Warthog Territory Forums
https://warthogterritory.net/forum/

A-10 Ordnance set-up
https://warthogterritory.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=8865		 Page 1 of 1
Author:  DXTR [ 21 Apr 2005, 15:15 ]
Post subject: 
Hi

A message from Denmark or actually a question.
Hope this is the right place for this post... if not, we do apologize

anyway. My friend and I were discussing what kind of different load out or ordance set up an A-10 Warthog could have? We were more or less debatting whether an A-10 could be loaded up with only AGM-65's (mavericks) and if so, how many? The debate centered around whether the A-10 would have different ordnance set-up for different mission and what kind of set-up.
The discussion was on if an A-10 would be going into cround support in a fictive tank-battle, would she be set-up with only AGM 65's or would normal airforce procedure require her to bring along some clusterbombs..

sincerely
David & Caz
Author:  gifted [ 21 Apr 2005, 16:09 ]
Post subject: 
There are only two stations wired up for Mavs. For a total of four, so you'd add cluster bombs to add to that capability.

"Some pup"
Nickname by Fenderstrat72
Author:  Hawg166 [ 21 Apr 2005, 19:03 ]
Post subject: 
A total of four ? I think you mean 6 on LAU-88's. It is not a regular practice to carry more tan two but we have done it. I have some great picture of Gooses jet carrying a full set of LAU-88's.

By this time tomorrow I shall have gained either a pearage or Westminster Abbey........Nelson
Author:  gifted [ 21 Apr 2005, 20:06 ]
Post subject: 
Last I knew the main gear tire was the reason they didn't carry three on each -88. Don't want that catching fire, but if you're ferrying the missiles across the ocean, I could see carrying three, and downloading the inboard one before going into combat.

You ever see them ferry the launchers on other stations? I've seen F-16s with LAU-118s on TERs, to carry them to the war zone. You just carried it, didn't use it, but the holes are there to put in the 14 inch lugs.

"Some pup"
Nickname by Fenderstrat72
Author:  Hawg166 [ 21 Apr 2005, 20:18 ]
Post subject: 
We didnt ferry them, we used them and I have heard competing stories about the reasons. One is to much drag and one is the burning of the wheel pod. There is probably truth in both. The reason we carried three was so we didnt loose the capabilities of extra MAV's when we lost the use of station 9 to the pod.

By this time tomorrow I shall have gained either a pearage or Westminster Abbey........Nelson
Author:  Coach [ 21 Apr 2005, 22:30 ]
Post subject: 
Six on LAU-88's. Don't use the inboard station in peacetime because it messes up the paint.

It is a draggy load though.

Coach
Author:  Dice-man [ 22 Apr 2005, 07:36 ]
Post subject: 
As most of you know the triple maverick issue dates back to DS. Not only did the exhaust plume burn the gear pod there were major problems with the LAU-88 itself. In fact the launcher had a TCTO to correct the problems following DS. The newer mavs solid rocket motor has been improved to produce a small plume which helps with the pod burning issue also.

Ugly But Well Hung
Author:  Hawg166 [ 22 Apr 2005, 11:51 ]
Post subject: 
Isnt there an issue with excessive drag if you try to fly with six MAV's and not just four ?

By this time tomorrow I shall have gained either a pearage or Westminster Abbey........Nelson
Author:  sgtgoose1 [ 22 Apr 2005, 20:41 ]
Post subject: 
IT DEPENDS ON "REAL OR CAN USED LOADS"
DESERT STORM, 4 MAVS ,MK-20'S OR MK-82'S OR A COMBINATION OF THE 2,
BUT ONLY 4 MAV'S WERE USED
<img src="http://image24.webshots.com/24/3/75/69/30737569VSXPPCvgWB_ph.jpg" border=0>





GOOSE



Edited by - sgtgoose1 on Apr 22 2005 7:45 PM

Edited by - sgtgoose1 on Apr 22 2005 7:48 PM
Author:  sgtgoose1 [ 22 Apr 2005, 20:51 ]
Post subject: 
<img src=newicons/anim_bannana.gif border=0 align=middle><img src=newicons/anim_bow.gif border=0 align=middle> WOW! IT WORKED,

MUST BE THAT SECERT MODERATOR TRAINING I BEEN GIVEN<img src=newicons/anim_lol.gif border=0 align=middle>

THATS A REAL A-10 LOAD OUT JAN-91
Author:  Hawg166 [ 23 Apr 2005, 12:04 ]
Post subject: 
Goose what is on 2 & 10 ?

By this time tomorrow I shall have gained either a pearage or Westminster Abbey........Nelson
Author:  fenderstrat72 [ 23 Apr 2005, 20:27 ]
Post subject: 
Looks like MK-82's to me. What you say Goose?

Fender
"A woman drove me to drink
and I hadn't even the courtesy to thank her".
W.C. Fields
Author:  sgtgoose1 [ 26 Apr 2005, 20:47 ]
Post subject: 
MK-82'S HIGH DRAG'S (THE ONES WITH THE CHUTES)

FENDER'S GROUP LOADED THEIR CLUSTERS ON TERS,THE 23RD DIDNT,THATS HOW YOU COULD TELL THEM APART IN THE EARLY DAYS.

GOOSE
Author:  TheBigThug [ 27 Apr 2005, 07:52 ]
Post subject: 
Mission and flight conditions will define allot.

With the A10 having the Short Field Capability (below 8000Ft RWY length) and or a mission where Ingress and egress speed needs to be on the higher end of its ability. The last thing you would want to do is Weigh the aircraft down. When for example playing rope a Dope with a Triple A or SAM site. Other examples would be Airfield altitude above sea level and temps.


Mission and logistics determines allot more than per say the capability of the aircraft. Each mission is planned with the terrain, weather, distance, enemy locations and weapons systems we expect to encounter in mind, and tailored to give us the maximum advantage and flexibility in determining the route and the type of flight. NOE is very intense and wears a pilot out much faster than typical straight and level flight, so we would save it for when it was necessary. this goes for the aircraft fatigue as well.

In the 15E world we have a good Weight Lifting capability, but you need some runway Length to do it safely, Sometimes you cant have both (full Fuel or Full Bombs) and a tanker needs to be close by so that you can top off your tanks before heading to the battle space.

When you start aski8ng aircraft to fly higher and essential out of the norm of its Cold war traditional operating envelope, you have drag and density issues to deal with to avoid surface threats etc.

personally id rather have the aircraft meet its full potential and utilise more aircraft with a lighter load.

It doesnt help having the max load and being asked to do something that puts the aircrew and aircraft at risk.

No aircraft flies at max capacity during combat.

"The greatest pleasure is to vanquish your enemies, to chase them before you, to rob them of their wealth, to see their near and dear bathed in tears, to ride their horses and sleep on the white bellies of their wives and daughters."
-Genghis Khan

Edited by - thebigthug on Apr 27 2005 07:04 AM
Page 1 of 1 All times are UTC [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/