Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-33 next last
To: sukhoi-30mki
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....
2 posted on
01/21/2010 8:39:38 PM PST by
ASOC
(In case of attack, tune to 640 kilocycles or 1240 kilocycles on your AM dial.)
To: sukhoi-30mki
Stupidity seems to be highly contagious.
3 posted on
01/21/2010 8:39:57 PM PST by
rbosque
(11 year Freeper! Combat Economist.)
To: sukhoi-30mki
The Tucano is a not a "prop" airplane like they imply.
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.
5 posted on
01/21/2010 8:42:51 PM PST by
Regulator
(Welcome to Zimbabwe! Now hand over your property....)
To: sukhoi-30mki
The Times jumped the gun, April Fools’ Day isn’t until a few months from now.
6 posted on
01/21/2010 8:43:38 PM PST by
Rembrandt
(.. AND the donkey you rode in on.)
To: sukhoi-30mki
7 posted on
01/21/2010 8:44:09 PM PST by
Kickass Conservative
(There is nothing Democratic about the Democrat Party...)
To: sukhoi-30mki
COMPLETELY useless in anything but a total Air Superiority theater.
Dumb is as stupid does.
10 posted on
01/21/2010 8:48:07 PM PST by
tcrlaf
(Obama White House=Tammany Hall on the National Mall)
To: sukhoi-30mki
These would work wonders for US border enforcement and flight interdiction.
11 posted on
01/21/2010 8:49:03 PM PST by
Centurion2000
(Something is seriously wrong when the .gov plans to treat citizens worse than they treat terrorists)
To: sukhoi-30mki
I understand that a couple of these:
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:
![](http://www.worldaffairsboard.com/attachments/american-politics/16924d1256838255-some-politics-questions-need-clearing-snoopy_wwi_ace_lb.jpg)
12 posted on
01/21/2010 8:49:31 PM PST by
Oceander
(The Price of Freedom is Eternal Vigilance -- Thos. Jefferson)
To: sukhoi-30mki
To: sukhoi-30mki
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.
18 posted on
01/21/2010 9:10:50 PM PST by
Zhang Fei
(Let us pray that peace be now restored to the world and that God will preserve it always)
To: sukhoi-30mki
I'm a P-47 fan, myself.![](http://home.att.net/~historyzone/PreCradleP-47N.JPG)
19 posted on
01/21/2010 9:10:58 PM PST by
smokingfrog
(You can't ignore your boss and expect to keep your job... www.filipthishouse2010.com)
To: sukhoi-30mki
Come to Papa.
![](http://www.anistor.gr/english/enback/3.jpg)
27 posted on
01/21/2010 9:44:11 PM PST by
VeniVidiVici
(Marsha Coakley's been teabagged. In Nov. Democrat Teabaggees - you're next.)
To: zot
I’m sure that new Sopwith Camels would be much cheaper that cold war jets to these folks
28 posted on
01/21/2010 9:48:34 PM PST by
GreyFriar
(Spearhead - 3rd Armored Division 75-78 & 83-87)
To: sukhoi-30mki
"...General Richards has argued that state-on-state confrontations will be largely replaced by counter-insurgency operations in the future..."
What is it with these folks who always want to prepare for the war they have fought or are in the midst of instead of the one they very well may have to fight in the future. Maginot Line anyone? Seems to be a lot of strategic nearsightedness in the West these days.
33 posted on
01/21/2010 10:51:36 PM PST by
ThomasSawyer
(Democratic Underground: Proof that anyone can figure out how to use a computer.)
To: sukhoi-30mki
This is ridiculous! What can you do with planes like this? It's all about the battleship!
![](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/ff/British_Battlecruiser_HMS_Hood_circa_1932.jpg)
To: sukhoi-30mki
The suggestion, from General Sir David Richards... Bud, you need to find a new line of work.
This is preposterous.
35 posted on
01/21/2010 11:46:20 PM PST by
DoughtyOne
(God, Family, Friends, Home, Town, State, the U.S., Conservatism, Free Republic & a dollar a day...)
To: sukhoi-30mki
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.
36 posted on
01/22/2010 12:34:11 AM PST by
ApplegateRanch
(I think not, therefore I don't exist!)
To: sukhoi-30mki
I believe what is being considered is ordering fewer of the high performance jets and procuring the A-29 Super Tucano for missions in more permissive environments. If Embraer goes ahead with a carrier version of the aircraft it could be a good match for the UK's new aircraft carriers and might even prevent the proposed reduction from 2 to 1 of the new ships. This is a pragmatic move even from this F/A-18 pilot's perspective.
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.
38 posted on
01/22/2010 2:17:04 AM PST by
paddles
To: sukhoi-30mki
These would be even cheaper.
![](http://www.justplanemodels.com/cart/products/AM320-CR.gif)
39 posted on
01/22/2010 2:24:27 AM PST by
packrat35
(Democrat Healthcare is a 9-11 Attack on the Constitution)
To: sukhoi-30mki
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.
40 posted on
01/22/2010 2:38:15 AM PST by
FreedomPoster
(No Representation without Taxation!)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-33 next last
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson