The A-10 warthog

[Gman]

The original airframes were suffering stress fractures. There was a program to reinforce the airframes that was referred to as "Hogging Up". The planes can be around for a while.

If you want to talk about aged aircraft still used in the inventory, the B-52 is probably unmatched. It was introduced in 1952 and is still in use, expected to be in service until 2045.

[fly boy]

[Gman]

I don't have one of those in my garage.

[RMAC757]

May be apocryphal but I remember a story from the 80s where a reserve colonel in an A-10 took on a F-15 in air-to-air and won -- cocky young pilot in his Eagle hadn't reckoned on the Warthog's ability to turn. It's an amazing airframe; what we need is a real replacement that builds on its strengths, not trying to substitute a regular jet for its role. I thought the AF was ridiculous when they tried to retire it in the 90s and claimed they could use F-16s to do the CAS/TAS job. Also, takes real cojones to volunteer for a job whose estimated lifespan was 10 minutes in combat under a Fulda Gap scenario.

That was the A-16 program. It failed due to the 30 cal cannons heat burning up the jet. The heat was literally too much for the airframe to take. A-10's are taught to circle when engaged there by allowing them to use a tap of the rudder and their cannon to ward off attackers. The same technique was utilized by the N Vietnamese when attacked by groups of US fighters. An A-10 beating an Eagle in Air to Air would probably warrant a new call sign for the Eagle Driver.....also desk duty. The fundamental design of the A-10's wing is to fly slow and and turn tight....its square.

[rondog]

A-16 - was that an F-16 with the GAU-8 gun mounted in a belly pod? I remember hearing about those, but never heard any more since. When I moved to Syracuse in 1987 the NYANG Boys From Syracuse flew A-10's, saw them over central NY frequently. But then they changed to F-16's, that's when I heard about the tankbuster version coming about, but never saw one.

[RMAC757]

A-16 - was that an F-16 with the GAU-8 gun mounted in a belly pod? I remember hearing about those, but never heard any more since. When I moved to Syracuse in 1987 the NYANG Boys From Syracuse flew A-10's, saw them over central NY frequently. But then they changed to F-16's, that's when I heard about the tankbuster version coming about, but never saw one.

I believe it was an internal 30mm cannon. The Airforce was desperate to get rid of the A-10's and they came up with this idea. It just wasn't structurally sound and was burning up the a/c internals. If it had worked there's a good chance the A-10 would be in the desert now given the time frame of the program.

[Aloha_Shooter]

I believe it was an internal 30mm cannon. The Airforce was desperate to get rid of the A-10's and they came up with this idea. It just wasn't structurally sound and was burning up the a/c internals. If it had worked there's a good chance the A-10 would be in the desert now given the time frame of the program.

Scuttlebutt I heard was the AF was desperate up until the Army said if we didn't want them, they'd take the Warthogs and put some NCOs in them ...

Frankly, I considered the A-16 proposal to be embarrassing as it showed the AF wasn't serious about CAS/TAS (just as our Army brethren alleged). The F-16 airframe doesn't do low-and-slow very well and I tend to doubt it would have the battlefield durability the A-10 has proven.

[RMAC757]

Scuttlebutt I heard was the AF was desperate up until the Army said if we didn't want them, they'd take the Warthogs and put some NCOs in them ...

Frankly, I considered the A-16 proposal to be embarrassing as it showed the AF wasn't serious about CAS/TAS (just as our Army brethren alleged). The F-16 airframe doesn't do low-and-slow very well and I tend to doubt it would have the battlefield durability the A-10 has proven.

From what I here that did happen. I've even met some Army Aviators who claimed to be in the pipeline for the A-10 at one point. The Viper is a great platform but it's not built for low and slow. Your spot on with the A-10 being designed for the Fulda Gap. It's sole purpose was to destroy tanks and be expendable. For the life of me I can't figure out why the AF can't think more dynamically and realize that "We already have that aircraft" rather than building another one. Part of me thinks that the SU-25 getting shot down like Pheasants in a ditch ( Ukraine, Chechnya ) is playing into this. They want to fight a war that doesn't exsist ( for us) with stealth and speed. For the time being, we're gonna keep 260 I think.

[clublights]

The A-16 30mm gun was belly mounted... 4 barreled and vibrated the aircraft so badly it was completely inaccurate and would likely shake the airframe to pieces.

http://www.f-16.net/f-16_versions_article18.html

[RMAC757]

The A-16 30mm gun was belly mounted... 4 barreled and vibrated the aircraft so badly it was completely inaccurate and would likely shake the airframe to pieces.

http://www.f-16.net/f-16_versions_article18.html

There were blocks of the F/A-16 that did use the Pave Claw Pod (GAU-13) but the main program focused blocks had the main gun internalized on the left side. "This project failed because the 30 mm gun would heat up and senge( I think they meant singe) the inner components of the left fuselage". The cannon was mounted on the inner left side of the aircraft. Trust me on this one. There was more than just one program involving the F-16 to replace the A-10. Several concepts were tried out on the Viper, including the Gau-13 cannon on a pod which was actually deployed and was a miserable failure. It was akin to the make shift Suu-23 pod on the F-4 (which was more successful ) they used during Vietnam. The more dedicated version was not meant to use a pod . Notice the cannon on the left side. In my opinion the A-7 would've been a better option for a problem that didn't exsist. The Air Force Brass has not or ever will love the A-10. Their latest threat is that their won't be enought mechanics to maintain to main the A-10 and F-35 fleets. One way or another they'll probaby get their way one day. A good buddy of mine at work, Former Marine Hornet driver, current A-10 Guard driver said it the best " No better way to kill a 19th century terrorist than with a 19th century airplane". I think that was meant as a compliment.


and yes I am a nerd with airplanes.