A-10 Stats
 

I need stats for the actual plane, AGM-65/F ATGM and Hydra 70 (M229 warhead) for my military campaign. I already have the GAU-8/A stats. Thanks!

Re: A-10 Stats
 

The Hydra 70mm rocket stats are in High Tech, and the Maverick might be extrapolated from the TOW in the same book, although the Maverick carries a much larger explosive warhead.

Re: A-10 Stats
 

Just to be clear, the AGM-65F is the naval variant, for anti-ship use. It is practically identical to the AGM-65G, except for unspecified "optimizations" to the guidance for targeting ships.

I can't find good numbers for the weapon. The heavyweight warhead of the E/F/G/H/J/K models is 300 pound with 80 pounds of explosive filler, but I haven't been able to find what filler is used. If it is something like RDX, it would give an explosive followup in the neighborhood of 6d*23 [6d*2] cr exp. Someone else will have to come up with the basic damage. Do numbers this high break Douglas Cole's formulas? Range is about 350/24000 (remember that for guided weapons, 1/2D is replaced with velocity in yd/s). Acc is best pulled off similar weapons. Total weight is 675 lbs.

Re: A-10 Stats
 

My mistake; thank you for the stats for the Maverick, but what about the actual plane? What are it's stats. Thanks!

Re: A-10 Stats
 

Maybe, maybe not, but probably. I get up to the one-ton projectiles of the 406mm guns of the Iowa battleships, but my model doesn't quite line up with that due to where I chose to optimize.

Re: A-10 Stats
 

Some plane and armament stats can be found in Pyramid 3/53 - Action. They can be used for comparisons and benchmarks, I suppose.

Re: A-10 Stats
 

Stats for the A-10 (I used to work it): AWESOME!!!

Re: A-10 Stats
 

Excuse me? Do you mean you have used A-10 stats before? If so, could you please give me a link or something?

Re: A-10 Stats
 

I think he meant that stats for the A-10 are awesome because he's dealt with it from an occupational standpoint. They were in the Guiness book of World Records for the most bullet holes in a plane that landed safely.

Re: A-10 Stats
 

That is pretty awesome

Re: A-10 Stats
 

Yes, I worked on the A-10 back when I was on active duty. That bird can carry a sh*tload of ordinance and can take enough damage to destroy five of any other combat type and it was designed to be easy to work on.

Have you tried Google? Search for the A-10 specifications and you should get what you need. What you probably won't be told is that the titanium bathtub, the cockpit protection, can take two 37mm hits in the same spot before the protection breaks down and anything after that can get through. The aircraft can fly with one engine and one horizontal and vertical stabilizer missing as well as the outer portion of each wing down to where the ailerons start.

The Electronic Warfare Receiver (what I used to work on - an earlier version, ALR-46 against ALR-69 today) can detect, and display (and otherwise warn the pilot about) as many as a dozen different threats of various types giving the direction in relation to the aircraft nose and the distance in relation to the effective danger distance. The effective danger distance is how close the threat has to be before it has a serious chance to kill the A-10.

Re: A-10 Stats
 

bump (please, plane stats anyone?)

Re: A-10 Stats
 

If you know (and can tell us without having to kill us), what sort of caliber does it take to actually pierce the skin of the wings/body/engine housings? I've seen quotes to the effect that it can "withstand" hits from 23mm (though whether that means it can't penetrate, or the DR and HP keep single/few hits from being crippling is at best vague), and the "bathtub" can stop up to 57mm groundfire (though probably not reliably near that limit). With better information there, it shouldn't be difficult to estimate the DR.

As a first draft:

Re: A-10 Stats
 

Personally, I'd treat the "withstand" as the average roll for those rounds. I'd probably give the titanium bathtub under the cockpit a level of hardened as well.

Not sure I agree with the Hnd/SR figures. 0/4 may be more accurate; it's been known to land safely after losing most of one wing and half the tail, and being riddled with .50cal AA gunfire.

Re: A-10 Stats
 

Oh boy! IIRC, 25mm would penetrate the skin other than the cockpit. And, as I said, the bathtub can take TWO 37 mm hits in the same spot and the third hit of any caliber would go through. But, there was so much duplication that no one hit with anything other than maybe a direct SAM hit would knock out the capabilities of the aircraft. My equipment was designed to prevent anyone from being able to effectively shoot at the aircraft so I had no direct knowledge except for the briefing given the maintenance and support troops when the A-10 first arrived at DMAFB. That, and the talks I had with the other maintenance people.

I'm not sure on the GURPS stats but the A-10 is extremely maneuverable, at least comparable to what I have seen WW II fighters do. The first A-10 at DMAFB put on an air show for the troops and it was doing high-G turns, loops, and rolls, etc. without leaving the maintenance area of the flight line once it was in the air, and never more than a couple of hundred feet in altitude, it didn't lose much altitude in all that maneuvering. Take-off and landing are short distance also, it was designed for unimproved runways where there might be obstacles close by.

In case you can't tell, the A-10 is my favorite of all the types I worked on, with the AC-130 a close second.

Re: A-10 Stats
 

I understand it can briefly turn inside just about any jet fighter of the same generation, but loses so much energy doing it that it's basically just a trick A-10 pilots liked to pull to annoy fighter pilots during war games. Slow, lazy turns to lure a fighter jock down into a valley to kill the "bomber", then yank the stick back and fill the sky with simulated 30mm.

Basically taught a generation of F-16 pilots which parts of the sky belong to Warthogs and Frogfoots (Frogfeet?).

Re: A-10 Stats
 

Accounts from people I've known in and around the RAF also suggest that they are surprisingly manouverable even compared to prop-trainers...

Re: A-10 Stats
 

No, it isn't a trick, it is a necessity for close air support. The A-10, and any aircraft intelligently designed for work close to the ground and in a high-threat environment will be able to maneuver like that and not lose much energy. An A-10 must be able to maneuver quickly in order to avoid not only weapons but ground obstacles as well.

In my post about the maneuverability of the A-10 I referenced the first A-10 to be assigned to DMAFB and the air show the pilot put on. I repeat that the aircraft was probably never over 200 feet in altitude and if the aircraft had lost energy as you suggest, he would have crashed into a whole bunch of A-7 aircraft parked on the flight line.