Textron Scorpion Closer to First Flight

a reply to: IamSirDrinksalot

The main mission it was designed for is real-time ISR. It is capable of being armed as a secondary role, and the wing box is capable of accepting a swept wing for performance if needed as an attack aircraft. There are many, many nations that need maritime patrol for their naval airforces or coast guard for search and rescue and drug interdiction missions and which have no need or desire to bomb or rape peasants.
Those nations can buy two Scorpions for the cost of an HC-144 or a MPA-D8. They can probably fly them almost twice as often for the same operating costs.
Some of those same countries will want to be able to hang a LGB on them because you can buy three of them for the price of a F-16, and then afford to fly them seven hours for every hour you'd be able to get a F-16 off the ground.

I doubt Textron evaluated the target market for African countries intent on bombing peasants, and decided to spend several million dollars in an effort to equip them with the latest (and completely unnecessary to the task) ISR sensors, but that sounds less incendiary than invoking napalming villages for profit.

aviationweek.com...

www.kansas.com...

a reply to: _Del_

It's a little prettier with the new paint.

a reply to: Zaphod58

You know that Cessna wouldn't have built this thing unless they have a market. Could the Scorpion be competing for the T38 replacement? I can't see Cessna inventing money in this financial environment on a project without a goal in mind.

Shut up and take my money!

Seriously, could a private individual buy one of these if they had the money? It would be unarmed of course, but how much fun would it be to have your own jet?!

Shut up and take my money!

Seriously, could a private individual buy one of these if they had the money? It would be unarmed of course, but how much fun would it be to have your own jet?!

the music doesn't fit the aircraft...it's like having Metallica laying down a soundtrack for a Disney TV show

Looks like someone tried to put together an F-14 without the instructions .

a reply to: buddah6

I don't think it's flashy enough to meet the T-X requirements.Though they did mention they designed the wing box to be easily replaced and that they have studied a swept wing...

It might not make a bad trainer, but the Jayhawk and Texans aren't really in need of replacing, and the unit cost is substantially more than both of those. It's sort of in the no-man's land in between those two tiers.
Flipside is that for certain customers, it will do a lot more than a Yak-130 or a T-50 for less money.

a reply to: _Del_

I agree with you but where is this it's niche? If not a candidate for TX, maybe a cheap A 10 replacement. I don't have a clue where this little bird is going.

reminds me of a bae hawk but with more up to date design to simulate flight characteristics maybe?

a reply to: buddah6

It's going to be upscale ISR. And the low operating costs are attractive to several countries, I'm sure. It will also have the ability to lug a decent payload. Cruising around at 20,000 feet with that sensor suite and endurance would be useful to many countries that don't have access to high-end UAV's, or those that are adverse to them for political reasons.

a reply to: suicideeddie

The Scorpion has a good amount of Cessna Citation linage in my opinion. The Hawk is a very capable plane and has been around long enough to have worked out the bugs. To be honest, I would love to fly either one of them.

a reply to: _Del_
I think a "lower technology" airplane might be a good idea. A plane with no "fly by wire" or "exotic aerodynamic" with a "off the shelf", tried and true engine. An airplane that is easy to fly and inexpensive to operate, that can be flown by a 20 year old youngster.

a reply to: buddah6

I think that's the idea. No fly-by-wire. They aren't pushing the envelope with exotic materials or construction methods. It's not interesting or pushing boundaries aerodynamically. No visible thought to signature management (at least in radio frequencies). Same proven engines as used commercially on the Citation III and Learjet 31. Component parts that are already in production and flight-rated in other aircraft. Keeps the costs down and let's you take a plane from back of the napkin to flight in less than two years. Impressive.

With top shelf ISR capability and able to haul some iron, it's a notch up from your typical COIN turboprop. The USAF will never buy them. They'll use Reapers for the role. Other countries, however, may find this very attractive.

a reply to: _Del_

BTW, what ever happened to the CAS turboprop program. Last year, I saw a AT6 close up and was amazed with it's technology. I guess that would be easy for a old Mohawk driver...lol.

Saw it depart fairford on Sunday. Got a poor camera shot of it's rear end when it flew past. I did take a photo of it on the ground though. Shame didn't do a little demo it looked good in the air, nifty little plane

a reply to: ThePeaceMaker

I would love to fly it! It looks as if it would be fairly easy to fly compare to the gen 4&5 jets.

a reply to: buddah6
That's what I liked about it, it looked like a very simple plane but also looked like it does the job perfectly. When I get home I'll upload the pic I took on the ground

a reply to: ThePeaceMaker
It has straight wings which makes low speed flight docile and landings easy. For a guy like me with "ham hands" that's good. While doing recon work being able to slow down and loiter in the area of interest is a must. It also helps the RSO get a better look at things on the ground and monitor movement of the bad guys. I'm guessing that the Scorpion is capable of using relative short runways too.