A10 capabilities

[ruff 102]

just a question

i read somewhere that a10 can take off at air craft carriers

is this true?

just really wanna know

been searching everywhere to find the answer but nothing specfic on wether it can or is currently able to fly off carriers

and would they be used for long range air support if they were on a aircraft carrier?

i just know can fly on short runways

pls answer

and how are a10s transported???aircraft carriers

pls ans any a10 pilots out there

[SKULLS_Viper 0]

I don't think it can takeoff a carrier(I don't think its designed to).They just takeoff from an airforce base in the US and fly all the way to where they are needed.If it takesoff from the US, heading to Iraq, all they do is refuel in the air, and fly non-stop.

[Stag 0]

When it first appeared, a naval version was proposed, but the USN didn't want it. The current USAF version can't use carriers.

[Necromancer- 0]

it should be possible though... just re-enforce the nose landing gear and the structure around the arrestor hook

[Burl 0]

The A10 could land on a carrier... Once... then it would be scrap.

[shadow 6]

it should be possible though... just re-enforce the nose landing gear and the structure around the arrestor hook

I think a little more tinkering is required.

How are you going to get it airborne again?

Why would the carriers carry A-10s?

They take up the space of 3, maybe 4 F/A-18's...

The carriers need planes that can be "packed and stacked" (folding wings).

I think all in all even if you did manage to connect a A10 to the catapult all you'd see is the biggest splash ever  

[Leveler 0]

It cant take off without afterburners and those punny engines unless its bombload is reduced. All you will have then is an airplane that soaks AA bullets

[Supah 0]

Basically no it does not in its standard version using the normal naval take off distance on carriers. A empty A-10 with no under wing ordenance how might JUST make it if you take out all most all the fuel and have it go to a tanker just after take off. It has very large straight wings ... in theory its possible ... it would have no real use or purpose how ever. Forget about landing it on one though

Quote[/b] ]and how are a10s transported???aircraft carriers

pls ans any a10 pilots out there

Its a plane ... it flies places ... The USAF has or had A-10's in europe. It can refuel inflight so there is no real problem there. They are planning to phase it out soon. Turkey is interested in buying them

[Baron Hurlothrumbo IIX 0]

Puny engines?

[Badgerboy 0]

Puny engines?

Its subsonic. The engines are tough, but don't put out an amazing amount of thrust. Additonally they are lacking a reheat.

The only reason the A-10 is still around is that it has had a bit of success in the Gulf in the last decade. A A-10 simply can't surive on a modern battlefield. It's too slow, lacks a decent amount of standoff weapons, and modern MANPAD's will shred it. (And you can't kill MANPADS with Weasels)

[Supah 0]

Puny engines?

Its subsonic. The engines are tough, but don't put out an amazing amount of thrust. Additonally they are lacking a reheat.

The only reason the A-10 is still around is that it has had a bit of success in the Gulf in the last decade. A A-10 simply can't surive on a modern battlefield. It's too slow, lacks a decent amount of standoff weapons, and modern MANPAD's will shred it. (And you can't kill MANPADS with Weasels)

Will shred it? LOL man you must not have been paying attention. You can shoot anything short of a wing of of this bird and it wll fly on. Its on tough motherfucker. Its designed to take battle damage. Shoot one bullet through an F-16 and your in trouble ... shoot one engine off off a A-10 and it will soldier on. it has a full titanium cockpit tub ... it is the toughest bird ever to be fielded by NATO.

[Milkman 1]

The A10 is perfect for Tank killing, it was designed to destroy Soviet tank formations, and no other attack aircraft has its tank destroying capabilities. Supah is right about its durability, there are countless stories of A10s loosing half of a wing, a vertical stabilizer, and an engine, and still making it home.

It also carries the most desructive Cannon ever placed on an aircraft. It makes quick work of any armored unit in the world. Including the Latest MBTs.

[4 IN 1 0]

in modern warfare speed is not the only key,

how to take down the enemys effectively is more important,

A-10 is still the ideal tank killer beside the attack chopper,

fly slow enought to nail bullets onto a tank with accrate,

strong enought to take multiple fire, and could do some other things that high speed fighters couldn`t/ not dear to do

[waffendennis 0]

in modern warfare speed is not the only key,

how to take down the enemys effectively is more important,

A-10 is still the ideal tank killer beside the attack chopper,

fly slow enought to nail bullets onto a tank with accrate,

strong enought to take multiple fire, and could do some other things that high speed fighters couldn`t/ not dear to do

About the speed is true but you never told of the pilot it's all about the pilot of the plane like: No pilot no flying plane. and a rookie pilot can't do that what an Ace can do.

[4 IN 1 0]

About the speed is true but you never told of the pilot it's all about the pilot of the plane like: No pilot no flying plane. and a rookie pilot can't do that what an Ace can do.

i admin that i forgot to mark down the pilot part, it is depend on how the pilot skilled, a Ace F-16 pilot could do the more then a rookie A-10 could do and more effective, but I think right now we are talking about choosing the right machine to do right kind of job, and i believed that a Ace A-10 pilot could finish the job times more effective then a Ace F-16........may be wrong though.........

[waffendennis 0]

About the speed is true but you never told of the pilot it's all about the pilot of the plane like: No pilot no flying plane. and a rookie pilot can't do that what an Ace can do.

i admin that i forgot to mark down the pilot part, it is depend on how the pilot skilled, a Ace F-16 pilot could do the more then a rookie A-10 could do and more effective, but I think right now we are talking about choosing the right machine to do right kind of job, and i believed that a Ace A-10 pilot could finish the job times more effective then a Ace F-16........may be wrong though.........

Your right at that but My list is this:

A10: Tank Hunter ( thats the nickname of the plane )

and as you may know, the A10 haves a low Decibel so its not as loud as an F16, so you could make an sneak attack from above then dive down and drop the load.

F15: Carrier based planes the F15 you see the most on the Aircraft carriers and it's the work horse of the Navy.

So my opinion on that is:

Dont put an A10 on a AC

[Supah 0]

F15: Carrier based planes the F15 you see the most on the Aircraft carriers and it's the work horse of the Navy.

So my opinion on that is:

Dont put an A10 on a AC

F-15's dont fly of carriers my young friend You probably mean the F-14 and F-18 The F-18 being the workhorse of the navy

[Grizzlie 0]

And we have to rememeber that A-10 can be serviced and operated from bases with limited facilities near battle areas.

It means it can "hang" nereby waiting for call for long time, not loosing it for fly from and to base, like other planes (maybe except A-8B).

[shadow 6]

F15: Carrier based planes the F15 you see the most on the Aircraft carriers and it's the work horse of the Navy.

So my opinion on that is:

Dont put an A10 on a AC

F-15's dont fly of carriers my young friend You probably mean the F-14 and F-18 The F-18 being the workhorse of the navy

Yeah, I would love to see an F-15 on a carrier

Have you seen the size of that behemoth?  

http://home.c2i.net/ofp/f15_big.jpg (2.17 MB)

Small version:

[denoir 0]

A10's and similar dedicated subsonic ground attack aircraft are only useful when you have air superiority and effective SAM suppression. They're built to take a lot of beating from AAA but are basically defenseless against enemy fighters and AA missiles.

So their role is more similar to attack helicopters than of other military airplane types.

I saw a video once (on Discovery IIRC) of a Su-25 being sprayed with 23 mm bullets from a couple of meters range. There wasn't even a scratch on the aircraft   I'd guess that the A10 is about equally durable.

They have great use in conflicts like the Iraq war. But should they be deployed in a more balanced war (say Russia vs USA), they'd be pretty much useless due to the extreme SAM density that would be in place.

[Leveler 0]

I've heard that the supreme strategists in TBA wanted to phase the A-10 out in favor for the multirole F-16. Has anyone else heard this?

[ozanzac 0]

Why wasn't the A-10 be used on carriers. Beause the Navy had the A-6 Intruder, A-7 Corsair II, F-4 Phantom, A-4 Skyhawk, A-1 Skyraider and A-3 Skywarrior just to name a few that could more or less, do the same job that the A-10 does.

The A-6 Intruder was the closest Naval equivalant to the A-10, and it was retired as an attack aircraft a couple of years ago in place of the F/A-18.

A better question would be, why weren't A-10's, or it's lesser competitor, the A-9, ever assigned directly to the army, seeing as they're closer to being tanks on wings than anything else.

[Supah 0]

Quote[/b] ]Why wasn't the A-10 be used on carriers. Beause the Navy had the A-6 Intruder, A-7 Corsair II, F-4 Phantom, A-4 Skyhawk, A-1 Skyraider and A-3 Skywarrior just to name a few that could more or less, do the same job that the A-10 does.

The A-6 Intruder was the closest Naval equivalant to the A-10, and it was retired as an attack aircraft a couple of years ago in place of the F/A-18.

I dont think the navy ever had a real equivalent of the Warthog. The A-6 didnt even have an internal gun. It was designed to be a fast low level attacker. I dont think the navy has a real need for a A-10 equivalent though.

Quote[/b] ]A better question would be, why weren't A-10's, or it's lesser competitor, the A-9, ever assigned directly to the army, seeing as they're closer to being tanks on wings than anything else.

Basically the airforce allready has a large knowledge base in operating fast(er) jet aircraft, the facilities to maintain the aircraft and to train the pilots. Besides the army allready has the AH-64 Apache as an air asset against enemy armour

[ozanzac 0]

Quote[/b] ]A better question would be, why weren't A-10's, or it's lesser competitor, the A-9, ever assigned directly to the army, seeing as they're closer to being tanks on wings than anything else.

Basically the airforce allready has a large knowledge base in operating fast(er) jet aircraft, the facilities to maintain the aircraft and to train the pilots. Besides the army allready has the AH-64 Apache as an air asset against enemy armour

I kind of meant, why wouldn't A-10's be under the direct control of the Army, seeing as the army is more tactical than the airforce, and the operations of the A-10 affect the Army more than the Air-Force.

Under my vision (in my battle commanding dreams) the Air Force would handle direct air threats (enemy aircraft and air defences) and strategical targets (CCC, Infrastructure and War Production) whilist Army assigned A-10's, operated on a sought of Direct Air Support role with freindly tanks in engaging enemy tank battalions, whilist choppers would support troop moevements and engagements. Not forgeting AC-130 gunships for support as well

(Ooo what a five star general I'd make)

Sure Choppers are nice , but they can't take that GAU gatling gun, or carry LGB's, CBU's or Mavericks as well as IR-AAMs all on the same loadout.

[Badgerboy 0]

Puny engines?

Its subsonic. The engines are tough, but don't put out an amazing amount of thrust. Additonally they are lacking a reheat.

The only reason the A-10 is still around is that it has had a bit of success in the Gulf in the last decade. A A-10 simply can't surive on a modern battlefield. It's too slow, lacks a decent amount of standoff weapons, and modern MANPAD's will shred it. (And you can't kill MANPADS with Weasels)

Will shred it? LOL man you must not have been paying attention. You can shoot anything short of a wing of of this bird and it wll fly on. Its on tough motherfucker. Its designed to take battle damage. Shoot one bullet through an F-16 and your in trouble ... shoot one engine off off a A-10 and it will soldier on. it has a full titanium cockpit tub ... it is the toughest bird ever to be fielded by NATO.

You obviously have not seen the effects of modern IR SAM's. (Kinetic and fragmentation). Secondly, blowing an actual engine off the aircraft will kill it, despite the popular theory that it won't. This is why they are mounted in such a way that IR trackers can't home in on them. However, modern all aspect lauchers have no problems tracking them these days.

I suggest you check the combat losses of A-10's in recent conflicts, and look at at how many were recovered to the airfield after being hit by a SAM, as opposed to hits from AAA.

There is no disputing that it is durable when confronted with AAA, but against a modern AA system it doesn't stand a chance.