An Historic PR "fumble" in the Super Tucano vs AT-6 Public Fight

Currently the U.S. Air Force is engaged in a source selection process to pick a Light Attack Support Aircraft (LAS) for the emerging Afghan National Army Air Corps.

The Super Tucano is the only platform with proven combat success in fighting against both the communist FARC guerillas in Colombia and drug kingpins operating across borders in South America. (http://www.sldforum.com/2011/05/all-else-is-rubbish/).

The AT-6, the other LAS in consideration, is not yet even certified for ordnance release.

An opening salvo was fired by Mr. Richard Michalski, general vice president of the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers (IAM&AW) and was posted in The Hill Congressional Blog. For some reason he focused on both a buy America argument while also attacking Embraer Air for not being cognizant of the ejection seat ergonomics for female fighter pilots. For a country with a female President this was truly strange.

The echo chamber supporting him in the comment section made two astonishing statements:

First was an attack on the Second Line of Defense article in which I had placed a picture of a Super Tucano female pilot in the Brazil AF (http://www.sldinfo.com/?p=17758)

The second point made in support of Mr. Michalski essentially captures the overall line of support currently in play that argues it is good for the American worker to select the American AT-6 over the Super Tucano.

Soon there appeared other articles in print stressing the need to protect the American worker and adding an additional point about the supply chain strength of building the AT-6 in America

(See for example http://www.lexingtoninstitute.org/at-6-meets-the-need-for-an-affordable-effective-light-attack-aircraft?a=1&c=1171)

“A final and not unimportant point is that unlike some of the other contenders for the LAAR role, the Hawker Beechcraft AT-6 would be developed, produced and assembled in the United States. The entire supply chain would be secure, safe and American. The AT-6 is a low-risk, low-cost solution that avoids the political, logistical and operational challenges that would inevitably arise if a foreign-built aircraft were selected as the LAAR.”

Or see http://www.lexingtoninstitute.org/pentagons-light-attack-plane-competition-has-large-implications?a=1&c=1171).

“There are only two credible contenders for the contract: an American plane made by Hawker Beechcraft designated the AT-6, and a Brazilian plane made by Embraer designated the EMB-314. They’re both propeller driven, multi-mission aircraft, and their price-tags are similar. But because the Beechcraft offering would be developed and assembled in America, it would generate over 1,000 jobs here. The Brazilian plane would be developed elsewhere, and final assembly in the U.S. would probably generate less than a hundred jobs.”

Concurrently, along with buy-America and supply chain arguments in play the next PR strategy was to stress the advanced systems on the AT-6. In a front page Aviation Week story a HBC pilot let the reader believe that the lone (1600shp) AT-6 in existence wakes up every morning and thinks it is an A-10

“Now, as the AT-6B/C, it is promising to become an inexpensive path to network-centric operations, precision strike and advanced surveillance for other air forces.

Nor is there a foreseeable end to the development potential envisioned for the two-seater. It offers 1,600 shp, 5-6-hr. endurance and an A-10C cockpit—a combination that’s being created by the team of Hawker Beechcraft and Lockheed Martin.

As for what a light attack platform should be, the debate is over, declares Daniel Hinson, AT-6 demonstration and test manager and chief test pilot. The answer, he contends, is an affordable manned platform that is toughened to the demands of pilot training and that lends itself to integrating niche features that include precision weapons as well as advanced intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR) capabilities.”

Unfortunately, for the advanced “tron” argument the AT-6 has bumped into some unforgiving laws of aerodynamics that were recently pointed to the very knowledgeable and prestigious Association of Old Crows.

The Association of Old Crows (AOC) sponsored a symposium in Arlington in May 2011 on the AT-6, and the laws of physics were made in a very direct way:

No RWR (Radar Warning Receiver) installed. Significant weight and balance (CG) and overall weight challenges associated with MWS (Missile warning System) installation Aircraft is tail heavy; ballast had to be installed forward to re-align CG Ballast detracts from overall aircraft payload

The Super Tucano is a proven combat aircraft that is currently killing Communists and drug kingpins; and The AT-6 is not yet certified to drop ordnance and pays a price in support in just trying to defend itself in a limited threat environment.

As much as I enjoyed the open and fair debate on capabilities, the AT-6 supporters were just handed a huge OOPSIE by HBC management and their investment banker owners (49% US, 49% Canada, 2% corporate officers)

May 24 (Bloomberg) – “Hawker Beechcraft Corp., the private- aircraft manufacturer owned by Goldman Sachs Group Inc. and Onex Corp., said itʼs in

negotiations about a joint venture that could lead to the production of planes in China.

The U.S. company has been in talks since January over a deal that may ultimately see it transfer technology to win a bigger slice of sales in the fastest

growing major economy, Chief Executive Officer Bill Boisture said in an interview.

“Iʼve been there three times since the first of the year and there are serious discussions about potential joint ventures,” Boisture said. While there are “real

possibilities,” talks are at an early stage and a deal may initially focus on joint sales, followed by production of parts and then final assembly “over the next

History of this type of activity with the Peoples Republic of China has not been kind to the American worker and our Defense Industrial Base. Joint Ventures with allies and fellow democracies have tremendous potential, but with the PRC absolutely not!

American workers are always caught in the middle between Investment Banking “deal making ” and PRC scamming and have over time learned some very hard lessons.

On August 24th 1993, Chinese Officials walked into a MacDonald-Dougless managed defense plant in Columbus Ohio. The plant had giant computer-controlled strategic machine tools. It built parts for the Minuteman missile, F-15 Fighter and C-17 airlifter. Needless to say the workers tried to block the PLA visitors with overturned tables and filing cabinets. All future PLA site surveys were scheduled for Sunday when the plant was shut down. But the deal went through and the tools were shipped to China.

Ultimately, everyone lost McD and the workers are both gone except of course the PRC who won because the machine tools wound up in PLA military factories.

Consequently, when the PRC makes overtures for joint ventures American national security can be put at risk, industrial base jobs will be lost and dual use technology compromised.

So everyone who has made arguments in favor of the AT-6 that it is American made and has state-of-the-art “tron” technology have just had their entire argument destroyed and thrown back in their face. It is actually sad for them because they tried so hard.

Hey Hawker Beechcraft - this dog won't hunt! The only NEW jobs you've created in years has been in Chihuahua, Mexico. Kansas is now subsidizing you to the tune of millions of dollars and you continue to kill union jobs in the U.S. as fast as you can. And for those of watching... we see that you're owned by foreign entities and that you are spending huge sums in UK advertising to tout yourself as one of, "Britain’s best-known performance brands.” Which is it? And by the way, come clean about the fact that the AT-6 is still in early development stages. Your most common refrains are about everything BUT the quality of your light attack fighter. Ed Timperlake has made it quite clear why.

Can somebody please tell me what the hell we are even considering these aircraft? We've spent untold billions on UAVs to avoid the risk of putting pilots over hostile territory. We've now got UAVs launching Hellfire missiles and dropping bombs.

Why do we need to put a pilot over enemy territory in a single engine, flack-bait aircraft?

This type of aircraft is designed as a hunter / killer aircraft, operating in friendly controlled airspace..it has slow speed, proven performance, and the loiter time need to give instant support to the ground pounders....this is an excellent platform, needed for the type of combat we are engaged in now....yes, it is needed, can be procured inexpensively, is inexpensive to operate, can operate from primitive forward landing strips, and carries one hell of a punch... a greated and stronger punch than 5 or 6 uav’s.....and you could have warrant officers flying them.....

“and you continue to kill union jobs in the U.S. as fast as you can”

Any sensible business would shed union production.

It’s inefficient, expensive, and the legal hassle is not worth it. The workers have been “protected” out of jobs.

I have some friends involved in the testing down in ABQ on these and the AT-6 failed to make one landing “off road” during the testing while the super tacano landed on a dirt runway that had a paved runway cutting across the middle and it took the bump with no problem. Th AF pilots were laughing at the AT-6 for how persnickety the company pilots were.
And for use in Afghanistan paved roads/runways would be scarce, dirt roads more likely

I want one (the Tucano).

And, as for a co-pilot...

when choosing a ground attack aircraft, reliability and durability take presidence over union jobs.......tuscano can be operating with our fly boys starting next week...

The AT-6 is a joke. They only have two prototypes which aren’t even certified to drop weapons yet. I hope the USAF acquisition people will make the right decision.

Maybe someone out there had something to do with this:

http://www.xtranormal.com/watch/12014290/the-at-6-is-awesome

tuscano can be operating with our fly boys starting next week...

Probably last year: 2009 Project Imminent Fury. USN would lease 4 Super Tucanos for use in Afghanistan for evaluation and to support the SEAL teams. The SEALS wanted it, the Commanding General in Afghanistan wanted it, the Pentagon wanted it, a couple of congresscritters from Kansas didn't want it, it never happened.

11 posted on 05/26/2011 3:20:19 PM PDT by Oztrich Boy (Monarchy is the one system of government where power is exercised for the good of all - Aristotle)

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.