I agree, the UAV and A10 have totally different missions, the A10 being able to sweep larger areas, while the UAV is capable of a small number of more precise shots. But the UAV can hang around for a long time and wait for the target to appear. If somebody is shooting at you, you would want the A10 there to sweep the bad guys off the face of the earth. The UAV doesn't have the weapons load to do what the A10 can do and I don't think it would make sense to try to repeat that capability. It's not coincidence that the bad guys disappear when either a drone or the A10's show up, but from what I've read, the bad guy's really fear the A10, and that say's it all.
I used to see them fly over my house. I think they flew out of Bradley in CT. They were so loud. Would fly in threes or fours at a time.
Hey, that was me, although I never shot a moose! Taz, we would go out to R2211 about once a quarter to be the range control officer for the week. They would fly us out by helicopter early Monday morning and take us back either Thursday or Friday. The range complex was basically a bunch of trailers connected together. We had to bring everything we needed for the week including linens and all of our food. In the evening I use to go up in the range tower, what a quiet peaciful place with uninterrupted views of the Alaska range to the south. Much different then when my squadron mates were doing their thing!
Very likely - the 103rd FW (118FS) flew A-10s out of Bradley until 2008, when it (the 103rd) was transformed from a Fighter to an Airlift Wing. They now fly C-21s (LearJets) and are supposed to get C-27s sometime in the next year or so. On an unrelated note, Bradley also hosted Pratt & Whitney's B-52 testbed. You definitely noticed when it passed over the house. http://www.air-and-space.com/strato/098903%20l.jpg (note the missing nacelles for the JT-9D (747 motor))
Jim- I was a range control officer at an RAF range, so it was an easy one hour drive to get there. On the Wash north of RAF Lakenheath. We sat Victor Alert at RAF Lakenheath, so I can feel for you. Our accomodations were a little plusher, though. Rob- I dropped bombs several times on Smokey Hill Range flying out of Cannon AFB, NM in the 70s. We usually reserved Smokey for check rides, so I got to go there dozens of times as a stan eval flight examiner (SEFE). With F-111Ds, we could use ranges all over the US without having to refuel. Long, long legs. As in take-off from McClellan AFB in Sacramento and land at Eglin AFB near Ft Walton Beach, FL with 8000 lbs of JP8 remaining.
But only because it is illegal in Alaska to hunt from a plane? There were two or three incidents of a stray or ricochet hitting Bullwinkle.
that is really cool! next time I'm in Salina I will get my pics from mom's house to scan. we moved to Salina in 1985. Lake 80's/early 90's we saw A-7's, F-4's, and A-10's. Not sure if we ever saw F-111's.
Rob- Not sure if the 27 FW was using Smokey Hill that late, or not. I was in Europe in that timeframe, just in time for the first major unpleasantness in the Gulf.
Hans Ulrich Rudel was directly involved as a consultant with the basic development of the aircraft. Is it any wonder that it was, and still is, such a success ? As a tanker in the Canadian army in the late 70's and early 80's we did not really fear anything from above trying to take us out during the the NATO Reforger exercises, until this thing came around.
I have done a number on a couple of radio-controlled tanks using AGM-65s during OT&E. The A-10s also carry those. Funny thing about the AGM-65D, the IIR model we tested, is that Tactical Air Command decided not to field it for the F-111 because there was no way F-111s would be attacking tanks. So naturally, during Desert Storm, one of our main roles was tank plinking and we had to use GBU-12s because we had no Mavericks. 1300 pieces of armor later, it would have been nice to have Mavericks. Of course an AGM-65D cost $100,000+ and a GBU-12 cost $9000, so we saved the taxpayers a little bit of money for a little loss of efficiency.
The A10 didn't have a FLIR system, but the guys flying it improvised. When they needed the FLIR capability their load would include one IR Maverick. They would do all of their targeting with the Maverick, but release the bombs and finally when they had off loaded everything else, the would use the Maverick. Poor man's FLIR system... The Maverick is a great weapon, compared to other weapons the bang for the buck is still very very good. It doesn't have long legs, but it costs about 1/10 of a Harpoon or equivalent. I was involved in a plan to repower the Maverick with a small turbine, but that plan didn't go very far due to politics, the AF wanted "Tacit Rainbow" and didn't want to hear about something that was cheaper and more capable.... The LR Maverick was to be used for SEAD missions and had an imaging MM wave radar. The thing could see into hangars and pick the one with a real airplane in it, or it could pick the trailer with the dish on the top, or pick the one with the dish on the top that was rotating, but not emitting.... The idea was to shoot it in the direction of the last emission and it would find the bad guy for you.
Maybe 20 years ago, I was fishing near Gothic (in the mountains above Crested Butte, CO) in west central Colorado, near Gunnison. Was walking down a dirt road (path, really) in the afternoon. Heard a sort of whistling noise... I looked up... then BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOM! and there was dust everywhere. A Warthog cleared the top of the hill beside me by about 5 feet and the top of my head by about 15 feet. It banked hard left and went roaring down the valley... I will never forget that moment.
Yup, once you blew the nosecone on the AGM-65D, you had to shoot her or send her back to the factory for refit. They could have just used a training Maverick, which would have done the same thing. The A-10s also used the TV version of the Maverick, but those early ones were daytime only. Max range on the IR seeker was about the same as the missile except for in the desert against a really hot target. We used Pave Tack to acquire and slaved the Maverick to the pod. As soon as you got a steady lock, hose her off. At TFR altitudes and near max range, that meant the Maverick climbed up in front of the aircraft to increase range. You could see it visually and on the Pave Tack image as it climbed through the pod's IR image of the target. Scared us the first time we saw that and thought we had missed. Had to tell the AC to close his eyes as you pressed the pickle button, or his night vision was shot for a long time. Imagine that could be a problem for an A-10C in the dark with NVGs. The A-10Cs have a targeting pod, I think.
cool stuff guys, my first love and want was to be a fighter pilot. of course every boy wanted the same and some of you guys actually did it! nothing keeps me in the uncontrolled pattern from getting on buddies 6 and mic'ing "guns guns".
Absolutely one of my favorite airplanes. Built around a 7000 pound gun system, a wing section that tolerates high alpha yank-arounds and rapid load peaks, almost unbendable wing structure, and some damn good fans to push it. I chatted with an Air Force pilot many years ago at the Paine Field show when the A-10 was new and he said that they couldn't fire the Vulcan at full rate because the muzzle gasses were choking the engines into silence. They eventually installed two deep fuselage strakes on it to divert the gasses. Interesting, too, is the extreme negative incidence in the horizontal tail, looks like it might be 4-5 deg. or better, to counter the extreme nose down pitch of what looks to be an NACA 4415 wing section or something close.
I read Rudel's book Stuka Pilot many years ago... He was in the air service for 4 years while being labeled a 'poor pilot'. Most of the time as an observer in a reconaissance aircraft. Then, he was finally accepted for dive bomber training... the rest is history. Was shot down many times by anti aircraft & ground fire. Wounded many times. Even lost a leg and still flew. Kills were hundreds of tanks, a Russian Battleship, a Destroyer, guns, trains.... etc. etc.. Near the end of the war, he did not want to be captured by the Russians (they would have hung him), so he and several other Stukas and 190's flew West to a US airfield. When they stopped on the runway they collapsed the landing gear (just the 190's, obviously) so the runway could not be used. Great book.
There are some cool pics on the 'net that testify to the survivability of this aircraft. It's amazing the amount of thought that went into it and how successful it has been with the stated mission.
Right on, Jim. It's always referred to as the Warthog. Thinking back to WW2, the original Thunderbolt, " Jug", was called "The King Of The Strafers". Barrel- chested and tough as a Rhino.
And the N went further, faster and I believe higher higher than anything else. I have read of pilots that loved flying the Mustang but preferred going to war in the Thunderbolt. Not exactly pretty but neither was Joe Frasier. Lots of Republic planes had nicknames that were not so complimentary but their products always stirred up some kind of emotion.
...and just as heavy as a Rhino... actually a LOT heavier... helluva plane, though. I was always amazed at the turbosupercharger location, back toward the tail, well behind the pilot. The intake air was piped from the cowl all the way back there, then all the way back up to the engine.
Just about one of my all time favorite planes. Too bad they couldn't have migrated to the USMC, as that always seemed to me a sure fit. Folding wings, CAT and tail hooks: Good to go.
