far better at CAS than this piece of shit will ever be. Putting money on this is putting money out of the F-35 pocket. We don't need this veteran's monkey model shit. We'll still use F-35 on anything outside of a media scrum for A-10 commie sympathizers.

Why would an a-10 make a t-72 butthurt in particular?

This. The cannon is useless these days when smart bombs can be dropped from 30,000 feet.

>completely ignoring that the GAU-8 can barely deal with a fucking T-62 from the side

Most things are better at CAS than the A-10, like the B-1. The A-10 is cool as balls but it's obsolete against anyone with modern anti-air capabilities, and incredibly inefficient against those that don't.

Attached: B-1B_Lancer_in_April_2010.jpg (2700x1796, 2.07M)

China will not grow larger.

Yes, nothing like an explosive payload to stop the mass of enemies in the forest less than a couple hundred yards away.

use it on the border until they BUILD THAT WALL!

Attached: 1522213440271.jpg (570x570, 101K)

>what is sdb

>be me. in Afghanistan.
> in firefight with towel heads.
>roughly 100 yards away
>ak fire is pinning my squad
>call in air support
>hear familiar sound of close air support vehicle
>whole squad gets wiped out by a guided missile dropped by friendly air support

>completely ignoring that the plane is fucking airborne and attacking the tank's top armor

youtube.com/watch?v=_up7IHd3LDs
USAF is replacing the B-1 with the B-21 anyway

Attached: Reaction.jet.jpg (1080x1086, 100K)

yeah, because they've been using it so much that it will need replacement

No, because maintenance is ridiculous on it. The B-21 is a modernized and simplified B-2 capable of flying the B-1's original intended missions of high altitude bombing not some RC bomb CAS shit.

>be me
>51 year old plane
>shread any ground/air unit with ease
>congress hates me
>Daddy US AirForce has my back
>BRRT BRRT bitches
>im never retiring

Attached: 143113.jpg (800x600, 64K)

You haven't read the A-10 Coloring Book, have you

A plane kept alive by boomers and fuckin' memes despite being garbage

Attached: 1509148534871.jpg (278x267, 24K)

>laws forbidden civilian possession of a device with schematics that are still classified
... what the heck would still be classified in a Hog? The thing has been public knowledge for decades and wasn't high tech even when it was built.

>congress hates me
>Daddy US AirForce has my back
Other way around bucko.
Congress keeps the A-10C alive with upgrades; the USAF has been trying to retire the A-10 for over a decade now.

Comms systems, specific avionics.

Even on DCS A-10c they're straight up completely missing a panel for that

Do B1 pilots count friendly troops for confirmed kills?

pic is how A-10s feel right now.

Attached: 1437335110582.jpg (500x375, 66K)

So how come the A-10 has the highest blue on blue and civilian death rate?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/190th_Fighter_Squadron,_Blues_and_Royals_friendly_fire_incident

I don't know, do A-10 pilots? They'd be winning if they did.

/thread

>completely ignoring the fact that A-10s don't attack from 90 degrees up

Don't really need to

Most tanks have armor on top for the name only and may be practically punctured with a sharp pencil poke

GAU-8 can only take out a T-62 while strafing in from the back with range below 400 meters.

T-62. Not T-72, not T-64, not T-80 and not T-90. Tee sixty fucking two. The only way for GAU-8 to take out anything more recent is by it's barrels being used as a ram, as A-10 kamikazes into it.

It's a fucking 30mm mang it can't do magic.

What an absolutely god fucking awful opinion.

>The F-35 is far better at CAS than this piece of shit will ever be.

That's cool, the F-35 only costs $42,000 per flight hour; the A-10 costs around $18,000. Moreover, having the A-10, or another dedicated CAS aircraft, frees up the F-35 to do shit it was actually designed for (hint: not CAS).

>Putting money on this is putting money out of the F-35 pocket.

While literally true, this is absolutely fucking retarded.

The amount being spent on restarting A-10 wing production is less than a single F-35 costs. In exchange, we get longer use of a dedicated CAS aircraft + lower flight hour costs + less required maintenance.

>The A-10 is cool as balls but it's obsolete against anyone with modern anti-air capabilities

I'm struggling to think of a situation where CAS is necessary against an opponent with modern anti-air capabilities because this isn't WW2 or Vietnam you dumbass.

>and incredibly inefficient against those that don't.

Yet it is significantly more efficient than the F-35.

You. I like you and the way you think.

>I'm struggling to think of a situation where CAS is necessary against an opponent with modern anti-air capabilities because this isn't WW2 or Vietnam you dumbass.
Are you in the crowd which believes there will never be a symmetric war again or do you seriously think that CAS is unnecessary in a symmetric war?

>So, legally, what's stopping the average American from buying one of these bad boys?
The USAF isn't allowed to sell any. Nobody else has any A-10s, and the manufacturer is now defunct. If Fairchild were still around, in theory you could legally pay them to build you one, and the only legal barriers would be ITAR (which is a nuisance but still manageable) and the FAA (which has no standard airworthiness certificate for the type, so it'd have to be certified experimental with the restrictions that entails).

Attached: maximum_nice.jpg (371x532, 39K)

Neither. I believe CAS will generally not be possible in a future symmetric war.

If we are at the point where we are kicking down doors in Shanghai, its no longer symmetric warfare.

>GAU-8 can only take out a T-62 while strafing in from the back with range below 400 meters.

>T-62. Not T-72, not T-64, not T-80 and not T-90. Tee sixty fucking two. The only way for GAU-8 to take out anything more recent is by it's barrels being used as a ram, as A-10 kamikazes into it.

>It's a fucking 30mm mang it can't do magic.

Going by quick googling all those have only 30mm of roof armor making them very vulnerable to airborne autocannon

>Why would an a-10 make a t-72 butthurt in particular
Because it would turn the T-72 into a colander with a three second brrrrt

because they get used for the most gnarly missions, and maybe because pilots get tired from the hours of loiter time the A-10 provides.

Its a testament to its effectiveness

Go learn about modern armor before you post bullshit on this board again.

>he thinks 30mm of armor will block 30mm autocannon rounds

>Durr A-10 costs less per hour therefore better
Since when are people with an IQ low as yours capable of posting on an internet board?

Attached: retard-spotted.jpg (218x231, 4K)

>the F-35 only costs $42,000 per flight hour; the A-10 costs around $18,000.

Do you even know how rich America is? Even if it costs $100,000 it doesn't matter since we're that rich. You're country must be poor. Or your just a Jew. Oh wait.

>frees up the F-35 to do shit it was actually designed for.
Like CAS. What you're not freeing up is supply, logistics and maintenance personnel since you need two parallel lines to service different planes when you can have one.

Maintaining and upgrading legacy fighters, A-10 included, would cost four times as much as upgrading to the F-35 which is much more superior in every way.

>frees up the F-35 to do shit it was actually designed for (hint: not CAS).

It was designed for CAS though, you cretin.

>I'm struggling to think of a situation where CAS is necessary against an opponent with modern anti-air capabilities
I bet you think CAS means the aircraft is close to the ground, don't you?

US doctine relies on air superiority and CAS missions supporting its ground forces, just like most western armies. Its not something you stop needing.

We should renamed CAS to FAS (Far Air Support) so retards stop thinking only the A-10 can do it.

>cant provide an actual rebuttal
>throws shade, makes basic grammatical mistakes

bless you

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
*BREATHES*
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

>Like CAS.

Do you have any evidence whatsoever to prove the F-35 was designed to perform CAS?

I'll help you out: you don't because the F-35 was not designed to perform CAS. You must be a literal fucking mongoloid that epitomizes the le 56% mutt meme if you equate a ground attack role to CAS.

>What you're not freeing up is supply, logistics and maintenance personnel since you need two parallel lines to service different planes when you can have one.

"Do you even know how rich America is? Even if it costs $100,000 it doesn't matter since we're that rich. You're country must be poor. Or your just a Jew. Oh wait."

Your proposed alternative reduces the number of F-35s available at any given point by deviating them to also perform CAS.

When we have a cheaper and proven alternative already in use no less.

>the Virgin F-35 suffers from FAS
>the Chad A-10 delivers CAS

>Do you have any evidence whatsoever to prove the F-35 was designed to perform CAS?

youtube.com/watch?v=lho79rXJAtg

are you braindead?

A-10 maintenance will not come close to F-35 maintenance -- feel free to provide a single source that proves otherwise.

As for upgrading, yeah no. The re-winging costs for the entire A-10 fleet are less than a single F-35.

It literally was not.

I see, you two fuckwits think we're going to have conventional combat against any relevant nation.

Um, literal lol?

Do you understand the terms interdiction and CAS? Both of which happen to be ground attack

>the F-35 was not designed to perform CAS
You are, quite literally, the lowest IQ poster on this entire board right now and that includes the Vatniks in threads talking about Armata.

During Green Flag, thats what the F-35 did. That was literally its role.

>I see, you two fuckwits think we're going to have conventional combat against any relevant nation.
I see, you're illiterate.

You're not allowed to arm aircraft in the USA. Even if you got your hands on the plane (you wouldn't) you wouldn't be allowed to arm it.

>Nice 2a amerifats

>military tests the capability of a new platform
>this means it is what it was designed for

I see IQ's sharply dropped while I was away

Same as the above + you're talking about this green flag, right?

"several other analysts claim the participation of two [f-35] test aircraft in the exercise was just a PR stunt, since the aircraft is still quite far from achieving a combat readiness required to really support the troops at war: it can’t use the gun, it is limited to a couple of JDAMs (Joint Direct Attack Munitions) and it is still flawed by a long list of serious issues, including those to the 400K USD HMD (Helmet Mounted Display)."

>goes off on a tangent instead of responding to my argument
>gets upset

fuck off back to plebbit

I will weld a rifle to the fuselage with a string trigger and there's nothing you can do to stop me, nyaha!

Yes, a capability. i.e it was designed to fill that role (along with others)

glad we agree.

Why does the military have to suck at making damn near anything electronic? What is so difficult about making a helmet with a transparent screen in it?

A capability ancillary to its intended function.

I guess you deserve some credit for the strawman tho

IIRC sensing the position and rotation of the helmet is tricky. Atleast with the F/A-18 each cockpit was individiually magnetically scanned to fit the parameters so the sensing would work accurate enough, since even a few degrees of misalignment between what the pilot is looking at and what the plane thinks the pilot is looking at means that the seeker wont find its target.

Can't afford proper electronics when you're spending all your dosh on buying 5th gen aircraft
for CAS to replace cheaper-to-operate dedicated CAS aircraft that you already have in service.

Jokes on you, he's just pretending to be retarded.

Moot point. The A-10 will inevitably retire while the F-35 will remain the primary fighter for ground attack missions.

Can't they just put a tiny laser pointer on the helmet and track its direction that way?

Biggest one is ECM

>t. I didn't read the A-10 Coloring Book

t. Modern Warfare elite player

according to google that tank literally only has 30mm of roof armor

You should inform the US Airforce, they are the ones making the A-10 instruction manuals

Well IIRC, ECM (Jammer) is modeled in DCS, obviously they probably didn't model it the way it would work in the real thing and only military-grade simulators have it work the way it should.

dumping the ebin book

Attached: NPA5DSK.jpg (484x608, 37K)

Attached: lHK1rIJ.jpg (800x557, 21K)

Let's put it this way: If Main Battle Tanks could be defeated by 30mm cannon rounds then tanks wouldn't carry shit like 120mm cannons. Or am I retarded here and missing something?

Attached: CdhuxoY.jpg (616x584, 79K)

I love this bit

Attached: Iu20yZv.jpg (802x576, 35K)

I believe this is some kind of challenge.

Attached: Yv3k0v4.jpg (542x618, 28K)

Tanks don't expose their roof armor against opponents the same ground level unless they're israelis

I'd like to see someone try lol

Attached: bDMR0Lb.jpg (606x578, 22K)

Attached: wGf56vj.jpg (608x580, 51K)

Its approximated, just like missile performance is heavily approximated

Attached: dJgdGgW.jpg (600x568, 52K)

Attached: HwLth2t.jpg (562x612, 67K)

You faggot realize that the A10 carries rockets and missiles too, right? It doesn't just have the 30mm

last one

Attached: ObtnEkT.jpg (866x568, 130K)

It's not enough. We got to replace the GAU/8 with a railgun, then it can penetrate modern MBTs just fine.