Just imagine how many shells you can buy for a single 35. Ukraine could dig a trench at the border with that AND stack a wall of shells in front of it. And with the leftover shells they could build the walls of another shell factory.
Imagine a C5 with a 16” gun running midline and the whole plane points its nose slightly upward to give the shell just a little extra range when it fires. When fired from an *Iowa*, the range was 29 miles. With a starting altitude of, say 20,000 feet, and fired in thinner atmosphere, could 50 miles be attained?
Edit: if this is too credible, I demand the right to name the big gun “Big Bad Wolf” because an *Iowa* Mark 7 round weighed 2k pounds and will blow your house down.
Add some controllable flight surfaces so the shell can do a Cobra manouever - can't C-RAM or Iron Dome something that has an arbotrarily interrupted ballistic trajectory - imagine shells dropping vertically or with an incredibly fluctuating altitude - aim for the moon, then free fall that sucker, like a drone-dropped mortar or an A10 Gun-run trajectory - good luck stopping the £1000, 105mm hail stone, with optical target acquisition and zero signal input required. Fire them by the thousand, like ultra cheap long-range BVR Javelins.
Basically saturation glide-bombs. Could probably make do with 76mm shells or something - impact speed is irrelevant with EFP, HE or Cluster munitions
Nah, AC-17. Already designed for austere airfields, and just as maneuverable as the C-130.
We need all the C5s for Airborne ICBM launchers anyways. https://youtu.be/xr2_cKfr8Sk?si=zPCjiPBI6frC5hTb
Damn it that's the worst way to use an orbital platform. An ICBM or a stealth aircraft firing hypersonic cruise missiles does that except better and without telegraphing the launch to everyone on earth in process. Ground targets are for aircraft and surface vehicles to deal with. Space platforms are for fighting space platforms.
That's the only way the Yanks will get European style rail connections - if they can put a hellfire through a window, they can definitely align kinetically installed rail track.
Future operation to secure Canadian Maple Syrup Supply after syrup embargo caused by FSB shell company purchases and Chinese Futures contracts choking exports to the USA
>Predators/Reapers as SEAD
>HARMs as DEAD
>F22s as leading edge penetration force (get no A2A kills as CAF is still grounded - gets A2G kills later confirmed to be civilian light aircrafts)
>F35s as Forward air dominance, target priority being Chinese Embassy using dumb bombs for the lulz (some VTOL F35s launched from flat Ed train carts)
>B2s with various thermobarics as preliminary site clearance delivery vehicles
>B52s with SDBs as surface levellers and gravel distribution platform
>C130s doing Rapid Dragon to paralyze and isolate French-Canada and Canada-Canada's communications network
>sub-launched Tomahawks as prefab Rail delivery platforms (perhaps fired in sequence to assemble fractions of a second before Cav Scout Vanguard train convoy passes
>Cav Scouts follow in Abrams, fitted with TROPHY and side-slung quad-bushmaster turrets, running with train-castor wheels, painted snow-white above the track level, and sick flames below, with a regarded skull drinking maple syrup from an unflattering bust of Treaudau with Castro's hair style
>Railcar AA systems and RADAR complexes, such as Patriot Batteries, interspersed amongst armoured assault vanguard, Patriot missiles fired blind and guided to targets by forward aircraft data link
>Air Assault forces in helicopters launched from flatbed Train cars to paradrop and occupy syrup repositories.
>Abrams-towed M109 Paladins and HIMARS, with fire controls improved to fire on the move at 100mph, engage deep strike targets with boosted velocity (deer blinds and Tim Hortons). Supply carriages carry ATACMS rail delivery munitions to ensure unlimited locomotive range. Rail Points and junctions transported by Alaska-based Chinooks after initial breakthrough cuts eastern western Canada from Alaska-Adjacent territory.
>Mechanized Divisions in Bradley's and open-top HMMVVs drive alongside tank train convoy as flank forces to neutralize entrenched Syrup-Insurgents, whilst flying Stars and Stripes banners. Bradley's to be retrofitted with side-slung Hellfire rocket pods for suppressing insurgent Moose presence
>Infantry crammed into WW2 cattle cars, with Brownings and TOWs as roof mounted AWPs, being towed behind coal fired engines because all the DoD funding for infantry transport went towards super cool new CANPAT camo, which looks like depressing pre millennial Flecktarn with hidden baguette and Geneva Convention clause splotch design. Somehow this is completely invisible when viewed from the south, but looks exactly like ironic MARPAT if viewed from the North.
>Blackhawk & A10 Escort CAS because rule of cool
>Schwerpunkt 2: Logistical Syrup Boogaloo
Dude, seriously we aint in the 1940s anymore.
If anything we should invest into MAGLEV GUNS!
***Not Railguns, these are for nerds. No, Good old artillery on a Maglev!***
No. Instead of buying railguns, buy 70 M-109s instead of a single F-35.
Step 1: The US has about 630 F-35s, sell them all.
Step 2: Buy 44,000 M-109s.
Step 3: Profit.
so, uh, this aged uh... really because because the clown known as MTG moved an amendment to the Ukraine/Israel aid bill to, uh, fund jewish spess lazers.
and yes, as absurd as it sounds, it is 100% truth.
Gobless, but I was just listening to an accent expert the other day and they had some fascinating insight on how the southern accent is just kinda bastardised British accent! (kinda like the Aussies)
gotta love it when you colonize half the world, fill it with slavery, fuck up so hard that they revolt against you _and win_, and then you call their stuff a "bastardized" version of yours because they have a different background than you do, lmao
like, ever wondered _why_ the southern accent shares a common root with the bri'ish? and it's ridiculous to pretend that neither have evolved since they diverged, that's where the differences come from in the first place, but to call one of them the "true" version and the other "bastardized" is quite rich considering the actual history at play.
(nothing against you, specifically, this is quite infused in language and i doubt anyone is making these associations deliberately. my point is just that the british have a cultural superiority complex and that it's cringe, not that people are guilty for picking it up, lol.)
(no offenses meant with the "bastardised" part it's just how I remember it being described. I'm a fan of all sorts of different accents it keeps things interesting EXCEPT THAT TIC TOC VOCAL FRY KARDASHIAN RICH PERSON SPEAK- That one is a little irritating to hear lol)
Not entirely correct. The AV-8B is obviously based on the original Harrier but it is a redesigned airframe by McDonnell Douglas. The British were originally involved in the upgrade program, then they dropped out and re-entered with BAe as a subcontractor after the US had approved development of the AV-8B, later becoming the Harrier II+ with the APG-65 radar and the Harrier II Night Attack variant with the dual mode tracker in the nose. And in the end, the BAe Harrier GR5 was the same airframe but produced separately from the MD AV-8Bs and with enough differences that it was technically a different aircraft.
So, depending on *which* Harrier you're referring to, it's American.
Given that there are now guided artillery shells that can kill tanks and other AFVs relatively easily, hard to argue with the main thrust of this argument.
You should only ever need CAS if you're too far from friendly lines to get artillery support, and if you're too far from friendly lines to get artillery support, you might be in the VDV, and so you might already be dead.
Isn't one of the advantages of CAS that you can approach or attack from any angle? Artillery attacks are limited in terms of where they can be deployed. That makes defending against artillery substantially easier.
But the big disadvantage is that you might not hit anything. Seriously, one of the reasons the A-10 keeps getting almost retired is its terrible accuracy
You make it sound like some 18th century cauldron looking thing just whipping primitive shells into the sky.
Modern artillery pieces can use guided munitions. They can hit moving ground vehicles.
So can the A-10??
Everyone seems to forget that the A-10 can carry a staggering amount of guided ordinance.
I agree that other CAS platforms can do its job better in a modern war, such as the strike eagle, but to claim that artillery is more accurate than a JDAM, SDB, LGB, or Maverick is absurd.
So can any other airplane, including useful things like the B52 to useless things like the F111. It's using the right airframe at the right place and right time.
And a F35 doing CAS would be no less visible to AAA or Manpads but nevermind that...
Depending who is 'we', we don't. Russia does. We've all seen Ukrainian folks dropping shells right on the money. Artillery is a pretty exact science. Kind of always has been, relatively speaking.
I sure as hell am not talking about russia when I say "we.
Yes it's possible to use guided shells of course, but just watch some actual footage. Rashist armored columns just drive along, shells are exploding 10s of meters around, and they easily get through.
Because not all shells are guided, it takes time to zero in, the feedback loop takes time and the column can change direction, etc. Not nearly the same thing as pointing a giant gun and pulling the trigger or firing off some Mavericks.
That's true, but you need the airframe, and you need air superiority. If you lose an attack aircraft to obliterate a mechanised assault you lost that fight.
Planes are too valuable to risk on CAS unless it's completely safe.
Because binoculars, drones and radios.
A plane drops one payload. A good artillery support system\* can fuck with an enemy all day.
\*Not just one weapon in one place, because counter battery is a thing. But several weapons in several locations, shooting and scooting, can cause trouble indefinitely.
How many self propelled howitzers can you airdrop? You do know towed howitzers are FPV-food and are being fazed out (except maybe for defending stationary bases)?
EDIT - also, what's easier to shoot down, an A10 or a cargo plane?
It absolutely does not at all.
Friendly fire because it is that precise of a weapon that (1) only that would get used that close to friendly forces (vs a bomb or howitzer), and (2) limitations are due to targeting sensors and software (which can be improved vs the weapon itself).
I'm talking about the weapon itself, things like CPE, MOA, etc. There is nothing that tops the GAU-8 in a bomb missile in a practical configuration.
Oh, btw, don't need GPS to fire the thing :D
How fast can your army move through contact? Probably not as fast as a HIMARS truck or piece of self propelled artillery on the road. Artillery can keep pace.
"On the road". Yeah great idea to wait for any sort of flanking maneuver only until artillery arrives. That way your enemy knows you can only move at a leisurely 20 mph.
As opposed to idk seizing territory that later is held under artillery and SAM coverage.
Wanna know how fast a drone goes? Much much quicker than artillery (and great for blowing them up too)
Isn’t CAS still much more mobile and much more destructive (I mean, a bomb does considerably more damage than an artillery shell, even a smaller bomb)
Surely enough an artillery shell is good enough against a tank or some infantry column, but I can’t help but feel like bombing is more useful.
Edit: watching Task and Purpose’s video about JDAM, one M982 Excalibur costs a few times a JDAM guidance kit. That’s just not good enough, especially given that artillery round is like 50kg with a 5kg warhead meanwhile a you get a 1 ton JDAM (half of it is explosives) that costs half or 1/3 that.
Even the hecking Russians (with doctrine exceptionally reliant on artillery) switched to using more and more glide bombs, because it just is better.
This is though continuous barrages, corrected shots, things of that nature don't require specialised munitions and will fuck people up. Man can call down artillery, then call it down again, and again, and again, and again, and a little to the left, and again.
The guided weapons with the element of surprise will take tanks, no worries. But if you've got time for a marking shot you can rapidly walk a barrage up on a position, an immobile vehicle, any kind of infantry formation in the field, whatever you like.
I mean it's there for all to see in Ukraine. Artillery is doing so much work because the logistics of whipping a bunch of shells downrange are better than for sending a plane with a big chungus payload.
Artillery is doing so much work in Ukraine because neither side can show up with serious air superiority. Heck, if it wasn’t for those glide bombs Russia would also barely have anything in the air.
When you can conjure proper air superiority, it is more effective.
This is not to say artillery has no place, it certainly does, and not a small one either. US had a 60 thousand shell opening barrage in Desert Storm. But overall air support is more effective.
Let's be honest, given the sheer amount of the stuff in various inventories around the world, artillery is the default response for fire support. You're right in many cases CAS has got more to offer, but unless you're American you're probably getting help from the artillery not a couple of planes loitering nearby.
Can't hear you over the sound of the [F-15 dispensing freedom.](https://www.acc.af.mil/News/Article-Display/Article/660249/desert-storm-the-strike-eagles-opening-act/)
Look at what you could have had:
Finland was banned from having air to ground weapons after WW2 and as a result, this tiny God-forsaken country built the biggest artillery force in Europe! They are laughing at the fools who rely on air superiority!
What type of AA with a range of 40 miles (Brimstone II) are your imaginary insurgents using, Patriots or S-400s? Also good luck with getting a lock on a F-22, a F-35 or even a B-52 lobbing its 20 AGM-86s from 700 miles away.
If you already know what you need to hit artillery is the way to go.
Aircraft are for when you don’t know what you need to hit and have to do your own isr. Hence why everything is moving to drones and datalink.
I genuinely wonder why drones aren't being used to replace close air support. Just give a reaper a 20mm autocannon and enough hellfires to level Moscow
lol this reminds me of Iwo Jima where the quarry was almost fully taken by the marines on like day 2... and then American CAS blew the shit out of the advanced squads of marines.
What is the purpose of planes then, if they can't hit targets on the ground? Hitting enemy planes, that also won't hit any of your soldiers on the ground?
Extremely based and artillerypilled. CANCEL THE F35, INVEST THE MONEY IN RAILWAY GUNS.
Just imagine how many shells you can buy for a single 35. Ukraine could dig a trench at the border with that AND stack a wall of shells in front of it. And with the leftover shells they could build the walls of another shell factory.
I mean are planes not just Flying Artillery?
Not all planes can be AC-130s.
Too small for modern conflicts, the US needs to hurry up and unveil the AC-5M Super Ghostrider.
Imagine the AN-225, but with a battalion's worth of artillery out both sides.
Imagine a C5 with a 16” gun running midline and the whole plane points its nose slightly upward to give the shell just a little extra range when it fires. When fired from an *Iowa*, the range was 29 miles. With a starting altitude of, say 20,000 feet, and fired in thinner atmosphere, could 50 miles be attained? Edit: if this is too credible, I demand the right to name the big gun “Big Bad Wolf” because an *Iowa* Mark 7 round weighed 2k pounds and will blow your house down.
And now add a JDAM-Kit to the shell, adding another 20 miles of range or so. Cruise-Artillery is born.
Add some controllable flight surfaces so the shell can do a Cobra manouever - can't C-RAM or Iron Dome something that has an arbotrarily interrupted ballistic trajectory - imagine shells dropping vertically or with an incredibly fluctuating altitude - aim for the moon, then free fall that sucker, like a drone-dropped mortar or an A10 Gun-run trajectory - good luck stopping the £1000, 105mm hail stone, with optical target acquisition and zero signal input required. Fire them by the thousand, like ultra cheap long-range BVR Javelins. Basically saturation glide-bombs. Could probably make do with 76mm shells or something - impact speed is irrelevant with EFP, HE or Cluster munitions
~~Appearing~~ We’re veering into credible territory. Quick say something about snakes or knife missiles.
An-225 with Rapid Dragon. 1 plane to fuck everything into rubble.
that actually sounds like a mildly credible idea. i like it!
Nah, AC-17. Already designed for austere airfields, and just as maneuverable as the C-130. We need all the C5s for Airborne ICBM launchers anyways. https://youtu.be/xr2_cKfr8Sk?si=zPCjiPBI6frC5hTb
> We need all the C5s for Airborne ICBM launchers anyways. Who's to say we can't use those for CAS as well?
Reformer spotted
Herman, is that you?
We have been duped by Big Flying. 😭
Based. I mean: superbased
With that much artillery and shells, Ukraine could blast a hole so deep in Moscow they could deliver Putin to Satan personally.
Or just create a moat around russia, call it the "Putin Gap" and declare peace in Europe again.
“I dont know why we need a gun that shoots railways, but Ill fund it anyway if you build it in my district” ~Congress
...and we're back to Rods From God.
You know damn well we never left.
Damn it that's the worst way to use an orbital platform. An ICBM or a stealth aircraft firing hypersonic cruise missiles does that except better and without telegraphing the launch to everyone on earth in process. Ground targets are for aircraft and surface vehicles to deal with. Space platforms are for fighting space platforms.
For repairing the decades of underinvestment and maintenance deferral, so we can mobilize more quickly in the event of war! Also trains are nice.
How else do you expect to build out mass transit infrastructure in the US?
Lets build STEALTH TRAINS! Theyll never see it coming!
That's the only way the Yanks will get European style rail connections - if they can put a hellfire through a window, they can definitely align kinetically installed rail track. Future operation to secure Canadian Maple Syrup Supply after syrup embargo caused by FSB shell company purchases and Chinese Futures contracts choking exports to the USA >Predators/Reapers as SEAD >HARMs as DEAD >F22s as leading edge penetration force (get no A2A kills as CAF is still grounded - gets A2G kills later confirmed to be civilian light aircrafts) >F35s as Forward air dominance, target priority being Chinese Embassy using dumb bombs for the lulz (some VTOL F35s launched from flat Ed train carts) >B2s with various thermobarics as preliminary site clearance delivery vehicles >B52s with SDBs as surface levellers and gravel distribution platform >C130s doing Rapid Dragon to paralyze and isolate French-Canada and Canada-Canada's communications network >sub-launched Tomahawks as prefab Rail delivery platforms (perhaps fired in sequence to assemble fractions of a second before Cav Scout Vanguard train convoy passes >Cav Scouts follow in Abrams, fitted with TROPHY and side-slung quad-bushmaster turrets, running with train-castor wheels, painted snow-white above the track level, and sick flames below, with a regarded skull drinking maple syrup from an unflattering bust of Treaudau with Castro's hair style >Railcar AA systems and RADAR complexes, such as Patriot Batteries, interspersed amongst armoured assault vanguard, Patriot missiles fired blind and guided to targets by forward aircraft data link >Air Assault forces in helicopters launched from flatbed Train cars to paradrop and occupy syrup repositories. >Abrams-towed M109 Paladins and HIMARS, with fire controls improved to fire on the move at 100mph, engage deep strike targets with boosted velocity (deer blinds and Tim Hortons). Supply carriages carry ATACMS rail delivery munitions to ensure unlimited locomotive range. Rail Points and junctions transported by Alaska-based Chinooks after initial breakthrough cuts eastern western Canada from Alaska-Adjacent territory. >Mechanized Divisions in Bradley's and open-top HMMVVs drive alongside tank train convoy as flank forces to neutralize entrenched Syrup-Insurgents, whilst flying Stars and Stripes banners. Bradley's to be retrofitted with side-slung Hellfire rocket pods for suppressing insurgent Moose presence >Infantry crammed into WW2 cattle cars, with Brownings and TOWs as roof mounted AWPs, being towed behind coal fired engines because all the DoD funding for infantry transport went towards super cool new CANPAT camo, which looks like depressing pre millennial Flecktarn with hidden baguette and Geneva Convention clause splotch design. Somehow this is completely invisible when viewed from the south, but looks exactly like ironic MARPAT if viewed from the North. >Blackhawk & A10 Escort CAS because rule of cool >Schwerpunkt 2: Logistical Syrup Boogaloo
Instructions unclear. Railgun mounted to AC-130
I was against this until you said railway guns. Now I'm all in
Cannot compute. Budget is now earmarked for rail guns on the F401 fighter bomber CAS low orbit space interceptor
Who would win? Giant railway gun Vs Thermite
You FOOL! That will only make the rails LONGER!
>Extremely based and artillerypilled. CANCEL THE F35, INVEST THE MONEY IN RAIL~~WAY~~ GUNS. FTFY
Genuinely thought that was what they said until I read your comment. I agree.
Artillery was never broke and didn't need fixing
Dude, seriously we aint in the 1940s anymore. If anything we should invest into MAGLEV GUNS! ***Not Railguns, these are for nerds. No, Good old artillery on a Maglev!***
IF A GUN CAN'T FIRE FROM THE INDIAN OCEAN AND HIT VLADIVOSTOK, I DON'T WANT IT
Did you mean Orbital Railcannon Strike?
Starting a DOD railway guns program could be what this country needs to get a working rail system back
No. Instead of buying railguns, buy 70 M-109s instead of a single F-35. Step 1: The US has about 630 F-35s, sell them all. Step 2: Buy 44,000 M-109s. Step 3: Profit.
<>
Any plane can provide ground support, once.
HELLO BOYS, I'M BAAAAAAAACK!
Excellent reference
The OG widowmaker before they made her an Overwatch character
<>
>F-104 fan >do not slander my beloved Someone is into being abused.
<>
I thought that was the Engineer shotgun that uses metal for ammo.
Good ol' Sargfighter.
Reject CAS, reject arty. Embrace direct fire anti tank guns again
Direct fire orbital anti tank guns*
Jewish Space Lazers
Oooh cool. I'm all for funding that
so, uh, this aged uh... really because because the clown known as MTG moved an amendment to the Ukraine/Israel aid bill to, uh, fund jewish spess lazers. and yes, as absurd as it sounds, it is 100% truth.
Give it it's proper name. It's the Death Star Of David.
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Di2GIwFW6I0](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Di2GIwFW6I0)
Yes
But the harrier is so cute
<>
You're British
<>
Bri'ish cope
<>
God save the queen. Definitely getting Yorkshire vibes off of ya, lad. Must have family that worked the mines
*Violently throwing Tea in the harbor*
Must really be craving a cuppa if you're using that much water
He's making tea with, at best, tepid water so thoroughly American
Gobless, but I was just listening to an accent expert the other day and they had some fascinating insight on how the southern accent is just kinda bastardised British accent! (kinda like the Aussies)
What makes it worse is I'm mostly non-Rhotic. So there is similarity.
gotta love it when you colonize half the world, fill it with slavery, fuck up so hard that they revolt against you _and win_, and then you call their stuff a "bastardized" version of yours because they have a different background than you do, lmao like, ever wondered _why_ the southern accent shares a common root with the bri'ish? and it's ridiculous to pretend that neither have evolved since they diverged, that's where the differences come from in the first place, but to call one of them the "true" version and the other "bastardized" is quite rich considering the actual history at play. (nothing against you, specifically, this is quite infused in language and i doubt anyone is making these associations deliberately. my point is just that the british have a cultural superiority complex and that it's cringe, not that people are guilty for picking it up, lol.)
(no offenses meant with the "bastardised" part it's just how I remember it being described. I'm a fan of all sorts of different accents it keeps things interesting EXCEPT THAT TIC TOC VOCAL FRY KARDASHIAN RICH PERSON SPEAK- That one is a little irritating to hear lol)
God save the queen. Definitely getting Yorkshire vibes off of ya, lad. Must have family that worked the mines
> I live in Virginia > Virginia is named after the "virgin queen" Elizabeth the first Checkmate, hon
<>
>Texas Cringe
Not entirely correct. The AV-8B is obviously based on the original Harrier but it is a redesigned airframe by McDonnell Douglas. The British were originally involved in the upgrade program, then they dropped out and re-entered with BAe as a subcontractor after the US had approved development of the AV-8B, later becoming the Harrier II+ with the APG-65 radar and the Harrier II Night Attack variant with the dual mode tracker in the nose. And in the end, the BAe Harrier GR5 was the same airframe but produced separately from the MD AV-8Bs and with enough differences that it was technically a different aircraft. So, depending on *which* Harrier you're referring to, it's American.
My brother in Lockmart (praise be upon them) there is no such thing as a "friendly" warthog
They are, after all, feral by definition
Don't forget the inexplicable, instinctual hatred for tea
They can clear the savannah after every meal!
Given that there are now guided artillery shells that can kill tanks and other AFVs relatively easily, hard to argue with the main thrust of this argument. You should only ever need CAS if you're too far from friendly lines to get artillery support, and if you're too far from friendly lines to get artillery support, you might be in the VDV, and so you might already be dead.
Isn't one of the advantages of CAS that you can approach or attack from any angle? Artillery attacks are limited in terms of where they can be deployed. That makes defending against artillery substantially easier.
But the big disadvantage is that you might not hit anything. Seriously, one of the reasons the A-10 keeps getting almost retired is its terrible accuracy
Skill issue, switch to mouse and keyboard.
Really? Terrible accuracy? Vs a howitzer? EDIT - downvote away, I look forward to some data
You make it sound like some 18th century cauldron looking thing just whipping primitive shells into the sky. Modern artillery pieces can use guided munitions. They can hit moving ground vehicles.
So can the A-10?? Everyone seems to forget that the A-10 can carry a staggering amount of guided ordinance. I agree that other CAS platforms can do its job better in a modern war, such as the strike eagle, but to claim that artillery is more accurate than a JDAM, SDB, LGB, or Maverick is absurd.
The A10 gets shot down. It's not real.
So can any other airplane, including useful things like the B52 to useless things like the F111. It's using the right airframe at the right place and right time. And a F35 doing CAS would be no less visible to AAA or Manpads but nevermind that...
They can but they don't. Or we wouldn't be firing a million shells a year to mostly just create craters in the fields.
Depending who is 'we', we don't. Russia does. We've all seen Ukrainian folks dropping shells right on the money. Artillery is a pretty exact science. Kind of always has been, relatively speaking.
I sure as hell am not talking about russia when I say "we. Yes it's possible to use guided shells of course, but just watch some actual footage. Rashist armored columns just drive along, shells are exploding 10s of meters around, and they easily get through. Because not all shells are guided, it takes time to zero in, the feedback loop takes time and the column can change direction, etc. Not nearly the same thing as pointing a giant gun and pulling the trigger or firing off some Mavericks.
That's true, but you need the airframe, and you need air superiority. If you lose an attack aircraft to obliterate a mechanised assault you lost that fight. Planes are too valuable to risk on CAS unless it's completely safe.
The A10 can carry a shitton of MALDs, which, just from the name alone makes it worthwhile.
Then why do we still make unguided 155mm shells?
Because binoculars, drones and radios. A plane drops one payload. A good artillery support system\* can fuck with an enemy all day. \*Not just one weapon in one place, because counter battery is a thing. But several weapons in several locations, shooting and scooting, can cause trouble indefinitely.
How many self propelled howitzers can you airdrop? You do know towed howitzers are FPV-food and are being fazed out (except maybe for defending stationary bases)? EDIT - also, what's easier to shoot down, an A10 or a cargo plane?
This video will pretty much cover it https://youtu.be/MJMi29KjRiw?si=4PCOuEyjFHSSRdye Start at 13:40 if you want to get straight to it
It absolutely does not at all. Friendly fire because it is that precise of a weapon that (1) only that would get used that close to friendly forces (vs a bomb or howitzer), and (2) limitations are due to targeting sensors and software (which can be improved vs the weapon itself). I'm talking about the weapon itself, things like CPE, MOA, etc. There is nothing that tops the GAU-8 in a bomb missile in a practical configuration. Oh, btw, don't need GPS to fire the thing :D
Not with JDAMs. You’re most definitely going to hit your target with that one. And not like A-10 is the only way to deliver that.
Remind me again how fast artillery can move?
How fast can your army move through contact? Probably not as fast as a HIMARS truck or piece of self propelled artillery on the road. Artillery can keep pace.
"On the road". Yeah great idea to wait for any sort of flanking maneuver only until artillery arrives. That way your enemy knows you can only move at a leisurely 20 mph. As opposed to idk seizing territory that later is held under artillery and SAM coverage. Wanna know how fast a drone goes? Much much quicker than artillery (and great for blowing them up too)
Isn’t CAS still much more mobile and much more destructive (I mean, a bomb does considerably more damage than an artillery shell, even a smaller bomb) Surely enough an artillery shell is good enough against a tank or some infantry column, but I can’t help but feel like bombing is more useful. Edit: watching Task and Purpose’s video about JDAM, one M982 Excalibur costs a few times a JDAM guidance kit. That’s just not good enough, especially given that artillery round is like 50kg with a 5kg warhead meanwhile a you get a 1 ton JDAM (half of it is explosives) that costs half or 1/3 that. Even the hecking Russians (with doctrine exceptionally reliant on artillery) switched to using more and more glide bombs, because it just is better.
This is though continuous barrages, corrected shots, things of that nature don't require specialised munitions and will fuck people up. Man can call down artillery, then call it down again, and again, and again, and again, and a little to the left, and again. The guided weapons with the element of surprise will take tanks, no worries. But if you've got time for a marking shot you can rapidly walk a barrage up on a position, an immobile vehicle, any kind of infantry formation in the field, whatever you like. I mean it's there for all to see in Ukraine. Artillery is doing so much work because the logistics of whipping a bunch of shells downrange are better than for sending a plane with a big chungus payload.
Artillery is doing so much work in Ukraine because neither side can show up with serious air superiority. Heck, if it wasn’t for those glide bombs Russia would also barely have anything in the air. When you can conjure proper air superiority, it is more effective. This is not to say artillery has no place, it certainly does, and not a small one either. US had a 60 thousand shell opening barrage in Desert Storm. But overall air support is more effective.
Let's be honest, given the sheer amount of the stuff in various inventories around the world, artillery is the default response for fire support. You're right in many cases CAS has got more to offer, but unless you're American you're probably getting help from the artillery not a couple of planes loitering nearby.
Can't hear you over the sound of the [F-15 dispensing freedom.](https://www.acc.af.mil/News/Article-Display/Article/660249/desert-storm-the-strike-eagles-opening-act/)
Give. The. Army. Their. CAS. Back.
[Incoherent USAF Key West Agreement screeching]
So… are you going to slander the AC-130? It’s a plane that shoots at the ground. But it’s got an artillery piece, among other weapons.
Look at what they need to mimic a fraction of our power!
Artillery gang you say? Name cutest artillery.
M101 is smol
Wrong. Grille is cutest. Its true. Because i said so.
"Peony" is a very cute name for an artillery piece. The mess it makes on the other end is not so cute.
Not name, but looks.
75 VK/98. It's so smol.
facts
- Brought to you by your local HIMAR bois.
How are bombs being dropped danger close any different from arty being dropped danger close?
Because the artillery gunner probably isn't on as much speed.
He's on Cope wintergreen and Rip-its
We can fix that (Finnish Defense Forces have entered the chat)
Because it just is, our thing is different and better so shut up
Because you can use the gun instead of giant bombs
Everyone asks for CAS, but no one asks *how* is CAS...
Turn them into drones!
Laser guided munitions:
Look at what you could have had: Finland was banned from having air to ground weapons after WW2 and as a result, this tiny God-forsaken country built the biggest artillery force in Europe! They are laughing at the fools who rely on air superiority!
r/StopDoingScience
Russia used to unironically believe this, they didn't even have proper glide bombs when they invaded.
Meanwhile, Granit was still dropping shells on friendlies. In another life, he'd be an A-10 pilot.
Based and objectively correct. CAS only "works" against insurgencies with no AA
What type of AA with a range of 40 miles (Brimstone II) are your imaginary insurgents using, Patriots or S-400s? Also good luck with getting a lock on a F-22, a F-35 or even a B-52 lobbing its 20 AGM-86s from 700 miles away.
If you already know what you need to hit artillery is the way to go. Aircraft are for when you don’t know what you need to hit and have to do your own isr. Hence why everything is moving to drones and datalink.
Go get your JFO and learn the wizardry bum
The virgin close air support vs the chad far air support
Only such Blasphemy could originate from the depths of Siberia
Wow, all the mortar teams agree with you 100%, those A10's in Afghanistan didn't do a god damned thing.
Shut the fuck up nerd. Call for more Close Air Support or get demoted. Can’t hear you losers over the sound of my Brrrrrrrt! 👉😎👈
You missed a good opportunity to post a picture of the Skorpion, since it was meant to be a CAS plane
Can your artillery move at Mach 2?
I genuinely wonder why drones aren't being used to replace close air support. Just give a reaper a 20mm autocannon and enough hellfires to level Moscow
To be fair nukes should have made air superiority obsolete but we decided to ban it
Screw you I'm going to call for even more air support
inst we need fleying battleships so they can be the ones to provide danger close artillery
Looks like a WT subredditor breached from containment
did the USAF fighter jocks hijack Trizzo's account or something? ROFL
lol this reminds me of Iwo Jima where the quarry was almost fully taken by the marines on like day 2... and then American CAS blew the shit out of the advanced squads of marines.
Instructions unclear, nearly blew me and my fellow Helldivers up (Actual incidents not withstanding) with danger close airstrikes and orbital strikes
This the equivalent of Snipers on 2fort yelling at you for expecting to shoot at anything other than Snipers on 2fort
I dunno trench assault with a TACP would be awesome.
What is the purpose of planes then, if they can't hit targets on the ground? Hitting enemy planes, that also won't hit any of your soldiers on the ground?
- Taliban spokesperson, circa 2008
Aren't 9-lines a medevac thing, unless the joke is you'll need one after the warthog strafes your people.
Ngl I thought that until recently too but it just so happens that the call up for CAS is 9 lines long as well and is called a nine line. Go figure
wtf