Design an A-10 Replacement

[Knowledgeispower]

A superlative heavy fighter that averaged a 4:1 air-to-air kill ratio in Vietnam?

And that was with it burdened by the most restrictive ROEs ever known to aerial combat, seriously if BVR combat had been routinely allowed I suspect the K/D ratio would have been closer to 10:1. The Phantom as it turns out was a great fleet interceptor for its time that turned up being good at a lot of other stuff which is a tribute to its excellent design. Moreover the E variant fixed the whole not having a internal gun problem and it was the most produced Phantom variant.

 

[Zachowon]

No, I actually understand the capabilities of the SAMs our peers are using very well. In fact, both the SA-2 and the SA-5 have very limited mobility in the modern fluid battlefield, and are frankly, obsolete to the point I'm not sure why you're bringing them up. Even large missiles like the Buk, it's important to recognise that the official engagement altitude may be 72,000 feet or something like that, but it isn't actually true over nearly any of the engagement envelope, which is a function of both cross-range from the launcher and altitude. So in fact even a Buk is marginal against a target at 45,000 feet traveling cross-range at speed; you just need to not blunder directly over the launcher. There is no MANPAD which can intercept a target at that altitude, nor particularly any missile complex smaller than the Buk.

Obviously, I don't understand why a 30mm cannon is needed against infantry. In fact, the Scorpion could just as easily carry cluster bombs to deal with infantry; carry more of them than the A-10 can carry 30mm shells, in fact!

As for stopping power against the A-10, I think the 2A38 30 mm cannon on the Tunguska has more than enough for that. It was built explicitly to deal with the development of aircraft like the A-10 which made the 23mm gun on previous Soviet SPAAGs inadequate.

So, I think you're not looking at the whole picture with missile utilization, and also not considering the impact of the fact we still use cluster munitions on the potential CAS capability of a light bomber.



A superlative heavy fighter that averaged a 4:1 air-to-air kill ratio in Vietnam?

The SA-10, 20, and 21 series can reach that altotude.

Also the SA-2 and 5 are great for defending high value stuff.

I know the value of having the A-10 and I am looking at it from the ELINT and standard use the Army asks it to use.

Also munitions like cluster bombs and SDB are more likely to fail then a bullet

 

[Knowledgeispower]

Also munitions like cluster bombs and SDB are more likely to fail then a bullet

And cluster bombs are rather unpopular in the international community due to their unfortunate habit of not having all the submunitions actually go off when they hit the target area and thus effectively creating small minefields

 

[Zachowon]

And cluster bombs are rather unpopular in the international community due to their unfortunate habit of not having all the submunitions actually go off when they hit the target area and thus effectively creating small minefields

That too. Lets not piss of everyone by using cluster munitions where bulets would be better

 

[paulobrito]

Modern-ish Russian systems like Tunguska and Pantsir have 30mm fast-firing guns, designed to deal with the A-10 after the 23mm in the Shika is considered not good enough. They are also fast reaction systems, both designed to operate against the A-10. I don't get the Tunguska numbers, but the Pantsir has a reaction time of less than 5s.
Yes, operated by the usual Arab forces - like the Syrians, that let it parked in the open with the missiles exhausted is not good to any system - but if you put a competent force using then, like the Serbians in the Kosovo crisis, that known the reasons behind be all the time camouflaged, the A-10 and helicopters have a very difficult job. BTW, the Apaches have a 30mm cannon, not machine guns.

 

[Zachowon]

Modern-ish Russian systems like Tunguska and Pantsir have 30mm fast-firing guns, designed to deal with the A-10 after the 23mm in the Shika is considered not good enough. They are also fast reaction systems, both designed to operate against the A-10. I don't get the Tunguska numbers, but the Pantsir has a reaction time of less than 5s.
Yes, operated by the usual Arab forces - like the Syrians, that let it parked in the open with the missiles exhausted is not good to any system - but if you put a competent force using then, like the Serbians in the Kosovo crisis, that known the reasons behind be all the time camouflaged, the A-10 and helicopters have a very difficult job. BTW, the Apaches have a 30mm cannon, not machine guns.

I..I know this. I was using Machine gun as a general type of fast firing weapon.
The point I am making is the Radar and imagery alone can give away the location of said vehicle, and allow for the use of cover that it cant shoot through or Radar not able to get a lock on quickly.

Trees and hills are Radars worst enemies, and no matter the skill of your crew, if one knows how to use those they can defeat even the best trained crews.

I know this from my current location and tactics they are known to use

 

[Deleted member]

Modern-ish Russian systems like Tunguska and Pantsir have 30mm fast-firing guns, designed to deal with the A-10 after the 23mm in the Shika is considered not good enough. They are also fast reaction systems, both designed to operate against the A-10. I don't get the Tunguska numbers, but the Pantsir has a reaction time of less than 5s.
Yes, operated by the usual Arab forces - like the Syrians, that let it parked in the open with the missiles exhausted is not good to any system - but if you put a competent force using then, like the Serbians in the Kosovo crisis, that known the reasons behind be all the time camouflaged, the A-10 and helicopters have a very difficult job. BTW, the Apaches have a 30mm cannon, not machine guns.

In Desert Storm there was only one case of an entire allied flight element being wiped out—American A-10s. It was the only time in the entire war that any allied aircraft including Arab allies flew into the attack and the entire attack element was defeated and shot down. Even in ‘91 the Iraqi AD was fully capable of blowing the A-10 out of the sky.

 

[Sailor.X]

Modern-ish Russian systems like Tunguska and Pantsir have 30mm fast-firing guns, designed to deal with the A-10 after the 23mm in the Shika is considered not good enough. They are also fast reaction systems, both designed to operate against the A-10. I don't get the Tunguska numbers, but the Pantsir has a reaction time of less than 5s.
Yes, operated by the usual Arab forces - like the Syrians, that let it parked in the open with the missiles exhausted is not good to any system - but if you put a competent force using then, like the Serbians in the Kosovo crisis, that known the reasons behind be all the time camouflaged, the A-10 and helicopters have a very difficult job. BTW, the Apaches have a 30mm cannon, not machine guns.

In Desert Storm there was only one case of an entire allied flight element being wiped out—American A-10s. It was the only time in the entire war that any allied aircraft including Arab allies flew into the attack and the entire attack element was defeated and shot down. Even in ‘91 the Iraqi AD was fully capable of blowing the A-10 out of the sky.

Oh for the love of Mike. Y'all forget these exist.

When a serious Anti Air battery is located it is good as dead because ordinance from these will be raining down on them. Nothing exists in a vacuum.

 

[paulobrito]

You knew that modern SAM systems are very mobile and capable of dealing with cruise missiles, right?

 

[Sailor.X]

You knew that modern SAM systems are very mobile and capable of dealing with cruise missiles, right?

And that helped the Iraqi Army and Taliban how????

 

[paulobrito]

And that helped the Iraqi Army and Taliban how????

All kind of hardware in the hands of incompetent users performs badly. Do you assume that the Abrams is a crap tank because of the sub-par performance of the ones of the Iraqi army against enemies with technicals?
The last time US forces confronted a competent adversary is against the Serbs in Kosovo, and they show the difference a competent force is, even with hopelessly dated hardware.

 

[Sailor.X]

All kind of hardware in the hands of incompetent users performs badly. Do you assume that the Abrams is a crap tank because of the sub-par performance of the ones of the Iraqi army against enemies with technicals?
The last time US forces confronted a competent adversary is against the Serbs in Kosovo, and they show the difference a competent force is, even with hopelessly dated hardware.

Um the Serbians still got pounded into the ground by the US so your point is moot. You can have all the fancy toys you want but the result will be the same. Resistance is Futile.

 

[Aldarion]

Um the Serbians still got pounded into the ground by the US so your point is moot. You can have all the fancy toys you want but the result will be the same. Resistance is Futile.

Actually, they did not. Serbs mostly gave up due to a) diplomatic pressure from Russia and b) prospect of land invasion (British troops were massed at the Macedonian border). Air campaign, by itself, achieved little to nothing.

 

[Deleted member]

Oh for the love of Mike. Y'all forget these exist.

When a serious Anti Air battery is located it is good as dead because ordinance from these will be raining down on them. Nothing exists in a vacuum.

So you want the Army’s CAS to only be able to operate in an environment where the Navy has completely destroyed the enemy’s battlefield AD forces with cruise missiles? Thanks but no thanks.

 

[Sailor.X]

So you want the Army’s CAS to only be able to operate in an environment where the Navy has completely destroyed the enemy’s battlefield AD forces with cruise missiles? Thanks but no thanks.

It was called part of the Invasion of Iraq.

 

[Deleted member]

It was called part of the Invasion of Iraq.

The invasion of Iraq was a success but that’s not a reason for us to leave our CAS configured around an operational strategy and tactical CONOPS which is 40 years out of date and made us lose 6 airplanes needlessly in that same conflict... 30 years ago... fighting a second-rate regional military.

 

[paulobrito]

With outdated hardware and incompetent.

 

[Sailor.X]

The invasion of Iraq was a success but that’s not a reason for us to leave our CAS configured around an operational strategy and tactical CONOPS which is 40 years out of date and made us lose 6 airplanes needlessly in that same conflict... 30 years ago... fighting a second-rate regional military.

The plane you were proposing should only be flown by 3rd World Countries. Not a Superpower.

 

[Zachowon]

Oh for the love of Mike. Y'all forget these exist.

When a serious Anti Air battery is located it is good as dead because ordinance from these will be raining down on them. Nothing exists in a vacuum.

Cant forget US Army Artillery, standard and Rocket

You knew that modern SAM systems are very mobile and capable of dealing with cruise missiles, right?

You do know all SAM systems have radars right? They can be mobile but that does not make them not able to be touched....

Do none of you understand this? These SAMs have to have radars or they are useless and dumb fired missiles...

 

[LordSunhawk]

The Tunguska is impressive... but not impressive enough. Shilka had a lower engagement time in the hand of the Red Army, mostly because the turret was lighter and could turn even faster.

And that is the rub. Tunguska is a threat to A-10, so was Shilka. It isn't an 'I Win' button.

As for the A-10 'element' that was shot down? You make it sound oh so dramatic.

It was 2 birds, the other 2 birds in the flight completed the mission. Moreover, Iraq/Kuwait was the worst possible terrain for the A-10, being fairly flat with very long sight lines. Thus while operating in a worst-case scenario, once, in the entire conflict, the Iraqi's managed to best-case the ADA side of the equation, and still only took down half the entire flight.

Scorpion is not a replacement for A-10, all it is is a COIN aircraft, a replacement for the OV-10 Bronco, but not an A-10 replacement.