Posted on 11/20/2011 8:52:19 PM PST by sukhoi-30mki
It’s a sad state of affairs when the USA cannot build a prop driven fighter attack aircraft. And we buy something from foreigners, that a corsair, mustang, or thunderbolt could slaughter,, outrun, out carry, and out range.
We could bring back Skyraiders and totally stack the deck,, turboprop it if you want. But buying brazilian is silly when we have 20% unemployment.
Dude,, thats the story as it was all over the news at that time. The Berretta was a sop to the italians to get them to agree to let us place medium range nukes there in the early 80s.
The beretta sucks compared to what our guys should have. And that open top slide in the desert is retarded.
Awesome machine,,that super tucano. Half the range, slower by 40 mph 20% of the firepower and a third of the bombload of a Skyraider. Throw in Carrier us for a Skyraider for free.
Maximum speed: 322 mph (280 kn, 518 km/h) at 18,000 ft (5,500 m)
Cruise speed: 198 mph (172 kn, 319 km/h)
Range: 1,316 mi (1,144 nmi, 2,115 km)
Service ceiling: 28,500 ft (8,685 m)
Rate of climb: 2,850 ft/min (14.5 m/s)
Wing loading: 45 lb/ft² (220 kg/m²)
Power/mass: 0.15 hp/lb (250 W/kg)
Armament
Guns: 4 × 20 mm (0.79 in) M2 cannon
Other: Up to 8,000 lb (3,600 kg) of ordnance on 15 external hardpoints including bombs, torpedoes, mine dispensers, unguided rockets, or gun pods
Prestige is an abstract concept. The COIN market is very small and the Super Tucano is pretty much acknowledged as the leader in that segment;sure a USAF purchase would be a crowning achievement but a lot of countries with such a requirement will want to buy it any way.
The Skyraider was also a maintenance hog, and in an era of precision guided munitions, payload is not a big factor.
Roughly,,,the super tucano is an SBD Dauntless with no carrier capability. Look at load, guns, speed and range. Freaking amazing,, and if thats what we need,, we can’t build it herein this country when we need the jobs? Insane.
Roughly,,,the super tucano is an SBD Dauntless with no carrier capability. Look at load, guns, speed and range. Freaking amazing,, and if thats what we need,, we can’t build it herein this country when we need the jobs? Insane.
Roughly,,,the super tucano is an SBD Dauntless with no carrier capability. Look at load, guns, speed and range. Freaking amazing,, and if thats what we need,, we can’t build it herein this country when we need the jobs? Insane.
Hmm..Nice stealth characteristics!
In an ideal world, a digital skyraider would have been the way to go. But in reality, would it have been developed fast enough and at an acceptable cost? That would be unlikely given the kind of expenses you see in US defense procurement. I’d guess that the Super Hornet was the last such affordable ‘maturity-based’ project.
It wouldnt be a maint hog with a turbo prop in the place of a radial. And with precision munitions,, imagine the loiter time when it carried fuel a super tucano cant. And not to lay it on too thick,, but 20 years from now, we might be somewhere that support from a carrier would be nice.
True true, It would take 20 years of development here. When in reality, it should take 6 months to be rolling out the factory door if government would fund it, and get out of the way.
The Super Tucano is to be built in Florida. Or that’s what Embraer says.
About carrier capability, I don’t think that’s prerequisite since the LAS programme is mainly about the USAF training foreign air forces like Afghanistan.
The pilots fear sending these particular planes into the modern combat arena will be like the Army's experience with the Humvees. Always playing catch-up against the enemy, “up-amoring” them so they are battled hardened enough to take some hits, and losing maneuverability and usefulness in the process, not to mention pilots.
A-10’s are a whole lot more expensive to operate, but are about the only viable option for the expected tasks. This will be even more true after the Libyan missiles find their way to the enemy.
Oldplayer
ok,, you are totally correct. My sentimental thought aside,, an A-10 is everything we need.
I give up,, i suppose a Super tucano does look slightly more capable than a Stuka Ju-87.
From the article: “The Air Force’s move surprised aircraft industry analyst Richard Aboulafia of the Teal Group.
“They seemed to be the front runner for the contract,” he said of Hawker. “They had the most infrastructure spread over the most states and the most political support.”
So then the analyst must have been in the bag for Hawker according to what you say must be the answer, therefore the responses I’ve been receiving all tell me the article is BS written by a local journalist with a trembling lower lip.
That statement smacks of pure politics. Nothing about aircraft capabilities, just how many Congresscritters would be in their corner.
Congress is the big issue here.
The Super T is available right now and can be bought while there is still a budget and a need to build them.
If they wait until Beech can supply an AT-6 they will never see a single airplane.
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.