10725198101090741028.jpg

-Nem alkalmazunk jelzős szerkezetet. Még arra se, akivel nagyon nem értesz egyet.
-Nem gyűlölködünk!
-HADITECHNIKAI TOPIC, aki nem tudja értelmezni, az megy máshova!


[Légi Harcászati / Légvédelmi FAQ]
  • molnibalage83
    #90101
    Kis A-10 mítosz oszlató, kapcsolódva a Haditechnikai Összefoglaló tartalmához, kiemelve a lényeges részt:

    It was Lt Gen 'Chuck' Horner himself who said it:

    A-10s vs. F-16s

    Q: Did the war have any effect on the Air Force's view of the A-10?

    A: No. People misread that. People were saying that airplanes are too sophisticated and that they wouldn't work in the desert, that you didn't need all this high technology, that simple and reliable was better, and all that.

    Well, first of all, complex does not mean unreliable. We're finding that out. For example, you have a watch that uses transistors rather than a spring. It's infinitely more reliable than the windup watch that you had years ago. That's what we're finding in the airplanes.

    Those people . . . were always championing the A-10. As the A-10 reaches the end of its life cycle-- and it's approaching that now--it's time to replace it, just like we replace every airplane, including, right now, some early versions of the F-16.

    Since the line was discontinued, [the A-10's champions] want to build another A-10 of some kind. The point we were making was that we have F-16s that do the same job.

    Then you come to people who have their own reasons-good reasons to them, but they don't necessarily compute to me-who want to hang onto the A-10 because of the gun. Well, the gun's an excellent weapon, but you'll find that most of the tank kills by the A-10 were done with Mavericks and bombs. So the idea that the gun is the absolute wonder of the world is not true.

    Q: This conflict has shown that?

    A: It shows that the gun has a lot of utility, which we always knew, but it isn't the principal tank-killer on the A-10. The [Imaging Infrared] Maverick is the big hero there. That was used by the A-10s and the F-16s very, very effectively in places like Khafji.

    The other problem is that the A-10 is vulnerable to hits because its speed is limited. It's a function of thrust, it's not a function of anything else. We had a lot of A-10s take a lot of ground fire hits. Quite frankly, we pulled the A-10s back from going up around the Republican Guard and kept them on Iraq's [less formidable] front-line units. That's line if you have a force that allows you to do that. In this case, we had F-16s to go after the Republican Guard.

    Q: At what point did you do that?

    A: I think I had fourteen airplanes sitting on the ramp having battle damage repaired, and I lost two A- 10s in one day [February 15], and I said, "I've had enough of this." It was when we really started to go after the Republican Guard.


    Kiegészítés mellé.
    USAF Warthogs fired 4,801 individual missiles (more than 90% of all Mavericks launched by the US Air Force).


    Ehm...

    A HTKA-ra is kiteszem, csak lefordítom majd asszem.
    Utoljára szerkesztette: molnibalage83, 2019.02.27. 11:37:02