# Why is the A-10 aircraft considered 'Ugly'?
**URL:** https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-the-a-10-aircraft-considered-ugly/782375
**Category:** In My Humble Opinion
**Created:** [March 17, 2017, 3:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-the-a-10-aircraft-considered-ugly/782375 "2017-03-17T03:47:53Z")
**Posts on this page:** 20
**Page:** 1
### Author:  [@chacoguy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/chacoguy)
#### Post date: [March 17, 2017, 3:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-the-a-10-aircraft-considered-ugly/782375/1 "2017-03-17T03:47:53Z")
What’s up with that?
---
### Author:  [@Johnny\_L.A](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Johnny_L.A)
#### Post date: [March 17, 2017, 3:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-the-a-10-aircraft-considered-ugly/782375/2 "2017-03-17T03:51:05Z")
You got me.
People considered the A-6 ugly, too.
---
### Author:  [@snfaulkner](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/snfaulkner)
#### Post date: [March 17, 2017, 3:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-the-a-10-aircraft-considered-ugly/782375/3 "2017-03-17T03:51:27Z")
I think because it’s not sleekly styled like a high speed fighter. I personally think it looks bad ass. Effeciently focussed engineering for a specific purpose is sexy to me.
---
### Author:  [@kopek](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kopek)
#### Post date: [March 17, 2017, 5:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-the-a-10-aircraft-considered-ugly/782375/4 "2017-03-17T05:50:22Z")
> [@snfaulkner](#):
>
> I think because it’s not sleekly styled like a high speed fighter.
I’m going with this. The requirements of an airframe designed for close support of the ground just isn’t going to have that “P-51” or fighter appeal to the average viewer.
---
### Author:  [@movingfinger](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/movingfinger)
#### Post date: [March 17, 2017, 5:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-the-a-10-aircraft-considered-ugly/782375/5 "2017-03-17T05:52:28Z")
It’s a badass-looking machine that has that take-no-prisoners look. A flying thug that no tank crew would want to encounter.
---
### Author:  [@Velocity](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Velocity)
#### Post date: [March 17, 2017, 6:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-the-a-10-aircraft-considered-ugly/782375/6 "2017-03-17T06:31:53Z")
There’s ugly-ugly, and there’s menacing-ruthless-awesome ugly.
---
### Author:  [@LSLGuy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LSLGuy)
#### Post date: [March 17, 2017, 8:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-the-a-10-aircraft-considered-ugly/782375/7 "2017-03-17T08:49:22Z")
It’s lumpy, ungainly, asymmetrical, and slab-sided. That’s like redneck engineering, not real engineering.
It’s got bumps and pimples sticking out all over the place. Hence the “wart” in “warthog”.
---
### Author:  [@Atomic\_Alex](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Atomic_Alex)
#### Post date: [March 17, 2017, 9:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-the-a-10-aircraft-considered-ugly/782375/8 "2017-03-17T09:54:19Z")
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder and all that but personally I would say the Warthog is in the same place as the Mi-24 Hind, neither are pretty but they look mean, aggressive and ready to break things and hurt people.
They look like what they are, a weapon of war, for some people that has an attraction of its own I suppose. I would describe them as ‘striking’, they aren’t aesthetically displeasing in any sense given what they are.
---
### Author:  [@Horatius](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Horatius)
#### Post date: [March 17, 2017, 12:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-the-a-10-aircraft-considered-ugly/782375/9 "2017-03-17T12:54:28Z")
> [@snfaulkner](#):
>
> I think because it’s not sleekly styled like a high speed fighter. I personally think it looks bad ass. Effeciently focussed engineering for a specific purpose is sexy to me.
Yeah, it’s like comparing a sports car to a maxed-out tow truck. The tow truck is a marvel of engineering optimized to do its job, which has an appeal all it own.
Particularly if you’ve just spun out your sports car and ended up in a ditch!
---
### Author:  [@BubbaDog](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BubbaDog)
#### Post date: [March 17, 2017, 1:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-the-a-10-aircraft-considered-ugly/782375/10 "2017-03-17T13:05:05Z")
> [@LSLGuy](#):
>
> It’s lumpy, ungainly, asymmetrical, and slab-sided. That’s like redneck engineering, not real engineering.
>
> It’s got bumps and pimples sticking out all over the place. Hence the “wart” in “warthog”.
I’m voting this explanation. It looks like a spare parts machine where they happened to find two oversized turbofan engines and mounted them wherever they could find a place to cram them in.
---
### Author:  [@davida03801](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/davida03801)
#### Post date: [March 17, 2017, 1:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-the-a-10-aircraft-considered-ugly/782375/11 "2017-03-17T13:52:56Z")
Not fast and not pretty. The reason the USAF wants to get rid of it.
However to me it looks bad ass. I’d hate to be on the ground and see that circling me like a buzzard.
---
### Author:  [@msmith537](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/msmith537)
#### Post date: [March 17, 2017, 2:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-the-a-10-aircraft-considered-ugly/782375/12 "2017-03-17T14:43:12Z")
The A-10 is like a bulldog. Squat, misshapen, terrible at most things, but really good at a few. And you just want to give it a big hug, no matter how much it protests.
Specifically, the A-10 is ugly because someone took the largest cannon they could put in the air and they built an airplane around it designed to do one thing - fly it into a battlefield and kill tanks.
> [@Atomic\_Alex](#):
>
> Beauty is in the eye of the beholder and all that but personally I would say the Warthog is in the same place as the Mi-24 Hind, neither are pretty but they look mean, aggressive and ready to break things and hurt people.
>
> They look like what they are, a weapon of war, for some people that has an attraction of its own I suppose. I would describe them as ‘striking’, they aren’t aesthetically displeasing in any sense given what they are.
Same thing with the Apache helicopter. It looks like a giant metal wasp. Their “beauty” is in the efficiency and utility of their design. Ugly machines designed to do ugly work.
---
### Author:  [@gnoitall](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gnoitall)
#### Post date: [March 17, 2017, 2:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-the-a-10-aircraft-considered-ugly/782375/13 "2017-03-17T14:57:57Z")
I’ll just recycle my earlier [comment](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=18132448&postcount=103) from [this thread](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=719159&page=3):
> [@Douglas Adams](#):
>
> The designer was clearly not instructed to beat about the bush. “Make it evil,” they’ve been told. “Make it totally clear that this [airplane] has a right end and a wrong end. Make it totally clear to anyone standing at the wrong end that things are going badly for them… this is [an airplane] for going out and making people miserable with.”
---
### Author:  [@Projammer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Projammer)
#### Post date: [March 17, 2017, 3:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-the-a-10-aircraft-considered-ugly/782375/14 "2017-03-17T15:33:03Z")
The A-10 is to planes what Ron Jeremy is to actors. Not pretty, but it’s going to f\*ck everything up.
---
### Author:  [@JRDelirious](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JRDelirious)
#### Post date: [March 17, 2017, 4:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-the-a-10-aircraft-considered-ugly/782375/15 "2017-03-17T16:47:38Z")
So you’re saying the Warthog’s a Hedgehog? 😃
The “official” nickname for the A10, “Thunderbolt II”, was meant to invoke WW2’s P-47, also characterized for being able to absorb prodigious punishment and still come home, and for not being particularly sleek.
---
### Author:  [@gnoitall](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gnoitall)
#### Post date: [March 17, 2017, 5:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-the-a-10-aircraft-considered-ugly/782375/16 "2017-03-17T17:02:24Z")
> [@JRDelirious](#):
>
> So you’re saying the Warthog’s a Hedgehog? 😃
>
> The “official” nickname for the A10, “Thunderbolt II”, was meant to invoke WW2’s P-47, also characterized for being able to absorb prodigious punishment and still come home, and for not being particularly sleek.
As reflected in one of the P-47’s own nicknames: “Jug”. Because it was short, stumpy, and round like a jug, and because it could took a beating and keep coming on like a juggernaut.
---
### Author:  [@Arrendajo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Arrendajo)
#### Post date: [March 17, 2017, 5:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-the-a-10-aircraft-considered-ugly/782375/17 "2017-03-17T17:11:47Z")
The P-47 wasn’t short, though. It was massive for a fighter of its day. It looks short because of the overall shape. Check out the Douglas A-1 Skyraider for another massive single engine ground supporter. It looks out of proportion, like the pilots are little miniatures stuck in the wrong diorama.
---
### Author:  [@bump](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bump)
#### Post date: [March 17, 2017, 5:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-the-a-10-aircraft-considered-ugly/782375/18 "2017-03-17T17:40:23Z")
> [@davida03801](#):
>
> Not fast and not pretty. The reason the USAF wants to get rid of it.
I suspect it’s probably more because they’re getting long in the tooth, and there’s no expectation in the foreseeable future to fight the sort of wars that the plane was made to fight.
The thing is built to wreck tanks and provide close air support, and it does those things very well. But most of what the USAF thinks it’ll be doing in the future is more along the lines of precision munition strikes and similar things, not doing strafing runs on tanks and dropping bombs close-in.
That said, it’s not “pretty”, but it is awfully cool. Kind of like the difference between a hand-engraved H&H double rifle and a modern assault rifle. The former is “pretty”, while the latter is relentlessly functional, both of which have their own aesthetic value.
---
### Author:  [@Declan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Declan)
#### Post date: [March 18, 2017, 12:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-the-a-10-aircraft-considered-ugly/782375/19 "2017-03-18T00:27:39Z")
> [@chacoguy](#):
>
> What’s up with that?
Compared with a Tomcat or a Lawn Dart, it won’t win any beauty contests, but like the wise man said, fighter pilots make movies, bomber pilots make history.
---
### Author:  [@drewder](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/drewder)
#### Post date: [March 18, 2017, 3:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-the-a-10-aircraft-considered-ugly/782375/20 "2017-03-18T03:13:59Z")
As someone who has toted a gun around a war zone I have to say it’s the most beautiful thing in the world.
[Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-the-a-10-aircraft-considered-ugly/782375.md?page=2)