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 ...
Duh. And when was the last three times the Brits operated "in anything but a total Air Superiority theater"?
Lets see. The Falklands, WWII and WWI. Three times in the past 96 years.
Using a high performance jet to drop bombs on the head of some guy armed with an AK47 is like using a dragster to deliver pizzas. If cost is no object, and you have all the dragsters you could wish for, and a pizza joint every 1/2 mile, as the dragster only goes 1/4 mile at a time, then delivering pizzas with a dragster makes sense. A dragster will get the pizza there faster than any other type of ground vehicle.
If, on the other hand, resources are limited. If you have only a few, widely scattered, pizzza joints, and if cost is an object, then you don't need a tiny number of super expensive, super fast, dragsters. you need a much larger number of slower, cheaper vehicles.
And the intestinal fortitude to put up with the the tcrlaf's of the world sneering at you that your delivery vehicles aren't as fast as a dragster.
Abstinence is the best policy!
With a few AC130 for the extra attention when required !
“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.”
Amen to that. High speed jets with lock on capability and missiles flying at 20K would decimate prop fighters at will.
Just buy a Predator or something.
Or
http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/images/AIR_UAV_Desert_Hawk_Held_lg.jpg
I love this effing bad boy:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RQ-4_Global
Somebody post this to the thread. Great shot.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:RQ-4_Global_Hawk.jpg_Hawk
Here is a cheaper alternative for the RAF but they will need the Germans help plus skunk works.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SDbQ5xvsrIU&feature=player_embedded
If you were on the ground getting shot at waiting for air support, which would you prefer!?!??!?!?
It’s easy to propose cutting the defense budget when you’re not getting shot at. What is the acceptable trade-off of lives lost per dollar saved? Did McNamara leave us an equation for that???
I’m sure that new Sopwith Camels would be much cheaper that cold war jets to these folks
Cheap is the name of the game in formerly great britain.
such a great nation once......... and we just about 20 yrs behind them and headed to situation in the world.....
Raytheon / Hawker Beechcraft AT-6 Texan II.
Boeing OV-10X Super Bronco
COIN aircraft work best in sub-national conflicts, such as Afghanistan or drug interdiction in Colombia.
Bud, you need to find a new line of work.
This is preposterous.
In other news, lance and saddle maker stocks have seen a stunning recovery, after HRH Prince Phillip spoke of reviving the Bengal Lancers.
“It is a proven fact that a mounted man can close upon enemy archers faster than a man-at-arms,” he said in follow up comments.
Can’t blame the poor general. He can ask for the low-tech toys and hope to get something or ask for the heavy duty stuff and get nothing.
The bulk of the CAS missions that ISAF is flying in OEF do not require high-performance jets and indeed are very costly given the environment versus the cost per flight hour. I am not, repeat not, advocating the total replacement of high performance jets with light attack aircraft as there have been many times in Helmand Province and elsewhere where nothing works better against unseen miscreants than thumping their suspected positions at 50' and 500kts.
The Super Tucano is the only modern, light attack turboprop out there that was designed from the ground up as a combat aircraft though it can also be used as a trainer. The T-6 was designed as a trainer and will require significant modifications to allow it to be employed in combat. The Navy will soon lease 4 of the STucs for use in OEF and the USAF will be watching it's performance closely.
This is likely a logical result of the RAF ignoring the ground support role, similar to the fight the US Army has had with the Air Force to keep the A-10 alive.
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.