I believe the station immediately inboard of the AN/ALQ-184 is an SUU-25 flare dispenser. Or a hella big Pringles can.
I think you are correct. Thanks!
I doubt it. I suspect the thing on station 2 is a LAU-61 7-tube rocket launcher for 2.75" = 70mm FFAR (Folding Fin Aerial Rockets).
That pic in general is a posed “catalog” shot. A “Geewhiz, lookit all the different stuff it can carry” picture not representative of an actual combat load-out. IOW, it’s demonstrating the Swiss army knife nature of the airplane versus the dazzling array of munitions Uncle Sam has developed over the years.
So…it’s not a Pringles can?
Time to gift all the A-10s to Ukraine. This will kill two birds with one stone: It’ll give Ukraine a lot of CAS power to wreak havoc against Russia, and it’ll silence the A-10 fanboys in America once and for all now that neither the USAF nor Army will have the Hogs.
Or folded arms.
Here’s a T-shirt for ya: A-10 Thunderbolt II T-Shirt
Is it not an LAU-131?
Time to donate al the A-10s to Ukraine so the debate can end
Could well be. The -61 was current a long time ago and the 131 is the modern equivalent.
Some more A-10 swag:
A-10s back in the news, given the apparently faltering Russian invasion of Ukraine:
I have been a fan of the A-10 since long before I knew what it actually was (courtesy of a toy called the Cobra Rattler) so I hope for the best for it even though the US is perpetually trying to retire it. The main criticism as I understand it is that the A-10 is slow compared to modern planes and could theoretically be taken down by modern SAMs with relative ease. This was not so much of an issue in Iraq because of the air superiority but how would Ukraine do if they had A-10s at their disposal right now? Would they actually be able to use them?
(I assume in any scenario where the conflict spreads to NATO, Russia’s air superiority evaporates in about one day so they’d be flying the friendly skies a short while later)
If we really wanted to help Ukraine, we’d donate the A-10s to Russia and help decrease the number of capable, living Russian pilots.
A-10s are fun to watch, but in reality they were obsolete almost by the time the rolled off the production line 50 years ago. They only work if the enemy doesn’t have radar-capable AA systems, which most definitely doesn’t describe Russia. In that environment, A-10s are dead before they fire a shot.
Nowadays, CAS is an attitude, not an altitude. You don’t need to have your belly scraping the ground spinning the brrt-brrt gun just to hit a few BMP-2s. That mission can easily be done by an F-16 from 5,000 feet, and more survivably too, with the extra benefit that the F-16 has decent dogfighting capabilities.
Sure, they could use them, for at least 5-10 minutes. Would definitely help to attrit the number of usable Russian AA missiles, but at the cost of an A-10 pilot, unfortunately. Seems expensive.
I don’t suppose you’d want a keychain, then, HMSI?: A-10 Thunderbolt Keychain K325 | Military Issue - The #1 Source For High Quality Military Collectibles
Ukraine, and Russia for that matter, has A-10 equivalents right now in the form of the Su-25. And those aircraft are greatly limited in what they can accomplish over the battlefield due to ground based air defenses. So any A-10s handed over would be used in the same cautious and indirect manner as the Su-25 fleet.
There’s a new book about the origins of the A-10, written by an Oberlin College professor: Amazon.com
Bumped.
Just recently finished the book I mentioned above, Warplane by Hal Sundt. It’s a pretty good discussion of the planning, design, construction, deployment and service history of the aircraft. The author focuses on the tiny cadre of smart, talented, badass Pentagon reformers who conceived of the Warthog and then advocated for it, often in the face of stiff opposition from the Air Force brass, over the years. The book could’ve been better edited, and I noticed some minor factual errors, but it’s still worth a read for anyone interested in the subject.
An A-10 is, as Alton Brown would call it, a “unitasker” - meaning, an appliance that can only be used for one thing. According to Alton, unitaskers have no place in the kitchen.
Weird thought just popped into my head. Tell me all the ways this wouldn’t work: Repurpose the A-10 as an anti-shipping/piracy/smuggling weapon. Very little chance of encountering advanced SAMs, long loiter time, discretionary guidance system/Fire-Don’t Fire system, etc. Of limited application, but it’s better than what it’s doing now (which is nothing.)