USAF shelve plans to retire the Warthog..
Discussion
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-aircraft-mcc...
"The U.S. Air Force is shelving plans to retire the aging A-10 "Warthog" aircraft, a heavily armored tank killer, because of its role in the fight against Islamic State, online publication Defense One reported on Wednesday, citing unnamed Pentagon officials.
The 40-year-old ground attack aircraft is popular with soldiers, Marines - and some U.S. lawmakers.
Defense One quoted the Air Force officials as saying that, while the A-10 would still need to be retired, the service would put aside immediate plans to take it out of service because of the important role it is playing in combating Islamic State........"
How ironic don’t you think..
"The U.S. Air Force is shelving plans to retire the aging A-10 "Warthog" aircraft, a heavily armored tank killer, because of its role in the fight against Islamic State, online publication Defense One reported on Wednesday, citing unnamed Pentagon officials.
The 40-year-old ground attack aircraft is popular with soldiers, Marines - and some U.S. lawmakers.
Defense One quoted the Air Force officials as saying that, while the A-10 would still need to be retired, the service would put aside immediate plans to take it out of service because of the important role it is playing in combating Islamic State........"
How ironic don’t you think..
In the cold war, the pressure on development pushed regular "sea changes" in tech. ie, jet engine supersonic performance, inteligent missiles replacing guns, stealth, and fly by wire etc.
Today, things haven't really moved on, and in fact, the segmentation of smaller warring nations and terrorist organisation have probably pushed things back towards where they were in the late 1940's early 1950s.........
Today, things haven't really moved on, and in fact, the segmentation of smaller warring nations and terrorist organisation have probably pushed things back towards where they were in the late 1940's early 1950s.........
Simpo Two said:
Militry aircraft seem to be getting longer and longer service lives. Is that because there's no real adversary, or because the technology has got about as far as it can go?
Because when they come up the perfect replacement it's another A-10 and they can't do that because it looks lazy and they can't ask the increased (over the original) billions of dollars to make what looks like an 40 year old aircraft.If Porsche built warplanes.
FourWheelDrift said:
Simpo Two said:
Militry aircraft seem to be getting longer and longer service lives. Is that because there's no real adversary, or because the technology has got about as far as it can go?
Because when they come up the perfect replacement it's another A-10 and they can't do that because it looks lazy and they can't ask the increased (over the original) billions of dollars to make what looks like an 40 year old aircraft.If Porsche built warplanes.
Wasn't this mess something to do with the omnipresent power struggle between different branches of the US armed forces?
Iirc the usaf runs the a10 and they have the associated cost but they don't really want to. At the same time they blocked the offer of us army/USMC to take some of the a10s because that would be an admittance of defeat to a rival service.
Glad they've been kept.
Politics. Odd.
Iirc the usaf runs the a10 and they have the associated cost but they don't really want to. At the same time they blocked the offer of us army/USMC to take some of the a10s because that would be an admittance of defeat to a rival service.
Glad they've been kept.
Politics. Odd.
Any excuse to post this..
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mbwZF9k_Fnc
Its the way when he gets the wheels up, he pushes the nose down.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mbwZF9k_Fnc
Its the way when he gets the wheels up, he pushes the nose down.
Simpo Two said:
Militry aircraft seem to be getting longer and longer service lives. Is that because there's no real adversary, or because the technology has got about as far as it can go?
Aero engines generally get around 1-2% better every year (trade, life/economy/performance).Hence civil aircraft tend to get replaced pretty regularly as they burn a lot of fuel. Generally they will 're-engine a type at least once and do a few aero and electronic improvements.
The gains associated with redesigning the airframe are relatively small. Hence it is relatively rare to bring in an entirely new plane.
In the military fighter context, the aerodynamic performance of new fighter aircraft is not substantially greater than those from the 1970s. See Gripen and Typhoon vs F15-18.
Going faster had limited benefit pulling a slightly higher sustained g is not worth the cost of redeveloping the aircraft. Additional range can be achieved by more air to air refuelling.
The only platform based advance was stealth and that has been so expensive as to stop extensive procurement.
Hence today's aircraft mostly use 1970's platforms, 90's engines and modern electronics. Compared to the 70's jets their offensive capabilities are orders of magnitude higher, their defensive systems are much more advanced.
If there was a (cold) war on I suspect the best current technological solution for air dominance would be Tranis type drones. Networked together with full 360 passive sensors and armed with long/short range missiles capable of being launched in any direction.
Talksteer said:
Aero engines generally get around 1-2% better every year (trade, life/economy/performance).
Hence civil aircraft tend to get replaced pretty regularly as they burn a lot of fuel. Generally they will 're-engine a type at least once and do a few aero and electronic improvements.
The gains associated with redesigning the airframe are relatively small. Hence it is relatively rare to bring in an entirely new plane.
In the military fighter context, the aerodynamic performance of new fighter aircraft is not substantially greater than those from the 1970s. See Gripen and Typhoon vs F15-18.
Going faster had limited benefit pulling a slightly higher sustained g is not worth the cost of redeveloping the aircraft. Additional range can be achieved by more air to air refuelling.
The only platform based advance was stealth and that has been so expensive as to stop extensive procurement.
Hence today's aircraft mostly use 1970's platforms, 90's engines and modern electronics. Compared to the 70's jets their offensive capabilities are orders of magnitude higher, their defensive systems are much more advanced.
If there was a (cold) war on I suspect the best current technological solution for air dominance would be Tranis type drones. Networked together with full 360 passive sensors and armed with long/short range missiles capable of being launched in any direction.
I suspect the next sea change in performance will be realised by ditching the Meatware in the cockpit! lets face it, 9g isn't a structural problem any more for the airframe, but it IS for the pilot! Then we get to the massive weight and system savings possible by not needing all that annoying life support stuff like A/C, ejector seats, control columns and panels etc!Hence civil aircraft tend to get replaced pretty regularly as they burn a lot of fuel. Generally they will 're-engine a type at least once and do a few aero and electronic improvements.
The gains associated with redesigning the airframe are relatively small. Hence it is relatively rare to bring in an entirely new plane.
In the military fighter context, the aerodynamic performance of new fighter aircraft is not substantially greater than those from the 1970s. See Gripen and Typhoon vs F15-18.
Going faster had limited benefit pulling a slightly higher sustained g is not worth the cost of redeveloping the aircraft. Additional range can be achieved by more air to air refuelling.
The only platform based advance was stealth and that has been so expensive as to stop extensive procurement.
Hence today's aircraft mostly use 1970's platforms, 90's engines and modern electronics. Compared to the 70's jets their offensive capabilities are orders of magnitude higher, their defensive systems are much more advanced.
If there was a (cold) war on I suspect the best current technological solution for air dominance would be Tranis type drones. Networked together with full 360 passive sensors and armed with long/short range missiles capable of being launched in any direction.
Gassing Station | Boats, Planes & Trains | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff