A-10s at 2K... [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : A-10s at 2K...


Skyhook
02-10-2004, 14:06
They just rumble past us looking VERY business-like!!
How can anything so %$#*# ugly be so good-looking??

FB3
02-10-2004, 14:40
The old Warthogs are tough and very well designed for their mission as tank killers. Also do a number on APC's and guns. The 30mm cannon can fire depleted uranium rounds, similar to the anti-tank sabots used in our tanks. Can carry quite an assortment of ordnance, has a lot of loiter time/range and is pretty tough. Excellent weapons delivery platform.

edited to add that I am not 100% sure of the capability to fire the depleted uranium stuff, but think that this is so.

ateamer
02-10-2004, 15:45
The depleted uranium is to give the round more kinetic energy. Uranium is very dense stuff, heavy for its size. I think the muzzle velocity is something like 4500 fps.

I love A-10s. Someday a few decades from now we'll be seeing them as privately-owned warbirds.

glocknsail
02-10-2004, 18:34
Originally posted by ateamer
I love A-10s. Someday a few decades from now we'll be seeing them as privately-owned warbirds.

Talk about something for home defense!

sopdan
02-10-2004, 22:45
The ANG has A-10s based out of the airport that I fly out of. It's so cool when they do a low fly-by. Even though they're not fast compared to other military jets, they're a lot cooler than the usual 172 doing pattern work.

However, they get priority and it kind of sucks holding short for 10 minutes so they can takeoff/land as well as the regular traffic when I was to the line first. :)

tSuperflyTNT
02-11-2004, 01:05
oh yeah

I'd happily give Uncle Sam 10 years of service without hesitation if they could promise me that i'd be there to fly. A-10s of course, (or B-52s) but something about the Warthog makes me tingle

Egyas
02-11-2004, 01:41
Originally posted by tSuperflyTNT
something about the Warthog makes me tingle

Yea, baby!

The Fairchild Republic A-10 Thunderbolt II (aka Warthog). Best tank buster ever made. Can even be a ship killer if pressed, although they are really slow and vulnerable in that role. I seem to remember reading somewhere (but I can't remember where) that the Russians refered to them as the "Devil's Cross". LOL

To the best of my knowledge, there is no mobile armor in servece today that can withstand it's 30mm cannon.

Yea,, baby!

flybywire
02-11-2004, 08:30
Originally posted by ateamer
The depleted uranium is to give the round more kinetic energy. Uranium is very dense stuff, heavy for its size. I think the muzzle velocity is something like 4500 fps.

The muzzle velocity of the GAU-8 30mm round is about 3500 fps, similiar to the 3300 fps muzzle velocity of the M61A1 20mm round. (The 20mm gatling is used by all other modern US fighters.)

When either round goes subsonic, it tumbles and becomes ineffective. The ballistics advantage of the depleted uranium round is that it does not slow down as much. This significantly extends the 30mm effective range.

For more info:

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/equip/gau-8.htm

SlimlineGlock
02-15-2004, 21:08
The DU shell weighs almost one pound.....slightly less than 7,000 grams at almost 3,500 fps.

The energy of a 20mm shell at the muzzle equals the energy of a 30mm shell 6,000 feet out from the gun barrell.

80% of rounds fired at 4,000ft hit within a 20ft radius......good accuracy.

and it is fun to shoot!

F14Scott
02-16-2004, 19:02
I heard somewhere that the A-10 is burst limited, not for barrel-life but because the recoil of the gun overcomes both the engines and the weight of the aircraft and will slow the aircraft to a stall, even in a dive.

I don't know if it's true.

SlimlineGlock
02-16-2004, 19:17
The A-10 isn't burst limited. You HAVE to be kidding!

Practically speaking, over 100 rounds, and the barrels start heating up and slinging lead wider and wider.

So, limiting the bursts to around 100 is tactically sound.

Egyas
02-18-2004, 08:14
Originally posted by F14Scott
I heard somewhere that the A-10 is burst limited, not for barrel-life but because the recoil of the gun overcomes both the engines and the weight of the aircraft and will slow the aircraft to a stall, even in a dive.

I don't know if it's true.


The cannon is not burst limited, but can stall the aircraft according to everything I have ever read. The pilot needs to be careful to to over do it.

ateamer
02-18-2004, 09:47
http://forum.biohazcentral.com/index.php?showtopic=99

Excerpt from discussion:
------------------------------
Question- Can the GAU-8A Avenger Cannon stall the aircraft?

My answer-

This question has been asked before and here is the answer from Ragman, an FCF pilot who flew A-10s for over 15 years.....


Ragman- The old wive's tale of the A-10 slowing down in flight when the gun is fired was generated by the early jokes bureau when the airplane first came to be...you know, A-10 simulator - put the pilot in a metal trash can and throw rocks at it. That kind of thing. Since bullets are expensive and chances to shoot on the range are limited, most pilots get in the habit of shooting short bursts: less than one second. Best chances for a kill on most targets (PK) is with a one second burst or around 70 rounds. In that length of time there's never any noticeable slowdown of the plane in flight.

When I was flying test sorties out of McClellan in the 80's, we were testing the Batelle gun gas diverter, a huge metal baffled wheel apparatus attached to the barrels that would sling all the gun gas down and away from the engines. A dismal failure of an idea because of weight and excess spinup of the gun. During the firing tests we were shooting four and six second bursts: what seemed like an eternity on the trigger. Even with that there was never any noticeable speed reduction during firing in the cockpit, but a slight evidence by the chase aircraft on the wing while trying to film.

Dice-man- Ragman what about noise, vibs and gun gas...

Ragman- As for vibration and noise, it's kind of like hitting those little grooved ridges on the shoulders of some two-lane roads in your car with only a muted growl for noise. The smoke is hardy noticeable. It's fun to shoot because it does have some feeling to it, unlike the 20mm in the F-5 that was kind of a joke after the Hog.

Dice-man-He flew F-5 for a couple of years. That's from the horse's mouth or in this case the Hog's mouth!

As a side note here Ragman said they held down the trigger for up to six second and if you look at the firing rate of the GAU-8A, its max load would be expended in 12-15 seconds. So there is not enough ammo loaded to cause the aircraft to stall. Also the barrel would melt long before that happen!
-----------------------------------------------------------------

My comments:
I don't see how a burst from the cannon can have enough energy to cause a plane weighing over 30,000 pounds and flying something in excess of 150 knots to slow down to where the wing stalls.

freepatriot
02-18-2004, 10:06
I used to think the Intruder was the most beautiful ugly plane the US could come up with... until I saw the Warthog.

I was thinking this morning about tossing out my old A-10 "Ugly Stick" t-shirt ("Go early, often!") but now you guys have got me changing my mind.

amprecon
02-21-2004, 11:07
I had never seen an A-6 Intruder until after I arrived at my first squadron VA-42 in Oceana, VA in 1988. I didn't know anything about them, but learned rather quickly what they were designed for and garnered a healthy respect for their capabilities.

However I also realized that in the new modern style of aerial combat that they were already obsolete against other "modern" defenses. They were effective, but their design left them to vulnerable to loss.

Their main defense was their low-altitude manueverability, the ability to fly nap-of-the-earth. If they were visually picked up by a bandit, and without air-cover, they were pretty fair game.

The A-10 was developed 30 years too late. It would have fit the bill perfectly in Viet-nam, however it would have competed against the A-1 Skyraider which was also an excellent ground support aircraft with a healthy loiter time, and it was also ship-bourne if I'm not mistaken.

I love the A-10, it is one of my all-time favorites and would love to fly one. But in today's combat atmosphere I do believe it's outdated unless we get involved in convential actions against third-world adversaries.

Dinky
02-22-2004, 17:22
An interesting use for the A-10


http://www.firehogs.com/photos/bottom.shtml

Texas T
02-22-2004, 22:03
Originally posted by Dinky
An interesting use for the A-10 You know what... if Evergreen were to make their 747 Air Attack into a tanker and use it to re-supply these A-10's, I'd bet they could get a lot more accomplished with a lot more accuracy.

Put the 747 into a racetrack a few thousand feet up; have the A-10's dump their loads; grab another load of slurry from the mother ship; and then start all over again.

If they could have 1/4 of the 747 as a fuel tanker and 3/4 as a slurry tanker they could keep the A-10's up there for a long time.

Dinky
02-23-2004, 05:24
That has always been the problem, waiting for the tankers to return. I can,t remember all the times we almost had a fire under control with the help of the tankers and then watched it grow, waiting for them to return, while the ground crews worked the flanks, stretching hose and cutting line.

BillCola
02-27-2004, 21:50
Here's a couple of shots of A-10's I took while attending a shooting school in Nevada. When they passed overhead, I could practically read the pilot's wristwatch. This was the best I could do after running like a madman for my camera.

http://authorized.net/download/GT/a10a.jpg http://authorized.net/download/GT/a10b.jpg

Bullman
02-28-2004, 08:07
Originally posted by Egyas
Yea, baby!

The Fairchild Republic A-10 Thunderbolt II (aka Warthog). Best tank buster ever made. Can even be a ship killer if pressed, although they are really slow and vulnerable in that role. I seem to remember reading somewhere (but I can't remember where) that the Russians refered to them as the "Devil's Cross". LOL

To the best of my knowledge, there is no mobile armor in servece today that can withstand it's 30mm cannon.

Yea,, baby!

They had a deal on the history channel last night about the A-10, it was awesome. They said on the show that there is nothing armor plated in service that can stand up to that 30mm cannon.

I love A-10s. Someday a few decades from now we'll be seeing them as privately-owned warbirds.

They also said on that show that they expect the A-10 to remain in service till 2025, so it may be a long wait.

Wulfenite
02-29-2004, 14:21
Saw the same thing on the History Channel. Pretty funny the AF was going to cancel the program till the Gulf War I came along and saved the program.

I'm kind of suprised the Navy has not picked up some and adapted them for carrier ops. Seems like it would be a heck of a good platform for supporting amphibious landings and protecting the fleet in crowded waters.

Might even work for anti sub work.

Bullman
02-29-2004, 18:14
Originally posted by Wulfenite
I'm kind of suprised the Navy has not picked up some and adapted them for carrier ops. Seems like it would be a heck of a good platform for supporting amphibious landings and protecting the fleet in crowded waters.

Might even work for anti sub work.

You know, now that you mention it, the A-10 could very well be the Skyraider of the 21st century, who do we call at the navy to suggest this? ;f

That 30mm could probably saw a destroyer in half.

Wulfenite
02-29-2004, 19:10
I was thinking it would be just the ticket for staying on station above the fleet whenever they are in a situation where a terrorist in a fishing boat might be able to sneak up on them. The A-10 could quickly get to where ever the threat was, get low and slow enough for a good look while being protected from small arms fire, and with the gattling gun should be able to sink just about any kind of boat a terrorist could get the keys to.

Basically the kind of stuff a helo might do but with a much longer time on station and more firepower to boot.

You know, now that you mention it, the A-10 could very well be the Skyraider of the 21st century, who do we call at the navy to suggest this?

You think there's a sizeable comission in this deal somewhere?

Bullman
02-29-2004, 21:25
Originally posted by Wulfenite
You think there's a sizeable comission in this deal somewhere?

I hope so, sizeable enough to finance my way through flight school and to buy me some wings somewhere, and something fun too, maybe they would just give me an A-10 to fly, I wouldn't complain.

Egyas
03-01-2004, 22:57
Doubt it could happen boys. The A-10's wings are just too darn big. Plus, you would have to make them foldable to work w/ a carrier, and I think the airframe would lose too much stability with these kind of modifications. Just my opinion.

Wulfenite
03-02-2004, 08:59
Shouldent be a problem.

The A-10 has a 57 foot wingspan.

The Viking is 68
The Intruder is 53
The Hawkeye is 80.

With the A-10 low slow manuverability it should be (relatively) easy to trap. A folding wing mod wouldent seem to be that difficult a thing.

Egyas
03-02-2004, 13:13
Would a wing with that folding mod still be able to carry the same weapon's load? It just seems to me (opinion here, not knowledge) that the payload capability would be reduced by eliminating by doing this.

F14Scott
03-02-2004, 20:34
Originally posted by Wulfenite
A folding wing mod wouldent seem to be that difficult a thing.

But a landing gear / frame / tailhook / folding wing mod might be. I think repeated three to four degree glideslope landings on those little struts would be bad.

BTW, I feel kinda stupid for passing along the recoil/stall rumor. I should have done the math before I opened the yap.

4TS&W
03-02-2004, 20:55
Originally posted by Egyas
Yea, baby!

The Fairchild Republic A-10 Thunderbolt II (aka Warthog). Best tank buster ever made. Can even be a ship killer if pressed, although they are really slow and vulnerable in that role. I seem to remember reading somewhere (but I can't remember where) that the Russians refered to them as the "Devil's Cross". LOL

I believe it was Clancy's "Red Storm Rising" where this phrase was used.

One of their best features was the titanium "bathtub" the pilot sits in to protect him from small arms and also the way the engines reduce heat signature for IR guided SAMs (by their "tuck" in with the tail.)

'course that gun kicks ass too! LOL ;f