A-10 In Big Demand in Astan

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by tomahawk6, Jun 16, 2006.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. http://www.armytimes.com/story.php?f=0-ARMYPAPER-1852381.php

    Soldiers call in planes every day in Afghanistan

    By Bruce Rolfsen
    Times staff writer

    These are busy times for A-10 Thunderbolts in Afghanistan.

    As the Taliban steps up its insurgency, A-10s are being called on daily. Fighters from Bagram Air Base sometimes strike targets in southern and eastern Afghanistan on the same day.

    On May 29, A-10s came to the rescue of troops under fire by flying several strafing passes against Taliban fighters near Deh Rawood. That same day, the jets also flew missions near Asadabad, 350 miles north.

    The high demand for the A-10 is easy for Warthog crews to explain.

    “It’s the one that guys in the field want. It’s the one that the enemy fears the most,” said Col. Warren “Wardog” Henderson, commander of the 23rd Fighter Group, the Flying Tigers, out of Pope Air Force Base, N.C.

    Since the spring of 2002, A-10s have been a steady presence at Bagram. Often, at least two A-10s are in flight for on-call close-air support missions, with more jets sitting alert on the Bagram flight line.

    Typically, the Air Force has about a squadron’s worth of A-10s and personnel on hand at Bagram serving a four-month deployment. However, the Air Force has, at times, doubled the number of jets there by delaying planes from deploying back to their home bases or by moving up arrival dates.

    In Iraq, during the spring of 2003, A-10s were the first U.S. fighters to be deployed to former Iraqi air force flight lines, taking up operations at Kirkuk Air Base and Ali Base.

    A-10s were the first fighters based inside Iraq and Afghanistan because the planes are designed to operate from beat-up runways. The A-10’s jet engines are mounted high enough that they aren’t likely to suck in rocks and concrete, whereas the intake of an F-16 Flying Falcon’s belly-mounted engine could act like a vacuum cleaner.

    As runway conditions improved in Iraq, the A-10s were replaced by F-16s. The F-16s can drop satellite-guided bombs, a capability A-10s lack.
  2. ....lets hope they know what a 'Warrior' looks like now.
  3. Ahh the A10 britkillers.
  4. If you are about to be overrun by the taliban I think you would rather roll the dice and take your chances with the USAF. I would.
  5. Comforting image....
  6. If you are about to be overrun by the taliban I think you would rather roll the dice and take your chances with the USAF. I would.

    Was it not the A10 pilots who killed more brits and destroyed more brit A.P.C's than the whole Iraq army in the first gulf war.

    Or maybe that was just an urban myth
  7. Al least those boys fly at night! In 2002 the crabs wouldn't fly after dark! :oops:
  8. At least those boys fly at night! In 2002 the crabs wouldn't fly after dark!

    I remember something along the lines (properly tabloid sh1t)Crabs were told not to use night vision as it was not safe in the Iraq environment.Even though they were used in the Falklands 9 years earlier
  9. A10 the usaf has been trying to get rid of them for years wants to replace them with the super hi tech JSF
    reguardless of the fact there no enemy on the horizon thats going to have a decent air defence structure.
    still would'nt want to be in on the ground when one was flying about
  10. Never mind anything else, I just wince at the fact that a Col is content to have the "handle" of Warren “Wardog” Henderson...... that is just sooooo cringe-worthy

    Rick "Napalm in the Morning" Shaw
  11. Probably explains why we have no decent armoured assets in afganistian .To be on the safe side dont drive a pick up truck and for ****
    sake dont take up any invites to wedding parties :twisted: .The ideal platform for whats happening in afgan/iraq at the moment imho.
    Its hated by the usaf as close support is not considered cool.
  12. Just one of those strange things...... The A-10, ugly as sin, so ugly ferry pilots use out of the way back country strips to fly from, dot to dot. Yet the A-10, a classic mud mover, is fulfilling the same role the RAF built 2 different aircraft for in WW2, Typhoon/Tempest and various other mud movers, Thunderbolt for one. The reason why I'd want an A-10 above me, with a bloody good FAC I trust!, is that the bugger can hang around for hours carrying the bomb load of a WW2 Lancaster. The A-10 comes with laser designation gear so you don't need F-16 to drop smart bombs. Fast movers are a pain, they move too fast to pick out targets properly and cos they're whipping around so fast it takes ages (in combat) to get the bugger back to have another go. The A-10 was built for High intensity warfare on the German plains against Soviet layed AD. So, the odd SAM and HMG shouldn't worry them! And by the way, the RAF and USAF racked up an impressive collection of Blue on Blues in 1944-45. And of course the RAF/USAF dislike ground support roles. You don't get made an ace for bombing things on the ground....!

    Edited cos I still can't spell!
  13. Taliban, hand to hand any day.....

    An A 10 doesn't give you much of a chance with that chain gun!

    Warriors are like wet paper bags when an A10 turns up....
  14. Goatman

    Goatman LE Book Reviewer

    My son's favourite ac, having spent a large part of his childhood playing a neocon fantasy PC game called << A10-Cuba >> :D

    ...happily he is unlikely to be on the ground anywhere near one flying a bombed -up mission with the words
    "Free-fire Zone - yeehah! "permanently hard-wired into the pilot's forebrain.....

    AFV recognition classes anyone ?
  15. That's obviously a Sukhoi Su-25 Frogfoot.

    Oops, another blue on blue! Never mind, the USAF have got plenty more left .....