Posted on 01/21/2010 8:35:53 PM PST by sukhoi-30mki
RAF urged to cut ‘Cold War’ new jets for cheap propeller aircraft
Tom Coghlan, Defence Correspondent
The RAF is under pressure to cut its multibillion-pound orders for fast jets in favour of cheaper propeller aircraft as part of a review of defence spending. The suggestion, from General Sir David Richards, has ignited a debate that pitches the head of the Army against his opposite numbers in the other two Services.
General Richards, Chief of the General Staff, believes that the Super Tucano offers a cost-effective alternative to fast jets such as the Cold War-era Eurofighter Typhoon in counter-insurgency operations such as those in Afghanistan. Resembling something from the Second World War, a Super Tucano costs about £5 million, a fraction of the £60 million estimated cost of the F35 Joint Strike Fighter ordered for the Royal Navy’s new aircraft carriers or the £67 million of a Typhoon.
A strategic defence review expected after the general election is likely to recommend that each Service’s budget is cut by about 20 per cent.
General Richards has argued that state-on-state confrontations will be largely replaced by counter-insurgency operations in the future, making huge savings possible if the Government is prepared to sacrifice ships and tanks for lighter and cheaper but technically advanced matériel.
Air analysts argue that the Tucano offers a cost-effective platform to which high-tech equipment and munitions can be attached. It is being considered by the US Navy after impressive performance in Colombia, where it is used against FARC rebels.
Paul Beaver, former editor of Jane’s Defence Weekly and a former army helicopter pilot, said: “What David Richards is saying is that the airframe does not need to be superb — you just need to put high-tech sensors and the defensive aids on there.
(Excerpt) Read more at timesonline.co.uk ...
Well, that might work for hadjis
What good will this do against a J10? or even a J8?
SOme COIN A/C make sense. All, not so much.
And I am a SPAD fan, no less....
Stupidity seems to be highly contagious.
It depends what the theater of operations is and what is it’s intended duties. I’m sure in certain cases it could work, but it can’t go head to head with jets. It’d be hit before it ever saw them coming.
As most people here know it is a Turboprop, i.e., a gas turbine powered aircraft. A jet engine with a prop out front, what one might call an "extremely high bypass ratio" fanjet.
Turboprops are efficient, reliable and fast. The Russian TU-95 Bear was a good example of the turboprop exploited to it's utmost.
So the good general is doing his job: he's explaining that sex appeal doesn't always win wars, the right tool for the job does.
And as the U.S. Air Force learned with the A-10, the A4-Skyraider, and other COIN aircraft ( OV-10 Bronco being my favorite ), ugly may be ugly, but it often wins.
The Times jumped the gun, April Fools’ Day isn’t until a few months from now.
Nice looking trainer.
There is a place for Prop driven planes on the battlefield but, only if they air is held by jets. Otherwise they are just targets.
My sentiment exactly.
One has to wonder how the enemies of freedom like Kim Jung Il, Hugo Chavez and Barack Obama feel about the Brits going backwards in terms of their National Security.
/s
COMPLETELY useless in anything but a total Air Superiority theater.
Dumb is as stupid does.
These would work wonders for US border enforcement and flight interdiction.
could be had even more cheaply, still. And what with their slow groundspeed, they'd be fantastic for loitering over suspected hidey-holes waiting to spring on unsuspecting hostiles.
Heck, there's even a ready-to-go cadre of pilots for these things, too:
Love the low-cost COIN aircraft ideas, but....if we’re doing to props, then mightn’t we look even further ahead..?
1. Take out the pilots
2. Make it air-2-air refuel capable —keep it on-station for days, maybe a week...
3. Provide for very secure FAC commo
4. Exploit the new advances in 70mm guided rockets; 4 for every hellfire —that could be 64 guided weapons on one UAV platform.
5. Explore feasibility of low-cost remote 50-cal weapon on UAV, or 30 mm (think very small unmanned AC130 substitute)
I read recently that there is interest in bringing back the OV-10. In the right environments these type of aircraft work out just fine.
Well, it is an STD after all...
I’ve heard round pebbles and slingshots are way cheaper than airplanes. Couple those to hot air balloons, and you have air support that is not only cheaper to buy, but cheaper to operate. The accuracy is kind of blah, but life is all about compromises.
Predator!
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.