• Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?

    Go here:

    Edit Account Details and Profile

Awesome A-10 News and Anchor

Pags

N/A
pilot
Ok gents, thanks a lot. Yet it seems to me that A-6Es, for example, up to 1986 had done very little that can be considered as something totally different from what Hogs did. Another truth is that you both are right, naval tactical air had had another tasking for daily routine. Again, was that change in theatres and styles of warfare that Navy faced in 1991, lacking precise weapon and its platforms for land targets' pounding, as unpredictable as it seems now?
A-6 was never designed to do what A-10s do. A-6 was a carrier based all-weather medium attack aircraft while A-10 was a close air support aircraft.
 

Treetop Flyer

Well-Known Member
pilot
Even if the Navy wanted to focus on the tank killing business, hornets carry mavericks too. I don't have the stats in front of me, but I believe a significant majority armor kills by the A-10 in desert storm were with mavericks
 

Max the Mad Russian

Hands off Ukraine! Feet too
A-6 was never designed to do what A-10s do. A-6 was a carrier based all-weather medium attack aircraft while A-10 was a close air support aircraft.
Ok, I was wrong with A-6 as Navy airplane, but Marines have used it too, Marines are keen on CAS more than everything else, and no other Marine birds of Navy origin - i.e. A-4 and F-4 - were better in CAS than A-6 of WMA(AW) squadrons, I believe. Let me repose the question - why USMC had not developed something like A-10? Marines were tasked with CAS in Norway, as did the Navy VAs of the incoming carriers there, in Norway, when the Norhtern Weddings were acted in 1980s - I know it for sure as we have this as example of our anti-carrier doctrine and Soviets didn't hesitate to use the T-55 and T-64 tanks of both Army and Naval Marine forces providing the tactical amphibs in Norwegian fjords, as well as BTR-60/80 APCs and light PT-76 tanks which both could "swim".
 

Max the Mad Russian

Hands off Ukraine! Feet too
Even if the Navy wanted to focus on the tank killing business, hornets carry mavericks too. I don't have the stats in front of me, but I believe a significant majority armor kills by the A-10 in desert storm were with mavericks

Do you mean LMAVs or IRMAVs? The latter was the primary weapon of Hogs mostly due to lacking of FLIRs for them, and the missile's IR seeker was used as "poor man's FLIR". The most successful antitank weapon of Desert Sorm was GBU-12 LGBs from USAF F-111Fs, according to published statistics. And Navy/Marine A-6Es with TRAM system could use the same LGBs for the same task - the only carrier-borne airplane able to do so then - if the had enough such bombs in the storages. CAS is not purely antitank job, and big gun and long loitering time are more important things...
 
Last edited:

Max the Mad Russian

Hands off Ukraine! Feet too
Gents,

Another Hog question. In this book the average example of the battle sortie for CAS is a section of two airplanes, and the flight lead is almost always Capt, but in a half of cases the wingman is Maj, LtCol, and in one occasion even full O-6, Colonel USAF. Is that the feature of the USAF Hog community solely or NAVAIR single-seaters' flight also can be arranged with the wingman senior to flight lead?
 

Treetop Flyer

Well-Known Member
pilot
Gents,

Another Hog question. In this book the average example of the battle sortie for CAS is a section of two airplanes, and the flight lead is almost always Capt, but in a half of cases the wingman is Maj, LtCol, and in one occasion even full O-6, Colonel USAF. Is that the feature of the USAF Hog community solely or NAVAIR single-seaters' flight also can be arranged with the wingman senior to flight lead?
There's no relation between seniority and flight leads. Obviously if a CO wants to be the lead, he will be. It's not automatic though.
 

Treetop Flyer

Well-Known Member
pilot
Do you mean LMAVs or IRMAVs? The latter was the primary weapon of Hogs mostly due to lacking of FLIRs for them, and the missile's IR seeker was used as "poor man's FLIR". The most successful antitank weapon of Desert Sorm was GBU-12 LGBs from USAF F-111Fs, according to published statistics. And Navy/Marine A-6Es with TRAM system could use the same LGBs for the same task - the only carrier-borne airplane able to do so then - if the had enough such bombs in the storages. CAS is not purely antitank job, and big gun and long loitering time are more important things...
Yes, IRMAV's back then.
 

fc2spyguy

loving my warm and comfy 214 blanket
pilot
Contributor
A-10 thread, so it seems appropriate. Just got back from a couple weeks in nellis. New liquid dispensers for the wardroom in hand.
 

Attachments

  • image.jpeg
    image.jpeg
    1.6 MB · Views: 53

Max the Mad Russian

Hands off Ukraine! Feet too
I'm guessing those are Reserve/ Guard units that have a mixture of young full time and older part time guys.

Well, really it was ANG unit with O-6 wingman, you are right. Thanks a lot. Here we have no any kind of reserve people who fly, that is why I was asking. In Russian AF flight lead usually senior to other troops in formation, and even in crewed airplane, say Su-24, a pilot almost always senior to WSO. Another gift from this book - trying to keep in formation, wingman burns more fuel so s/he may need tanker earlier. Always so?
 

Max the Mad Russian

Hands off Ukraine! Feet too
"We did, it's called the Zulu Cobra"-Actual quote from the DCA

Thanks. Not familiar with USMC rotary and based on US Army experience with AH-64, I'm trying to say that helicopters aren't able to CAS where it turns BAI and can provide CAS only in form of Close Combat Attack (CCA), sharing ground troops' SA but lacking the SA of FAC(A)'s level.
 
Top