Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cs.utexas.edu!ginosko!usc!rutgers!att!cbnews!military
From: bnr-di!borynec@watmath.waterloo.edu (James Borynec)
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: Re: A-10 Thunderbolt
Message-ID: <10493@cbnews.ATT.COM>
Date: 23 Oct 89 23:08:34 GMT
References: <10404@cbnews.ATT.COM>
Sender: military@cbnews.ATT.COM
Organization: DI, Bell-Northern Research, Ottawa, Ont.
Lines: 24
Approved: military@att.att.com



From: bnr-di!borynec@watmath.waterloo.edu (James Borynec)

In article <10404@cbnews.ATT.COM>, henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) writes:
> 
> Um, what's a reasonable angle of attack for an A-10 coming in at treetop
> height to avoid hostile fire?  Virtually horizontal, I'd say... which
> means hitting the front armor unless the A-10 makes a detour to come in 
> from the side.
> 
The way a tank on the ground is pointed has little to do
with the way that they will be attacked from the air.  They point in the
direction they are moving.  This is usually related to things such as
roads and tree lines, or even towards where the enemy on the ground is.
Further, pilots prefer to attack along the forward edge of the battle area
rather than into it.  This is because they can duck into "friendly" airspace
more quickly.  Thus the chances of an enemy tank presenting its frontal
armour (and nothing else) is rather small.  Note also that many rounds are
being fired so even if some vulnerable areas are presented there is a good
chance that some rounds will penetrate.  
-- 
UUCP : utzoo!bnr-vpa!bnr-di!borynec  James Borynec, Bell Northern Research
Bitnet: borynec@bnr.CA        Box 3511, Stn C, Ottawa, Ontario K1Y 4H7