Specifically, the idea that a relatively low performance airframe can serve better in the counter-insurgency (COIN) or the close air support role than something like the F-15, F-16, F-22, or F-35 JSF.Not only would lower performance aircraft tend to have better short and rough field capabilities, just as the A-10 Warthog currently does, but they would be able to loiter over the battlefield for a much longer time, as they are designed for this regime, unlike aircraft designed to operate above 30,000 feet and to reach supersonic speeds.
Case in point, the Combat Air Tractor, an aircraft based on Air Tractor's crop dusting aircraft.
It can take off and land off of rough airfields in less than 100m, and can loiter over the battle field for over 10 hours.(click slide show [top] for pictures of aircraft and weapons load outs)
The CAT also costs somewhere between $4 and $10 million dollars, as opposed to the $80-$200 million of a JSF, and it has been used in combat situations, spraying herbicide on coca fields and the like, and the aircraft is on the tarmac at the Paris air show.
While it would be an unlikely choice, there are also rumblings that the USAF is considering modifying their T-6 trainer for a similar role (bottom pic)
Personally, I'd favor something turbofan powered, because it could be designed with narrow-band stealth against radar guided AAA, but anything is better than the current plan, which is JSF's for everything.
0 comments :
Post a Comment