Whats up with the A10 domination?

[VipersGhost]

^^ I'd have to agree out of common sense with FSgt.Land. In-game though those A10's are rediculously effective....I don't mean against armor. I love that the A10 is insanely deadly against armor...its gun is awesome. Something needs to be done to bring the thing back to reality though.

I'd say a very average Mig pilot IRL should be able to completely dominate an A10 in numerous ways....even if the A10 pilot was as amazing as they get. I think if a MIG entered combat and there was no AA or support aircraft that the A10 would have to bugout asap. In-game though the A10 has a pretty damn good chance against a mig even if the mig pilot is good. The mig is a natural counter to the A10....not its rival. I think this should be represented as causes the gameplay to suffer atm without it.

[PlatinumA1]

i like Kashan desert period. Only thing i hate about it is the people who play it like noobs who don't know how to fly , climb into a a-10 , get owned and your air support is wasted just cause some guy thought he could fly.This happens every time i play Kashan desert and also i notice like no teamwork is going on anymore. And ye its the pilot who makes does the work, but really all you have to do is fly high and come down.

[EagleEyeLG]

I think the HUGE reason air to air combat is so difficult in the first place is that they can be maneuvered way too nimbly and the fighter jets are just too fast to be able to stay on the tail of a bomber effectively. I find that in a fighter I have a much better shot against a fighter than against the bomber simply because it is easier to stay on the tail of a fighter that is going your speed. Many people don't have throttles to be able to maintain the speed of a bomber making it nearly impossible to stay on its tail.

[Eddiereyes909]

Its not the aircraft but the pilot, ive gotten in the Mig and taken down A-10s and F16s and im a pretty average pilot that will only fly when no one is in the air.

That being said i prefer the 32 player map for the choppers. A-10s are ok but a Cobra is better for Air to Ground support in my book.

[Zybon]

I think fighters should be able to slow down a lot quicker (via speed brakes.) Not only would this make it easier to stay behind the slower ground attack planes, it would also make it much easier (and faster) to get behind them in the first place.

[G.Drew]

dam i miss the A-10 on AlBasrah, even tho i only flew it once

it made things alot........louder, lol

[Lampshade111]

Yeah I miss the A-10 there too. At least until you hit a lag spike and crashed into the city.

[Cerberus]

Yeah I miss the A-10 there too. At least until you hit a lag spike and crashed into the city.

Or until someone landed it on a gas station.

[Red Halibut]

My beef with the A10 vs Mig is that without BVR conditions you are forced into dogfighting. I'd like to see the A10's response to a couple of R27AE's fired from 80k out...

[TF6049]

it pee's me off when A10 is used to minigun other planes, if it cant be used probly in a realism mod then it should be removed and brought back as a commander aid

I think an A-10 actually claimed a gun kill on an Iraqi helicopter in the 1st gulf war. And, one of their tactics is to strafe the enemy with bullets to scare them.

[Wolfe]

I'm lazy so I'm just going to cut and paste this: jets overpowered / anti-air underpowered

...and this:

Briloliant lol. That's pretty much exactly how it's working atm

On Kashan the intent was that the Fighters Jets spawn much faster than the attack jets, so any side that is lacking fighter escort for it's attack jets will not be able to keep the attack jets in the air for very long.

Additionally the SA weapons were supposed to be such that you really would be forced above the cloud layer if there was SA weapons active.

We need to work on the AA and SA combat dynamics.

[Flanker15]

From my experience from simulators, mainly LOMAC:FC. If your in an A-10 and you detect a fighter or a radar SAM site you run away as fast as you can, you just have no chance against them. A fighter will pick you off before you even see them and SAM sites can only be beaten by popping up from behind terrain. There strong point is hitting soft and armored units, they can use their maverick missiles to destroy AAA vehicles (not ones with radar SAMs though they'll hit you out of the sky before you get in range, IR missiles are easier to handle) and then use their other weapons to take out the objective (try to use your other weapons bombs/rockets/cannon on AAA and you'll get torn up!). One thing I noticed was you could destroy tanks with an A-10s cannon when IRL the cannon is documented as having a "low" kill capability against T-55 front armor, so against a T-90 it has no chance and would only cause superficial damage. The cannon is said to be used to take out soft and lightly armored targets like BMPs etc with cluster bombs and missiles used on MBTs.
You can knock down helicopters with ease using their cannon and forced into a dogfight it can be deadly against a plane, if you even get a chance to fight back. They come with sidewinders for self defense aswell but they're not much use unless you catch a plane at close range.
So in conclusion if a A-10 is able to engage enemy fighters and AA units and win they are defiantly in need of a nerfing!

[Outlawz7]

CAS has too much armor, IMO

I got hit by F16 and Linebacker, landed for repairs, and my engine was intact and I was actually reloading longer than reparing

Once the engine stars burning, jets should lose HP, because Ive seen a Frogfoot flying with a burning engine for 30 mins without problems, only prob he had, was the big black smoke trail behind him

[Outlawz7]

From my experience from simulators, mainly LOMAC:FC. If your in an A-10 and you detect a fighter or a radar SAM site you run away as fast as you can, you just have no chance against them. A fighter will pick you off before you even see them and SAM sites can only be beaten by popping up from behind terrain. There strong point is hitting soft and armored units, they can use their maverick missiles to destroy AAA vehicles (not ones with radar SAMs though they'll hit you out of the sky before you get in range, IR missiles are easier to handle) and then use their other weapons to take out the objective (try to use your other weapons bombs/rockets/cannon on AAA and you'll get torn up!). One thing I noticed was you could destroy tanks with an A-10s cannon when IRL the cannon is documented as having a "low" kill capability against T-55 front armor, so against a T-90 it has no chance and would only cause superficial damage. The cannon is said to be used to take out soft and lightly armored targets like BMPs etc with cluster bombs and missiles used on MBTs.
You can knock down helicopters with ease using their cannon and forced into a dogfight it can be deadly against a plane, if you even get a chance to fight back. They come with sidewinders for self defense aswell but they're not much use unless you catch a plane at close range.
So in conclusion if a A-10 is able to engage enemy fighters and AA units and win they are defiantly in need of a nerfing!

Yep - destroying tanks with strafing=ridiculus
Also, the A10 usually ends in a dogfight and strafes the MEC jets with its cannon.
When does the A10 use its cannon in a dogfight? Its not a fighter, ffs

[milobr]

Should we remove the planes to improve realism, then? It's the only way, supposing it's impossible to make huge ArmA-like maps.

[Flanker15]

Maybe the planes could be removed as playable objects and the commander could call in Air strikes where the plane would appear fly to target, drop bomb and leave?

[Outlawz7]

^^ Suggested before as an alternative to artillery

[Meester]

could destroy tanks with an A-10s cannon when IRL the cannon is documented as having a "low" kill capability against T-55 front armor, so against a T-90 it has no chance and would only cause superficial damage.

Mind if you can get the quote to that?

From looking at the wiki of the A-10 Thunderbolt II, it says that 1000 iraqi tanks, 2000 military vehicles and 1200 artillery were the victims of its firepower in the Gulf War. This was because of their low flying ability and because smoke from burning oil wells obscured the tanks from F-15 and F-16 fighters. etc. 5-7 A-10's were lost in the Gulf War.

One was shot down in the Kosovo conflict (I believe). Their success rate was less in Kosovo but that may have been because of political interference.

They manged to shoot down two iraqi helicopters in the current conflict in Iraq. One was shot down by a french SAM. A-10's are capable of receiving quite a decent amount of damage and still fly back.

"Recent proof of the durability of the A-10 was shown when USAF Captain Kim Campbell, flying a ground support mission over Baghdad during the 2003 invasion of Iraq suffered extensive flak damage to her A-10. The hit damaged one of the A-10's two engines and crippled its hydraulic system, forcing the back-up mechanical system to operate the aircraft's stabilizer and flight controls. Despite this, the pilot managed to fly it for an hour and landed it safely at the air base in manual reversion mode." from Wikipedia. I think they were also designed to fly back without half a wing (how many half-wings I don't know) and half a tail etc.

Personally in PR I havn't really encountered too much A-10 flying but if theres an imbalance then anti-aircraft systems (from fighters and SAM's) would probably be improved.

[77SiCaRiO77]

he is talking about the GAU in the a10 , not the entery a10 .