[ / / / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / agatha2 / animu / ausneets / b2 / choroy / dempart / freeb / vichan ]

/k/ - Weapons

Salt raifus and raifu accessories
Email
Comment *
File
Password (Randomized for file and post deletion; you may also set your own.)
* = required field[▶ Show post options & limits]
Confused? See the FAQ.
Embed
(replaces files and can be used instead)
Options
dicesidesmodifier

Allowed file types:jpg, jpeg, gif, png, webm, mp4, pdf
Max filesize is 16 MB.
Max image dimensions are 15000 x 15000.
You may upload 5 per post.


There's no discharge in the war!

File: 5c8979238708321⋯.jpeg (50.33 KB, 621x414, 3:2, 726ff08dc0b268dc0119bc43b….jpeg)

d6004b  No.663834

Air Force Gearing Up for Next A-10 Re-Winging Contract

http://archive.is/aT9xw

https://www.military.com/dodbuzz/2019/04/02/air-force-gearing-next-10-re-winging-contract.html

2 Apr 2019

Military.com By Oriana Pawlyk

>The U.S. Air Force is preparing for the next A-10 Warthog contract to re-wing more of the close-air support aircraft.

>The next contract for the "A-10-Thunderbolt II Advanced-Wing Continuation Kit," known as "ATTACK," is going through source selection and is expected to be awarded this fall, Air Force spokeswoman Ann Stefanek said Monday. The service has $267 million set aside to buy "about 20 total wings," she said.

>The service last year said it had begun searching for a new company to rebuild wings on the A-10 after ending its arrangement with Boeing Co., even though officials have not committed to re-winging the entire fleet. The Air Force has 281 A-10s in its inventory, but it has decided to maintain wings for only six of its nine A-10 combat squadrons through roughly 2032.

>Boeing is on track to complete its re-winging agreement, known as the "Enhanced Wing Assembly," for 173 aircraft by this summer, Stefanek said. So far, 169 aircraft have been re-winged under the contract, with the remaining four to be completed in the next few months.

>But work on the next few close-air support mission planes is changing as the Air Force moves forward with new acquisition and research and development techniques.

>Dr. Will Roper, assistant secretary of the Air Force for acquisition, technology and logistics, said "digital engineering" sometimes allows the service to bypass the regular manufacturing process for parts.

>Digital engineering is unlike 3D printing, which produces a physical part. If the service owns the rights to manufacture specific components of a plane or weapon, digital engineering lets developers see how to make the part and, in some cases, allows maintainers and engineers to create it themselves if they have the right tools and materials.

>That's been working on the A-10, Roper said.

>"I think new technologies like digital engineering allow us to change how production and design are done, and I think … [digital engineering] will allow us to not raise the cost of sustainment for very heterogeneous Air Force," he said last month during the annual McAleese & Associates conference.

>"We don't have nearly enough [digital engineering programs]," he said, adding that it is also being used on the Ground Based Strategic Deterrent program to replace the Minuteman III intercontinental ballistic missile system.

>With digital engineering, the Air Force "can make smart choices" in very early stages, Roper said. In addition to potentially giving aircraft a few additional flight years, "we can completely change the game on how we do aircraft development and fielding," he said.

I for one welcome the continuation of a decades work and input from great CAS pilots such as Hans Ulrich Rudel, and the A-10's inspiration from the Ju-87 and Il-2; it's a beautiful plane and I envy the Americans for being able to see these things up close.

d6004b  No.663838

Also, sorry for the terrible reddit tier spacing, the original article was like this as it seems the entirety of pieces submitted to "Online Journalism" is written by debt-ridden bachelor of liberal arts fags who don't know how paragraphs work.


b0079e  No.663840

I thought they were planning on scraping them and replace them with F-35s


160567  No.663909

>>663840

The F-35s didn't fly so good


9cbdf9  No.663910

File: 15b6ed7bd669bef⋯.jpg (44.72 KB, 703x960, 703:960, 15b.jpg)

>>663909

Or perhaps he's wondering why someone would introduce a plane before throwing out an existing airframe?


01e79c  No.663915

It's going to go badly. It always does.


7c6b88  No.663921

They should also re-engine them and out a small LERX at the wing's root to increase its never-exceed-speed. I would also suggest use of composites and carbon fiber in the new wings since the rest of the airframes doesn't have that much life left but given that one of A-10's greatest virtues is soaking punishment and its consequent makeshift-repairability on field that might not be such a good idea.


3a64e5  No.663922

>>663834

its retarded that the A-10 isn't carrier-capable.

Its meant to fly good slow, its already got rough landing gear, and should have very strong wing, and getting NEW wing. All it should need is tail-hook and catapult thingy.


7c6b88  No.663923

>>663922

Also this. It's rather STOL by design.


d4ed5e  No.663957

>>663922

Why would they Navy want the A-10? They wanted the A-18 and were able to reach a compromise in the F/A-18 family which can do anything an A-10 can do in terms of being a bomb and AGM truck. Space is at a premium for carriers so if they can get a multi-role aircraft then they don't need to waste deck space for a plane that can only do some jobs.

Now, the Marines on the other hand said they were looking into buying the air forces A-10 fleet if they seriously went through with retiring them as it can actually take off from a Wasp class amphibious assault ship without needing a catapult. They planned on re-winging them with folding wings and reinforced gear for arrester wire landings but the whole thing fell through once the Air force realized that it might not be a good idea to retire the flying gun in favor of an aircraft that doesn't even have an "A" designation and decided to re-wing them.


3a64e5  No.663967

>>663957

yeah, the Marines mostly. A-10 seems like it would fit their general mission, lot of which seems to be becoming targets to draw out enemy response so more advanced overwatch can take out enemy defense. Don't worry about folding wings if it becomes an issue. A-10 is supposed to be rough field ops. Just keep on deck and have helos work around, and fly-off to other base for maintenance or erect tent if really needed.

IMO its retarded that F-22 and USAF version of F-35 isn't carrier capable, even if it takes special handling like bigger landing area.


310014  No.663989

Why haven't they updated the A-10 with a variant that houses a 120mm cannon?

I'm sure M1028 would be more efficient at peppering entrenched infantry than 20mm slugs.




[Return][Go to top][Catalog][Nerve Center][Cancer][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[]
[ / / / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / agatha2 / animu / ausneets / b2 / choroy / dempart / freeb / vichan ]