The Greatest Attack Aircraft of All Time...

[Dac]

Originally Posted by syscom3

The Jaguar and A10 seem to be two totally different aircraft for two different missions.

I wouldn't say totally, during the first Gulf War the A-10 was used for long range CSAR, Scud hunting and even SEAD. The Jaguar can't take out tanks with it's two 30mm cannon, but it can destroy APCs and soft targets. They use different approaches to survive, the Jaguar flys low and fast and the A-10 uses it's manoeuverability.

[syscom3]

But the A10's also fly low, although a lot slower.

I dont know of any A10 attacks on airfields or other heavily defended targets deep in Iraq.

[Dac]

Originally Posted by syscom3

But the A10's also fly low, although a lot slower.

I dont know of any A10 attacks on airfields or other heavily defended targets deep in Iraq.

I think in Desert Storm A-10s stayed above 10,000 feet, unless they were on attack runs, to avoid AA and SAMs. They also worked with F-4Gs to take out SAM sites with Mavericks and Mk 82s until they started taking loses. They were returned to the close air support mission when the ground war began.

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

The average Sam can reach to 10,000ft. We recieved many breafings on them when were in Iraq, we had to deal with the manpads every day and most of them can reach into the 10,000ft range. That is why in Iraq we fly low and fast.

I vote for the A-10.

[FLYBOYJ]

Remember this - almost everything on the A-10 that has a "left" and "right" is interchangable. Outter wing panels, aileron, rudders, engines. A-10 gets my vote....

[Glider]

Originally Posted by FLYBOYJ

Remember this - almost everything on the A-10 that has a "left" and "right" is interchangable. Outter wing panels, aileron, rudders, engines. A-10 gets my vote....

I can certainly see the logic but the A10 depends on its survivability on being able to take damage and operating in airspace dominated by friendly forces.

I feel thats its use is severely limited by these factors.

In addition, whilst there can be no doubt that the A10 is exceptional at what it does best, i.e. knocking out enemy tanks. These are a small minority of the targets on the battlefield, and the Jaguar can tackle the rest. This small limitation which can be addressed by the use of cluster bombs and other weapons is I feel outweighed by the greater flexibility of the Jaguar.

[Dac]

There's no doubt the A-10 is a successful aircraft, and it was inexpensive too.

The original cost was only $2.4 million per plane.

[R988]

Harrier's aren't too bad either

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Got to see them destroy some **** in Iraq, that was pretty impressive. They were Marine Harriers.

[davparlr]

There's just something about the get down in the dirt with the grunts, roll up you sleave and fight attitude of the A-10. Psychologically, its gotta be depressing for the enemy and a great lift for our guys to see an A-10 bobbing around the battlefield. I remember seeing a report form Bagdad right after we entered. In the background was the unmistakeable form of an A-10 flying overhead. It was magnificent.

I vote for the A-10

[evangilder]

Having seen A-10s in action on a few occasions, I would go for that as well. While the Jaguar is a capable aircraft, when you need support on the ground, the low speed and loiter capability of the A-10 is outstanding.

Twitch, I agree the A-1 is one mean mutha. It won't do for tanks, but it sure will keep the bad guys heads low.

[davparlr]

Originally Posted by Twitch

While it doesn't have "the gun" the old A-1 could haul massive amounts of ordnance low and slow.

Right you are. Interestingly, the A-1 was not the biggest lifter of the competion for an attack aircraft. The Martin AM-1 Mauler, with around 500 more horses could lift an amazing amount of ordinance, once lifting 12,179 lbs of useful load including three torpedoes and 12 250lb bombs, guns and ammuntion for a gross weight of 29,332 lbs. Unfortunately, Martin could not do a good job building the aircraft and only 149 were built with most going to the Reserves.

The A-1 was a great aircraft and was replaced by a great and worthy successor, the A-10.

[Twitch]

Yeah it made no sense to have 2 attack planes in the peacetime budget so the beefier AM-1 got the ax. After only a year of its introduction the Reserves got it!

I only say the A-1 was greatest because of its long and successful combat history which eclipses the A-10's to some degree.

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

The A-10 though is capable of doing more than the A-1. Just look at the Highway of Death in Kuwait and Iraq.

[Twitch]

That isn't why I say the A-1. It simply has a longer overall successful in-service record and deployment in many theaters of operation and model variants. Those are the criteria I use, not one engagement. And that's not taking anything away from the A-10.