- Joined
- Feb 26, 2019
I'd wager they're more survivable... but only if they can fly with the added ECM & the additional countermeasure pods (i.e. flares/chaff) as the USAF would flying those missions. And since the A-10's thermal signature is also definitely different & designed to be minimal (as compared to the Su-25), it's theoretically more difficult to hit with IR missiles.I'd say it's just as vulnerable as the Su-25. They could be shipped to replace frogfoot losses with the benefit of being able to mount modern Western PGMs. I'd ship them without GAU-8 ammo just to minimize foolish use of the system. I'd assume they have a shit ton of usable airframes at the boneyard to save money.
And they definitely wouldn't be flying in with AGM-65s, dropping JDAMs (unless they play bomb-toss), and doing GAU gun-runs as the USAF would; instead we'd see them being loaded to the gills with folding-fin rocketpods, same as the Su-25.
Aside from that, one capability A-10 has which would be useful isn't the gun, it's being able to use ECM & HARM to hunt Russian battlefield radars (i.e. counterbattery & range/tracking), not just SAMs.
IIRC don't think Ukraine's Su-25 has that capability or equivalent Russian missile available, and they have to use Mig-29s & Su-27s for the anti-radiation role. But that's a pretty small & risky slice to use A-10s for, so an airborne MLRS it would mostly be.