A10 Firehogs, Will This Work? — Military Forum

Sponsor Message:


My Starred Topics \| Profile \| New Topic \| Forum Index \| Help \| Search

A10 Firehogs, Will This Work?

Maiznblu_757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2002, 5112 posts, RR: 52
Posted (9 years 1 month 3 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 1729 times:

Other than it being orange Big thumbs up , I think it might... Big grin

http://www.firehogs.com/

[Edited 2004-03-28 21:55:13]

5 replies: All unread, jump to last

727200er From Canada, joined Mar 2004, 318 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (9 years 1 month 3 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 1615 times:

While it could be a workable thing, especially with the A-10s massive lifting ability and fantastic manouverability. (Is it obvious that I'm a fan? Big grin

) There would probably be a number of safety issues. I would love to see them dropping fire suppressant on a big fire.

"they who dream by day are cognizant of many things which escape those who dream only at night" - Edgar Allen Poe

L-188 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 29350 posts, RR: 62
Reply 2, posted (9 years 1 month 3 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 1602 times:

Technically yes.

But the Air Force is never going to let those A-10's out of Davis Monthan.

They keep finding new uses for an airplane that they want to destroy.

OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.

SlamClick From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 10062 posts, RR: 71
Reply 3, posted (9 years 1 month 3 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 1539 times:

The blue ribbon commission has already decreed - there will NEVER be another old, ex-military tanker conversion approved.

If the A-10 becomes a tanker according to their rules it will be as a brand-new zero-time airframe.

Seems like a good choice.

Happiness is not seeing another trite Ste. Maarten photo all week long.

L-188 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 29350 posts, RR: 62
Reply 4, posted (9 years 1 month 3 weeks 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 1497 times:

Would this be, Jim "Ground it" Hall's commision.

The day he got the hell of the NTSB was a day the darkness was lifted a little on aviation.

I am going to love to find out where the forest service is going to get all their big tankers now. Russian and Canadian tankers are too expensive or have too short of support chains, and to design something new will be too expesive.

Why is it that a 747 conversion is safe but a C-130 isn't?

Answer: it isn't, At least in anybody but Jimmys mind.

OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.

SlamClick From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 10062 posts, RR: 71
Reply 5, posted (9 years 1 month 3 weeks 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 1394 times:

It would be funny if the staggering cost of 747 tankers drove us full circle. We could wind up with hordes of Stearman and N3N tankers with 200-300 gallon hoppers at every Podunk airport.

Oops! Those would be ex-military. Guess it will have to be Grumman ag-cats.

Happiness is not seeing another trite Ste. Maarten photo all week long.

Top Of Page

Forum Index

Reply To This Topic A10 Firehogs, Will This Work?

Username:	No username? Sign up now!
Password:	Forgot Password? Be reminded. Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)

Military aviation related posts only!
Not military related? Use the other forums
No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
No hostile language or criticizing of others.
Do not post copyright protected material.
Use relevant and describing topics.
Check if your post already been discussed.
Check your spelling!
DETAILED RULES

Check Spelling

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)

Similar topics: