It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Air Force requests funding for low cost fighter experiment

page: 3
5
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 3 2017 @ 06:51 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

It's like something out of mad max in the best of all possible ways.

It kills me that the purpose-built cropdusters are too pricey to be a legitimate time-building aircraft.




posted on Mar, 3 2017 @ 07:05 PM
link   
a reply to: Barnalby

That's why I laughed my ass off the first time I came across it. It's the perfect post apocalyptic bomb the living hell out of your enemies platform.



posted on Mar, 3 2017 @ 07:18 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

There was a time during one summer on the habor in high school where my coworker and I, after watching a particularly dilapidated gasoline tanker pass by, mused about writing out a business plan for buying old freighter off Yachtworld, converting it to carry and launch small STOL aircraft with basic weaponry, and renting it out to 3rd world nations as a mercenary aircraft carrier of sorts.

This thing would be perfect for that role.



posted on Mar, 3 2017 @ 07:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: pteridine

The Navy refitted the aircraft, but SOCOM performed the original experiment. The continued program will occur under the Air Force.


Is the Air Force responsible for all air support to SOCOM units?



posted on Mar, 3 2017 @ 07:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Barnalby

What's not to love about an armed crop duster?




And if they run out of wars,just put the spray nozzles back on!



posted on Mar, 3 2017 @ 07:47 PM
link   
a reply to: pteridine

It's on as available basis, but the Air Force is primarily responsible as they're usually closer.



posted on Mar, 3 2017 @ 08:21 PM
link   
a reply to: Sunwolf

I wonder if they could be modified to spray Agent Orange, or napalm, or VX...

I should stop.



posted on Mar, 4 2017 @ 02:53 AM
link   
a reply to: Barnalby

Well considering you don't spray 2 of those things?

Honestly this screams set up for a consolation prize to the TX program. Honestly I hope something crazy like Textron wins just for the shake up. Although a Textron win is an invite for a Boeing or Lockheed order Northrop buy out.

Zaphod, what ever happened to Textron having alternate wings for the scorpion?



posted on Mar, 4 2017 @ 08:39 AM
link   
a reply to: bra1nwash

That was on the production aircraft. It flew last year with them.



posted on Mar, 5 2017 @ 02:12 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

All of the actual photographs I've found of the Scorpion show her with a longer loiter, slower speed, ISR-style wing configuration. There are some renderings of the Scorpion with a more F/A-50 set up for higher speeds and more aggressive maneuvering. A common fuselage with a wing section that is easy to change would be great for the USAF or any air arm really because it would offer so many roles on one common air-frame. I always thought that was their intention with it to begin with.



posted on Mar, 5 2017 @ 02:17 PM
link   
a reply to: Caughtlurking

The production variant added a 4 degree swept wing, instead of the straight wing that was on the prototype.



posted on Mar, 5 2017 @ 05:52 PM
link   
Be a good chance for Australia to get back into the Aerospace game

Transavia Airtruk



posted on Mar, 5 2017 @ 06:11 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

You won't get less than 50 percent availability with it...unlike some aircraft we could mention.



posted on Mar, 5 2017 @ 06:16 PM
link   
a reply to: seagull

Is there a reason why Canada's Bombardier doesn't make anything for the military?



posted on Mar, 5 2017 @ 06:21 PM
link   
a reply to: D8Tee

They do. They build maritime patrol/SAR, C4ISR, medevacs, VIP transports, and general purpose aircraft for various militaries around the world. The RAF uses a Global airframe for their R1 Sentinel, the USAF uses two for their E-11 BACN platform.



posted on Mar, 5 2017 @ 06:23 PM
link   
a reply to: seagull

And it won't cost $61K/flight hour to fly a CAS mission either.



posted on Mar, 5 2017 @ 06:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: D8Tee

They do. They build maritime patrol/SAR, C4ISR, medevacs, VIP transports, and general purpose aircraft for various militaries around the world. The RAF uses a Global airframe for their R1 Sentinel, the USAF uses two for their E-11 BACN platform.


Oh, did not know that, thank you.

What about DeHaviland?



posted on Mar, 5 2017 @ 06:37 PM
link   
a reply to: D8Tee

Nowhere near as many as before, but there are still a few out there. The Dash-8-100 and -300 are both used by both Canadian and American military units for surveillance, training, and range control. The Air Force uses two -100 platforms as the E-9A range control aircraft to monitor live fire exercises in the Gulf of Mexico. The Army uses the -300 series as the RO-6A recon platform. There was quite the controversy after one crashed in Columbia. Canada uses the -100 as the CC-142 transport in Europe, and the CT-142 for navigator training.



posted on Mar, 5 2017 @ 06:55 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Was the Avro Aero a decent plane or is that some kinda Canadian national pride myth.



posted on Mar, 5 2017 @ 07:04 PM
link   
a reply to: D8Tee

It's hard to know for certain. It was shaping up to be pretty good. The early flights all went pretty well, although they did have a couple incidents, though that wasn't unexpected for a brand new design. They reached just short of Mach 2 on their 7th flight, and they used a number of features that are used on stealth aircraft now, such as weapons bays. It certainly had the potential to be a hell of an aircraft.




top topics



 
5
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join