From: mole-end!mat@uunet.uu.net
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: Re: is the A-10 going bye-bye?
Date: 20 Aug 92 16:39:56 GMT
Organization: NCR Corporation - Law Department


From mole-end!mat@uunet.uu.net

In article <Bt4oC5.1p3@lawday.DaytonOH.NCR.COM>, asp+@pitt.edu (Anandeep Pannu) writes:
 
> From asp+@pitt.edu (Anandeep Pannu)
 
>  I recently saw the A-10 for the first time at an airshow and was taken 
> aback at the size. This is one big airplane ! Slow and big is not good news
> in close support. ...  The Sukhoi [Su-7] (called S-22 in Indian service)
> was well liked by its pilots ...  But the S-22s had the largest
> loss rate for any Indian plane in the war. 

> According to the IAF pilots this was due to 2 reasons - 
 
>  (ii) the sheer size of the plane made it vulnerable to undirected ack-ack 
>       and small arms fire. Not a single Su-7 was lost in dogfights and despite
>       its ability to take a lot of punishment all the losses were due to
>	ground fire. 

I don't know about the Su-7, but it would have to be one incredible
aircraft to be better protected than the A-10.
 
> So I think that the F-16 would be a good choice for close air support today. 
> Its agile, its fast and it has the avionics to do the job. I wouldnt like to
> be an A-10 pilot in any environment with any sort of defensive capability.

The F16 is large, expensive, and far more vulnerable to gunfire.
 
The A10 doesn't rely on fly-by-wire and computers that create one more
vulnerable and critical volume on the aircraft.  Its primary flight
control surfaces are paired, and either the left or right member of the
pair may be decoupled.  The left elevator jammed by damage?  Uncouple it
and fly on the right.  The right rudder jammed?  Uncouple it and fly
on the left.

The F16 is filled with computers that are flight-critical.  Not so
the A10.  The pilot is surrounded on five sides by titanium armor.
The aircraft can take huge amounts of gunfire and keep flying.  The
engines are hard to see and hard to hit from the front.  They are
high-bypass, with a small core, so that a hit on the nacelle has
to be near the centerline to cripple the engine.  The primary weapon
is a cannon.  It's hard to jam a cannon with flares or chaff.

In the KTO, one A10 after another flew out with patches over bullet
holes.  (How much of the F16 can be holed through without crippling
or destroying the aircraft?)  One A10 has to have come close to setting
a record for flying with damage.

This plane lost two-thirds of the skin on one wing, along with half the
leading and trailing edge and most of the aileron.  Two of the three wing
spars were shattered by the AA from the ground.  The debris from the wing
was sucked into the engine on that side (`ingested').  The engine quit.
The pilot managed to get the plane out of the fire and level it off.  The
engine spat out the metal it had sucked in and restarted.  The pilot,
unhurt, flew the plane carefully and radioed his base, where he eventually
made a controlled, gear-down landing.  (You'll notice that his radio was
still working, too, and that he hadn't lost all his fuel.)  The missiles
on the damaged wing were hanging from the wiring harness.

The photos that were published of the wing were incredible.  You
couldn't imagine a plane flying with that kind of damage anywhere,
much less to the wing.

But the most incredible part of the story is that a couple weeks
later, the plane was back in the air.  It was repaired *in Saudi
Arabia* at the forward base.

That can't be happenstance.  The A10 *and its support systems* are designed
to fight that way.  It's not glamorous, but in a prolonged war, it might
be the most valuable, longest-lived aircraft below 1000 feet.  It can't
fight for air superiority, but it shouldn't have to.  (One A10 in the
KTO did destroy a helicopter with its gun.  I would like to see films of
*that*!)

On a different note: I read that the Blue Angels are to perform over
or near Moscow this year!  I hope someone will be able to report on the
popular reception they receive.

 (This man's opinions are his own.)
 From mole-end				Mark Terribile

 mat@mole-end.matawan.nj.us, Somewhere in Matawan, NJ
Newsgroups: sci.military