GarryB wrote:So they kinda did get used but... no guns just Mavericks i guess.
Putting a gun pod on an F-16 does not make it a CAS aircraft, and does not make it an A-16.
They call it an F/A-16 but it always had air to ground capability so they should all be called F/A-16.
The comments I remember reading suggest the lack of armour made them unsuitable for the role.
I personally find SU34 fine as CAS platform, its very agile, armored, has very high payload, good endurance and impressive range, if they didnt mean him to ever perform CAS they would not armor its cabin.
It does not have great agility with a very high payload and impressive range, it is not armoured to stop small arms fire, that is to stop bomb fragments from bombing at very low level endangering the crew.
Its replacing SU24 that spent most of its carrier actually just providing CAS with very rare actual long range strike missions.
No it didn't. It didn't have the right radio equipment to communicate with troops on the ground, so its attacks were independent of friendly ground activity... unlike the Su-25 which was in direct communication with ground forces and whose pilots went to briefing meetings to discuss objectives and likely issues before hand.
In normal strike roles you wont be nowhere near explosing ordinance thats the problem. You are near only during CAS with gravity bombs or unguided ammunition. But still SU24 never actually performed any real long range strike missions like it was its real role, it was almost always doing sort of CAS, except maybe during Iran-Iraq war.