By: arquebus
- 5th March 2017 at 00:32Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
With cannons in the internal bay the Scorpion would be a good low level defence fighter and would be able to defend itself well after dropping ordinance in an attack mission. You cant compare the Scorpion with turboprop attack a/c like the Tucano and PC-9 as the 300kt speed of these a/c are completely ineffective against jet fighters. Remember than all a/c are subsonic at low level so that the Scorpion is as fast as any fighter for low level defence.
By: TomcatViP
- 15th March 2017 at 20:22Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Bronco will never come back. It was a test only with the two Broncos in Iraq, to confirm the idea.
Perhaps that
[Speaking about the Scorpion] The jet’s ability to fire precision-guided munitions while maintaining low levels of noise could make it a better choice for urban close-air support than loud, less advanced turboprop planes, [Textron AirLand’s vice president of Scorpion sales] Harris said.
By: J Boyle
- 15th March 2017 at 20:29Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Just out of curiosity, I wonder if the Bronco tooling still exists?
The former NAA (and Curtiss during WWII) factory still exists, last I heard it warehouses bureaucrats doing paper work.
Since the 70s, it has been US policy to retain tooling, I recall seing the B-1 tools in storage at Davis-Monthan.
At any rate, the AT-6 sounds like a useful aircraft for low intensity situations, I flew one several years ago and was very impressed by its performance.
However, to make a REALLY low cost (no crew to lose), could a attack aircraft of this type be unmanned?
I also read that the USAF is considering using NCO drone operators as opposed to the current commissioned officer corps, reducing costs even more. Imagine, giving a recent high school graduate the ultimate video game system. :)
It was notably hinted that the Scorpion could also fulfill a Tanker role for aircraft or unmanned vehicles.
Textron spokeswoman Sylvia Pierson also noted that its Scorpion jet has the payload and ground clearance necessary to use it for tanking missions. However, “we have not yet received any customer requirements to integrate and demonstrate this capability,” she said.
By: KGB
- 9th September 2017 at 06:17Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
The whole point of a light attack aircraft is to simplify things and have something less expensive to store, maintain and fly. Sure this Scorpion thing is cool looking and probably goes like hell. But thats not the point.
Watch the Scorpion win. Then we will read about cost overruns, technical issues and pilot training issues.
Posts: 12,109
By: bring_it_on - 3rd March 2017 at 10:59 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
From AWS17 Courtesy Lara Seligman
Posts: 1,123
By: Hotshot - 4th March 2017 at 07:48 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
It would be good it it had the ability to see through folliage.
Posts: 275
By: arquebus - 5th March 2017 at 00:32 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
With cannons in the internal bay the Scorpion would be a good low level defence fighter and would be able to defend itself well after dropping ordinance in an attack mission. You cant compare the Scorpion with turboprop attack a/c like the Tucano and PC-9 as the 300kt speed of these a/c are completely ineffective against jet fighters. Remember than all a/c are subsonic at low level so that the Scorpion is as fast as any fighter for low level defence.
Posts: 5,905
By: TomcatViP - 5th March 2017 at 00:32 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I guess this is the target:
(source https://www.usni.org)
[ATTACH=CONFIG]251728[/ATTACH]
Posts: 275
By: arquebus - 5th March 2017 at 00:53 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
or this
[ATTACH=CONFIG]251731[/ATTACH]
Posts: 54
By: andys - 5th March 2017 at 09:32 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Who was it that said, "America First"? So any foreign candidates are almost certainly off the table, however good they might be.Posts: 4,619
By: mrmalaya - 5th March 2017 at 09:38 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Scorpion in that camo scheme is the winner then.
Posts: 54
By: andys - 5th March 2017 at 14:59 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Has anyone seen any confirmation that the Bronco could be put back into production? How many (if any) are in storage at AMARC?
Posts: 5,905
By: TomcatViP - 5th March 2017 at 21:19 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
A two tone on top (for the time on tarmac) and an underbelly grey will do for me. I am bored by all this tactical grey/tactical black etc...
Posts: 3,156
By: hopsalot - 5th March 2017 at 21:29 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
If purchased these would be operated by the USAF.... don't expect any crowd pleasing paint schemes.
Posts: 5,905
By: TomcatViP - 5th March 2017 at 21:50 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
lol. Obviouly. But this...
[ATTACH=CONFIG]251738[/ATTACH] or
[ATTACH=CONFIG]251739[/ATTACH]
[ATTACH=CONFIG]251740[/ATTACH]
is really pleasing
Posts: 2,271
By: eagle - 6th March 2017 at 01:04 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Expect something like this:
[ATTACH=CONFIG]251746[/ATTACH]
http://www.defensemedianetwork.com/stories/combat-dragon-ii-demonstrates-ov-10g-bronco-capabilities/
Posts: 137
By: xena - 6th March 2017 at 01:57 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Bronco will never come back. It was a test only with the two Broncos in Iraq, to confirm the idea.
Posts: 203
By: F/A-XX - 6th March 2017 at 04:28 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
To confirm the idea is feasible yet reject it anyway? The Bronco seems just as viable as the Super Tucano for such a role.
Posts: 5,905
By: TomcatViP - 15th March 2017 at 20:22 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Perhaps that
Source (Defense News.com):
Textron sets its sights on US Air Force's light aircraft experiment
A dual buy of airframe is discussed in here and Textron is well placed having two complementary products already.
Posts: 9,821
By: J Boyle - 15th March 2017 at 20:29 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Just out of curiosity, I wonder if the Bronco tooling still exists?
The former NAA (and Curtiss during WWII) factory still exists, last I heard it warehouses bureaucrats doing paper work.
Since the 70s, it has been US policy to retain tooling, I recall seing the B-1 tools in storage at Davis-Monthan.
At any rate, the AT-6 sounds like a useful aircraft for low intensity situations, I flew one several years ago and was very impressed by its performance.
However, to make a REALLY low cost (no crew to lose), could a attack aircraft of this type be unmanned?
I also read that the USAF is considering using NCO drone operators as opposed to the current commissioned officer corps, reducing costs even more. Imagine, giving a recent high school graduate the ultimate video game system. :)
Posts: 12,109
By: bring_it_on - 20th July 2017 at 23:42 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Saudi Arabia considering Scorpion deal: Textron chief
Posts: 12,109
By: bring_it_on - 21st July 2017 at 00:57 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Textron, Sierra Nevada prep for OA-X experiment at US Air Force base
Posts: 5,905
By: TomcatViP - 6th September 2017 at 14:29 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
US Air Force completes first round of light attack aircraft demo
It was notably hinted that the Scorpion could also fulfill a Tanker role for aircraft or unmanned vehicles.
Source:
DefenseNews.com
Posts: 1,168
By: KGB - 9th September 2017 at 06:17 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
The whole point of a light attack aircraft is to simplify things and have something less expensive to store, maintain and fly. Sure this Scorpion thing is cool looking and probably goes like hell. But thats not the point.
Watch the Scorpion win. Then we will read about cost overruns, technical issues and pilot training issues.