quote:

Originally posted by RogueJSK:

quote:

Originally posted by Sunset_Va:

quote:

Originally posted by sdy:
the Ukrainian parliament on Monday tweeted that Europe was sending 70 fighter planes to Ukraine, including 28 MiG-29s from Poland, 12 from Slovakia and 16 from Bulgaria, along with 14 Su-25s from Bulgaria.

20 A-10's with munitions would have caused some havoc.

Provided they had trained pilots to fly them. But there are no Ukrainian A-10 pilots.

However, there are Ukrainian Mig-29 and Su-25 pilots. Hence why they're providing those models.

Knew there aren't Ukrainian A-10 pilots. My thoughts were how effective they would be against armor units.

Not to beat a dead horse, but A-10s also require air superiority and air defense suppression in order to operate effectively, otherwise they're low, slow, lumbering, easy targets.

The Ukrainian Air Force is very unlikely to be able to achieve either of those.

quote:

Originally posted by RogueJSK:
Not to beat a dead horse, but A-10s also require air superiority and air defense suppression in order to operate effectively, otherwise they're low, slow, lumbering, easy targets.

The Ukrainian Air Force is very unlikely to be able to achieve either of those.

i agree with you. but one point to consider is that the A10 (and others) is a highly damage resistant air frame. also-- the Ukrainian pilots have the excellent advantage of -- if necessary -- bailing out over friendly territory.

nobody wants to get shot down -- but if you do -- it would be nice to do it over (mostly) friendly territory. WW2 stories abound with pilots getting shot down and flying missions again soon.

the Russian advance is looking pretty JV (even taking into account 'disinformation' / psyops)

---------------------------------

Your latter argument would apply to any domestically piloted plane in the Ukraine theater, no?

One doesn't ever decide on the use of a warplane with the intention of getting shot down / bailing out. One decides on a piece of war equipment b/c of its superiority in its role AND as an integral part of a larger force.

quote:

Originally posted by Sunset_Va:
20 A-10's with munitions would have caused some havoc.

Heck, one A-10 could destroy that convoy heading to Kiev and put Ivan on his heels.

A couple of hundred civilian cars driven out to meet the convoy and abandoned en masse blocking the highway would delay the convoy significantly.

The Ukrainians would be better off hitting Russian armor with anti-tank munitions like the TOW or Javelin (preferred). Newer rocket designs have tandem warheads to defeat reactive armor and kill tanks, and fighters can melt into the background after fire-and-forget shots.

quote:

Originally posted by Dakor:
Your latter argument would apply to any domestically piloted plane in the Ukraine theater, no?

One doesn't ever decide on the use of a warplane with the intention of getting shot down / bailing out. One decides on a piece of war equipment b/c of its superiority in its role AND as an integral part of a larger force.

you missed my poorly worded point i think. no harm.

of course the comments about A10s are neither here nor there -- they have a loyal following but seeing them over Ukraine is wishful thinking.

i do hope any Ukraine pilots who get shot down are covered safely.

-----------------------------------------

I enjoy watching and hearing all the upside media reports about the Ukrainians. As only the media can do its made up stories seem to prevail so actually hearing the truth is difficult.
The time to have sent them arms and training is long past, it should have been done months/years ago, not now.If planes are held out of country, like Poland, because the risk of planes being destroyed siting on the ground in the Ukraine, what will happen when the Russians fly into a Nato country and bomb those assets?
All the feel good fluff War stories will disappear when the Russians have had enough and start to carpet bomb the cities.

Ukraine used Turkish drones in two strikes on the convoy.

https://www.wsj.com/livecovera...DrigGO7vkGfDzbBuncnA

quote:

Originally posted by gearhounds:
The Ukrainians would be better off hitting Russian armor with anti-tank munitions like the TOW or Javelin (preferred).

That, and whatever artillery assets they have, are pretty much their only options at this point, being as they lack air superiority.

But that wasn't the point. The point was purely technical: If they had A-10's, and if they could give them air cover, a couple of them could take out pretty much that entire convoy in a couple passes.

quote:

Originally posted by ensigmatic:

quote:

Originally posted by gearhounds:
The Ukrainians would be better off hitting Russian armor with anti-tank munitions like the TOW or Javelin (preferred).

That, and whatever artillery assets they have, are pretty much their only options at this point, being as they lack air superiority.

But that wasn't the point. The point was purely technical: If they had A-10's, and if they could give them air cover, a couple of them could take out pretty much that entire convoy in a couple passes.

It’s not a matter of having A-10s. They have Su-25s that can do the same job.

Well damn.

Europe won't transfer fighter planes to Ukraine. Poland decided not to, and Slovakian defense ministry spokesperson confirms to me just now: “Slovakia will not provide fighter jets to Ukraine."

Polish President Duda just said: "We are not going to send any [fighter] jets to the Ukrainian airspace" because "that would suggest an open military interference in the Ukrainian conflict." NATO is not a party to this conflict, Duda said.

https://hotair.com/ed-morrisse...s-to-ukraine-n452091

I agree. The A10 armed with the Mavericks and some Rockeyes could easily have wiped out some convoys.
They would need air cover with Migs or SU27 and some anti radar missiles fired from SU25s.
They should have plenty of SU25 around 90 but some of them probably aren't operational.

quote:

Originally posted by RogueJSK:
Not to beat a dead horse, but A-10s also require air superiority and air defense suppression in order to operate effectively, otherwise they're low, slow, lumbering, easy targets.

The Ukrainian Air Force is very unlikely to be able to achieve either of those.

Yep. They would be Sky Turkeys.

quote:

Originally posted by sdy:
Well damn.

Europe won't transfer fighter planes to Ukraine. Poland decided not to, and Slovakian defense ministry spokesperson confirms to me just now: “Slovakia will not provide fighter jets to Ukraine."

Polish President Duda just said: "We are not going to send any [fighter] jets to the Ukrainian airspace" because "that would suggest an open military interference in the Ukrainian conflict." NATO is not a party to this conflict, Duda said.

https://hotair.com/ed-morrisse...s-to-ukraine-n452091

Bulgaria has also reportedly pulled out.

That's a hard pill for Ukraine to swallow, but I guess I understand the reasoning.

Zelensky gets a standing ovation from the EU, but then they say, "Sorry, you're on your own".

Bunch of pussies.

They don't get that they're next, but you can damn sure bet they'll be begging for help too when their time comes.

Those Su-25 are tough, tough birds. The love affair with the A-10 is understandable, however don't discount or, forget about the Frogfoot. These type of planes are specialized so they'll need CAP cover in order for them to operate.

There's a video floating around of a Russian Su-25 on its attack run, takes a proximity hit from a MANPAD, continues on to deliver its strike and gets out.

Switzerland had decided to sanction Russia and Russians too.
They didn't even do that to the Nazis.
Somebody needs to start mentioning war crimes trials next and include other powerful people in Russia.
That's the way to put the heat on Putin.

https://www.reuters.com/world/...t-russia-2022-02-28/