One of Moscow’s fighter jets has been shot down by Ukrainian forces, according to a military blogger with links to the Russian air force. Another pro-Moscow milblogger said that the Sukhoi Su-34 aircraft had been downed by a Western-supplied F-16.
Once they use those F-16s to establish air dominance someone needs to give them a few A-10s to help them speed up retaking their territory.
That would be super helpful. Everyone always says that the A10s would be too vulnerable to AA but I’m guessing it’s survivability in the skies of Ukraine will probably be higher than helicopters and they are still flying those. A10s will absolutely decimate Russian lines if they can get close.
Helicopters can loiter better, fly closer to the ground, and resupply close to the front.
Even so, attack helicopters are not really used in anything other than ATGM sneak attacks from terrain cover (which the A10 can’t do, being a plane), or UGM “artillery” strikes. Most helicopter usage is about utility transport or troop transport in Ukraine. The primary CAS platform in Ukraine is drones. For tactical strikes, it’s glide bombs and cruise missiles, but that’s in short supply, no point in having a bunch of platforms if they have nothing to shoot.
The A10 is not really useful in near-peer engagements. At least not as useful as an equivalent value amount of SAMs or drones. And aid is passed by congress by value, so it absolutely matters how much something costs, they have to package the best stuff they can in the dollar limits.
deleted by creator
The A-10 is vulnerable to AA and to fighters, that’s why establishing F-16 patrols first is important. I’d also prefer that the A-10s either be escorted by or fly in mixed formations with Ukraine’s Soviet era fighters.
If the USAF doesn’t want to deal with the A-10s supply chain, there’s a good chance Ukraine doesn’t either.
The only thing that keeps the A-10 flying is Congressional mandates from a few jobs-oriented congressmen.
It’s a morale booster. Marines want a battleship to roll-up and lob explosive vws at the enemy and the army wants to keep it’s brrt buddy. With more modern electronics and better drone link they’d still be very capable at the job they are built to do.
I mean, they made to strafe tanks. Pretty sure they were actually terrible at that when first introduced.
They did fine, budget dweebs just never thought they were enough of an advantage to offset the cost. They stay in service because people in the actual field want them around, it’s the same reason a lot of obsolete “useless” weapons stay in service.
Yea the a-10 is on the us chopping block. Could be their next step.
BBBRRRRRRRRRRTTTTT
My vote is for a dozen AC-130J Ghostrider gunships
Those planes are workhorses, they would hardly need a dozen. We could probably put two of them on loan for a weekend and the Ukrainians would have the majority of the trenches converted into graves.
Also a fun indy game on steam “project gunship”
Big asterisk* it’s a fun but very dead partially developed game that hasn’t been updated in 10months despite its popularity.
Dam your right! Such a shame. As it is atm its still fun, could do woth more scenarios/maps.
Such a shame, any news on what happened to the dev?
No idea just sorta stopped I guess.
Or they could just put sanctions on emirates or thailand where russian are chilling, stop sending more war toys to the ukrainian government and the war would be over within a month.
I hope you’re a troll and not actually that stupid.
They’re a Russian troll. I have them tagged from a previous thread.
When it comes to Index, it’s anyone’s guess.
As a Russian, I have nothing against this. Actually, screw it, just send all of them. Russian MoD’s probably going to put bounties on them, like they did with Leopards. This way, the US finally get to decommission that meme of an aircraft, some AA crew is going to get an easy payday of like $10k each, and the MoD gets to report that they’ve inflicted $20mil worth of damage for only pennies, while in reality only lifting the burden of maintenance of those planes from the US budget. Sounds like win-win-win to me. The only losers here are those few poor Ukrainians who will have to pilot the damn thing.
Russia was getting spanked by Bradleys, f16s would glory over the battlefield, and it would open the door to unsealing real weapons.
We need to train their best on f35s.
Newsweek - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)
Information for Newsweek:
MBFC: Right-Center - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: Mostly Factual - United States of America
Wikipedia about this sourceSearch topics on Ground.News
Pakistan proved AIM-120s are still king in the air for MRAAMs back in 2019 against India’s Su-30s.
Obviously there’s a lot of skill and technique involved, but you get a pretty nice edge with the range. Apparently the IAF said that the pilots couldn’t get a shot off without first entering the no escape zone, or at the very least felt uncomfortable getting locked up before they could lock the F-16s.
Although now that China has brought back LRAAMs, it’ll be cool to see what the USA makes as the successor to the AIM-54.
The aim260 is in opeval, it’s basically a smaller Phoenix (except, you know, with a good seeker).
Also they have the aim 174 (I think that’s the number), which is an sm6 upper stage strapped to an f18, basically like shooting a telephone pole at someone from 200km+ away.
We were slow getting started, but we’re getting there.
I assume the bomber has to slow down to subsonic speeds to drop it’s payload. Don’t want to think about the forces acting on the payload if it were to drop at supersonic speeds.
