USA to use new A-67 in Iraq?
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 1,451
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A Bronco in MANPADS environment? Hmmmm... don't think so.
If you're looking for "cheap and cheerful", How about a laying a PT6 into the armoured "bathtub" of an old Stormovik airframe? I understand the Stormovik kept flying until brought down by the sheer weight of the hits it had taken.
If you're looking for "cheap and cheerful", How about a laying a PT6 into the armoured "bathtub" of an old Stormovik airframe? I understand the Stormovik kept flying until brought down by the sheer weight of the hits it had taken.
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: West Sussex
Posts: 262
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Here's a link to video of the A-67's first flight, if anyone fancies a look:
http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...raft-a-67.html
Just use an A-10 though, you know it makes sense!
http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...raft-a-67.html
Just use an A-10 though, you know it makes sense!
"The 6 October 2006 maiden flight from Monett municipal airport in Missouri lasted 45min and – not shown on the company’s video - ended with the landing gear collapsing on landing. Flight testing is expected to resume in the second quarter with a redesigned and strengthened landing gear"
From the flight article above...
Doh! Well suppose it won't have to land anyhow, as someone with a peashooter could clearly bring that down!
From the flight article above...
Doh! Well suppose it won't have to land anyhow, as someone with a peashooter could clearly bring that down!
Skyraider with a turboprop....
... it's been done. And then there is this...
Now, the only trick is to fit it with an engine that does not perform an uncommanded transition into a divebrake.
... it's been done. And then there is this...
Now, the only trick is to fit it with an engine that does not perform an uncommanded transition into a divebrake.
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
GlobalSecurity.org: Ares Mudfighter [Agile Responsive Effective Support]
The Ares (Agile-Response Effective Support) from Scaled Composites was a close-air-support/anti-helicopter fighter. The ARES, Scaled Model 151, was designed initially in response to a US Army request for a Low Cost Battlefield Attack Aircraft (LCBAA). A design study was performed by Rutan Aircraft Factory in 1981 for such an aircraft. The original LCBAA design was for a pusher turboprop aircraft, of generally the same aerodynamic configuration. It also was designed around a 30mm chain gun. Its mission goals were low-altitude, close air support, with long endurance, and with adequate field performance to operate from roads. Its structure and systems were simple enough to be maintained and repaired in the field.
The turbofan and the inlet are 8° offset to the left. And the fuselage is offset to the right of the wing centerline. The reason is not stability. The gasses, produced by the firing General Electric GAU-12/U 25 mm cannon (sounds like a big gun to me), may not get into the engine. That is why the inlet is offset. During flight there is some trim needed when applying more thrust.
Scaled followed up with the concept, and ultimately decided to build a demonstrator aircraft with internal funds. By the time construction started in 1986, the design had evolved to the current configuration: a single Pratt and Whitney Canada JT15D-5 turbofan engine (same as in the Beechjet / T-1A Jayhawk), and a GAU-12/U 25mm gatling gun.
The ARES first flew on February 19, 1990, with Scaled test pilot Doug Shane at the controls. Since that first flight, the ARES has flown more than 250 hours, and demonstrated all of its design performance and handling qualities goals, including departure-free handling at full aft stick. During November of 1991, under a contract from the U.S. Air Force, initial ground and flight (air-air and air-ground) tests of the GAU-12/U gun system installed in ARES were performed, with outstanding results.
Since its initial development, ARES has been utilized for development of some unique, proprietary systems, and is currently available for use as a research testbed........
The Ares (Agile-Response Effective Support) from Scaled Composites was a close-air-support/anti-helicopter fighter. The ARES, Scaled Model 151, was designed initially in response to a US Army request for a Low Cost Battlefield Attack Aircraft (LCBAA). A design study was performed by Rutan Aircraft Factory in 1981 for such an aircraft. The original LCBAA design was for a pusher turboprop aircraft, of generally the same aerodynamic configuration. It also was designed around a 30mm chain gun. Its mission goals were low-altitude, close air support, with long endurance, and with adequate field performance to operate from roads. Its structure and systems were simple enough to be maintained and repaired in the field.
The turbofan and the inlet are 8° offset to the left. And the fuselage is offset to the right of the wing centerline. The reason is not stability. The gasses, produced by the firing General Electric GAU-12/U 25 mm cannon (sounds like a big gun to me), may not get into the engine. That is why the inlet is offset. During flight there is some trim needed when applying more thrust.
Scaled followed up with the concept, and ultimately decided to build a demonstrator aircraft with internal funds. By the time construction started in 1986, the design had evolved to the current configuration: a single Pratt and Whitney Canada JT15D-5 turbofan engine (same as in the Beechjet / T-1A Jayhawk), and a GAU-12/U 25mm gatling gun.
The ARES first flew on February 19, 1990, with Scaled test pilot Doug Shane at the controls. Since that first flight, the ARES has flown more than 250 hours, and demonstrated all of its design performance and handling qualities goals, including departure-free handling at full aft stick. During November of 1991, under a contract from the U.S. Air Force, initial ground and flight (air-air and air-ground) tests of the GAU-12/U gun system installed in ARES were performed, with outstanding results.
Since its initial development, ARES has been utilized for development of some unique, proprietary systems, and is currently available for use as a research testbed........
SASLess,
You're such a tease. I might be in the USA in June with work, more than happy to stick a couple of days leave on the end....!
OV-10 v MANPADs? Fit the right MWS / Flares & IRS on the engines and you're no more vulnerable than the majority of Helos. Good call! But what about a similarly modified Pucara?
T-6 as a COIN ac? Already done(ish). T-6Gs were used in the "Mosquito" role in Korea as FACs, though often they did a little "COIN" as well. Though having sampled the T-6 I think they were brave guys!
Westland Wyvern? Probably the last good design out of Yeovil...
Il-2/10? I like your thinking! Fit a big turboprop, lots of armour. I bet the North Koreans have a whole load of them stuck in an underground hangar!
What about the most succesful ground attack ac, the P-47? It'd be a brave DSHka gunner that took on 8 .50 Cals coming the other way!
I see in Janes that the USAF is looking for someone to re-wing the A-10, why don't you go the whole "hog" and make some extra fuselages as well!
I bet this much lateral thinking never occurs in the Pentagon or Mod MB!
You're such a tease. I might be in the USA in June with work, more than happy to stick a couple of days leave on the end....!
OV-10 v MANPADs? Fit the right MWS / Flares & IRS on the engines and you're no more vulnerable than the majority of Helos. Good call! But what about a similarly modified Pucara?
T-6 as a COIN ac? Already done(ish). T-6Gs were used in the "Mosquito" role in Korea as FACs, though often they did a little "COIN" as well. Though having sampled the T-6 I think they were brave guys!
Westland Wyvern? Probably the last good design out of Yeovil...
Il-2/10? I like your thinking! Fit a big turboprop, lots of armour. I bet the North Koreans have a whole load of them stuck in an underground hangar!
What about the most succesful ground attack ac, the P-47? It'd be a brave DSHka gunner that took on 8 .50 Cals coming the other way!
I see in Janes that the USAF is looking for someone to re-wing the A-10, why don't you go the whole "hog" and make some extra fuselages as well!
I bet this much lateral thinking never occurs in the Pentagon or Mod MB!
OV10 or Pucara? - I have only seen one pucara (in the AAC museum in Middle Wallop UK). Don't know too much about it. Though the OV10 is around in lots of numbers, plenty in storage in the US, plenty in use in Thailand, Phillipines, Indonesia and civil contracts in US. USMC employed them in GW1. USMC was investigating recently the option of taking them out of storage and deploying them to Iraq for convoy escort, COIN etc. Not sure what is happening there though.
P51D, Skyraider and OV10 are the only fixed wing I would want to fly, they are almost good enough to be helicopters.
Though I do like your option of building more fuselages to go with the additional wings for the A-10's.
P51D, Skyraider and OV10 are the only fixed wing I would want to fly, they are almost good enough to be helicopters.
Though I do like your option of building more fuselages to go with the additional wings for the A-10's.
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: NW FL
Posts: 230
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Evalu8ter
T-6 as a COIN ac? Already done(ish). T-6Gs were used in the "Mosquito" role in Korea as FACs, though often they did a little "COIN" as well. Though having sampled the T-6 I think they were brave guys!
http://www.af.mil/factsheets/factsheet.asp?fsID=124
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Killer bees:
...........Ongoing operations in Iraq and Afghanistan indicate that counterinsurgency (COIN) is likely to occupy the U.S. military for the foreseeable future. As ground forces tend to dominate this type of warfare, the air-power focus is expected to be on ISR, transportation, light strike, psychological operations and drug eradication, as well as the support and training of host nation air forces.
Though no surprise to military analysts, the return of counterinsurgency-based “special air warfare” has yet to have an impact at the policy level. The Pentagon remains focused on large-scale conventional wars and the procurement of big-budget platforms with which to fight them. Of the four U.S. service branches, the Air Force is probably the least enthusiastic when it comes to counterinsurgency, purging virtually all mention of it from its doctrine after the Vietnam War defeat and doing little to acknowledge it since.....
COIN BECOMES FID
If the counterinsurgency concept survives at all in Air Force thinking, it is under the general heading of foreign internal defense (FID), a mission the service appears to have embraced reluctantly. The 6th Special Operations Squadron (SOS) — activated in 1994 in response to the 1986 Goldwater-Nichols Act, which, among other actions, brought America’s special operations forces back into vogue — is the only Air Force organization dedicated to assisting foreign forces involved in low-intensity conflict.
Staffed with around 100 personnel and equipped with a handful of aging U.S.-and Soviet-built transports and helicopters, the 6th SOS bears a solitary and growing burden. Since 2001, the Hurlburt Field, Fla.-based unit has sent advisers on 49 missions to 26 nations, with a typical mission requiring 10 people for 25 days, according to a September Rand study of the Air Force role in fighting insurgencies. This is a marked increase from the previous five years, which saw 37 missions to 19 countries, with an average of seven advisers deployed for 19 days.
According to a former 6th SOS commander, manpower shortages obligated the squadron to decline more than half of all tasking requests received during his tenure. Demand for 6th SOS-type services may be as much as 400 percent of capacity, the Rand study concluded, based on its estimate that 82 of the 191 United Nations member states face active or latent insurgencies and nearly 80 percent of them have security assistance relationships with the U.S.
Despite this apparent need, the larger Air Force special operations community has kept its distance from the counterinsurgency/foreign internal defense world. Since its inception, this three-star command has focused on the more glamorous, direct action aspects of special operations, missions Armed Forces Journal once categorized as “raids, rescues and Rambo.” Its high-end fleet is a reflection of this, comprising no fewer than six varieties of the four-engine C-130 Hercules transport; MH-53 and MH-60 helicopters; and up to 50 CV-22 Osprey tilt rotors on long-term order.
For intratheater support of special operations forces, Air Force Special Operations Command in August 2005 very quietly deployed a fleet of six Pilatus PC-12s, pressurized single-engine turboprops able to operate from unpaved strips. Designated U-28As, these 10-seat aircraft offer near-jet performance as well as a low profile, while reinforcing the idea that modern civil aircraft are often well-suited to niche military roles.........
COMBAT CROP-DUSTERS
A low-key appearance does provide certain advantages. The U.S. State Department operates a fleet of Ayres Vigilantes, armed and armored derivatives of the T-65 Turbo Thrush crop-duster modified for the drug eradication mission at the national level, where it overlaps with counterinsurgency and foreign internal defense. Painted black and flown by two-man crews seated in tandem, these aircraft are able to operate with relative impunity in areas where an overt military presence is considered obtrusive and might even compromise political objectives.
Since 1988, a nondescript hangar at Patrick Air Force Base in Melbourne, Fla., has served as the U.S. headquarters for these International Narcotics and Law Enforcement (INL) aircraft and their crews — civilian contractors recruited for their crop-dusting experience and Spanish language fluency. Deployments are typically to the cocaine-, marijuana- and opium poppy-producing states of Colombia, Bolivia, Peru, Guatemala, Mexico, Belize, Thailand, Burma and now, Afghanistan.
In Colombia, for example, Vigilantes typically work in pairs, staging from unpaved agricultural airstrips close to the high mountain valleys where coca plants are grown. A Cessna Caravan furnished with a multispectral digital imaging system identifies and maps the drug-producing fields, passing target coordinates on to the Vigilantes, which navigate with commercial Global Positioning System receivers.
Upon reaching the target zone — which could be as small as a tennis court — one aircraft sprays while the other provides surveillance and cover. Should drug cartel or insurgent forces (who often receive financial support from the drug trade) shoot at them, the Vigilantes are equipped for immediate fire suppression with guns, rockets and other ordinance carried on various under-wing hard-points.
It can be risky work. Last year, INL aircraft in Colombia sustained 332 hits from ground fire and several were shot down, according to State Department documents. Others faced significant downtime for repairs.......
...........Ongoing operations in Iraq and Afghanistan indicate that counterinsurgency (COIN) is likely to occupy the U.S. military for the foreseeable future. As ground forces tend to dominate this type of warfare, the air-power focus is expected to be on ISR, transportation, light strike, psychological operations and drug eradication, as well as the support and training of host nation air forces.
Though no surprise to military analysts, the return of counterinsurgency-based “special air warfare” has yet to have an impact at the policy level. The Pentagon remains focused on large-scale conventional wars and the procurement of big-budget platforms with which to fight them. Of the four U.S. service branches, the Air Force is probably the least enthusiastic when it comes to counterinsurgency, purging virtually all mention of it from its doctrine after the Vietnam War defeat and doing little to acknowledge it since.....
COIN BECOMES FID
If the counterinsurgency concept survives at all in Air Force thinking, it is under the general heading of foreign internal defense (FID), a mission the service appears to have embraced reluctantly. The 6th Special Operations Squadron (SOS) — activated in 1994 in response to the 1986 Goldwater-Nichols Act, which, among other actions, brought America’s special operations forces back into vogue — is the only Air Force organization dedicated to assisting foreign forces involved in low-intensity conflict.
Staffed with around 100 personnel and equipped with a handful of aging U.S.-and Soviet-built transports and helicopters, the 6th SOS bears a solitary and growing burden. Since 2001, the Hurlburt Field, Fla.-based unit has sent advisers on 49 missions to 26 nations, with a typical mission requiring 10 people for 25 days, according to a September Rand study of the Air Force role in fighting insurgencies. This is a marked increase from the previous five years, which saw 37 missions to 19 countries, with an average of seven advisers deployed for 19 days.
According to a former 6th SOS commander, manpower shortages obligated the squadron to decline more than half of all tasking requests received during his tenure. Demand for 6th SOS-type services may be as much as 400 percent of capacity, the Rand study concluded, based on its estimate that 82 of the 191 United Nations member states face active or latent insurgencies and nearly 80 percent of them have security assistance relationships with the U.S.
Despite this apparent need, the larger Air Force special operations community has kept its distance from the counterinsurgency/foreign internal defense world. Since its inception, this three-star command has focused on the more glamorous, direct action aspects of special operations, missions Armed Forces Journal once categorized as “raids, rescues and Rambo.” Its high-end fleet is a reflection of this, comprising no fewer than six varieties of the four-engine C-130 Hercules transport; MH-53 and MH-60 helicopters; and up to 50 CV-22 Osprey tilt rotors on long-term order.
For intratheater support of special operations forces, Air Force Special Operations Command in August 2005 very quietly deployed a fleet of six Pilatus PC-12s, pressurized single-engine turboprops able to operate from unpaved strips. Designated U-28As, these 10-seat aircraft offer near-jet performance as well as a low profile, while reinforcing the idea that modern civil aircraft are often well-suited to niche military roles.........
COMBAT CROP-DUSTERS
A low-key appearance does provide certain advantages. The U.S. State Department operates a fleet of Ayres Vigilantes, armed and armored derivatives of the T-65 Turbo Thrush crop-duster modified for the drug eradication mission at the national level, where it overlaps with counterinsurgency and foreign internal defense. Painted black and flown by two-man crews seated in tandem, these aircraft are able to operate with relative impunity in areas where an overt military presence is considered obtrusive and might even compromise political objectives.
Since 1988, a nondescript hangar at Patrick Air Force Base in Melbourne, Fla., has served as the U.S. headquarters for these International Narcotics and Law Enforcement (INL) aircraft and their crews — civilian contractors recruited for their crop-dusting experience and Spanish language fluency. Deployments are typically to the cocaine-, marijuana- and opium poppy-producing states of Colombia, Bolivia, Peru, Guatemala, Mexico, Belize, Thailand, Burma and now, Afghanistan.
In Colombia, for example, Vigilantes typically work in pairs, staging from unpaved agricultural airstrips close to the high mountain valleys where coca plants are grown. A Cessna Caravan furnished with a multispectral digital imaging system identifies and maps the drug-producing fields, passing target coordinates on to the Vigilantes, which navigate with commercial Global Positioning System receivers.
Upon reaching the target zone — which could be as small as a tennis court — one aircraft sprays while the other provides surveillance and cover. Should drug cartel or insurgent forces (who often receive financial support from the drug trade) shoot at them, the Vigilantes are equipped for immediate fire suppression with guns, rockets and other ordinance carried on various under-wing hard-points.
It can be risky work. Last year, INL aircraft in Colombia sustained 332 hits from ground fire and several were shot down, according to State Department documents. Others faced significant downtime for repairs.......
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Bradford
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is a great deal of sense in this proposal. Part of the dynamics of a counter-insurgency is a low-tech enemy versus the technologically sophisticated. This can lead to a situation where the costs of dealing with the insurgents become prohibitive and the taxpayer (aka voter) pulls the plug.
In certain respects, this mirrors the Reagan Cold War scenario, where, as legend would have it, the US was able to up the spending ante on the arms race, forcing the USSR to compete and driving it into bankruptcy.
In this situation, you have insurgents with the archetypal $10 Kalashikov being tackled by weapons systems which cost millions (if not billions). The insurgents, therefore, can drive their opponents, if not into bankruptcy, into a position where it become too expensive to prosecute the war.
An example of this comes from recent Parliamentary questions by Ann Winterton, which elicted that the cost per hour of operating a Harrier were Ł37,000 (excluding the costs of ordnance), while the (funded) cost of running a Tucano were around Ł5,000. Similarly, running a Lynx costs Ł23,000 per hour while operating a Huey (Bell 212) cost Ł2,000.
What we need to consider very urgently, therefore, is the issue of cost effectiveness, which is an important part of counter-insurgency warfare in a democracy. Short of total war, defence spending will always have to compete with other spending, so we need to find ways of increasing capabilities at reduced cost.
See here - search for "economics of war".
In certain respects, this mirrors the Reagan Cold War scenario, where, as legend would have it, the US was able to up the spending ante on the arms race, forcing the USSR to compete and driving it into bankruptcy.
In this situation, you have insurgents with the archetypal $10 Kalashikov being tackled by weapons systems which cost millions (if not billions). The insurgents, therefore, can drive their opponents, if not into bankruptcy, into a position where it become too expensive to prosecute the war.
An example of this comes from recent Parliamentary questions by Ann Winterton, which elicted that the cost per hour of operating a Harrier were Ł37,000 (excluding the costs of ordnance), while the (funded) cost of running a Tucano were around Ł5,000. Similarly, running a Lynx costs Ł23,000 per hour while operating a Huey (Bell 212) cost Ł2,000.
What we need to consider very urgently, therefore, is the issue of cost effectiveness, which is an important part of counter-insurgency warfare in a democracy. Short of total war, defence spending will always have to compete with other spending, so we need to find ways of increasing capabilities at reduced cost.
See here - search for "economics of war".
EU,
Don't forget that the "economics of war" are driven by the MPs who have BAES and AW plants in their locales. A cheap non-hi tech war is not what these companies want to fight!
We would have to candidly admit that we're at war and pay the money to put these companies on a "war footing" to out-produce the enemy with rugged, cheap , effective weaponry (such as A-10/A-67/OV-10) and guarantee handsome profits in order for sanity to prevail. Big business is about money, not about warfighting.
Don't forget that the "economics of war" are driven by the MPs who have BAES and AW plants in their locales. A cheap non-hi tech war is not what these companies want to fight!
We would have to candidly admit that we're at war and pay the money to put these companies on a "war footing" to out-produce the enemy with rugged, cheap , effective weaponry (such as A-10/A-67/OV-10) and guarantee handsome profits in order for sanity to prevail. Big business is about money, not about warfighting.
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Bradford
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don't forget that the "economics of war" are driven by the MPs who have BAES and AW plants in their locales. A cheap non-hi tech war is not what these companies want to fight!
We would have to candidly admit that we're at war and pay the money to put these companies on a "war footing" to out-produce the enemy with rugged, cheap , effective weaponry (such as A-10/A-67/OV-10) and guarantee handsome profits in order for sanity to prevail. Big business is about money, not about warfighting.
We would have to candidly admit that we're at war and pay the money to put these companies on a "war footing" to out-produce the enemy with rugged, cheap , effective weaponry (such as A-10/A-67/OV-10) and guarantee handsome profits in order for sanity to prevail. Big business is about money, not about warfighting.
I live in hope (perhaps forlorn) that there are enough people out there who are able to re-frame the debate and point ministers in the right direction.
A whole load of Mustang (about 20% of the parts are common)! Much modified Cavalier mustang, though strangely Piper were very reluctant to market it as a "modern mustang". With a 2450hp lycoming turbo-prop up front it went like the clappers! but I bet it just didn't sound right....Still, I've looked at the one at Wright Patt and it is kinda handsome..
It's immediate forebear was the Cavalier Turbo Mustang which had the ubiquitois Dart before the switch to the T-55 Lycoming (itself a core engine found on the Ch-47 and BAe 146) and could haul 4500lb for a loiter of 90mins at 150nm. Clean she would hit 540mph(!) (all figures from Paul Coggan's excellent book "Mustang Survivors").
Now if we could get Wastelands or BWoS to start churning out microwaved mustangs or turbo-spads things might start getting interesting!
By the way, well said EU!
It's immediate forebear was the Cavalier Turbo Mustang which had the ubiquitois Dart before the switch to the T-55 Lycoming (itself a core engine found on the Ch-47 and BAe 146) and could haul 4500lb for a loiter of 90mins at 150nm. Clean she would hit 540mph(!) (all figures from Paul Coggan's excellent book "Mustang Survivors").
Now if we could get Wastelands or BWoS to start churning out microwaved mustangs or turbo-spads things might start getting interesting!
By the way, well said EU!
P51D, Skyraider and OV10 are the only fixed wing I would want to fly
The Nakajima Ki-115 'Tsurugi' (Sword) was designed from the outset as a disposable (suicide) aircraft. The major impetus in building this aircraft was the perceived lack of available obsolete aircraft to use in kamikaze attacks should the Allies invade the home islands. This aircraft had to carry a decent bomb load, and use non-strategic materials (mostly wood and steel). While the initial batch were made from aluminum, the follow on aircraft were to primarily be made of wood and steel.
Additionally, the aircraft was to be able to accept a number of different powerplants. The initial production aircraft (Ki-115a) were powered by 1,150 hp Nakajima Ha-35 radial engines. The offensive load of one 250, 500, or 800 Kg bomb, was carried in a recess under the forward fuselage. Flight testing began less than three months after the initial proposal in March 1945. The aircraft was to use a droppable main landing gear to save weight, so a simple welded steel tube landing gear was attached to the aircraft (see the photo above). This rigid gear combined with poor cockpit visibility presented major ground handling difficulties for the poorly trained pilots who would be flying the aircraft. By the end of testing in June 1945, improved landing gear and auxiliary flaps, attached to the trailing edge of the wing, were added. Provisions were also made in all 104 production aircraft, for the attachment of two rocket assist take-off units. While none were operational, two were sent to the Showa Aircraft Company to use as pattern aircraft for a proposed naval version of the Tsurugi. An improved version, the Ki-115b, was to have longer span wooden wings and tail surfaces. A three-view of the aircraft is shown below. (from www.geocities.com)
Additionally, the aircraft was to be able to accept a number of different powerplants. The initial production aircraft (Ki-115a) were powered by 1,150 hp Nakajima Ha-35 radial engines. The offensive load of one 250, 500, or 800 Kg bomb, was carried in a recess under the forward fuselage. Flight testing began less than three months after the initial proposal in March 1945. The aircraft was to use a droppable main landing gear to save weight, so a simple welded steel tube landing gear was attached to the aircraft (see the photo above). This rigid gear combined with poor cockpit visibility presented major ground handling difficulties for the poorly trained pilots who would be flying the aircraft. By the end of testing in June 1945, improved landing gear and auxiliary flaps, attached to the trailing edge of the wing, were added. Provisions were also made in all 104 production aircraft, for the attachment of two rocket assist take-off units. While none were operational, two were sent to the Showa Aircraft Company to use as pattern aircraft for a proposed naval version of the Tsurugi. An improved version, the Ki-115b, was to have longer span wooden wings and tail surfaces. A three-view of the aircraft is shown below. (from www.geocities.com)
Flight testing began less than three months after the initial proposal in March 1945
The aircraft was to use a droppable main landing gear to save weight
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Iraq Issues RFP for COIN Aircraft
Flight International reports that the USAF's Aeronautical Systems Center (ASC) has issued a solicitation on behalf of the Iraqi Air Force [IqAF] to buy at least 8 counter-insurgency (COIN) aircraft that can serve a dual role as a intermediate to advanced single-engine turboprop trainers. The aircraft should be delivered from November 2008 - April 2009, with options to buy additional aircraft in annual lots of 6.
The solicitation requires a single-engine turboprop powered by a Pratt & Whitney Canada PT6 family engine, in "wide use," with an advanced suite of sensors and weapons including electro-optical sensors and guided weapons capability. Indeed, it went one step farther and narrowed the field to 4 candidates that can be difficult for a novice to tell apart:
Korea Aerospace's KO-1 Woong Bee, the armed forward air control & light attack version of its KT-1 training aircraft. The KT-1 project began in 1988, and the first aircraft was delivered to South Korea's air force in 2000.
Pilatus PC-9M. The Swiss firm has created a widely-popular trainer turboprop. The design has been licensed by other firms (see below), and Pilatus has sold this aircraft to 14 countries beyond Switzerland - including 20 aircraft sold to Iraq from 1987.
Embraer EMB-314 Super Tucano/ ALX. The Super Tucano is used in an armed role by Brazil as a patrol and border overwatch aircraft in the Amazon region, and by Colombia and the Dominican Republic; the older EMB-312 Tucano trainer aircraft has been bought by 17 countries. Brazil also has some familiarity with Iraq, as a mid-level military equipment supplier in previous years.
The Super Tucano has a reputation for being a bit 'heavy' as a training platform, as a tradeoff for being built from the ground up as an effective short-field light attack/ patrol/ counter-insurgency aircraft that can operate with little ground support. In 2006, the USA successfully discouraged a $500 million sale of Super Tucanos to Venezuela, a decision that Embraer accepted in good grace. The firm had moved to sweeten the pot for that sale by promising to set up a Florida manufacturing facility; a reprise of that approach might help take some of the "Buy American" label off of...
Hawker Beechcraft's AT-6B Texan II; the firm also unveiled an AT-6B light attack/COIN version at Farnborough 2006, back when they were still Raytheon Aircraft. The T-6 is a licensed Pilatus PC-9 design with some modifications, and serves as the USAF's and US Navy's JPATS intermediate to advanced training aircraft. It is also used by Canada and Greece. Greece specified that its T-6Bs had to be capable of being armed, but the aircraft was not initially designed for an armed role.
Flight International magazine has an April 2007 blog entry by a staffer who flew in a T-6B; the AT-6B variant will simply be a T-6B trainer with additional equipment as requested by the customer. It certainly sounds as if the company is expecting the Iraqi Air Force Order...
Flight International reports that the USAF's Aeronautical Systems Center (ASC) has issued a solicitation on behalf of the Iraqi Air Force [IqAF] to buy at least 8 counter-insurgency (COIN) aircraft that can serve a dual role as a intermediate to advanced single-engine turboprop trainers. The aircraft should be delivered from November 2008 - April 2009, with options to buy additional aircraft in annual lots of 6.
The solicitation requires a single-engine turboprop powered by a Pratt & Whitney Canada PT6 family engine, in "wide use," with an advanced suite of sensors and weapons including electro-optical sensors and guided weapons capability. Indeed, it went one step farther and narrowed the field to 4 candidates that can be difficult for a novice to tell apart:
Korea Aerospace's KO-1 Woong Bee, the armed forward air control & light attack version of its KT-1 training aircraft. The KT-1 project began in 1988, and the first aircraft was delivered to South Korea's air force in 2000.
Pilatus PC-9M. The Swiss firm has created a widely-popular trainer turboprop. The design has been licensed by other firms (see below), and Pilatus has sold this aircraft to 14 countries beyond Switzerland - including 20 aircraft sold to Iraq from 1987.
Embraer EMB-314 Super Tucano/ ALX. The Super Tucano is used in an armed role by Brazil as a patrol and border overwatch aircraft in the Amazon region, and by Colombia and the Dominican Republic; the older EMB-312 Tucano trainer aircraft has been bought by 17 countries. Brazil also has some familiarity with Iraq, as a mid-level military equipment supplier in previous years.
The Super Tucano has a reputation for being a bit 'heavy' as a training platform, as a tradeoff for being built from the ground up as an effective short-field light attack/ patrol/ counter-insurgency aircraft that can operate with little ground support. In 2006, the USA successfully discouraged a $500 million sale of Super Tucanos to Venezuela, a decision that Embraer accepted in good grace. The firm had moved to sweeten the pot for that sale by promising to set up a Florida manufacturing facility; a reprise of that approach might help take some of the "Buy American" label off of...
Hawker Beechcraft's AT-6B Texan II; the firm also unveiled an AT-6B light attack/COIN version at Farnborough 2006, back when they were still Raytheon Aircraft. The T-6 is a licensed Pilatus PC-9 design with some modifications, and serves as the USAF's and US Navy's JPATS intermediate to advanced training aircraft. It is also used by Canada and Greece. Greece specified that its T-6Bs had to be capable of being armed, but the aircraft was not initially designed for an armed role.
Flight International magazine has an April 2007 blog entry by a staffer who flew in a T-6B; the AT-6B variant will simply be a T-6B trainer with additional equipment as requested by the customer. It certainly sounds as if the company is expecting the Iraqi Air Force Order...