Was A10 a Russian Plane???

[Black Knight 0]

In 1 preview for a game they said "It includes all the Russian planes including the A10"  ? It said something like this.

[amos m 0]

I think that's being a bit picky.

[Supah 0]

That is probably due to the previewer being a bit ignorant about military aircraft. The russian IRL have never used the A-10 nor will they. The only one to field them is the US Airforce. Nowadays allot of them seem to be getting put in the boneyard at davis- montisham or someplace like that in the desert.

[MP 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Quote: from supah on 9:02 pm on Dec. 23, 2001

That is probably due to the previewer being a bit ignorant about military aircraft. The russian IRL have never used the A-10 nor will they. The only one to field them is the US Airforce. Nowadays allot of them seem to be getting put in the boneyard at davis- montisham or someplace like that in the desert.<span id='postcolor'>

It's a real shame that this is happening... There a fine aircraft.

[Miles 0]

why? The f16 is far superior

[762WorldOrder 0]

Uhhh... the F-16 is a made for an entirely different role than the A-10.

The F-16 does not carry the air-to-ground weapon load the A-10 does. It is used for air-to-air engagements and close air support.

The A-10 is basically a flying tank, which engages enemy armored units at close range and low altitude. It is made to directly support ground units, not fly in dogfights, as it's too slow to effectively engage most modern air-to-air fighter aircraft.

Whereas the F-16 is a quick fighter made to maintain air superiority over a certain area, the A-10 is armored and made to grind enemy tanks into powder.

[Unl33t 0]

Who ever wrote that review is a complete fool!

[Guest]

lol, I want to see that previewer write a new story about some form of SIM2002 game, "Featuring in this game, the Russian Empire State building and the Australian Eifeltower"

[GFX707 0]

...and the French statue of liberty :/

[Supah 0]

The A-10 is being taken out of service mainly because the US Air Force is moving towards faster jets with semi-autonomous amunitions. Reading through code-one which is a magazine published by the Lockheed-Martin company I found a missile which can find and identify its target on its own. Simply release and it will hunt down vehicles. Presumably a F-16 could carry 12 of them. Just a problem if ur allies are using russian equipment id think. Back to the A-10 Turkey was interrested in buying them. But their ongoing disagreement with Greece made the us a bit less the eager to sell them too turkey (who IMHO have one of the coolest airforces of nato)

(Edited by supah at 4:04 pm on Dec. 24, 2001)

[MotherRussiaAK74 0]

Too bad the statue of liberty is french... by the way, I wouldn't call ONE Russian fighter all the Russian fighters.

(Edited by MotherRussiaAK74 at 6:14 pm on Dec. 24, 2001)

[MrLaggy 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Quote: from supah on 4:02 pm on Dec. 24, 2001

Reading through code-one which is a magazine published by the Lockheed-Martin company I found a missile which can find and identify its target on its own. Simply release and it will hunt down vehicles.<span id='postcolor'>

And presumably each missile only costs about half as much as an A-10... not to mention that given the trouble human US pilots have distinguishing friendly forces from enemies I can't help but feel that an *automated* system would be a disaster.

[Supah 0]

Well any new system will have its teething problems. Allthough this being a weapon system its teething problems might be very messy. As for the cost ..... i think these new weapons will cost a #### of allot more then ur average BMW 7 series and mb even more then ur Ferrari F40. So cost ....... Way up. But it does mean less risk to the pilot who is a multimillion dollar investment in his own right.

[Ruskiesrule 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Quote: from supah on 3:02 pm on Dec. 24, 2001

The A-10 is being taken out of service mainly because the US Air Force is moving towards faster jets with semi-autonomous amunitions. Reading through code-one which is a magazine published by the Lockheed-Martin company I found a missile which can find and identify its target on its own. Simply release and it will hunt down vehicles. Presumably a F-16 could carry 12 of them. Just a problem if ur allies are using russian equipment id think. Back to the A-10 Turkey was interrested in buying them. But their ongoing disagreement with Greece made the us a bit less the eager to sell them too turkey (who IMHO have one of the coolest airforces of nato)

(Edited by supah at 4:04 pm on Dec. 24, 2001)

<span id='postcolor'>

turkey has infact invaided the ONCE greek island of Cyprus in about 1985. It was because of the US too (Another fine example of US forign policy!), Because of the coldwar, the US wanted airfields near russia where an aircraft would be in range to drop a nuke, The US made a deal with turkey, if the US could use Northern turkish airfields they would turn their nose if Turkey invaided Cyprus. A Very evil thing i think! My fathers friend called Davie Brown was a Para who was based in Cyprus, They used to feed the Cypriots who where on the Turkish side of the fense bread and water, but some American 'soldiers' (He wasn't to sure what they where!) told their CO and they had to stop.

Realy shows you how the world works today!

[animalica 0]

Did anyone remember the good flight sim "A10 Tank Killer" by Dynamix for the CBM Amiga?

That was an real good one - flying through river beds to avoid detection, taking tanks out while gearing, returning home with only one wing...

Or those A10`s in "M1 Tank Platoon" when they flew (?) endless in circles over the battlefield because one of their wings was crippled...

[Ruskiesrule 0]

lol, Mad!

[Isopro 0]

Hey Ruskie, you need to brush up your Russian history before you criticize the policies of foreign nations.

[Frizbee 0]

It seems that alot of the good aircraft are being retired in favor of 'swapable' part, multi-role aircraft.

The A10

The F14

Both are being retired, with the F16 to be fazed out as a frontline strike aircraft, and the FA-18 Hornet to be put into the backseat of carrier operations as well.

[KillorLive 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Quote: from supah on 11:02 pm on Dec. 23, 2001

That is probably due to the previewer being a bit ignorant about military aircraft. The russian IRL have never used the A-10 nor will they. The only one to field them is the US Airforce. Nowadays allot of them seem to be getting put in the boneyard at davis- montisham or someplace like that in the desert.

<span id='postcolor'>

They're phasing them out.

Sadly it's the ignorant pen pushers.

That's the best d*amn aircraft (for it's quotta).

NOTHING performs better at killin' tanks than the A-10, except maybe the Commanche that's comming in '06....

Most A-10's are being run until they screw up, then they're stripped and buried with whatever metal is left.

Kind of like all tracked APC's.

[charles 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Quote: from Frizbee on 3:18 am on Dec. 28, 2001

It seems that alot of the good aircraft are being retired in favor of 'swapable' part, multi-role aircraft.

The A10

The F14

Both are being retired, with the F16 to be fazed out as a frontline strike aircraft, and the FA-18 Hornet to be put into the backseat of carrier operations as well.

<span id='postcolor'>

yea, too bad they are gonna replace the tomcat as well, that little F/A-18 will just never be able to do what the turkey can do

[Airwolf 50]

the joint strike fighter is made to replace most jets now, including the A-10.