The Greatest Attack Aircraft of All Time...

[evangilder]

Nice shot Lee. That seems a common paint scheme with the Spads. I think it may depend on the era. For Korea and Vietnam, I would say the A-1 without a doubt. From the 80s on, the A-10. Both are incredibly effective. Check out the speed brake on the Skyraider! They are only that big on the A-1H, according to Skyraider Bob.

 

[trackend]

Great shots Eric I bet when you dropped that plate it was like standing on the stop pedal. The ordnance is not bad either.

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Nice shots there.

 

[Gnomey]

Good shots Eric!

 

[evangilder]

Cheers guys. I would imagine pulling the speed brakes on the A-1H would be like getting hit with a very large gust of wind. I am still amazed every time I see those things. You do notice the speed change from the ground. Notice that he is pulling out of a dive in that shot. Obviously need a good airspeed before opening them up. But it is a good demonstration of how the A-1 could get to a hot spot quickly, slow down for attack, and then accelerate away.

 

[johnbr]

Me I love the A-10

 

[102first_hussars]

The A-10 is easily the best Attacker its really performed its job well, through Kosovo, Iraq, and Afghanistan, the A-10 actually shot down a Taliban Fighter, But I have always been a big fan of the A-4 Skyhawk, that plane did some damage against the Royal Navy with Argentinians

 

[syscom3]

the A4 also did damage to its foes in the Middle East and Vietnam.

Thats my favorite.

 

[JohnnyL]

Man, the skyraider is so awesome. Flying one of those things to cover the grunts would have to be the best job there is.

Also:

The USMC should go steal all the A-10s and put arrestor hooks and launch bars on them.

 

[Glider]

My personal favourite is the Jaguar the case for which I put earlier in the thread, but there is one aircraft of this type that always, always get overlooked and that is the A7.

Few planes have served the USN and the USAF so well over a number of years.

My second choice would be the A7. The reason for putting it ahead of the A10 is straightforward. I could not see the A10 being deployed over N Vietnam which is where the A7 earned its spurs.

 

[102first_hussars]

I should also mention Evan, those are some awesome High Quality pictures right there, take them yourself?

 

[evangilder]

Thanks Hussars. Yes, those are my photos.

 

[Jaws]

A-10 is a great aircraft but is too slow.
It sure does ok with USAF because it has all the cover it needs and the enemies are usually much much weaker and can't disrupt it's activity.
Against an enemy with similar strength i think the A-10 would be just like the Il-2 during WW2. Great against ground forces but would suffer heavy casualties to fighters and enemy AAA.
Just think for a while how A-10 would do if it wasn't flying for the USAF.
I'd say to be a great attacker this days an aircraft needs a lot more then just a nice cannon, missiles and heavy armor. Speed is what you need to survive in a modern, complex battlefield. You need speed to get in and out of combat area fast.
That's why I think the concept of slow specialized attacker is obsolete. Is only suitable for a huge air force of a country that can afford the costs of a fleet of planes with such a limited range of missions. Multirole is what makes sense this days when the price of building and operating combat aircraft is so high.


But since we talk about pure attackers I'll go with the Jaguar.

 

[evangilder]

Speed of other aircraft is exactly why the A-10 was developed. When attacking ground targets, you have to be able to see them to target them. If you are flying over the target area at high speed, you chances of hitting the target are not very good, if you even happen to spot it at all. Your arguments are what they stated before almost retiring the A-10 before the first Gulf War. After the results from there, the A-10s were kept around, surprise surprise.

The A-10 is way more durable than you give it credit for, Jaws. Have you seen what they can do first hand? Have you seen one come back full of holes from AAA and/or SAMs? Have you seen one return from a mission with only one main wing? There are members of this forum who have (myself included, although I did not personally witness the aircraft fly with only one main wing, I did see it afterwards).

 

[Bullockracing]

I have personally seen some land that didn't look like they should... Another gollygeewhizwow feature on the A-10 is that the landing gear is very durable, and has a very wide track, and will lock down without hydraulics (for the most part - it retracts forwards). This makes the landing gear that much more survivable and much more tolerant of pilot error (not that pilots ever make errors LOL). Have seen two ground loops that would have destroyed (or at least tipped over) conventional attack aircraft.

 

[Jaws]

I'm not saying A-10 is not an outstanding aircraft for it's role. But just imagine for a second how would the A10 do in let's say first gulf war if it flew for the Iraqis.
Do you think it would have posed a big treat to allied armor and ground forces, with all those integrated air deffences and constant CAP?

Well this case is a little extreme, No plane had a chance under those conditions.

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

I'm not saying A-10 is not an outstanding aircraft for it's role. But just imagine for a second how would the A10 do in let's say first gulf war if it flew for the Iraqis.
Do you think it would have posed a big treat to allied armor and ground forces, with all those integrated air deffences and constant CAP?

Well this case is a little extreme, No plane had a chance under those conditions.

Yes it would have posed a very large threat. The aircraft in itself is a tank with wings.

 

[Bullockracing]

Yes it would have posed a very large threat. The aircraft in itself is a tank with wings.

Probably not, the A-10 would be blown out of the sky if it flew without "command of the air" against a modern air force, no matter how much I like the A-10.

 

[jakal]

Hi

Can anyone spell "Frogfoot"


ha-ha

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Probably not, the A-10 would be blown out of the sky if it flew without "command of the air" against a modern air force, no matter how much I like the A-10.

I agree that it require air superiority to enjoy real success but she is very hard to shoot down and very maneuverable therefore she would still be a great threat as long as she remained undetected.