One of Moscow’s fighter jets has been shot down by Ukrainian forces, according to a military blogger with links to the Russian air force. Another pro-Moscow milblogger said that the Sukhoi Su-34 aircraft had been downed by a Western-supplied F-16.

  • s_s@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    23 天前

    If the USAF doesn’t want to deal with the A-10s supply chain, there’s a good chance Ukraine doesn’t either.

    The only thing that keeps the A-10 flying is Congressional mandates from a few jobs-oriented congressmen.

    • Madison420@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      23 天前

      It’s a morale booster. Marines want a battleship to roll-up and lob explosive vws at the enemy and the army wants to keep it’s brrt buddy. With more modern electronics and better drone link they’d still be very capable at the job they are built to do.

      • Maalus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        23 天前

        You don’t spend excessive logistics on a “morale booster”. Then, those morale boosters would get shot down in no time and it would have both the strain on the logistics, and the opposite effect for morale. It’s an old plane that’s not useful on modern battlefields. Get Ukraine what they need - long range rockets and permission to use them how they want. Get them more fighter jets. Get them more artillery. Don’t send trash.

          • Maalus@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            23 天前

            Dude you bring up a curiosity in a different situation, time and war, economy and scale. Ukraine doesn’t have countless factories pumping out fighter jets to be able to dedicate those to making spare parts for an obsolete airframe. No amount of morale is worth it when you cannot supply the soldiers with what they need. Imagine ice cream barges going through the pacific when most of the US carriers would be on the bottom of the ocean with no more comming. It would be a laughable waste of resources.

            • Madison420@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              23 天前

              You said we don’t waste logistics on militarily useless morale boosters. Clearly the us does as do most militaries, good cas is well worth every penny. CAS that scares the shit out of your enemy and raises your troops spirits is even better.

              It’s never been a forward weapon, it was never meant to be. No one is suggesting to send it now they’re saying it may be useful to ship pilots and get them started training and as far as I’m aware that’s wrapped into funding.

              • Maalus@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                23 天前

                A10’s aren’t “good CAS”. They are a hog on logistics, expensive, the gun isn’t worth it anymore and the job can be done in 300 other, more efficient ways. It’s a white elephant and nothing more, there is a reason they are getting retired.

      • AEsheron@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        23 天前

        I mean, they made to strafe tanks. Pretty sure they were actually terrible at that when first introduced.

        • Madison420@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          23 天前

          They did fine, budget dweebs just never thought they were enough of an advantage to offset the cost. They stay in service because people in the actual field want them around, it’s the same reason a lot of obsolete “useless” weapons stay in service.