Posted on 12/17/2014 7:19:08 AM PST by ImJustAnotherOkie
The U.S. Air Force has a complicated relationship with its low- and slow-flying A-10 Warthog attack jet. And that’s putting it mildly. The flying branch has tried more than once to retire the ungainly A-10 in favor of speedier planes, only for lawmakers to block the move.
But on at least one occasion, the Air Force actually defended the heavily-armored, gun-armed Warthog from an unlikely challenger—a modern version of the World War II P-51 Mustang that Congress for some reason really loved.
In 1979, Congress demanded the Air Force test out the tiny Piper PA-48 Enforcer light attack plane—a derivative of the then-39-year-old P-51—as cheaper alternative to the A-10, which was brand new at the time. Five years later, the air service put two Enforcers through their paces.
(Excerpt) Read more at medium.com ...
But...it IS sorta compelling...
...in a weird, compelling sorta way... compellingly....
The plane... NOT the mustache on the Lady Grace, that is...
The SPAD!!!
Nice wings... love it.
At least it doesn’t look like a crop duster.
Whatever happened to these?
http://www.airplane-pictures.net/photo/12002/zk-jtl-private-cessna-a-37b-dragonfly/
I've often wondered, though, if a P-51, or the old A-1 Skyraiders, might be more suited to some of the brushfire wars that we're fighting in the Middle East. The rough field capability, in particular, would be handy, I'd think.
Would love to have FReepers more learned than I, comment.
They tried to push this plane for use in low intensity conflicts in the 3rd world countries. We had the A1, so who needed this? The key was low maintenance, but I would still prefer the A1 over it.
Was told the A-1 could carry the same bomb load as a B-17 ....
“The practically all-new aircraft married the Mustang’s basic shape to a powerful turboprop engine. The plane had a variety of other improvements...”
Then why so much dissing possibly the greatest fighter of all time?
’ the ungainly A-10’?..............
What about a turboprop version of the A-1?
Having been involved with military sales for an entire career, I can tell you what’s wrong with your choice. They didn’t grease the right Congress Critter. To get Future Combat Systems approved, (a colossal waste) it took the Congress Critters of two companies, Boeing and SAIC. They both became project leads, or integrators of integrators, in the specially developed terminology to handle this idiot move. Half of all the money went toward their management services and only .20 cents on the dollar bought hardware or software.
You can sell cr*p to the military if you carry a pocket Congressman. Even the most spectacular equipment will not sell just on its merits. You need some cronyism in your corner or it’s no sale.
It can’t have all the armor protection of an A10 and it certainly doesn’t have the super cannon. You can’t pack too much of a punch.
Spell check...SPAZ not SPAD.
The dissing this latest incarnation. The original P-51 was a true beauty.
Shoehorning a big enough turboprop engine into the A-1 was problematic. There was an attempt back in the 50s called the A2D Skyshark. Hulking mess of an aircraft.
Thanks for the new screen background.
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.