Comments by "Titanium Rain" (@ChucksSEADnDEAD) on "Why The A-10 Warthog Is Totally Invincible" video.

  1.  @dkkuhn87  That's not true. Air superiority was achieved in both Desert Storm and Serbia, but air defenses remained active. The definition of air superiority is being able to conduct operations without prohibitive interference by opposing air forces. Defenses are ground forces.
    55
  2.  @dkkuhn87  They didn't destroy all SAMs, they targeted early warning radars and command posts first, because F-117s did not have RWRs to detect SAM emissions. That's how one F-117 was shot down in Serbia, because the pilot didn't know he was being locked. The rest of the SAM network was attacked by Wild Weasel aircraft, and Iraqis started then shutting down radars and using AAA to prevent being targeted by HARMs. And again, that's not air superiority because air superiority is just the degrading of enemy air power to the point you can fly freely without enemy fighters. You still have the ground threat.
    30
  3.  @brecibros2469  Okay, and? AAA and MANPADS are still a threat. Air superiority is when you can perform operations relatively free from opposing air forces. Air superiority has NOTHING to do with the ground threats. SAMs do not conflict with air superiority. The US achieved air superiority in both Desert Storm and Serbia, but SAM threat was always present. Taking out the SAMs doesn't achieve air superiority, taking out enemy fighters does. Also, SAM crews wise up and turn their radars off so that they can avoid being taken out. The Serb defensive crews used tactics to stay alive through the conflict.
    20
  4.  @brecibros2469  That's not the point. You lost the argument so you had to change the subject?
    11
  5.  @tallflguy  That's not true. After the US suppressed the Iraqi SAM network in 1991, the AAA kept firing. The response was sending Fast FAC F-16s armed with cluster munitions and dumb bombs. These F-16s were authorized to go under the 12,000ft safety ceiling to carry out these attacks unlike other jets.
    5
  6. The Army not only cannot operate fixed wing attack aircraft due to the key west agreement, they're also not interested in the logistical burden of gearing up to receive a 1970s aircraft that's going to have to be retired in a few years.
    4
  7. The Navy never adopted any A-10s. It wasn't designed to land on carriers.
    3
  8.  @mullerpotgieter  How is the A-10 a trump card?
    2
  9. It can't take repeated hits from RPGs, not that a RPG is easy to use against aircraft anyway. They can survive a proximity fuse detonation from a MANPADS and limp home, but a direct hit rips the airframe and causes it to lose structural strength.
    1
  10. The A-29s purchased to provide CAS for SOCOM are cheaper.
    1
  11.  @andrewdoesyt7787  Only around 700 were made. Not "thousands". And they are not all sent into combat at the same time.
    1
  12. False. Congressmen have kept the A-10 on life support since the 1990s.
    1
  13. That's not what happened. Congress is the sole government agency keeping the A-10 in service by refusing to authorize the retirement.
    1
  14.  @funfactor4528  The F-22 at the time was essentially the most powerful air superiority fighter and it was full of classified technology. The A-10 was purposefully built without high performance metrics, so it literally wouldn't matter if one got captured.
    1
  15.  @void-2b  Their reputation is unfounded. In Desert Storm six of them were lost and the USAF was forced to pull them away from Iraqi National Guard units.
    1
  16. Most modern rotary cannons keep the casings due to the danger of jets ingesting cartridges through the intake. It's usually belt fed or revolver cannons that eject casings.
    1