What would be the strategic impact of sending the A-10 Warthog to Ukraine?

What would be the strategic impact of sending the A-10 Warthog to Ukraine? Could the A-10 survive in the dense SAM cover created by Russia?

  1. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Russian AA has proven to be so shit that A-10s might be viable

  2. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    The A-10 and SU-25 realistically have no place on the modern battlefield, but beggers can't be choosers. A-10 training is extensive and time-consuming though. Training Ukrainian pilots on F-16s would be a much better use of time and money.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Su-25s have seen successes in Ukraine

  3. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >in the dense SAM cover created by Russia?
    When does this meme is going to die once and for all?

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Probably when we get videos of Russian armor eating >brrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrt

  4. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Fuck that shit, give them Block 50+ F-16 and C/D Hornets, and load them down with Harpoons and SLAM-ERs. I want to the Sevastopol harbor be turned into the worlds #1 source of recycled metal.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      This. Lots of Falcons and Hornets and ASMs, let Ukraine clear the entire Black Sea. That would be huge AND it'd stick to Biden's precious "we can't let them attack Russian territory" shit. A perfect big power play, would also get Ukraine grain and trade moving again.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        The Black Sea isn't Russian territory, and the US never said Ukraine cannot attack targets there.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          That's the point of his post midwit

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Oh you're right. I'm blind.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Too late though as I've heard what's left of the black sea fleet went back to Novorossiysk out of fear of possible ATACM strikes

  5. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Could the A-10 survive in the dense SAM cover created by Russia?
    No.
    The A-10 would perform above Ukraine as mediocre as the Su-25s they already field. They'd continue to be mediocre once you successfully SEADed, because you're not going to get all the non-radar AA that's everywhere.
    That's not to say giving them A-10s is a bad idea, but they're not going to produce amazing results.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Imagine if the R*ssians manage to create another convoy traffic jam though and one gets to go to town on it:

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Just thinking about it makes me hard

  6. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    No the A-10s would likely only be used for close range bombing runs.

    Also its never going to happen, same reason we won't give them our long range rocket tech. We don't want them attacking beyond their borders.

  7. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    A10s actually kinda suck. They're older than the vast majority of the ordinance in the US arsenal and as such can't use a lot effectively.

    Early on in the GWoT A10s were involved in a lot of blue-on-blue incidents because guess what? 1970s planes designed to provide CAS that can't get in close to the ground, that lack all the sophisticated electronics can't provide CAS effectively. A10 pilots were literally flying around with binoculars in the cockpit trying to IFF visually.

  8. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Soooo late. Would have been perfect when russian vehicles were stuck in huuuuuge convoys.

  9. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    a-10 might be on par with Russian air defence
    don't have much hopes for it in this conflict

  10. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    See desert storm package Q. There's plenty of ways to defeat air defense.

  11. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    It doesn't need to survive Russian air defenses. It's primary use would be as a missile bus for a bunch of N(e)ATO rockets and PGMs. The thing can carry 6x Mavericks.

  12. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >its yet another attempt from the .mil brass to ditch the A-10

    How many times has the military tried to shitcan this great bird?

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Not enough times.
      But you have this in reverse - if the shitty outdated thing manages to do well enough in an environment it is not supposed to survive - against actual modern SPAAGs and SAM - then it might survive longer as its main (perceived) drawbacks are:
      >poor awareness - before the modernization at least
      >low speed
      >low extremely vulnerable to any sort of modern AA
      >expensive - the modernized version at least
      >only good when doing what other planes do better - lob missiles

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >But you have this in reverse

        Nah, I don't. The airforce wants to give these planes away and even if they survived I doubt the US would take them back. They are not making A-10 airframes anymore so that is just more A-10 planes the airforce will want to replace with the F-35.

  13. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >dense SAM cover created by Russia
    Where?

  14. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I just want to see 100234582475 drone/cell videos of A10s brrting
    I don;t even give a shit who or what they hit. at least they're flying and fucking stuff up instead of sitting around doing nothing in the US

    send that shit immediately, and then make more

  15. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    As annoying as the le buuuuuuurt memes would be I would pay good money to see ukies use them like the have been using their su-25
    >fly low
    >pitch up 30 degrees and start lobbing 30mm
    >bank out
    Absolute chaos

  16. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    A handful of A-10Cs with Sniper pods functioning as ISR and attack platforms for counter convoy operations and hit and run raids could be effective. especially if they can datalink with ucav operators and run as nodes.

  17. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Why not just give Ukraine nukes?

  18. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Seems like this would be the perfect platform as a backdoor way to give Ukraine access to a bunch of NATO missiles. The A-10s just have to truck them around while recon groups lase anything that offends them.

  19. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Even against mediocre Russian AA it's going to get slaughtered. It's only useful against and hyper-specialized against targets without AA.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Russian AA has proven to be dogshit, Ukraine has almost no SEAD capability yet they are still able to operate Su-25s and Tb-2s. A-10s would do just fine. No worse than the Su-25s they have already been using.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Any AA at all is bad for the A-10 and Russian AA isn't "dogshit" as much as it is mediocre. You seem to have access to Monke's copium and the KGB will be there to arrest you shortly.

  20. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    This makes so much sense. The air force has been trying to get rid of these for years. There will never be a better opportunity to retire them.

  21. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    better to provide absolute kino than to be unceremoniously scrapped a decade or two in the future

  22. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Vatnik shill butthurt would reach new heights.

  23. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    posting twitter screen caps should be an instaban

  24. 4 weeks ago
    Sage

    Russian AA has proven to be to deadly for planes tonventure far from the frontline.

  25. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Why don't we just build a money printer in Ukraine?

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      OR we could just shred the money here, same effect

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      OR we could just shred the money here, same effect

      I don't see how shredding money by itself would lead to more dead R*ssians. The current arms shipments on the other hand (which, compared to U.S. wars of the past decades, is a drop in the fucking bucket) have allowed Ukies to kill thousands of them, with no sign of stopping. Name a better use of that money.

Your email address will not be published.