Why the need for A-10 Warthogs now-a-days when you have Apache Helicopters?

[JEDI]

Both were originally designed as tank killers last century. (now basically obsolete in that role.)

Now both are for close air support.
i would think Apaches make better close air support than the Warthogs.

 

[biostud]

The A10 only requires one pilot. But combat range, payload diversity, speed, cost of running?

 

[Captante]

The A-10 is one hell of a good aircraft.

 

[JEDI]

The A10 only requires one pilot. But combat range, payload diversity, speed, cost of running?

operational cost of A10 is less than the apache?

yes, a 2nd pilot adds a few $ to the operational cost but i would have thought helos were cheaper to run (and maintain) than fixed wing?

 

[Captante]

but i would have thought helos were cheaper to run (and maintain) than fixed wing?

No.... quite the opposite in fact. (in most cases)

Think about how helicopters fly and the reason for this should be obvious.

 

[ultimatebob]

I don't think that A-10s would work all that well against an opponent with modern surface-to-air missiles.

They did do a good job at turning Taliban fighters into a pink mist, though.

 

[PowerEngineer]

Why would you think that helicopters are less susceptible to surface-to-air weaponry?

It's all about drones now!

 

[ultimatebob]

Why would you think that helicopters are less susceptible to surface-to-air weaponry?

It's all about drones now!

Helicopters can fly at a much lower altitude and can hide behind cover. A-10s are kinda sitting ducks.

 

[Greenman]

To a fighter jet, helicopters are targets, A-10's are opponents. A-10's are also more robust than choppers.

 

[lxskllr]

I see them all the time around here. Very distinctive sound.

 

[biostud]

Probably just good to have a mix of weaponry, so the enemy can’t prepare for only one type of attacks. And have just the right tool at the right time.

 

[Jeeebus]

Because BRRRTTTTTTTTTT

that's why

 

[Captante]

Helicopters can fly at a much lower altitude and can hide behind cover. A-10s are kinda sitting ducks.

Compared to a SAM the same can be said of an F-35 a U-2 or even an SR-71 Blackbird at maximum speed/altitude.

A slow-moving helicopter is FAR more vulnerable to any and all ground based anti-aircraft weaponry and further they are exponentially easier to damage to the point they drop out of the sky due to mechanical complexity.

The A-10 Warthog is one of, if not THE toughest US combat aircraft ever built.

Period.

 

[spacejamz]

Here's a pic of an A-10 I got at the Ft Worth airshow last year....

 

[Captante]

They used to fly a few A-10's out of Bradley airport in Windsor Locks CT not sure if they're still there.

Rolled right past them on departing/arriving flights a few times.

 

[UsandThem]

I still remember the site of a squadron of A-10s flying over the mountains to land at Peterson AFB when I was there on TDY in 1998.

It was early morning and you just heard this roar before seeing them coming over the mountain range and drop down to begin their landing sequence.

I think I might even have been slightly aroused.

 

[MtnMan]

An Apache Helicopter costs about 20X more than an A10.

That makes the owners of our members of congress very happy.

 

[Captante]

I still remember the site of a squadron of A-10s flying over the mountains to land at Peterson AFB when I was there on TDY in 1998.

It was early morning and you just heard this roar before seeing them coming over the mountain range and drop down to begin their landing sequence.

I think I might even have been slightly aroused.

Now that I think about it I saw A-10's in flight while skiing at Heavenly Tahoe a few times years ago myself.

The time that comes most to mind we were eating lunch on a high ridge overlooking the lake and two pairs went screaming by MAYBE 500ft overhead at most.... nearly crapped my pants!

 

[skyking]

Helicopters are an order of magnitude higher cost to maintain than a fixed wing.
helicopters have hard time limits on all of the critical rotating components. Aircraft airframes are inspected and returned to service. Parts are replaced "on condition" on fixed wing aircraft, as opposed to those hard limits on rotating assemblies.

 

[pauldun170]

The A10 only requires one pilot. But combat range, payload diversity, speed, cost of running?

A-10 is cheap to run if you are comparing it to other jets that do the same mission that the A10 was designed for.
It's way overpriced when you compare it to other platforms that do the same mission the A10 actually does.

In order for an A-10 to operate, you need 8+ pilots

It needs 1 pilot in the A10.
2 pilots in the pair of F15\F22 to prevent the A10 from being shot down from other aircraft and make it safe for the A10 to fly
1 Pilot in the F-16 who is flying around destroying SAM sights to make it safe for the A-10 to just fly.
1 pilot in the EA\18 who is preventing the A-10 from being from SAMs and disrupt com traffic that is telling everyone where that slow ass A10 is flying
15 guys in the AWACS
3 guys in the KC-135

So figure at a bare minimum 1 A10 is going to need 8 pilots, various personnel and boom operator and maintenance crews.

We do not use the A10 for what it was designed for because we like "living pilots"
We use A10's for COIN operations. That whole beating the shit out of armed angry civilians thing.
A10's are great when you are beating the shit out of civilians\lightly armed militia in Toyotas causing problems for guys on the ground.
Patient guys on the ground if the A10 is not in the area cause that fucker is slow and good luck if it has a heavy load.

A10's are a cheap to fly compared to other jets, paid for and the folks that fly them are are highly capable. But A10's are not cheap to operate in actual "wars". An A10 mission is pretty fucking expensive.
Unless you want to fly in a country with no functioning military and an opponent without any serious weaponry. It's more sensible to run drones, prop planes and helicopters.
Then you got bigger problems like what the fuck are you doing in that country to begin.

 

[pauldun170]

Helicopters are an order of magnitude higher cost to maintain than a fixed wing.
helicopters have hard time limits on all of the critical rotating components. Aircraft airframes are inspected and returned to service. Parts are replaced "on condition" on fixed wing aircraft, as opposed to those hard limits on rotating assemblies.

It's the military and you have to think big picture.
The fixed wing airbase is magnitudes more expensive to stand up and keep going then where you can deploy a helicopter too.

 

[ultimatebob]

A-10 is cheap to run if you are comparing it to other jets that do the same mission that the A10 was designed for.
It's way overpriced when you compare it to other platforms that do the same mission the A10 actually does.

In order for an A-10 to operate, you need 8+ pilots

It needs 1 pilot in the A10.
2 pilots in the pair of F15\F22 to prevent the A10 from being shot down from other aircraft and make it safe for the A10 to fly
1 Pilot in the F-16 who is flying around destroying SAM sights to make it safe for the A-10 to just fly.
1 pilot in the EA\18 who is preventing the A-10 from being from SAMs and disrupt com traffic that is telling everyone where that slow ass A10 is flying
15 guys in the AWACS
3 guys in the KC-135

So figure at a bare minimum 1 A10 is going to need 8 pilots, various personnel and boom operator and maintenance crews.

We do not use the A10 for what it was designed for because we like "living pilots"
We use A10's for COIN operations. That whole beating the shit out of armed angry civilians thing.
A10's are great when you are beating the shit out of civilians\lightly armed militia in Toyotas causing problems for guys on the ground.
Patient guys on the ground if the A10 is not in the area cause that fucker is slow and good luck if it has a heavy load.

A10's are a cheap to fly compared to other jets, paid for and the folks that fly them are are highly capable. But A10's are not cheap to operate in actual "wars". An A10 mission is pretty fucking expensive.
Unless you want to fly in a country with no functioning military and an opponent without any serious weaponry. It's more sensible to run drones, prop planes and helicopters.
Then you got bigger problems like what the fuck are you doing in that country to begin.

Of course, if you sent out some Apache attack helicopters to go tank busting instead, their commanding officer would probably insist on roughly the same level of air support for them as well.

You're right... it makes more sense to send some armed drones instead. Nobody wants to see dead or captured pilots on CNN.

 

[skyking]

It's the military and you have to think big picture.
The fixed wing airbase is magnitudes more expensive to stand up and keep going then where you can deploy a helicopter too.

Foreign Object Damage (FOD) is a big killer of turbines. The A-10's high ground clearance, coupled with the high engine position allows them to use less than ideal runways.
https://www.businessinsider.com/a-1...ng-on-improvised-runways-in-california-2019-6

here again off a dry lake bed.
https://theaviationist.com/2014/05/01/a-10-mud-lake-pix/

The wheel track is around 20', allowing operations off a regular two lane road. 57 foot span fits in standard road right of ways. Knock down the signs and go to work for daylight operations with no runway at all.

 

[skyking]

Despite all of that, the drones will operate off similar conditions and no pilot to risk. They don't care about G's either, so a modern drone can do evasive things a pilot cannot tolerate. They will have drones that can execute precise 15G evasive maneuvers while deploying chaff and flares, that may defeat the shoulder fired SAMs at any decent range. I'm all about the drones.

 

[pauldun170]

Despite all of that, the drones will operate off similar conditions and no pilot to risk. They don't care about G's either, so a modern drone can do evasive things a pilot cannot tolerate. They will have drones that can execute precise 15G evasive maneuvers while deploying chaff and flares, that may defeat the shoulder fired SAMs at any decent range. I'm all about the drones.

You have drones that guys on the ground can control.
You have stuff like global hawk controlled from a desk.
Now you have the new era of stuff like loyal wingman where pilots can basically manage swarm like capability from safety.

Loyal Wingman | Royal Australian Air Force

Loyal Wingman The Loyal Wingman uncrewed aircraft is a pathfinder for the integration of autonomous systems and artificial intelligence to create smart human-machine teams. It is the result of an exciting collaboration between Air Force and Boeing Australia. The Loyal Wingman will have a range...

www.airforce.gov.au