Military Review

The last American attack aircraft A-10 left Europe

61



The last American A-10 attack aircraft left Europe. A-10s were developed during the Cold War to combat Soviet ground forces in Europe. There was no war with the USSR, and the A-10 turned out to be a formidable combat aircraft in subsequent conflicts, first in 1991 during the liberation of Kuwait, and then in Afghanistan and Iraq. Over the past decade in Afghanistan the most sought after aviation The support of the ground forces was A-10. A similar situation has developed with the A-10 in Iraq. The military of all countries quickly appreciated the unique capabilities of this aircraft of the era of the 1970s, which the US Air Force has tried several times to write off. Two years ago, the U.S. Air Force announced that they were writing off 102 A-10s, leaving 243 of these aircraft in service. At the same time, the air force accelerated the modernization of the remaining A-10s to the A-10C level.



Modernized A-10, which are also intended for high-precision strikes, must remain in service until the 2028 year. This means that most A-10s will last more than 40 years and fly more than 16 000 hours. The process of modernization has been going on for more than five years. Improvements include new electronics, as well as airframe and engine repairs. A-10C provides the pilot with the same target guidance and fire control capabilities as the last fighter. The new A-10C cab has only color displays and easy-to-use controls. Since this is a single-seater aircraft operating at extremely low altitudes (it requires much more concentration of the pilot), all this automation in the cockpit allows the pilot to perform many more tasks with less stress, strain and danger.



The basic construction of A-10 is related to 1960 years, in comparison with it the new additions look very impressive. A new communication system was installed, allowing the pilot to exchange photo and video information with ground forces. The A-10 pilot also has access to a tracking system for the position of his troops, so that on the display he can observe the location of friendly forces when using the 30-mm gun at low altitude. A-10 can now use smart bombs, making it a versatile fire support aircraft.

A-10 are widely used in Afghanistan. For example, A-10 Squadron consists of a dozen aircraft and 18 pilots. The average flight time of pilots is about 100 hours per month: about twenty sorties, an average of 5 hours each. Aircraft are patrolling over the entire south of Afghanistan in anticipation of a command to provide air support to ground forces. A-10, nicknamed "warthog" or simply "pig", is able to fly at low altitudes and low speeds, and its booking is able to withstand ground fire from small weapons. Troops trust A-10 more than F-16 or any other aircraft used for ground support.



Single A-10 weighs about 23 tons, is equipped with two engines, its main weapon is a multi-barrel 30-mm cannon, originally designed to defeat Soviet tanks shells with armor-piercing cores. Currently, 1174 30-mm shells are mostly HE shells. A 30 mm cannon fires sixty-five 363-gram shells per second. A cannon usually fires bursts lasting a second or two. In addition, the A-10 can carry seven tons of bombs and missiles. Currently, the A-10 carries smart bombs (with GPS and laser guidance) and Maverick missiles. It can also carry a container with target reconnaissance and target designation equipment, allowing the pilot to monitor enemy activities using high-resolution day / night cameras. Cruising speed is 560 kilometers per hour, but the A-10 can patrol at a speed of 230 kilometers per hour. In Afghanistan, two outboard fuel tanks are commonly used to increase flight duration.

If another big war breaks out in any place on the planet, such as Korea or Iran, A-10 will once again be one of the most popular aircraft among the ground forces.
Originator:
http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htairfo/articles/20130528.aspx
61 comment
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Dima190579
    Dima190579 31 May 2013 08: 08 New
    +8
    A plane built around a gun. If tomorrow is war, if tomorrow is a campaign where they are new A 10 planes will be torn. Who will build them. I know the Chinese.
    1. Professor
      31 May 2013 08: 27 New
      14
      Quote: Dima190579
      Aircraft built around a gun.

      Not just guns, but guns.
      1. ultra
        ultra 31 May 2013 16: 08 New
        +7
        I don’t know how anyone and I really like the A-10, purely outwardly, it has something from the past times of WWII. Yes, and as a support aircraft it is very effective.
        1. crazyrom
          crazyrom 3 June 2013 05: 51 New
          +2
          I don't like America and the American, but this "plane around the cannon" is a masterpiece, it's a pity that we didn't create it.
      2. Vadivak
        Vadivak 31 May 2013 22: 16 New
        +2
        Quote: Professor
        Not just guns, but guns.



        heavy-duty 30-mm seven-barreled gun GAU-8 with an initial projectile speed of 1067 m / s and a rate of 4000 rounds per minute, the study of which was launched by the U.S. Air Force in 1968. After a 75 mm gun mounted on American aircraft during World War II, the GAU-8 was the most powerful aviation artillery system created in the United States.
    2. Atrix
      Atrix 31 May 2013 13: 33 New
      +3
      Quote: Dima190579
      A plane built around a gun. If tomorrow is war, if tomorrow is a campaign where they are new A 10 planes will be torn. Who will build them. I know the Chinese.

      They focus on UAVs, why send pilots if you can send UAVs.
      1. Pimply
        Pimply 31 May 2013 21: 36 New
        0
        Rather, it was replaced by a helicopter now.
    3. Larus
      Larus 1 June 2013 10: 48 New
      0
      And where will we take when there is one plant left and they can’t cope with the state defense order ...
  2. Vladimirets
    Vladimirets 31 May 2013 08: 11 New
    17
    Who said the Su-25 is old? Pterodactyl A-10 flies and will still fly. Modernization and modernization again.
  3. Landwarrior
    Landwarrior 31 May 2013 08: 35 New
    -12
    The plane is rather strange in itself, to be honest. Pretty archaic design - straight wings, forked tail, made out of the fuselage of the nacelle. It seems that the task of the designers was to create an aircraft with the maximum possible number of vulnerable points.
    1. Parabelum
      Parabelum 31 May 2013 09: 09 New
      32
      The design of the A10 is truly unique and thought out specifically for the attack aircraft:
      - Straight wings, the plane "works" at low speeds, which allows you to strike more accurately;
      - Remote and spaced engine nacelles increase the survival of the aircraft when rockets hit, also the upper location of the engine nacelles reduces the likelihood of engine damage (they are obtained by protected wing planes) from the ground;
      - Two-tail tail, this is a standard solution with this arrangement of engines;
      We will modestly keep silent about weapons, this is a specialized attack aircraft (just like our SU25), and not a "universal" aircraft for everything.
      IMHO a wonderful specialized aircraft.
      1. unclevad
        unclevad 31 May 2013 09: 43 New
        +7
        In addition, highly suspended engines have less dirt and sand on the runway, which is good for their resource.
      2. cumastra1
        cumastra1 31 May 2013 15: 47 New
        +3
        I will add the bottom of the cockpit is armored and made of "skids" to soften the impact during a forced landing, for the same purpose the chassis partially "peeks" out of the hatches.
      3. Landwarrior
        Landwarrior 31 May 2013 16: 01 New
        -3
        Quote: Parabelum
        the plane "operates" at low speeds,

        Is a slow-moving car no more vulnerable?
        Quote: Parabelum
        - Remote and spaced engine nacelles increase the survival of the aircraft when rockets hit, also the upper location of the engine nacelles reduces the likelihood of engine damage (they are obtained by protected wing planes) from the ground;

        On the side projection it is clear that the nacelles are located just between the wings and the keels. Well, all right, given that no one shoots under 90 degrees, I accept laughing

        Quote: Parabelum
        - Two-tail tail, this is a standard solution with this arrangement of engines;

        But what about Cessna? apparently not as standard as you argue wassat
        1. Parabelum
          Parabelum 31 May 2013 18: 35 New
          +3
          A low-speed car is initially more accurate, do not forget, this is a stormtrooper whose mission is the destruction of small targets. Designed to combat armored vehicles. In speed, it is slightly inferior to SU25.
          There are different colors, in short I will say, with standard plumage due to the high location of the engines, the keel will be in an unstable air flow, which will negatively affect its handling, aerodynamics you know ...
          1. Landwarrior
            Landwarrior 31 May 2013 19: 05 New
            -3
            There are different tsesny,

            OK, I’ll clarify.
            Cessna 500 Citation. spaced engine nacelles, almost straight wings, but there’s no talk of any bifurcated tail. laughing
            This is not the only such model, there is more. wassat
            So far from as standard as you assure.laughing
        2. the47th
          the47th 2 June 2013 09: 53 New
          0
          Quote: Landwarrior
          Is a slow-moving car no more vulnerable?

          Using a quiet machine is easier to work on ground targets.
    2. scliss
      scliss 31 May 2013 11: 12 New
      0
      so the attack aircraft
    3. Vovka levka
      Vovka levka 31 May 2013 14: 39 New
      -2
      Quote: Landwarrior
      The plane is rather strange in itself, to be honest. Pretty archaic design - straight wings, forked tail, made out of the fuselage of the nacelle. It seems that the task of the designers was to create an aircraft with the maximum possible number of vulnerable points.

      In her class, she is the best, I rook far to him.
      1. Dimani
        Dimani 31 May 2013 14: 46 New
        0
        oh? justify your statement ... smile
        1. Argon
          Argon 1 June 2013 00: 06 New
          +1
          A10-specialized machine-hunter for tanks over Europe can be used around the clock, on moving targets. Su-25 is designed for strikes in simple weather conditions on fixed targets.
          1. Dimani
            Dimani 1 June 2013 07: 01 New
            0
            What nonsense is this? Su-25 subsonic attack aircraft designed to directly support the ground forces over the battlefield day and night with direct visibility of the target, as well as the destruction of objects with the given coordinates around the clock in any weather conditions.
            The attack aircraft is armed with a built-in cannon installation VPU-17A with a 30-mm double-barreled GS-30-2 air gun [1] [10] (GRAU index 9A623 [11]), made according to the Gast scheme. The air gun is designed to destroy armored vehicles, openly located enemy manpower, as well as air targets at medium and close ranges.
            And why the Su-25 can not be used around the clock and the A-10 can?
            I will add that even Americans recognize the superiority of the Rook in relation to the Warthog
      2. Landwarrior
        Landwarrior 31 May 2013 16: 02 New
        +1
        Quote: Vovka Levka
        I’m still far from him.

        For the Arabian desert, A10 is a sweet deal. laughing
        1. lelikas
          lelikas 31 May 2013 16: 39 New
          +2
          In Muslim Europe, it is not politically correct to keep an airplane with a "wrong" name - so we have to deduce it.
    4. yanus
      yanus 31 May 2013 15: 24 New
      +2
      Quote: Landwarrior
      swallowtail...

      But no matter how much I look at this forked tail, I can’t think of how to shoot the A-10 from the Needle so that it doesn’t catch its tail, but still gets to the engine. So the tail is fine.
  4. Sirozha
    Sirozha 31 May 2013 09: 06 New
    +7
    I don’t know how much is true, but I read somewhere that when a shot is fired from a cannon, the plane slows down.
    Despite his not very familiar, by today's standards, appearance, potential, it has good potential, it’s not for nothing that he has been working for so many years. Great job engineers!
    1. Professor
      31 May 2013 09: 18 New
      +7
      Quote: Sirozha
      I don’t know how much is true, but I read somewhere that when a shot is fired from a cannon, the plane slows down.

      This is true for any aircraft. Calculating the momentum is quite simple: the mass of the aircraft at speed versus the mass of shells at their speed.
    2. alex86
      alex86 31 May 2013 21: 54 New
      -1
      Quote: Sirozha
      but I read somewhere that when a shot is fired from a cannon, the plane slows down

      approximately from the same source - the recoil is approximately equal to the engine thrust (for this aircraft)
  5. PROXOR
    PROXOR 31 May 2013 09: 12 New
    +3
    In this regard, the SU-25 is protected much better. Our Rook avionics would be modern and the arsenal is high-speed. And then we beat uncontrollable.
    1. Professor
      31 May 2013 09: 21 New
      +1
      On the Su-25, this has already been done, though not for Russia.
      http://www.elbitsystems.com/elbitmain/area-in2.asp?parent=169&num=174&num2=174
      1. Vadivak
        Vadivak 31 May 2013 11: 26 New
        +2
        Quote: Professor
        On the Su-25, this has already been done, though not for Russia.


        They don’t do it for themselves either, they pay Scorpions with Turkmenistan for debts of one lyama per car, although it costs from five to six
  6. aviator_IAS
    aviator_IAS 31 May 2013 09: 28 New
    +2
    Quote: Sirozha
    I don’t know how much is true, but I read somewhere that when a shot is fired from a cannon, the plane slows down.


    Naturally. The laws of physics have not been canceled. If we estimate the weight of a second volley, then such a momentum is obtained. The recoil and recoil of the guns does not surprise anyone.
    1. Parabelum
      Parabelum 31 May 2013 09: 51 New
      +3
      With a gun firing rate of 4200 rounds per minute, 70 425-gram shells fly out of the barrel of the gun every second at a speed of 1067 m / s. It follows that the recoil force of the gun is approximately 30 KN. It is claimed that the recoil force of GAU-8 is approximately 45 KN, the difference is due to the additional force from the powder gases flowing from the trunks. The total maximum thrust of two A-10 engines is 80 KN.
      However, such a powerful return is equivalent to turning off one of the engines and leads to rapid braking of the aircraft, especially when flying at high speeds. In addition, the recoil occurs somewhat later than the pilot’s command (the time required to spin the block of barrels) and increases almost instantly to maximum values ​​(and therefore, critical jerk values ​​are obtained), causing extremely unpleasant sensations for the pilots.
      Similar sensations are described by pilots of other types of light aircraft with mounted quick-firing air guns (in particular, F-16 and MiG-23).
  7. Yankuz
    Yankuz 31 May 2013 10: 41 New
    0
    Serious car! We would have a similar one.
    1. Atrix
      Atrix 31 May 2013 13: 36 New
      0
      Quote: Yankuz
      Serious car! We would have a similar one.

      As for me, it's better to make drones for these purposes than send pilots.
  8. avt
    avt 31 May 2013 10: 52 New
    +5
    Quote: Yankuz
    Serious car! We would have a similar one.

    But the Su-25 didn’t please request ?
    1. patsantre
      patsantre 31 May 2013 12: 42 New
      +4
      To upgrade as it should ... otherwise SM, according to the VAF, is not a cake.
  9. USNik
    USNik 31 May 2013 13: 58 New
    +1
    professor (1)  Today, 09:21 ↑

    On the Su-25, this has already been done, though not for Russia.

    According to your link, it is written in white according to Angliyskolm that there is a new modification of the SU-25, and to whom it was delivered there is not a word. And do not worry about Russia, there are new modifications and they are ALREADY in the army:
    "Ten new Su-25SM3 attack aircraft arrived at the Krasnodar air base"
    http://warsonline.info/aviatsiya/na-krasnodarskuiu-aviabazu-pribili-10-shturmovi

    kov-su-25sm3.html

    (Substation A-10 is an excellent attack aircraft, which has nothing to replace, but there is a lot of controversy over its gun, which 70% of the time just rides on an airplane ...)
    1. Geokingxnumx
      Geokingxnumx 31 May 2013 14: 48 New
      +3
      Quote: USNik
      and to whom it was supplied there is not a word

      To Georgia!
      1. Professor
        31 May 2013 15: 22 New
        0
        Did they still stay in Georgia? What is the fate of the plant?
        1. Geokingxnumx
          Geokingxnumx 31 May 2013 15: 51 New
          -1
          Quote: Professor
          Did they still stay in Georgia?

          Scorpio yes! everyone is safe!
          Quote: Professor
          What is the fate of the plant?

          Su-25 do not upgrade and do not build! civilian aircraft, upgrade or disrupt Helicopters (mi-xnumx-mi-xnumx mohawk) didgori and lasiks are built (now test passes, and there will be changes)
          Military Uniforms hang, well, Mortars Grenade launchers, well, a lot of everything


          Now there is an infarmation that Georgia and Azerbaijan can design and create new modernization Su-25 planes! êàî Joint project say this is a rumor!
          1. Professor
            31 May 2013 16: 02 New
            0
            Thanks for the answer. Will they do this project without Elbit or will Azerbaijan connect Elbit? Did you get Mi-24 back from Israel?
            1. Geokingxnumx
              Geokingxnumx 31 May 2013 18: 03 New
              0
              Quote: Professor
              will they do this project without Elbit or will Azerbaijan connect Elbit?

              I don’t know, maybe life or maybe not! this rumor is simple! I think they will
              Quote: Professor
              Did you get Mi-24 back from Israel?

              I don’t know anything about this! I just know that the 31 factory just repainted and repaired the Mi-24.
  10. sergey261180
    sergey261180 31 May 2013 14: 22 New
    +1
    Nice plane. His only drawback is low thrust-to-weight ratio. Not enough traction to get away from missiles. A cannon can come in handy when it’s permissible due to interference the use of guided weapons becomes impossible.
    1. Pimply
      Pimply 31 May 2013 21: 38 New
      +1
      In fact, not one aircraft has enough thrust to escape from missiles. A rocket is always faster than an airplane - it does not have a pilot.
      1. Vadivak
        Vadivak 31 May 2013 22: 13 New
        +3
        Quote: Pimply
        In fact, not one aircraft has enough thrust to escape from missiles


        There was a bike about the MiG-25, as the P 40 rocket was launched during firing (not on the target but on the plane, the pilot at the Black Sea Fleet left the rocket, the flashlight melted, and the pilot was cut out of the plane after landing. It’s clear, of course, in the 70s they believed
      2. sergey261180
        sergey261180 1 June 2013 13: 04 New
        0
        For example, when the USSR delivered C-75 to Egypt, ours, as soon as Israeli aircraft entered the affected area, launched rockets, and Israeli pilots turned around, cut down the afterburner and dumped them. I had to change tactics and let the planes get closer. Another trick: we dive sharply to an extremely shallow height in the folds of the terrain. Most missiles are controlled from the ground, so the damage zone is in direct line of sight. Well, the third trick with shooting traps and a sharp maneuver. The first missile smears, while there on the ground they come to their senses and launch the second, excess thrust will not hinder to flee.
  11. Andrew
    Andrew 31 May 2013 14: 46 New
    +2
    Is an eight ton load true? That is, it carries the same mass as the SU-34. Then a really good plane. And he needs helicopters because they use them, and a subsonic plane can fly at a similar speed.
    1. Andrey77
      Andrey77 2 June 2013 16: 39 New
      0
      I have data from the A10C simulator. In kg and tons, count yourself.
      Empty weight (without fuel, weapons, etc.) - 24959 pounds
      Normal take-off (full refueling, full ammunition for the gun) - 30782 pounds
      The maximum take-off is 51000 pounds.
    2. Andrey77
      Andrey77 2 June 2013 16: 54 New
      0
      Supersonic speed for an attack aircraft is only a hindrance, it is not a fighter.
  12. RoadRunner
    RoadRunner 31 May 2013 14: 50 New
    +1
    The last American A-10 attack aircraft left Europe.

    Good riddance hi
  13. VohaAhov
    VohaAhov 31 May 2013 15: 22 New
    0
    Good article. Positive. Americans are slowly leaving Europe. Recently, the news of the withdrawal of the last "Abrams" from Europe slipped through.
  14. Snoop
    Snoop 31 May 2013 15: 30 New
    0
    No matter how you say the formidable car, even the silhouette is felt.
    1. Vadivak
      Vadivak 31 May 2013 22: 25 New
      +1
      Quote: Snoop
      No matter how you say the formidable car, even the silhouette is felt.


      And ours gave him the nickname "Cheburashka"
    2. Atrix
      Atrix 1 June 2013 01: 20 New
      +1
      The sound of the gun is just flying away repeat
      1. Landwarrior
        Landwarrior 1 June 2013 19: 48 New
        0
        Quote: Atrix
        The sound of the gun is just flying away

        As if the canvas was torn laughing
  15. uzer 13
    uzer 13 31 May 2013 17: 16 New
    +5
    The A-10 Thunderbolt is a very well-designed attack aircraft. Its unexpectedly long life in the US Air Force is explained very simply: endless local conflicts required just such a means of support from the air, simple and reliable. In the SU-25, which came to light much later, of course some shortcomings of the American analogue were taken into account, and in all respects they surpass the A-10. There should be no question of removing the SU-25 from armament. There are simply no analogues or competitors to this aircraft.
    1. scrabler
      scrabler 31 May 2013 21: 38 New
      +2
      So say no pros for the sake of. For some reason, all foreign aviation causes a very great desire to attack it, but our vehicles hung on all sides somehow even look good smile But this makes them no less effective, as if there is a "recommendation" not to be aggressive in appearance.
    2. Vadivak
      Vadivak 31 May 2013 22: 32 New
      +2
      Quote: uzer 13
      There should be no question of removing the SU-25 from armament. There are simply no analogues or competitors to this aircraft.


      I saw how Rutskoi circled on it, well, purely like a fighter,
      1. Landwarrior
        Landwarrior 31 May 2013 23: 35 New
        -1
        Quote: Vadivak
        I saw how Rutskoi circled on it, well, purely like a fighter,

        I read somewhere that after Rutskoi in the "Grac" grappled with a Pakistani fighter and drove him into the ground, they began to put air-to-air missiles on the 25th smile
    3. Argon
      Argon 31 May 2013 23: 43 New
      +1
      Let me ask, how many moving tanks can destroy the Su-25 at night?
  16. Ivanovich47
    Ivanovich47 31 May 2013 21: 20 New
    +3
    Look at this beauty! Our Rook, this is a legend! And Bolt he and Africa Bolt! Warped, on one engine, will come home. What about armor? Our Su-25 is a knight in chain mail. But on its basis they create a new car. So that grandfather will have good grandchildren.
    1. Windbreak
      Windbreak 1 June 2013 10: 55 New
      0
      Quote: Ivanovich47
      And Bolt he and Africa Bolt! Warped, on one engine, will come home.



    2. Stasi
      Stasi 30 September 2013 21: 11 New
      0
      Totally agree with you! Our "Rook" is much more powerful and tenacious than the "Thunderbolt". There are cases when, even with the "Stinger" hit, the damaged "Rooks" were able to reach the base. Our planes in Afghanistan were fired upon even from above, and how this "Thunderbolt" withstood the Afghan test I would have tried the Yankees to withstand a hit from MANPADS, it would be interesting to assess its survivability.American pilots in general, compared to ours, was not so hard in Afghanistan, our aircraft often had to operate in a sea of ​​fire from dushmans.
  17. Black
    Black 31 May 2013 22: 28 New
    +1
    The comb is however dearer ..
    1. Vadivak
      Vadivak 31 May 2013 22: 41 New
      +2
      Quote: Chen
      The comb is however dearer ..


      They also called the comb by primacy, and there are those who thought it was not because of the suspension, but because it combed the brilliant green
  18. Truffoff
    Truffoff 31 May 2013 23: 03 New
    0
    Deprecated ...
    1. Andrey77
      Andrey77 2 June 2013 16: 51 New
      0
      Do you have something better?
  19. Zomanus
    Zomanus 2 June 2013 07: 21 New
    +1
    All the same, a beautiful car, no matter what. A simple hard worker on the war field.
  20. Airmax
    Airmax 11 March 2014 23: 48 New
    0
    A-10 Wonderful, most effective attack aircraft! The Su-25 is also strong, but for the fight against tanks, I would still choose the A-10.