| Warthog Territory Forums https://warthogterritory.net/forum/ |
|
| A-10 OIF Load-outs? https://warthogterritory.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=5482 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | flynavydan [ 01 Feb 2004, 20:09 ] |
| Post subject: | |
Hi im building a model of a Iraqi Freedom A-10 and i was wondering what their normal loadout was, station by station. If anyone can give me a good idea please let me know. thanks flynavydan@yahoo.com |
|
| Author: | TinyGiant [ 01 Feb 2004, 20:30 ] |
| Post subject: | |
Sure, ECM Pod on 1 Rocket Pod (HE or WP) or LUU-2 on 2 Mav (D/G) on 3 Mk-82 or CBU-87 on 4, 5, 7, 8 Mav (D/G) on 9 Rocket Pod (HE or WP) or LUU-2 on 10 2x AIM-9 on 11 |
|
| Author: | fenderstrat72 [ 02 Feb 2004, 04:16 ] |
| Post subject: | |
TG, was the LATIRN pod on 9 and LAU-88 on 3 employed? Fender "A woman drove me to drink and I hadn't even the courtesy to thank her". W.C. Fields |
|
| Author: | TinyGiant [ 02 Feb 2004, 07:41 ] |
| Post subject: | |
<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=1 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote> TG, was the LATIRN pod on 9 and LAU-88 on 3 employed? Fender "A woman drove me to drink and I hadn't even the courtesy to thank her". W.C. Fields <hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote> Depends on who you talk to. There were no planes out of Jaber that carried the Litening Pods. However, A-10s out of another location did. And your loadout for those planes is correct. |
|
| Author: | Dice [ 02 Feb 2004, 07:58 ] |
| Post subject: | |
This months wallpaper shows a loadout with pod.... <img src="http://www.warthogpen.com/wallpapers_files/feb04m.jpg" border=0> HMFIC Edited by - Dice on Feb 02 2004 06:59 AM |
|
| Author: | PlanePhlyer [ 02 Feb 2004, 14:35 ] |
| Post subject: | |
A slight correction to the load out. No CBU-87's, only on the CSAR jets. GBU-12's on 5&7 Mark 82's on 4&8 The LUU-1 is on station 10 The LUU-2 is on station 2 |
|
| Author: | TinyGiant [ 02 Feb 2004, 16:09 ] |
| Post subject: | |
I carried CBU-87 on several missions that were not CSAR (nor were they CSAR slated jets). We never carried both kinds of flares at the same time, either. This is for Jaber based-jets. Not what was carried by the jets from the other place. |
|
| Author: | boomer [ 02 Feb 2004, 16:42 ] |
| Post subject: | |
this seems like an obviouse question to me but... are CBUs ever deployed at low level? is there a retarded version? "We sleep safely in our beds because rough men stand ready in the night to visit violence on those who would harm us". George Orwell Fighting For Justice With Brains Of Steel ! <img src="http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/atengun2X.GIF" border=0> |
|
| Author: | TinyGiant [ 02 Feb 2004, 18:07 ] |
| Post subject: | |
CBU are, in and of themselves, "retarded." We do have mils for deliveries at low level, but don't normally employ CBU at low level. However, to answer your question, they can be employed at low level. |
|
| Author: | PlanePhlyer [ 02 Feb 2004, 20:29 ] |
| Post subject: | |
Hey TinyGiant, Question for you? Are you an active duty Hogdriver? Is it difficult to become an active duty pilot without ROTC or AFA? I'm weapons guy with the Mass Air Guard and am in my senior year as an engineering student. Any advice you could provide would be appreciated. |
|
| Author: | boomer [ 02 Feb 2004, 21:59 ] |
| Post subject: | |
so you just depend on the decel of the bomblettes for the retarding? Or does the canister slow down considerably? "We sleep safely in our beds because rough men stand ready in the night to visit violence on those who would harm us". George Orwell Fighting For Justice With Brains Of Steel ! <img src="http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/atengun2X.GIF" border=0> |
|
| Author: | TinyGiant [ 02 Feb 2004, 22:00 ] |
| Post subject: | |
I am an active duty Hog driver, but the question about difficulty of becoming a pilot is not that easy to answer. Obviously it is easier from some sources than from others, and you can probably find many discussion about this on this board and others. The Academy has about 50% or so of its graduates go into pilot training. From ROTC (the best I can tell), there are 1-2 slots per college or area (I'm not sure exactly how ROTC works). Others are let into pilot training on an at large basis. Basically you go to your recruiter or contact letting him know that's what you want. Unfortunately I can't speak to much about the process since I did mine through the Academy (the easy way?). There are probably a coupla guys on here that are trying or have tried your route that can give you better advice than I. If you're looking to fly a particular aircraft, the Guard/Reserve will probably be your best route. If you don't care what plane you fly and like to travel, AD is the way to go. Sorry I couldn't help you more. Let me know if you have any more questions you think I might be able to answer. |
|
| Author: | TinyGiant [ 02 Feb 2004, 22:04 ] |
| Post subject: | |
Boomer, As you probably already know, the bomblets themselves have small "airbags" attached to them that decelerate them and attempt to have the munitions impact at a 90° angle to the target. This provides a considerable amout of time to the pilot to get out of the frag envelope of the submunitions. The canister itself does not show an appreciable amount of deceleration until it functions. |
|
| Author: | boomer [ 03 Feb 2004, 10:54 ] |
| Post subject: | |
I like the CEM the most, but I have seen some that are just like little darts never saw a retarder on them at all like this anti-armor(see pic) dont have any idea how much they slow down <img src="http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/dumb/cbu-59b.gif" border=0> "We sleep safely in our beds because rough men stand ready in the night to visit violence on those who would harm us". George Orwell Fighting For Justice With Brains Of Steel ! <img src="http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/atengun2X.GIF" border=0> |
|
| Author: | TinyGiant [ 03 Feb 2004, 11:36 ] |
| Post subject: | |
<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=1 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote> I like the CEM the most, but I have seen some that are just like little darts never saw a retarder on them at all like this anti-armor(see pic) dont have any idea how much they slow down <img src="http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/dumb/cbu-59b.gif" border=0> "We sleep safely in our beds because rough men stand ready in the night to visit violence on those who would harm us". George Orwell Fighting For Justice With Brains Of Steel ! <img src="http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/atengun2X.GIF" border=0> <hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote> Boomer, check out the CBU that we currently use, the CBU-87 at this fas link: http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/dumb/cbu-87.htm We also carry the CBU-89, but those (hopefully) don't explode on impact. |
|
| Author: | PlanePhlyer [ 03 Feb 2004, 11:44 ] |
| Post subject: | |
There is actually a new muntion, the CBU-97. Manufactured by Texton Industries in Boston, Mass. An absolutely incredible weapon. Haven't seen any in use yet. |
|
| Author: | boomer [ 03 Feb 2004, 22:18 ] |
| Post subject: | |
yeah I read about the CEM maybee 10 years ago? something like that. Saw a pick of an F-4 mule dropping one, like I said it's my favorite CBU, and probobly the fav of whoever has the job of deciding which planes get which munition the CEM can pretty much do it all!!(other than concrete and materials like that) "We sleep safely in our beds because rough men stand ready in the night to visit violence on those who would harm us". George Orwell Fighting For Justice With Brains Of Steel ! <img src="http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/atengun2X.GIF" border=0> |
|
| Author: | Coach [ 04 Feb 2004, 04:06 ] |
| Post subject: | |
Boomer's picture of CBU-59 is actually MK-20 Rockeye, a weapon no longer in use by the USAF. The drawing of the canister is not very good, but the bomblet is pretty accurate. Mk-339 fuse on the front would open the canister based on time of fall, pretty small pattern with the bomblets. The USAF never used a CBU-59, to my knowledge, we had CBU-52, 58, 71 and 72 (using SUU-30 canisters) and now the CBU-87, 89 and 97 using the SUU-64/65 dispensers. Coach |
|
| Author: | Hawg166 [ 04 Feb 2004, 13:44 ] |
| Post subject: | |
When textron started to deliver the new (at the time) SFW to the Air Force, the allowed a bunch of our Crew Chiefs, Weapons Loaders and pilots to go to the facility and tour the assembly lineand get the real inside skinny on the munition. It is real impressive and supposedly leaves no gaps in the targets it is employed against because of its ability to seek its targets before the submunition actually fires. Plus it has the ability to be used against soft or hard targets. By this time tomorrow I shall have gained either a pearage or Westminster Abbey........Nelson |
|
| Author: | Coach [ 04 Feb 2004, 19:03 ] |
| Post subject: | |
SFW works great as long as the wind doesn't blow and the target sits still... Coach |
|
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|