Ridiculous. Great Briton needs to throw out all of its liberals, and we need to do the same.
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 ...
So you put a laser seeker head zapper on it. They’re small enough now, I expect. They’ve been on C-17s and such for quite some time.
Ridiculous. Great Briton needs to throw out all of its liberals, and we need to do the same.
If you are going that route, use something that will haul some serious ordinance like the A-1 did. Also, how vulnerable is a turboprop to ground fire? Will one shot from an AK-47 do it in?
Would 10% be enough?
Gee whiz. Did he also suggest Great Britain just surrender and become a Caliphate? That would certainly save some money short term. Idiots.
I guess what disturbs me about this article is the General’s emphasis on cost-cutting rather than superiority and versatility.
There’s no problem with prop aircraft if they’re the right tool for the job. But once you start advocating cost over capability, you’re on the slippery slope to training your pilots to run around with their arms straight out, making engine noises and yelling “bang! bang!”.
I think an A-10 type aircraft would be invaluable for long term ground operations!
I also wonder why we dont have an airborne missile system for coastal defense against anything, you can put a fairly large missile inside a 747 or DC-10 with an awsome range for standoff capability, and many of those missiles, too
I think something like that off Iran with medium range missiles from the air to defend against small craft would be awsome. :)
friend of mine now flys heavys across the pond, he went from a 46 pilot to an OV-10 pilot in the 80’s
Hey, I'm thinking outside the box here.....
We already have a turboprop-based, pilotless aircraft that does well in counter-insurgency, and costs much less than a jet. It's called the Predator:
Another step towards an unmanned air force?
In response, the RAF claimed that the Army should revert to using the Enfield rifle forthwith, as it should be sufficient for counter-insurgency operations likely to be encountered, since state-on-state conflicts were unlikely to occur in the future.
The RAF further recommended that Her Majesty’s Royal Navy abandon the use of costly steel ships, replacing them with steam-powered, wooden-hulled vessels. The RAF did allow, however, that copper-plating the wooden boats would be acceptable since that was a cost-effective way to avoid damage from shipworm.
Military Channel had a show about the AD and how the Air Force wanted Douglass to restart the assembly line. The AD’s by this time were worn out; but it was still the best plane for the job. The cost proved prohibitive and I suspect the same would be true for the OV-10.
Now here’s an opportunity for a rich entrepeneur - building propeller planes from older designs. There is a use for P-47’s and P-51’s; F4U’s and AD’s.
good idea! (/s) and we (US) can reintroduce the
pre-Pearl Brewster Buffalo
“SOme COIN A/C make sense. All, not so much.”
Ditto that. We need specialized machines for specialized tasks.
Love to see some RAF Spit IX’s take to the skies !
Drones are good for maybe 50% of the air, but note that terrorists recently infiltrated our drone communications. Infiltration and jamming is important to consider.
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.