According to the Air Force Times, "the A-10 attack jet has killed more US troops in friendly fire incidents than any other aircraft flown by the US military." Yet with its role as an anti-tank aircraft, shouldn't friendly fire be less common? Are armoured vehicles not easier to identify than individual soldiers? Shouldn't an autocannon be more precise than a bomb with shrapnel and submunitions?
Explain this Jow Forums.
Other urls found in this thread:
youtu.be
airforcetimes.com
fas.org
en.wikipedia.org
twitter.com
they're the plane equivalent of pit bulls
>plane used in the most CAS
>most incidents of friendly fire
You know that if you own a pool that your likelihood of drowning increases right?
>trusting reservists for anything
>trusting reservists to fly attack planes
i can't help but post this
They let women pilot it.
/thread
Because the pilots have a discipline problem. Its not even an American thing, bongs have the same propensity for blue on blue with their own A10 pilots. The airframe just seems to attract dangerous retards, leading me to wonder if A10 squadrons aren't the scrapheap of the airforces that use them, the wastepaper bins full of 2nd rate pilots.
>bong
>A-10 pilots
The A-10 is an Amerimutt exclusive
Moron.
There a lot of friendly fire incidents from Western nations, it just never gets covered in the media. A simple Wikipedia search would show you the staggering amount just from the Afghanistan war alone
I'm sure there's even more friendly fire instances that are falsely labeled killed-in-action. It might just be harder to lie about 30mm bullet wounds
>A-10 pass with GAU-8 blaring
>Where did that treeline the Taliban were in go?
>Wait where did Private Johnson go?
Mutts gonna mutt
sounds of danger close BRRT "Nicey did you shit yourself...." BLBLAMBLAMBLAM
>Are armoured vehicles not easier to identify than individual soldiers
Except most A-10 runs are being used to suppress infantry.
Its becaue the A-10 is a peice of shit that needs to be replaced by the F35.
this.
If that’s the incident I’m thinking of, yeah those two A-10 pilots fucked up royally. You can see the video on youtube.
>Its not even an American thing, bongs have the same propensity for blue on blue with their own A10 pilots
You complete fucking retard
That being said, it was 2003 and there was some chaos. The JTAC told them there were no friendlies in the area, and then they convinced themselves they were seeing orange rockets.
Worthless story. Name the pilots. With their names. Their entire names. Given by their parents, on government forms.
>no source
Got it
Chairforce has a bad habit of friendly fire in general, nevermind with specific craft. If they aren't firing at their own troops they're firing at allied troops.
>the plane used in cas the most
>the longest running devoted cas plane
>has the most friendly fire incidents
What’s next war causes death ?
Because its the nature of aircraft in CAS to be firing near friendly troops
The US airforce has excess of 900 F-16s, excess of 400 F-15s (which are also ground attack aircraft) compared to less than 300 A-10s. I doubt the A-10s are the most used US aircraft just judging on their inventory.
By using the A10s exclusively for ground attack/CAS, it freed up the F16s and F15s for other missions: CAP, SEAD, A2A, bomber escorts, etc. I'd say it's pretty plausible that the A10 had the most CAS missions, because it was the sole reason it was even made.
Why can't CavScouts into proper target marking?
It's the B-1B.
The B-1B has the most CAS missions.
Turns out having a literal fucking flying ordinance cafeteria that can go supersonic if need be is ten times better than some souped-up Skyraider with learjet motors taped on, especially in a world where CAS is almost exclusively done with PGMs.
A gun that powerful begs to the machine spirit. It is death, it's will is death, and cares not what it reaps.
But that's bullshit, Khorne wants honorable blood spilled in ritualized combat.
>plane most used in CAS
>A-10
Wrong
lol did you even look at the chart?
coalition & other is basically inadmissable as statistics and f15/16 are historically "show of force" flybys
eh true, just world eaters tend to interpret that as, in the great words of a well adjusted individual, "STRIP THE FLESH, SALT THE WOUND!"
Oh. Are you going to fund the $40k/hr flight time of the F35 just to shoot at the Taliban? The F35 is too advanced to be just going on bombing runs
Over 100 US troops were killed and 500 wounded in WWII by 8th Air Force heavy bombers (B-17s and B-24s) during Operation Cobra in WWII, when trying to use heavy bombers for tactical support during the Normandy invasion. Maybe they mean the A-10 has killed the most of planes currently in use..
It's amazing how many people ITT do mental gymnastics to defend the A-10 from criticism, even when presented with data from the US air force. It is clearly a dangerous liability to foot soldiers. It isn't very durable either, as many of them were shot down during the Gulf War.
The amazing part is that the A-10 is not even that dangerous to enemy tanks; even with DU ammunition the GAU-8 can only penetrate 38mm of RHA at its effective range of 1000m. This is far, far, far, far, far, far below the thickness of modern main battle tanks. The T-80 has 440 - 500mm of effective protection against kinetic weapons.
Because muh low n' slow mk.1 eyeball big gun herp derp 1911 gurgle fart.
the cannon won't kill tanks but the Mavericks it has will
>The amazing part is that the A-10 is not even that dangerous to enemy tanks
The only "Tanks" enemies of the US are fielding are either rusted up T-55s or armored VBIEDs. The A-10 is no longer a tank buster; it's a weapon of psychological warfare. It's fast enough to remain close to the sorts of conflict US troops see in places like Iraq, Syria, and Afghanistan without the threat of drawing small arms fire. At the same time, it's slow enough that the enemy gets a very good look at the loud, pissed off "fuck you" of an aircraft itching for a chance to BRRRRT all over them, their buddies, and their whole fucking village.
Yes, in 2019 the A-10 is pretty much entirely incapable of performing the task it was designed for, if you define that task as killing contemporary and modern MBTs. Even as a missile truck, the A-10 lack survivability against modern anti-air systems. That being said, the US doesn't fight modern MBTs. The US fights enemies armed with, at most, hand-me-down second-generation MBTs. Hell, the AH-64 was designed for the same damn thing, and it's doing just fine.
What's that flash of light at 3 seconds?
handing CAS with fast jets over to the air force was a mistake
Because they are the main cas aircraft we have
a-10's generally get grounded when complicated shit occurs they have a very high likely hood of getting shot down by ground fire compared to the 16
bitch nigga russia had no problem giving t90a's to ukranian separatists and syrians
Because it's a plane designed to strafe soviet tank columns out in the open being used for close in counter insurgency operations. It's like trying to do an appendectomy with a chainsaw.
Yeah, it's also heavy as shit so it has trouble maneuvering.
>americans killing british
desu its as american as apple pie. dont see the issue
big gun, little people, small world
plane strafes with a damn chaingun if Pvt Snuffy is on the long end of the run then I guess hes got a good chance of becoming dirt that day
No targeting pod
I wanted to know the same thing
I expect it's some sort of tandem charge to defeat ERA.
The gun has great utility. Very small danger close numbers. If you want to kill a modern tank you have to use something like a Maverick or maybe even a JDAM or something big.
A-10
>Akbar-10
he is referring to the en.wikipedia.org
the US refused to positively identify the pilots but british media identified one of the pilots as a Lt colonel Gus Kohntopp of the idaho ANG.
the incident is one of the best documented and analysed friendly fire incidents in recent history and is essentially a catalogue of errors on the part of the A10s that amounted to gross negligence.
the review board for the incident concluded that the pilots should face administrative and disciplinary action as a result. however this was overridden for political reasons higher up in the DoD.
motherfuckers should be just getting out of prison today if justice had been served.
It's pretty old, and has crude electronics (though this is mainly because the DoD shitters have continuously refused to pay for upgrade packages). Also, if you want a solid danger pack, you're better served by an AC-130J (low threat enviro) or a B-1 (high threat enviro).
Is it just me, or does popov 35 sound like nutnfancy?
A temptation to go for guns over precision weapons in combination with a primitive cockpit mainly relying on visual identification of target areas for gun runs rather than sitting at 30k feet dropping PGMs on JTAC designated targets.