I Count 6 SU-25s but only count 2 A-10s, is the russian side of the Dev team still thinking anyone is going to keep playing top tier?

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.

2 Likes

When america produces it

Sorry to break it for you but america went more into planes than short ranged anti air

A-10 is specifically made for US needs and doesnt exactly have lots of variants avaliable as i believe they are the only operator

Meanwhile the SU-25 has multiple variants with either small or big changes thats operated by 20+ countries that might make their own modifications to them

5 Likes

Dev team still thinking anyone is going to keep playing top tier?

You really think people are going to stop playing top tier like that?

What would the A-10C bring that the other variants lack? More modern cockpit, TGP and GBU’s (which have limited use in game, especially for a slow mover like the A-10).

And what BR should it be at and still be competitive?

Don’t take me wrong: I love the Warthog and it’s one of my most flown aircraft. Certainly the one I enjoy flying most.

An A-10C would end up probably at 10.7, even 11.0, because of GBU’s, and there it will struggle, whereas at 10.3 it can hold its ground very well.

2 Likes

The big ticket item for now is the ability to carry 4x BRU-61s, and subsequently up to 16x GBU-39B/B (250lb class HE warhead, INS/GPS guided glide bombs, w/ optional SALH terminal homing, not dissimilar to an unpowered counterpart to the recently added Kh-38ML ) and still have stations left over for more ordnance, with the further integration of the GBU-53 being likely at some point in the future.

Otherwise the A-10C stores list (circa 2016) was basically the following;

f-35-a-10-capabilities-1
f-35-a-10-capabilities-2

6 Likes

Exactly. With the Paveways and AIM-9M’s the only stores currently implemented in WT that the Warthog can not yet carry in game…

The GBU-39’s and JDAM’s would push the A-10C even more up. Fine IRL where they roam with air superiority on the US side, but in WT it would have to go against vastly “more meta” vehicles.

The AGR-20 (APKWS II) is in game as well, it can found on high BR helicopters, 7x SALH rockets per station isn’t something to sneeze at either considering the sheer number of stations that can be loaded( up to 49 rockets + TGP).

The upgrade to the AN/ALR-69 would also be nice to have, and I’m pretty sure that ECM pods may turn up this patch since AMRAAM carriers in a down tier (potentially seen as low as 11.7 on the AV-8B+) are going to cause significant issues for Strike aircraft otherwise.

The HMD would also be nice to have since it allows you to utilize the off-bore capabilities of the AIM-9M.

Assuming a very conservative glide ratio of 1 to 10, means that releases about ~2km will travel 20km. which edges out the Pantsir slightly, also with up to 16x available, it would also have greater magazine depth than it as well so even spamming missile won’t help, nor killing the Designator due to INS/GPS guidance.

It may also cap out the number of TWS contacts and so further complicate the detection of incoming ordnance, since it its anything like the AWG-9 its going to start randomly dropping contacts once they saturate.

1 Like

TGP definitely does not have limited use of an A-10. It would allow the launch of Mavricks from an actually effective range, because the camera of the AGM-65D is so poor. Higher quality thermals and zoom.

JDAMs wouldn’t be too OP tbh. Long range but it wouldn’t track moving targets, unless they added laser JDAMs, which would need a laser lock anyway. But I have some fun ideas for how it would work.

GPS cords can be set by the LITENING pod, and I think it would be interesting if a scout drone could mark cords and a JDAM could slave to that somehow

1 Like

Maybe the A-10 should go backwards before it goes forwards?

YA-10A…a few minor airframe changes and the basic load outs amount to rockets, bombs and early Mavericks only. You can further split it down to the initial 20mm and Late reproduction 30mm airframes.

The 30mm one might get flack for c&p as it would be hard to distinguish from the A-10A(e) beyond the lack of AIM-9s, but the initial configuration is definitely unique. But perhaps forcing it to a true attacker rather than an ad hoc missile slinger wouldn’t please everyone.

1 Like

WAAAYYYYY better zoom optics for the AGMs

newer AGMs, better radar datalink, jammer pods DCS did a amazing job showing the A-10C hud/cockpit https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/products/planes/warthog/

1 Like

i mean they just added a missile that has a 20km + range for russia that actually hits its target

and gaijin did a marvelous job at completely messing up and ruining it to the point where it has no purpose.

1 Like

JDAMs are gonna be hot garbage. Bad targeting, no tracking

Paveway IV on the other hand is going to be pretty rad. It’s a Paveway with GPS+INS and laser guided too.

Good guided CAS below 12.0 or 12.7 if you want AGMs. US lacks ‘modern era’ CAS in the entire 11.x bracket since the F-4E hasn’t been updated in forever so lacks like 3/4 of its IRL ordinance and capabilities.

AIM-9M, D+ Mavericks, TGP, LGBs, APKWS, and more on a lower BR package. It would be the US’s Su-25SM3. Slower, but better armed.

We have no datalink ecm pods

It would be great for the first few hours because it would be easy to knock out the SPAA bots that sit in spawn and never move, then they would catch on and move 5 feet to the left every 10 seconda and then they would suck

1 Like

It would be great for the first few hours because it would be easy to knock out the SPAA bots that sit in spawn and never move, then they would catch on and move 5 feet to the left every 10 seconda and then they would suck

1 Like

It would be great for the first few hours because it would be easy to knock out the SPAA bots that sit in spawn and never move, then they would catch on and move 5 feet to the left every 10 seconda and then they would suck

1 Like