Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
PSA
Member Login

Site Notices
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Posted: 9/17/2013 9:15:50 AM EDT
It looks like an F-15, an A-10, and an A-6 all blended together.  Interesting.

http://www.cnn.com/2013/09/17/tech/innovation/new-scorpion-attack-jet/index.html?hpt=hp_t3
Link Posted: 9/17/2013 9:23:23 AM EDT
Looks like a maintenance hog
Link Posted: 9/17/2013 9:42:15 AM EDT
Only holds 3000 lbs of munitions?

That's not much at all
Link Posted: 9/17/2013 9:53:16 AM EDT
"In an impressively short time, the joint venture has designed and built
a capable and mission-ready aircraft with no up-front government
funding."



So the military won't pick it up, and Bushmaster will put out a really heavy overpriced version?  

Link Posted: 9/17/2013 11:44:12 AM EDT
Been several light attack aircraft over the decades; Folland Gnat/Ajeet, Italian/Brazilian AMX, to some extant the F-5 series.   Given the enormous cost of new fighter aircraft this one might have a market in the second or thrid world air forces.  I doubt the US has any interest in it, other than as a foreign aid item (like the Cessna Caravans we gave Iraq).
Link Posted: 9/17/2013 11:53:13 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Star_Scream:
Only holds 3000 lbs of munitions?

That's not much at all
View Quote


That's at least 600 rounds of 20mm, and 6-10 HellFire missiles and/or the new laser guided 5" Zuni or 2.75" rockets, with the option of two to four LGB's in the 250-500 pound class. In this day of guided weapons, you don't need nearly as much ordnance to kill each target. The key to success here is higher speeds to the turboprop ground attack aircraft and hopefully loiter times of at least two hours at a max combat radius of 300MN.
Link Posted: 9/17/2013 12:24:55 PM EDT
Considering they were going for as cheap as possible, the fact that it'd a twin really surprises me.  I guess engineers consider redundancy to be critical on aircraft that will be subjected to potential ground fire...small arms and such.

I do not see this thing surviving in SAM territory, and if a current generation first-world enemy fighter gets near it, goodbye.  It won't be put into that environment, though.





Link Posted: 9/17/2013 12:38:06 PM EDT
Link Posted: 9/17/2013 12:38:43 PM EDT
This also seems like something Iran would design - it tries to look high-tech with canted verticals, etc. but has traditional control surfaces and a straight wing.  

It seems like a fun alternative to a Citation Mustang though.
Link Posted: 9/17/2013 12:44:51 PM EDT
As far as when it's flown by pilots with stars and stripes on flight suits, I imagine this being used on drug interdiction missions and to illegally monitor and/or kill US citizens, nothing more.
Link Posted: 9/17/2013 12:53:29 PM EDT

Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By ChiefPilot:


This also seems like something Iran would design - it tries to look high-tech with canted verticals, etc. but has traditional control surfaces and a straight wing.  



It seems like a fun alternative to a Citation Mustang though.
View Quote




The ENTIRE point of the straight wing & traditional controls surfaces is for slow speed maneuvers which is what is needed for CAS.  You also want to be able to glide around at altitude and loiter over the field for long periods, you need efficient wings and deltas & swept wings are not remotely efficient at low speeds.  





The design is purposeful for the stated mission type.





In the age of our High Tech AirForce, I doubt they'll be impressed though; and I'll surely miss the A-10 and it's GAU-8...



 
Link Posted: 9/17/2013 1:11:59 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By blwngazkit:
The ENTIRE point of the straight wing & traditional controls surfaces is for slow speed maneuvers which is what is needed for CAS.  You also want to be able to glide around at altitude and loiter over the field for long periods, you need efficient wings and deltas & swept wings are not remotely efficient at low speeds.  


The design is purposeful for the stated mission type.


In the age of our High Tech AirForce, I doubt they'll be impressed though; and I'll surely miss the A-10 and it's GAU-8...
 
View Quote



I get that - high aspect ratio trumps low for the mission.   Turboprops also trump turbofans for that mission.    I predict this design goes nowhere.
Link Posted: 9/17/2013 1:13:14 PM EDT
Read the first few sentences and scrolled up to make sure this wasn't a Duffleblog article
Link Posted: 9/17/2013 2:01:54 PM EDT
If the politics of cas would get put if the way, this could be used something like the ov10 in project imminent fury
Link Posted: 9/17/2013 4:25:16 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/17/2013 4:26:35 PM EDT by ChiefPilot]
Full of derp (emphasis added):

He indicated that worldwide fleets of A-37s, as well as the US Air Force’s fleets of A-10s and F-15Cs, could be platforms replaced by the Scorpion. Both those Air Force platforms are potentially on the cutting block due to sequestration.
View Quote


http://www.defensenews.com/article/20130916/DEFREG02/309160016/Textron-unveils-light-attack-Scorpion


I imagine pilots of MiG-29, SU-27, and other platforms the world over shall lose sleep over this startling revelation.
Link Posted: 9/17/2013 5:43:09 PM EDT
Yeah, I agree the MIG jockeys won't have a panic attack. However, the stated purpose is for low threat environments, patrolling, etc. I vote for it'll die on the vine since the brass hats didn't think of it.
Link Posted: 9/18/2013 2:02:20 AM EDT
Too bad they couldnt make the airplane adaptable so that you could adjust the angle of the wings on the ground for different missions.  Like a ground only adjustable propeller it would be neat.  You could use it for cas and then make it more efficient for long range ferry.
Link Posted: 9/18/2013 2:09:06 AM EDT
Link Posted: 9/18/2013 6:49:51 AM EDT
Sounds like about the same mission as this...

Crop dusters go to war

Link Posted: 9/18/2013 7:12:39 AM EDT
looks like the bird from HOtshots movie.
Link Posted: 9/18/2013 7:40:46 AM EDT
First thing that popped into my head was 'T-X'.
Link Posted: 9/18/2013 7:57:27 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By osprey21:
http://i.imgur.com/nhoeIqJ.jpg
View Quote


Maybe they'll sell them to civilians :)
Link Posted: 9/18/2013 9:44:53 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History



I AM PARTICULARLY FOND OF THE EXTERNAL SUN VISOR. My Kubota tractor has some thing similar, but it cautions against going too fast and not using it as protection from falling objects.
Link Posted: 9/18/2013 10:11:29 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By ElSupremo:



I AM PARTICULARLY FOND OF THE EXTERNAL SUN VISOR. My Kubota tractor has some thing similar, but it cautions against going too fast and not using it as protection from falling objects.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By ElSupremo:



I AM PARTICULARLY FOND OF THE EXTERNAL SUN VISOR. My Kubota tractor has some thing similar, but it cautions against going too fast and not using it as protection from falling objects.



Yes, and notice the airfoil shape.  It adds 1500 pounds to max payload.  
Link Posted: 9/18/2013 12:49:40 PM EDT
Link Posted: 9/18/2013 1:05:08 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By F224:


That's at least 600 rounds of 20mm, and 6-10 HellFire missiles and/or the new laser guided 5" Zuni or 2.75" rockets, with the option of two to four LGB's in the 250-500 pound class. In this day of guided weapons, you don't need nearly as much ordnance to kill each target. The key to success here is higher speeds to the turboprop ground attack aircraft and hopefully loiter times of at least two hours at a max combat radius of 300MN.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By F224:
Originally Posted By Star_Scream:
Only holds 3000 lbs of munitions?

That's not much at all


That's at least 600 rounds of 20mm, and 6-10 HellFire missiles and/or the new laser guided 5" Zuni or 2.75" rockets, with the option of two to four LGB's in the 250-500 pound class. In this day of guided weapons, you don't need nearly as much ordnance to kill each target. The key to success here is higher speeds to the turboprop ground attack aircraft and hopefully loiter times of at least two hours at a max combat radius of 300MN.


Aviation Week posted the spec's in a recent article. Looks similar to the early A-4 from an ordnance standpoint. Internal is 3,000 pounds plus 6,100 pounds on six hardpoints, dual optic mounts on lower fuselage, 425kts top speed and five hours of internal fuel with two seats. Not for high threat environments and better redundancy than any single engine turbo prop or training jet. Projected operating cost is $3000 per hour, less than one sixth of the cost of an F-16 and an even smaller fraction by a wide margin than any other current or future USAF jet.
Link Posted: 9/18/2013 3:00:43 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Sig_Prude:
Considering they were going for as cheap as possible, the fact that it'd a twin really surprises me.  I guess engineers consider redundancy to be critical on aircraft that will be subjected to potential ground fire...small arms and such.

I do not see this thing surviving in SAM territory, and if a current generation first-world enemy fighter gets near it, goodbye.  It won't be put into that environment, though.





View Quote


It has a ceiling well above what would be required for 99% of the Sam threat we fly against.  CAS usually assumes air superiority.  I think it would be perfect for the last two wars we fought.  Not sure what the take off and land distance is, but if low this could be a great asset.  Use fighters/missiles to get rid of the med and high alt threats.  Then for next 99% of the war use these.  Save money and wear and the expensive stuff.
Link Posted: 9/18/2013 3:02:28 PM EDT
Oh yeah, forgot to add twin engine would be nice when the occasional manpad gets used.
Link Posted: 9/21/2013 2:28:03 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Sig_Prude:
Considering they were going for as cheap as possible, the fact that it'd a twin really surprises me.  I guess engineers consider redundancy to be critical on aircraft that will be subjected to potential ground fire...small arms and such.

I do not see this thing surviving in SAM territory, and if a current generation first-world enemy fighter gets near it, goodbye.  It won't be put into that environment, though.





View Quote


Wish the US Governmet and Lockheed saw it that way with the FTurdy5.

Link Posted: 9/21/2013 2:31:25 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History

I fucking want one.
Link Posted: 9/21/2013 2:58:10 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Andrew123:
Oh yeah, forgot to add twin engine would be nice when the occasional manpad gets used.
View Quote

I cannot understand why this threat of SAMs isn't a problem for single engine Army helicopters.
It's the primary argument I've seen against LAAR-type aircraft.

Oh, and not having an anti-satellite capability is a real downer for this aircraft, but I guess it looks good at air shows, so maybe it's a wash.
Link Posted: 9/21/2013 3:06:56 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By ziarifleman:

I cannot understand why this threat of SAMs isn't a problem for single engine Army helicopters.
It's the primary argument I've seen against LAAR-type aircraft.

Oh, and not having an anti-satellite capability is a real downer for this aircraft, but I guess it looks good at air shows, so maybe it's a wash.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By ziarifleman:
Originally Posted By Andrew123:
Oh yeah, forgot to add twin engine would be nice when the occasional manpad gets used.

I cannot understand why this threat of SAMs isn't a problem for single engine Army helicopters.
It's the primary argument I've seen against LAAR-type aircraft.

Oh, and not having an anti-satellite capability is a real downer for this aircraft, but I guess it looks good at air shows, so maybe it's a wash.


How does "anti-satellite" capability work in aircraft?
Link Posted: 9/21/2013 3:10:54 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Sig_Prude:


How does "anti-satellite" capability work in aircraft?
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Sig_Prude:
Originally Posted By ziarifleman:
Originally Posted By Andrew123:
Oh yeah, forgot to add twin engine would be nice when the occasional manpad gets used.

I cannot understand why this threat of SAMs isn't a problem for single engine Army helicopters.
It's the primary argument I've seen against LAAR-type aircraft.

Oh, and not having an anti-satellite capability is a real downer for this aircraft, but I guess it looks good at air shows, so maybe it's a wash.


How does "anti-satellite" capability work in aircraft?

It's an essential capability for all newly developed aircraft.

Otherwise they're not worth buying.
Link Posted: 9/21/2013 3:31:02 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By ziarifleman:

I cannot understand why this threat of SAMs isn't a problem for single engine Army helicopters.
It's the primary argument I've seen against LAAR-type aircraft.

Oh, and not having an anti-satellite capability is a real downer for this aircraft, but I guess it looks good at air shows, so maybe it's a wash.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By ziarifleman:
Originally Posted By Andrew123:
Oh yeah, forgot to add twin engine would be nice when the occasional manpad gets used.

I cannot understand why this threat of SAMs isn't a problem for single engine Army helicopters.
It's the primary argument I've seen against LAAR-type aircraft.

Oh, and not having an anti-satellite capability is a real downer for this aircraft, but I guess it looks good at air shows, so maybe it's a wash.


who said it wasn't an issue.  I think manpads are an issue for all low slow fliers.    
Link Posted: 9/21/2013 3:40:16 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By ziarifleman:

It's an essential capability for all newly developed aircraft.

Otherwise they're not worth buying.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By ziarifleman:
Originally Posted By Sig_Prude:
Originally Posted By ziarifleman:
Originally Posted By Andrew123:
Oh yeah, forgot to add twin engine would be nice when the occasional manpad gets used.

I cannot understand why this threat of SAMs isn't a problem for single engine Army helicopters.
It's the primary argument I've seen against LAAR-type aircraft.

Oh, and not having an anti-satellite capability is a real downer for this aircraft, but I guess it looks good at air shows, so maybe it's a wash.


How does "anti-satellite" capability work in aircraft?

It's an essential capability for all newly developed aircraft.

Otherwise they're not worth buying.


Does this mean they can launch anti-sat missiles?
Link Posted: 9/21/2013 3:47:14 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By M82Assault:

I fucking want one.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By M82Assault:

I fucking want one.


Oh, hell yeah.  Rides like this, and the one in the OP are the solution to the pilot shortage.  Everyone sees drones as the future, but the biggest, and insurmountable problem with them is that nobody wants to fly them.  The idea is to not risk lives, put pilots want to fly airplanes.
Link Posted: 9/21/2013 3:55:08 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By ske714:


Oh, hell yeah.  Rides like this, and the one in the OP are the solution to the pilot shortage.  Everyone sees drones as the future, but the biggest, and insurmountable problem with them is that nobody wants to fly them.  The idea is to not risk lives, put pilots want to fly airplanes.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By ske714:
Originally Posted By M82Assault:

I fucking want one.


Oh, hell yeah.  Rides like this, and the one in the OP are the solution to the pilot shortage.  Everyone sees drones as the future, but the biggest, and insurmountable problem with them is that nobody wants to fly them.  The idea is to not risk lives, put pilots want to fly airplanes.


Sad fact is that it's only going to be a few more short years before we're at the point where the only people actually riding in aircraft are those who's only goal is to get from point A to point B.
Link Posted: 9/21/2013 5:31:20 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By ziarifleman:

I cannot understand why this threat of SAMs isn't a problem for single engine Army helicopters.
It's the primary argument I've seen against LAAR-type aircraft.

Oh, and not having an anti-satellite capability is a real downer for this aircraft, but I guess it looks good at air shows, so maybe it's a wash.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By ziarifleman:
Originally Posted By Andrew123:
Oh yeah, forgot to add twin engine would be nice when the occasional manpad gets used.

I cannot understand why this threat of SAMs isn't a problem for single engine Army helicopters.
It's the primary argument I've seen against LAAR-type aircraft.

Oh, and not having an anti-satellite capability is a real downer for this aircraft, but I guess it looks good at air shows, so maybe it's a wash.


Because in high threat environments, Army helicopters operate nap-of-the-earth, below the minimum engagement altitude for 98% of all SAM's. But when down that low, we are at risk from small arms, anti-aircraft guns, conventional artillery and tank main guns.

That's why they pay us the big bucks! And we have no anti-satellite weapon capabilities...
Link Posted: 9/21/2013 5:36:45 PM EDT
Link Posted: 9/23/2013 3:29:56 PM EDT
Fire up the A-1 Skyraider production line.
Link Posted: 9/24/2013 3:47:01 AM EDT
What ever happened to the BD-10?

Link Posted: 9/24/2013 5:01:30 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Laser917:
What ever happened to the BD-10?

http://www.bd5.com/brothers2.jpg
View Quote



They kept crashing and coming apart in mid air.
Link Posted: 9/24/2013 5:08:06 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/24/2013 5:14:52 AM EDT by Cheesebeast]
517mph and a 3000 pound load?

What is the price of a P-51 adjusted for inflation?

ETA: $50,945 in 1945 unit cost
CPI adjusted for inflation: $661,936.88 in 2013

Link Posted: 9/24/2013 7:56:57 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Cheesebeast:
517mph and a 3000 pound load?

What is the price of a P-51 adjusted for inflation?

ETA: $50,945 in 1945 unit cost
CPI adjusted for inflation: $661,936.88 in 2013

View Quote


Yeah, I was thinking about a turboprop mustang, but I was afraid to mention it.
Link Posted: 9/24/2013 8:04:26 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By ske714:


Yeah, I was thinking about a turboprop mustang, but I was afraid to mention it.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By ske714:
Originally Posted By Cheesebeast:
517mph and a 3000 pound load?

What is the price of a P-51 adjusted for inflation?

ETA: $50,945 in 1945 unit cost
CPI adjusted for inflation: $661,936.88 in 2013



Yeah, I was thinking about a turboprop mustang, but I was afraid to mention it.

It needs to be a two-seater. And a more comprehensive avionics/sensor suite.

Then you pretty much have a Super Tucano.
Link Posted: 9/24/2013 8:30:47 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/24/2013 8:37:20 AM EDT by ske714]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By ziarifleman:

It needs to be a two-seater. And a more comprehensive avionics/sensor suite.

Then you pretty much have a Super Tucano.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By ziarifleman:
Originally Posted By ske714:
Originally Posted By Cheesebeast:
517mph and a 3000 pound load?

What is the price of a P-51 adjusted for inflation?

ETA: $50,945 in 1945 unit cost
CPI adjusted for inflation: $661,936.88 in 2013



Yeah, I was thinking about a turboprop mustang, but I was afraid to mention it.

It needs to be a two-seater. And a more comprehensive avionics/sensor suite.

Then you pretty much have a Super Tucano.


Link Posted: 9/24/2013 8:46:37 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/24/2013 8:50:17 AM EDT by Sinister]
I think it's a very cool concept aircraft -- which doesn't mean the Air Force will buy it.

They might if they keep sending rated pilots to UAVs and they see them bailing as soon as they reach service obligation.

I imagine it's pretty analogous to the A-37 Attack and FAC Tweets.


Vietnam

25 A-37As were sent to Vietnam in August 1967 under the "Combat Dragon" evaluation program, and flew from Bien Hoa Air Base on USAF "Air Commando" missions, including close air support, helicopter escort, FAC, and night interdiction. Combat loads included high-explosive bombs, cluster munition dispensers, unguided rocket packs, napalm tanks, and the SUU-11/A Minigun pod. For most missions, the aircraft also carried two additional external fuel tanks on the inner stores pylons.

A-37As flew thousands of sorties. None were lost to enemy fire, although two were wrecked in landing accidents. The A-37A was formally named the "Dragonfly", but most pilots called it the "Super Tweet". The Combat Dragon program was successful, but unsurprisingly the combat evaluation revealed some deficiencies. The most noticeable problem was that the aircraft lacked range and endurance. Other concerns were heavy control response during attack runs (the flight controls were not power-boosted) and the vulnerability of the aircraft's non-redundant flight control system.


An OA-37 Dragonfly aircraft armed with bombs over Edwards AFB, California

The USAF signed a contract with Cessna in early 1967 for an improved Super Tweet, designated the "A-37B". The initial order for 57 aircraft was quickly increased to 127. The A-37Bs were primarily intended to be supplied to the South Vietnamese Air Force (VNAF) as replacements for their Skyraiders. The A-37B prototype was rolled out in September 1967, with deliveries to the South Vietnamese beginning in 1968.

The A-37Bs were all newly built airframes. These were stronger than those of the A-37A, capable of pulling 6 g instead of 5, and were built to have a longer fatigue life of 4,000 hours. Field experience would demonstrate that 7,000 hours between overhauls could be tolerated.

The A-37B weighed almost twice as much as the T-37C. A remarkable fraction of the loaded weight, 5,800 lb (2,600 kg), could be external stores. In practice, the A-37B usually operated with at least two and sometimes four underwing fuel tanks to improve combat endurance.

To get this increased weight off the ground, the A-37B was fitted with General Electric J85-GE-17A engines, providing 2,850 lbf (12.7 kN) thrust each. These engines were canted slightly outward and downward to improve single-engine handling. Vietnam Air Commando pilots operating the A-37A found single-engine cruise an effective means of improving their flight endurance.

Modifications were made to control surfaces to improve handling. To improve aircraft and crew survivability, the A-37B was fitted with redundant elevator control runs that were placed as far apart as possible. The ejection seats were armored, the cockpit was lined with nylon flak curtains, and foam-filled self-sealing fuel tanks were installed.

The A-37 excelled at close air support. Its straight wings allowed it to engage targets 100 miles per hour slower than swept-wing fighters. The slower speed improved bombing accuracy, enabling pilots to achieve an average accuracy of 45 feet.

The A-37B added a refueling probe to the nose, leading to pipes wrapped around the lower lip of the canopy, for probe-and-drogue aerial refueling. This was an unusual fit for USAF aircraft, traditionally configured for boom refueling. Other improvements included updated avionics, a redesigned instrument panel to make the aircraft easier to fly from either seat, an automatic engine inlet de-icing system, and revised landing gear. Like its predecessors, the A-37B was not pressurized.

The A-37 required a relatively low amount of maintenance compared to contemporary fighters—only two hours of maintenance for each hour of flight time. This was partially due to multiple access panels in strategic locations.

The 20 mm GPU-2/A and AMD 30 mm cannon pods were tested with favorable results on the A-37B but reports indicate that such pods were either seldom or never used in operation.
View Quote
Link Posted: 9/24/2013 8:55:51 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By ske714:


View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By ske714:
Originally Posted By ziarifleman:
Originally Posted By ske714:
Originally Posted By Cheesebeast:
517mph and a 3000 pound load?

What is the price of a P-51 adjusted for inflation?

ETA: $50,945 in 1945 unit cost
CPI adjusted for inflation: $661,936.88 in 2013



Yeah, I was thinking about a turboprop mustang, but I was afraid to mention it.

It needs to be a two-seater. And a more comprehensive avionics/sensor suite.

Then you pretty much have a Super Tucano.




OK, 2x the capacity, plus 2x for the avionics/doohickeys/magic buttons and shit.

Would 4 x 661,936.88 = $2,647,747.52 cover it?

We are a bit thin these days but I think if we raid all the sofa cushions in all .gov offices we can buy at least a dozen.
Link Posted: 9/24/2013 9:01:48 AM EDT
But it still won't have stealth or anti-satellite capability.
Link Posted: 9/24/2013 9:08:12 AM EDT
Link Posted: 9/24/2013 9:22:53 AM EDT
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Top Top