What are those things ... ??? Rhymes with 'NATO'???
We could even put some mini-guns in her and call her .... well, how 'bout "PUFF", for starters ???
-
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?
- Thread starter aircav06
- Start date
We could even put some mini-guns in her and call her .... well, how 'bout "PUFF", for starters ???
What are those things ... ??? Rhymes with 'NATO'???
We could even put some mini-guns in her and call her .... well, how 'bout "PUFF", for starters ???
Excellent! Perfect example of how you can read most anything you want into such basic requirements as listed in that article. Only improvement to this idea I'd make is the Basler Turbo Prop conversion. You get nearly 50% better performance and it burns the same kerosene as your other aircraft, as opposed to 140/145 octane gasoline. Let's here it for old guys and old toys.
You really think so...not being facetious, that's a legitimate question. If they just wanted another attack jet, they'd ask for more A-10s. I thought this was meant to be both economical and rugged, with less support crew and lower impact required than something more advanced/sexy.
Based on statements made by senior AF leadership, to include the Chief of Staff, and some recently published articles, you are right in assuming the intent is rugged, simple, less expensive, possibly off the shelf. But I stand by my prediction. We will likely see a jet with more capability then required for the perceived mission. The AF is all about fighter pilots. I am sure they would call a guy flying an AT-6 Texan with a couple bombs a fighter pilot but the Viper and Eagle pilots would snicker and make jokes behind their backs. Flying that machine would be a one tour thing only to be followed by a "real" fighter. There would be no career path in a COIN AT-6 Texan.
I'd be willing to bet that if it falls under AFSOC, it'd be its own career path. Fighter guys would be banging down the door to get in, and AFSOC could pick from the cream of the crop of guys with a shit ton of hours in single engine turboprops: T-6 FAIPs.
Fuck em, with the type of ops we are doing now, the COIN pilots will see all the action. The "real" fighter types will be banging on their door for a tour.
"The cream of the crop" = FAIPs? A guy whose only winged tour was flying Primary studs around is not who you want standing this mission up. That's not how this will play out.
unless I missed your sarcasm.
no no no no. They'll have a bunch of guys who know what they're doing in a single engine turboprop, and can afford to be choosy when it comes to picking young guys to fill out the initial cadre of the squadrons.
We don't all start out as department heads...surprisingly enough, the navy takes guys with less than 400 hours and puts them into super hornets...some are even in single seat supers all by their onesies!
ahh, the horror!
that was sarcasm.
Agreed, but I doubt A-10 guys are clamoring to trade in their hogs. AFSOC takes plenty of young guys and puts them into different missions, straight outta flight school. I could see this being one more of those, with guys from other backgrounds coming in to help stand up squadrons and put together an RTU for it.
Gents, all this COIN stuff is about the mission not the aircraft. So, the the USAF is going to be picking pilots based on their ability to hack the mission. Not the ability of anyone to fly a single engine turbo prop. Flying an airplane (any airplane) is not hard. The USAF is not going to care how much single engine turbo prop time that FAIP has, its a non factor.
Too bad the many instances of fratricide leave them far from the first choice of those on the ground.
Agreed, but I think the point of my post didn't come across. I doubt this will be like the Seal support Tucanos. AF bubs regularly make a career in AFSOC. Gunships, ospreys, Pilatus's, MC-130s..etc etc. This will turn into one more of those if it actually takes off...
That's what I was getting at.
WHY CANT WE JUST PUT A GIANT TURBOPROP AND SOME SEXY AVIONICS IN THIS??!!:
It's combat proven, hauls 4 tons of shit, and looks cool; hell it even has room in the back for a fire team of snake-eaters with parachutes. The only problem I see is that some of us are going to have to get a taildragger endorsement.
:icon_smil
It's combat proven, hauls 4 tons of shit, and looks cool; hell it even has room in the back for a fire team of snake-eaters with parachutes. The only problem I see is that some of us are going to have to get a taildragger endorsement.
:icon_smil