The A-10 Thunderbolt II is a one-trick pony that is of no use to Ukraine:
• can the A-10 fly Combat Air Patrols (CAP)? No.
• can the A-10 Suppress Enemy Air Defenses (SEAD)? No.
• can the A-10 do Close Air Support (CAS)? Yes.
The F-16 can do all three and do them better. 1/n
The F-16 can mount six AIM-120C-7 or six AIM-120D AMRAAM beyond-visual-range air-to-air missiles (BVRAAM). The A-10 can mount none, because it doesn't even have a radar.
Photo: a F-16C Block 40, which uses the AN/APG-68(V)5 radar, departs with six AIM-120C-7 for a CAP. 2/n
The F-16 can mount two AGM-88E AARGM air-to-surface anti-radiation missiles with a AN/ASQ-213 HTS pod to find and strike enemy air defenses. The A-10 can't.
Photo: two F-16CJ Block 52 with a full SEAD load on patrol. 3/n
When the A-10 was designed and introduced a plane doing CAS had to fly low to accurately straff enemy positions.
Low meant within range of enemy man-portable air-defense systems (MANPADS) and anti-aircraft cannons. Therefore the A-10 has an armored cockpit. 4/n
With the arrival of laser-guided, GPS-guided, infrared homing, etc. bombs and missiles a plane doesn't have to fly low to accurately hit an enemy position.
Nowadays a F-16 (or A-10, F-15E, F/A-18E/F) can fly above the range of MANPADS and anti-aircraft fire, because 5/n
thanks to targeting pods they can drop a dozen bombs with pinpoint accuracy on enemy positions.
The US Air Force even mounted Sniper Advanced Targeting pods on B-1B Lancer bombers and used the bombers for CAS.
There is no need for a fighter to fly low anymore. 6/n
Even the A-10 fly now with a Sniper or Litening targeting pod.
On the modern battlefield there is no need for a plane like the A-10 anymore - a plane that can only be used after fighters have won air supremacy and have destroyed enemy air defenses. 7/n
Of all the US Air Force fighters the F-16 is the most versatile.
It is still in production and the newest variant, the F-16V Block 70/72, is capable to defeat all non-NATO fighters. And: the Block 70/72 upgrade can be retrofitted to older F-16 variants.
8/n
On the other hand the A-10 is only useful against an enemy without air force and with no air-defenses.
If A-10 planes are sent to Ukraine now, then their life expectancy is less than that of a russian ammo dump.
What Ukraine needs are F-16. And lots of them.
9/.
PS re. other US fighters:
• F-22, F-35 off limits to UA
• F-15C/D can only do combat air patrols
• F-15E/EX USAF needs them all
• F/A-18C/D excellent fighter, not as good for SEAD as the F-16, production line has closed, 2nd best option for UA
• F/A-18E/F USN needs them all
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
And this is how Berlin would look like 3 days after putin attacks Europe... because Germany doesn't have the air defence ammo to defend any of its city for more than 2 days.
1/12
This is Copenhagen.
And this is how Copenhagen would look like the morning after putin attacks Europe... because Denmark doesn't have any air defence to defend itself.
2/12
This is Paris.
And this is how Paris would look like a day after putin attacks Europe... because France only has SAMP/T air defence systems, which is as of now has very limited capabilities against ballistic missiles.
3/12
Let's run some numbers on Ukraine's brilliant operation to take out russia's strategic aviation deep in russia and Siberia.
8× containers are visible in this image
As Ukraine sent 2× containers to each of the 5× air bases they attacked, another 2× must be out of sight. 1/6
Each container roof seems to have housed 9 compartments. Here we can see that at 3× per compartments, but they might have even had space for 4× drones.
Quick math: that's 27× or 36× drones.
Two containers per air base: 54× or 72× drones
But (!) not all compartments likely 2/6
held drones.
As we saw in this video from on of the containers launching drones, the roof of the containers slid to the side and fell down... so one compartment might have housed the motor and system to slide the roof off.
Also all the containers self-destructed once they 3/6
Italy's 61º Stormo received enough of the new T-345A basic jet trainers to begin pilot training this June.
As everyone knows, I am all for growing European militaries and adding capabilities... but why does EVERYTHING have to be with US engines?
Europe must stop buying US
1/22
made kit, components and weapon systems.
The Italian T-345A (left) and the Czech L-39 Skyfox (right) are the only two basic jet trainers currently in production in Europe... and both use a Williams International FJ44-4M turbofan made in Ogden, Utah.
Yes, there are more 2/n
American components than just the engines in both, but as aircraft are designed around their engines Europe needs to stop buying American and start building engines again.
Both planes the T-345A and L-39 Skyfox replace used European engines: the Italian MB-339 (pic) 3/n
To my American followers: it is time to plan for exile.
Doesn't mean you will have to leave, but based on experiences of Jews fleeing Nazi Germany after 1933 here are a few things to make escape and exile easier:
1) get an up to date passport (the regime might no issue you
1/12
one in the future thus stranding you) 2) if possible get a passport from another nation. It doesn't matter which; just get a passport the regime can't cancel. 3) open bank accounts in a foreign nation (I can't stress this enough! The regime will freeze your American accounts,
2/n
which will prevent you i.e. from booking a flight; and you will arrive in another nation penniless if you do not shift your funds into a non-American bank in a non-American nation ASAP) 4) plan for the regime putting you on a no-fly list. How can you get to the border and to
3/n
I am sorry 🇸🇪 Sweden, but I must talk about the Blekinge-class submarine procurement disaster.
Because it exemplifies what happens, when a nation guts its defence budget AND nonetheless demands from its defence industry to deliver cutting edge systems.
This never works!
1/25
Sweden built its first submarine HM Hajen (pic) in 1904.
Since then Sweden continuously built submarines at Kockums' shipyard in Malmö and at the state owned Karlskrona shipyard.
Between December 1954 and December 1988 (34 years) the two yards launched 24 newly built and 2/n
6 upgraded submarines (The latter, the Jaktubåtarna boats, were extensively reconstructed WWII era coastal submarines).
From 1960 to 1979 Swedish defence spending was always above 3%... in 1980 the decline began, but when the last Västergötland-class submarine was launched 3/n