- Видео 1
- Просмотров 4 716 287
AF Warthog
Добавлен 21 май 2014
Sen. McCain on the A-10: "... don't insult my intelligence!"
U.S. Senate Armed Service Committee hearing on the Air Force
April 29, 2014
April 29, 2014
Просмотров: 4 716 307
Добавлен 21 май 2014
Mcains not buried in Arizona he was deposited in the Tomb of the unknown soldier. Soon to be exhumed and then redeposited in the labrea tarpits.
The military telling our government you're wasting money, and the politicians are like, nope.
Realistically there's no way the B1 will be used for close air support (CAS) because it's a very expensive asset that's going to be used for stuff that justifies its huge payload and supersonic speed. It's funny how the 4 star air force general talks about budget cuts and using the B1 for CAS in the same sentence. It's also funny how these guys can extrapolate a relatively minor conflict in Afghanistan as a case study for a war with a near peer adversary, where air supremacy and even air superiority might never be achieved. In such a war a B1 is not going to be risked for CAS.
Quit giving our taxpayers money to other countries. Wow budget fixed now
women in the military,,,, lmao. they shouldnt be voting.
B 1 as close air support 😂 she has never served and will never serve 💯
Completely overrated aircraft. Strike Eagles can do what ever the A-10 does snd more. Change my mind.
I like presidents who don't insult war heroes.
There is no finer CAS aircraft than the Hog! The Cobra and Apache are close but not equal.
"B1 Bomber has done some some close air support". She doesn't have a clue.
So at the end of the day did they completely get rid of the A10 and what was their reason for doing so?
2:13 The B-1 bomber *has* been used for close air support, and might hold the record for most friendly/civilian deaths with a single bomb in the 21st century. Up to 147... (I guess it was hard to count the bodies after the blast.) But the Air Force left that out of their friendly fire comparison because they omitted 2009 data from their report. And what is the operating cost per hour of a B-1? Multiples of the A-10s $10,000/hr.
Oh but the A 10 is completely fine? Even though it's notorious for hitting friendly troops due to its low situational awareness, the gun is completely useless against tanks, which was its main design purpose, and the precision weapons it mainly uses can be delivered much safer and faster by other planes, and one of the main selling points (that being its cheapness, reliability, ease of maintenance, etc,) are now all gone in the newest model of the plane, which is the only one actually viable for modern combat, so it isnt even unique anymore, it's just a slow sitting duck of a plane, an easy target for SAMs and anti air guns. The A 10 is outdated and obsolete, that's all that needs to be said
*Bu-ut, it does brrt!*
"they're the ones with troops in harms way" damn that was the most military specific backhanded put down I have ever heard
This woman is a joke
Waiting for this video to age like vinegar. Ah yes the a10, rampantly murdering children and blue coalition forces left right and centre. Lets advocate its continued deployment as it hap hazzardly deploys precision guided munitions that pretty much any other, better suited platform can carry, in a less precise way.
How do those hold up against Soviet Mig[hty] Gnats? 🤔 Are those difficult to squash? We have a lot of those A10s, right? Slava Ukraini!
Mccain was wrong. Time and time again
JM right on this one.
McCain dead, where he belongs…
That's like saying, "we're going to replace our aircraft carriers with 3 battle ships taped together pulling an oil rig platform behind them..aircraft can still land on it" like this bitch is dumb as hell
6️⃣6️⃣6️⃣1️⃣
If tanks around ,,,,,a 10 if fast enothe you think two jet moter miss and what's on it again you should look into them if your using tanks support troops with them behind lines and when advancing good tank buster or troop eniliator ,,
Brrrrrrrrrttttt
The A-10 is trash in a real war.
How many Iraqi vehicles did it kill compared to the SU-25?
@@omwando1 I don't think Russia ever went to Iraq but sure I guess..
I think that's the only time I've agreed with John Mc Cain on anything.
The B52 still works. The C130 still works. The A10 still works and the AF has always hated it. Just give it to the Army and to hell with the AF controlling all fixed wing aircraft. Justification: it's tactical, just as are helicopters. AF is strategic. I also disagreed with McCain on many political issues, but he's dead right on this one.
He's not right on this one either, I challenge you to find me ONE thing the A 10 can do that other planes can't do better
A- 10 is a Tank Killer... USMC tool that Jarheads are so familiar w/... Love Self, Peace.... What is it, 200 rounds a minute on the Mini Gun...!!!
Close air support to ground troops with a B1 bomber??? The time an A10 spent in the air for immediate response for close air support, to troops out on patrol or already engaged by large Taliban numbers, could and never was something a B1 bomber could do. Trusting a B1 bomber for close air support ...in the same manner as an A10 could produce, is technically impossible. I think some of even the military hierarchy are delusional in what they refer to as close air support, and what is close air support to a section of soldiers pinned down, under fire and facing certain death on the ground. A10s have returned home after saving our ass`s on the ground, with wounded pilots, shot up aircraft hardly able to fly, and a wing and a prayer to keep them alive....no such event ever happened to a B1 crew. I couldn't stand McCain....but this is one instance he was just sticking to plain everyday facts for the soldier on the ground that relies on good, expedient ground support!
The comment section for this video is fascinating - The armchair admirals are out in full force. By looking at comment history, contribution to this thread, and the need to argue with men who have served, it’s more than obvious who has got their Air Force knowledge from video games or being obsessed with RUclips videos on the topic of CAS, lol. You know what they say….opinions are like assholes. Ill watch the experts make the decisions, and wait for other experts to provide criticism or to refute claims.
"It is my belief that the B1 bomber"😂 lol, but can those planes loiter as long as the A10 ? 2nd, how much does it cost to operate a B1 or F16, per hour, vs the A10?
we need John McCain and the A10 in the world right now
No we don't, the A 10 is an outdated and obsolete POS and it can't be retired soon enough
The last Republican I had any respect for.... R.I.P. Senator McCain.
This is at once hilarious, pathetic and frightening. This twits think a B1 bomber will do close air support.
They always start by kissing ass.
The warthog needs to stay period!
If you believe a gun with a plane is obsolete I very much question your ability to think. Because fucking seriously you think a strategic bomber is better than a jet built for CAS?
A10 is redundant imo, you can use the b1 to use JDAM or laser guided, carry way more bombs, longer range, loiter at very high altitudes. if theres too many SAMs it can use stand off weapons also it can stay on station longer, advanced sniper pods/targeting pods to view the ground, then employ guided bombs mean your aircraft just flies above at a safe altitude out of triple AAA/manpads, you can also run sead/dead aircraft to clear heavy SAMs JDAM/LJDAM and laser guided bombs mean you can hit targets with great great accuracy and deliver huge punches. its literally an angle of death if it is above - id be very very scared of a bomber with say 20 JDAMs, these things can carry sooo many weapons, the payload is stupid, and carries a lot of fuel. the b1 can even cruise very fast to target area I love the A10 but i think it would be better to use mavericks on A10 and guided bombs/rockets
The B-1 bomber has dropped more bombs in close air support than the A-10... 🤦🏻♂️ I love it when politicians act cocky about something and don't actually know. 😒
Oh yeah because a strategic bomber is better than a aircraft built for the purpose of CAS.
@@Ghost0465-1 Then why has it dropped more bombs in close air support??? 🤔🤡 The A-10 isn't all it's cracked up to be. A-10 has the highest friendly fire rate of any active plane. People only like it because of the cool gun sounds. It's not an effective plane. You're doing exactly what I called out the ignorant politicians for. 🤡
@@Studio23MediaBut the C-130 still works the B-52 still works what about the A-10 all the planes I have mentioned have been in service since the mid to late 50’s
When I see videos of the A-10 flying today, I am always reminded of this video on how this Senator with actual wartime experience had to tell in the most polite way possible, 'Are you f***ing kidding me that you would actually compare the use of a B1 or even F15 or 16 for that matter as a dedicated and more reliable close air support aircraft than the A10?" I'm not even American and this so rings true. The A10 is a beast. End of story and hope it lives on for a long period of time
The general (Welsh) that he was talking to was a former A-10 pilot that flew in the Middle East. McCain had been far removed from his Vietnam flying days. McCain represents Arizona and Arizona is the home to the A-10 pilot traning.
Unbelievable that women has no Fricken idea WTF she is talking about…just unbelievable
No she's 100% correct the B1 conducted 25% of CAS missions for the USAF between 2014 and 2019. Its far more survivable and its accuracy is far safer for troops on the ground
God this is GREAT.
Afghanistan war is different than a conventional war. Waiting an hour for a b-1 lancer to bomb the taliban is somewhat exceptable in this low intensity warfare. On the other hand, if youre sitting in a trench currently being assaulted by Russian tanks, infantry, and IFVs, you are fucked if you have to wait an hour, and you would be lucky if the B-1 doesnt end up bombing you as well.
I love this man, b1 bomber lol.
To be fair, they did use the B1 extensively in a CAS role in Afganistan, but it was because of a lack of availability of other aircraft. They switched as soon as they could. Cause somehow I doubt it worked as well as the A10...
Now-a-days, the CAS mission is achieved using guided munitions and a targeting pod (the A-10 included). All you really need is something to truck the munitions to the area and loiter. So you want something that can carry a lot of stuff and has a large fuel tank. The B-1 can carry 125,000 lbs (this is more than the B-52 which can only carry up 70,000 lbs) compared to the A-10's 16,000 lbs. As a result, 8 B-1s accounted for 40% of all munitions dropped during Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF) by tonnage compared to the 735 fighters that were deployed, which likely accounted for a significant portion of the remaining tonnage. Other aircraft were used because there was a lack of available B-1s. Secretary James and General Welsh do a very poor job of conveying their points.
B1 bomber, do these two know how close you get for close air support, A10 is and always will be the best plane for this job.What a couple of MORONS
A-10 is dog shit. It has more friendly fire incidents than any aircraft. It's obsolete, bad at CAS, extremely inaccurate and more expensive than the F-16 and F-35 per flight hour while also having now unique capabilities.
@@capras12 so is your MAMA
Man, it sure would be nice if the air force ever made another dedicated close-air-support airframe instead of an endless supply of new multirole fightercraft. Oh well, guess we'll keep going with a staggeringly long-lived CAS frame that is only relevant thanks to its amazing original design and an endless suite of upgrades.
A-10 is dogshit. Those multirole aircraft you mentioned are more capable, cheaper and MUCH more survivable than the A-10.
@@capras12 Yes, the point of my comment was that a modern CAS craft would be even better at the job than either; currently, the USAF etc's options for close-air-support are either an obsolete airframe or multirole craft that, while adequate, suffer from design compromises because they're mostly a fighter. While either are fine for striking technologically inferior targets like terrorists, and modern multirole craft would _probably_ work against a modern peer competitor (overwhelming technological, numerical and pilot-qualitative advantages cover a multitude of sins), a newer, dedicated CAS craft would be capable of substantially better performance in a narrow field.
@@kevint1929 I disagree. Current multirole aircraft can perform CAS without any reasonable compromise. For example, the F-35A can carry more weight has a higher range and MUCH more capable sensor suite than the A-10. Why make a new aircraft when the F-35 can already do everything you need for fixed wing CAS? Was sort of capabilities are supposedly being compromised on with the multi role aircraft?
I wouldn't insult her intelligence but I won't ever be the man any woman wants me to be not to say any woman wants me anyway just throwing that out there can we talk about me dying yet and actually me die this time and not be brought back
Why you bring this piece of shit up. He's dead leave it that way it's much better than having him alive.
Sec. James needs to put those tits in war.. what a clown !!
Sec. James needs to put those tits in war.. what a clown !!