A-10: Like a zombie, back from the dead!!!

[Greg]

I don't have a degree in aeronautics or ground combat, but to somehow the idea of mixing "Orbital Bombardment" and "Close Air Support" does not seem like a fantastic idea.

Orbital bombardment makes a pretty neat replacement for the 'smart bomb from a Bone flying racetrack orbits somewhere' type of CAS.

[Termite]

They could have re-engined the B-52 with four, instead of eight engines, sometime within the last 40 years as well, and probably cut its fuel burn by half by switching to turbofans, but we know how well THAT has gone.

Q: Why do Shreveport-Bossier residents cheer when the BUFFS at Barksdale do a sortie scramble?

A: Because the exhaust smoke reduces the local mosquito population by 75% for a few days!!

[Jericho941]

Funny how when you're wrapped up in something, you can think you've toned it down when you really haven't.

This might be of interest:

http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-bu ... thog-15064

Short answer: I, too, would like a living pony made out of diamonds. They're essentially asking for a subsonic F-15E with the F-35's cockpit and the A-10's gun.

Long answer: When Pierre Sprey is the voice of sanity, you're in trouble. You can get some of what they want out of a Super Hawg, but not all of it. Stronger engines generally mean more weight, and additional fuel and weapons definitely do. That's going to impact your maneuverability. You're certainly not going to make a jet with 15,000 pounds of ordnance and a full fuel load dance like a Zero.

However, The key to producing a new warplane quickly, on time and to budget is to use the best existing technology rather than trying to invent entirely new hardware and software.

That ship sailed the minute they started talking about new engines and avionics. Even keeping the old stuff sometimes necessitates new hardware and software; part of the A-10C upgrade included a new engine monitoring system and support kits for data collection.

Additionally, the Warthog 2.0 would also need to be able to track and kill moving targets from ranges greater than eight nautical miles while flying at altitudes above 20,000 feet.

That's fine and all, but this is already pretty solidly in the domain of the F-15E, F-16, F-22, F-35, B-1, B-2, and B-52, and that's just aircraft in the Air Force inventory.

I'm not saying this is bad, but it is a weird thing to specify when you're objecting to "standoff CAS" and an aircraft being "jack of all trades, master of none."

The aircraft would also need to be able to carry both versions of the 250-pound Small Diameter Bomb and potentially the AIM-9X air-to-air missile for self-defense. Ideally, it should be fitted with the AIM-120 radar-guided air-to-air missile, as well—but that’s not necessarily crucial. It is imperative, however, that the aircraft carry a gun similar to the General Electric GAU-8 30-millimeter cannon installed on the A-10.

SDBs yes, AIM-9X... without at least IRST, it's not like you're going to be making HOBS shots from an A-10. The AMRAAM is about as pie-in-the-sky as you can get; you're not going to install the required radar on an A-10, and as slow as even their fastest Hawg 2.0 concept is, it'd still be too slow to be a decent networked missileer. The concept works for stealth aircraft or those fast enough to fire their missiles and run, not so much for an aircraft that is neither.

If you really want to get more out of this "Hawg 2.0" you're going to have to compromise somewhere on the gun. It's not an exaggeration to say the A-10 is a plane wrapped around a big gun. It is tightly wrapped around it. You're going to want a smaller gun, ammo drum, or both.

The new aircraft should have better terrain avoidance systems and improved displays in the cockpit. It should also be equipped with a better targeting pod, such as a Litening Gen IV or another such system with a video data-link. A helmet-mounted display capability similar or better than the Thales Genetex Scorpion that is currently mounted on the A-10 is also an item on the must-have list. In a perfect world, the Warthog 2.0 would have a 360-degree infrared sensor capability and a terrain following radar as well.

Again, it all comes down to what you’re willing to give up to get it. You’re gonna need a redesigned “bathtub” with less protection to make that happen. At this point, with TGPs, TFR and ECM, we’re talking about giving up weapons stations for pods unless they compromise on the gun size so you actually have room to mount these things internally.

The Warthog 2.0 might even be equipped with advanced missile warning sensors and the latest digital radio frequency memory jammers to elude the larger and more capable surface-to-air missiles such as the SA-19. “We want to be able to defeat the latest, greatest, common SAMs we might encounter on the battlefield,” one of the pilots told me.

Shrink the gun and you might actually fit those components in the aircraft, and avoid destroying them when you fire the gun.

For comparison, the F-15's on-board RWR and ECM systems are excellent. But the parts are also big, heavy, complex, and sensitive. They require a great deal of attention from maintenance. With more modern variants, you can reduce this somewhat, but you're still going to have to find somewhere in the aircraft to put them.

The A-10 pilots cautioned that many of the items on the wish list are placeholders. Some of the capabilities might not be compatible with an affordable and effective aircraft design—though the goal would be to field a plane with a unit price of less than $20 million and costing less than $15,000 per flight hour to operate.

You are simply not going to get new-production A-10s with all of these capabilities for only $1.2 million per aircraft more than the current models, and you're certainly not going to get it for more than $2500 less per flight hour.

The ECM and engines already demand a much higher unit cost, and ECM avionics are not exactly low-maintenance. All the other bells and whistles only add to that. I'd be surprised if this could be done for less than $60 million and $35,000/hour, especially if it's not to be exported.

And for what? At the end of the day, you've taken your "does one thing better than everyone else" aircraft and paid through the nose to make it another "jack of all trades, master of none."

It's why I keep coming back to things like the Skyraider as a proper replacement. It doesn't have to literally be a Skyraider, but something at about that size, without all the gold plating.

[Rich]

The A-10 is a very good airplane for it's mission, perhaps the best we ever have had. It has it's share of faults, but then so have all the others that have been mentioned.

But, time passes and attrition takes it's toll.

Here is what I would do.

Things like:

1: Design a top of the fuselage fairing to house additional avionics and perhaps some additional fuel.

2: Adapt a couple of pylons to mount over the wing like the Brits have done. One on each wing for AAMs and perhaps one for additional tankage or pods. Use the existing AAM hardpoint for other purposes like jammer pods.

3: Leave the gun alone.

4: Re-engine or upgrade the existing engines to the most efficient configuration.

Then re-manufacture the existing fleet squadron by squadron to the new standard, before starting to make new ones. About 200 more should do it.

Then start working on CAS version 2.0. And I don't care who “owns” them.

[Aesop]

Short answer: I, too, would like a living pony made out of diamonds. They're essentially asking for a subsonic F-15E with the F-35's cockpit and the A-10's gun.

Long answer: When Pierre Sprey is the voice of sanity, you're in trouble. You can get some of what they want out of a Super Hawg, but not all of it. Stronger engines generally mean more weight, and additional fuel and weapons definitely do. That's going to impact your maneuverability. You're certainly not going to make a jet with 15,000 pounds of ordnance and a full fuel load dance like a Zero.

Like I said.
So we agree on that much.

But if they could upgrade the A-10 evolutionary, instead of going for revolutionary, they'd take a load of mission off the F-35's far too optimistically full plate, and maybe whittle it down to something usable for the other eleventy missions left behind.

Then everybody wins, except the @$$holes who thought you could shoehorn 9 aircraft for 3 services into 1 airframe, which was a fool's errand from the get-go, and has been every time we've tried it.

And the guys on the ground still get actual CAS missions flown by dedicated CAS aircraft; a FrankenA-10 now, and something better down the road.

[blackeagle603]

" It's not an exaggeration to say the A-10 is a plane wrapped around a big gun. It is tightly wrapped around it. You're going to want a smaller gun, ammo drum, or both."

How important is a 30mm to this CAS mission, vs a 20mm or 25mm?

An M61 20mm is 1/3 the length and 1/4 the weight of the GAU-8. With HEI rounds is it enough for the CAS role?

[Rich]

" It's not an exaggeration to say the A-10 is a plane wrapped around a big gun. It is tightly wrapped around it. You're going to want a smaller gun, ammo drum, or both."

How important is a 30mm to this CAS mission, vs a 20mm or 25mm?

An M61 20mm is 1/3 the length and 1/4 the weight of the GAU-8. With HEI rounds is it enough for the CAS role?

Problem is, when you screw with the gun on the A-10, unless you're willing to add a whole bunch of internal braces, struts and whatnot to mount the new gun, you're talking a whole new fuselage.

Keep the gun. Someone, somewhere, will eventually drive something lightly armored across the nose and we will be accused of overkill again.

[blackeagle603]

I'm back at the replacement airframe idea. A smaller gun would open some degrees of design freedom.

Is a tank killer gun role really called for in the current era? If no, then would 20mm or 25mm be adequate for the CAS role?

[Denis]

Funny how when you're wrapped up in something, you can think you've toned it down when you really haven't.

No worries. Glad you could come back to the topic rested and relaxed!

[Netpackrat]

I bet the Georgians would be happy to sell us some new SU-25s.