A-10's on a carrier is a wonderful thought, but a non-starter. The plane isn't equipped for takeoffs and landings and altering carriers will never happen. To be honest, how many Marine F/A-18 squadrons deploy with a carrier? They once did, and all Marine aviators are "qualified" Naval aviators, but realistically how many deploy as part of a CAW?
Hmmm...who to believe? Green Berets in the field, or the Defense Department...
- Thread starter Ooh-Rah
- Start date
Well I think he means compared to the Afghan National Police and the various security forces. All of which are pretty dismal. It's like being the least criminal inmate in prison.
Rog that, but since it'll never happen, we can chew on it a bit...
...and I bet it could be rigged for carrier ops. There have been a lot of crazier ideas out there...Now you're talkin
It'll blow-dry your hair inbound to target and drop that nape right where you want it. Spad was The Beast.
Last edited:
Very True
As to the A-10 argument: There are capabilities and limitations with any weapon, which is better for FID: M-14 or M-4? It's a stupid argument. What makes the A-10 good at CAS isn't the aircraft. It's the people, the aircraft just helps optimize things. You can multi-role the weapon all you want, that doesn't mean the person wielding that weapon will be good at CAS/Interdiction/Hard Target Attack/FID/Direct Action/ Manuever Warfare/ Hostage Recovery/ Personnel Recovery/ Non-Conventional Assisted Recovery/ Force Protection/ Just continue this list with every function of the DOD. It's about people, not things.
Just give Canada all the A-10's and spare parts. We'll take care of the rest.
With what budget?
No like a gift, for free... we are saving a shit ton of money right now since the Navy had to put their row boats in dry dock.
Our F/A-18 squadrons deploy on carriers pretty regularly but we have C-130s that don't deploy on ships. Most of our aviators fly on the MEU (harriers-soon to be joint strike fighters, all helos, ospreys etc). I think getting the A-10 would be a huge win for us. Making the A-10 carrier compatible would be a non starter unfortunately, especially since our main sea based platform are amphib carriers which really limit our fixed wing capability.
I knew a squadron per air group used to be Marine, but I thought that practice had fallen by the wayside as available carriers contracted, Prowlers excluded.
pardus
Verified Military
- Joined
- Sep 7, 2006
- Messages
- 10,534
Partially correct but no (IMO), with regards to the A-10. The A-10 is a CAS platform, to say a B-52 is just as good due to the personal is a stupid argument as far as I'm concerned.
Your concept is correct, your specific example isn't.
My .02c
As I said, the A-10 is optimized for that role. However CAS is the bread and butter and almost the only thing those squadrons train. If you assigned them 4 other primary missions in addition to CAS, then they would not be as good. There are only so many flight hours and flying days in a training cycle.
A long walk on a short pier...
I don't know how many squadrons go out with the carriers but I know they still do because my friend just did one a year or two ago.
By then all the generals that should be held responsible will be professors at Ivy League schools, part of the political power structure in the Clinton White House, or making bank with their jobs at Bechtel, Northrup Grumman, or L3.
If your counterparts aren't up to the task, all the enemy has to do to win is wait for you to leave.
Similar threads
