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.

 

AHRLAC to be offered to USAF as light attack craft

page: 1
4

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 21 2018 @ 06:19 PM
link   
South African based Paramount Group International has announced the formation of a new subsidiary called Bronco Combat Systems. They are partnered with Aerospace Development Group, and Virginia based Fulcrum Concepts, and will offer a US built AHRLAC, known as the Bronco II, light attack aircraft to the Air Force.

Unlike the Super Tucano and Texan II, the AHRLAC is a purpose built light attack aircraft. Like the previous Bronco, it's designed as a two seat aircraft, optimized for low speed observation and attack. It's a single engine design, with a slight forward sweep to the wing. It was launched by Paramount in 2011, and is about to be delivered to an undisclosed customer. They're in talks with US suppliers, and are looking for a home for a manufacturing plant.

www.flightglobal.com...




posted on Feb, 21 2018 @ 07:01 PM
link   
Might be a good platform for spec-op support but that's about it, looks like some home-built from Oshkosh.

K~



posted on Feb, 21 2018 @ 11:56 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Cool. I like the mid engine design, seems like a better weight distribution for a single engine plane than a forward engine. Pusher props tend to be more efficient too, don't they?

How does this stack up against the A-29 and the AT-6, performance and price wise? Any idea what the price tag will be?



posted on Feb, 22 2018 @ 02:09 AM
link   
a reply to: TheBadCabbie

The A-29 and the AT-6 are heavier (~50% to 30%), have slightly more powerful engines. Both cost supposedly about $12 million.

My guess is that the AHRLAC will be in the same price range, maybe a bit cheaper. Operational costs will probably more important though. The AHRLAC, being a new design, also has not seen any battle yet. This can be seen as a negative point.



posted on Feb, 22 2018 @ 02:41 AM
link   
a reply to: TheBadCabbie




I like the mid engine design, seems like a better weight distribution for a single engine plane than a forward engine


Mid-mounted engines have a lot going for it until there is a minor crash and all that momentum carries the engine through the cockpit.



posted on Feb, 22 2018 @ 03:35 AM
link   

originally posted by: RadioRobert
a reply to: TheBadCabbie




I like the mid engine design, seems like a better weight distribution for a single engine plane than a forward engine


Mid-mounted engines have a lot going for it until there is a minor crash and all that momentum carries the engine through the cockpit.


Well I could see how that might be a problem...



posted on Feb, 22 2018 @ 04:10 PM
link   
Looks nice




top topics



 
4

log in

join