https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/10-warthog-appears-become-drone-201418094.html>At least one U.S. Air Force A-10C Warthog has returned from a deployment to the Middle East with kill markings revealing drone kills. The evidence most likely confirms that the attack jets are now using laser-guided air-to-ground rockets as counter-drone weapons in an operational context. TWZ was the first to reveal that the A-10 has received the ability to employ the Advanced Precision Kill Weapons System II (APKWS II) in the air-to-air role, as you can read about here. The image of the jet in question was captured by @mhtplanes, who posted it to the social media site X.>Two kill markings depicting Shahed-type long-range one-way attack drones were seen on the nose of one of the 12 A-10s that landed at Portsmouth International Airport, in Pease, New Hampshire, on October 7 and 10. The aircraft in question, named “Ares,” was in the second cell. As well as the Shahed kill marks and Ares nose art, the jet carries further markings that appear to denote a Small Diameter Bomb (SDB) and 30mm cannon employment during the same deployment.>The dozen A-10s from the 124th Fighter Wing of the Idaho Air National Guard, home-stationed at Gowen Field Air National Guard Base in Boise, had returned from a deployment to the Central Command (CENTCOM) area of responsibility, where they had first arrived at the end of March. This meant they were in theater during the 12-day conflict between Iran and Israel, in the summer, in which the U.S. military, including Air Force assets, played a significant role in downing Iranian attack drones. It isn’t clear if this is when the engagements occurred, but it is possible, if not probable that was the case.>story continues in the link, character limit reached
Well it's one way to make use of an obsolete aircraft I guess
why are they describing it like a wild animal that was tracked>>64399403it's about the a10 not the f35
Right now the talk among those in the know is to adapt the Gavin into an anti-drone platform.
>>64399413>make a platform upgrade-capable>never upgrade itsuch is life
>>64399420You're upgrade-capable
>>64399395>Guided missile kill droneDoes it matter if it's A 10 or not?
>>64400013Low flight hour cost, long loiter time and lack of another role make an a10 carrying 70-80 apkws behind the lines for anti drone spam work a good idea to free up more capable or survivable aircraft for front line use.
>>64400044Why not UAV carry anti drone munition then? Which is better than A10 in each category except loss of control.
Bump for next day shift.>then letting thread die
>>64400387They had an a10 is probably the real answer
Wouldn't one of these be enough of a plattform to intercept drone spam?
>>64399395Cant wait to see this outdated slop get raped by a 005 USD cent drone
>>64401575drones got too fast to be intercepted by prop aircraft in some cases exceeding 300mph
>>64401584fair enough, I was thinking of shahed type drones mostly
APKWS are easily the most impactful munition the USAF has gained in decades.
>>64400387The aircraft you have in inventory vs aircraft you do not.
>>64399405>why are they describing it like a wild animal that was trackedBecause this is a planespotter’s report and not an Airforce Public Relations Office press release.
>>64401575The A-10 is both faster and carries half again more rockets in maximum load configuration. 228 vs 152.
>>64399405I know you get cagey over the F-35's (misguided IMO) attempt to replace the brrrrt, but lets not pretend it isn't a quantum leap in capability over the F-16 which was what it was actually intended to supersede.
>>64400387>Better than an A-10Drones are 70 years behind in air-to-air capability compared to even the most modest of trainers. You would have better results using a helicopter for anti-drone dusting than another drone.
>>64399413>picI like how the MG is pointing down at the mudafuka suggesting it. Go boy! Get him!
>>64399405>spreytard still crying about the f35
>>64401584Not anything worth a warhead unless you're describing a cruise missile. Even they can be intercepted by prop aircraft; after all, they can be intercepted by stationary emplacements as well.
>>64399395>make thirdies love american aerospace with this one simple trick! click here to learn more! >click link>it's outdated useless trashBoy, i wonder why people who hate Freedon(TM) want us to keep using such a shitty plane? I wonder...
>>64401631Depends, if the new microwave/ew antidrone stations work as advertised those rockets will end up not even being needed. Same as drones
>>64408007you vill vly ze waltzhog, you vill zhoots ze drone, and you vill like ich
>>64408007>people who hate Freedon(TM) want us to keep using such a shitty plane? I wonder...Some well-meaning burgers in year ~1.5 of the Ukraine war asked Congers to give Ukraine the A-10. Ukrainians said the gesture was appreciated but also implied that they wanted to keep their pilots alive, and declined.
>>64401575Just use a Super Tucano.
>>64400013there's gotta be a point when some air to air's developed specifically for these little flying shits, a regular missile is just too complex for shasneeds so by cost-volume alone they'll still have the advantageshooting them proved to be dangerous as you're flying into debris, ew jamming is slow and also expensive, just come up with a cheap flying shit that can barely be called a missile to counteract the other cheap flying shit
>>64411049APKWS and quad-motor FPV interceptors both cover it.
>>64411049Sneeden is developing cheap micro missiles for it.
Wonder what could be done with the A-10's for a retrofit.
