News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Dark spot under cockpit of A-10s by Pxtl on Thursday March 06, 2014 @12:17PM (#7355067)
It really demonstrates the problem with the American military bureaucratic structure - all the best attempts they made with rotary combat aircraft couldn't really measure up to the A-10 in that role, but the army wasn't allowed to operate fixed-wing combat aircraft so they had to rely on the air-force to do that... and the air-force infrastructure and culture doesn't really properly "map" to the kind of work the A-10 did.

Regardless, the A-10 is an anachronism now. Its chief advantage was its ruggedness and ability to properly explore the battlefield when attacking unlike faster, more fragile aircraft... and now they have drones that fill that role of "slow enough to look around before opening fire and we don't care quite so much if it gets shot".

Re:Dark spot under cockpit of A-10s by redthrowaway on Thursday March 06, 2014 @01:04PM (#7355426)
>Regardless, the A-10 is an anachronism now

True

>Its chief advantage was its ruggedness and ability to properly explore the battlefield when attacking

Well, not really. While those are both big advantages it enjoys, its chief advantage and the mission is was designed for was that it carries enough ordinance to stop a Soviet tank column rolling into Germany in its tracks.

The A-10 is absolutely overkill for any modern CAS mission, and the airframes are simply 40 years old. Extending their life is only a temporary solution; they'll have to be replaced sooner or later. When they are replaced, there really isn't much of an argument for building a direct replacement instead of farming its various roles out to other platforms {hang and wait: predator, strike: f-35, CAS: Apache}

Re:Dark spot under cockpit of A-10s by jessaustin on Thursday March 06, 2014 @01:24PM (#7355575)
...it carries enough ordinance to stop a Soviet tank column...

If we don't need them there would probably be some interested parties in Eastern Europe right about now...

Re:Dark spot under cockpit of A-10s by stackcollision on Thursday March 06, 2014 @03:10PM (#7356255)
And that's how the US Air Force became Rent-A-Warthog.
Re:Dark spot under cockpit of A-10s by Uhhrrr on Thursday March 06, 2014 @03:59PM (#7356539)
It's like Uber for ground-attack aircraft!
Re:Dark spot under cockpit of A-10s by chernevik on Thursday March 06, 2014 @07:35PM (#7357614)
Uber Alles
Re:Dark spot under cockpit of A-10s by redthrowaway on Thursday March 06, 2014 @07:12PM (#7357496)
Just don't tell Bloomberg.
Re:Dark spot under cockpit of A-10s by Pxtl on Thursday March 06, 2014 @01:36PM (#7355649)
Well, I meant in recent engagements. I mean, how many times was the A-10 actually used to attack a Soviet tank-column vs. gunning down a bunch of poor guys with AKs hiding in light cover?
Re:Dark spot under cockpit of A-10s by dylanrw on Friday March 07, 2014 @05:49AM (#7359538)
Maybe not soviet, but it sure racked up an insane count & ratio on Iraqi columns:

Destroying: - more than 1,000 tanks - 1,200 artillery pieces - 2,000 other military vehicles Confirmed kills include: - 967 tanks - 926 artillery pieces - 1,306 trucks - 501 armored personnel carriers - 28 command posts - Successfully hunted and destroyed SCUD missiles - Suppressed enemy air defenses - Attacked early warning radars

Those numbers to 5 losses in Desert Storm alone...

Re:Dark spot under cockpit of A-10s by Turing_Machine on Thursday March 06, 2014 @02:33PM (#7356019)
Well, none. Deterrence, dude.
Re:Dark spot under cockpit of A-10s by qbrass on Friday March 07, 2014 @12:25AM (#7358658)
If you think the A-10's an anachronism, the B-52 has been around for 60 years and is planned to be around for 30 more.
Re:Dark spot under cockpit of A-10s by ericd on Thursday March 06, 2014 @12:36PM (#7355208)
I imagine that a few depleted uranium rounds are a cheaper way to kill a tank than a hellfire, though?
Re:Dark spot under cockpit of A-10s by sp332 on Thursday March 06, 2014 @01:33PM (#7355632)
The A10's gun has no (declassified) rounds capable of piercing a tank's armor. Sorry I can't find a more reliable source but http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20090812213536AA... Its anti-tank weapons are missiles.

I put "declassified" in there because I saw a video a few years ago that claimed to show an A10 ripping through a tank. No idea what those rounds were.

Re:Dark spot under cockpit of A-10s by greedo on Thursday March 06, 2014 @02:38PM (#7356059)
Perhaps not through the front armor of a current MBT, but that's not where the guns aims. Instead it hits the top of the turret, the engine deck, and treads. This may not always result in an explosive, turret tossing engagement, but it definitely will result in a mission kill.
Re:Dark spot under cockpit of A-10s by ericd on Friday March 07, 2014 @03:42AM (#7359112)
Every video I've ever seen of the A-10 involved it doing nasty things to tanks with its gun, at the very least rendering the tank inoperative. From wiki, sounds like it uses 5:1 mix of ~1 pound AP and HE rounds.

Like greedo alluded to, MBT armor is usually concentrated in the front (and angled) to defeat rounds from other tanks fired from roughly on the level, they tend to skimp everywhere else, and especially on the top.

Re:Dark spot under cockpit of A-10s by Already__Taken on Thursday March 06, 2014 @01:11PM (#7355496)
Yes but count in the time of the whole operation, I bet that equation looks a bit different.

Stuff like loiter times to find the tank, risk to pilots. I bet pilots are the most expensive component in the aircraft. Wikipedia says a helfire is $68,000 usd. Say you fit 8 on an aricraft, how many depleted uranium rounds must you have to take out 8 targets (and account for misses). That takes logistics to move, occupies room.

Re:Dark spot under cockpit of A-10s by ericd on Thursday March 06, 2014 @11:24PM (#7358494)
Oh, I thought they cost significantly more, not bad (much cheaper than an Abrahms)