0
9

[–] Dildo-Shwaggins 0 points 9 points (+9|-0) ago 

Seriously, if you want to be good at your job be like the A-10. Be simple, have redundancies to ensure a small mistake doesn't become a large one, and use the correct tool for the mission.

0
3

[–] Mylon 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

Why can't we go back to that kind of design? Why does everything have to be a fucking f-35 swiss army knife? Do one job and do it well. If you need something else done, bring in that tool instead.

0
3

[–] Womb_Raider 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

To what redundancies do you refer? I don't know enough about the A-10, just that it's badass as hell.

0
8

[–] marvinrabbit 0 points 8 points (+8|-0) ago 

Just look at the engines, for example. Obviously, there are two of them. Each engine is complete unit and not molded in to the body of the plane. They are mounted high and to the rear. So in an attack run, the inlets are shielded from ground fire by the wings in front. From the sides, the large, extended tail surfaces shield the engines from additional fire. And (far from finally) each engine is mounted on a stalk held out from the fuselage. An engine can literally catch fire, burn up, and fall off without compromising the integrity of the plane.

0
3

[–] WeekendBaker 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

Could be wrong, but I think just about ALL the electronics could fail and there is enough hydrolics to still operate.

0
1

[–] Dildo-Shwaggins 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

"The redundant primary structural sections allow the aircraft to enjoy better survivability during close air support than did previous aircraft. The aircraft can survive direct hits from armor-piercing and high explosive projectiles up to 23mm. Their self-sealing fuel cells are protected by internal and external foam. Manual systems back up their redundant hydraulic flight-control systems. This permits pilots to fly and land when hydraulic power is lost."

http://www.af.mil/About-Us/Fact-Sheets/Display/Article/104490/a-10-thunderbolt-ii/

0
1

[–] watch_listed 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

And when all else fails, improvise.

0
6

[–] tanukihat 0 points 6 points (+6|-0) ago 

BRRRRRRRRRRT

0
2

[–] AOU 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

The sound of it gives me a boner.

Check YT.

0
6

[–] Aswimmingday 0 points 6 points (+6|-0) ago 

Holy shit. What a perfect gun run that'd be. Do the NORKs not know wtf a herring bone formation is?

0
6

[–] lorlipone [S] 0 points 6 points (+6|-0) ago 

Probably not so much thought put into actual strategy, when you believe your leader is god. .

0
2

[–] yabigayniggerjew 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

Show of force. North Korea does nothing but bluff.

1
3

[–] fagnig 1 points 3 points (+4|-1) ago 

It would be a better display to the world to do that, but its a display for the citizens, and theres something about the order and symmetry of military formations in non-combat displays which makes good propaganda footage.

0
1

[–] Mylon 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

Parades. Parades are about looking nice and neat for aesthetics. A real battlefield is chaos but that doesn't look neat when showing off your military and might make the citizens worry that their military isn't up to snuff of protecting them.

0
4

[–] Samsquamch 0 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago 

North Korea has not been in a war for what, 50 years? 60 years? It's no wonder they're still using WW2 and before strategies - They think making long lines of soldiers and equipment still intimidates their opponents. Little do they know their opponents are likely salivating at the chance to engage a military as clueless as North Korea's.

2
0

[–] Fuzzycrumpkin 2 points 0 points (+2|-2) ago  (edited ago)

I thought North Korea only beat us because they used gorilla tactics. It seems kinda stupid that they would try and intimidate people with who have something like a moab, and I'm pretty sure some of our warships have railguns, but that might be technically "classified"

0
1

[–] Samsquamch 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

The Korean war never officially ended, so there is no official winner and loser. That said, if the country splits in two and you end up in the impoverished country under a dictator that spends every dime on his military to try and make the world "respect you", you were on the losing side.

0
2

[–] yabigayniggerjew 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

Yummy. Look at all those armored vehicles and soft targets to blow away.

0
2

[–] AOU 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

They are under his fatness godly protection