User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 10/1/2014 12:00:50 AM EDT
[#1]
Anything we send in is going to get hit with Stringers this time around they have lost to many to enemy hands.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/1/2014 12:00:57 AM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
This Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Modernize the bastards  Bring them into the nuclear age - one round of depleted uranium at a time.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/1/2014 12:01:11 AM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The need to be low and accurate in the vicinity of friendly forces for one. That coms delay isn't a big deal at altitude, but down near the floor with friendlies around? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
It kills bad guys and comes home despite getting shot up. What's not to like. Faster jets don't get shot up as easily, and still have a reasonable chance of surviving hits. Two A-10 pilots were killed in Desert Storm, and three more were captured. This was in less than a month of fighting. Against ISIS, those three pilots would likely have been beheaded on camera. You fight savages like that with these things: http://www.unmannedsystemstechnology.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/Predator-B-MQ-9-Reaper.jpg You don't do CAS with things like those. What prevents it? The need to be low and accurate in the vicinity of friendly forces for one. That coms delay isn't a big deal at altitude, but down near the floor with friendlies around? Wow. Just about everything you said was 180 degrees off from reality. An A-10 is a big loud machine with a lot of firepower. The guy in the plane looks out the window, cant really see too much, has to be told what to do by the JTAC. The plane is survivable and has a lot of firepower. A pred flies very high up in the sky, cant be seen, cant be heard. It has a camera that is very powerful. It can tell if you have a weapon or are digging in an IED. It flies really slow...who cares, no one is in it. It can loiter for a while so if you're not certain if you are looking at a bad guy...watch him for an hour...he wont know he's being watched and you can make up your mind in the meantime. The hellfire is very accurate and not that much of an explosive radius to it. You can use it next to buildings and such. Against insurgents who will ditch their weapons and get into civilian character when faced with heavy firepower, you want an armed UAV. If the UAV is unarmed you can still use the camera and call in artillery. The A-10 pilot, like most pilots, is moving too fast to tell the details of what is going on, cant tell the insurgents from the civilians and the grunts have to explain it to him. An armed UAV can hunt all by itself. If armed reaper or pred was overhead in a gunfight you wouldn't know until the hellfire is about a second out. Against guerrillas, armed UAVs are better. Unless you are dealing with a platoon of them and need raw firepower...that is rarely the case. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/1/2014 12:09:34 AM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It would make much more sense to acquire more AC-130 spectre gunships and to get rid of the A-10. The AC-130's have much greater loiter time and kick way more ass. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Just keep the damn plane already! We have nothing else effective to replace it!  Hell, we ought to make More of them! We've had a far greater need for CAS as opposed to A2A for the last 12 years! Saint Peter It would make much more sense to acquire more AC-130 spectre gunships and to get rid of the A-10. The AC-130's have much greater loiter time and kick way more ass. They don't like to come out and play in the day light. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/1/2014 12:30:27 AM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Wow. Just about everything you said was 180 degrees off from reality.
An A-10 is a big loud machine with a lot of firepower. The guy in the plane looks out the window, cant really see too much, has to be told what to do by the JTAC. The plane is survivable and has a lot of firepower. A pred flies very high up in the sky, cant be seen, cant be heard. It has a camera that is very powerful. It can tell if you have a weapon or are digging in an IED. It flies really slow...who cares, no one is in it. It can loiter for a while so if you're not certain if you are looking at a bad guy...watch him for an hour...he wont know he's being watched and you can make up your mind in the meantime. The hellfire is very accurate and not that much of an explosive radius to it. You can use it next to buildings and such. Against insurgents who will ditch their weapons and get into civilian character when faced with heavy firepower, you want an armed UAV. If the UAV is unarmed you can still use the camera and call in artillery. The A-10 pilot, like most pilots, is moving too fast to tell the details of what is going on, cant tell the insurgents from the civilians and the grunts have to explain it to him. An armed UAV can hunt all by itself. If armed reaper or pred was overhead in a gunfight you wouldn't know until the hellfire is about a second out. Against guerrillas, armed UAVs are better. Unless you are dealing with a platoon of them and need raw firepower...that is rarely the case. The Islamic State is not fielding guerrillas. It's an ad hoc army, and is kicking the Iraqi Army's ass. What does an Islamic Caliph seek to rule? Mecca. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/1/2014 5:58:54 AM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Anything we send in is going to get hit with Stringers this time around they have lost to many to enemy hands. so why would you use an aircraft that flies an attack profile that makes that a possibility? Whats the max altitude for a MANPAD? Guess what doesn't fly above that? Helos and A-10s. You know why A-10s are so tough? They have to be. 14 years of GWOT. Only plane shot down was the A-10. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/1/2014 6:13:46 AM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Sure, as long as you can ID your target correctly. I suspect the troops on the ground are not going to be happy with you firing towards them from 10kft from the safety of your air conditioned trailer. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
CAS does not need to be low, the PGMS shot from Preds and Reapers are of equal accuracy as when they are used by any other platform, the com latency really is not all that bad. Sure, as long as you can ID your target correctly. I suspect the troops on the ground are not going to be happy with you firing towards them from 10kft from the safety of your air conditioned trailer. They have gotten use to it from the last 11 years of it happening. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/1/2014 6:24:44 AM EDT
[#8]
Honestly I've never completely understood the popularity/obsession over the A-10 when considering the type of war we've been fighting the last 14 years.
I understand its role in more conventional warfare like we saw in '03, troops or armor in the open is the kind of fight it was designed for, and it can bring a lot of fucking hate to the table because the things are basically flying hard points with engines. But it just doesn't really strike me as being more effective for fighting an insurgency than rotary would be. In terms of agility and awareness of whats going and the ability to maneuver and communicate with troops on the ground. Rooting out shit heads that are huddled in citrus orchards or poppy fields or along side the walls of some shit hut. Engaging them or communicating with and directing QRF or other ground forces to them... etc. Seems like rotary would have a huge edge there. Not saying I think it's a capability we should lose, considering the other more recent threats out there right now, just something that's crossed mind a couple times over the years. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/1/2014 6:49:42 AM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
They have gotten use to it from the last 11 years of it happening. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
CAS does not need to be low, the PGMS shot from Preds and Reapers are of equal accuracy as when they are used by any other platform, the com latency really is not all that bad. Sure, as long as you can ID your target correctly. I suspect the troops on the ground are not going to be happy with you firing towards them from 10kft from the safety of your air conditioned trailer. They have gotten use to it from the last 11 years of it happening. For smushing targets given to you by ground forces, whats the difference? The effect is the same. Stop asking for a platform. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/1/2014 7:06:15 AM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
For smushing targets given to you by ground forces, whats the difference? The effect is the same. Stop asking for a platform. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
CAS does not need to be low, the PGMS shot from Preds and Reapers are of equal accuracy as when they are used by any other platform, the com latency really is not all that bad. Sure, as long as you can ID your target correctly. I suspect the troops on the ground are not going to be happy with you firing towards them from 10kft from the safety of your air conditioned trailer. They have gotten use to it from the last 11 years of it happening. For smushing targets given to you by ground forces, whats the difference? The effect is the same. Stop asking for a platform. I think most people get wrapped around type 1 controls which are the minority of the executed controls |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/1/2014 7:14:25 AM EDT
[#11]
 |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/1/2014 7:16:11 AM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I think most people get wrapped around type 1 controls which are the minority of the executed controls I think the greater point is the A-10 was designed to do specifically what we end up doing most of the time. That it does it for a battlefield that expired a generation ago is secondary. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/1/2014 7:16:13 AM EDT
[#13]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/1/2014 7:22:21 AM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The A-10's forward fuselage would need to be redesigned to accommodate a smaller gun. And really the A-10 itself would need a complete redesign if you're going to do all that, the newest airframe was made in the early 1980's. Keep the overall shape and concept and reliability of the A-10, make it a two seater, give it the ability to fire Hellfires, IFR from a drog, lengthen the airframe for more ammo, fuel, and center line hard points, make the wing slightly larger, wider, stronger, and then better engines, with more power. A-10E Super Hawg. Quote HistoryQuoted: I think it would make sense with our missile technology to do away with the GAU-8 and go with something smaller so that more ammunition can be carried to better support ground forces against light armor and infantry. The A-10's forward fuselage would need to be redesigned to accommodate a smaller gun. And really the A-10 itself would need a complete redesign if you're going to do all that, the newest airframe was made in the early 1980's. Keep the overall shape and concept and reliability of the A-10, make it a two seater, give it the ability to fire Hellfires, IFR from a drog, lengthen the airframe for more ammo, fuel, and center line hard points, make the wing slightly larger, wider, stronger, and then better engines, with more power. A-10E Super Hawg. Nope.
 |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/1/2014 7:47:47 AM EDT
[#15]
Hawgs are still getting the job done in Afghanistan , why do they act like that a10s have been retired ?the fso and jtac going to be some busy mofos in the next couple monthss
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/1/2014 12:11:18 PM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted:Sure, as long as you can ID your target correctly. I suspect the troops on the ground are not going to be happy with you firing towards them from 10kft from the safety of your air conditioned trailer.
I give the Reaper sensor operator on a short four hour shift staring at his big monitor while seated comfortably in an air conditioned office a better chance of IDing that target from 10k than the Hawg driver trying to do the same while also flying the plane at the same time. Modern sensors beat Mk1 eyeball, and the Reaper control station has a much bigger screen to look at than the MFD in the A-10 cockpit. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/1/2014 12:18:01 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I give the Reaper sensor operator on a short four hour shift staring at his big monitor while seated comfortably in an air conditioned office a better chance of IDing that target from 10k than the Hawg driver trying to do the same while also flying the plane at the same time. Modern sensors beat Mk1 eyeball, and the Reaper control station has a much bigger screen to look at than the MFD in the A-10 cockpit.
http://twistedsifter.files.wordpress.com/2010/05/mq-9-reaper-control-center-pilots.jpg http://owari-ch.net/images/3/3b/A10_cockpit_2.jpg Yeah, that's a great side view the drone operator has compared to that tiny space we're looking @ the A-10 cockpit through. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/1/2014 12:20:53 PM EDT
[#18]
The boys in blue really don't like that mud hugger do they? They have been trying to kill that for years
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/1/2014 12:25:03 PM EDT
[#19]
Quoted:
Quoted: I give the Reaper sensor operator on a short four hour shift staring at his big monitor while seated comfortably in an air conditioned office a better chance of IDing that target from 10k than the Hawg driver trying to do the same while also flying the plane at the same time. Modern sensors beat Mk1 eyeball, and the Reaper control station has a much bigger screen to look at than the MFD in the A-10 cockpit.
http://twistedsifter.files.wordpress.com/2010/05/mq-9-reaper-control-center-pilots.jpg http://owari-ch.net/images/3/3b/A10_cockpit_2.jpg Yeah, that's a great side view the drone operator has compared to that tiny space we're looking @ the A-10 cockpit through. The Reaper operator can see anything underneath the drone in 360°, and can zoom in to view a specific spot in much greater detail than available with the naked eye. He also doesn't have to keep an eye on his flight path and his instruments at the same time; the pilot sitting next to him handles that half of the work load. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/1/2014 1:14:29 PM EDT
[#20]
It's time to convert A-10's into remote controlled drones.
QA-10C. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/1/2014 1:18:03 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Yeah, that's a great side view the drone operator has compared to that tiny space we're looking @ the A-10 cockpit through. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted: I give the Reaper sensor operator on a short four hour shift staring at his big monitor while seated comfortably in an air conditioned office a better chance of IDing that target from 10k than the Hawg driver trying to do the same while also flying the plane at the same time. Modern sensors beat Mk1 eyeball, and the Reaper control station has a much bigger screen to look at than the MFD in the A-10 cockpit.
http://twistedsifter.files.wordpress.com/2010/05/mq-9-reaper-control-center-pilots.jpg http://owari-ch.net/images/3/3b/A10_cockpit_2.jpg Yeah, that's a great side view the drone operator has compared to that tiny space we're looking @ the A-10 cockpit through. Yes the aviator can see the ground much better, but order to get adequate SA he either talks to the guys on the ground via "victor" or looks through his pod. Both of which are also done by UAVs |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/1/2014 4:01:08 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It's time to convert A-10's into remote controlled drones. QA-10C. Stupid idea, but it keeps being mentioned about building an A-10 with a backseater to handle the target spotting and extra ISR systems.... So why can't we take a current A-10, add the sensor suites from the predator to it, and then have the best of both worlds? In cockpit pilot flying real time PLUS all the guys sitting back in the trailer running those cameras and finding targets for the pilot to attack? Virtual crew members. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/1/2014 8:47:42 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Wow. Just about everything you said was 180 degrees off from reality. An A-10 is a big loud machine with a lot of firepower. The guy in the plane looks out the window, cant really see too much, has to be told what to do by the JTAC. The plane is survivable and has a lot of firepower. A pred flies very high up in the sky, cant be seen, cant be heard. It has a camera that is very powerful. It can tell if you have a weapon or are digging in an IED. It flies really slow...who cares, no one is in it. It can loiter for a while so if you're not certain if you are looking at a bad guy...watch him for an hour...he wont know he's being watched and you can make up your mind in the meantime. The hellfire is very accurate and not that much of an explosive radius to it. You can use it next to buildings and such. Against insurgents who will ditch their weapons and get into civilian character when faced with heavy firepower, you want an armed UAV. If the UAV is unarmed you can still use the camera and call in artillery. The A-10 pilot, like most pilots, is moving too fast to tell the details of what is going on, cant tell the insurgents from the civilians and the grunts have to explain it to him. An armed UAV can hunt all by itself. If armed reaper or pred was overhead in a gunfight you wouldn't know until the hellfire is about a second out. Against guerrillas, armed UAVs are better. Unless you are dealing with a platoon of them and need raw firepower...that is rarely the case. Charlie, no one is disputing the value of a Predator in ambushing small groups of insurgents. They work great for that. They can loiter for a long time and look for suspicious activity and take out a good handful of bad guys at a time. But that is NOT what we were talking about. What we were talking about is Close Air Support (CAS) - our forces on the ground directly engaged with substantial numbers of enemy forces where they need air support to get out of a sticky situation. I contend that a Predator is *not* ideal for this role. Yes, the Predator can loiter at high altitude unseen and unheard for some time. However, once it finds its targets, it only has *two* AGM-114 Hellfire missiles then it's done. That is virtually useless for a CAS role were you might want to engage enemy ground forces for an extended period of time. For that you will need a gun, which as far as I know the Predator doesn't have, and if it did you'd have a whole new set of problems. If you mounted a gun, *now* you'd have to get the aircraft down low, because guns at high altitude are as likely to hit friendlies are they are the enemy. Perhaps you know more about the Predator than I, but I would be very skeptical of it's ability to make low gun runs at enemy ground forces. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/1/2014 8:55:15 PM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
For smushing targets given to you by ground forces, whats the difference? The effect is the same. Stop asking for a platform. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
They have gotten use to it from the last 11 years of it happening. For smushing targets given to you by ground forces, whats the difference? The effect is the same. Stop asking for a platform. Look, obviously you guys have the experience, but don't you see the possibility that you might find yourself engaging a large enough enemy ground force that the 2 missile payload of the Predator becomes an issue? Or do you just have the ability to get enough Predators over the battle field that they can each shoot their two and fly home and you've got enough overhead to get the job does? It would seems like there would be situations were you'd want to keep the enemy forces' heads down for an extended period of time where a gun would be more desirable than missiles. You tell me. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/1/2014 8:57:31 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Look, obviously you guys have the experience, but don't you see the possibility that you might find yourself engaging a large enough enemy ground force that the 2 missile payload of the Predator becomes an issue? Or do you just have the ability to get enough Predators over the battle field that they can each shoot their two and fly home and you've got enough overhead to get the job does? It would seems like there would be situations were you'd want to keep the enemy forces' heads down for an extended period of time where a gun would be more desirable than missiles. You tell me. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
They have gotten use to it from the last 11 years of it happening. For smushing targets given to you by ground forces, whats the difference? The effect is the same. Stop asking for a platform. Look, obviously you guys have the experience, but don't you see the possibility that you might find yourself engaging a large enough enemy ground force that the 2 missile payload of the Predator becomes an issue? Or do you just have the ability to get enough Predators over the battle field that they can each shoot their two and fly home and you've got enough overhead to get the job does? It would seems like there would be situations were you'd want to keep the enemy forces' heads down for an extended period of time where a gun would be more desirable than missiles. You tell me. MQ-9 carries significantly more than 2 AGM-114s, but that being said. Guns are the least effective system when it comes to CAS, what is needed is HE on the DMPI |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/1/2014 9:01:33 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
MQ-9 carries significantly more than 2 AGM-114s, but that being said. Guns are the least effective system when it comes to CAS, what is needed is HE on the DMPI Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
They have gotten use to it from the last 11 years of it happening. For smushing targets given to you by ground forces, whats the difference? The effect is the same. Stop asking for a platform. Look, obviously you guys have the experience, but don't you see the possibility that you might find yourself engaging a large enough enemy ground force that the 2 missile payload of the Predator becomes an issue? Or do you just have the ability to get enough Predators over the battle field that they can each shoot their two and fly home and you've got enough overhead to get the job does? It would seems like there would be situations were you'd want to keep the enemy forces' heads down for an extended period of time where a gun would be more desirable than missiles. You tell me. MQ-9 carries significantly more than 2 AGM-114s, but that being said. Guns are the least effective system when it comes to CAS, what is needed is HE on the DMPI If you've got a hundred enemy fighters spread over a few dozen acres in close with friendly forces, how many missiles are we talking about to effectively take them out of the fight? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/1/2014 9:06:33 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
If you've got a hundred enemy fighters spread over a few dozen acres in close with friendly forces, how many missiles are we talking about to effectively take them out of the fight? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
They have gotten use to it from the last 11 years of it happening. For smushing targets given to you by ground forces, whats the difference? The effect is the same. Stop asking for a platform. Look, obviously you guys have the experience, but don't you see the possibility that you might find yourself engaging a large enough enemy ground force that the 2 missile payload of the Predator becomes an issue? Or do you just have the ability to get enough Predators over the battle field that they can each shoot their two and fly home and you've got enough overhead to get the job does? It would seems like there would be situations were you'd want to keep the enemy forces' heads down for an extended period of time where a gun would be more desirable than missiles. You tell me. MQ-9 carries significantly more than 2 AGM-114s, but that being said. Guns are the least effective system when it comes to CAS, what is needed is HE on the DMPI If you've got a hundred enemy fighters spread over a few dozen acres in close with friendly forces, how many missiles are we talking about to effectively take them out of the fight? probably less than required gun runs. Air burst HE is the best way to kill troops in the open |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/1/2014 9:24:25 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The A-10's forward fuselage would need to be redesigned to accommodate a smaller gun. And really the A-10 itself would need a complete redesign if you're going to do all that, the newest airframe was made in the early 1980's. Keep the overall shape and concept and reliability of the A-10, make it a two seater, give it the ability to fire Hellfires, IFR from a drog, lengthen the airframe for more ammo, fuel, and center line hard points, make the wing slightly larger, wider, stronger, and then better engines, with more power. A-10E Super Hawg. Quote HistoryQuoted: I think it would make sense with our missile technology to do away with the GAU-8 and go with something smaller so that more ammunition can be carried to better support ground forces against light armor and infantry. The A-10's forward fuselage would need to be redesigned to accommodate a smaller gun. And really the A-10 itself would need a complete redesign if you're going to do all that, the newest airframe was made in the early 1980's. Keep the overall shape and concept and reliability of the A-10, make it a two seater, give it the ability to fire Hellfires, IFR from a drog, lengthen the airframe for more ammo, fuel, and center line hard points, make the wing slightly larger, wider, stronger, and then better engines, with more power. A-10E Super Hawg. A-11 = Hogzilla  |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/1/2014 9:26:52 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
probably less than required gun runs. Air burst HE is the best way to kill troops in the open DPICM? But arty over CAS if I have the choice anyday. But I'll take CCA over both. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/1/2014 9:36:03 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
DPICM? But arty over CAS if I have the choice anyday. But I'll take CCA over both. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
probably less than required gun runs. Air burst HE is the best way to kill troops in the open DPICM? But arty over CAS if I have the choice anyday. But I'll take CCA over both. ICM is going away; the new PRAXIS round may prove to be just as good for troops |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/1/2014 9:38:40 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
ICM is going away; the new PRAXIS round may prove to be just as good for troops Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
probably less than required gun runs. Air burst HE is the best way to kill troops in the open DPICM? But arty over CAS if I have the choice anyday. But I'll take CCA over both. ICM is going away; the new PRAXIS round may prove to be just as good for troops damned communists. off to google. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/1/2014 9:46:02 PM EDT
[#32]
Does the top speed of the Predator give you any pause in terms of time to on station in a hot zone? What are we talking about, roughly 200 kn for a Predator II vs about 400 kn for an A-10?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/1/2014 9:51:48 PM EDT
[#33]
Use, improve what works?
To top it off they've already inactivated the first Kiowa squadron, the rest to follow. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/1/2014 9:55:03 PM EDT
[#34]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/1/2014 9:58:14 PM EDT
[#35]
BUUUURRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRBBBBP".................
Bring back napalm while we're at it..... |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/1/2014 10:08:59 PM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted: damned communists. off to google. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: probably less than required gun runs. Air burst HE is the best way to kill troops in the open DPICM? But arty over CAS if I have the choice anyday. But I'll take CCA over both. ICM is going away; the new PRAXIS round may prove to be just as good for troops damned communists. off to google. i did that too. looks like an upgraded artillery fired SFW with triple fuse to cut down on duds |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/2/2014 6:27:54 AM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
i did that too. looks like an upgraded artillery fired SFW with triple fuse to cut down on duds Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
probably less than required gun runs. Air burst HE is the best way to kill troops in the open DPICM? But arty over CAS if I have the choice anyday. But I'll take CCA over both. ICM is going away; the new PRAXIS round may prove to be just as good for troops damned communists. off to google. i did that too. looks like an upgraded artillery fired SFW with triple fuse to cut down on duds Proximity fused air bursting submunitions |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/2/2014 6:34:10 AM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Does the top speed of the Predator give you any pause in terms of time to on station in a hot zone? What are we talking about, roughly 200 kn for a Predator II vs about 400 kn for an A-10? Return to major combat operations will see a significant change in tactics and as Sylvan alluded to if we are fighting a high end opponent most air assets will switch to interdiction and strike while ground fires will be provided by Artillery (rocket, mortar, howitzer and missile) Those few occasions where CAS is brought in they will either use stand off attack with PGMs or high speed ingress with a pop up delivery. But they are more than likely not going to linger over the battlefield like they do now with much effort in SEAD |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/2/2014 6:41:00 AM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Return to major combat operations will see a significant change in tactics and as Sylvan alluded to if we are fighting a high end opponent most air assets will switch to interdiction and strike while ground fires will be provided by Artillery (rocket, mortar, howitzer and missile) Those few occasions where CAS is brought in they will either use stand off attack with PGMs or high speed ingress with a pop up delivery. But they are more than likely not going to linger over the battlefield like they do now with much effort in SEAD Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Does the top speed of the Predator give you any pause in terms of time to on station in a hot zone? What are we talking about, roughly 200 kn for a Predator II vs about 400 kn for an A-10? Return to major combat operations will see a significant change in tactics and as Sylvan alluded to if we are fighting a high end opponent most air assets will switch to interdiction and strike while ground fires will be provided by Artillery (rocket, mortar, howitzer and missile) Those few occasions where CAS is brought in they will either use stand off attack with PGMs or high speed ingress with a pop up delivery. But they are more than likely not going to linger over the battlefield like they do now with much effort in SEAD And if you can skip the indirect application of SEAD and just target those primary targets directly, well, all the better. We will arty ADA so that aircraft can target artillery and maneuver systems. Well, why don't we just arty red artillery and maneuver systems and cut out the middleman? In the PGM era to continue to use a CAS doctrine rooted in Pete Quesada and the 9th AF in Western Europe is the height of stupidity. The COIN era has blinded us to what no shit artillery can do. Now, you can take that lesson and say, "well, we do a lot of COIN, maybe we don't need arty." and I can accept that logic. But then it must be applied to every weapon system and I don't think big blue especially wants to go there. Or you can say, "low intensity conflict is a constant anomoly (WFT?!) that shouldn't dissuade us from procuring high intensity capabilities as a primary focus" In which case arty is your responsive, low risk, high payoff fires ability. Now we want to split the difference. We don't use arty in the wars we fight! We don't need it! The wars we fight are bullshit! Fulda Gap (Beijing plains?) are the future of combat. Procure accordingly (aside from arty, of course) |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/2/2014 7:00:07 AM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
you mean like men in the back of the truck Or do you mean all the tanks isil has?
i hate to kill the jerkoff fest here but 30mm really sucks in that theatre which has been proven over and over. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
When it comes to just getting out there and trying to locate and destroy targets of opportunity, it is hard to beat the A-10. Or do you mean all the tanks isil has?
i hate to kill the jerkoff fest here but 30mm really sucks in that theatre which has been proven over and over. I believe the AH-64 crews would disagree. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/2/2014 7:04:36 AM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I believe the AH-64 crews would disagree. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
When it comes to just getting out there and trying to locate and destroy targets of opportunity, it is hard to beat the A-10. Or do you mean all the tanks isil has?
i hate to kill the jerkoff fest here but 30mm really sucks in that theatre which has been proven over and over. I believe the AH-64 crews would disagree. I know many who wouldn't. Because they watch the gun tapes. If it isn't a direct hit or isn't on rocks/concrete it isn't working very well. 30mm is designed to defeat armor. Do you think 9mm FMJ is as effective as HP? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/2/2014 8:01:33 PM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryLook at those pylons!!!!!!! |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
