Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: Shark24
The are both great aircraft.

I'm partial to the AT-6

These aircraft are cheaper to operate and can respond faster than the A-10 in many circumstances.

The ability to respond quickly to disrupt and break up an attack or ambush as soon as possible after contact is a nice thing to have and these smaller aircraft can provide that sort of support and then stick around to act as FAC for larger aircraft or artillery support afterwards

32 posted on 01/07/2018 11:09:11 PM PST by rdcbn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies ]


To: rdcbn

Agree from what I’ve seen so far. I don’t know enough to comment on cost/schedule as I’m out of the loop for that. Now you’ve got me interested in how the AirTrackers have been in operational use, will ask around and report back if I find out. I’ve only seen them in person further up the deployment chain. Pretty cockpit for a “crop duster”. :)


38 posted on 01/08/2018 12:07:21 AM PST by Shark24
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies ]

To: rdcbn

The dirty little secret is that the AT-6 doesn’t have a U.S. airworthiness certification. The USAF decided in 2013 that there was too much technical risk. The Philippines just turned down the AT-6 in favor of the A-29 for the same reason.


55 posted on 01/08/2018 5:45:05 AM PST by paddles ("The more corrupt the state, the more it legislates." Tacitus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson