Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Fighters, Bombers and Recon Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: A-10 Storm Chaser
SYSOP    9/27/2014 5:14:02 AM
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Pages: 1 2
Batou    Was the 60's so bad..?   9/28/2014 1:39:56 AM
So Warthog is a 60's design?
The B-52 dates from 1950!
The AAV7 from the 70's and Brit's version, the FV432 from the 60's as well.
 
That make young pups like the F-16, F-15, the Bradley and Stryker all teenagers by comparison...
 
 
BUT the the US Mil.. and I will hold the USAF especially bad at this..... seem damn determined to re-invent the wheel again... and again... again for what gain? Just to spend National dollars?
So what a Foxbat flew near the coast - it was intro'ed in September 1975, but is you listen to the Henny Penny's, the Modern World is about to fall.
 
Foxbat became operational in 1981 and the world didn't fall. Funny how the Russikies can keep updating old reliables and the USAF generals (with more of an eye on a fat corporate paycheck) need to reinvent the wheel...
 
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

Blacktail       9/28/2014 2:55:39 AM
Looks like the USAF is still grasping for straws to get rid of each and every A-10 they can manage --- this time under the charade of a "swords to plowshares" program.
 
Unmentioned in all this is that the A-10's design is optimized for flying low and slow with an extremely heavy payload, surviving numerous, major, and consecutive direct hits, and strafing runs. In other words, it's self-evident that this is a terrible airframe for hurricane-hunting.
 
Quote    Reply

WarNerd       9/28/2014 4:20:03 AM
Looks like the USAF is still grasping for straws to get rid of each and every A-10 they can manage --- this time under the charade of a "swords to plowshares" program.
 
Unmentioned in all this is that the A-10's design is optimized for flying low and slow with an extremely heavy payload, surviving numerous, major, and consecutive direct hits, and strafing runs. In other words, it's self-evident that this is a terrible airframe for hurricane-hunting.
Sounds like they don't want a plane that that flies high, they have all those they need, but one that can survive low down in a storm, with the hailstones and debri.  If not the A-10, what would you suggest?
 
Quote    Reply

myhandlewontfi    hmm   9/29/2014 4:07:31 PM
I wonder if they think they can fly into the hurricane with it, if so I think they are optimists, nature might just decide to teach then a lesson. Not being an expert in huricanes I cant say for certain.
 
Quote    Reply

WarNerd       9/29/2014 9:58:46 PM
I wonder if they think they can fly into the hurricane with it, if so I think they are optimists, nature might just decide to teach then a lesson. Not being an expert in huricanes I cant say for certain.
 They have been deliberately flying aircraft into hurricanes for 71 years (the first was an AT-6 Texan in 1943).  Now a days it is handled by the 53rd Weather Reconnaissance Squadron and NOAA Hurricane Hunters on a routine basis to collect critical data (mostly wind speed and barometric pressure) that cannot be done with satellites.
 
What would be new with the A-10 would be collecting data at lower altitudes.  Don't know if it is the armor, the engines, or the overall ruggedness that makes the aircraft a good choice.
 
Quote    Reply

Evan    unstable on one engine   9/29/2014 11:09:40 PM
It is not a stable platform with one engine out, so this should be most interesting.
 
Quote    Reply

keffler25       9/29/2014 11:35:47 PM
Yep, its a bolo. Pass the popcorn.  
It is not a stable platform with one engine out, so this should be most interesting.

 
Quote    Reply

joe6pack       9/30/2014 4:11:28 PM
Complete ignorance on the subject..  but how many aircraft provide a stable platform - with one of their engines being out?  I've been in very large 4 engine aircraft that weren't particularly stable with all the engines working and no hurricane..
 
 I'd say the good thing is that A-10 would be able to stay aloft minus an engine.. not sure that's true in all twin engine aircraft.

 
 
Quote    Reply

keffler25       9/30/2014 7:42:10 PM
The engines are spaced wide enough apart and the dual tail control geometry is such that you get natural wing dip and a yaw roll in the direction of the dead engine. If you don't have lift restored on that dipping wing  quick, it's down you go, and not in a pleasant fashion.  

Complete ignorance on the subject..  but how many aircraft provide a stable platform - with one of their engines being out?  I've been in very large 4 engine aircraft that weren't particularly stable with all the engines working and no hurricane..

 

 I'd say the good thing is that A-10 would be able to stay aloft minus an engine.. not sure that's true in all twin engine aircraft.



 

 
Quote    Reply

joe6pack       9/30/2014 8:03:52 PM
Anecdotally, it would appear the problem is not insurmountable
 
 
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5120/5894132855_8b3d76bcc3_z.jpg" class="CSS_LIGHTBOX_SCALED_IMAGE_IMG" alt="" />
 
 
Quote    Reply
1 2



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics