By: haavarla
- 14th February 2017 at 19:23Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Assad has to be secured first... so that Russia can continue to have one puppet country in the middle east, no matter the casualties.
And ISIS has not been defeated yet.
If you want to solve the problem and get rid of Assad the puppet dictator, arm the millions of migrants that flee Syria ( many if not mostof them men of military age ) and send them back to fight. Check how the Kurds are fighting with minimal equipment. We could provide the air support, artillery, etc, but of course if we do that that can escalate with the Russians who want to keep their dictator in place, sounds familiar?
Omg..
The sheer amount of ignorance is dazzling.
In 2014, Assad was ELECTED the president of Syria. What does that tell you? So its up to US to decide whom is going to be president in other countries now.. Hurray for USA democracies and double standards!
If Any Country want to favor Russia, well so what..? Huh, are you telling me that its reason enough to go to war??
As for the Kurds, i actually like them, and i really hope they get a say in Syria future.
But has not US supplied them with large stocks of weapons and advisors? Another "puppets" of USA to use your own words here.
As for your moronic proposal to arm imigrants.. have you spoken to them? News flash!! They don't want to do it. Why should they!
I find your lack of logic and spaced ideas disturbing..
The Freaking ISIS is not Syria or Russia fault. Its a very bad spot to start pointing fingers.
By: TomcatViP
- 14th February 2017 at 19:32Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I witnessed some of the F-16 30mm gun pod testing. It wasn't encouraging because fuselage/pylon deflection caused excessive dispersion of the burst.
I am surprised. Without dismissing at all what you have seen, the video have a zoomed in view of the target board with an impressive low burst dispersion (see at 4:12)
By: haavarla
- 14th February 2017 at 19:37Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
'The A-10 conducts CAS differently from other aircraft In Afghanistan, A-10 pilots used their 30mm GAU-8 cannons much more frequently than other weapons, including guided bombs. In contrast, the F-16 relied largely on guided bombs for CAS.During interviews we conducted, many ground commanders expressed a preference for the 30mm cannon over precision bombs because the cannon is highly accurate (80 percent of rounds within a 20-ftradius at 4,000-ft range), is better able to hit moving targets than even precision
bombs, and produces less collateral damage than bombs.Also, many missions involved a show of force, in which aircraft flew low and slow over the U.S. ground forces to deter adversary activity.'
The Gatling gun 6X30mm GAU-8 standard ammunition from A-10 has been composed of anti-tank incendiary projectiles PGU-14B and high explosive incendiary projectiles PGU-13B in the proportion of 4X1, but this standard has been apparently used against targets such as armored columns (MBT, IFV, APC).
As in Iraq and Afghanistan after 2003 these are not routine targets, in fact should not have been needing the ammunition like the PGU-14B of deplete uranium to pass through armored, so this type of higher cost projectile could not be the standard with the A-10.
In fact it were almost incomprehensible that the A-10A had been not equipped with a laser designator / telemeter laser, since others attack fighters from NATO like the Jaguar and Harrier II had such system, just as this were a standard with the former Soviet Union: Su-17M, MiG-23BN, MiG-27, Su-25.
The lack of the laser rangefinder with A-10A had been limited the accuracy of both GAU-8 cannon and free fall bombs and rockets, since the A-10 were not equipped with radar, unlike the first version of the F- 16A/B that has been equipped with multirole radars.
The A-10A has been equipped with a passive laser sensor Pave Penny , then its only capable to locate targets has been marked by laser designator from others aircraft and ground troops .
With the modernization from A-10A to the standard A-10C and the introduction of the Sniper and Litening pods into the A-10C, it now has been equipped with laser designator / telemeter, as well as a long-range TV and FLIR system, so it has been considerably increased the accuracy and safety for ground troops with GAU-8 while has been compared with version A-10A.
In the attack against armored columns from Warsaw Pact from 80's by the A-10A with the GAU-8 cannon this would have been happened at low altitude and short distance, since the GAU-8's anti-tank ammunition needs high speed to penetrate the more resistant armors, perhaps in reason of this mission it had been omitted such laser designator / telemeter in the version A-10A.
Even in the 80's there were plans to modernize the A-10A with laser designator and FLIR, but at this time the USAF had been already announced that it would remove the A-10A from the active service and it would replace by a new version of F 16 with internal laser designator and FLIR, once the Lantirn pod with the F-16C/D should be just a temporally measure until this new version of the F-16 that would be acquired by USAF in the 90's.
The outcome of the 1991 Gulf War and the end of the Cold War has been allowed the A-10 still active even though it has been highly unwanted by the 'Father' USAF since its conception, once the A-10 does not look like a child from USAF, otherwise It looks like the 'neighbor' US Army.
Yes i knew most of A-10 history, thank you.
If you read my first post, i questioned what anyone would use the gun on A-10 on towel heads with a smaller CAS platform. Beside from the fact, it can't be done.
The GAU-8 is massive. That gun was designed for the purpose of taking out armoured collums against Soviet.
I'm not sure, but i do not think they still use depleted Uranium tip on those rounds these days.
Anyway. My point was, its not a very common type of ammo that is widely used. Hense, its not cheap at all.
When a A-10 first open up his gun, he mostly if not always return to base depleted, so its not a matter of a "few rounds".
By: haavarla
- 14th February 2017 at 19:46Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I am surprised. Without dismissing at all what you have seen, the video have a zoomed in view of the target board with an impressive low burst dispersion (see at 4:12)
[ATTACH=CONFIG]251373[/ATTACH]
Well the marker was pretty close by. It does not tell us anything on the pod gun accuracy.
New
Posts: 4,472
By: Nicolas10
- 14th February 2017 at 20:44Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Assad has to be secured first... so that Russia can continue to have one puppet country in the middle east, no matter the casualties.
And ISIS has not been defeated yet.
If you want to solve the problem and get rid of Assad the puppet dictator, arm the millions of migrants that flee Syria ( many if not mostof them men of military age ) and send them back to fight. Check how the Kurds are fighting with minimal equipment. We could provide the air support, artillery, etc, but of course if we do that that can escalate with the Russians who want to keep their dictator in place, sounds familiar?
By: Hotshot
- 15th February 2017 at 08:14Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Yes i knew most of A-10 history, thank you.
If you read my first post, i questioned what anyone would use the gun on A-10 on towel heads with a smaller CAS platform. Beside from the fact, it can't be done.
The GAU-8 is massive. That gun was designed for the purpose of taking out armoured collums against Soviet.
I'm not sure, but i do not think they still use depleted Uranium tip on those rounds these days.
Anyway. My point was, its not a very common type of ammo that is widely used. Hense, its not cheap at all.
When a A-10 first open up his gun, he mostly if not always return to base depleted, so its not a matter of a "few rounds".
The GAU-8s are already available from the USAF boneyard, so they they come free. With this munition, it is a highly effective and accurate weapon. The GAU-8 might sound a little old tech but for that kind of mission it is still praised by the pilots.
But why would you care about precision when you can use cluster bombs right?
Even the APKWS costs close to $30000 per unit. Its cost is likely to go down but it will still remain much more costly that a gun strafe.
I bet they could build a relatively light plane built around a GAU-8, around 6.5 tons empty with 1/3 the operational cost of an A-10, with one drum (575 rounds) instead of 2, plus 6 external hardpoint, for 2 500lbs bombs and 4 lighter weapons. That could be very cost-effective for low intensity scenario, because it wouldn't use a lot of PGMs.
By: Hotshot
- 15th February 2017 at 08:24Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Omg..
The sheer amount of ignorance is dazzling.
In 2014, Assad was ELECTED the president of Syria. What does that tell you? So its up to US to decide whom is going to be president in other countries now.. Hurray for USA democracies and double standards!
If Any Country want to favor Russia, well so what..? Huh, are you telling me that its reason enough to go to war??
As for the Kurds, i actually like them, and i really hope they get a say in Syria future.
But has not US supplied them with large stocks of weapons and advisors? Another "puppets" of USA to use your own words here.
As for your moronic proposal to arm imigrants.. have you spoken to them? News flash!! They don't want to do it. Why should they!
I find your lack of logic and spaced ideas disturbing..
The Freaking ISIS is not Syria or Russia fault. Its a very bad spot to start pointing fingers.
I'm done with this debate with you.
Assad is the same kind of president as your "President" Putin ex KGB director, half president half dictator.
Assad has violated the human rights of his population so many times we've lost the count.
I think that if there were a concerted effort from all the partners, western countries, Russia, Arab countries against Assad and ISIS, the migrants would surely see a real possibility of freeing their country and would fight. But the way it is now it is such a mess that the only thing they can do is flee. Russia is partly responsible for this desperate situation.
By: Sanem
- 15th February 2017 at 18:27Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
You are comparing a pre-contest & pre-contract "JSF" estimation of the lifetime average cost to an LRIP cost.
I'm comparing the price that was originally promised to the price it costs today
that price might go down. or maybe it'll go the way of the F-22, the F-111, the B-1, the B-2... and be more expensive and in lower numbers than promised
not that it matters, even if they can keep down the cost, they're still selling overpriced cr*p that will be outdated by the time it becomes operational
By: SpudmanWP
- 15th February 2017 at 19:17Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Early pre-contract prices were estimations, not "promises" and reflect a completely different Baseline Year [BY] (=inflation adjusted year).
Most people only quote the "cost" without stating the the BY.
Btw, it's only "overpriced" if it's somehow not worth the new price. The recent Red Flag has put that argument to bed. Don't get me wrong, they blew the contracted cost but the DoD & Partners are still satisfied with it at it's current price curve.
As far as "outdated" (no longer useful or acceptable : not modern or current), please tell me how that applies to the plane as a whole?
Posts: 6,441
By: haavarla - 14th February 2017 at 19:23 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Omg..
The sheer amount of ignorance is dazzling.
In 2014, Assad was ELECTED the president of Syria. What does that tell you? So its up to US to decide whom is going to be president in other countries now.. Hurray for USA democracies and double standards!
If Any Country want to favor Russia, well so what..? Huh, are you telling me that its reason enough to go to war??
As for the Kurds, i actually like them, and i really hope they get a say in Syria future.
But has not US supplied them with large stocks of weapons and advisors? Another "puppets" of USA to use your own words here.
As for your moronic proposal to arm imigrants.. have you spoken to them? News flash!! They don't want to do it. Why should they!
I find your lack of logic and spaced ideas disturbing..
The Freaking ISIS is not Syria or Russia fault. Its a very bad spot to start pointing fingers.
I'm done with this debate with you.
Posts: 5,905
By: TomcatViP - 14th February 2017 at 19:32 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I am surprised. Without dismissing at all what you have seen, the video have a zoomed in view of the target board with an impressive low burst dispersion (see at 4:12)
[ATTACH=CONFIG]251373[/ATTACH]
Posts: 6,441
By: haavarla - 14th February 2017 at 19:37 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Yes i knew most of A-10 history, thank you.
If you read my first post, i questioned what anyone would use the gun on A-10 on towel heads with a smaller CAS platform. Beside from the fact, it can't be done.
The GAU-8 is massive. That gun was designed for the purpose of taking out armoured collums against Soviet.
I'm not sure, but i do not think they still use depleted Uranium tip on those rounds these days.
Anyway. My point was, its not a very common type of ammo that is widely used. Hense, its not cheap at all.
When a A-10 first open up his gun, he mostly if not always return to base depleted, so its not a matter of a "few rounds".
Posts: 6,441
By: haavarla - 14th February 2017 at 19:46 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Well the marker was pretty close by. It does not tell us anything on the pod gun accuracy.
Posts: 4,472
By: Nicolas10 - 14th February 2017 at 20:44 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Reading Liberation too much?
Posts: 815
By: Ozair - 14th February 2017 at 21:27 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Again, GAU-22 is the best option...
Posts: 1,123
By: Hotshot - 15th February 2017 at 08:14 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
The GAU-8 uses an HEI round, the PGU-13/B. An improved variant has been developped:
http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2008gun_missile/6337GimmyKirk.pdf
The GAU-8s are already available from the USAF boneyard, so they they come free. With this munition, it is a highly effective and accurate weapon. The GAU-8 might sound a little old tech but for that kind of mission it is still praised by the pilots.
But why would you care about precision when you can use cluster bombs right?
Even the APKWS costs close to $30000 per unit. Its cost is likely to go down but it will still remain much more costly that a gun strafe.
https://defensetech.org/2016/10/19/navy-orders-laser-guided-rockets/
I bet they could build a relatively light plane built around a GAU-8, around 6.5 tons empty with 1/3 the operational cost of an A-10, with one drum (575 rounds) instead of 2, plus 6 external hardpoint, for 2 500lbs bombs and 4 lighter weapons. That could be very cost-effective for low intensity scenario, because it wouldn't use a lot of PGMs.
I am sure the A-10 pilots would love that!!!
Posts: 1,123
By: Hotshot - 15th February 2017 at 08:14 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Never read Liberation in my life.
Posts: 1,123
By: Hotshot - 15th February 2017 at 08:24 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Assad is the same kind of president as your "President" Putin ex KGB director, half president half dictator.
Assad has violated the human rights of his population so many times we've lost the count.
Tortures, executions of opponents are part of his way of governing:
Report of Amnesty International.
I think that if there were a concerted effort from all the partners, western countries, Russia, Arab countries against Assad and ISIS, the migrants would surely see a real possibility of freeing their country and would fight. But the way it is now it is such a mess that the only thing they can do is flee. Russia is partly responsible for this desperate situation.
Posts: 593
By: Sanem - 15th February 2017 at 18:27 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I'm comparing the price that was originally promised to the price it costs today
that price might go down. or maybe it'll go the way of the F-22, the F-111, the B-1, the B-2... and be more expensive and in lower numbers than promised
not that it matters, even if they can keep down the cost, they're still selling overpriced cr*p that will be outdated by the time it becomes operational
Posts: 5,197
By: SpudmanWP - 15th February 2017 at 19:17 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Early pre-contract prices were estimations, not "promises" and reflect a completely different Baseline Year [BY] (=inflation adjusted year).
Most people only quote the "cost" without stating the the BY.
Btw, it's only "overpriced" if it's somehow not worth the new price. The recent Red Flag has put that argument to bed. Don't get me wrong, they blew the contracted cost but the DoD & Partners are still satisfied with it at it's current price curve.
As far as "outdated" (no longer useful or acceptable : not modern or current), please tell me how that applies to the plane as a whole?