A10 Warthog vs SU25 Frogfoot - Flying Tank Comparison

A10 Warthog vs SU25 Frogfoot - Flying Tank Comparison
► Subscribe to Grid 88: goo.gl/UYzU9H
A10 Warthog vs SU25 Frogfoot - Flying Tank Comparison
At the height of the Cold War, the world's two superpowers created a new pair of battlefield aircraft, similar in both power and purpose. One is the America’s A10 Thunderbolt, known as warthog, and other SU25 also known as Frog-foot. Both aircraft were designed for the sole purpose of dedicated close air support. These tank busters remined highly effective in various battlefields since their inception. Today we’ll be pitting America’s A10 warthog against SU25 frog-foot in this video and try to determine which aircraft is better.
1. Overview
SU25 is quite a bit smaller than the A10, but has a top speed of 606mph - that is over 167mph faster than the A10. Both aircraft can carry wide array of bombs, rockets, missiles, pods and fuel tanks under their wings, but A10 can take-off with almost 7,451Ib more weapons load than its equivalent. The 30mm cannon on SU25 is significantly less impressive due to limited rounds than A10, but it still packs a killer punch. SU25 is smaller and faster, making it more difficult target. Both aircraft are heavily armored and considered safest and most feared close air support jets in the world.
2. Performance
A10 is powered by 2 turbofan engines generating 18,130 pounds of thrust combined. The engines allow the aircraft to reach at maximum speed of 439mph. With ferry range of 2,580mi, the aircraft has combat radius of 290mi. A10 weighs around 24,959Ib and can take-off with maximum weight of 50,000Ib. With climb rate of 6,000ft/min, the aircraft can reach at maximum altitude of 45,000ft.
On the other hand, major driver of SU25 performance is its two engines. The engines are capable of generating around 19,860 pounds of thrust. These are meant to drive the jet to maximum speed of 606mph. With the maximum range of 620mi, the aircraft can combat within the radius of 470mi. The frog-foot weighs around 21,605Ib and can take-off with maximum weight of 42,549Ib. With climb rate of 11,400 ft/min, the jet can reach at maximum altitude of 23,000ft.
3. Armor & Survivability
Survivability is an essential attribute of any successful ground attack aircraft. A10 excels in this category due to its heavy armor. For example, the engines are located a bit higher on the rear fuselage…
In contrast SU25 is comparatively smaller and faster jet, which makes it a difficult target from ground fire, however it is less of a problem for guided missiles. Frog-foot is able to reach supersonic speeds when flown clean, the airframe can withstand 6.5 Gs…
4. Radar & Avionics
A10 is equipped with improved communications, inertial navigation systems, night vision, fire control, weapons delivery systems and target penetration aids. The head-up display indicates air speed, altitude and dive angle on the windscreen. Pave Penny laser-tracking pods…
Similarly, SU25 has an integral laser system for ranging, tracking and targeting with HUD designation. In terms of pods the aircraft has infrared and optical systems for both day & night time operations…
5. Firepower
The A10 has 11 hardpoints including 8 pylon stations under both wings, while remining 3 are fitted under the fuselage with a total payload capacity of 16,000 lb. A10 can carry up to 10 Maverick air-to-surface missiles…
In contrast, the frog-foot is fitted with 11 hard points capable of carrying various rocket PODs, bombs and missiles. Bomb load outs include a variety of general purpose munitions, cluster bombs and other special purpose weaponry…
Watch full video for detailed Conclusion.
FOLLOW us on Social Media:
► Facebook: thegrid88
► Twitter: grid_88
► Become a Patreon
/ factsbox99
Playlists
► Military, Army, Navy & Air force
• Military
►US Army
• Playlist
► SUBSCRIBE so you never miss another video: goo.gl/UYzU9H
Credits
1) “The Descent” Kevin MacLeod (incompetech.com)
Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0 License
creativecommons.org/licenses/b...
2) US Department of Defense
3) Минобороны России
creativecommons.org/licenses/b...
The appearance of US DOD visual information does not imply or constitute their respective endorsements. All footage and images are owned by their respective owners.

[@sue08401]

Answer is - Not a single grunt would want either of them firing on them

[@armadillo3454]

facts

[@pieterniemandt1733]

Or an APC group. I mean would also not want to see either of them. These planes can cause maximum air to ground attacks. They are like downsized Fortress bomers. But can do more harm. Flying tanks. But l wonder what are their air to air abilities. Do they need a few F16s around when the Mig 21 or older come accross it. I'm going to look for answer right now.

[@artmathias9725]

Dammit, you beat me to it. It also happened to be the first comment under Grid 88's.

[@pieterniemandt1733]

Got it. A10 is an excellent dogfighter at close range and because it turn 5 times sharper than a fighter, the fighter jet will always be staring down the barrel of a 30mm. But fighters use long range radar guided missiles that can take the A10 down.

[@codexjerry1156]

Its hard to argue with this assessment.

[@westsidetrucker7943]

reasons to like the Frogfoot: Lots of fascinating facts Reasons to like the A10: BRRRRRRT WHIIIIIIIIIIIIIR

[@glennhuinda9783]

Frogfoot boasts on 4x4 rocket packs if the mission wants to use that kind of mod. 20 pcs 80mm rockets each packs.

[@jetskusintrosfin8037]

@@glennhuinda9783 lol su25 no brrt Lol laser, tv guided weapons dependant on weather, su25 no MWS and no LWS

[@s4dg]

Frogfoot: BUT I'M FASTER AND MORE MANEUVERABLE! A-10: HAHA GUN GO BRRRR--------------------------------------------------WHIIIIR

[@jetskusintrosfin8037]

Technologial gap = su25 bad

[@iplaygames8090]

@@jetskusintrosfin8037 i think su 25 is more advanced tbh. A 10 is like the B bombers can carry lot of munition and hard to shoot down.

[@ChukN0rris]

I think that it's safe to say that both of these are capable of absoloutely ruining anyone's day. The Frogfoot will do it faster, but the A-10 will do it in style.

[@JK-uy8yi]

Going to be making a whole lot more pitstops to refuel though.

[@benwatso]

Pretty sure that one gun run with the a10 will either kill enemy or just make them surrender in 4 seconds

[@dysfunctionalorange]

This is a bit late..but faster is worse when doing gun runs or using un guided munitions, you want a slow stable even approach with low stall speed, it’s almost impossible to stall out the a-10 on an attack run, however I highly doubt you could go under 200 mph in the frog foot without stalling, and most likely in the low 200s you’d lose tons of stability and maneuverability, where as the a-10 is right at home. Slower is better in cas, it’s not a fighter jet

[@lennywallace9201]

Russia with 40 colum long line of tanks can be shredded with a10s

[@huckleberryred472]

All that you need to know is the A10 can BRRRRRTTTTT and fly 2600 miles The Su can go Woosh and only fly 620 miles

[@billthecat7536]

Let's put it this way: if you've pissed off either of these pilots, you're about to have a bad day!

[@abimbolawaheed8621]

My best comment

[@davidvasquez08]

Agreed Though most likely to end your day quickly

[@ErnestJay88]

in simple sentence : A-10 is a flying minigun, SU-25 is a flying rocket launcher.

[@user-mc3if9xs7w]

eh

[@vanderwallstronghold8905]

"mini"

[@DannY-xj8ci]

@@vanderwallstronghold8905yep there's nothing mini about the GAU 8 Avenger

[@Pygmyz06]

@@vanderwallstronghold8905 yah technically.. in the military (at least the US military), calling your personal firearm a “gun” is discouraged to the point that it’s practically considered blasphemy. You’re either referring to your rifle (the big firearm) or your sidearm (your small pistol) - and you’d damn well better refer to them that way, or you’ll get chewed out by practically everyone. Side note, both may also be referred to as your weapon. But never your “gun.” If you use the word “gun” to refer to something you’re carrying on your person, you’d better be referring to your penis. As far as the military is concerned, guns are mounted weapons. Aircraft and Navy ships carry guns. They’re generally very big and very heavy. The “mini” in “minigun” refers to the fact that it’s on the smaller end of the spectrum in comparison to other vehicle-mounted weapons - rather than being small in comparison to what civilians tend to call “guns” (small arms like rifles and pistols).

[@vanderwallstronghold8905]

@@Pygmyz06 Yes I know all of this but the point is that the GAU-8 Avenger is not a minigun. It's a gatling cannon.

[@moonshredder5181]

P-47D Thunderbolt: a plane for its engine A-10 Thunderbolt: a plane for its gun

[@stefanoiaconissi2727]

F-14 Tomcat: a plane for its missile

[@actualyoungfarmer1078]

A10 engineers logic: “we need a gun that shoots armour penetrating rounds at a high fire rate.” Su25 engineers logic: “Hey comrades, have you ever thought what it would look like if the fireworks came from the sky to the ground?”

[@TrenchReisen]

Su-25 ? more like, flying Katyusha BM-8

[@99Yeti]

As I say again a 10 carries more rockets and has apkws

[@John-mf6ky]

Katyusha punching the air rn

[@dusttruction6691]

"Here's a bulletproof bathtub and a 20 foot gun. Make it able to fly manually and make sure the gun can shoot no matter the damage" btw I want them built with either the scariest gun sound or the most relieving one

[@SldOnEmWithDa45]

My base has a static A-10 displayed and it’s surprisingly not that big. It’s actually smaller (in length) than the F-100 displayed next to it. The wings are just long and the engines are massive, but it’s a relatively compact plane believe it or not.

[@elo_9420]

Au-25: a plane with guns A-10: a gun with wings

[@signa-tune2823]

Makes sense

[@yourbigfan1777]

Su*

[@tboda2621]

@@signa-tune2823 But, can the su25 do the cobra? A Ha!!! There is its weakness! No airshow chick magnetism.

[@tboda2621]

Btw, FROGFOOT? DAMN!

[@BurntBalls]

Su 25: pew pew A 10: brrrrrrrrrrrrrrt

[@SeanCampbell_iRacing]

Honestly, if these two planes combined F R O G H O G

[@guyvalentine7258]

That is absolutely hilarious. THANKS for the laugh.😂🤣😜👍👋🖖🇺🇸

[@manuvirajkhare]

Yes. That's called the Unholy Spawn.

[@soldatradev7285]

I'll die the day that comes out. There is nowhere safe then😂😂

[@jamesvangorder9599]

or...WARTFOOT

[@SeanCampbell_iRacing]

@@jamesvangorder9599i think WartFrog would work better but yeah

[@ofekk213]

the Gsh-30-2K (SU-25's gun) uses a lot of tracers and is very loud too. sure, A-10's brrrrt sound is a big moral boost, but SU-25's laser gun is a much bigger moral boost. also, the SU-25t can carry vikhr ATGMs which nullify the A-10's survivability, as if the A-10's survivability didn't mean jack shit already against SHORAD's SAMs...

[@Deltatwo3]

A10 better

[@yzakhd5586]

Broh a10 can carry atgms to

[@ofekk213]

@@yzakhd5586 I meant that the Vikhrs can act both as anti-air and anti-tank. On anti-air mode they have a 10km range and a 20m trigger radius, and they are guided by laser so the A-10 can't do jack shit to fool them off as flares, chaff and ECCM do not work on laser. The A-10's only air-to-air weapon is the AIM-9L or whatever other variant of the sidewinder it uses. While capable, the Vikhrs outrange even the AIM-9X.

[@yzakhd5586]

@@ofekk213 nop vikhr is only agm and can't exced mach2 and i don't think it have a longe burn so its a very bad aa missole

[@ofekk213]

@@yzakhd5586 It has an air-to-air mode.

[@anuclearpan4554]

"23 millimeter cannon pods" proceeds to show the su-25 deploying every weapon except for a 23mm cannon pod

[@amir021idm]

lmao

[@loafofcheese3335]

Frog foot pilots: Yeah my plane is fast and has a lot of ways to kill my targets A-10 pilots: hehe plane *BRRRRRRRRT*

[@maxwellrechkemmer8696]

Plane go brrrrrrrt

[@BraydonHopfner]

The namw is the BRRRRTTTTT

[@generalpershingm2656]

Tank go:

[@apple222sickly]

Both go BRRRRRT so...

[@cleopatravii2385]

You definitely don’t know anything about Frogfoot🤦‍♂️😁

[@allanbernabe5189]

A-10 has a Transformer toy. I don't know about SU-25.

[@coolkid7029]

Aww it has 69 likes so I can't like it

[@mrtoyexpert9769]

Allan Bernabe If anything has a Transformer toy it’s automatically better

[@Echo_4609]

A-10 automatically better now

[@sovetskyskaiyastrigon1750]

It’s and Viper,Viper is the Decepticon-Cobra aligned Decepticon and there’s the red autobot one I forgot his name

[@whydoineedaname11]

that's the best reason for one of them to be better than the other, but I now wish there was a Frogfoot Transformer so they would be equal-but-different again.

[@TheMoukis]

The frogfoot’s gun is actually two 30mm barrels fused to one frame. Great omission.

[@Gutenburg100]

Yea this video isn't very good. He mentions the fact the A-10 can take rounds but doesn't mention it has jamming devices and flares to fight off shoulder mounted launchers and SAMs until he gets to the armaments lol. Then goes to the SU-25 and doesn't mention shit about its survivability but mentions hkw it can defeat missiles launched at it. Then the gun omissions and such. Started off good with the 1 to 1 then just got worse lmao.

[@spackle9999]

@@Gutenburg100 And he also says the Frogfoot is more maneuverable?! The Frogfoot handles like a pig.

[@mnztr1]

@@spackle9999 How do you know that?

[@Marktheburrito]

@@spackle9999 With its huge armament load? Hell no, but when its load is all gone it's pretty maneuverable.

[@grantt1589]

The A-10s Brrt cannon sound affect alone makes it better

[@mojavewanderer7719]

In October of 2001, I was driving on US Highway 95 in Nevada, which is just outside the boundaries of Nellis Air Force Base , and area 51. I happened to look in my rearview mirror, and there was an A10 coming up behind me. He flew about 50 feet over my truck, and the jet wash nearly shook me off the road. The whole thing took maybe 20 seconds. It scared me half to death, but it was awesome!

[@cabourn81]

A money can’t buy experience! Lucky guy.

[@Canopus68]

I had the same thing happen to me. I was driving a 5ton from Kuwait to Bahrain. Two A-10s came up behind us about 25 ft off the deck. It was a hair raising moment. I'm sure they were laughing all the way back to base.

[@OcotilloTom]

Man how things have changed. As a machine gunner and later a platoon commander in Vietnam during my two tours in Vietnam I could expect a F-4 Phantom, A-4 Skyhawk or an occasional A-1 Sky Raider flown by the South Vietnamese as air support. Tom Boyte. Gy.Sgt. USMC, retired Vietnam 65-66/70-71

[@guyvalentine7258]

What no A-6s or A-7s. I worked on F-4s and C-130s. USAF OCT. 72-76. Udorn AB, Thailand, 6/74-6/75. F-4d's, F-4e's, RF-4c's

[@Kainery]

How do you rate the South Vietnamese troops fighting capability, and compare it to the North and VC? I'm curious.

[@specforged5651]

Thank you for your service!

[@thevoyager87]

Thank you for your service my good man!

[@duartesimoes508]

Tom Boyte and so far as I read, their pilots were awesome!

[@aussiegta8267]

Needs updating. A10 no longer has eth Penny, it uses a TPG, date link systems and has integrated helmet targeting.

[@CaptCap25]

The best thing about the A-10 is that it’s slow enough to give its targets time to piss their pants

[@joshuacruz732]

LMAO

[@Blido]

Hearing the BRRRRRRRT is a huge morale booster. So I would rather be supported by A-10 :)

[@varunkoganti9067]

You don't know about the gun pods on the su 25 do you? They're auto tracking.

[@bradleytruax4255]

The A-10 all day everyday

[@voornaam3191]

You prefer an A-10. Then buy one.The frog is faster, can get to you when that A-10 can't reach you, and let's bet it is a lot cheaper. Talking about cheaper, are you into shooting? Have you ever received the bill for 10,000 30mm rounds? Do you like paying? Is your daddy called Trump, and always paying for your mistakes? Are you a spoilt brat? Perhaps a flying .50 can save you as well, those rounds you can pay yourself. You have an expensive taste for brrrrrt. Don't get yourself into trouble! When you need an A-10, you have screwed up, yourself, you are in the wrong place. Yankee go home! Afghanistan is just one example. When you want brrrrrrrt, buy a drum kit and move those hands. Bet you only move a joystick? Got it? Do not worship guns, you'll get shot, one day. Worship God, the worst that can happen is you getting crucified. Just kidding. Got the message? Stay safe. And yeah, that Gattling is impressive, but so is that Russian plane. Russian airplane machine guns are famous. Ask pilots who know about them. Reliable is a key word. And all airplanes have a slightly different role, there will always be differences. When pilots really need heavier guns, there will be heavier guns, don't worry.

[@spectre_actual6630]

Voor Naam I don’t think he was doubting Russian planes, he was just saying he’s fond of the A-10 cuz of its main cannon (of course it’s expensive for the rounds but it’s quite reliable much like its Russian counterpart). Trust me when I say Russian planes are beautiful as I am quite the fan of the MiG series (MiG-25, 31 specifically❤️) love from Canada

[@Blido]

@@voornaam3191 Y SO SERIOUS? I'm not even from US as you assumed, I live in Poland. And altough i'm bit into shooting and I have nice arsenal of firearms (not only Americans keeps guns at home, imagine that) I don't know much about military aircraft, I just expressed that the iconic sound of the A-10 gatling gives me chills and if it would give me air support it would definitely raise my morale. That's all

[@tylerjohn3414]

Tough call. Also, there is a difference in the doctrine as well. The A-10 is designed for loitering. The Su-25 is designed to offload most of it's ordnance at once target. The A-10 is better at counterinsurgency. The Su-25 is better in a contested environment

[@simonworthington-eyre3525]

Good comment!!

[@HoLeeChit11]

Tyler John The A10 is a gun with a plane wrapped around it, also able to carry missiles and rockets. Probably the closest thing to a flying tank. The SU25 is a plane with various weapons for ground support.

[@Archangel1862]

Tyler John That doesn’t make sense when the A-10 was designed to destroy Russian tank

[@drksideofthewal]

Isn't loitering the more important trait to have for an infantry support plane? Being designed to "offload most of its ordinance on one target" is more of a bomber's purview.

[@wheeleekwazee1641]

A-10 go brrrrrrrrrrt thats my argument

[@Metaretru]

I love how cute SU25 is, like stubby fighter but pack a lot of punch lol

[@volhv1973]

SU 25 called "rook" as a bird in russian. The last model is a super rook

[@christopherings7996]

Yeah, people keep on forgetting that the Russians have their own names for their equipment. It's a trick of branding that everyone in the west uses the NATO codenames. (Which for ex eastern bloc countries, always start with F)

[@pavelperina7629]

@@christopherings7996 In Czech Republic we called it hrábě (rake) because it's how this plane look from the front with 10 hardpoints.

[@frankkpowersjr8357]

All I can say is that the A 10 brought my SON HOME. HE DROVE TRACKER TRAILERS CARRYING ABRAM TANKS

[@imthatguypal_]

I would feel so safe if an A-10 was escorting me, I thank your son for his service 💪🏽

[@brianjones8106]

That same plane probably sent a lot of enemies home in pine boxes too!! Thank you for your son's service!!

[@albertjoseph754]

I agree. As someone on the ground who was in need of close air support, the A-10 did not let us down. The same could not be said when they sent us F-16s or F-18s. Those planes fly to fast to be able to put ordnance on target at danger close.

[@winstonbarker4009]

I thank your son for his services and may God bless you all. Ps I truly love the A-10 warhog it's truly 2nd to none. It's like an avenging angel in the sky like no other

[@winstonbarker4009]

@@albertjoseph754 indeed!!

[@unfunnyironypage9664]

If I was in combat and needed close air support I honestly wouldn't care which one I got it from

[@ninaa4192]

Truth

[@samuelfischman6949]

@@ninaa4192 i'd want the BRRRRRRRRRRRRRRT

[@MagiciansApprentice1]

the A-10 got through, the Su-25 was dead on it's runway the week before we went in

[@ebukaobi2098]

@@MagiciansApprentice1 ?

[@jakekaywell5972]

@@MagiciansApprentice1 I'll take "things that didn't happen" for $500.

[@worldwarstopmotionstudio]

A10: I go brrrr. What do you have? Su25: oh, well...i go BLYATATATATATATATATATATA

[@pjotr9507]

it uses more missiles than its gun so it goes like KURVVVVWWWWWHHHHHA and BLYAT at an explosion lol

[@samcdonald888]

I would say development of each plane clearly had different design approaches. BUT…both achieved the same goal and I’d wager they are equally effective in their mission. The difference would come down to pilot skill and training methodology. Even in that regard I would wager they are equals.

[@lazersharp0262]

Didnt mention either of the aircrafts turn rates, the A10 has an insane turn rate

[@marcschepers8144]

it did say frogfoot more agile but ive seen the a10 do insane manouvres so i really doubt that. the fast turn was incredible

[@fpena6038]

It's true, the A10 is famous for it's extremely high maneuverability, which is actually factored by its low speed and large wing area (just like the highly maneuverable stunt propeller planes). The Frogfoot's increased speed, wing area, and engine type/position make it impossible for it to match the A10's maneuverability.

[@tylermoore3903]

F Pena if you’ve played dcs, a pretty accurate depiction of both as the su-25 is faster but it’s a pig in the turns it feels really heavy. The a-10 feels light although it is pretty slow it’s easier to control and more direct.

[@specialagentoso2227]

U don’t need to turn when ur going brrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrttttt

[@1FastC5ZO6]

@@specialagentoso2227 It's all about the brrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrtttttttttttttttt. lol

[@alniedrich1245]

Interesting video. That titanium "bathtub" that protects the pilot can actually withstand a 57mm round. The canopy can take a 23mm. Having worked on the A-10 for 8+ years in Alaska and England, I would point out the Warthog is far more maneuverable than most people give it credit for. When I loaded the A-10 it could only carry the AGM-65 on stations 3&9. We used the LAU-117 single rail launcher. The triple LAU-88 was loaded in a slant 2 configuration as the rail nearest the wheel well if loaded could do damage when fired (per the USAF). When I first loaded the A-10 we did load all three rails on the -88. In England the LAU-117 was the go to configuration. Note, I worked on the "A" model only.

[@catosicarius9047]

Awesome stuff I hope it's true

[@alniedrich1245]

@@catosicarius9047 Very true indeed. Weapons wise I am very well versed on the Warthog. I hold two modest distinctions of loading the first live AGM-65 on an Alaskan Air Command A-10 and being the first USAFE weapons crew chief to be qualified on the AIM-9 on this jet.

[@randybaumery8399]

Al Niedrich --- We had them at Davis Monthan AFB Tucson Arizona. They are EXCELLENT ground attack and close air support aircraft. I would imagine its safe to say that both the Warthhog and the SU-25 excel at ground attack roles and in different ways.

[@clanwaddell5628]

As a civilian, I have always marveled at the A - 10

[@brianjohnson9456]

@@clanwaddell5628 me too! Love the WartHog!!🎯

[@harryhorn5282]

I worked on the A - 10 in the late 70s at Myrtle Beach AFB & later at Bentwaters RAFB in the U K. The one thing I hope that has been improved is the ammo belt. It was made of pure aluminum & broke easily. That would not be good in a combat situation.

[@mmgross144]

Speaking as a former A-7 Corsair jet engine mechanic, I recall tales of Russian troops fearing the Warthog, calling it the Devil Cross. Honestly, before viewing this video I had never heard of the Su-25 Frogfoot, but it does sound impressive. I think the A-10's better weapons, flying ceiling, and armor give it the advantage.

[@Larez121]

In Tom Clancy's i-Red Storm Rising-i the Soviets dreaded the Warthog and called it yup "Devil's Cross"

[@elzorro7of9]

You were a US mechanic and never heard of the Frogfoot? Maybe you fell asleep during that class.

[@matejbenko8268]

Nice fairy tale

[@godra051]

You didn't hear because Russia is not continuously in a war for 2 centuries and they didn't go in so many countries, started so many wars and killing 10s of millions of people, mostly innocent. In Vietnam alone over 2mil civillians killed.

[@ghostpatriot2370]

@@godra051 your point?

[@conduit64]

Frogfoot: "I'm faster and more maneuverable" Warthog: "Who needs to worry about missiles when you can still safely fly home with only half a plane"

[@Capone80]

a true story

[@GokuBlackThatIsBlack]

*A10 engines are shot to shit* Pilot: Just one more run.

[@ComasGhost]

Wut?

[@user-mc3if9xs7w]

@@ComasGhost a10 can take a lot of shots, possibly shells and still fly back to base pretty much fine. The pilot is also sitting in a giant tub of titanium

[@ComasGhost]

@@user-mc3if9xs7w And who said not? But even in this point (survival) SU 25 is better becuase is faster and smaller making it a difficult target

[@freyawion5337]

'If you hear the BRRRT, it wasn't trying to hit you.'

[@carlson2469]

If you are the target you hear the BBRRRRRT your a ghost

[@Aegirak]

If you’re the enemy, you won’t hear it. If you hear it you are glad you heard it.

[@thatonebruneiankid8824]

If you hear the BRRRRTTT,you get blessed in two ways, First,you get to hear the holy BRRRRTTTT Second,you ain't dyin today

[@sergeantblue6115]

moral boost

[@liamfalvey5142]

So, basically, the SU-25 is a jet made for highly effective CAS, while the A-Is basically a flying tank made for highly effective CAS. So the TLDR is: Both. Both is good

[@lifeofaloneguy1024]

best answer here

[@dkerr4077]

Fortunately the narrator elaborated on the fact that the SU 25 is smaller, and faster. I got it finally after the first 10-12 times. So...does that mean the A10 is larger, and slower? I'm so confused.

[@wyvrusgriffion3948]

I think everyone knew it's is slower but it compensate with defense, maneuverability, and endurance. The Frogfoot is a sprint runner light and fast while the Warthog is a marathon runner.

[@hourdebass7916]

Pentagon: "NO! YOU CAN'T JUST KEEP FLYING AN OLD ATTACK PLANE! YOU HAVE TO HAVE STEALTH! YOU HAVE TO BE ABLE TO DOGFIGHT!" Air Force: "Lol, A-10 Warthog go Brrrt."

[@sea.biscuit]

Lmao when obama tried to stop a10s

[@thedyingmeme6]

A10: *hysterical BRRRT'ing*

[@thomasbessis2809]

It's the opposite, the air force will try anything to get rid of the A-10, the government wants to keep them in service.

[@sea.biscuit]

@@thomasbessis2809 now that's the case because trump is in office but obama really wanted them gone. also the air force doesnt want to get rid of them lol idk where you got that idea

[@deanarupe73]

@@sea.biscuit Lockheed Martin are the ones wanting to get rid of it. They were proposing a special f35 version to replace the a-10 with. So it's about money government contracts. The a-10 can be made for cheep. It's all about the💰

[@thegreatobiwan9844]

Let’s all be honest We all like the A-10 I don’t need a answer I already know why BRRRRRRRRRT

[@sjakse]

No and yes

[@BurntBalls]

True

[@hitsurapapel1978]

I prefer the frogfoot a bit

[@da_brrrt_mashine2877]

Yes

[@shaneh1872]

BRRRRRRRRT

[@gz_insurgent1767]

Fun fact: The Mig-27 had a fast rpm than the A-10 with it being literally strapped on the bottom and it would literally rip it apart when it fired.

[@quik478]

Honestly man despite having shorter barrels and shorter casings for the shells GSh-6-30 is still absolutely fucking insane and to this day is used on ships

[@99Yeti]

It did t have a bigger round tho or ap

[@Nickgames1985]

The frogfoot has over twice as much titanium protective armament.

[@jackholman5008]

It ate a manpad

[@lord_hades8210]

@@jackholman5008 And? having titanium does not makes you unbeatable, if you shoot to the A10 with manpand will eat it too, think

[@jackholman5008]

@@lord_hades8210 you think it ate a manpad in a special circumstance and not saying its invisible,i know you hate russia no need to be childish about it

[@lord_hades8210]

@@jackholman5008 No, i dont hate Russia, I love that country, but i think that i havent said anything childish, only saying what i think is the real case.

[@raistlarn]

A-10: You may be faster than me, but I have the high ground.

[@popoju9]

he said the SU25 climbs way faster. i was like, "yeah but what's the use, you have a low ceiling. do you just want to get there faster and then what....."

[@michaeljohnmorales7613]

@@popoju9 climbs faster = Kills A10 faster

[@raistlarn]

@@michaeljohnmorales7613 a10 starts higher, and commands the battle. Seriously though I highly doubt we would see these 2 ever fight unless some stupid leaders were to get into a wa...er....well hopefully they won't have to fight anytime soon.

[@dziolex2190]

@@michaeljohnmorales7613 you do realise that these are close air support planes, they are there to destroy land vehicles not air vehicles so your comment doesn't have a logical point

[@spartanx9293]

@@michaeljohnmorales7613 these planes would never fight each other

[@supratiksaha2001]

Grandpa Stuka is proud of both of them.

[@maxfreedom1710]

it's a shame the good guys lost that war

[@trololoev]

@@maxfreedom1710 yea, they can make bunch of soap out of your grandmother. Also IL-2 better.

[@CRAZYHORSE19682003]

@@trololoev They were different aircraft. The IL-2 was a TRUE close support aircraft. The Stuka was a dive bomber.

[@trololoev]

@@CRAZYHORSE19682003 i mean il-2 better as representation "grandfather" of this two planes

[@mojo5148]

@@trololoev Well, Hans Rudel helped in the development of the a10 after flying a Stuka "kanonenvogel" (Stuka with dual 3.7cm At cannons) in ww2. So the Stuka is kinda the grandpa of the A10.

[@joehayward2631]

I was a Marine grunt . When in crap you love the A10 sound, the enemy is scared and tries to run. Nothing including the worthless f35 POS can not protect ground units like the A10, I have the greatest respect for the A10 pilots and ground crews,thank you.

[@Zingalamadumi]

Biased for obvious reasons

[@Desertduleler_88]

I admire the A10 for it’s cannon and ordinance capacity, but l prefer the Su25 for it’s speed and small signature footprint.

[@j.g.beasley2646]

Ain't no point in running fast when you only gonna die tired. So I'm all the way Guardian Angel A-10 Thunderbolt.

[@Nothing....]

@@j.g.beasley2646 no hate for a10 tho just want to give more vibes

[@pranotiduttas2153]

@@j.g.beasley2646 ur both wrong the correct choice is the po-2

[@shullln]

For a CAS airframe, stall speed is the more important number than top speed.

[@notgonnaduit6315]

Yup the high ceiling is just a perk loiter time is key.

[@PotatoeJoe69]

Indeed, the slower you can go, the longer you can get rounds on target. The A-10 can pull turns at speeds as low as 180 knots. If a SU-25 tried to turn at that speed, it would fall out of the sky like a rock.

[@iphoneupdate]

Not stall speed but high angle of attack capability, an aircraft can stall at any speed but will always stall at the same angle of attack depending on configuration. Reason I prefer the A-10 any day all day.

[@TheBucketSkill]

@@iphoneupdate The way we use A-10 in the middle east vs there SU-25 in Ukraine... I will admit it makes A-10 look like were basically just toying with insurgents. Like playing with food, we just want to hear and see 30mm cannon spin. SU-25 seems to attack like I imagined a ground attack jet is supposed to. It's can slow a down a bit to really take a dump on them and they unload there payloads and use rockets if necessary. It just seems much more effective a way to conduct ground attack. Flying around in circles with the A-10 just for you to be able to fire on target for a few seconds... it's just not as impressive. Plus 99% of times it was used on Taliban. Insurgents with clothes and a rifle. We just buy into our propaganda a bit (it's harmless tbh)

[@hemendraravi4787]

@@PotatoeJoe69 yea but when u got enemies with stingers/shooting at u ,u won't even plan on using ur guns ,maybe for 1 quick pass other than that nope

[@matsudaindustries2530]

Should include price and operating costs as well

[@alexwilliams1687]

@@ACoolRodentia A-10 is literally designed only for supporting ground troops in broken arrow situations and other combat operations. They may have to change parts but the plane can still make it back safely to continue missions

[@quasimotto8653]

Yes, to a certain extent, but "price" and "operating costs" are relative terms. In other words, the SU-25 may be half the price of the A-10, but I can assure you, the US can much more easily "scrape together" $50 billion to build a new fleet of A-10s than Russia would be able to put $25 billion to build a new fleet of SU-25s. And the US has such a massive, experienced industrial complex (military and otherwise), that the US could easily have 500 new A-10s combat ready before Russia could have 200 SU-25s ready.

[@alexwilliams1687]

@@quasimotto8653 you do realize that F-22's can attack from anywhere right?

[@quasimotto8653]

@@alexwilliams1687 Not sure what in my statement makes you bring up the F-22....did you accidentally put your comment in the wrong thread? I am somewhat aware of the prowess of the F-22 but the A-10 is a very specialized type of combat aircraft; one of the reasons it's so effective at CAS is that it can fly at relatively slow speeds. An F-22 cannot do that; it was not meant to. Small piece of trivia: I've actually put my HAND on a real F-22 while working as an IT contractor in the Lockheed Martin facility in Fort Worth, Texas in the late 90s.

[@JacobVahrSvenningsen]

Exactly. The cost of operating is always the first choice when deciding to buy a tool of war Including the logistics chain Here I believe the frog foot has a smaller, well... logistics footprint and lowest cost of first piece of ordinance in the battle theatre

[@ManuelGarcia-ww7gj]

The two aircraft are pretty much a match.

[@drewmcpheeters3424]

"And sophisticated attack systems which allows for more precise targeting" (as the video shows a strike missing the target)

[@armadillo3454]

Going to say A-10. Reasons: most missiles these days can go well above and beyond 6.5 G tolerance making all that agility next to worthless. Another reason is that the A-10 can hold chaff and flares as well and has quite a lot of it which the video made it seem like it had none. Finally the last reason which was NOT touched on was attack angle the A-10 can come down much higher than the frog foot and recover much more easily thanks to the shape of its tail which provides more stability at lower speed and altitude that the typical tail of most planes.

[@joebama5504]

Obviously both planes carry flares and chaff. Which plane pulls harder from a dive all depends on weight of each airplane and the speed each plane is going at. I feel that you need a controlled experiment to figure that out. In which both planes dive at the same alt and pull up from the same alt while having the same weight. Also any plane can dive down at any AOA the frog foot is faster since it has a after burner and sloped wings but that probably makes it harder to pull up since your going faster( just assuming) so i would think that the slower u go the easier it is too pull up making the a-10 better at that.

[@jimmieburleigh9549]

A10 can also loiter at lower speed for better ground force protection

[@joebama5504]

@@jimmieburleigh9549 also shorter time between attacks since you dont need to do such a big turn

[@markroberts3363]

I'd be worried if my anti air missile only had 6.5G tolerance, 60's missiles could have up to 30G

[@mhamma6560]

@@joebama5504 A10 hands down is the best CAS platform ever built. The AF is trying to retire it too. A10 is far more maneuverable at slow speeds and has no analog in that realm. The tails being able to utilize the the thrust the way they are allows for some crazy slow bank angles when down low. The 2 may have been built for the same task, but the A10 doesn't have an equal in getting down low and laying waste to ground targets. Its 30mm gun also has no analog on any aircraft -- hell there's no ground based 30mm that come close to it.

[@Tamburello_1994]

Left out the very important fact one can be refueled in-flight, the other cannot. For that reason alone, I'm picking the A-10 Warthog.

[@bestamerica]

hi T... ' yeaa that right A-10 is better than ussr cheap low su-25

[@daerth_4433]

@@bestamerica i mean A10 is famos and good for A10 but if SU25 can kill him in dog fight. But A10 is better for destroying armored threats.SU is better for fast supporg A10 is good for pushing up or defeniding,but he needs to be in air arledy Sorry for my english guys:(

[@reverie314]

@@daerth_4433 youre kind of spitting bullshit at this point, how the fuck does a AIR SUPPORT JET, *DEFEND* or as you said "push up"? explain that. I'm more of a Russian stuff guy but you're honestly saying very dumb stuff SU-25s are also good at destroying armored targets...

[@jnel8630]

@@daerth_4433 tell me this why would a close air support aircraft be engaged in dog fighting? Haha maybe in like some back water country you'd see it but I guarantee you if the A10 was getting buzzed by another plane an F(16,18,22,or 35) would shoot that thing out of the sky so fast! Haha there's not really any point in having it as air support

[@gueigudze1759]

You are saying that fuel is the most important. For ground attack planes the payload is. If A-10 could be RELOADED not refueled in the air this is much more useful. Or you will need more than a 6-hours flight to get to the battlefield. Just imagine the condition of the pilot after 6 hours flight how he will react is he tired? Good luck stay safe.

[@talonmc1999]

They missed a Big part in a real comparison. The reliability and the ease of getting parts

[@ErickMarcelloni]

Russian engineering all the way. Cheaper, realiable and effective

[@richardsears4665]

@@ErickMarcelloni Sorry noone can hear you from the fourth generation

[@dabulls1g]

@@ErickMarcelloni lol usaf engineering isn’t reliable/effective? We’re not comparing china and russia you dork.

[@astonmartin8dude832]

Appears that both provide lethal ground support roles. Obviously it would be nice if newer versions of the A-10 would “goose” it’s top end speed and be more effective against heavy armor. However, when it came down to a “one-on-one” contest I suspect, as with many systems, it would ultimately come down to the training and skill of the pilot. Amazing how often this latter factor is the deciding factor in survivability.

[@vixxivix7992]

Yo this new minigun is awesome it even come with a jet attached

[@burebistta1923]

the whole comment section: lol screw performance I only care about the gun

[@zippyparakeet1074]

In my view, the A-10 is better at counter-insurgency but, in a real war, the Su-25 would be more useful

[@cristobalalvarez5491]

Help me get to 5000 subs without a single video actually the su-25 has a lower range than the a-10 it has 5 times the range

[@zippyparakeet1074]

@@cristobalalvarez5491 I think that range can be extended with mid-air refueling

[@deanarupe73]

@@zippyparakeet1074 But the a-10 has already seen it's fair share of battle and it's still being used. So it's fair to say it's more than proven it's battle prowess.

[@cristobalalvarez5491]

@Hot Dog yes to perform high altitude strikes if needed

[@kickofftheboot]

As a close air support platform, the A-10 is second to none. That 30mm can practically neutralize an entire grid square. The A-10 has longer range which translates to more time in station supporting the troops on the ground. High speed in close air support is not essential. In fact, the A-1 sky raider proved a slower airframe is more ideally suited for CAS.

[@MRsolidcolor]

and the sound is known. and the enemy will run a lot of the times. or they will stay and he will do another strafe run and get them.. A10 all day

[@murdzstang2777]

But an SU25 is brutally effective in the right hands , is harder to hit & easier to maintain

[@Spollekop]

Is it really a CAS platform? Reports from Afghanistan and Iraq state that the a-10 had a lot of blue on blue incidents because of the inaccuracy of the gun. I think the a-10 should only be used for what it was designed, a tank/armor buster. The gun is useful for armored vehicles and the missiles for tanks.

[@ohnoes3084]

well I wouldn't say the A-10 is that effective, it's racked up the most Friendly Fire & Civilian deaths of any aircraft since we've been keeping track, + there have been lots of reports of Friendlies taking cover to avoid being hit by the A-10's gun (it's incredibly inaccurate) and having the enemies do the same since they realize a strike is coming, leading to no deaths

[@kickofftheboot]

@@ohnoes3084 A-10’s have killed a lot of friendlies. Can’t argue that.

[@tammyhenson7295]

Fun fact: Most, if not all A10's didnt have any night vision during the first Gulf War...the pilots had to use head mounted NVD's or the TV relay from their Mavrick missiles.

[@realme2411]

Whos older between the two?

[@canbrit4621]

Both have the armoured cockpit... vid makes it sound like only the A10 has it

[@longstrong232]

True

[@bestamerica]

hi C... ' yes look like... not sound... A-10 is better than cheap su-25

[@zaho87]

@@bestamerica They both have their own set of advantages and disadvantages when compared to one another. In a direct fight, the Su-25 has a better anti-air capability. But these planes are not designed for dogfights, close air support is their purpose. Ultimately, both aircraft are equally well suited for their role and are combat proven as reliable and deadly machines. The only way to determine which aircraft is better than the other depends entirely on the skills of the individual pilots in doing their job.

[@laa0fa502]

@@bestamerica I hope you know being cheap is actually an advantage

[@dominatorandwhocaresanyway9617]

@@bestamerica yeah but you can get 2 SU-25s for the price of 1 warthog, they can take off a field, and get the job done. also a veteran pilot in ww2 P-47 thunderbolt can probly strike more targets than anew pilot with modern jet

[@oddlygamers]

I’d rather have a whole animal than just the foot

[@waynereloaded87]

its the nato code name. Obviously russians dont call it that

[@oddlygamers]

@@waynereloaded87 it’s a joke

[@sommerrachelle8369]

I see what u did there!

[@redacted2713]

I believe the russian call it "Crow" or something like that

[@notalexzander2]

@@redacted2713 the russian name for the Su-25 is Grach, which means Rook (as in the bird). you were pretty close there.

[@nadtz]

These planes both do what they were designed to do so better is kinda relative. It's also worth noting the frogfoot can take off from much rougher ground which is part of the reason it's smaller and lighter.

[@mikeporter76470]

"Allow for more precise firing" gunner missed the target.

[@davidbeattie4294]

I have a GAU-8A training round sitting on my desktop. I'm pretty sure I would prefer to have 1350 of the live rounds flying over my head to keep the bad guys away. To say nothing of a vast assortment of battle tested missiles and precision guided bombs all tied to an incredibly tough air-frame. Make mine an A-10.

[@mnztr1]

Which one can get there faster and have ordinance on the enemy faster when you are in the *hit?

[@iamlegion5826]

@@mnztr1 the one that was called , prepped and lifted off first ... After that it's all about hang time

[@Salty_Balls]

I have a 30mm round on my dresser that my dad got years before I was born. It's brownish, with a silver nose cone that's been flattened somewhat, and weighs about 9 ounces. It has a ring around it at the base, I think it was to engage the rifling lands, that looks like a softer metal like brass or copper. Does this sound like the same round you have? I've never found an exact match to this on Google images.

[@Grid88]

Please subscribe and help us to reach 200k subscribers mark.

[@craffte]

What will you give me? I want an f15. no pilons, etc.

[@j.m.1524]

30mm gun is ineffective against armored targets? yea, lol

[@NeoMorphUK]

Ummm... A-10C does NOT use the Pave-Penny pod to guide the gun lolz. In fact most A-10’s no longer even have that pod on the airframe and those that do still have it don’t use it as they use the under wing Litening pod instead (it’s tons better).

[@brunotironi804]

like, share, subscribe, bend over, touch me inappropriately... you pervert!!!!

[@rickybrownsr4997]

@shaquille mccray ljlh

[@garyhughes9649]

I would really like to see a comparison of the new improved warthog up against the Frog foot especially with speed and rate of climb and how much weight the plane can carry

[@wittwer427]

One thing you didn’t mention is how the a 10 can effectively be flown much slower which might seem like a disadvantage until you realize how much more time it allows a pilot to focus on and stay aimed at targets on a strafing run. If you’re going for the element of surprise an a 10 can strike potentially multiple targets on one run then bug out before the ground targets have an opportunity to counter strike.

[@99Yeti]

By the way it will just use its data link with jascos on the ground or a laser marker and not have to line up at all

[@greenspiraldragon]

Mistaken assumption that since the Su25 flies faster that it stalls faster. Stall speed is 90 knots which translates to 103 mph and the A10 stalls at 138mph so the SU25 can actually stay on target even more than the A10.

[@Logarithm906]

6:22 which allows for more precise targetting. *shows a strafe where all the shots miss*

[@xxxxxx5868]

I think that's a user error, not the fault of the aircraft. You can see that the actual grouping of the shots are very accurate.

[@figurativeride2258]

Id say human error,5/6 ordinence were precise but they were aimed badly

[@shellwermir]

shots where done from another sight, flight time - several seconds, unguided missles. while plane moving . This camera in position to confirm hits, not to guide.

[@csme07]

It wouldn’t matter honestly for soft targets and heavy ones would be taken out with ATGM’s

[@stankygeorge]

You noticed that too!

[@aeronaut1906]

6:24 "more precise targeting" *misses by 100ft*

[@vanderwallstronghold8905]

Precise, yes. Accurate, no.

[@random-b-i2480]

I can see that you're making "hate" comment right there We're not in a fight saying my thing is better, he's just comparing Lmao these kids

[@james9242]

@@random-b-i2480 what the fuck? He wasn't making a hate comment on the warthog

[@chemislife]

To be fair they never stated what they where using as the base line for saying it had better targeting.

[@aeronaut1906]

@@random-b-i2480 how is that a hate comment? its a joke

[@RenshiErmine]

I feel that a deciding factor is also price. If you can field two planes for the price of one it changes the dynamic greatly.

[@dwood4453]

A 10 most definitely. Even if shot up it most likely to bring you home with all the back up systems.

[@johnabney3530]

My dad flew the A-10 when he returned from Vietnam flying the F-100 and said it was one of his favorites. When he was a squadron commander, he flew his A-10 cross country for my wedding carrying my wedding gift of heirloom silverware. I think my choice is obvious. The hard part was getting over the looks but after time it grows on you lol

[@rodshoaf]

I loved the looks from the get go.. reminds of other planes like the B-15 and B-17

[@johnabney3530]

Rod, after all the sleek cool jets he flew and then he tells me the next one is called the warthog… and then I see AND it’s slow. Yeah, it took me a bit to get a custom but that gun is an absolute beast. He gave me a dummy 30 mm and it’s so much bigger than the 20mm from the F-100 which I thought was huge at the time.. That sold me lol

[@KFLY007]

Damn your dad is lucky to fly A10 It would be an honor to fly one

[@barkmark4479]

A-10 was first built a full decade after the Vietnam war.

[@iamlegion5826]

@@barkmark4479 must be why he flew it after he came home from Vietnam 🙄

[@hanssolo3215]

the A10 cannon is an ineffective weapon against armored vehicles?? Um thats wrong

[@dang0s804]

Nope, it's actually right, he's talking about tanks.

[@lunatic_nebula9542]

Nope he is right

[@SilverShamrockNovelties]

The A-10 has 11 hardpoints that carry Bombs, Rockets, and AGMs, so it can kill tanks just as well as anything else in the air. The difference between the two is the A-10 can save its missiles for “tanks” and use the gun to destroy everything else, up to and including any other armored fighting vehicle.

[@troyezell5841]

Depends on the tank. Sadam's tanks did not fare well against A-10 strafing runs. Modern tanks utilize ceramics and other materials that deplete the energy of the 30mm enough to protect the tank from penetration. However, if the A-10 only has 30mm ammo left, the tanks armor is only going to last maybe 2 go around at most. Nevertheless it's war, therefore you don't waist opportunities on chances, you go for the jugular sooner than later.

[@zhufortheimpaler4041]

@@SilverShamrockNovelties well, the SU25 can use its 30mm for the same task. both guns are not able to penetrate modern MBT since the 80´s, for IFV, APC, etc it is more than enough, only in recent years IFV and APC are getting armor protection able to defeat 30mm cannon ammunition in the frontal arc and those are in most cases modern western IFV and APC like Puma and Boxer

[@einundsiebenziger5488]

2:14 nice to give the metric tranlation for the A-10's performance data. Yet, you could have converted lbf into Newtons, also mph convert to kilometers per hour, not only kilometers.

[@ZebraFacts]

If it were my choice and I could have both, that is what I would do, because both have specific abilities that I don't think necessarily overlap. And I bet, the Frogfoot is much cheaper to build and to maintain.

[@HappyBacon777ttv]

They both fulfill the roles that their countries want them to. Personally though, I would pick the A-10. If I want a CAS aircraft, I would want to pick something that can loiter for a longer period of times, while also holding more payload.

[@schizo1382]

but if you have an unexpected armor on the battlefield,and you need support fast with more deadly weapons frogfoot is the what i pick,it has double the climb rate and its faster,so both aircraft have their bonuses,and for the record im not russian i just have bad english sry :/

[@emporernanner]

I think that difference can be chalked up to difference of doctrine, soviet doctrine was informed by the events of the great patriotic war, when air superiority could never be counted on, thus CAS planes needed to be able to get to target and get out quickly, whereas american doctrine is built on having air superiority and thus the long time on objective for CAS is seen as a positive rather factor rather than a weakness. TL:DR soviet equipment is built for fighting near peer nations, american equipment is built for Roflstomping 3rd world countries and insurgent groups.

[@jaquigreenlees]

@@emporernanner I agree with you, but it really means the video is pointless. Which is better? depends on what the conditions are at the battle front. No air superiority? The SU25 is better. With air superiority, the A-10 is. if keeping the aircraft and pilots is a priority. ( which it is ) For real longer time on target close air support, why not a much slower propeller driven aircraft designed and built for the job. With modern materials used in the design right from the start you could get an extremely agile close air support craft that can stay over the front for longer than the A-10 yet not require the air superiority it does.

[@Jonathan-fb1kj]

Around 2014ish I heard their actually doing just that, looking for a prop plane as a replacement for the A-10 CAS wise. No clue if their still going to do that though.

[@jaquigreenlees]

@@Jonathan-fb1kj I think they will need to design from scratch to get what they would want. Which defeats the purpose of ending the A-10 to reduce the number of different aircraft to be supported.

[@ronaldmartinsr4433]

The one that can stay on scene the longest time to cover troops is the one the infantry prefers, armament means a lot for a pilot to choose from due to its mission, refueling in air is a plus but not if it's out of ammo!

[@idontknowanygoodnames1498]

when you say stay on the scene the longest i hope you don't mean on continuous runs, because that isn't what the su-25 is for, but if you mean the amount of time they can sit and wait for a command then yeah sure, it matters a fair amount, although most runs are planned or have ample time to get from a airbase.

[@ExcavationNation]

We will find out soon!

[@ericgilbert56]

I love the A-10 but I still question it's armor protection making up for it's speed. After reading about some being shot down. Though it is a marvelous technical creation of an aircraft.

[@knowplay3258]

During my time overseas, I have dealt with both aircraft on occasion. Literally had my butt saved by a pair of A-10s...me and a squad I was responsible for at the time were ambushed...radio call and then two Hogs saved us. My AO saw quite a bit of, at the time, very recently acquired Soviet/Russian surplus weapons and gear. As a result, I got to observe a Rook(NATO designation: Frogfoot) or two in action. Both aircraft are exemplary examples of ground support and anti armor weapons platforms. Both perform the task well, each taking a slightly different approach to do so...an approach that plays to each planes strengths. Much in the video is made of the ability to out maneuver or out run SAMs...neither aircraft is intended to do so rather relying on electronics to negate SAMs. Yes, the A-10 can fly slower and has better low speed/low altitude agility and maneuverability for which Hog pilots take advantage of in how they approach attacking...low, slow, and unleash alot of ordnance...the sledgehammer approach. The Su-25 uses a faster, steeper approach similar to a WWII dive bomber then quickly climbs out of small arms reach...combine this with quick, flat strafing runs.

[@knowplay3258]

Both are great at what they do...they just do it differently. The A-10 is like an armored sledgehammer taking design cues from a WWII British Spitfire. The Su-25 combines a WWII dive bomber with a more modern interdiction aircraft. Also, much is made on both aircraft being "sitting ducks" if caught by fighter aircraft...and I beg to differ. If attacked by a superior jet, the A-10 has various defensive electronics, usually a couple of A-2-A missiles, and Hog pilots know to get low until help can get there. The Su-25 also uses defensive electronics, can carry defensive missiles(rarely), but prefers to get low, turn on it's speed, and run towards help.

[@johnriggs3143]

I was an 11h during Desert Storm, I would much prefer to go up against the su-25, the altitude at which they fly and speed lets you see and hear them from a lot further out, unlike the A-10 which can literally be right on top of you before you realize it lol.

[@knowplay3258]

@John Riggs You can definitely hear a Frogfoot coming especially when it's pilot is using the usual steep dives to attack. An A-10? I know for a fact you see everything around being destroyed and splintered before you ever hear the engines or the BRRRT!! It's kinda mind-blowing to see the enemy and their cover totally destroyed before you hear anything overhead.

[@johnriggs3143]

@@knowplay3258 Lol...yeah it blew my mind as well!

[@notalpharius3861]

SU-25: I have a ton of Missiles and fast engine A-10: I have a Flying Gun.

[@WilluOrNot]

Correction: I AM a Flying Gun!

[@wjdyr6261]

Both are great aircraft. I prefer A10 because I had a model of it. Plastic models back in the day were cool

[@chrish5791]

The A-10 has a reputation of striking fear into the opposition on the ground. I’m not sure about the SU-25, but I am quite sure that I wouldn’t want either one firing at me!

[@briish85]

The A-10 wouldn’t lose it would come back with missing parts and gunshots

[@UwUchan-kp2ok]

Mostly true

[@joeb578]

Not from missiles

[@Shad0hawK]

@@joeb578 actually the A10 has survived missile hits.

[@momsspaghetti9970]

@@Shad0hawK To be fair the A-10 was hit at a non critical area of the aircraft (shredded half of the tail, half of control surface still intact with both engines) It would have been a different story if it was hit by a missile fired from an aircraft or any of the medium to long range SAMs the soviets gave to the Iraqis.

[@Shad0hawK]

@@momsspaghetti9970 I worked in aviation for over a decade, I personally know no less than 3 A10 pilots. There is no such thing as a "non critical area" on ANY aircraft...

[@WiliiamNoTell]

Would not want to be in a tank, against either one. Great video! Thanks for sharing.

[@Escape_Raz]

It's funny you say the SU25 isn't as resistant to damage while highlighting the armor of the A10, when the SU25, despite being a smaller frame, has nearly double the weight of titanium armor than the A10 does.

[@travisedmonds4214]

Why would it possibly matter that the frogfoot is faster when you're talking about close air support and ground attack? You'd think having a slower stall speed if anything would be more important for their missions. Ditto for service ceilings and climb rate.

[@cleopatravii2385]

The amount of 5 star generals and military technology experts in the comment section is truly fascinating😑

[@johnnytarerio3186]

It doesn't take that much to be able to say which aircraft are better at what when you have statistics and facts about the aircraft in question.

[@wdaswwqads]

@@johnnytarerio3186 you can't say shit because both sides spread propaganda how better they are than the other

[@johnnytarerio3186]

@@wdaswwqads Yeah but they literally do demonstrations and show off their capabilities to the public, and aircraft like the A-10 are used and seen a lot by everyone from air force to infantry. Obviously with things like absolute top speed they could up or downplay them by small amounts but with top speeds that low do you really think they're bumping them up in this case?

[@multibillionair7910]

nice comparison, not bias at all and pointing out the weakness and strengths of both aircraft

[@fylecabagnot5703]

A-10 "brrrrrrrrrrrt" vs. Su-25 "pffffffffft, plop plop plop!"

[@vinrico6704]

The A10 has always been my favorite... But that frogfoot is a beast too.... I really like both

[@lukehinkle9614]

I was stationed at Moody AFB a few months ago and loved hearing the A-10 fire its gun. It sounded like they were in my backyard! I am at Osan AB now and we have A-10s, but the firing range is too far to hear the Warthogs firing :(

[@broderman5]

The warthog is clearly the better ground pounder while the frogfoot is a better flight model, if I wanted close air support I'd want it from the warthog

[@thecoolestcorgi4991]

Are you guaranteed to have air supremacy? If not, the a 10 might have a lot of problems without extensive escort. Just food for thought.

[@Daniel-jg8ff]

Based on what? The Sukhoi has a superior combatrecord then the A10

[@broderman5]

@@Daniel-jg8ff you can't just say that without backing it up, what are the stats and where is your source?

[@Daniel-jg8ff]

@@broderman5 Just the chare amount of conflicts and that it Saw action already 1981-1989 i Afghanistan, Iran-Iraq, Chechnya, Ukraine, Syria, Macedonia, Africa etc etc

[@cristobalalvarez5491]

Daniel kid the a-10 has proven it self since 1977 till this day it has seen more combat and it’s combat record against the su-25 is superior

[@RamPuppy]

based on the performance of the russian military in Ukraine, and the A-10 getting some sahweet upgrades... Id say the mos dangerous thing in the A-10s arsenal is highly trained pilots with loads of combat experience in a modernized platform, while the most dangerous thing in the SU25's arsenal is also the pilot, but only because they barely get any training hours, and it's quite obvious Russia hasn't been keeping up with the times.

[@PGTornado]

In March 2022 the only thing that is "terrifiing" about the SU-25 is, that it will crash into your house... when shot down 🤷

[@Supermatmike]

i think that it is quite easy to pick the winner... one goes: BRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRTT the other does not.

[@mehrdadtube1]

They both go BRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRTTTT It seems you have not heard the Gryazev Shipunov fire

[@andrewzimmer4015]

I mean I think it meant the one that goes BRRRRRRRRRRRT that was built around a big mfing gun

[@Koshzor]

Well. The other goes woosh-woosh-woosh-woosh. Wouldn't want to be at the receiving end of either of them.

[@jorge2.049]

Based on your comment, it seems you didn't even watched the video. Your opinion is based on the brrrrrrrrrt. Your brrrrrrrtt can't penetrate armored vehicles and it has to get dangerously close to make damage to them. Your opinion is based on the sound it makes😂

[@Pighood]

ahahaaahaahaa

[@jorge2.049]

I like them both, it seems like one can compensate for the other one's missing capabilities and vice versa. And I'm able to see that, because I'm neither US or USSR, so pride doesn't blind me...like some in the comments ⬇️

[@user-xp8wk1zt2p]

Ussr doesnt exist so ofc u aint that

[@Quetzalcoatl_Feathered_Serpent]

I'm US but unlike some people I appreciate all machines and not biased because of my nationality. On that note I like both the Su and the A-10. I would consider them equals. They both do the job very well with little to no differences except for types of weapons with a little difference here or there. If I had to choose my favorite it would still be the A-10 just due to it more unconventional design compared to the more conventional looking frogfoot. However I wouldn't mind one bit flying the Frogfoot. Hmm you know given the age of the Frogfoot. It wouldn't be a bad idea to spirit a few away and suddenly turn up like at Planes of Fame :P

[@haroldwaig2242]

Jorge2.0: It's Great That Others Have A Clearer View Of Things! As A American I Wish The U.S. Gov't. & The Russian Gov't. Would Work Together Sometimes! And Then "MAYBE" There Would Not Be So Much Distrust Of Each Other!!...Politicians In Both Countries "GET OVER IT" Get Over Your Fears!! Of Each Other...Just Because We Believe Differently Doesn't Mean We Can't Trust Each Other A Little Bit? And Work It Out To Each Others Liking. "But Then That Takes Understanding And Willest To Do It! Does It".

[@haroldwaig2242]

Years After USSR Disbanded...Did The U. S. Gov't. Western Europe Attack Russia?...And Take You Over?...Rule You?... "FEAR IS A WEAPON" Is Much Stronger Than Even Death.

[@1copperfly]

@@haroldwaig2242 Good answer

[@1701Larry]

OK ------------ Did you notice the F-35 optical helmet the pilot was wearing in one of the A-10 cockpit Shots. This gives the pilot 360-degree vision more than doubling the A-10s combat effectiveness. Hora!

[@chrissiler6075]

I've seen the A-10's out of Whiteman, fly in between telephone poles at 400mph. When we were on the ground, we watched an A-10 manuver on a fighter for the kill. He turned and lined the cannon on the fighter so he flew thru the fire to attach the A-10. Guess he wasn't so unprotected

[@mrkoolaidman5975]

Well I have served in the Army and have been helped by the A10 and have close to being shot at by the SU now I always felt safe as long as a A10 was upstairs....

[@axlas318]

Me: watching this video Also me: stops the video at engine sounds Engine sounds: *dont stops*

[@Armored_Ariete]

its too late, start running

[@theholypeanut8193]

YOUR FREE LIVING TRIAL HAS EXPIRED

[@natureb2267]

Both very good but it comes down to environment. If you have total air superiority that matters as well. Loiter time is important if you are supporting ground pounders.

[@bejaminmaston1347]

A-10 because 2 reasons 1. The A-10 is as old as it is and is competing with a modern jet 2. The BRRRTTT