The A-10 in AF classed as a fighter, and not a bomber!?

[A4D|Mofoka]

Re: The A-10 in AF classed as a fighter, and not a bomber!?

Nevermind the 20mm depleted uranium anti-armor nose mounted gattling gun that burps out a couple thousand rounds of tank-busting goodness per minute...

I love the A-10, in fact when we were heading to see my partents ay Warner Robins AFB I got the see one landing in Barksdale AFB, home of the 2d Bomb Wing. The plane was coming in for a landing and was in the middle of a J route towards the airstrip and the turns the pilot was doing were crisp and quick.

I love the cannon on it and the main reason is power, just pure friggin power. And because of this power you can't fire it nonstop because the is would slow the plane down, and that some straight up in your face swiss cheese ownage lol.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GAU-8/A_30mm_Avenger_Cannon

[sgt-Sander-NL]

Re: The A-10 in AF classed as a fighter, and not a bomber!?

Nevermind the 20mm depleted uranium anti-armor nose mounted gattling gun that burps out a couple thousand rounds of tank-busting goodness per minute...

The machine gun on the front of that sucker will be its biggest asset, if they do it right.

The A-10 is made for low altitude, tank busting with its gun, thats why the engines are mounted high on the tail section, less chance of crap getting in them as they scrape the battlefield...

Man, now I gotta go look for an A-10 video... i love that aircraft.

I love it so much I mistook the 30 mm cannon for a 20mm cannon, lol...

its 30 mm.

err, aren't the engines mounted higher so they are more protected from SAMs etc? i don't think they'll fly so low that dirt will come into the engines..

[Chris_Redfield]

Re: The A-10 in AF classed as a fighter, and not a bomber!?

err, aren't the engines mounted higher so they are more protected from SAMs etc? i don't think they'll fly so low that dirt will come into the engines..

From what I read, the engines are up because of the smoke from the cannon wouldnt get into the engines. Of course the reasons arent limited to it. The cannon is fracking huge, so you cant have engines in the plane or it would make the fuselage too big.

[Heavy552 AWG]

Re: The A-10 in AF classed as a fighter, and not a bomber!?

The placement of the engines shield them from typical low level IR airdefenses. Ultimately the rest of the plane should protect the engines from Triple AAA such as the feared ZSU that always travel with the tanks.

I would not worry about the dirt. I think it is a high bypass turbofan and it will tolerate a little bit.

I recall when the first M1 Abrams came out we all laughed and said drive that thing in the desert one mile and the sand will ruin that fancy smancy engine. How little do we know.

The Gun used in the plane is about 20 feet long. The entire plane is built around the gun, not the other way around.

[Jade Falcon]

Re: The A-10 in AF classed as a fighter, and not a bomber!?

And that's not even mentioning the titanium bathtub that the pilot sits in.

It's odd though that the Russian Su-25 bears more than a passing resemblance to the Northrop A-9 that was the A-10's competitor. :)

[Heavy552 AWG]

Re: The A-10 in AF classed as a fighter, and not a bomber!?

Falcon, The Soviets were willing to copy our work and make it useful instead of having to invent something from scratch. Our open society with it's many books, media, images etc... was very easy for them to learn and do.

The other side of the Soviet thinking is simple, cheap and many of them. Thier SU-25 Frogfoot can be kept anywhere they wanted to, maintained by a few highly trained idiots and a toolbox that it takes with it where it goes. Bases? HAH. They preferred to keep it where we dont know where it aint. They dont rely on first class bases full of luxury's like the USAF did back then.

Only now some of thier hardware is truly maturing and becoming modern. It's a good thing Reagan broke thier financial backs and ended the Cold War. Unfortunately we have to face thier hardware globally and some of it is quite good.

[J3p]

Re: The A-10 in AF classed as a fighter, and not a bomber!?

If an A-10 is approaching a SAM site with it's engines concealed behind it's wings, will the SAM be able to lock on? This is my biggest question right now.

Imagine if we got to have AGM-114 Hellfires or AGM-65 Mavericks

[Saureco]

Re: The A-10 in AF classed as a fighter, and not a bomber!?

About the A-10's engines.

Heavy552 got one of the points--the engines are placed higher, but they work in conjunction with the dual rudder design. Since the A-10 is a low level aircraft, it is a lot closer to ground defenses. As we all know, one of the best tracking methods is to lock onto the heat signature of a jet's exhaust. The A-10 uses the separated positions of the rudders to "mask" the exhaust from visibility from the sides.

Also, the engines are externally mounted so in the event that one of them is hit, it can fall off the aircraft while it still has another one to limp home. Almost all other figher aircraft have their engines internally mounted, so if they are hit they either blow up or drop out of the sky.


Oh, and as for the maneuverability of the A-10, it is still not as maneuverable as fast attack and multirole fighters. The A-10's design is what we engineers call "aerodymanically stable", meaning that center of gravity is in line with the lift point, but it's maneuverability is hindered. Conversely, a jet like the F-16 is aerodynamically unstable, which means the weight is out of alignment with the lift point, but that helps with maneuverability.

Cheers.

[J3p]

Re: The A-10 in AF classed as a fighter, and not a bomber!?

I wonder what tactics player will use? A-10 really doesn't have speed going for it...

[Saureco]

Re: The A-10 in AF classed as a fighter, and not a bomber!?

Ground attack sweeps. Plop a UAV over a flag, then the A-10 comes in slow, raining death on the flag in any of 3 flavors.

[A4D|Mofoka]

Re: The A-10 in AF classed as a fighter, and not a bomber!?

My question is, will the A-10 be a two seater in BF2? The reason I ask is becase the A-10 has laser guided bombs just as the SU-34 for MEC so that would mean it would have to have a second co-pilot.

I am a big flight sim fan, since Janes U.S.A.F and then on to IL2 Sturmovik and then on to LockOn and now playing Blazing Angels but here is the SS of the laser guiding system in the A10 on LockOn,

http://lo-mac.com/screens.php?id=4773

[Saureco]

Re: The A-10 in AF classed as a fighter, and not a bomber!?

A-10 has characteristically been a one-seater. All laser-guided bombs can be handled by the FLIR piped through to the pilot's multifunction displays (MFDs). Tactical bombers, however, should use a dedicated bomber. Hence, the F-15 and SU-35.

[Heavy552 AWG]

Re: The A-10 in AF classed as a fighter, and not a bomber!?

Tatics are quite simple.

Pick a ridge. Follow it to the target area. Usually something like a Kiowa, Apache LongBow or even a on-ground FIST (Very very high value and easily spotted with it's many antennas)

Profile will be to keep ridge or treeline between the enemy until final popup. If done right the last thing the Soviet tank commander will see is the flaming gun as he dies.

The next attack will be from about 120 degrees off the vector and never the same path twice. One or two passes and it's time to go reload.

Regarding the airdefense, there is alot going on across Optical, IR and Electronics (Radar) The Soviets carry all their air defense with them into attack. Hopefully the JStars and other assets can identify these assets and take them out before the hog arrive on scene.

I have seen these planes manuver during airshows and frankly they have the ability to cover all areas of the sky and ground within a 1/4 mile turf.

I really would not expect too much from EA and DICE from these planes. They probably are NERFTED to tickle the armor. Burp! Buuuurrrppp! BUURRRRRP! "WTF?" the tank wont die!" will be pretty common the first day we all get the add-on.

[Stomp-GoA-]

Re: The A-10 in AF classed as a fighter, and not a bomber!?

Yet another totalbf2 post that makes no damn sense. Sorry to be a stickler, but this is getting retarded now.

http://www.dailygrammar.com/

http://eslus.com/LESSONS/GRAMMAR/Gram.htm

http://www.english-grammar-lessons.com/

Maybe your were not meant to understand it.

https://www.sukit.com

I really would not expect too much from EA and DICE from these planes. They probably are NERFTED to tickle the armor. Burp! Buuuurrrppp! BUURRRRRP! "WTF?" the tank wont die!" will be pretty common the first day we all get the add-on.

This I agree with.

But then again, if they did make it to scale, would tanks really have a chance and would it throw the balance off? I know in working with A-10's they can with stand a lot of damage.

I just hope its enjoyable.

Do you think they made it sound like a real A-10 or a actual jet?