Air power on the cheap

[Rahul92]

Many of them still work

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Many of them still work

They not only work but run like anything..
Best COIN aircraft's IA can have..

Embraer EMB 314 Super Tucano - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

FMA IA 58 Pucará - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Home | www.802u.com

 

[ALBY]

due to its low flying are'nt they susceptible to RPGs which are common among terrorists

 

[Godless-Kafir]

Which aircraft did the LTTE use for raiding SL airports?

 

[Kunal Biswas]

due to its low flying are'nt they susceptible to RPGs which are common among terrorists

They are too fast to be shot down by RPGs, And if small arm fire they can be hit like any-other airborne assets including Jets..

Which aircraft did the LTTE use for raiding SL airports?

They use some thing call ZLIN -143
New Page 1

 

[agentperry]

yes. i talked to IAF western command accounts and planning officer and he said IAF is very optimistic about hawk trainers cuz of there agility and use for ground attack role. they can carry more armament then the mig-21s(check it yourself). and they are cheap also. just 18 million compared to more then 20 million for same migs.

Does our Hawk trainer qualify as a cheap attack air craft. It carries a decent pay load. Once air superiority has been established it can be used for ground attack roles.

So may be this is one of the reasons we have bought many more recently in a repeat order.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

yes. i talked to IAF western command accounts and planning officer and he said IAF is very optimistic about hawk trainers cuz of there agility and use for ground attack role. they can carry more armament then the mig-21s(check it yourself). and they are cheap also. just 18 million compared to more then 20 million for same migs.

Hold on..

This thread is dedicated to turbo props no jets pls

 

[Kunal Biswas]

North American Rockwell OV-10 Bronco

North American Rockwell OV-10 Bronco

The North American Aviation Rockwell OV-10 Bronco is a turboprop light attack and observation aircraft. It was developed in the 1960s as a special aircraft for counter insurgency (COIN) combat, and one of its primary missions was as a forward air control (FAC) aircraft. It can carry up to three tons of external munitions, and loiter for three or more hours.

Boeing has recently put together plans internally to build a modernized, improved version of the OV-10 Bronco, called the OV-10X,[4] to satisfy a possible Air Force requirement for a light attack plane.[5] According to Pentagon and industry officials, while the aircraft would maintain much of its 1960s-vintage rugged external design, the 21st century modernizations would include a computerized glass cockpit, intelligence sensors and smart-bomb-dropping capabilities. Boeing indicates that international interest in restarting production is growing, to compete with other light attack aircraft such as the T-6B Texan II, A-67 Dragon and EMB 314 Super Tucano. On 3 February 2010, during the Singapore Air Show, Boeing announced that the international interest for the aircraft was such, that it would go on with its development even in the case it failed to win the USAF tender for 100 Light Attack/Armed Reconnaissance aircraft

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Irregular warfare offers new role for propeller driven aircraft

Irregular warfare offers new role for propeller driven aircraft

Bringing back the propeller-driven fighter in the age of counterinsurgency may seem to some a belated no-brainer or to others a wasteful diversion with potentially suicidal risk to the pilot.
As late as early 2008, the leadership of the US Air Force sided firmly with the sceptics. Lt Gen Donald Hoffman, then the USAF's top-ranking acquisition official, implied to a group of reporters in April of that year that the idea of deploying propeller-driven aircraft in modern combat is too risky.
"We can rebuild the [North American] P-51 - great airplane," said Hoffman, citing the propeller-driven Second World War fighter. Then, however, the former Lockheed Martin F-16 pilot pointed at each of the journalists. "All we need is you, you, you and you to go fly it into the threat zone," he said.


Propeller-driven aircraft fly lower and slower than fast jets such as the F-16, and carry less cockpit armour than the "titanium bathtubs" surrounding pilots in the Fairchild A-10 or the Boeing AH-64 Apache. It is this combination that drove the type out of the USAF inventory immediately after the Vietnam war, with the retirements of the Douglas A-1 Skyraider, the Cessna O-2 Skymaster and the de Havilland C-7 Caribou.
Paradoxically, however, the propeller-driven aircraft's ability to fly low and slow for long periods is responsible for a rebirth of enthusiasm within the USAF since shortly after Hoffman made his remarks about reintroducing the P-51.
The USAF leadership's position on the light attack mission would quickly evolve in 2008, even as the service's top leadership was fired - partly for moving too slowly to support a counterinsurgency campaign in Afghanistan.
One year after Hoffman's remarks, new USAF chief of staff Gen Norton Schwartz struck a different tone while addressing the same topic during a 24 April 2009 lecture at the Brookings Institution think-tank.
"There is a legitimate need to talk about the light strike role and building partner capacity role," Schwartz said. "And we intend to have that discussion in the coming months."
From outright derision to open-minded interest, USAF policy on propeller-driven warplanes continues to evolve. Reintroducing a modern-day version of the A-1 Skyraider into the USAF combat fleet is still not a priority.
But the USAF is moving forward to begin acquiring propeller-driven aircraft for a variety of roles related to counter-insurgency.
Industry officials expect the USAF to soon issue requests for proposals for a "light air support" (LAS) aircraft that will be donated to the Afghan air force, and a light mobility aircraft that will join the USAF's airlift fleet.
By the end of 2013, a squadron of 15 propeller-driven trainers should become operational to prepare USAF advisers to train foreign pilots on similar aircraft. The contract is called the light attack and armed reconnaissance (LAAR) fleet, but USAF officials are clear the aircraft will not be designed or equipped for combat missions.
"The LAAR squadron will be training our aircraft pilots. It will not be deploying. While operated by the Air Combat Command, it will be operated in a training environment," says Steven "Gringo" Peak, a requirements chief for Air Combat Command.
The definition of LAAR as a training squadron with 15 aircraft may seem like a step forward for the cause of fielding a propeller-driven aircraft, but is actually a steep downgrade from the original vision.
A capabilities request for information published by the USAF in July 2009 called for a combat-coded wing with 100 aircraft that could enter service within three years. The document sparked a strong industry response.
Hawker Beechcraft teamed with Lockheed Martin to propose integrating the latter's digital cockpit for the A-10C with the airframe of the AT-6 Texan II. Embraer proposed the EMB-314 Super Tucano that was already being tested for the counterinsurgency role by the US Navy.
Meanwhile, Boeing proposed a new version of the OV-10 Bronco, which was retired nearly 20 years ago. More exotic concepts also appeared, including a proposed revival of the PA-48, which itself is a turboprop-powered version of the P-51 Mustang.
The concept for an irregular warfare wing, however, soon fell victim to a change of priorities driven by "fiscal realities", says Lt Col Jeffrey "Homer" Godfrey, an A-10 pilot and operations planner for Air Combat Command's requirements branch.
The requirement for LAAR was refocused on a single squadron charged with training USAF pilots on the tactics that they, in turn, can share with foreign pilots. Separately, the USAF defined a new capability for an OA-X platform, a light attack fighter that is not yet an approved requirement and has no funding.



CONCEPT
"It is a concept and there are no current plans to pursue a fleet of OA-X aircraft," Peak says. "That was the genesis of what we were looking at last year." He adds: "There may be some development down the road pending the success of the LAAR programme that makes the OA-X programme something that wants to be looked at in the future."
The new strategy follows the policy of the new chief of staff, Schwartz, who spoke of favouring the training role to the combat role at the Brookings speech in 2009.
"If we had a primary trainer that is for basic pilot training, that could be easily reconfigured into a light strike platform, and then you would have a cadre of instructors organic to those machines who not only did primary training for our air force but can sort of make that transition quickly to a building partner capacity role in the same airplane, same crew, perhaps folks who we have arranged to have language skills and so on as part of their repertoire, that is a very attractive way to approach solving this problem," Schwartz said last year.
The current strategy is closely aligned with Scwhartz's statement in 2009. A small group of pilots will be trained to serve as advisers, and a selected group of allies - starting with Afghanistan - will be encouraged to buy a US-built, propeller-driven fighter.
"The time is right for increasing the scope of this mission," Godfrey says.
If fiscal realities led to the postponement of launching the OA-X programme, the same issue could force the USAF to re-examine the decision. As options for a propeller-driven fighter were still being discussed, the Air Combat Command produced a 20-page document on 23 December 2008 called "OA-X Enabling Concept".





FUEL SAVING
The paper cited a study earlier that year that said replacing one and a half squadrons of deployed fighters with an OA-X fleet would save $300 million a year in fuel operations costs. More recently, an ongoing demonstration of the AT-6 by the USAF, which was ordered by Congress, produced similar savings figures, with USAF officials saying the AT-6 costs $600 an hour to operate.
The same mission flown by an F-16 costs $17,000 in fuel and maintenance, the USAF says. Those figures have persuaded both major competitors for the LAAR trainer contract and the Afghan LAS contract that the market for OA-X still exists.
"We have not taken our eye off of that OA-X enabling concept," says Derek Hess, Hawker Beechcraft's director for AT-6 programmes.
When Hess thinks of the potential of the AT-6, he looks far beyond the immediate opportunities to win the LAS contract for 20 aircraft and the LAAR contract for 15 aircraft. Instead, Hess recalls, surprisingly, the Northrop F-5, a lightweight, affordable fighter that was designed to be exported to US allies around the world.
Hess adds that the scale of the export market for propeller-driven aircraft may never equal the scale of the F-5 programme, which delivered more than 2,000 fighters from 1964 to 1989. The goal of the light attack fighter concept, however, is similar: provide allies with an affordable aircraft for the counter-insurgency mission.
But aerospace industry analysts are more sceptical about the potential of sales in this market. Forecast International, a Connecticut-based firm specialising in market analysis, predicts a demand for about 650 aircraft over the next 10 years between the Super Tucano and AT-6. "It's not a huge market," says Raymond Jaworowski, a senior aerospace analyst at Forecast.
On the other hand, Forecast has not factored in potential sales in the US market beyond about 250 T-6A Texan IIs on order as primary trainers for the USAF and US Navy.
But the need for tactical aircraft is growing even as the numbers in the USAF inventory are declining. By the end of the decade, both the USAF and USN project shortfalls of hundreds of fighters beneath even the reduced requirements. If funding is not available to buy more Lockheed Martin F-35s, which are projected to cost at least $60 million on average by the end of the decade, investing in a propeller-driven aircraft may become a more attractive option.
In addition to fighting insurgents, propeller-driven aircraft also could be used to support the USAF air sovereignty mission, patrolling the skies over major cities and critical infrastructure.
That explains the Lockheed/Hawker Beechcraft team's pursuit of more powerful armament for the AT-6, which would not be necessary for the LAAR trainer. In a briefing at the Air Force Association convention in September, Hess disclosed the AT-6 could be armed with a single-barrel version of the 25mm General Dynamics GAU-6 Avenger gatling gun in development for the F-35. The current area suppression weapons for the AT-6 are two .50cal gun pods mounted under the wing.
Embraer, meanwhile, has had discussions with French industry about a 20mm gatling gun for the Super Tucano, although it has no firm plans to supplement both .50cal guns installed inside the aircraft's wings.




STRAFING RUNS
Interest in a cannon-like weapon for both aircraft speaks to the emerging mission profile for the OA-X. In addition to providing armed overwatch of patrols, convoys and infiltration operations, the USAF's enabling concept proposes the OA-X should be called upon for strafing runs during the close air support of troops in contract and to protect downed pilots waiting to be rescued. Both competing teams are also interested in equipping their aircraft with precision-guided, small munitions. With the combination of precision weapons and an on-board targeting sensor, such as the L-3 Wescam MX-15 electro-optical/infrared camera, the OA-X aircraft could supplement the role currently provided by armed unmanned aircraft systems. Unlike jet-powered fighters, a propeller-driven OA-X could loiter near a target for several hours without needing to refuel.
In the same "enabling concept" document drafted by the Air Combat Command, a combination of about 36 F-16s and F-15Es consume 190,500kg (420,000lb) of fuel provided by six tankers per day, and the tankers themselves require another 245,000kg.
The OA-X requirement, if moved forward, will look beyond new armament. It will be critical for the manufacturer to protect the crew from a range of small arms fire.
While infantry patrol wearing body armour and ride in blast-shielded vehicles, pilots in A-10s and AH-64s are enclosed in an armoured bubble.



FLIGHTCREW PROTECTION
Any aircraft the USAF selects for OA-X would need similar protection for flightcrew. "It's going to have to work in our normal requirement for any other aircraft that's going to go down-range," Peak says. Embraer has equipped the Super Tucano with Kevlar and ceramic plates that protect the pilots from .50cal bullets, says Acir Padilha, vice-president of marketing and sales at Embraer Defense. The AT-6, by contrast, is protected with ceramic plates designed to stop a 7.62mm armour piercing incendiary round, Hess says.
The USAF has left open the option of pursuing an all-new aircraft that could be designed specifically for the OA-X, perhaps with heavier armour for the pilot. The USAF is clear that even if an acquisition process is launched for OA-X, it will not be a follow-on order to the winner of the LAS or LAAR contracts. "It would be a truly new-start programme," Peak says.
The focus is now on the pending contract awards. Schwartz signalled in his 2009 remarks that the ideal LAAR candidate would be based on an aircraft already performing a basic trainer role, which would seem to favour the AT-6 derivative of the USAF's existing primary trainer.
The USAF instead wants a "fair and open competition strategy to get the very best solution", Godfrey says.
Embraer's Padilha concedes that the Super Tucano may face political pressure in the LAS and LAAR contracts. The navy planned to deploy a leased Super Tucano to Afghanistan this year to conduct an operational assessment, but the project - called Imminent Fury phase 2 - was cancelled by Congress.
"It caught our attention," Padilha says. "We know that we have the best product. A fair competition must be in place."

​

Irregular warfare offers new role for propeller driven aircraft

 

[Kunal Biswas]

A U.S. Army general today dropped a bit of interesting news about a U.S. Air Force program today. The air service will make a decision on what type of plane it wants for the Light Air Support contest in November, Army Maj. Gen. Peter Fuller told bloggers this morning.

For years now, the Air Force has been looking to buy a handful of light, turboprop-driven planes that can be used to train foreign pilots and carry out light attack missions. Embraer's Super Tucano, already used throughout Latin America for these missions is a perfect example of this type of plane.

The Super T has been pitted against Hawker Beechcraft's AT-6 (shown above) in the competition for up to 20 birds to help train the nascent Afghan National Army Air Force.

Continued

 

[jamwal]

Propeller driver aircraft indeed have advantage of lower costs and easier maintenance (?), but still I'd take arguments posted in 1st post's article with a big pinch of salt. Specially where it talks about advantages over helicopters.
Another thing that I find misleading is their claimed superiority over jets while dealing with ground fire. In my opinion, both are susceptible to ground fire just the same. A well aimed bullet can take down or at least seriously damage any plane, it's being jet or propeller driven will have little effect. Infact jets will have slight advantage evading ground fire from small weapons owing to their higher speed.
Prop driven seem good for ground support and counter insurgency operations but I'd seriously think twice before operating them in a battlefield where enemy has credible anti-air assets.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Propeller driver aircraft indeed have advantage of lower costs and easier maintenance (?), but still I'd take arguments posted in 1st post's article with a big pinch of salt. Specially where it talks about advantages over helicopters.
Another thing that I find misleading is their claimed superiority over jets while dealing with ground fire. In my opinion, both are susceptible to ground fire just the same. A well aimed bullet can take down or at least seriously damage any plane, it's being jet or propeller driven will have little effect. Infact jets will have slight advantage evading ground fire from small weapons owing to their higher speed.
Prop driven seem good for ground support and counter insurgency operations but I'd seriously think twice before operating them in a battlefield where enemy has credible anti-air assets.

Yes, Indeed maintenance is lower compare to a turbine Engined Helo so does opeartional cost yet it can deliver bigger payload, Thier is no where such comparison but i would say a Armed Air tractor is much more armored than a MIG-21 or a F-16...

That depends on what type of Airdefence we are talking abt ?, These Machines can fly way beyond MANPADS and AAA fire also can drop PGMS, When low ground these can drop Nap-ham and cluster bombs at speeds where its same as a Jet, Strafing a unarmed convoy or troops in open with guns and rockets is fun but such cases are limited..

 

[Godless-Kafir]

Its not called propeller driver, it called a turbo prop aircraft which has an turbine to run the props. The propeller aircraft could either have an IC engine or a Turbine, however the IC engine aircraft is no more and all large commercial aircrafts have turbo props or turbine driven propellers. Those are the one which are cost effective and efficient.

 

[pmaitra]

@Vladimir,
AJT is a jet, If our MOD authorized IA to buy jets than i can see its a good platform, Otherwise Turbo-prop is the best solution to our problems, As IA aircraft will be mainly for COIN and PGM strike operations, with low flying cost and easy maintenance, can land on any runway on earth..

Kunal,

Just curious.

Why would anyone prefer turboprop over a jet apart of fuel economy issues? Turboprop is also a jet engine powered aircraft, with similar kind of maintenance a jet would need.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Kunal,
Just curious.
Why would anyone prefer turboprop over a jet apart of fuel economy issues? Turboprop is also a jet engine powered aircraft, with similar kind of maintenance a jet would need.

1. As u said Fuel Economy aka operational costs, Also unit price.
2. Ability of Short landing and take off from rugged or no run way just plain fields..
3. More or less Similar Payload specs ( LGB, Rocket pods, Guns, A2A & A2G guided missiles combos ) with jets..
4. More loitering time compare to Jet over battlefield..


Both Engines follow the same concept BUT not the maintenance, A tubroprop is simple and smaller in size compare to a Military Jet engine which is complex and bigger in size hence more time maintaining more costs more men..

A jet Engine

A Turbo Prop Engine..

 

[Kunal Biswas]

SM-27 MACHETE - COunter-INsurgency (COIN) military aircraft

[h=2]SM-27 MACHETE - COunter-INsurgency (COIN) military aircraft [/h]
Interesting Concept, Never Knew before..

Stavatti also is apparently developing two other aircraft: SM-26 Sleek & the SM-36 Stalma. Link

MACHETE is a single engine Close Air Support (CAS), COunter-INsurgency (COIN) and Advanced Trainer (AT) military aircraft..

The SM-27S/T MACHETE is a single engine, turboprop aircraft which will be produced in two variants: The SM-27S and SM-27T. The SM-27S is a single seat, high performance light attack and COunter INsurgency (COIN) platform. The SM-27S is designed specifically for Close Air Support (CAS), and in addition to COIN, can satisfy a host of air missions including Light Attack (LA), Forward Air Control (FAC) and Armed Reconnaissance (AR). The SM-27T is a two place tandem weapon system which can not only satisfy the COIN, CAS, FAC and AR role, but also serve as an Advanced Trainer (AT).

Power for the SM-27S/T is provided by a 3,000 SHP class free turbine engine powerplant driving a contra-rotating propeller. Powerplant airflow is supplied by laterally mounted, bifurcated fuselage inlets. A three surface arrangement consisting of a high aspect ratio wing, low aspect ratio canard foreplanes and an all-moving horizontal tail is provided. Twin vertical stabilizers provide directional stability and yaw control.

A one piece bubble canopy and pressurized cockpit with zero-zero crew-member escape capability is provided. Flight controls are of manually actuated, aerodynamic force-feedback type with yaw dampening. Tricycle landing gear consisting of a forward retracting oleo-pneumatic nose strut and inboard wing/fuselage retracting oleopneumatic main gear is employed. A comprehensive integrated avionics suite, including Electronic Warfare/Electronic Counter Measures (EW/ECM) is featured. Stores and ordinance is carried on one fuselage and six wing hardpoints. Typical fixed internal armament includes a single port mounted 30mm cannon.

PowerPlant:

The SM-27S/T is powered by one Pratt & Whitney Canada PW127G free turbine propulsion engine developing 2,920 SHP at maximum take-off with a shaft output of 1,200 RPM. Basic engine TBO is 6,000 hours. Self-start capability and electric power control with mechanical back-up is provided. PW127G mass flow is provided via two semi-flush mounted, bifurcated fuselage air inlets equipped with EESS deicing. Engine exhaust is ducted afterward and out through a 173 sq in annular exhaust pipe blended into the aircraft cowling to permit a net thrust increase.

The PW127G is orientated in a pusher configuration, mounted to the aircraft via Titanium engine mounts with the engine bay segregated from the fuselage by a Titanium firewall. The engine itself is enclosed in a clamshell armored cowling consisting of SPECTRA /polyimide and molecularly pure Chromium. Engine bay fire suppression is provided by an integrated KIDDIE detection and suppression system.

The PW127G drives two contra-rotating, six blade, 108 in diameter reversible-pitch, constant speed propfan blades of Scimitar form. Totalling twelve pusher blades, each blade is fitted with EESS for deicing.



The aircraft fuel system is of OBIGGS pressurized type, composed of five rigid self-sealing fuel tanks and one feeder tank. Four of the fuel tanks are located within the fuselage, while the remaining two tanks are located within the port and starboard wing respectively. The maximum useful internal fuel load for the SM-27S/T is 2,600 lbs, equivalent to approximately 388 gallons of JP-8 (at 6.7 lbs/gal) or 400 gallons of JP-4 (at 6.5 lbs/gal). SM-27S/T fuel tanks are sized for 400 usable gallons of JP-4, resulting in a total capacity of 426.7 gallons, including the volume necessary to accommodate self-sealing cells.

Fuel tanks are fitted with tear-resistant, self-sealing bladders lined with open cell reticulated foam. A single point refueling interface is located on the starboard fuselage, while gravity refueling may be accomplished through three filler locations including one on each wing and a single fuselage point. A probe-and drogue in-flight refueling system may be installed on the right forward fuselage as a customer, cost added option. All fuel lines are of Titanium construction, are of absolute minimum length and routed within fuel tanks to improve survivability whenever possible. Fuel tanks feature internal cross-feed capability with redundant feed flow. Fuel is initially consumed from the wing tanks to enhance survivability, with all fuel delivered to a self-sealing fuselage feeder tank prior to powerplant receipt. Closed cell foam is incorporated throughout all dry bays neighboring tanks.

Armament & Warload:

SM-27S/T armament includes fixed internal and expendable, external carried weapons.

SM-27S/T fixed internal armament includes the carriage of one 30mm cannon within an streamlined, port fuselage fairing. 30mm cannon ammunition is fed through a link-less feed system supplied by and contained within a fuselage armored ammunition drum. Ammunition is loaded/serviced through a ventral fuselage loading hatch. The cannon provides anti-armor/anti-aircraft capability.

The standard SM-27S/T cannon is the single barrel Oerlikon-Burle KCA 30mm. The cannon is provided with 250 rounds and offers a rate of fire of 1,350 rounds per minute at a muzzle velocity of 3,379 ft/sec.

Ammunition types include AP, HEI, SAPHEI and TP and the KCA can deliver a total of 22.5 strikes/sec resulting in an impact mass of 0.6 slugs/sec. In the SM-27S, the cannon may be provided with over 625 rounds of additional ammunition contained within an expanded ammunition drum located aft of the forward cockpit.

A variety of alternate 30mm cannons may be fitted within the port fuselage cannon fairing. These cannons include the General Dynamics GAU-13/A 30mm. Furthermore, a variety of cannons and machine guns may be carried within the nose/radome of the MACHETE provided the aircraft is not fitted with optional radar/sensor systems. Carriage of machine guns and cannons within the MACHETE nose may significantly alter the standard avionics configuration due to volume constraints associated with weapon and ammunition drum packaging. Overall, the MACHETE offers a flexible weapons platform providing a variety of options.

Up to 5,250 lbs of expendable, external stores and ordinance are carried on a total of seven external hardpoints consisting of six wing mounted and one fuselage centerline mounted pylons equipped with NATO standard 14-inch and 28-inch lug suspension.

Of the seven hardpoints, three are rated to 1,000 lbs and four are rated to 2,500 lbs maximum external carriage capacity at a +7.5 g load factor. Four of the external wing hardpoints are plumbed for external fuel tanks.

The MACHETE is designed for air-to-ground missions, employing ordinance including the AGM-65, GBU-32, CBU-97, CBU-59, BLU-107 and additional stores. Air-to-Air capability is provided through the carriage of AIM-9 and similar passive homing/IR AAMs. The MACHETE is capable of LANTIRN, LITENING and ECM pod carriage and employs a MIL-STD-1760 Weapon Interface Data Bus. Weapons release is conducted through a control column gun trigger switch and weapon release button for air-to-air/air-to-ground.

SM-27S/T at Stavatti.com Link

SM-27 Gallery and Literature


Though it always remained as a Conceptual Idea..

But good degin..

 

[Kunal Biswas]

http://www.aviationnews.eu/2009/09/03/hawker-beechcraft-gains-faa-certification-of-new-t-6b-military-trainer-aircraft/http://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/at-6b-light-attack/

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Home | www.802u.com

 

[Kunal Biswas]

You don't need, A dedicated Run way..

 

[Kunal Biswas]

[h=1]A-29 SUPER TUCANO WINS AIR FORCE BID FOR LIGHT AIR SUPPORT MISSION[/h]

Sierra Nevada and its major partner Embraer have been awarded a firm-fixed price contract for $355.1 million for the U.S. Air Force's Light Air Support (LAS) aircraft program; but competitor Hawker Beechcraft indicated it will continue to fight the move in court.
Hawker, the Pentagon and Sierra and Embraer variously announced the award Dec. 30, including dueling press statements between the prime competitors over what could become a federal court case regarding USAF contract procedures, the fate of Hawker Beechcraft and the future of U.S. efforts to train allied air force pilots, starting in Afghanistan.


According to a Pentagon announcement, issued after regular trading closed on U.S. stock markets, the five-year award is for 20 "non-developmental aircraft procured for conducting advanced flight training, surveillance, air interdiction and close air support."
As described by the contract announcement, "The LAS aircraft is a single-engine turboprop fixed-wing aircraft with tricycle, retractable landing gear, and tandem two-place pressurized cockpit with ejection seats, capable of operating from semi-prepared air fields."
The Hawker AT-6 and Embraer Super Tucano were evaluated by the Air Force in a flyoff conducted in January 2011. Sierra is the A-29 Super Tucano's U.S. lead in the LAS competition, and final preparation will occur in Jacksonville, Fla. In a press statement Sierra and Embraer executives hailed their win.


""We are ready to support the LAS mission immediately," said Luiz Carlos Aguiar, President Embraer Defense and Security. "This is a tremendous opportunity for Embraer, the citizens of Florida and the thousands of employees who will be part of our supply chain."
"We are honored by this decision and the opportunity to serve our country," said Vice President of ISR Business Development Taco Gilbert. "We believe in the goals of the Light Air Support mission and are proud to be able to support the United States in its partner-building efforts in Afghanistan and elsewhere around the world. American warfighters, American workers, and our partner nations all win with this award."


Embraer will provide the A-29 Super Tucano aircraft, simulators and planning stations, and spare parts. Sierra will provide in-field logistic support and pilot and maintenance training. The companies said more than 70 U.S. suppliers in 21 states will supply parts or services, and at least 1,200 U.S. jobs will be supported through this contract.
Earlier in the day, Hawker said the firm had learned from Justice Department attorneys at a U.S. Court of Federal Claims hearing that the Air Force apparently awarded its Light Air Support (LAS) aircraft contract to Sierra Nevada and Brazilian airframe manufacturer Embraer on Dec. 22.


Furthermore, as of early Dec. 30 government officials apparently had elected not to make public the contract award, although Dec. 28 court transcripts confirmed the fact, according to Hawker.
The lag prompted Bill Boisture, Hawker chairman and CEO, to say, "This is yet another example of the Air Force's lack of transparency throughout this competition." Hawker filed suit with the Court because it was declined a review of why it was disqualified from the LAS competition. "With this development, it now seems even clearer that the Air Force intended to award the contract to Embraer from early in this process."


Hawker's AT-6 LAS bid, a beefed up and more powerful version of its T-6 Texan II trainer, faced stiff competition from the Embraer EMB-314 Super Tucano fielded through Sierra, during the LAS competition. The AT-6 is a newcomer to counterinsurgency warfare and the LAS program would have been its first opportunity for combat experience. Super Tucano, in contrast, has been on active duty for several years with the armed forces of Brazil and Colombia, among other nations, and it is a veteran LAS combat aircraft.
As Aviation Week & Space Technology reports in its Jan. 2, 2012, edition, the outcome of the legal battle could directly affect Hawker's future. Despite the profits from military sales, the company has posted cumulative operating losses of nearly $1 billion since 2009, and its core market of business jets is not expected to rebound significantly until at least 2013. And unlike other business jet manufacturers such as Cessna, which is owned by Textron, and Gulfstream, a unit of General Dynamics, Hawker does not have the backstop of a large corporate parent. Investment bank Goldman Sachs and Canadian buyout firm Onex Corp. purchased Hawker in 2007 from Raytheon for $3.3 billion.


In recent months, there has been widespread speculation that the company's owners could try to recoup part of that investment by selling off some or all of its operations in pieces, with the military segment going to a U.S. buyer and the civil aircraft unit sold to an entity in China, which is trying to become a player in the business and general aviation market. But if the company does not win the LAS competition, its military line would be less attractive.

- with Joseph C. Anselmo in Washington

Sierra, Embraer Win USAF LAS; Hawker Fights | AVIATION WEEK


Built for the Mission : A-29 Super Tucano News

Continued