" Comparison of USAF A-10 and Luftwaffe Schlachtgeschwader " Topic

I have always loved the comparisons from WWII and how they compsre to the present. Robert

A Comparison of the USAF projected A-10 Employment in Europe
and the Luftwaffe Schlachtgeschwader Experience on the
Eastern Front in World War Two

"ABSTRACT
This study was conducted to analyze the methods,successes,
failures,and operational performance of the German Luftwaffe
anti-tank aircraft and units in World War Two on the Eastern
Front, and the possible application of the Luftwaffe experience to the current NATO air forces. The research involved interviews with former Luftwaffe officers who
participated in the German Eastern campaign from 1941-45,
a trip to the Bundesarchiv-Militdrarchiv in Freiburg,West
Germany, a trip to the Air University Library, Maxwell AFB,
Alabama,in addition to participation in an anti-tank seminar
held in Washington,D.C.,on 14-15 October 1976. The results
of the study indicate considerable applicability of the Luftwaffe experience in World War Two on the Eastern Front in anti-tank operations,to the current military situation in
Europe.The USAF A-10 aircraft, based on the cited historical
example,appears to have considerable potential for use as an
airborne anti-tank platform in combating the massive Warsaw
Pact armored strength."
PDF link

Funny, I don't recall MANPADS or radar guided AAA on the Eastern Front…. Another 'punch my ticket' paper…

And so then Skip got sent to RAF Bentwaters for 2 years.

But back in 1977 when the paper was written the effectiveness of hitting an aircraft was offset by using automatic terrain following radar whereby the A-10 could have defeated both radar directed AAA and SAMs wouldn't it? Robert

With the massive amount of AA assets that the WARPAC would've brought to the table (even in 1977), even the A-10 would have problems. One reason why they built it so rugged (so it could absorb more hits). And defeat SAMs and radar guided AAA? Not likely, given the amount it would run into (especially in the FEBA).

'And so then Skip got sent to RAF Bentwaters for 2 years'

Or 5 sides on the Potomac (pronounced 'Potty Mac')…

Or AFLC at Wright-Patterson?

The A-10 and all the Helicopter Gunships were US/NATO's attempt to help stem the flood of all that Russkie armor. The US developed a tactic called a JAAT – Joint Air Attack Team … Where Army Cobras and USAF A-10s worked together to attrite the USSR's AFV flood. As an Air Ops in the 101, we "wargamed" this JAAT tactic. And thru out my time on active duty '79-'90, for Grunts one of the highest priority targets were Russian ADA/AAA. To assist with the JAAT as well as CAS … A series of events had to happen … Gain air superiority even if just local. SEADS – Suppress Enemy Air Defense Systems, include FA along flight routes as well as USAF "Iron Hand"/"Wild Weasel" missions. We saw USAF PAVELOW and US Army Gunships take out Iraqi intergated ADA/AAA systems as a first step in the 1st Gulf War. Opening up flight routes for CAS and gunships. We also saw in the 2nd Gulf War, where a unit 36 AH-64s from the 1st CAV were severely mauled by Iraqi ADA/AAA … It appeared to me there was no SEADS along the flight routes to avoid collateral damage … Live and learn … or not …