Home » Air » Look Schwartz — New COIN Plane

Look Schwartz — New COIN Plane

By Colin Clark Tuesday, June 2nd, 2009 7:57 am
Posted in Air, Intelligence

UPDATED: Prototype Made First Flight Last Week. Price Tag = $4 Million To $10 Million. Comments From Chief Engineer.

Christian has a really neat piece on a competitor for the COIN plane that Gen. Norton Schwartz, Air Force Chief of Staff, says he’s probably going to buy. It will be unveiled at the Paris Air Show and we will bring you coverage of it from the show.

The Hawker Beechcraft T-6 is the Air Force’s current primary trainer aircraft. Its maker has proposed a modified plane with machine guns and the ability to carry a variety of PGMs so it would seem a natural candidate for this role. Now they appear to have some interesting opposition in the form of a reconfigured fire fighting plane. Can the white scarf boys buy something this simple?

UPDATE: Since posting this I reached Lee Jackson, chief engineer for Air Tractor. He is the company lead for the 802U. Lee said, as a reader tipped us off, that the State Department has been buying a lesser version of the 802U, one equipped with ballistic glass, armor and self-sealing fuel tanks, since 2002. They are used, Jackson said, for crop eradication efforts. The 802U will be on display at the Paris Air Show but will not fly, Jackson said.

Here’s Christian’s story:

Call it a kick butt cure for a strong case of “Next-War-itis”…

Sick of F-22s, Ospreys, VH-71s and JSFs? Well, then the Combat Air Truck is the plane for you.

Built by Air Tractor, a premier designer and builder of crop dusting planes, the CAT is set to debut at the Paris Air Show coming up in the middle of this month. Built as a purpose-designed counter insurgency aircraft, the CAT sports extremely short take off and landing capability (150–200 feet) with very long loiter (10 hours with fuel bladders) and plenty of lift to carry rockets, GAUs and pods in expeditionary environments.

A source who’s flacking the plane tells me the main benefit is the plane’s lack of logistics footprint…“everything can be fixed with a wrench and screwdriver,” he said, eliminating the need for expensive spare parts, maintenance bays and teams of techs to keep the thing up and running.

The plane could provide low-cost, long-loiter CAS, convoy escort and FID missions for US troops, allies and contractors flying out of areas as small as battalion — or even company-level FOBS.

“This is about having breakfast with a convoy commander before launching to provide him with route recon, battlefield overwatch, and if necessary precise and withering fires on anything that gets in the way,” my source sent me.

I’m bullish on COIN aircraft and with a USAF chief of staff who’s keen on the idea of cheaper, longer loiter, less maintenance intensive aircraft for the current fight and for allies who can’t afford $10 million aircraft, this capability is going to be increasingly attractive.

eds. note. I found the following stats on the web.

New Turboprop Gunship Debuts At Paris Air Show

Olney, TEXAS – A new single-engine turboprop utility aircraft prototype makes it debut June 15–21 at the 2009 International Paris Air Show, and will be configured for a military direct fire support role in asymmetrical warfare theatres of operation. The Air Truck AT-802U, manufactured by a division of ag plane manufacturer, Air Tractor, Inc., is being marketed as a versatile aerial platform designed to perform counter-insurgency close air support and intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance missions.

The AT-802U is based on the popular Air Tractor AT-802 ag plane, but has been significantly modified for a light attack capability against fixed, stationary and moving soft targets. The AT-802U will be displayed at the Paris Air Show configured with dual 12.7 mm GAU-19/A three-barrel Gatling guns, M260 rocket launchers, and representative MK-82 bombs. It can also be configured to carry more advanced weapon systems, including the Lockheed Martin Hellfire II, DAGR laser guided rockets, and Sniper XR surveillance and targeting pod systems.

The AT-802U is equipped with the Wulfsberg Flexcomm tactical modular multi-band airborne FM/AM radio communications system. This enables the AT-802U pilot to maintain secure radio communications with practically any radio system utilized by ground units.

An infrared camera and turret system on the AT-802U, with a secure video downlink, allows commanders to see the battle space in real time. The downlink system will be ROVER compatible allowing the aircraft to transmit the live video feed to a joint terminal attack controller on the ground.

The Air Truck AT-802U can also be configured for an intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance role at low and medium altitudes. Its cockpit-forward payload area is configurable for an auxiliary fuel tank. Additionally, drop tanks can be added on wing/fuselage hard points to enable loiter times of more than ten hours.

The pilot in the AT-802U high-visibility cockpit commands a level of battlespace situational awareness that unmanned aircraft with “soda straw” sensor views simply cannot match. The 802U has the ability to provide a “persistent stare, pervasive knowledge” capability that creates significant advantages for a counter-insurgency force. It can be a communications node for instant command and control with ground forces or other air assets.

The AT-802U is equipped with the AAR-47/ALE-47 countermeasures suite for defense against IR missile threats.

Other features of the AT-802U include:
● Ballistic glass and cockpit armor
● Self-sealing fuel tanks & emergency fuel tank shut-off
● AmSafe Inflatable Restraint system integrated with a 5-point harness
● Crash-worthy airframe
● Oxygen system and air conditioner
● Large and reconfigurable fuel system
● Rough strip low drag landing gear
● Lightning protection

Simple yet rugged design, reliable flight systems, robust electrical system and the proven Pratt & Whitney PT6A-67F turbine engine equipped with a high dust environment air induction system, help the AT-802U achieve a low daily operation cost. The aircraft has a very low logistics footprint and requires minimal ground support equipment.

For more information about the Air Truck AT-802U, contact Leland Snow, President or Lee Jackson, Design Engineer at Air Tractor, Inc. Telephone: 940–564-5616. Email: airmail@airtractor.com

Join the Conversation

	jimbo June 2nd, 2009 at 8:20 am As long as this thing can carry lots of iron, and can take some hits.. IM in… not to mention its american made!
	solomon June 2nd, 2009 at 9:52 am so i guess Boeing is late to the party again with its revamped OV-10. damn it that’s why they never win, they’re too slow to take advantage of emerging markets. at least that had a demonstrated track record, i wonder how this truck will work…
	mike j June 2nd, 2009 at 10:32 am US State dept has been flying an armored version of the 802 crop duster for drug eradication since 2002. This is a logical evolution.
	Charles Phillips, LtCol USAF Ret June 2nd, 2009 at 11:04 am Pardon me for being a party pooper again, but if we need a COIN aircraft, why buy something that is totally new to the Air Force? Congress has mandated that aircraft have approved maintenance plans, logistics and spare parts, trained maintainers, pilots that have graduated from established training courses, etc. Of course this curtails our flexibility but we have learned (for decades) to apply Systems Engineering so that we don’t learn the system by experience in combat losses. People want fast and easy answers — if we buy this aircraft are we gonna ship them all back to the manufacturer for maintenance? As a guy with experience in the Oklahoma City Air Logistics Center — that aircraft can be fixed with a wrench, a screwdriver, and Knowledge. How long until we have Senior Airmen on the flightline that know the aircraft? A better answer — buy more A-10s. They are well known, we have lots of logistics in the system, they are rugged, we have lots of trained pilots and can produce more quickly, etc etc. Right now, with an obscene Federal deficit, is this a good time to go out and buy lots of stuff for a new aircraft?
	DC2 Jennings June 2nd, 2009 at 11:43 am Solomon, Boeing has offerred a new production OV-10 to the Air Force. Mike, That is a pretty good commentary that I never thought of. All you would need to do is put the electronics and hardpoints on for weapons. Lt.Col. Phillips, I believe they want an even slower airplane that is cheaper to build, fly, and maintain. Even as efficient as the A-10 is, it still has two turbofan engines that suck up way more gas than a single engine turbo-prop. I made this comment on the DefenseTech site, the Navy currently is leasing a Super Tacano from a Black Water spinoff company. They wanted to use the AT-6, but R&D would have taken 18 months. So they had to go off the shelf and get the Super Tucano. That does not mean something will not be bought in the future that is different than the Super Tucano. DC2
	jimbo June 2nd, 2009 at 12:21 pm .… if you read the article this thing is going to fly out of places away from bases… and probabley w/the troops it supports… aka flyin out of dirt roads.. they want these things connected to the force they protect ->“This is about having breakfast with a convoy commander before launching to provide him with route recon, battlefield overwatch, and if necessary precise and withering fires on anything that gets in the way,” .. i dont think the a-10 can operate out in the middle of nowhere as far as i know.. plus im thikin we are talking about a large amount of cheap planes for the job..
	solomon June 2nd, 2009 at 1:15 pm DC2Jennings… i don’t believe they have. last i read is that they were considering the move. not making concrete steps like this company has.
	mike j June 2nd, 2009 at 1:18 pm RE: “places away from bases” & the OV-10 Reading up on the development of the OV-10, was similar in concept to the CAT. A simple little armed recon bird that lived with the troops. Link: http://www.volanteaircraft.com/l2vma.htm Very different from what the Bronco turned into. Operational OV-10s had about half the endurance advertised for the CAT. Gotta say I like the idea of a second crew member to handle the workload.
	jimbo June 2nd, 2009 at 1:18 pm Boeing has offered a new version… it is the same plane basically… but with a glass cockpit.. and the ability to drop smart weapons… but im sure its a much higher price tag then one of these suckers…
	Alex June 2nd, 2009 at 2:07 pm That thing seems useless if it can’t use smart weapons. Helos can do recon just fine, and they don’t even need 200ft of runway to land or take off. Not to mention, it’s probably a sitting duck for small arms fire. Perhaps I underestimate its usefulness…
	Charles Phillips, LtCol USAF Ret June 2nd, 2009 at 2:24 pm It seems that an Osprey or an A-10 could do the job that the ground forces have been asking about for decades. The Osprey has the advantage of being newer and therefore sexier, the A-10 is well proven. Between one of those two and some drones — the ground commanders will have something close to what they have wanted. Of course we will still have the Apache, etc but since people are so enamored of new COIN aircraft — we must not have enough of them to go around. Those two (Osprey/A-10) must use a lot more fuel than a turbo prop, but it sounds like we have lots of aerial tankers — if the Marines want to convert some of theirs from full time tankers into part time bombers.
	mike j June 2nd, 2009 at 2:30 pm Alex, Did you just not see this part? “It can also be configured to carry more advanced weapon systems, including the Lockheed Martin Hellfire II, DAGR laser guided rockets, and Sniper XR surveillance and targeting pod systems.” Is a helo any less of a sitting duck?
	jimbo June 2nd, 2009 at 2:32 pm umm… for a low slow plane… that issupposed to get in the fight.. smart weapons arent as necessary as its gonna have its eyes on the target… and iron on it pretty accuratley… no need for the high tech stuff.. this thing doestn need a runway.. jus a patch of dirt or a field for that matter… Look at the sandy’s record from vietnam… low slow.. lots of firepower… helped save lots of downed pilots and the army by providing CAS… this plane enables the plane to get closer to the fight… instead of having to be called in and a delay for support.. it will respond to threats as they appear as its providint overwatch… smart weapons are NOT needed for this mission..(wouldnt hurt w/the capability either… just costs MORE money).
	jimbo June 2nd, 2009 at 2:38 pm .… the tankers are way too old… and way overworked btw… plus the ospery isnt even an attack platform! it a transport platform… with defensive weapons… The marines are putting roll on kits for there ac-130’s because the airforce have all their ac130’s deployed and overworked with no plans to buy more… so the marines put the responsiblility in their own hands by making the platform more flexible so they can support their own troops in firefights.. the a-10 is too large and expensive and can not operate out in the field w/the troops like they want the COIN to… although the a-10 is the ultimate ground pounder..
	Alex June 2nd, 2009 at 3:16 pm No Mike, I missed that. Anyways, the usefulness of this aircraft comes down to amount of maintenance and logistics required to support it, otherwise we might as well keep using attack helicopters. I’m assuming these will have to carry similar weapons loads as an Apache, but be much cheaper to buy and simpler to maintain and support. This thing probably will not have any armor, so it will be interesting to see how easily small arms fire can bring them down. A-10s were built to be able to take a beating because of their slow speed and how close they would be flying to the action, and they have definitely utilized that armor. These COIN aircraft are basically slower, cheaper, unarmored A-10s. What is going to happen when some guy pops out from behind a tree and puts 20 AK rounds right into the wing or belly of one of these?
	jimbo June 2nd, 2009 at 3:20 pm well hopefully it exposes them…so the boots on the ground can put 30 m-16 rounds in his body…
	mike j June 2nd, 2009 at 3:41 pm LOL good point Jimbo Alex, seriously? scroll up the page… eight bullet points “Other features of the AT-802U include:”… read the top one.
	John the civi June 2nd, 2009 at 4:53 pm A pilot’s life seems to come with a premium.
	Phillip June 2nd, 2009 at 5:24 pm The AT-802 has been used in Columbia for drug eradication by the State Department, those planes were armored with bulletproof glass, plates and have self-sealing tanks. So, Yes, Alex, the AT-802U probably will be armored.
	mike j June 2nd, 2009 at 8:52 pm Not to throw cold water on this, I still think this is a good idea… :BUT: This is one big bird! Nearly 40ft long, 60ft wingspan. They advertise it as the “world’s biggest single.” Even the old Spads weren’t that big. On the off chance an Air Tractor Rep stumbles by here to read the good press: Do this makeover on the 802’s little brothers. Small isn’t a bad thing when you’re getting shot at.
	Alex June 2nd, 2009 at 9:13 pm mike, that’s the problem. This seems like a great idea in principle, but as it stands right now it just doesn’t seem very practical. I would think you would want something small that can pack a punch, maybe even a couple 500lb JDAMs, relatively maneuverable, able to withstand small arms fire, only needs a couple hundred feet of runway to takeoff/land, cheap, and VERY easy to maintain. Barring any of those things, its debatable that we get good value for our money vs using assets we’ve already paid for. The biggest potential advantage I can see for this is if it takes a load off of the rest of our aircraft that are being grossly overworked. If that is the case, then I say go for it. If we can use one of these instead of an overstressed f-16 or f-15 to take out a couple of insurgents in a building or hiding in a ditch, then that would be great.
	Alex June 2nd, 2009 at 9:15 pm I should note that I realize this aircraft has most of the qualities I’ve listed with the exception of size and maneuverability, but I think those two things would be very important if it were to fulfill its intended role.
	mike j June 2nd, 2009 at 9:50 pm Alex– In general an ag plane is fairly agile, if you’ve ever seen them dodging power lines, that’s clear. But yeah, even if the bad guys can’t usually hit the broadside of a barn, I’d still rather fly something smaller than said barn. The plane you’re describing could easily be built. See that link in my above post about the OV-10 prototype. Also Rutan’s ARES, with the 25mm on one side and the intake on the other– built at the request of the Army, btw. Figures. In “America’s Defense Meltdown”, Pierre Sprey has a plan for a mini-Warthog that could do 20+ kill passes, with a high-bypass turbofan powerful enough to give a thrust/weight ratio near unity. He’s mister A-10, I’ll give him the benefit of the doubt. It’s there if we want it.
	jimbo June 2nd, 2009 at 10:50 pm lol a mini warthog?… i wanna see that thing drawn up, sounds interesting… prob is maintenence out in the field on turbo-fan engines are going to be a biatch! rememeber this things supposed to take off where the troops are operating… then provide oversight when they go out and stir up trouble… not only does this thing have to be able to take/off and land out in the middle of nowhere.. it has to be maintained out there too.. has to be simple to repair… what you need is a simple single engine prop plane, that can take off short dirt strips, and put iron on target… most of what has been proposed has been promising… but this one looks like the best option so far
	tipover June 3rd, 2009 at 2:09 am Crop dusters are agile, durable, easy to maintain, proven in the field (literally). The production line has been in continuous service for decades (years for this model). The logistics and training are simple, just get most of the non-combat info from any duster operation that uses this AC. It helps they seem to be using existing tech for systems, commo and weapons. The AC would have to be based close to the front for timely support as it would be too slow for a long transit to the action. The A-10 is great but the production line is long gone and would have to be designed and built from scratch. Used properly and with trained aircrew and and maintainers I suspect it could be very useful. I would, however, keep a few spare props handy as that engine has to suck rocks on takeoff on gravel strips (as will any turboprop).
	fred thomas June 3rd, 2009 at 1:45 pm Boeing can protest and since they have Obama and Biden and the unions they will get this program bogged down and will eventually win it too…
	elgatoso June 3rd, 2009 at 7:12 pm Some ideas,and i am sorry if some are BS,IMHO,this Stuka could be a solution for a lot of problems that we have.With a cost of 10 million dolar top of the line ‚we can use for the air national guard to replace some worn out f-16, with the cost of 4 f-16 we can have 20 Stukas.Maybe the navy could use for CAS.Should be posible modified for use in aircraft carriers?With the cost of a couple of f-18 we make a air wing for a aircraft carrier.Of course, this is thinking outside the box.In a time of crisis,this could be a common-sense, fiscally responsible battlefield solution .And I love the idea of this going to Army aviation
	Steve June 4th, 2009 at 3:50 am Put the Corsair back in the air…
	cdr. p.w.prawl June 4th, 2009 at 4:35 am Imagine that, shades of the Army Air Force! Imagine, a co commander at his FOB with his OWN 2-plane air force to do what HE WANTED. Turn the IRBM’s over to the army, send the B52’s to the bone yard until needed again, make the aiirforce a RESERVE organization, with cargo units called up as needed (as we do now), WOW, what an idea!
	G.A. David June 4th, 2009 at 4:50 am That thing looks like the Rockwell cropduster I used to fly in Wyoming.
	Rocket Scientist June 4th, 2009 at 6:04 am This poor thing would be a dead duck to small arms fire and missiles. The cost of upgrades compared with simply building more A10’s is too high! (Not to mention the fact that the A10 is far more capable!) It sounds to me as if a mixture of A10’s and drones makes FAR more sense! (And is a heck of a lot safer and cheaper!)
	Bob McDonagh June 4th, 2009 at 8:05 am Why not get really cheap and small? Combine some RC remote controlability with Ultralight weighs and costs? Put in a some ‘fish bowl’ observation equipment. Sure, this is a couple of mile range type ‘stuff’ but could be relatively small and implanted in every forward unit. No need for multilevel communcation(s) and control. And use solar panels on the wings to charge enough for any time of day short electric(quiet)on demand flights. If a forward patrol runs into the need, they’re right there with their own group to coordinate and assist. It still ‘boils down’ to troups on the ground and good (quiet) local, quick support. And no second guessing from far away ‘support’ groups. Instant response. and not only fire power, but constant local observations for the troops on the ground. And even when the troops are off the front line; they can relieve themselves by practicing with these planes. I know, no big government contracts. No difficult transportation problems. We, also make some of them in the form of small helicopters, too. Combine intel gathering and fighting abilitys (day and nite). Enough said by me. How about some of you with forward combat experience adding your ‘fine tuning’ideas?
	Robert D. McDonagh June 4th, 2009 at 8:07 am Bob McDonagh Why not get really cheap and small? Combine some RC remote controlability with Ultralight weighs and costs? Put in a some ‘fish bowl’ observation equipment. Sure, this is a couple of mile range type ‘stuff’ but could be relatively small and implanted in every forward unit. No need for multilevel communcation(s) and control. And use solar panels on the wings to charge enough for any time of day short electric(quiet)on demand flights. If a forward patrol runs into the need, they’re right there with their own group to coordinate and assist. It still ‘boils down’ to troups on the ground and good (quiet) local, quick support. And no second guessing from far away ‘support’ groups. Instant response. and not only fire power, but constant local observations for the troops on the ground. And even when the troops are off the front line; they can relieve themselves by practicing with these planes. I know, no big government contracts. No difficult transportation problems. We, also make some of them in the form of small helicopters, too. Combine intel gathering and fighting abilitys (day and nite). Enough said by me. How about some of you with forward combat experience adding your ‘fine tuning’ideas?
	El Coqui June 4th, 2009 at 9:55 am Guys: Several things that everyone seem to overlook here. This is a COIN aircraft for observation and low intensity conflicts. Is cheap and easy to maintain, so the host country (ie Afghanistan but others, too) can integrate them in their inventory after we leave and not break the piggy bank or have to paid expensive foreign civilians experts to maintain it. Frankly, it looks perfect for the sort of backyard mechanics expertise found on those places. If the sensor package can be controlled from the ground, it could become a poor man’s UAV, without having to put a second person at risk or lose the data to crash or shootdown. Yeah, it will sucks to be the pilot in that instance but c’est la vie. Both A-10 and OV-10s are for big boy air forces. Frankly with all the no-invented-here discourse from blue-suiters, I will assign those Air Tractors to Army Aviation and put them in SOAR outfits like the 160th for tactical use and training of the indigenous forces. Something that Special Forces excel in.
	ClairemontWhooska June 4th, 2009 at 11:11 am What ah beauty! Can be fixed with a wrench and ah screwdriver. BA Ba Black Sheep Corsair Squadron can fix it yourself and it can land on a short air strip. Beautiful piece of flying machinery. Human Rcon/Fighter Pilots are still a requirement because electronics and robotics are fallible. U can send a money into space;but it does take a human being, an Astronaut to bring the craft to a successful flight in the event of an unsheduled malfunction. West Virginia Chuck Yeager is always on some sort of flying trip. He says flying is like driving… Ronald Reagan liked to drive. The AT 802U is a sharp looking air craft. Man, it would be somthin to race this at an air show! U know General Chuck Yaeger will test fly this. What a treat for the aviator! Radio made in Wolfsburg Germany. Sleek winged like a Stuka Dive Bomber. Air intake underneith, chrome nose on the sharp looking propeller and more strategic details. What a treat and mass production could speed these out possibly in time to augment the immediacy of demand. Some young 18, 19 year old flyer…the next George Bush is gonna love this plane.
	DC2 Jennings June 4th, 2009 at 11:26 am El Coqui, Good commentary. Couldn’t agree with you more. For all of you A-10 lovers (of which I am one), we will never start production of this plane again. It takes tooling specific to each aircraft to build said aircraft. The tooling for the A-10 was destroyed 30 years ago. The same reason we don’t restart A-10 production is the same reason we haven’t restarted production of any aircraft after production ceased (except for maybe the E-2 which is a low production aircraft to begin with). It is the same reason people fear shutting down the C-17 and F-22 production lines. Once they stop they don’t start up again.…. ever. DC2
	Wayne D. June 4th, 2009 at 11:49 am I worked for a spray pilot for a while and he had this model Air Tractor and the AT-401. These things are amazing! My boss always gave me a heart attack whenever he lifted off from a short dirt road while fully loaded with about 800 gallons of spray when we were out in the field and would just barely make it over fences and under power lines (he is also an aerobatic pilot too). Over the entire summer he did not have a single mechanical issue other than an access panel popping loose on the tail. Just go out and watch a spray pilot sometime and I think you would be convinced this is actually a doable idea. Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=65KLN5gDHzI
	Musket 104 June 4th, 2009 at 12:05 pm Does this thing have an ejection seat??? How about flares or chaff? Sooner or later, one of the bad guys is going to forget to read the press hype — releases about how awesome and invulnerable this thing is and actualy shoot one down with a Golden BB. The real threat is the MANPADS. Below 15,000 ft AGL, it make life miserable for slow movers (incl the Warthog). You gotta drop high if you are int Strela country. The bad guys we face aren’t big no high tech: AK’s, RPG,s and Mortars for “Kinetic Ground Combat Systems” and pickup truck for transport. Both the AT-6 and this bird are @ 6,000 lbs gross. The AT-6 in already in the DoD inventory — I don’t see the advantage of the 208U.
	leon Clinton June 4th, 2009 at 12:12 pm What most of you guys don’t know is that this Air Tractor plane has been in government service now for 7 years, spraying drug fields in Columbia, under fire every day, without a single loss of life. They take small arms fire on every mission. They are very bullet proof. They have a proven track record. They cost about 1/10 as much as a chopper or an A-10. They will operate at about 1/10 the cost of a chopper or an A-10. Talk about saving money in hard times, this is the best money saving product in years. There is world wide parts distribution already in place. These planes will carry much more ammo than a chopper, at a fraction of the cost.
	Rick June 4th, 2009 at 1:14 pm Finally a good use for all the crop dusters put out of biz after 9–11.
	Rick June 4th, 2009 at 1:16 pm It is called a COIN also because it can turn on a dime.
	Do the right thing June 4th, 2009 at 3:02 pm I don’t understand this fantasy that this plane or the AV-8B or the new F-35B have the ability to operate from a dirt road near the front line of fighting. Where do we fight these days that we are entrenched for some period of time that they can set up operations to refuel and rearm these aircraft. Let alone do a bit of maintenance? That requires logistics that are difficult to establish. And to protect. Even in transit to the forward area. Who is going to move all the fuel and ammo in and out of these forward areas. And if the front lines are volatile then this sort of support is very unrealistic. We don’t do this with helo’s so why do we expect to do it with fixed wing aircraft? If you recall how quickly IED design progressed in Iraq, then that same initiative and ability to adapt and overcome has to be considered if this airplane is deployed. Good luck!
	jimbo June 4th, 2009 at 3:30 pm a simple plane, like this one and others have been proposed can be maintained and re-supplied in small numbers.. they are simple prop planes… and in this case all you need is a screw driver and a wrench apparently to service the whole plane… Now complicated jet-fighers that eat up fuel and take hundreds of man hrs to maintain (av8b, and f35b) have never been considered… Helicopters also are very complicated and hard to maintain thats why we do not deploy them out there.… Its not like we are basing 50 of these things w/our troops im assuming its like a handful.. so when they move they provide overwatch or when they encounter some fire they respond immediatley..
	El Coqui June 4th, 2009 at 7:26 pm Musket 104 June 4th, 2009 at 12:05 pm Does this thing have an ejection seat??? How about flares or chaff? Sooner or later, one of the bad guys is going to forget to read the press hype — releases about how awesome and invulnerable this thing is and actualy shoot one down with a Golden BB. Musket, if it happens, it happen. They are cheap, so you buy more and who knows, maybe the golden BB allows him to do a dead stick landing somewhere. Where, the pilot with trusry screwdriver and playersa may be able to put him back in the air. You are right that the AT-6 is in the inventary but it requires a larger footprint that some developing countries can support. And I don’t know if you notice something, once peace is achieved, remove the armor and weapons and what are left with? A crop duster.
	xtestpilot June 5th, 2009 at 5:45 am I think the best all-around solution is a new P47 Thunderbolt — not only could it take a lot, underscore that, a LOT of hits and keep on flying/fighting; replace those eight .50cals with a newer weapon like the AH64’s .30mil cannon, put in the bathtub armor of the current A10 to protect the pilot, and you have a baby A10. We shouldn’t lose the lessons of WW2 and fighter development which included jungle, desert, urban, and mountains.
	jimbo June 5th, 2009 at 12:11 pm That what was my first thought.. that sucker had an amazing record! If i had my choice id do exactly that..
	mike j June 5th, 2009 at 2:49 pm One of the dumbest things the Air Force did in Korea was leaving the P-47s stateside. We still had a few hundred kicking around. My Uncle was in the engineers in the Korean War. USAF blew up a bridge he was working on, presumably going too fast to tell the friendlies from the bad guys.
	Chris June 5th, 2009 at 6:17 pm Lest we forget, both the P-47 and the A-10 were designed by Alexander “Sasha” Kartveli, who came out of retirement to work on the prototype for the AX requirement. He has heavily responsible for the redundancy and other survivability features built into the A-10. BTW, the attitude at FRC was that if the A-10 were an U.S. Army program, the production run would have been 4,000.
	El Coqui June 5th, 2009 at 8:16 pm The A-10 was the AF answer to the AH-56 Cheyenne. The best thing that we could say was that because it was not a sexy supersonic fighter it flew under the radar of AF leadership. The Grunts, both Marine and Army had benefited since. Remember, when they were discussions about moving them to the Army.
	Dogsoldier June 6th, 2009 at 6:57 pm This is not new in concept. Drug Lords of S. Am were buying “Mud Puddle Jumpers” that had “Chevy” engines. Shade Tree mechanics could do the maintenance. They were armed with SMG 60cal. Could carry 1,800lbs payload. (Dope,SMG’s,Bombs,Pilot) DEA detected the private Drug Lord AF In-Country. They were made in TX and exported under Ag Support Products. This AC would compliment SOF Ops, with easy Pilot Trng.and Grnd Supt.Crew for direct Air/Grnd Support. Could also be Div. Level Air Support for Bde. Cmdrs. etc. (Cost Effective) Could be included in US Army / USMC inventory easy, such as the old “Off The Shelf” Command options, More bang for the buck on the LIC Battlefield.
	Fastmover June 8th, 2009 at 8:57 am I think that if you want to loose a bunch of pilots in trade for a cheap Coin bird its a great idea. Hell every bad guy in the world can obtain an SA-7. The A-10 is the slowest Coin bird we should deploy,its survivability makes up for this lack of speed.
	3warLTC June 9th, 2009 at 9:27 pm The need for a low cost, easy to maintain COIN aircraft has been around for years. Now all we need is the politcal will to purchase this new airframe. If we really want to minimize Innocent Civilian collateral casualties we need a slow mover type COIN aircraft. I wonder if the USAF has the will to put aside decades of fast mover worship to ask congress for the funds for at least several hundred of these airframes. Of course, that means all the necessary logistical support that goes with a mass purchase.
	Fastmover June 10th, 2009 at 9:13 am http://images.compasscall.multiply.com/image/6:bac167/photos/56/500x500/1/Strikemaster-419–02-at-Manston-after-a-SAM-7-hit.jpg?et=%2CcJvSq7jDrCCduDjLAQA4A&nmid=231858689 Well, the A-1 Skyraider proved that a slow bomb truck has great value. However survivability must also be part of the mix. This ag wagon would not last long over a modern battlefield. And with man portable SAMs readily available,ever battlefield is modern. I for one do not believe in trading our guys lives for the lives of the enemy,whether combatant or non combatant. Above is a link to a picture of a BAC-167 Strikemaster damaged by a SA-7 in the Dofor conflict 1972. Weapon was used by un-trained Yemen Rebels. The Strikemaster in a coin bird with the same speed as a A-10.
	Gary Watson, USAF Retired July 25th, 2009 at 5:41 am We need something along the lines of the A-10 or A-1, but it must be day/night all weather, not an ag-truck. We’ve got the plans for the first 2 dust ‘em off, bring it up to date, stand up the production lines and build a large amount of them. We don’t need the F-22, we need something that can hang in the air for a long time, get low, slow and close with a lot of firepower, and take hits, for it will, and bring the crew home.
	rc21 July 25th, 2009 at 9:18 pm This is a long overdue idea however it’s being executed poorly. The problem is going to be small arms fire, and single engine platforms are out of luck when they take an engine hit. That’s why the fast movers rarely come in low to attack, and why the Army relies on attack helicopters — two engine attack helos. Sure they fly the Kiowa Warriors, and do well with them. The problem with the KWs, and this aircraft, is a single golden BB, usually 7.62x39, can cause a forced landing. It happens to the KWs often enough and I’d rather autorotate into an unimproved landing area than have to look for someplace long enough to land a fixed wing. Agree low and slow is the only way to go in the COIN fight but maybe a twin that can survive an engine out condition would be a better idea. Hope it has an ejection seat — and the pilots are qualfied to shoot an M4 carbine.
	Rhys F July 29th, 2009 at 10:46 pm I wonder if they can get the blueprints and tool up to make the Hawker Typhoon or the P40 Kittyhawk again with a modern turboprop motor up front instead of the big merlin/griffin? Makes just as much sense :D and the P-40 is at least an historically AF approved plane :D
	RonB June 28th, 2010 at 4:05 pm Industry scuttlebutt is some Texas congressmen are trying to get the requirements for ejection seat and retractable gear removed from the LAS requirements. Supposedly this has final release of a DRFP sttalled. Anyone else heard. If there is anything too it the legislation should require the congressmen to write the letters to the families.

NOTE: Comments are limited to 2500 characters and spaces.

By commenting on this topic you agree to the terms and conditions of our User Agreement

DoD Buzz

Look Schwartz — New COIN Plane

Join the Conversation

Recent Comments