Page 214 of 214

Re: Why is the F-35 replacing the A-10?

Unread postPosted: 04 May 2019, 08:54
by kimjongnumbaun
That has been my biggest gripe about the A-10 vs F-35 debate. A plane is a plane. If they are really concerned about CAS, then stand up F-35 squadrons that are dedicated CAS platforms who train on CAS as their main mission and everything else is secondary. You retain tribal knowledge and can develop TTPs to evolve the mission beyond the current tactics.

Re: Why is the F-35 replacing the A-10?

Unread postPosted: 04 May 2019, 12:51
by mixelflick
charlielima223 wrote:


A-10 was good in a permissive while the F-35 excelled in a non-permissive environment... who would have thought.

It good to see that they are learning and developing new tactics to have better effects. At this point the phasing out of the A-10 is inevitable. I'll be sad to see the end of a era but so long as we keep the pilots and their experience to train the next generation, I would not be worried that the close air support mission will be exceedingly more effective and capable.

Of course when the report does come out and made public, I'll be thoroughly entertained by the circus of stupidity.


The debate will never end. Will live on long after the "Russian Collusion" fiction is settled IMO..

Re: Why is the F-35 replacing the A-10?

Unread postPosted: 21 Mar 2020, 02:12
by spazsinbad
On page 210 of this thread: viewtopic.php?f=22&t=24483&p=406888&hilit=Norden#p406888 there was discussion of de NORDEN bomb sight with a very nice photo of one. I'll add a pdf page from latest AIR & Space Magazine May 2020 below about this 'not so good' bomb sight. [thanks 'lbk000' PROPA LINK inserted now]
Norden Bombsight
May 2020 CHRIS KLIMEK

"IT TESTED MORE IMPRESSIVELY THAN IT FOUGHT, BUT ITS MARKETING HIT THE BULLSEYE.

CARL L. NORDEN’S bombsight calculated a bomb’s drop point based on the delivery aircraft’s speed, range to target, wind, and other variables, causing it to be touted during World War II (among those with the security clearance to know of it) as a miracle device that would destroy targets with pickel-barrel accuracy from 20,000 feet. The U.S. military spent $1.1 billion in 1940s dollars to build 90,000 Nordens, each one a 50-pound analog computer comprising 2,000 intricately joined parts including gyros, motors, gears, mirrors, and levers. If their aircraft were fatally hit, bombardiers were under orders to destroy the secret machine rather than allow it to be captured.

While showing great promise in daylight testing, in combat, it failed to produce notably better results than similar devices fielded by other air forces. By the time the United States entered the war, the Germans had copied Norden’s synchronous- release, gyroscopically-stabilized design thanks to a spy at Norden’s factory named Hermann Lang.”

FORGOT PHOTO CAPTION: "This Norden M-9 is installed in the B-17G Shoo Shoo Baby, assigned in 1944 to the 91st Bomb Group based in England. All Nordens had a rubberized eyepiece, which often created a black circle around the bombardier’s eye."


Source: AIR & SPACE Magazine May 2020

Re: Why is the F-35 replacing the A-10?

Unread postPosted: 21 Mar 2020, 02:28
by lbk000
Think you kept the wrong link on your clipboard there spaz?

Re: Why is the F-35 replacing the A-10?

Unread postPosted: 21 Mar 2020, 04:19
by Gums
Salute!

TNX, Mixel.

Got my letter of reprimand in 1974 from "on high" after my Aviation Week op-ed letter published about the Hog versus Sluf.

No question the Hog could turn better at low altitude and get the nose pointed where you wanted to hit. Had great staying power as the Sluf, and had a good loadout for CAS or CSAR. Then there was the gun.

But the difference was in accuracy other than the gun. Ask any Sluf jock from the 356th TFS that was the first operational Hawg outfit. Only the A-37 in 'nam compared with the Sluf, and the Corona documents at Air University bear this out. We were talking about 50 or 60 foot CEP for dumb bombs and were requested by name by the FAC's until late 1972.

My views about the Warthog acquisition and all its shortcomings and the politics have been posted here many times. Only later Block Vipers than I flew came close to the Sluf avionics and such.

The F-35 is the closest analogy to the Sluf versus the Double Ugly or Hawg discussion.

I was initially suspect of all the high tech crapola, and my concerns seemed credible for a few years. Then the program managers and company attacked the nits and bits and have produced a really capable weapon system.

Gums sends...

RE: Norden.... The Sluf nav/ radar bomb mode would have saved hundreds of Forts and Libs that didn't have to go back again and again. Our ex-Thud folks that flew the first Sluf missions told us that they would have had many less POW's and losses with our system. [ most of the Sluf cadre at the Beach were F-100 and F-105 folks. They added a few Double Ugly guys and then the low and slow folks like me and A-1 drivers.]

Re: Why is the F-35 replacing the A-10?

Unread postPosted: 21 Mar 2020, 06:59
by sprstdlyscottsmn
Always love hearing from you Gums.

Re: Why is the F-35 replacing the A-10?

Unread postPosted: 21 Mar 2020, 14:21
by mixelflick
sprstdlyscottsmn wrote:Always love hearing from you Gums.


Me too :)

Re: Why is the F-35 replacing the A-10?

Unread postPosted: 21 Mar 2020, 17:42
by Gums
Salute!

NO KISSING UP!!

As some know, I have a bright target painted on me due to my bad habits as a clueless yute and getting older. And believe me, you get older quicker than you think, he heh

I enjoy the discourse and would hope folks like BP, Outlaw, TEG, Spaz, Okie, John Boy of GD, et al would keep posting. Worst thing would be to become a site for sim players, wannabes and critics. We need more folks here with combat experience, and it is obvious that the environment of the last twenty years or so is vastly different than what I experienced. Except that there still ain't no points for second place.

Dreamers? Need more that wish to pursue aviation careers and actually fly. We must strive to put out good poop for them to ingest and digest.

Gums sends...

Re: Why is the F-35 replacing the A-10?

Unread postPosted: 21 Mar 2020, 21:21
by johnwill
Agree all around, Gums. As most of the subject matter is focused on operations now (of which I am clueless), I don't post as much now. But I am with you every day, still learning stuff and keeping up with online friends, people I greatly admire and respect.

Re: Why is the F-35 replacing the A-10?

Unread postPosted: 21 Mar 2020, 22:23
by count_to_10
Gums wrote:Salute!

NO KISSING UP!!

As some know, I have a bright target painted on me due to my bad habits as a clueless yute and getting older. And believe me, you get older quicker than you think, he heh

I enjoy the discourse and would hope folks like BP, Outlaw, TEG, Spaz, Okie, John Boy of GD, et al would keep posting. Worst thing would be to become a site for sim players, wannabes and critics. We need more folks here with combat experience, and it is obvious that the environment of the last twenty years or so is vastly different than what I experienced. Except that there still ain't no points for second place.

Dreamers? Need more that wish to pursue aviation careers and actually fly. We must strive to put out good poop for them to ingest and digest.

Gums sends...

Frankly, it’s all you “been there done that” guys that make this site.