Some think 21st century air power is closer to an F35 than a 182, but what's the future of USAF light attack fighters...single engine turboprops that a PIC will strap into not unlike their P-40 brothers in 1944. Is there a place for light attack fighter strafing runs, recon/intel/surveillance flights, etc. in modern warfare, and if so is that a financially sound way for the USAF to help meet its mission within future budget constraints?
If the light attack fighter is a viable platform, could CAP's AE and CT missions, flight academies, and general capabilities have the potential for an increasingly important support mission? Meaning, could a civilian USAF Auxiliary's air power be put to uses of vital importance to Big Blue not seen since WWII?
Just a wild random thought....thanks in advance for any feedback, sirs & maam's.
Quote from: Wild Weasel on March 03, 2012, 04:34:10 PM
Some think 21st century air power is closer to an F35 than a 182, but what's the future of USAF light attack fighters...single engine turboprops that a PIC will strap into not unlike their P-40 brothers in 1944. Is there a place for light attack fighter strafing runs, recon/intel/surveillance flights, etc. in modern warfare, and if so is that a financially sound way for the USAF to help meet its mission within future budget constraints?
If the light attack fighter is a viable platform, could CAP's AE and CT missions, flight academies, and general capabilities have the potential for an increasingly important support mission? Meaning, could a civilian USAF Auxiliary's air power be put to uses of vital importance to Big Blue not seen since WWII?
Just a wild random thought....thanks in advance for any feedback, sirs & maam's.
The USAF is currently bidding an aircraft not unlike the role of the SANDIES in Vietnam. The favored yet denied aircraft was the AT-6B Texan II. The current winner is a Brazilian bird. The process is down in the mud for political reasons like the process the KC-X went through.
The Embrarer won the contract valued at over $1billion. Hawker Beechcraft lost. Bull-honky if you ask me. No different than the Army choosing the Eurocopter EC-145 over the MD902. Maybe someday the government will remember we still make airplanes in this country.....for now.
But I dont see any of this having any impact on how the USAF uses CAP.
This contract is not for aircraft for USAF use. It's for Iraqi and Afghan Air Forces.
Little stuff like that doesn't make the neighbors (i.e. Iran) unhappy. Unhappy neighbors in that part of the world tend to invade...
Quote from: Flying Pig on March 03, 2012, 06:36:42 PM
The Embrarer won the contract valued at over $1billion. Hawker Beechcraft lost. Bull-honky if you ask me.
I can not understand how anyone could have made that decision either. The AT-6B has what, 90% commonality with the T-6A? Which is an aircraft already in the inventory. It would require almost zero conversion training for anybody that learned to fly on the T-6A. It has already been put into pre-production, so it's a proven platform.
Quote from: PHall on March 03, 2012, 06:56:36 PM
This contract is not for aircraft for USAF use. It's for Iraqi and Afghan Air Forces.
Little stuff like that doesn't make the neighbors (i.e. Iran) unhappy. Unhappy neighbors in that part of the world tend to invade...
If it's not for the USAF then why are we involved at all? Last time I checked both of the countries have a government now.
Part of the agreement we have with those governments to pull out US Forces was to equip the Arabs with several squadrons of various aircraft. The C-130, UH-60 and the LAF mentioned above spring to mind. Thought had been given to reviving the F-5 production line but was voted down in favor of a newer platform.
If my memory is correct, the C-130's and the '60's were inherited from USAF and USA aviation units in country when they cycled back to the states. .
The article I read.....if I can find it again, said that all the Hawkers would be phased out through attrition and as they needed replaced would be replaced by the Embrarer.
Iraq and Afghanistan seem to have no issues flying our RC-12's OH-58s and Hueys....why the beef about the Hawker?
Quote from: SAR-EMT1 on March 03, 2012, 08:08:56 PM
Part of the agreement we have with those governments to pull out US Forces was to equip the Arabs with several squadrons of various aircraft. The C-130, UH-60 and the LAF mentioned above spring to mind. Thought had been given to reviving the F-5 production line but was voted down in favor of a newer platform.
Isn't equipping political factions in the 80s and 90s how we got into this mess in the first place? :angel:
I know... I know... not my call. Would have been better to give them C-182's with hardpoints. ::)
Quote from: Spaceman3750 on March 03, 2012, 08:10:34 PM
Quote from: SAR-EMT1 on March 03, 2012, 08:08:56 PM
Part of the agreement we have with those governments to pull out US Forces was to equip the Arabs with several squadrons of various aircraft. The C-130, UH-60 and the LAF mentioned above spring to mind. Thought had been given to reviving the F-5 production line but was voted down in favor of a newer platform.
Isn't equipping political factions in the 80s and 90s how we got into this mess in the first place? :angel:
Its a new world now........relaaaaaaaaax. Theres now way it can backfire on us this time.
Quote from: SAR-EMT1 on March 03, 2012, 08:08:56 PM
Part of the agreement we have with those governments to pull out US Forces was to equip the Arabs with several squadrons of various aircraft.
Using US tax dollars. US tax dollars should never be sent to a foreign company to supply a second foreign power. If US tax dollars are being spent to supply a foreign power they should be spent on US built equipment.
Quote from: Flying Pig on March 03, 2012, 08:13:03 PM
Quote from: Spaceman3750 on March 03, 2012, 08:10:34 PM
Quote from: SAR-EMT1 on March 03, 2012, 08:08:56 PM
Part of the agreement we have with those governments to pull out US Forces was to equip the Arabs with several squadrons of various aircraft. The C-130, UH-60 and the LAF mentioned above spring to mind. Thought had been given to reviving the F-5 production line but was voted down in favor of a newer platform.
Isn't equipping political factions in the 80s and 90s how we got into this mess in the first place? :angel:
Its a new world now........relaaaaaaaaax. Theres now way it can backfire on us this time.
You're kidding, right?
http://www.foxnews.com/world/2012/03/01/2-troops-killed-by-afghan-soldier-civilian/ (http://www.foxnews.com/world/2012/03/01/2-troops-killed-by-afghan-soldier-civilian/)
Looks like 'Political Factions,' or whatever you call them, are still biting the hand that trained them, so to speak.
You quoted 3 people? WHo are you talking to. If you were referring to mine, I thought it was obvious I was joking. Sorry if it wasnt clear. I guess I need to use more :) ;) ;D >:( :o ??? :P :-[ of these things
Quote from: Wild Weasel on March 03, 2012, 04:34:10 PM
Some think 21st century air power is closer to an F35 than a 182, but what's the future of USAF light attack fighters...single engine turboprops that a PIC will strap into not unlike their P-40 brothers in 1944. Is there a place for light attack fighter strafing runs, recon/intel/surveillance flights, etc. in modern warfare, and if so is that a financially sound way for the USAF to help meet its mission within future budget constraints?
If the light attack fighter is a viable platform, could CAP's AE and CT missions, flight academies, and general capabilities have the potential for an increasingly important support mission? Meaning, could a civilian USAF Auxiliary's air power be put to uses of vital importance to Big Blue not seen since WWII?
Just a wild random thought....thanks in advance for any feedback, sirs & maam's.
Not in "modern" warfare. What we are seeing now is not "modern" but we are fighting now is called "asymmetic warfare". We build the F35 to fight our possible first world advasaries....but when you going after Somali Pirates or Afgan insurgents.....it is like bringing a sledge to build a house.
It can work...but it is not the right tool for the job.
The problem with the Light Strike Aircraft is that in an enviornment of budget crunches.....you have to make sacrafices.
Personally I think the LSA will not be funded or if it is...it will be a very limited number.
Interestingly just a single copy of F35 could buy a couple of SQUADRONS of light strike
it seems like we did the math on this in a different thread
in terms of dollars it's a good deal
the question is do we NEED that capability
Quote from: davidsinn on March 03, 2012, 08:58:51 PM
Quote from: SAR-EMT1 on March 03, 2012, 08:08:56 PM
Part of the agreement we have with those governments to pull out US Forces was to equip the Arabs with several squadrons of various aircraft.
Using US tax dollars. US tax dollars should never be sent to a foreign company to supply a second foreign power. If US tax dollars are being spent to supply a foreign power they should be spent on US built equipment.
For the record I agree.
Quote from: SAR-EMT1 on March 04, 2012, 12:50:45 AM
Quote from: davidsinn on March 03, 2012, 08:58:51 PM
Quote from: SAR-EMT1 on March 03, 2012, 08:08:56 PM
Part of the agreement we have with those governments to pull out US Forces was to equip the Arabs with several squadrons of various aircraft.
Using US tax dollars. US tax dollars should never be sent to a foreign company to supply a second foreign power. If US tax dollars are being spent to supply a foreign power they should be spent on US built equipment.
For the record I agree.
Two down, 302 million to go...It's gonna be a long night. >:D
This thread is pretty much moot: the contract with Embraer has been cancelled.
Now we go back to a complete re-bid for the aircraft. Apparently, the AF has egg on its face.
Quote from: bosshawk on March 04, 2012, 03:53:40 AM
Apparently, the AF has egg on its face.
Again. You'd think they would have learned the last dozen times they bid something.
Quote from: bosshawk on March 04, 2012, 03:53:40 AM
This thread is pretty much moot: the contract with Embraer has been cancelled.
Now we go back to a complete re-bid for the aircraft. Apparently, the AF has egg on its face.
Outstanding! I hadnt heard that. Im getting pretty tired of the US military buying foreign weapons! Euro-crapters, Embrarers......
Now, I know everything in the Hawker probably says "Made in China".....but still!
Quote from: Flying Pig on March 04, 2012, 05:08:19 PM
Quote from: bosshawk on March 04, 2012, 03:53:40 AM
This thread is pretty much moot: the contract with Embraer has been cancelled.
Now we go back to a complete re-bid for the aircraft. Apparently, the AF has egg on its face.
Outstanding! I hadnt heard that. Im getting pretty tired of the US military buying foreign weapons! Euro-crapters, Embrarers......
Now, I know everything in the Hawker probably says "Made in China".....but still!
I suggest you don't look too hard at Cessnas or Beechcrafts then. Lot of parts in there, especially avionics, that "weren't built here".
It's a global market in aviation these days.
Quote from: davidsinn on March 04, 2012, 03:58:34 AM
Quote from: bosshawk on March 04, 2012, 03:53:40 AM
Apparently, the AF has egg on its face.
Again. You'd think they would have learned the last dozen times they bid something.
The system itself is broken.
That's not going to fix itself just because you started over, or bid on something new.
The Embraer A29 was better AND was to be built in Florida.
http://conservative-outlooks.com/2011/11/25/beechcrafts-at-6-v-embraers-super-tucano-a-29-the-facts/ (http://conservative-outlooks.com/2011/11/25/beechcrafts-at-6-v-embraers-super-tucano-a-29-the-facts/)
Recent article on the Beechcraft AT-6 and Embraer Super Tucano.
http://defense.aol.com/2012/03/01/hawker-beechcraft-at-6-texan-ii-guns-for-super-tucano-as-air-for/ (http://defense.aol.com/2012/03/01/hawker-beechcraft-at-6-texan-ii-guns-for-super-tucano-as-air-for/)
The United States built the SR71, U2, B29, B17, F14,15,16,18,22,35 the A10 and the ancestor to this newest idea, the P47, A1 and probably the most feared of aircraft in the current war, the A10. I have no doubt we can make the T6 work without looking to a South American country with ties to Iran. I dont care
if they are "allowing" us to put them together in Florida. We are still buying weapons from a foreign country. Nor do I care what some blogger thinks whos flown on a Brasilia a few times. God forbid we perfect the T6 and sell it to other nations vs giving Brazil almost $1B. We are already going out of our way to buy oil from them vs drilling our own.
Quote from: Thrashed on March 04, 2012, 09:17:38 PM
The Embraer A29 was better AND was to be built in Florida.
http://conservative-outlooks.com/2011/11/25/beechcrafts-at-6-v-embraers-super-tucano-a-29-the-facts/ (http://conservative-outlooks.com/2011/11/25/beechcrafts-at-6-v-embraers-super-tucano-a-29-the-facts/)
Yes but beech hawker have rented better congressmen. :-[
Quote from: Flying Pig on March 04, 2012, 10:46:04 PM
The United States built the SR71, U2, B29, B17, F14,15,16,18,22,35 the A10 and the ancestor to this newest idea, the P47, A1 and probably the most feared of aircraft in the current war, the A10. I have no doubt we can make the T6 work without looking to a South American country with ties to Iran. I dont care
if they are "allowing" us to put them together in Florida. We are still buying weapons from a foreign country. Nor do I care what some blogger thinks whos flown on a Brasilia a few times. God forbid we perfect the T6 and sell it to other nations vs giving Brazil almost $1B. We are already going out of our way to buy oil from them vs drilling our own.
Your lament is understandable......but what is really the problem......Forgein companies make better and cheap stuff!
Quote from: Flying Pig on March 04, 2012, 10:46:04 PM
The United States built the SR71, U2, B29, B17, F14,15,16,18,22,35 the A10 and the ancestor to this newest idea, the P47, A1 and probably the most feared of aircraft in the current war, the A10. I have no doubt we can make the T6 work without looking to a South American country with ties to Iran. I dont care
if they are "allowing" us to put them together in Florida. We are still buying weapons from a foreign country. Nor do I care what some blogger thinks whos flown on a Brasilia a few times. God forbid we perfect the T6 and sell it to other nations vs giving Brazil almost $1B. We are already going out of our way to buy oil from them vs drilling our own.
90% of the A29 was USA made parts, that's more than any plane made in the USA. Just ask Boeing.
Then lets just build the other 10% ourselves and be done with out Iranian sympathizers!
The Iraqi and AFG airforces proudly fly the Cessna Caravans. Some are equipped for ISR (w/hellfires) and others for light transport. I cannot tell you how many Beechcraft King Air's and Pilatus (sp?) PC-12's I have seen in AFG, but its alot. And the tag says made in Witchta KS. The U.S. GA industry is doing a hell of lot better than any other country. Lets export this kind of stuff, and keep the high performance jets and technology for ourselves. These arab pilots can barely handle GA aircraft, F-35's are clearly out of the question. But I am all for helping them, I am tired of being in this part of the world.