It will be interesting to see if they actually go through with a formal contract and purchase instead of chasing the F-35 “Do Everything” dream. Imagine a cheaper aircraft that’s better suited to the kind of low intensity conflicts we’ve been doing.
Kind of surprised Boeing didn’t try to submit an upgraded OV-10D. Seems like it would have been easy to have modified it for the competition.
This looks like a prototype A-10. I wish they would just keep those in circulation forever like the B52. Minor upgrades to a more than capable platform.
Except for the Scorpion, they all look like glorified crop dusters.
That said, there’s a definitive role for them in ground support. A lot cheaper to procure, maintain and operate than things like the A-10. And don’t get me wrong, as an old A-10 crew chief, I certainly have my sympathies for the old bird.
No expert here, but it seems like any of these are a sitting duck for an enemy with lightweight SAMs (MANPADs) or even a decent gunner with a .50 BMG or similar heavy machine gun on a pintle mount. In contrast the A-10 has little vulnerability to small arms fire and has several countermeasures against the SAMs. Am I missing something?
Just an opinion here, but I don’t think you’re missing anything here, just asking the wrong question.
It’s like saying let’s not use Humvees because they are vulnerable to HMG fire, or Stryker because they are vulnerable to RPG. Nothing is ever invulnerable. But you manage the risk and they’ll do so with these.
This is a great idea that should have been done years ago. These small planes can stay on station much longer and still carry a ton of ordinance. They are very maneuverable and can get down very low to get right on target.
It is the same concept of SOF using the Little Bird when the Apache is bigger, carries much more firepower, and has better survivability. This would not be the CAS for everyone. But it would have a place.
The bottom one, the Air Tractor, is a crop duster. And if you have ever seen those things fly they can do some amazing things.
In my Air Force magazines, you can’t make it through an issue without ads for both the AT-6 and Super Tucano. They both tout leveraging A-10c and MC-12w platforms.
Having dealt with a great deal of CAS, from the ground only. I would say that something like the Air Tractor AT-802 would be the best bet. Those things are very maneuverable and can carry a lot of weight while doing it. Those crop-dusters are carrying a crap-ton of weight and can still do things that you would not believe.
I’ll second the crop duster. Ugly as they may be the damn things can turn on a dime and haul a lot of weight while doing it. They don’t make money by spraying the wrong area, or taking forever to get lined up for the next pass. Plus I’m pretty sure the design already has a great track record of being able to land on just about any kind of improvised less than ideal runway. So theoretically they could be operated close to the ground elements they support, increasing loiter time, or payload vs fuel on take off.
Nyet Comrade! The fascist pig Ju-87 has a prominent chin scoop on the nose, where the glorious Ilyushin has no need of this decadence. This crop duster also has no need of any scoop on front of aircraft, meaning it is strong like bear, and also for it comes from virtuous agricultural proletariat class!
Engines are like balls; one will work, but it’s better to have two.
None of those seem to have real armour.
I’d say that they are trying to make it fail by under resourcing it. They’ll spend billions on it, get the planes, find out they are death traps and then sell them to some third world country. Then they get the maintenance contract for a generation that is paid for with US aid.
