TomcatViPThe Leclerc had a massive reliability issue for years. I think they hve worked it out for now but it still stands at a 2/3rd level depending of the condition of deployment (started from a low 30/40% availability reached 70+ before going down again due to some issues with desertic terrains (!) ).
TomcatViPThx for the pic.
In fact, the A10 story is part of a broader whole question that turn ard the roles devoted to the USAF and the US Army at the dawn of a new age.
I’ll just point out that the US army hve so much tank that it needs a large number of Apache with a lot of them being what they are just for doctrinal issues. A fixed wing mud-mover is a cost saving way of doing CAS. It does not do everything a choper can do, but at the army echelon, it’s a force multiplier.
On the other hand, on the USAF point of view with new doctrines leaning more and more toward a complete dominance over vast space of lands and seas (and even space), a point effective asset like the A10 and even the cargo 130 is more and more anachronistic. That the frontier btw the two services hve to be blended, yes. That they hve to be some sort of exclusion zone as we see today, that is more and more questionable.
On the Budget point of view, stretching the capabilities of Choper to match the conditions on the modern battle field is way more expensive than hveing a mixed fleet with fast mud-mover. Fighting the obsolescence of large fleet of rotary-wing assets by the usage of a mixed fleet of helicopters and low-end fixed wing aircraft such as the A10, might prove to be more affordable.
TomcatViP[…]
When were the interdiction flights close to Iraqi airfields you refer to?
I’m sry Swerve but I don’t hve the book at hand reach. You’ll need either to get it or cross-check on other publications
Ex. :
http://www.amazon.com/Gulf-Air-War-Debrief-Described/dp/1880588005
[ATTACH=CONFIG]221128[/ATTACH]
I bought this one at the time and still think it is one of the most complete book on the subject. My own single opinion of course.
The only engagements between A-10s & Iraqi aircraft I can find were when A-10s twice shot down Iraqi helicopters.
Well helos are hard to hit. It is far from a pce of cake!
TomcatViPA-10s did not operate in ‘reasonably’ contested airspace over Yugoslavia in 1999. They faced no threat of interception by hostile aircraft. After the second day of the war, when the JVR lost six out of the seven MiG-29s it sent up to try to fight & didn’t even manage to shoot at a NATO aircraft, let alone damage one, it made only token efforts to intercept NATO aircraft, scrambling single aircraft when then refused battle.
1991 was a long time ago, & if you remember, even then A-10s operated in the zone with the lowest chance of interception. Times have changed, & risk aversion has increased.
This is not correct. A10 hve conducted deep interdiction missions during GWI (Scud hunting) or attacked targets close to Iraqi’s airfields. Of course, they had the opportunity to call the defensive fighters umbrella according the USAF doctrines but in that case they did not require more or less CAP than any other assets.
A good and quick read on the subject :
[ATTACH=CONFIG]221110[/ATTACH]
TomcatViPSyria hands over Chemical weapon list. Officials says (anonymously) that Syrian CW list [is] more complete than anticipated:
“We were pleasantly surprised by the completeness of their declaration,”
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/21/world/middleeast/syria.html?_r=0
Potentially, the synergy ard this tragic event might be the next big thing after Camp David in the ME.
Last but not least, the way Eu has handled the crisis (at least the so said big voices representing the Eu like Barozozo) is representative of the new shift of foreign policy dominating Europe (at least conservatives forces – we hve even seen one of the French top figure among the conservatives going to Moscow to criticize the gov, a move abt foreign policy that only extreme right/left party were susceptible to do in the past).
TomcatViPWho in his right mind would have thought that B-2 was designed to out-run fighters on the deck ? 🙂
thanks
Yes it came to me as a surprise too.
The doc was sadly shy on other aspects but still stands as one of my best read on the subject.
TomcatViPI find the story pretty much possible. When approaching from rear hemisphere, one could achieve that even in a non-stealthy jet.
Anyway, two questions come into my mind:#1 Is the Raptor’s pilot behavior in accordance to the official procedures? Maybe it is just me but pulling up on the opponent’s left wing seems like a stupid risk to me. One unexpected maneuver and that sucker could get on your six and engage with cannon, stealthy or not.. Another option would be a purposeful collision just to bring the bird down to access some of its technology. Is such incautious behavior tolerated?
2. What is the actual cost of those intelligence missions? If I think about two $300mil F-22s doing HVAAE on a stupid $4mil drone, then I must say that someone in Pentagon has really twisted the math beyond imaginable.
I think that is why it was mentioned that the Raptor’s pilot did go under the F4 belly to check what kind of armament the Phantom was loaded with. If it was a D with no central pylon (but does IrAF hve any SUU gun pods?), staying close at hand reach, obviously was safe enough for a “Maverick” show of force.
Regarding your second point of concern, the RQ170 story might hve cornered the air force in such measure. I guess that no one in the DoD or the white house want to loose face with another drone being lost to cyber-hacking or whatever it was (the 22 being around to shoot down the drone if it goes coucou even in the middle of Iran).
TomcatViPThe UK used to build great transports and airliners like the Shorts Belfast, Andover, Vickers VC10, etc
now all you really have is the BAe 146
the UK let their civlian/military transport industry die only to rely imports from the Yanks and worse, the French.
yet the Brazilians, Japanese, Indians, etc are trying to build their own transports, at least short and medium sized ones..
should the Brits get back into the game?
Most – if not all – airbus wings are build in UK.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airbus_UK
Hard to see that as a dying industries. But I guess you was ironic.
Massive build-up in Carbon fiber tech might change this trend in the future, but so far the signs for such an event are weak.
TomcatViPAn interesting tale of a drone, two Phantoms and a pair of Raptors….
http://theaviationist.com/2013/09/19/f-22-f-4-intercept/#.UjrFc8bryvw
Good story. thx for posting.
But now I hve this stupid Berlin theme in my head…. Take my breath awaaaay aaaarrggg
TomcatViProger that.
Good answer.
TomcatViPService life is planned until 2040. So, I don’t think that fleet management is an issue.
But, again, I was talking abt Sub-contracting the Extender to defense contractor like OMEGA to add revenue.
A 50/50% ownership with a share btw industries and gov could make the project viable (no hardware invested – the gov provide its share by bringing the fleet and the parts), the industry provide the manpower (Military on multi-years years leaves/ ANG volunteer), commercial facilities and budget.
By pairing its strategic market with the needs of the USAF (hence the participation in its shares), hypothetically a majority of the services needs can be fulfilled (on the condition of course they are prioritized) with the benefit of added revenues.
The remaining fleet is mothballed and sold to customer in non-strategic locations or sold to improve the synergy effect (anyway, the fly away price won’t be reasonably lower than 100M so you won’t sell a lot).
What would be the benefits of a potential customer ?
Let’s take for example an Eu nation. Today, mil budgets are contracted even more by the financial crisis. Less, the tanker fleet needs some fresh blood to remain useful (I think French are battling with a 50% mission rate – but it’s from my mem so don’t take those nbr for concrete). Hence the urgent introduction of A400 as a “cheap” way to beef-up the fleet.
By providing tactical refueling service in Eu and the Med theater, a contractor will help to delay the investment needed btw such a potential customers, helping to reduce the overall mil budget in a period of time were states are struggling with budget deficits.
Obviously aggressive reactions from some of the local industries are to be expected. But look closely, the tankers builders are not in the majority the fighters builders. So it will be certainly a knifes fight but not one that can’t be won.
And the 10 to 15 years tempo is perfectly framed both with the introduction of the 46 and Eu budget restrictions.
Synergy…
TomcatViPTu22mm, you makes a lot of assumption that over-kill the objectives (answering the initial question).
Typical of you, as we speak again abt missiles, is to compare Wing loading value of a missile with that of a targeted fighter. Or to compare battle reports assessment by military planners with reports written by accountants.
I understand that you hve a point to make here. But such are not most of us here.
I don’t care X looking better than Y. I am only interested by the Why and What made it better. Partisanism is often way out of a Cartesian thinking. And you certainly don’t makes good fighters without sound reasoning.
TomcatViPThe interesting combination here is early warning radars and dormant popup threats. Anyways, this was my claim:
“F117 type targets can be tracked at ranges over 70km by semi modern mobile radars.”
Is it true or false?
[ATTACH=CONFIG]221017[/ATTACH]
From http://www.kbradar.by/text/pages-view-37.html
Dear TU22m
Vostok-E introduction date: 2007
F117 first flight 1981
F117 fleet being decommissioned in 2008
What a poor victory for the Radar side: 20 years years late with the counter measure being (nearly) alrdy activated at the time (JDAM Raptor). Wew!
That way, you know, we can says that France has battled out the 1940 Wehrmacht since we got the mighty AMX battle tank!
TomcatViPStructurally it’s a beauty. Where was made the fuselage ?
Country like Israel cld see an interest in it (persistent manned ISR over congestioned airspace with light strike cap). But definitively, this thing is riding on the A/T37 legacy.
TomcatViPIt is neither, it is total cost per target destroyed.
You shld read beyond the first line before writing any comment. It’s common sense and… effective 😉
Sign In
