Warbird Information Exchange

Looks like this baby been hogged tied!

http://www.strategypage.com/military_ph ... 15826.aspx

I love the fact that somebody chocked the wheels!

Looks like the only damage would be to some of teh underside antennea, and maybe the bottom tips of the verticals. Probably have her flying again with a few hours' work.

Just notice the cannon barrels have been pulled partway out..is this SOP to "safe" the weapon after an emergency landing?

SN

I'm willing to bet that other Sidewinder off the left wing is a few hundred feet behind the aircraft...good thing they're inert.

I would also guess that the cannon was just torn up, the nose may have pitched down on touchdown. 30mm rounds from the A-10 are cranked out, so I'm not sure if they could pull any target-piercing shells out with it on the deck like that.

_________________
ATC: "Oscar 2, cleared to engage wildlife at your discretion..."

The A-10 was specifically designed with main tires that stick out when the gear is retracted with this situation in mind.

That thing on the right wing is not a Sidewinder, BTW. It is an AIS pod used for tracking jets during Green Flag.

UHH OH!!

So....when did the Rangers get A-10's?

_________________
Don't make me go get my flying monkeys-

the wheels are partially supporting the plane and can roll....just like the b-17
which you can steer by differential braking during a wheels up landing.

_________________
EVERYTHING that CAN fly should be ALLOWED to FLY!
IWO JIMA'S best narative..."GOD ISN'T HERE"
http://www.amazon.com/God-Isnt-Here-Ame ... 0976154706


P: Noise coming from under instrument panel. Sounds like a midget pounding on something with a hammer.

S: Took hammer away from midget.

The mishap was caused by an exploding canon shell.

Mike

I figured the exposed wheels were intended to minimize damage in a wheels-up landing. Didn't know they could actually be steered, though!


So the damage to the cannon happened in flight? Dang..that could have been a real disaster!

SN

All things considered the A-10 has to be one of the most well thought out designs in military aviation history.

the air force, true to form, has repeatedly tried to ditch teh warthog--without replacing it. While air superiority counts, and I'm sure Randy does just fine from 30K, I always liked the feeling of security that big darn flying bathtub gave me.

Randy recently note dthat the AF has had some issues. One of them is taht they've refused to play ball with the rest of the kids, insisting taht they can win the war with wizbang sparklers and a few hooters and some party hats. That they haven't been allowed to trash the A10 tells me maybe they need to lok at their mission a little harder next time it's time to dream up a new toy...

_________________
"I knew the jig was up when I saw the P-51D-20-NA Mustang blue-nosed bastards from Bodney, and by the way the blue was more of a royal blue than an indigo and the inner landing gear interiors were NOT green, over Berlin."

The Beech 1900 and I think the King Air are the same. In a wheels up landing, the brakes are still effective.

_________________
Curtis Block

I've seen too many airplanes destroyed by the term "Static Restoration."

Well, sorta. The F-15E brings different tools to the fight than the A-10. We bring more gas (meaning more time on station), more ordnance of different types, and much better sensors. What we don't do well is get low and slow. None of the guys I've covered have ever complained that my jet wasn't an A-10, especially when turning the gun on down below 1000 feet.



The basic disagreement is this: The SECDEF was concerned only with placing all available resources toward fighting the current wars -- he had no interest in plans that were sustainable over a term longer than the rest of his term in office. The USAF was primarily concerned with making sure the force was healthy tomorrow as well as today.

I liken it to a racer who goes all-out on power but puts nothing into a braking system. Yes, he crosses the finish line first, but dies when he smacks into the wall that is located on the other side of that finish line.

The current SECDEF will not be the SECDEF in 10 or 15 years. Decisions made now about aircraft and force sustainment WILL still be affecting how the UAF does business in 10 or 15 years. The USAF leadership chose to focus on long term health, knowing that there was absolutely no way that they could do what the SECDEF wanted today and still be able to accomplish the mission tomorrow.