Oh, okay...So that's why the B-1 looks as cool as it does!
Posted on 03/15/2015 5:15:56 PM PDT by EveningStar
After more than four decades in service, the A-10 Warthog is due for a replacement. So says the U.S. Air Combat Command.
What's more, ACC says it's already "thinking about" fielding such a replacement. But what might that replacement be?
Last week, we got a clue. As reported by Reuters, the Air Force has recently begun evaluating Textron's Scorpion fighter jet as a potential 21st-century replacement for the 20th-century Warthog.
(Excerpt) Read more at fool.com ...
Agreed. The A-10 is a long-term success, and still has unique battlefield utility. It’s a tested and proven platform, with great survivability and tremendous weaponry and armament options.
Change for the sake of change? Not always a good idea. Especially when the status quo has no significant Current shortcomings.
But, then, it ain’t their money, is it?
What about combat survivability? The scorpion is small therefore more succeptible to the "golden BB" much like the AV-8 Harrier.
The spec sheet doesn't talk about loiter time either. It's just a shiny go fast toy.
Unless it has titanium armor surrounding the pilot and is built around a big a$$ gatling gun.....................no!It sucks when you try to reinvent the wheel and replace it with something that is square.
Can This Plane Replace The A-10 Warthog?
What part of “No” do you not understand?
Oldplayer
According to the article, it can fly slower and faster than the A10. Also has a 5 hour loiter time.
I don’t see a Gatling gun on the Scopion.
Looks like a glorified trainer. How does it stand up to AAA...and where does the 30mm gun go?
Looks like a Frogfoot.
That article is about investments and NOT aircraft, I’ve read through the entire thing three times now and there isn’t a single word anywhere that could even charitably be described as a Performance Specification.
Just from eyeballing the pictures, I doubt that pretty little thing could be equipped with a tailhook (which rates it a FAIL for Naval Air/Marine Tactical Air) and/or sufficient effective armament at ANY speed or Time Over Target to be as significant to the people it’s supposed to protect as a dose of clap.
...and please don’t insult anyone’s intelligence with this Smart Weapons line of bilge. Especially after the time “some of us” got to devote to retraining people and reconfiguring aircraft that got sent into air-to-air combat without those unsexy, cludgy old guns. (Sorry, it still pi$$es me off so bad I could spit.)
Screw these financial clowns and all their political friends. Not only keep the ‘Hog, but build some more so they can go play with Marines when required.
I call BS on the whole deal.
Are you crazy or something?
Here is the order of the decision tree in ALL government procurement activities:
1. Sex
2. Politics
3. Pecking Order
4. Budgets
5. Schedules
6. Logic
No, its a very very light tactical reconnaissance platform. It’s simply not built for tough combat. At best, it might be something to sell third world countries so they feel like they have a “jet”.
“The Motley Fool owns shares of Textron,.”
Just saying...
Well written!
Its a bizjet with a bubble canopy. Seriously.
Well, I’ve been called lots of things, but “crazy or something” hasn’t been one of ‘em.
Also, I thought that this thread was about an aircraft.
I thought that I just offered up an opinion on that aircraft.
If you wish to discuss my mental capacity, I guess we’ll have to start another thread. Probably on Vanity.
Thanks. I worked with a guy who flew them in Vietnam. I can’t recall what he said was the bomb load but do remember him saying it would handle the largest bomb they had at the time.
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.