WT Forums

Even though I'm ex-Navy, Warthogs have always gotten my interest--something very awesome about these birds! I've often wondered why they weren't picked up by the Navy. Although slower than the Intruder, I think they would have been a plausable replacement. The high engines would all but eliminate FOD problems, and as far as I can tell, have a comparable weapons loadout. Based on that, I am building a scale model of what I think should have been--a carrier-based A-10. My biggest problems are figuring out where to mount a tailhook, and where would be an acceptable method/location to break the wings, as the wingspan is more than allowable for carrier aircraft. What the limit might be is one thing they never bothered to teach us, or maybe I was napping that day? Anyone have any ideas? Thanks. Please reply via email.

Hey Osama, check your six!

The wing folds would need to be at or outboard of the wheel pods.

"face it....perhaps your only purpose in life is to serve as a warning to others!"

Or the Marine Grunts sleeping in birthing would sneak up topside at night and push the harriers over the side......<img src=newicons/anim_lol.gif border=0 align=middle><img src=newicons/anim_lol.gif border=0 align=middle><img src=newicons/anim_lol.gif border=0 align=middle><img src=newicons/anim_lol.gif border=0 align=middle><img src=newicons/anim_lol.gif border=0 align=middle>

"The power to Destroy the planet, is insignifigant to the power of the Air Force----Mudd Vader

Check the Navy forum down below, there was quite a thread about A-10s and Marine operations......

SEE HERE:

http://forum.a-10.org/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=6768

That debate got lively, to say the least, lol.

"Molon labe".
Leonidas, King of Sparta,
Thermopylae, 480 B.C.

I think you could theoretically make a navalized A10 but I see a couple of problems with it. The first and biggest is that in the world NAVAIR alpha strikes an A10 just couldnt keep up with the strike package. No way no how. Secondly you could put a tailhook on it but it would have to go mid-aircraft near station #6 because anywhere aft of that would create a real FOD problem when the wires removed the empanage from the rest of the airframe. Third, I dont know if you could put a launch bar on it because you would have to put such a hugemongous drag strut on the front that I think the forward CG woud be be way way out of wack. Although maybe you could put the drag strut on and remove the variable ballast plates. Oh yeah we would need to make a fixed IFR probe out of the front of the nose reminiscent of the A6 or maybe on the top of the left wheel pod. Motors ? Bigger motors ?

By this time tomorrow I shall have gained either a pearage or Westminster Abbey........Nelson

_________________
YGBSM !

Also, could the airframe/landing gear take the stress of carrier launches/landings? As Hawg166 said, it requires too many modifications--many of which probably aren't practical or even possible--but it is a fun thought and crazier things have happened!

Good luck, don't forget to post some pics when you are done. I would really like to see what the folding wings look like!

Cheers! M2

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=1 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>
I think you could theoretically make a navalized A10 but I see a couple of problems with it. <hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>

You can't get there from here. You have to start from somewhwere else.

THE RAMPTOR ENGINEERING TEAM <img src=icon_smile_big.gif border=0 align=middle>
"Who cares if it works? Does it look good on the ramp?"

_________________
????

I think your biggest problem would be that the bird is just too tall. The Catapult would rip the nose gear off or at least collapse it as it fold forward to retact, and on landing, any tail hook would create a violent shift in the center of gavity and the tail would snap down and smack the deck. In order for it to work, you'd not only have to fold the wings, but also beef up the nose gear and move the main gear aft and lower the whole thing a couple of feet. That of course could cause some really nasty bumps on the heads of the maintenance types. You would also need bigger engines wiith more thrust so the hog could catch up with the carrier. Another big problem you'd run into would be the need for more ships to carry all of the munitions that the hogs could carry.<img src=icon_smile_big.gif border=0 align=middle>

"Slow is Fast - Fast is Slow"

_________________
Slow is Fast, Fast is Slow
Violence may not be the best option, but it IS an option

We repeat:
<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=1 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>You can't get there from here. You have to start from somewhwere else.<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote><img src=icon_smile_wink.gif border=0 align=middle>

So, you have trouble. We all have trouble. Build a bridge and get over it.

_________________
\"Those who hammer their guns into plows
will plow for those who do not.\"
- Thomas Jefferson

well, you always make the engines tilt and take off vertically. <img src=icon_smile_tongue.gif border=0 align=middle>

"Oh good for a second I thought it was me, because I am blue, and I like to sleep, but if he is dead that would just be silly."-Caboose

Yeah the nose gear is tall but a kneel sytem would fix it. Remember the F4 went into cat-extend and was made longer for the bridal ? Not a valid argument. And I think you could attach the hook to the centerline station #6. Just loose station 6, still have 10 total.That would eliminate any CG problems and if it didnt just take out or add a litle more variable ballast in the nose. Actually the heavier strut would make up the difference. And the belly of an A10 is not alot higher than an F14 or an A6, maybe just a foot. But the A10 would slow the strike package down way to much.

By this time tomorrow I shall have gained either a pearage or Westminster Abbey........Nelson

_________________
YGBSM !

not to mention, could the structure of the a-10 even withstand a catapult? oh god i just see bad things happening with that!

just sit back, and let the 30mm do the work!!!

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=1 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>
not to mention, could the structure of the a-10 even withstand a catapult?
<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>

Not a chance. It requires major redesign of the nose gear, retraction system and forward fuselage to handle the tow force (> 200,000 lbs, limit). Right now the nose gear can probably handle less than a tenth of that because it was only designed for landing "spin-up and spring-back" loads in the fore and aft direction. If we were lucky, the off center tow can be done without major consequences, otherwise the nose gear would be really funky looking (and heavy) to get the tow force on centerline.

THE RAMPTOR ENGINEERING TEAM <img src=icon_smile_big.gif border=0 align=middle>
"Who cares if it works? Does it look good on the ramp?"

_________________
????

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=1 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>If we were lucky, the off center tow can be done without major consequences, otherwise the nose gear would be really funky looking (and heavy) to get the tow force on centerline.
<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>
And we're NOT sacrificing space in the nose/fwd fuselage for funky gear at the expense of the gun. No wimpy 20mm for our beloved Hawg!!<img src=newicons/anim_cussing.gif border=0 align=middle><img src=icon_smile_wink.gif border=0 align=middle><img src=icon_smile_big.gif border=0 align=middle>

So, you have trouble. We all have trouble. Build a bridge and get over it.

_________________
\"Those who hammer their guns into plows
will plow for those who do not.\"
- Thomas Jefferson

that's why you have to go for the vertical take off and landing modifications!! it would be totally kick ass!

"Oh good for a second I thought it was me, because I am blue, and I like to sleep, but if he is dead that would just be silly."-Caboose

Ah, the ever popular tilt-turbofans!<img src=newicons/anim_lol.gif border=0 align=middle>

So, you have trouble. We all have trouble. Build a bridge and get over it.

_________________
\"Those who hammer their guns into plows
will plow for those who do not.\"
- Thomas Jefferson

So now were trying to make it fit for a gator freighter and not a conventional CV ? How these topics get twisted.

By this time tomorrow I shall have gained either a pearage or Westminster Abbey........Nelson

_________________
YGBSM !

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=1 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>
that's why you have to go for the vertical take off and landing modifications!! it would be totally kick ass!
<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>

How about this concept?<img src=newicons/tard.gif border=0 align=middle>

<img src="http://aerostories.free.fr/dossiers/ADAV/img79.jpg" border=0>

THE RAMPTOR ENGINEERING TEAM <img src=icon_smile_big.gif border=0 align=middle>
"Who cares if it works? Does it look good on the ramp?"

_________________
????

Stress

Too cool! All we have to do is cut a Hog in half and put on some hinges and hydraulics. How tough could that be?? <img src=icon_smile_tongue.gif border=0 align=middle>

One question though...how does it takeoff/land when its main gear is facing forward like that??? <img src=icon_smile_clown.gif border=0 align=middle>

Cheers! M2

Well ifin the gear is facing forward the jet obviously would land backwards ! DUH !

By this time tomorrow I shall have gained either a pearage or Westminster Abbey........Nelson

_________________
YGBSM !