Path: utzoo!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!linac,att!cbnews!cbnews!military
From: x35147d3@usma8.usma.edu (Bergman Charles CDT)
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: Re: Carrier based A-10s?
Message-ID: <1991Mar18.133756.16913@cbnews.att.com>
Date: 18 Mar 91 13:37:56 GMT
Sender: military@cbnews.att.com (william.b.thacker)
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories
Lines: 22
Approved: military@att.att.com



From: x35147d3@usma8.usma.edu (Bergman Charles CDT)

The reason there are no A-10s on carriers is simple.  The Aircraft is not
needed in the Naval Service.  The Marines have the AV-8B and F/A-18 for Close
Air Support.  These aircraft perform the mission very well.  The AV-8B is far
better then the A-10 for CAS.  It was a good thing that the Iraqis had no Air
Force because the A-10 can not survive when threat aircraft are present.  The
Harrier II is very survival and can hang in Air-to air combat.
The other reason is that you would need to heavily modify the A-10 for carrier
duty!
Also the A-10 is extremely underpowered and very slow.
The Marines wanted the Marine Machine, the AV-8B and they got it and it works
great!  It can hold everything the A-10 can, deliver ordnance on target, and
defend itself.  The Marines don't want the A-10, there is no need for it.


Charles K. Bergman
CDT USMA '93
x35147d3@usma8.usma.edu        ***************************************
                               * There is no substitute for victory! *