Do we need A-10 Thunderbolt II for CAS ?

[era_shield]

The best thing of this aircraft is the TF-34 engine!
General Electric TF34 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
In this aircraft They used turbofan engine from commercial aircraft.
The civilian variant, the CF34, is used on a number of business and regional jets. This engine hasn't afterburner, not powerfull for supersonic speed. Aircraft can flying only subsonic. But engine has long lifecycle and cheap. The engine doesnt need intensive care

Bombardier

Chinese plane with CF34

Embraer

Reason of the A-10 create to economic air IFV.
A-10 flying with 30mm cannon which is use cheap ammunition for cheap target.
Your enemies have not only tank, IFV they have also trucks for transports and logistic.
One Hellfire more expensive than KAMAZ or old Russian truck.Toyota pickup 4x4 also cheaper than Hellfire.

You can use 30mm cannon for antiperson.
So A-10 Thunderbolt airtructer in the Land war. A-10 smart idea against vehicle. Send Tanks and IFV far away has big risks.
A-10 reliable attack aircraft like AK-47.
You can use in the war long terms without limits.

Similar job could be done with the CAS variant of Hurkus. They're even cheaper to operate, and Cirit is also cheap and can be fired from 10km away which is beyond the range of anything the mountain rats have.

 

[cabatli_53]

@BordoEnes

Try to accept opinions. We did of course. But it is too late and it is all not indigenious. Time passes so fast you can't imagine, in 30 years all will be outdated. Science develops not additive but multiplicative.

We have now to defend Türkiye.

If a country have infrastructure/matured technologies/projects of avionics, AA missiles, AG missiles, AESA radars, communication systems, E/O, links but don't have a plan to integrate all those technologies to own platform that intellectual and property rights solely belongs to you, Then It is time to judge the brainpower of the plan makers in Turkish defence industry. It is not important what will be the situation 30 years after now. Noone can predict what will be the technological capabilities of Turkish defence institutes within 30 years. What We need is an aerial platform that aerodynamic parameters met our ambitious performance requirements. Rest is just a matter of upgrading and modernization like USAF does their 1970 designed aerial machines continuously and already operating effectively so worrying about the way of technology within 30 years is no need, as long as you have a base platform and subsystem infrastructure along with qualified engineers on continuously progressing industry.

 

[-------]

We need better intelligence gathering first..

 

[Basel]

Boeing wants to sell 300 A-10 s from US inventory, some of them are from 2005 on upgraded A-10 C Versions.

Should we ask for some 2-3 squadrons air refuelable with our KC-135 tankers, instead discussing to turn some of our C-130 in gunships ?

C-130'lar 'Gun Ship' olacak!

Boeing Looks to Sell Retired A-10 Warthogs Abroad | DoD Buzz

Warthog is an airplane with superb firepower and survivability.

The Air Force's Rationale For Retiring The A-10 Warthog Is Bullshit

I don't want to discuss the survivability against heavy AA-Missiles. In that enviornment every plane is in severe risk, if not SEAD's Mission are done before.

I think it would be horrible firepower against DEAS and PKK terorists. The 30 mm cannon is
unsurpassed.

Türkce :

Savunma Sanayi .NET – Savunma Haber ve Savunma Teknolojileri Portalı»
Hava Savunma Sanayi » Katil taarruz uçağı A-10′larla 2030’lara kadar yola devam

DARPA is working to enhance CAS capabilities of A-10s, now you can imagine how deadly it will become if you know what DARPA is.

Check their official twitter account.

A-10 is already offered to turkey as transfer units for free, but its denied by our airforce because of the infastructure needed to be founded for repair and operation of planes ,which turns into money sucking platform for turkey . It is debatable how much we need such a system on such a terrain. We could go for a smaller system than A-10.

A-10 is one of the greatest system in my opinion.But against PKK even helos are barely usefull ,A-10 wouldnt be so.

If its sold or transferred to a country which needs such platform ,thats is win win. But i feel like it will be pushed to low- developed countries as a gift eventhough they dont need ( as its tried to be pushed to turkey with a hope ). Its what US does , transfer units for free but obligated to repair and operate in control of US by the US companies.

Will be good for Pakistan in Operations against terrorists on western borders, if properly upgraded A-10 (which can fly without one main wing) can be very deadly on our eastern border where enemy is huge and have advance weapons on ground and air.

 

[Hurshid Celebi]

DARPA is working to enhance CAS capabilities of A-10s, now you can imagine how deadly it will become if you know what DARPA is.

Check their official twitter account.



Will be good for Pakistan in Operations against terrorists on western borders, if properly upgraded A-10 (which can fly without one main wing) can be very deadly on our eastern border where enemy is huge and have advance weapons on ground and air.

Yes I know Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, that's the reason why I opened that Topic.
A-10 will be a mighty bird until 2030-2040, USA never will phase them out in near future;
USA even holds IOWA class and B-52 operational.

 

[Nart]

Yes I know Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, that's the reason why I opened that Topic.
A-10 will be a mighty bird until 2030-2040, USA never will phase them out in near future;
USA even holds IOWA class and B-52 operational.

IOWA Class BB's have been officially stricken from the Naval Vessel Register. The critical systems on the ships irreversibly/permanently removed which makes their reactivation is not physically possible. Sorry for going off-topic.

 

[madmusti]

 

[Hurshid Celebi]

IOWA Class BB's have been officially stricken from the Naval Vessel Register. The critical systems on the ships irreversibly/permanently removed which makes their reactivation is not physically possible. Sorry for going off-topic.

I referred to that News 17.08.2015, that 4 are mothballed and Museum ships, but can be reactivated;
despite they are not in the ship Register.

"All four remaining battleships went on to lead successful military careers and all survive even today as preserved mothballed vessels or floating museums. "

There was a heavy discussion in congress about it , cause of costs for the artillery projectiles;
but enough were produced before mothballing and stored.



USS Missouri (BB-63) - Battleship - History, Specs and Pictures - Navy Ships

 

[UkroTurk]

Hurkus and A-10 looks similar but unfortunately not.

A-10 is flying Otokar ARMA , Hurkus or Super Tucano are flying Otokar Cobra.

A-10 has turbofan engine so A-10 flying longer, faster, more rate of climbing(Needs Against Antiairguns and MANPADS).

A-10 has more payload.

A-10 has 30mm auto cannon and 1200 ammo. One 30mm ammo cost 50 dollars. But one Cirit costs min 20K$!
Always you cant send rocket to 10km range . I am repeating but One Kamaz truck cost nearly CIRIT costs.
You allways need fire pressure in the war. I think, you cant send HURKUS 250km far away from motherland to fight or destroying to enemy object.



Commentaries about A-10 vs Tucano Scorpion and others.


Future Light Attack - Textron Scorpion

"Just like an A10. Yes you can see it like that. But this is not a Hog... I wld certainly prefer to seat in a J6 when the manpads start flowing ard "
"It's not really an A-10 replacement. The A-10 isn't going to be replaced. Sad but true.

It's a replacement for the A-37, OV-10, L-39, MB-326/339. A COIN aircraft that also has the payload/range to do real combat CAS missions over lightly defended air space like over Libya/Kosovo.

If manpads are a threat it can just stay at high altitude like everyone else. If you have grunts on the ground in trouble, you're better off sending this down low than an F-35."


About cheap service of HURKUS, I agree with you. But Remember this HURKUS cost 10 million dollar. Hurkus also not cheap aircraft.
Turkey can produce subsonic ground attack aircraft with commercial and simple turbofan engine.

Commercial turbofan give cheap service payments.



Scorpions Light attack aircraft near to my dream.
2 seat, twin engine light attack jet
Max speed: 450 knots
Endurance: 5 hours @ 150nm
Payload: 9,000 lb (6,000lb internal fuel, 3,000lb internal payload bay, 6 hardpoints)
All-composite, 20,000-hour life airframe
Two 4,000lb thrust TFE731 turbofans
Weight, empty & MTOW: 11,800 - 21,250 lb (5,350 - 9,650 kg)
Scorpion verry interesting and cost effective jet.
Scorpion has commercial jet engine from businessjet.
Garrett TFE731 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Maybe this jets more economic than turboprops. Because they are faster, more payload also has cheap service.


Beyond the hype: the year of the Scorpion fighter jet - Airforce Technology
"Textron AirLand calls it the Scorpion, a two-seat, twin-engined jet that costs less than $20m per unit and around $3,000 for every hour it flies.
In recent conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq, the US military used high-performance jets like the F-16 to carry out these missions, costing the air force $18,000 in hourly fuel bills. The Scorpion is being pushed as an affordable alternative.

 

[era_shield]

Hurkus and A-10 looks similar but unfortunately not.

A-10 is flying Otokar ARMA , Hurkus or Super Tucano are flying Otokar Cobra.

A-10 has turbofan engine so A-10 flying longer, faster, more rate of climbing(Needs Against Antiairguns and MANPADS).

A-10 has more payload.

A-10 has 30mm auto cannon and 1200 ammo. One 30mm ammo cost 50 dollars. But one Cirit costs min 20K$!
Always you cant send rocket to 10km range . I am repeating but One Kamaz truck cost nearly CIRIT costs.
You allways need fire pressure in the war. I think, you cant send HURKUS 250km far away from motherland to fight or destroying to enemy object.



Commentaries about A-10 vs Tucano Scorpion and others.


Future Light Attack - Textron Scorpion

"Just like an A10. Yes you can see it like that. But this is not a Hog... I wld certainly prefer to seat in a J6 when the manpads start flowing ard "
"It's not really an A-10 replacement. The A-10 isn't going to be replaced. Sad but true.

It's a replacement for the A-37, OV-10, L-39, MB-326/339. A COIN aircraft that also has the payload/range to do real combat CAS missions over lightly defended air space like over Libya/Kosovo.

If manpads are a threat it can just stay at high altitude like everyone else. If you have grunts on the ground in trouble, you're better off sending this down low than an F-35."


About cheap service of HURKUS, I agree with you. But Remember this HURKUS cost 10 million dollar. Hurkus also not cheap aircraft.
Turkey can produce subsonic ground attack aircraft with commercial and simple turbofan engine.

Commercial turbofan give cheap service payments.



Scorpions Light attack aircraft near to my dream.
2 seat, twin engine light attack jet
Max speed: 450 knots
Endurance: 5 hours @ 150nm
Payload: 9,000 lb (6,000lb internal fuel, 3,000lb internal payload bay, 6 hardpoints)
All-composite, 20,000-hour life airframe
Two 4,000lb thrust TFE731 turbofans
Weight, empty & MTOW: 11,800 - 21,250 lb (5,350 - 9,650 kg)
Scorpion verry interesting and cost effective jet.
Scorpion has commercial jet engine from businessjet.
Garrett TFE731 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Maybe this jets more economic than turboprops. Because they are faster, more payload also has cheap service.


Beyond the hype: the year of the Scorpion fighter jet - Airforce Technology
"Textron AirLand calls it the Scorpion, a two-seat, twin-engined jet that costs less than $20m per unit and around $3,000 for every hour it flies.
In recent conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq, the US military used high-performance jets like the F-16 to carry out these missions, costing the air force $18,000 in hourly fuel bills. The Scorpion is being pushed as an affordable alternative.

Where did you get cost of Cirit being $20k+ ? Should be around $5k.

 

[gangsta_rap]

They were meant to break armored columns of Russian T-series tanks, like the Iraqi army of the Saddam era. Turkey doesn't face such threats.

A better idea would be to focus on choppers (ATAK) and enhance their capabilities when dealing with insurgents.

 

[UkroTurk]

Where did you get cost of Cirit being $20k+ ? Should be around $5k.

I couldnt find in Internet Cirit costs.
I made infrances. Israel the most economical supporter, their war technology prices very cheap. Israel missile like CIRIT cost nearly 20k$. American more expensive. I dont think so Turkish CIRIT cheaper than Israelis.
Because Hydra rocket price same in the world. Electronics and chips costs also nearly.
In Aselsan and other companies work a lot of enginner and worker. Engineers and workers get salary. Aselsan cant sell with loss.
Even thought If Cirit cost 5000$, you can't use only Cirit missile against enemy.
A-10 has 1200pieces 30mm ammo. 1200 ammo= 15000 $ nearly.
15000$ = 3 cirit if cirit costs 5k$!!!!

Without rapid fire you cant. You should make fire pressure. You have to use rapid fire. For the fire pressure needs rapid fire, howitzer,mortars, artillery rockets. To 200km far away, send artilerry has big risks. Send artilerry rockets and SOM verry expensive. I think USA calculated every details. )

 

[madmusti]

A-10 has much better Armour then Otokar Arma.

 

[UkroTurk]

A-10 has much better Armour then Otokar Arma.

It was an example. Comparing each land vehicle. Also Otokar Cobra has much better Armour.
Because A10 doesnt need stronger armour.
But a10 has big 30mm auto cannon and 1300ammo şike Otokar arma and a10 can flying near the sound speed and service of aircraft doesnt cost expensive.

 

[Hurshid Celebi]

We need it ! But TSK fears logistics for them