Despite being a pretty much “meh” aircraft with a short combat history, the A-10 has such a chokehold on pop culture and never leaves discussions about aircraft. Why?
Why is the A-10 so popular?
Despite being a pretty much “meh” aircraft with a short combat history, the A-10 has such a chokehold on pop culture and never leaves discussions about aircraft. Why?
it shoots things real good
a10 is cool because all of our brothers/cousins/ friends watched them smoke goat frickers.
you dont really see f15/f18s/f35s like you do a10s as a grunt.
Being an infantry support, funny sounds, payload. I dunno, really. I think it just looks pretty good in some weird way.
90s and 2000s military "documentaries" that were just propaganda aimed at kids / young adults.
Trash products needs good marketing.
Proxy forces on the ground love it (bongs need not apply)
Simple as
>cheap
>forgiving
>big payload
>big gun
>erotic
simple as
also the meta for when it was built was basically
>if the russians have as many tanks as they say they have and storm the fulda gap, we'll just carpet the entire countryside with 30mm DU
>bongs need not apply
"do not affix orange panels to your vehicle. A-10 pilots are colorblind and WILL shoot your APC"
The A-10 as an aircraft apprals to those that have no understanding of modern aircraft design and aerial combat. And since the average person is clueless about such topics it does appeal.
With that being said it was effective the way it was utilized and is not a bad aircraft per se, but rather is just rigid and obsolete. The repetetive reddit memes only drag it down further.
I just like it, and other than hurr brrrt memes (which as a burger, I'm legally obligated to favor because "America builds something around a weapon" is a recurring thing through history that I think is pretty great), I feel its shape with the two engines up high and rear like that plus the twin tail is really nice looking and a little erotic. Most of the hate on it seems to be "it's shit, it's obsolete, etc." and yeah that's great but being obsolete doesn't make something less interesting or there wouldn't be museums full of warbirds to ogle.
That said, I also think the YA-9 looks damn good and would probably like it just as much had it been adopted instead, so maybe I've just got brain problems :DDDD
BRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRT
what more needs to be said?
That the BRRRRRRRRT is harder to use than, less effective than, has less range than, is more expensive than, and less accurate than the CRV7 rocket.
The gun-novelty wears off when it's substandard compared to anything else that can be slung on basically airframe.
The gun novelty might wear off to military enthusiasts or experts, but not normies. Plane has big gun is all that's necessary.
The A-10 is kept alive on threat of the Army some day becoming independent from the Air Force in supplying it's own CAS.
>it's
*its
>Army some day becoming independent from the Air Force in supplying it's own CAS
They just call it Fire Support and use Apaches to do it.
Because it has a GAU-8 Avenger which is probably one of the coolest guns ever made
Well goat frickers out in the desert do not warrant much beyond getting shot at from the sky and the A-10 is exactly slow enough to do it while being fast enough to actually get there. While simultaneously being tough enough to take getting shot at getting close. The chair force wants drones and high speed planes to just zoom in and bomb shit like a video game, the actual grunts want something that actually scares goatfrickers into retreating or running away just from hearing the sound of what is coming.
You've been ignored long enough, you are absolutely correct. While people will cry about "modern combat" and "peer threats" while absolutely ignoring that is PURELY ON PAPER. Nobody died or was maimed fighting the battlefield where RussiaChina had 20 MANPADS per infantry platoon or theater level air defense per company but the A10 fought in REAL WAR and is respected and feared.
>inb4 blue on blue
Cool, now average that against all the sorties the A10's did and that average absolutely PLUMMETS.
monkey take
>monkey take
OK fricknuts, post evidence of wars that the A10 fought where it had to fight against peer opponent. I'll wait.
It's something the average person can understand
Two words: Big Gun
It looks like something made for WW2 instead of cold war, let alone the modern age. It's a plane appealing for people who really liked the dramatic scenes of strafing runs and dive bombs from old war movies.
WW2 was so huge a thing culturally that despite being a war that was fought when lot of of houses didn't have electricity or running water yet and the horse was the main method of transport, it still resonates with a lot of people even just aesthetically speaking, especially if it was seen in movies.
However, thankfully we're slowly starting to move on from the notion that history started with the Holocaust and ended with the Cold War.
And most of that history since the Cold War has sucked. People are dumber than ever including the hacks running the military these days. No wonder WWII seems so fricking cool in comparison to some DoD mandated training about pronouns or whatever the frick they think is a priority.
big fricking gun that flies
reddit: the plane
>gay-10 is beloved on /k/ for years
>but all of the sudden it's reddit and you're supposed to like the Aardvark or the Mudhen instead
How about eat shit
If the only reason you can give for liking it is "le brrrrrt xddddddd" you aren't old enough to know it has been beloved on /k/ for years.
Been here since fpop and brrrrrrr was always the point
No I still don't care about brazilian super tucanos doing COIN ops
Eat a dick
Hey moron. The OP asked why its so popular, and people gave the pop culture answer. You can stop pretending to be an oldhomosexual now
A-10 would have gotten fricked up pretty bad in peer combat in the 1980s.
It was designed at a time when air defence was unreliable and guided munitions were very expensive, however that fairly rapidly changed.
It survived up until now because it was largely cheaper to keep flying than to replace it with purpose built COIN platforms.
The A-10 is ok at COIN, it's loiter time is not that great compared to actual purpose designed aircraft and it's more expensive to procure and operate since it is unnecessarily large for that job.
>Why?
BRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRT
That's the entire reason stop overthinking it
the moment (You) arrived
epic PWNage! Here's your reddit gold, my good sir!
Every normie and kid can get the appeal of BRRRRT. PGMs need to be explained, missiles need to be explained, a hail of lead doesn't. Plus it looks so distinct from any other USAF combat plane, remember normies confuse Flankers and Falcons but nobody is confusing a warthog for anything else. Same reason laymen think battleships are cool but think missile cruisers are lame
Is there a single reason to use an A-10 over an F-15E, or hell, even an F-18 for that matter?
They can do the exact same things as a Warthog except they can also go higher, faster and can defend themselves against fighters. The single difference is that gun runs wouldn't be as effective but in what situation would you need a GAU-8 where a Vulcan or unguided rockets would achieve the same results? Perhaps if it was crazy cheap to procure and operate, but that hasn't been the case for years.
At this point, the A-10 is only used so that the USAF doesn't have to accrue unnecessary flight hours on their other planes.
>Is there a single reason to use an A-10 over an F-15E, or hell, even an F-18 for that matter?
is there a single reason to use an F-15E or an F-18 when you have air superiority and your only threat in the area is 1970's soviet MANPADs?
>what situation would you need a GAU-8 where a Vulcan or unguided rockets would achieve the same results?
#1, most of its missions were "fire for effect" especially in places like Bala Murghab and shitty forward positions where SOF would just need an opportunity to disengage or level a dug-in group
#2, it's a big fricking deal if an F-15 gets hit with an igla. Not so much with the A-10, especially since there was one A-10 that landed successfully minus one engine, half of its skin, and like 60% of systems functioning
#3, the military has other places that it needs to be for strategic readiness. There's no reason to allocate a sizeable portion of F-15's to a place where an F-16 or A-10 can drop a JDAM or Paveway just as gooder
it's the baseball bat of airplanes
application to the enemy is startlingly effective despite not being used for its intended purpose
>is there a single reason to use an F-15E or an F-18 when you have air superiority
That's not how it works.
The A-10 has a huge opportunity cost in the fact that they have their own pilot school, their own maintenance and logistics pipeline, etc.
You're posing the question as if the Strike Eagle or Hornet are somehow "too much" so they should be sidelined but that's the wrong way to think about it, as it is the A-10 that has to justify its job position not being eliminated. Because the mere existence of the A-10 is causing other aircraft to be more expensive to run as resources have to be drawn to it.
>especially since there was one A-10 that landed successfully minus one engine, half of its skin, and like 60% of systems functioning
Everyone remembers that story, but not of Lt. Patrick Olson. He got struck, limped the A-10 back to base, and then died trying to land that piece of shit. Le returns to base successfully meme is undeserved because a great story of survival overshadowed a tragic one.
>the military has other places that it needs to be for strategic readiness
And keeping the A-10 in service reduces the amount of resources it can dedicate to its strategic readiness.
> it's a big fricking deal if an F-15 gets hit with an igla. Not so much with the A-10, especially since there was one A-10 that landed successfully minus one engine, half of its skin, and like 60% of systems functioning
If you're comparing it to the F-15 there was one that landed with ONE WING
?t=293
The gun made hadjis run away because it sounds so menacing.
>bitching and moaning over people saying that the A-10 is liked because of its big gun
brush the sand out of your vegana Black person, if anyone is the redditor it's you for throwing a tantrum over nothing
Frick off, Pierre
it's the katana of airplanes
How else will you get rid of orange rocket launchers?
>a meh aircraft
Only by mentally moronic standards. The A10 is a FANTASTIC aircraft and those who insist otherwise are completely moronic.
Elaborate.
Besides it's durability, cost per flight hour, hardpoints, and 30mm autocannon?
>30mm autocannon
If a weapon can cause a enemy to collapse into a panicked retreat by the SOUND of it's firing never mind it's effect then you know you've reached the pinnacle of skill.
>looks at the new counterinsurgency aircraft
For all the complaining about "payload, speed, and survivability" you certainly dickride a aircraft that's WORSE in all aspects.
>durability
It needs to be durable because it has a top speed of 350mph. Any of the other supersonic strike aircraft don't even need that capability
>cost per flight hour
This was relevant at the time it entered service. Nowadays it's just as expensive (if not more) than other aircraft more suitable for the role
>hardpoints
Same as the F-18. And still has less payload capacity than the F-15E and even the fricking Phantom.
>30mm autocannon
A clunky and sub-optimal weapon no matter the target. Tanks? Use a missile, doofus. Light armor? Bombs, you absolute clown. Infantry? Literally any other aircraft cannon or rocket pods, silly billy.
>If a weapon can cause a enemy to collapse into a panicked retreat by the SOUND
And there it is. Name one instance where this has happened. It's just the Stuka siren meme but in the 21st century. It's no more "morale shattering" than any of the other ordnance listed above. If anything it let's the enemy know that an A-10 is flying low and aiming at them, giving them an opportunity to take proper cover and then retaliate. Meanwhile with stand-off munition they're being blasted to smithereens from something they can neither see nor hear let alone strike back at, arguably a much more nightmarish experience.
>you certainly dickride a aircraft that's WORSE in all aspects
That's actually cheap. If the A-10 is really meant to be used against rag heads who don't have any modern weapons that could threaten it, as you claim, then creating an even cheaper alternative for such scenarios seems way more rational.
It's American and has a big gun. That appeals to the pro-gun right wing Ameritards (people with average IQ of 90, racist, sexist, homophobic, hating "socialism" as in demonstrably working governance because their grifters can't profit from it, uneducated and proud of it.)
Garbage human in, garbage opinion out.
because it goes brrrrt
>why is le BRRRRTTTTTT xD meme plane so popular?
Redditors.
Why it isn't a prop? It flies at prop speed.
The amount of stale ass memes on /k/ is pretty concerning, it has gotten worse since 2022.
Our young generation is clearly lost, man, clearly lost.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/190th_Fighter_Squadron,_Blues_and_Royals_friendly_fire_incident
Just like the viper, It probably helps that a10s were so heavily utilized by the ANG. Lots of us have memories of seeing a10s scream over at 300 feet on training sorties
Stop fricking trying so hard. We all think redditors are gay, you don't need to fricking trip over the rest of us to prove you think the same.
Disgusting WSO hands made that meme, ignore it. It's time for the hog to ride off into the sunset and make room for better and newer things, but any hate for it is pure, contrarian bullshit.
I'd hate to be stuck with that WSO. Dumb enough to think attacking a tank from the front with the cannon is how you do it.
>attacking a tank from the front with the cannon is how you do it
According to the testing done in the 70s, give an A-10 pilot free reign to pick his gun runs and he's still going to have trouble penning T-48s.
Wait... Rafale is almost equal to the F-15 in carry capacity?
Almost. The F-15EX Eagle II can carry 29.5k lbs.
Désolé.
Because it's American as frick.
>ugly
>overweight
>gun fetish
>hates brits
Tradition.
Basically the A-10 is one of the last modern combat aircraft to carry the same design and philosophy traditions as its forebears all the way to WW1 canvas planes.
It's most obvious in the chassis shape, but also in it's role as CAS with dogfight capacity.
It's effectively the perfected version of this idea of combat aircraft, designed for dogfighting and close air support. It's got a frickoff big brrrrrrrt gun, loads of missiles, can hang around in the air for ages, and is tough as nails as far as planes go.
While it's increasingly not viable as a platform
in this (soulless) new age of standoff range missile launches, stealth aircraft and suicide drones, culturally most people still far more identify with this kind of aircraft being a proper fighter plane, and so see it as the pinnacle of combat aircaft.
This is a good thing. She's a traditional tomboy, and a piece of legacy that sings to the hearts of any man with a mind to the past.
The A-10 was never a fighter
It actively participates in battles, i.e. fights. Therefore it's a fighter.
>tomboy
As if the rest of your post wasn't enough to out you as a contrarian cargocultist, homosexual, and moron to boot.
They're good at killing Brits and Canadians.