Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!swrinde!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!lll-winken!sun-barr!newstop!sun!amdcad!amdcad!military
From: madmax@gargoyle.uchicago.edu (Max Abramowitz)
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: Re: Carrier based A-10s?
Message-ID: <1991Apr6.021150.14775@amd.com>
Date: 5 Apr 91 17:30:13 GMT
References: <1991Mar18.133756.16913@cbnews.att.com> <1991Apr5.092442.8906@amd.com>
Sender: military@amd.com
Organization: University of Chicago
Lines: 19
Approved: military@amd.com



From: madmax@gargoyle.uchicago.edu (Max Abramowitz)

In <1991Apr5.092442.8906@amd.com> stevenp@decwrl.pa.dec.com (Steven Philipson)
writes:
>   I find the "slow" argument amusing -- the A-10 is considerably faster
>than any attack helicopter, which is the other type of aircraft that
>performs the same role.  A legitimate argument might be that the A-10
>isn't slow enough as it can't hover, but the Air Force hasn't been
>saying that.

Ahhh, but one must remember (deja vu?) that the army operates the attack 
copters and the air force the A-10 (or at least they did until very recently),
and the the two branches of the armed forces have slightly ;-) different needs
and agendas.

max abramowitz
madmax@gargoyle.uchicago.edu