From: owner-skunk-works-digest@netwrx1.com (skunk-works-digest) To: skunk-works-digest@netwrx1.com Subject: skunk-works-digest V9 #52 Reply-To: skunk-works@netwrx1.com Sender: owner-skunk-works-digest@netwrx1.com Errors-To: owner-skunk-works-digest@netwrx1.com Precedence: bulk skunk-works-digest Tuesday, July 25 2000 Volume 09 : Number 052 Index of this digest by subject: *************************************************** RE: Fairchild Republic A-10 Thunderbolt II Re: Fairchild Republic A-10 Thunderbolt II Beauty in the eye... RE: Fairchild Republic A-10 Thunderbolt II RE: Fairchild Republic A-10 Thunderbolt II RE: Fairchild Republic A-10 Thunderbolt II Big Safari RE: Fairchild Republic A-10 Thunderbolt II RE: Fairchild Republic A-10 Thunderbolt II RE: Fairchild Republic A-10 Thunderbolt II RE: Fairchild Republic A-10 Thunderbolt II RE: Fairchild Republic A-10 Thunderbolt II RE: Fairchild Republic A-10 Thunderbolt II RE: Fairchild Republic A-10 Thunderbolt II RE: Fairchild Republic A-10 Thunderbolt II RE: Fairchild Republic A-10 Thunderbolt II RE: Fairchild Republic A-10 Thunderbolt II news: Concorde crashes in Paris RE: news: Concorde crashes in Paris off topic - seeking info on past programs RE: Fairchild Republic A-10 Thunderbolt II *************************************************** ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 15:04:23 -0400 From: "Weigold, Greg" Subject: RE: Fairchild Republic A-10 Thunderbolt II This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. - ------_=_NextPart_001_01BFF5A2.30699F5E Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" A-10? PRETTY? Man, if the A-9 was uglier...... - -----Original Message----- From: Tom C Robison [mailto:tcrobi@ftw.rsc.raytheon.com] Sent: July 24, 2000 9:08 AM To: skunk-works@netwrx1.com Subject: RE: Fairchild Republic A-10 Thunderbolt II David Linthwaite wrote : >Interesting post. Never heard of the Northrop YA-9A though. Can anybody enlighten me ? The Northrop A-9 was the competitor to the A-10. Two prototypes were built and later disassembled after they lost the competition. Both are now stored at the Air Force Museum. I saw them just a few weeks ago. An interesting design, but definitely not as "pretty" as the A-10. Tom - ------_=_NextPart_001_01BFF5A2.30699F5E Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" RE: Fairchild Republic A-10 Thunderbolt II

A-10?  PRETTY?   Man, if the A-9 was uglier......

-----Original Message-----
From: Tom C Robison [mailto:tcrobi@ftw.rsc.raytheon.com]
Sent: July 24, 2000 9:08 AM
To: skunk-works@netwrx1.com
Subject: RE: Fairchild Republic A-10 Thunderbolt II




David Linthwaite wrote :
>Interesting post. Never heard of the Northrop YA-9A though. Can anybody
enlighten me ?

The Northrop A-9 was the competitor to the A-10. Two prototypes were built and
later
disassembled after they lost the competition. Both are now stored at the Air
Force Museum.
I saw them just a few weeks ago. An interesting design, but definitely not as
"pretty" as the A-10.

Tom


- ------_=_NextPart_001_01BFF5A2.30699F5E-- ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 13:23:55 -0700 (PDT) From: Kathy Rages Subject: Re: Fairchild Republic A-10 Thunderbolt II > From: Tom C Robison [mailto:tcrobi@ftw.rsc.raytheon.com] > > > I saw them just a few weeks ago. An interesting design, but definitely not > > as "pretty" as the A-10. > > A-10? PRETTY? Man, if the A-9 was uglier...... > Yeah, the very sight of it would probably turn the enemy to stone. - -- Kathy Rages ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 16:34:03 -0400 From: "Morris, Andrew" Subject: Beauty in the eye... Well there is a certain elegance in both form and function for the A-10. Conceptually it strayed from a standard cookie cutter a/c design of that era. And it had been a while since I looked at the A-9, it reminded me of the Bell P-59A with a sleeker nose and bigger air inlets! And from a non-mil pilot's perspective: if an aircraft's design is also intended to provide a sense of ruggedness or confidence- the A-10 would induce me to do what needs to be done more than the appearance of the A-9 (do ya know what I mean here?). Andy Morris - -----Original Message----- From: Weigold, Greg [mailto:GregWeigold@mynd.com] Sent: Monday, July 24, 2000 3:04 PM To: 'skunk-works@netwrx1.com' Subject: RE: Fairchild Republic A-10 Thunderbolt II A-10? PRETTY? Man, if the A-9 was uglier...... - -----Original Message----- From: Tom C Robison [ mailto:tcrobi@ftw.rsc.raytheon.com ] Sent: July 24, 2000 9:08 AM To: skunk-works@netwrx1.com Subject: RE: Fairchild Republic A-10 Thunderbolt II David Linthwaite wrote : >Interesting post. Never heard of the Northrop YA-9A though. Can anybody enlighten me ? The Northrop A-9 was the competitor to the A-10. Two prototypes were built and later disassembled after they lost the competition. Both are now stored at the Air Force Museum. I saw them just a few weeks ago. An interesting design, but definitely not as "pretty" as the A-10. Tom ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 15:56:26 -0500 From: "Tom C Robison" Subject: RE: Fairchild Republic A-10 Thunderbolt II "A-10? PRETTY? Man, if the A-9 was uglier......" Yes, the A-10 is rather elegant looking compared to the A-9, in my opinion...The A-9 sat too low and squat, had a single vertical tail; twin engines, I think, but within the fuselage, with intakes on top... all in all, the A-10 is much more aesthetically pleasing (for a warthog). Tom ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 17:12:25 -0400 From: John Szalay Subject: RE: Fairchild Republic A-10 Thunderbolt II At 03:04 PM 7/24/2000 -0400, you wrote: > Man, if the A-9 was uglier...... -----Original Message----- Remember: beauty is in the eye of the beholder. even the F-4 goes by the monikor "Double Ugly" But it sure looked beautiful to us down in the mud. John Szalay 101st Airborne (65-68) Pathfinder's ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 15:17:50 -0700 From: Erik Hoel Subject: RE: Fairchild Republic A-10 Thunderbolt II Tom [mailto:tcrobi@ftw.rsc.raytheon.com] wrote: > Yes, the A-10 is rather elegant looking compared to the A-9, > in my opinion...The A-9 sat too low and squat, had a single > vertical tail; twin engines, I think, but within the fuselage, > with intakes on top... all in all, the A-10 is much more > aesthetically pleasing (for a warthog). This is sort of like the frog calling the toad ugly. In any event, Andy Morris sent me (thanks Andy) a couple links that have images of the A-9 to help refresh my memory of what it looked like: http://aerofiles.com/north-a9a.jpg http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/a-9.htm Erik - -- Erik Hoel mailto:ehoel@esri.com Environmental Systems Research Institute http://www.esri.com 380 New York Street 909-793-2853 (x1-1548) tel Redlands, CA 92373-8100 909-307-3067 fax ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 21:19:43 -0700 From: "T.Toth" Subject: Big Safari Quiet USAF Organization Fields Covert Spycraft http://www.aviationnow.com/TwoShare/getPage?sid=4177770264245827683 And if you want more on their 'Project Scathe Mean' (desruption of Iraki Air defence in 1991) http://www.aviationnow.com/TwoShare/getPage?sid=6171097620514865068 One wonders what else they've been up to... Timothy ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 08:01:58 -0400 From: "Weigold, Greg" Subject: RE: Fairchild Republic A-10 Thunderbolt II This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. - ------_=_NextPart_001_01BFF630.55810488 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" These images evoke a more sleek, aerodynamic feel (regardless of whether it really was). The A-9 looks more like a fighter than the A-10. Of course, the A-10 proved to be beautiful in function, if not looks - -----Original Message----- From: Erik Hoel [mailto:ehoel@esri.com] Sent: July 24, 2000 6:18 PM To: 'skunk-works@netwrx1.com' Subject: RE: Fairchild Republic A-10 Thunderbolt II Tom [mailto:tcrobi@ftw.rsc.raytheon.com] wrote: > Yes, the A-10 is rather elegant looking compared to the A-9, > in my opinion...The A-9 sat too low and squat, had a single > vertical tail; twin engines, I think, but within the fuselage, > with intakes on top... all in all, the A-10 is much more > aesthetically pleasing (for a warthog). This is sort of like the frog calling the toad ugly. In any event, Andy Morris sent me (thanks Andy) a couple links that have images of the A-9 to help refresh my memory of what it looked like: http://aerofiles.com/north-a9a.jpg http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/a-9.htm Erik - -- Erik Hoel mailto:ehoel@esri.com Environmental Systems Research Institute http://www.esri.com 380 New York Street 909-793-2853 (x1-1548) tel Redlands, CA 92373-8100 909-307-3067 fax - ------_=_NextPart_001_01BFF630.55810488 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable RE: Fairchild Republic A-10 Thunderbolt II

These images evoke a more sleek, aerodynamic feel = (regardless of whether it really was).  The A-9 looks more like a = fighter than the A-10.

Of course, the A-10 proved to be beautiful in = function, if not looks

-----Original Message-----
From: Erik Hoel [mailto:ehoel@esri.com]
Sent: July 24, 2000 6:18 PM
To: 'skunk-works@netwrx1.com'
Subject: RE: Fairchild Republic A-10 Thunderbolt = II


Tom [mailto:tcrobi@ftw.rsc.raythe= on.com] wrote:

> Yes, the A-10 is rather elegant looking compared = to the A-9,
> in my opinion...The A-9 sat too low and squat, = had a single
> vertical tail; twin engines, I think, but = within the fuselage,
> with intakes on top... all in all, the A-10 is = much more
> aesthetically pleasing (for a warthog).

This is sort of like the frog calling the toad = ugly.

In any event, Andy Morris sent me (thanks Andy) a = couple links that have
images of the A-9 to help refresh my memory of what = it looked like:

        http://aerofiles.com/north-a9a.jpg

        http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/a-9.htm

Erik
--
Erik = Hoel           &n= bsp;           &n= bsp;           mailto:ehoel@esri.com
Environmental Systems Research = Institute      http://www.esri.com
380 New York = Street           =          909-793-2853 (x1-1548) = tel
Redlands, CA  = 92373-8100          &n= bsp;           &n= bsp;  909-307-3067 fax



- ------_=_NextPart_001_01BFF630.55810488-- ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 08:08:18 -0400 (EDT) From: Sam Kaltsidis Subject: RE: Fairchild Republic A-10 Thunderbolt II > Tom [mailto:tcrobi@ftw.rsc.raytheon.com] wrote: > > > Yes, the A-10 is rather elegant looking compared to the A-9, > > in my opinion...The A-9 sat too low and squat, had a single > > vertical tail; twin engines, I think, but within the fuselage, > > with intakes on top... all in all, the A-10 is much more > > aesthetically pleasing (for a warthog). > > This is sort of like the frog calling the toad ugly. > > In any event, Andy Morris sent me (thanks Andy) a couple links that have > images of the A-9 to help refresh my memory of what it looked like: > > http://aerofiles.com/north-a9a.jpg > > http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/a-9.htm > > Erik > -- > Erik Hoel mailto:ehoel@esri.com > Environmental Systems Research Institute http://www.esri.com > 380 New York Street 909-793-2853 (x1-1548) tel > Redlands, CA 92373-8100 909-307-3067 fax > > The A-10 might be ugly but it can fly with 50% of the wing blown away :-) pretty impressive... not to mention that the pilot is seated in a titanium tub for added protection. IIRC the A-10's vital parts can take multiple hits from 27mm AAA and survive, I think the cockpit armor can withstand up to 57mm hits (but I'm not positive about that because I don't have my A-10 book handy right now). During desert storm 2 A-10s took out 22 tanks in one engagement... fortunately for us the A-10 is pretty vicious :-) Unfortunately, the USAF is trying to get rid of the A-10 because it doesn't want to perform the A-10's mission, but we can always use some serious tank-busters and CAS aircraft in the sky. The F-22 and JSF aren't going to be nearly as survivable as * the A-10 and yet they are going to be expected to perform the A-10's mission upon its retirement. Heck, a few 7.62mm (.30cal) rounds might be able to bring down or cripple an F-22 or JSF... * or as capable in CAS, anti-tank and stike missions Sam CIO - Dark Entertainment LLC http://www.darkent.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 07:46:09 -0500 From: "Tom C Robison" Subject: RE: Fairchild Republic A-10 Thunderbolt II >In any event, Andy Morris sent me (thanks Andy) a couple links that have >images of the A-9 to help refresh my memory of what it looked like: http://aerofiles.com/north-a9a.jpg Well, now I'm confused. I thought I saw the two A-9 prototypes at Dayton a few weeks ago, but what I saw had air intakes on top of the fuselage behind the canopy. Otherwise the appearance of the fuselage was certainly reminiscent of the A-9 (The two were in pieces, fuselage separated from wings, other bits and pieces lying around, but the general length and shape of the fuselage was suggestive of A-9) What was it, then, that I saw at Dayton? Do they have a couple Frogfoots, I wonder? Tom ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 07:53:14 -0500 From: "Tom C Robison" Subject: RE: Fairchild Republic A-10 Thunderbolt II Sam wrote "Unfortunately, the USAF is trying to get rid of the A-10 because it doesn't want to perform the A-10's mission, but we can always use some serious tank-busters and CAS aircraft in the sky. The F-22 and JSF aren't going to be nearly as survivable as * the A-10 and yet they are going to be expected to perform the A-10's mission upon its retirement. Heck, a few 7.62mm (.30cal) rounds might be able to bring down or cripple an F-22 or JSF..." I've never understood the Air Farce's attitude on this. If they don't want to do the mission, why don't they give or sell the aircraft to the Army or the Marines? Tom ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 09:38:56 -0400 (EDT) From: Sam Kaltsidis Subject: RE: Fairchild Republic A-10 Thunderbolt II > >In any event, Andy Morris sent me (thanks Andy) a couple links that have > >images of the A-9 to help refresh my memory of what it looked like: > > http://aerofiles.com/north-a9a.jpg > > > Well, now I'm confused. I thought I saw the two A-9 prototypes at Dayton > a few weeks ago, but what I saw had air intakes on top of the fuselage > behind the canopy. Otherwise the appearance of the fuselage was certainly Kinda sounds like an A-10... I don't recall having seen either of the two YA-9s at WPAFB. Perhaps these links will help resolve this... http://www.af.mil/news/factsheets/A_10_OA_10_Thunderbolt_II.html http://www.wpafb.af.mil/museum/modern_flight/mf39.htm > reminiscent of the A-9 (The two were in pieces, fuselage separated from wings, > other bits and pieces lying around, but the general length and shape of the > fuselage was suggestive of A-9) > > What was it, then, that I saw at Dayton? Do they have a couple Frogfoots, > I wonder? I don't think they have Su-25s at WPAFB... The Su-25 Frogfoot does look similar to the YA-9 though... interesting huh? http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/row/su-25.htm http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/a-9.htm > > Tom > > Sam CIO - Dark Entertainment LLC http://www.darkent.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 09:53:17 -0400 (EDT) From: Sam Kaltsidis Subject: RE: Fairchild Republic A-10 Thunderbolt II > Sam wrote > "Unfortunately, the USAF is trying to get rid of the A-10 because it doesn't > want > to perform the A-10's mission, but we can always use some serious tank-busters > and CAS aircraft in the sky. > > The F-22 and JSF aren't going to be nearly as survivable as * the A-10 and yet > they are going to be expected to perform the A-10's mission upon its retirement. > > Heck, a few 7.62mm (.30cal) rounds might be able to bring down or cripple an > F-22 or JSF..." > > I've never understood the Air Farce's attitude on this. If they don't want to do > the mission, > why don't they give or sell the aircraft to the Army or the Marines? lol They don't want the A-10 or the A-10 mission but they would rather give up half their budget rather than allow someone else to have the A-10 or take over the CAS mission. I'm exaggerating but you get the idea... the USAF is suffering from "we don't want it but we'll be damned if we let someone else have it" attitude. Perhaps Art could elaborate as he has done so eloquently in the past. > > Tom > > Sam CIO - Dark Entertainment LLC http://www.darkent.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 08:55:56 -0500 From: "Tom C Robison" Subject: RE: Fairchild Republic A-10 Thunderbolt II More on the A-9A: http://www.wpafb.af.mil/museum/research/attack/a6/a6-11.htm ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 10:16:27 -0400 From: "Weigold, Greg" Subject: RE: Fairchild Republic A-10 Thunderbolt II This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. - ------_=_NextPart_001_01BFF643.1F2CB5AE Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" With inter-serice rivalries being what they are, would the Army or Marines be interested in used USAF planes? Greg W - -----Original Message----- From: Tom C Robison [mailto:tcrobi@ftw.rsc.raytheon.com] Sent: July 25, 2000 8:53 AM To: skunk-works@netwrx1.com Subject: RE: Fairchild Republic A-10 Thunderbolt II Sam wrote "Unfortunately, the USAF is trying to get rid of the A-10 because it doesn't want to perform the A-10's mission, but we can always use some serious tank-busters and CAS aircraft in the sky. The F-22 and JSF aren't going to be nearly as survivable as * the A-10 and yet they are going to be expected to perform the A-10's mission upon its retirement. Heck, a few 7.62mm (.30cal) rounds might be able to bring down or cripple an F-22 or JSF..." I've never understood the Air Farce's attitude on this. If they don't want to do the mission, why don't they give or sell the aircraft to the Army or the Marines? Tom - ------_=_NextPart_001_01BFF643.1F2CB5AE Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" RE: Fairchild Republic A-10 Thunderbolt II

With inter-serice rivalries being what they are, would the Army or Marines be interested in used USAF planes?

Greg W

-----Original Message-----
From: Tom C Robison [mailto:tcrobi@ftw.rsc.raytheon.com]
Sent: July 25, 2000 8:53 AM
To: skunk-works@netwrx1.com
Subject: RE: Fairchild Republic A-10 Thunderbolt II




Sam wrote
"Unfortunately, the USAF is trying to get rid of the A-10 because it doesn't
want
to perform the A-10's mission, but we can always use some serious tank-busters
and CAS aircraft in the sky.

The F-22 and JSF aren't going to be nearly as survivable as * the A-10 and yet
they are going to be expected to perform the A-10's mission upon its retirement.

Heck, a few 7.62mm (.30cal) rounds might be able to bring down or cripple an
F-22 or JSF..."

I've never understood the Air Farce's attitude on this. If they don't want to do
the mission,
why don't they give or sell the aircraft to the Army or the Marines?

Tom


- ------_=_NextPart_001_01BFF643.1F2CB5AE-- ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 09:51:12 -0500 From: "Tom C Robison" Subject: RE: Fairchild Republic A-10 Thunderbolt II I wrote: > Well, now I'm confused. I thought I saw the two A-9 prototypes at Dayton > a few weeks ago, but what I saw had air intakes on top of the fuselage > behind the canopy. Otherwise the appearance of the fuselage was certainly and Same wrote: "Kinda sounds like an A-10... I don't recall having seen either of the two YA-9s at WPAFB." and I reply... These two fuselages were in storage in the restoration area, which I toured about a month ago. The tour guide didn't know what they were, but they looked like A-9s to me at the time. However, these had two air intakes, about 8-10 inches wide and 3-4 inches high built into the upper fuselage between the canopy and the tail. There were no engines visible on these airframes, thus I assumed the engines were internal or attached to the wings. The wings were separated from the fuselages and stacked nearby. All the pieces were natural metal, and there were no national or corporate markings visible. I thought sure at the time that they were A-9s, but now I don't think so. What could they be? Tom ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 09:53:49 -0500 From: "Tom C Robison" Subject: RE: Fairchild Republic A-10 Thunderbolt II I'm exaggerating but you get the idea... the USAF is suffering from "we don't want it but we'll be damned if we let someone else have it" attitude. Indeed, the same as the SR-71 mission. Seems to me some folks in the Air Force need to be reminded of who they're working for. Tom ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 08:55:09 -0700 From: Erik Hoel Subject: news: Concorde crashes in Paris For those of you interested in the Concorde, an Air France Concorde went down an hour ago in Paris, killing all 109 aboard. Cnn.com, etc. have good streaming video/audio coverage. Erik ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 12:54:53 -0400 From: "Weigold, Greg" Subject: RE: news: Concorde crashes in Paris This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. - ------_=_NextPart_001_01BFF659.406A874E Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" What I heard a little while ago talked about it getting almost airborne, then rolling over and hitting a hotel at the airport..... - -----Original Message----- From: Erik Hoel [mailto:ehoel@esri.com] Sent: July 25, 2000 11:55 AM To: Skunk Works (E-mail) Subject: news: Concorde crashes in Paris For those of you interested in the Concorde, an Air France Concorde went down an hour ago in Paris, killing all 109 aboard. Cnn.com, etc. have good streaming video/audio coverage. Erik - ------_=_NextPart_001_01BFF659.406A874E Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable RE: news: Concorde crashes in Paris

What I heard a little while ago talked about it = getting almost airborne, then rolling over and hitting a hotel at the = airport.....



-----Original Message-----
From: Erik Hoel [mailto:ehoel@esri.com]
Sent: July 25, 2000 11:55 AM
To: Skunk Works (E-mail)
Subject: news: Concorde crashes in Paris


For those of you interested in the Concorde, an Air = France Concorde went
down an hour ago in Paris, killing all 109 aboard. = Cnn.com, etc. have good
streaming video/audio coverage.

Erik

- ------_=_NextPart_001_01BFF659.406A874E-- ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 10:25:16 -0700 From: Tony Dinkel Subject: off topic - seeking info on past programs I hope the members of this list can help me with a curiosity I have had for some time. I am looking for a place, an email list, news group or web page where people who helped to build history in aviation and aerospace meet to talk about old times. Any program is of interest even ones that were canceled or considered insignificant. NASA, DOD, JPL, other contractors or independents. Engineers, techs, mechanics, assemblers, test conductors, even the people who swept the floors. Anybody is of interest. I am not writing a book, but I may build a web page if I get enough interest. Please respond off list, I appreciate everyone's patience. Tony Dinkel tonydinkel@clubnet.net ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 18:29:44 GMT From: "wayne binkley" Subject: RE: Fairchild Republic A-10 Thunderbolt II i am not 100% sure but i believe the army is prohibited by an agreement(which could be changed)or by law(much more difficult) from operating certain kinds of acft. whether the A-10 is one or not i do not know.the USAF wasn't very happy when the army got mohawks,and i was surprised to learn they were operating 4 engine turboprop acft(dehavillands(sp?)).this all goes back to the "middle" of the war in vietnam when the army turned over it's C-7 caribou's to the AF and the AF gave the army it's cargo helicopters(it kept rescue and "special ops).if any one can enlighten me on this subject,please do. wayne - ----Original Message Follows---- From: "Weigold, Greg" With inter-serice rivalries being what they are, would the Army or Marines be interested in used USAF planes? Greg W - -----Original Message----- From: Tom C Robison [mailto:tcrobi@ftw.rsc.raytheon.com] Sam wrote "Unfortunately, the USAF is trying to get rid of the A-10 because it doesn't want to perform the A-10's mission, but we can always use some serious tank-busters and CAS aircraft in the sky. The F-22 and JSF aren't going to be nearly as survivable as * the A-10 and yet they are going to be expected to perform the A-10's mission upon its retirement. Heck, a few 7.62mm (.30cal) rounds might be able to bring down or cripple an F-22 or JSF..." I've never understood the Air Farce's attitude on this. If they don't want to do the mission, why don't they give or sell the aircraft to the Army or the Marines? Tom ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ End of skunk-works-digest V9 #52 ******************************** To subscribe to skunk-works-digest, send the command: subscribe in the body of a message to "majordomo@netwrx1.com". If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe "local-skunk-works": subscribe local-skunk-works@your.domain.net To unsubscribe, send mail to the same address, with the command: unsubscribe in the body. Administrative requests, problems, and other non-list mail can be sent to georgek@netwrx1.com. A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "skunk-works-digest" in the commands above with "skunk-works". Back issues are available for viewing by a www interface located at: http://www.netwrx1.com/skunk-works/ If you have any questions or problems please contact me at: georgek@netwrx1.com Thanks, George R. Kasica Listowner