Design an A-10 Replacement

[Zachowon]

However, the AH-64 Apache has one advantage compared to any low and slow fixed wing that they can never replicate, they can be -for all intents and purposes- crabgrass to enemy radars. Trying to fly a heavily armed fixed-wing 30 meters from ground level is -for all intents and purposes- impossible, especially if you want to RTB even partially in one piece.

From what I understand, you'll need to cover two roles with the A-10: Close Air Support (CAS) and Battlefield Interdiction (BAI). Both of these are vital in combat conditions. BAI goes out to damage or annihilate enemy combat formations while CAS is simply 'flying artillery' in the traditional sense. Due to the aforementioned limitation of fixed-wing aircraft, you'll have to fly high and fast, out of the range of MANPADs and AAGs.

Also, the definition of 'Close' in 'Close Air Support' isn't on how close the aircraft is to the troops, that's just due to technological issues, but on how close the ordinance is landing to the troops. Basically, if the ordinance is landing close to the soldiers (up to and including 'danger close'), then its CAS. Everything else is BAI.

Not really, radar has gotten damn good at the low altitudes that the A-10 was designed for. You have to have an altitude of 30 meters or so to avoid even SPAAG radar... and 30 meters for a fixed-wing is deadly dangerous. Remember what I found out in the Sgt. York program, where aircraft had to have solid cover between them and the radar set? Yeah, that's an actual thing for a long-ass time now.

Also, networking is becoming a real thing, meaning that you'll get to the point where one set sees, everyone else sees. I wouldn't be surprised that this capability is being retrofitted on vehicles that can be fitted with such tech.

The A-10, but it's -in any current or future ADS scenario- basically dead meat if the enemy is even half-way competent with its AA assets.

Radars are not good enough to be able to track a target on the other side of a mountain, or between a thick forest...

The right question is - can the A-10 still do is job, in a non very permissive environment, and/or against a competent adversary with decent-ish anti-air weapons?

Yes

The answer there is complicated, so bear with me.

The short answer is sometimes yes, sometimes no, it depends.

However in general, specifically for the CAS mission, the A-10 is capable of handling the mission, although it will take losses in early phases against a fully intact air defense network. Note that the nature of CAS means that said network is going to be degrading rapidly, because CAS does not occur in a vacuum.

The primary benefit of stealth is the reduction of detection range. In 'conventional' stealth aircraft, such as F-117, F-22, F-35, B-2, and the upcoming B-21, this is accomplished by reduction in radar cross section and other emissions/reflections. However the older way to accomplish this is to fly extremely low.

All forms of detection against aircraft, be it radar, IR, UV, etc, requires a degree of line of sight. Certain types of radar have, in certain circumstances, non-LOS capability. However, this non-LOS capability is only applicable to extremely large radar systems operating over great ranges where they make use of various properties of the atmosphere to 'bend' radar waves.

So, to reduce visibility to these sensors, you either reduce your signature (the 'Stealth' route) or you keep solid objects between you and the sensors in question.

The A-10 does the latter. It is capable of flying low enough to the ground that LOS is broken by terrain. Moreover, at the altitude the A-10 operates, there is a phenomena called 'ground clutter' which makes even airborne radar have severe issues locking on to a target.

As I explained earlier in the thread. The A-10 makes brutal use of ground clutter and terrain in its attack profile. By keeping extremely low, terrain itself will mask the approach. The A-10 will have the benefit of datalinks back to AWACS and various ELINT birds informing the pilot of the location of targets and threats.

The A-10 pilot will therefore already know where his target is with a solid degree of confidence. In a CAS run, he'll either be making a rapid pass and deploying retarded bombs, lofting Maverick (which can take advantage of off-platform designation, I might add) without breaking cover, or perform the pop-up and dive attack affectionately known as BRRRTTTT.

So now your air defense platform needs to perform the following actions in the sub 3 second span that the A-10 is vulnerable.

Detect the target.

Identify the target (would really suck to waste your ammo on a flock of startled birds, wouldn't it)

Track the target (it's a moving target, you can't shoot where it is now, you need to predict where it will be in 1 to 2 seconds when your shells will intersect)

Engage the target.

Meanwhile, BRRRRTTT is heading your way, which is what the Chieftain would describe as a 'significant emotional event'.

Note, that even with all of this, there's still guesswork. Because that A-10 is not going to fly straight. It's going to break, either left or right. Flip a ruble, Ivan, because if you guess wrong you'll still miss.

Radars work certain ways and often are not as simple as Aaron is making it out to be

One possible scenario is like this:
US forces are under attack / engaged with an adversary. They ask for air support / CAS.
An A-10 that is near is dispatched to deal with the adversary.
Unknown to the A-10, a Tunguska / Pantsir-S1 is near, well camouflaged.
While the A-10 approaches the target area making use of all the possible elevations of terrain to mask is run, he enters the range of said Tunguska / Pantsir.
Question - the A-10 has sensors that inform the pilot that is 'painted'? If not is toasted, if yes, need to move away because don't know the exact location of the enemy anti-air.
In both cases don't do its job.
Yes, is a bit more complex scenario, and involves a competent adversary with a two-group force.
but is possible.

There is no such thing a well camoflaged when every vehicle on Earth gives off a heat signature that thermal sensors can pick up. Especially from recon drones. Northrop Grumman RQ-4 Global Hawk - Wikipedia

A-10 does in fact carry sensors of that nature, generally pod-mounted. However, in that scenario *any* CAS platform would be forced to break off the attack, and ELINT/Recon assets were incompetent, because a Tunguska/Pantsir system is not all that stealthy as it relies on active emissions to operate.

As someone who does ELINT, something like that wont be missed if it is on and looking.

 

[ShadowArxxy]

We've also long ago managed to baffling engines so that they can be quiet on a low altitude flyby. The B-2 is an old bird now and I'm sure we can make a smaller plane even quieter. With manpads as your main threat, sight and sound are just as if not more important than radar. If a grunt has to spend a few seconds wondering who is making tea before he realizes it is a jet he is hearing, that can be the entire difference between boom and zoom.

I watched an A-10 flight demo at Edwards AFB, so I can testify from firsthand observation that even with its old engines, the A-10 is startlingly quiet.

They demonstrated the 'racetrack' gun technique -- quick pop-up into a fifteen-second strafing dive, sharp snap-turn out of the firing line and circle around low while another A-10 goes into strafing dive. It takes them ~45 seconds to circle back for another run, so by this method, two A-10s can hit the target zone with a strafing run every 30 seconds, or four A-10s can hit the target zone with continuous back-to-back-to-back-to-back strafing.

(That is not speculation based on the time it took them to circle; per the Air Force announcer narrating the flight demo, that is the specific purpose of this technique, laying down sustained multiple strafing runs against soft targets caught in the open.)

 

[Scottty]

The US military considered this monstrosity a good proof of concept,

White on top and black underneath? The biologist in me says that's just wrong.

The A-10 will have the benefit of datalinks back to AWACS

Why doesn't this give away the A-10's location?

 

[LordSunhawk]

White on top and black underneath? The biologist in me says that's just wrong.



Why doesn't this give away the A-10's location?

Mostly because it's passive on the receiver end (AWACS et al transmit highly encrypted, the various receiving platforms simply pick up the signal, they don't transmit back).

 

[Tiamat]

Mostly because it's passive on the receiver end (AWACS et al transmit highly encrypted, the various receiving platforms simply pick up the signal, they don't transmit back).

Meaning A-10 pilots would be getting similar messages from the AWACS just like the fighter escorts...?

“All your kills are belong to us!” 😜😎