The A-10 is literally made of paper, and has been since release. Is this actually the intended damage model that Gaijin is happy with? Actually?
1 shot to one of the elevators, despite the other being undamaged, and the A-10 will nose dive into the dirt.
1 nearby airburst and the aircraft blows apart.
1 direct hit from a 20mm and it loses all control surface authority and dives into the ground.
Are we being serious here guys? Is this actually the damage model you’re happy with? Really?
Yes it is, but SU-25K can withstand 3 Roland 3 rockets. Why you don’t understand?
A-10 has survived many missile hits & Su-25 has died in one burst.
It depends on what is aimed at.
You can’t seriously be suggesting the Su-25 is just as weak as the A-10…
Depends on where the missile detonates.
I’ve had stingers one shot Su-25s and A-10s, and I’ve had stingers detonate near the wingtips of both and do nothing.
It all depends cause this is 2011 damage model architecture due for complications to be made to damage models.
Everywhere around the cockpit of the Su-25 is hilariously weak, which is what I’ve learned using F-5E against them.
Their tails are also weaker than their wings and engine cowlings, but so is A-10’s.
You just learn this stuff when you focus A-10s and Su-25s in air RB since their introductions. [A-5C’s Magic 1 kills both equally.] And shoot them in ground since their introduction whenever you get an opportunity.
Completely unbiased video right? Now make the same about how much Stingers is needed to kill an A-10, similar role plane
I am playing atm 10.3 germans a lot grinding the Vilkas out.
And i have the Gepard 1A2 with Stingers nearly every battle out on average the Su 25 survives 2-3 hits with the Stinger the A10 1 and at max 2
Your answer is in the post you replied to.
I see Crow is derailing the conversation by continuing to call all USA Russia and all Americans naughty words.
Stop with the non-English what I assume are insults.
I don’t approve of being called slurs purely just cause I’m American and defend American equipment from slander.
Back on topic please. The A-10 is pathetically weak for something which has been proven in battle to survive far more than what it currently does in game. Do any of the game dev’s care to step in here and say that indeed the current model is working perfectly as intended?
"It has double-redundant hydraulic flight systems, and a mechanical system as a backup if hydraulics are lost… It is designed to be able to fly with one engine, half of the tail, one elevator, and half of a wing missing…
Its durability was demonstrated on 7 April 2003 when Captain Kim Campbell, while flying over during the 2003 invasion of Iraq, suffered extensive flak damage that damaged one engine and crippled the hydraulic system, requiring the stabilizer and flight controls to be operated via manual reversion mode. Despite this, Campbell’s A-10 flew for nearly an hour and landed safely"
Well, seeing how most of its combat history was fighting guys with AK-47’s and Technicals and minor air defenses, it makes sense to have not been shot down. Now is it proabably not that great considering it’s fought against barely any resistance.
I think the issue is this:
The Su-25s survivability comes from being reasonably well armoured that can be modeled by the game
The A-10s Survivability comes from massive amounts of redundancy which isn’t modeled in game.
This means the A-10 cant survive hits it might be able to IRL. But the Su-25K can shrug off hits it could IRL.
I have certainly seen quite a few Su-25s survive direct hits and whilst I rarely fight against A-10s. They dont seem to survive the same kinds of hits
Yeah, I can usually put a shot burst of ADENS on a A-10, usually takes it down first few shots, and I’ve put 2 missiles on a SU-25 and it still didn’t want to go down.
Use English on our International Forum please… Thanks!
I submitted a bug report regarding the A-10’s pitch control failure when one of it’s two elevators gets damaged. It’s frustrating to learn that many of these reports have been made multiple times over the last two years and that this issue is yet to be fixed.
I love how even the smallest change in war thunder is depicted as it needs hard and long development.
Adding redundant control systems could be coded in an afternoon.
Even the announced planned updates contain so many trivially easy to implement features one cannot help but wonder why those are even announced instead of just making them…
The game is still full of bugs that were reported 10 years ago, and take like 5 minutes to think about how a fix could be coded. Like the bug that does not let you drop bomb when flying close to the ground, because the game thinks you are ON the ground…
Sounds like the A-10 got the good old Hs- 129 treatment…