11-12-2024, 11:23 PM
(11-12-2024, 10:09 PM)Tecate Wrote: Ok Zaph I get that she’s not modern enough.
But there’s no other platform like it that strikes fear into and gets the rest of the bad guys running, as is as armored, right?
What would be the difference in terms of downtime be?
Tecate
The thing with the A-10 is that it HAS to get down in the weeds to do its mission, which is one reason it's so armored. But with PGMs anything can do CAS better. The A-10 didn't fly nearly as many CAS missions in Iraq and Afghanistan as people think. IIRC even the B-1s flew more missions than they did. They were even using B-52s as CAS platforms, and they were more effective because they could stay on station far longer than any fighter could, and were well above any possible threat.
The big advantage the A-10 has in terms of downtime is that the C update is so recent. It gave them an entirely new wing, and significant cockpit improvements. So it was seeing less down time for a while because of that. But, like everything else, they're extremely long in the tooth. The average age is 32, and they first flew over 50 years ago. In FY23, the A-10 averaged a 67% mission capable rate. That was on the high end for fighters, again, largely due to more recent updates.
Logic is dead. Long live BS.
