• Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?

    Go here:

    Edit Account Details and Profile

Return of Turboprops to CAS role?

Clux4 said:
Pulled it out of my a$$. But at about 15 aircraft per Squadron, we could get about 12 Squadron. 6 Actvie Duty, 2 Reserves and 4 for the Guard which leaves about 20 for Test and Evaluation Squadron's.
Click to expand...

What about a training squadron? What about aircraft in depot-level maintenance? 200 still seems like quite a bit considering the Air Force is planning on having a total of just 356 A-10C's in their inventory as of 2011.
 
HackerF15E said:
I'll reserve you some crow. Care to put money on it, too?



And the semen who measure dicks in similar fights between Aviation, surface warfare, and the subs are perfectly fine, eh?
Click to expand...

I like crow, I don't get to eat it often enough. Unless yer in lower Alabama, the wager would be hard to pay... maybe I'll sing the AF song for you, clapping all the while and holler "Air Power" like the tards at ACSC do... your services best and brightest at work...yyyyyyeeeeeaah.

There is some mild ribbing among our branches, but nothing most don't overcome from being imprisoned operating together for 6-7 months at a time, not to mention workups... builds a perty good team. I certainly wouldn't assert that we don't need submarines or ship drivers anymore, much less an entire branch of service (as airfarce iconic leaders tend to do). I know, I know.. we have our patriarchs too, just busting yer labia.
I can and I should, you being on a sea-faring website and all...

I'll stand by, the AT-6 in a low threat CAS environment sounds like too good of an idea fiduciarily for the AF to embrace (my super secret squirrel sources are actually backing your assertion). It'll be great, more branches of AF to sissy slap fight, I'll giggle even more. Guess the squids will have to carrierize the turbo weeners as we already use them for CAS spotting...
 
MAKE VAPES said:
I'll stand by, the AT-6 in a low threat CAS environment sounds like too good of an idea fiduciarily for the AF to embrace (my super secret squirrel sources are actually backing your assertion). It'll be great, more branches of AF to sissy slap fight, I'll giggle even more. Guess the squids will have to carrierize the turbo weeners as we already use them for CAS spotting...
Click to expand...

Big USAF is not the only player in this, SOCOM is a big player too (I believe with the same budget authority/say as a service) and they often get what they want. Ought to be interesting how it plays out.
 
busdriver said:
Rumor that Boeing is thinking about re-manufacturing the Bronco
Click to expand...

Eh. It'd be dope to see the Bronco ride again, and if the Navy were to bring back the VO/HAL squadrons, sign me up. But I'd lay money the AF wouldn't go for it. Institutionally, I just can't see a technocratic service putting up the money to resurrect an "old" airplane. It's just psychological. Boeing would be better off calling it something different and saying it's just "based on some design elements" of the Bronc.

If I had to put money down, I'd say if a COIN a/c is going to happen - and for once I agree w/ Flash, nowadays, SOCOM tends to get what it wants - it'll be an AT-6 variant. Too many political issues with building a foreign aircraft under license (see: KC-45, VH-71) for the Tucano to be a player, and anything else needs to design, or redesign, develop and build an airframe. At least the AT-6 is already flying.
 
busdriver said:
http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/the-dewline/2009/01/will-the-ov-10-ride-again.html

Rumor that Boeing is thinking about re-manufacturing the Bronco
Click to expand...


Wait a minute. Let me catch my breath.........

It wasn't so much the aircraft that got the job done, it was the mission and the ROE's. The AF put so many restrictions on themselves they had trouble providing quick-response CAS. So did the Marines. The Navy placed very few rules and restrictions on us, allowing us to do whatever was needed. Clearance to shoot was quick and direct. Both the AF and the Marines used their OV-10s as FACs, while all we did was CAS. The (very) few times we were required to work with an AF FAC, we inevitably got frustrated and told him to hold off to the side and watch the magic show.

Its not the a/c, its the mission.
 
unfortunately command trusting the guy flying the mission without injecting their opinion is getting rare. SATCOM and real time video feed, means that a general 3000 miles away seems to think that he has enough info to tell the flight lead on scene what to do.
 
What say you Hey Joe...he has the absolute best information of this subject I think.
 
Uncle Fester said:
If I had to put money down, I'd say if a COIN a/c is going to happen - and for once I agree w/ Flash, nowadays, SOCOM tends to get what it wants - it'll be an AT-6 variant. Too many political issues with building a foreign aircraft under license (see: KC-45, VH-71) for the Tucano to be a player, and anything else needs to design, or redesign, develop and build an airframe. At least the AT-6 is already flying.
Click to expand...

The AT-6 is a foreign design aircraft, built here under license (AT-6 is effectively a Pilatus PC-9). Pilatus licensed it to Beechcraft to do the defense deal (same relationship as the KC-45).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top