Low-Cost Fighter Aircraft: Old Planes Reborn

FBKampfer,



That's a point lost on too many A-10 fanboys. To them, the Mighty Warthog is a veritable flying M-1 Abrams tank that is well neigh indestructible.

The reality of the conflict that it was designed to operate in is that A-10s would be getting blown out of the skies with an appalling a steady frequency. That the Warthog's success in the modern age is primarily due to our enemies not having much in the way of AAA - if any - and what little they do have is easily enough countered by the flares and chaff and automated systems built-in to the A-10s. Against the likes of the PLA or the RAF the A-10s would be getting nailed at breathtaking rates.

Which takes nothing away from how awesome is the 'Hog nor why we have a profound need for it in our arsenal.

For conflicts that don't require that high a level of capability however, the A-10 is mucho overkill. Hence the concept of turbo-prop trainers being adapted to CAS / COIN. Even there however, those things are still expensive and somewhat overkill. Taking a genuine crop-duster machine and arming it with a couple of M-60 type machine guns on each wing would be a huge force multiplier that could acquired on the cheap and in such volume as to easily absorb the high operational loses while accomplishing their mission.

it would have been interesting to put the A10 up against the combined efforts of other NATO forces ...

the RAF's MFF Hawks would be able to out turn it , the Harriers would be able to viff it into it;s grave, assuming they didn;t just pop-up from cover for close in kill like a helicopter
 
Their training costs are still remarkably similar. Like I said, just because the pilot is in a trailer, doesn't mean he's any less trained. That goes for every nation. UAVs are not a cheap investment. You're fooling yourself if you think a country is going to entrust a multi-million dollar UAV with several hundred thousand dollars of ordinance hung on it to someone who's total experience level is flying an RC plane they picked up from the local hobby shop. A UAV pilot still has to train every bit as much as an A-10 driver

the pilot as commissioned officer , dates back to the cold war .

during WWII a lot of the RAFs pilots were Sergeant/ Flight Sgt / Master aircrew ( the NCA equivalent to British Warrant Officer)

I was only really with the rise of Nuclear weapon equipped aircraft that the push for all Officer pilot and Nav cadres came about - there were some transport command and RW Master Aircrew Pilots who hung around for really rather a long time . the FAA had the same although it;s RW pilots and nav/obs went all commissioned quickly due to nuclear depth charges.

the AAC has never had nuclear weapons and it's still possible to complete Army Pilot training as a corporal altough promotion to sgt follows fairly shortly
 
Like I said, just because the pilot is in a trailer, doesn't mean he's any less trained.
But how long is it really until the computer can fly itself and the "pilot" is really only taking over to give general directions and ok weapons release if that?
 

SsgtC

Banned
But how long is it really until the computer can fly itself and the "pilot" is really only taking over to give general directions and ok weapons release if that?

My guess? Decades. If ever. Automated weapons release raises huge ethical issues and I don't see world militaries allowing that any time soon. Even just completely automated flight is unlikely. Again, ethical issues of a computer having sole responsibility for weapons.
 
the pilot as commissioned officer , dates back to the cold war .

during WWII a lot of the RAFs pilots were Sergeant/ Flight Sgt / Master aircrew ( the NCA equivalent to British Warrant Officer)

I was only really with the rise of Nuclear weapon equipped aircraft that the push for all Officer pilot and Nav cadres came about - there were some transport command and RW Master Aircrew Pilots who hung around for really rather a long time . the FAA had the same although it;s RW pilots and nav/obs went all commissioned quickly due to nuclear depth charges.

the AAC has never had nuclear weapons and it's still possible to complete Army Pilot training as a corporal altough promotion to sgt follows fairly shortly

"Taff" Walker instructed on 240 OCU (Wessex) right up to 1980 / 81. I believe he was the last serving RAF Master Pilot.

Called everyone 'boy' - including the staish.
 
Considering that sending a Piper Cub out to conduct CAS would be a one way mission with the plane shot down and the pilot dead or captured, even if flown against just a couple guys with AKs: ground crews, nothing, because they won't be needed after the first mission and can be reassigned. The pilot, prob between 50 and 100k, plus whatever his life insurance is going to pay to his family.


So $ 6 million for fight jock AND 100K train a piper cub pilot.

how much do ground crew cost
 

SsgtC

Banned
how much do ground crew

Like I said, since any aircraft like a Piper Cub being used for CAS are on one way mission, you wouldn't have grounds crew costs. You can just grab the grounds crew from another aircraft. It doesn't take a genius to put gas in a plane and load an M60
 
The 'price' of a shot down superT with its crew lost exceeds that of a shot down Drone - certainly in western nations.......
Bud, contrary to what you might think, i do value human life, specially those of soldiers under my command. If you haven't had to make that decision you have no clue of what it feels like. War is a dirty business, people are going to die and contrary to popular belief there is no magic bullet that can win wars without casualties. Our job is to try to bring war to an end in our favor with as little casualties as possible. I have had to call cas or fire support on a target to protect my soldiers, knowing that there is a chance for them and the aircrew to die- I have done so, I have gotten into transport planes and helos with my troops and hit hot LZ, knowing full well that me or my soldiers could die. But also knowing that our actions might prevent our sons and daughters from having to do so and enjoy the way of life we have. I have lost friends and family doing this and second guess every day every decision I made. So unless you have done the same I might have a better perspective on the price we pay. If you are unwilling to pay the price in blood, then don't start wars.
 
Bud, contrary to what you might think, i do value human life, specially those of soldiers under my command. If you haven't had to make that decision you have no clue of what it feels like. War is a dirty business, people are going to die and contrary to popular belief there is no magic bullet that can win wars without casualties. Our job is to try to bring war to an end in our favor with as little casualties as possible. I have had to call cas or fire support on a target to protect my soldiers, knowing that there is a chance for them and the aircrew to die- I have done so, I have gotten into transport planes and helos with my troops and hit hot LZ, knowing full well that me or my soldiers could die. But also knowing that our actions might prevent our sons and daughters from having to do so and enjoy the way of life we have. I have lost friends and family doing this and second guess every day every decision I made. So unless you have done the same I might have a better perspective on the price we pay. If you are unwilling to pay the price in blood, then don't start wars.

Well I'd hope you'd value human life - it should be the default setting - and as for leading men into Hot LZs etc - as an Army Air Corps pilot once told me "If you had done better at school you could have stayed in the Helicopter!"

But lets back up just a sec because the point I'm making is that the Rich old men who sent you and your's into hot LZ's don't like it when you and yours die or when you nause up the locals and kill to many of them!

They generally don't give a stuff when drones crash or get shot down though - this is the cost I was referring to - the crew of that cheap CAS AC are more valuable (certainly in the first world) than a more expensive Drone!

And just so that we are clear - I have never started a war!
 
and as for leading men into Hot LZs etc - as an Army Air Corps pilot once told me "If you had done better at school you could have stayed in the Helicopter!"

Bud, you don't know me nor how good I did a school nor my level of education, so I respectfully ask you to cease with the personal attacks, just because I don't agree with your premise. also I apologize if you inferrred that, I was stating that you personally had started a war. that is not what I meant.
 
Like I said, since any aircraft like a Piper Cub being used for CAS are on one way mission, you wouldn't have grounds crew costs. You can just grab the grounds crew from another aircraft. It doesn't take a genius to put gas in a plane and load an M60
Not interested in CAS mission per say, just questions of relative cost.
 
Not sure if anyone's mentioned...
exterior_gallery_0021.jpg

...the Iomax Archangel (and others) for low-intensity theatres?
 
There's no point to such piloted aircraft anymore. Drones can now carry almost as much for cheaper, and in the conflicts where drones risk getting hacked by the enemy, slow piloted aircraft would be quickly blown out of the sky anyway.

There was a window back in the late 90s - ealry 00s, but that is gone now.
 

SsgtC

Banned
There's no point to such piloted aircraft anymore. Drones can now carry almost as much for cheaper, and in the conflicts where drones risk getting hacked by the enemy, slow piloted aircraft would be quickly blown out of the sky anyway.

There was a window back in the late 90s - ealry 00s, but that is gone now.

You're not even close to accurate here. An MQ-9 Reaper can carry up to 3,800 pounds of ordinance. An A-10 can carry 16,000, plus the ammo for the GAU-8. Over four times as much. 4 Reapers verses 1 Hog. Your low cost UAV is now more expensive for the same payload
 
Yes, but I'm not talking about the A-10. I'm talking about single-prop buzzers proposed by various companies for low-intensity work. They're more expensive than drones for very little extra.

Besides, an A-10 can be only in one place at a time, whereas 4 Reapers can be in, yup, four places. And in many cases it's more important to have 2000 lb of ordnance in 3-4 separate spots than 10000 in a single place. Not to mention that the Reapers have a longer range and can stay aloft (loiter) far longer than the A-10.
 
Top