Cessna builds a tactical jet
09-24-2013, 04:30 AM
#41
Moderator
Thread Starter
Joined APC: May 2006
Position: ATP, CFI etc.
Posts: 6,056
The brass at Textron-Airland apparently think a manned Cessna tactical jet is going to sell more than an equivalent UAV. Good question. This jet is not a response to a request for proposal (RFP) as far as I know, so it is based on some sort of entrepreneurial calculus at Textron. Even when an aircraft is based on an RFP there is no guarantee it will be purchased, and the target customers for this one have the freedom to choose their own hardware. I think it is an attempt create a market for an airplane where a UAV tends to be the preferred platform.
...jet of choice for border patrol, air defense operations, counter narcotics, and maritime surveillance—especially Air National Guard missions...
...jet of choice for border patrol, air defense operations, counter narcotics, and maritime surveillance—especially Air National Guard missions...
09-24-2013, 08:07 PM
#43
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2013
Position: FO
Posts: 627
Fire Scout is alive and well, conducting deployments, and currently sapping department head slots from my community. I think the ideal role is to throw 2 scouts and one H-60 on a cruiser or destroyer and call it a great compromise (no sarcasm), but they have dedicated fire scout boats with languishing qualified aviators. I would love to know the thought process behind that. I feel the X-47 will follow a different path. There will always be a need for manned fighter/attack aircraft, but the need will be lower. I foresee mixed squadrons on Navy carriers within 10-12 years.
On to the Scorpion...great, as long as you can either (a)make it a joint platform with true multi-role capability and purpose, or (b)sell it to SOCOM. This aircraft fills a niche that is no longer relevant. It's price does make it especially appealing, however, and will certainly attract the interest of foreign military sales.
09-25-2013, 05:03 PM
#44
Moderator
Thread Starter
Joined APC: May 2006
Position: ATP, CFI etc.
Posts: 6,056
Private sector, no dog in the fight. I used to want a couple of the bizjet manufacturers in Wichita to obtain light attack airplane contracts so I could work on them, but I left Wichita in the meantime. I have a high regard for Cessna Aircraft Company and I think they need this airplane for diversification.
10-06-2013, 07:19 PM
#45
On Reserve
Joined APC: Jun 2013
Position: AV-8B
Posts: 17
I was not aware anyone thought High/Hot/Heavy was an issue for the A-10. If you do, try crunching the numbers on a Harrier and you will never think that about the HOG again.
A friend of mine, who flew A-37s in Vietnam, was a consultant on this program.
If the Air Staff succeeds in killing the A-10 (which I think is a mistake), I hope they replace it with something like this. The Hawg is awesome for CAS, but is limited by hot/high performance in Afghanistan.
A high-aspect wing like this could solve several problems:
1. Takeoff with full armament
2. Loiter time
3. Operating cost
4. Ability to engage close-in fights due to slower final speed
If the Air Staff succeeds in killing the A-10 (which I think is a mistake), I hope they replace it with something like this. The Hawg is awesome for CAS, but is limited by hot/high performance in Afghanistan.
A high-aspect wing like this could solve several problems:
1. Takeoff with full armament
2. Loiter time
3. Operating cost
4. Ability to engage close-in fights due to slower final speed
12-04-2013, 06:22 AM
#46
Moderator
Thread Starter
Joined APC: May 2006
Position: ATP, CFI etc.
Posts: 6,056
Scorpion light strike aircraft completes pre-flight taxi trial
Textron [Cessna- AirLand] has released video footage showing taxi testing with its Scorpion demonstrator, just days before the type's expected first flight. Performed in Wichita, Kansas on 25 November, the event involved the twin turbofan-powered tactical strike concept, which has been in development since early 2012 by the Textron AirLand venture, also involving AirLand Enterprises
Textron [Cessna- AirLand] has released video footage showing taxi testing with its Scorpion demonstrator, just days before the type's expected first flight. Performed in Wichita, Kansas on 25 November, the event involved the twin turbofan-powered tactical strike concept, which has been in development since early 2012 by the Textron AirLand venture, also involving AirLand Enterprises
12-09-2013, 11:56 AM
#47
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2013
Posts: 360
My 2 cents:
1. OV-10X
2. Air Tractor
3. Super Tucano
4. AT-6
The Scorpion was a paper project when I was on the sidelines during the LAA proposal. Looks like they've come along, but I still see limitations.
Not that any of this will see traction, at least in the AF. The Navy seems much more interested, as noted with the OV-10G+/Combat Dragon II project.
1. OV-10X
2. Air Tractor
3. Super Tucano
4. AT-6
The Scorpion was a paper project when I was on the sidelines during the LAA proposal. Looks like they've come along, but I still see limitations.
Not that any of this will see traction, at least in the AF. The Navy seems much more interested, as noted with the OV-10G+/Combat Dragon II project.
12-11-2013, 08:16 AM
#48
Moderator
Thread Starter
Joined APC: May 2006
Position: ATP, CFI etc.
Posts: 6,056
Textron knows there is not a ready market for this airplane in the US, however the situation was Cessna owned by Textron nearly went bankrupt during the Great Recession because they had a poorly diversified product line with no government products. So, maybe no ready customer is there now, but if you cannot sell something you do not have. Textron smartly realizes they need a ready military airplane in case a customer shows up and especially if (more like when) another recession hits. Historically Cessna always had military products in its line, only in the last 20 years they got away from making them in favor of the higher profits found in bizjets and small props. It was not a wise policy and they paid dearly for it in 2009.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Textron [Cessna] AirLand Scorpion Has “Doubtful” Future In The U.S.
Dave Majumdar at the War Is Boring (12/11) blog writes about the Textron AirLand Scorpion jet fighter, a jet designed for “low-intensity warfare” that few in the public has heard of and that has “doubtful” prospects when it comes to the Defense Department purchasing it. Textron CEO Scott Donnelly said if there were a customer, it could come into production by 2015. However, Majumdar questions why the U.S. Air Force would purchase the plane when it is currently trying to end the “much more sophisticated and capable A-10” program and is not looking for “anything” in that same category. Majumdar thinks there may be foreign buyers, but reiterates it is still “highly doubtful” the U.S. will purchase it.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
[Textron-Cessna-AirLand] Scorpion Jet Takes Flight
(P. Bergqvist, 12/12/2013, Flying) This morning, Textron AirLand successfully completed the first flight of the Scorpion, the company's new tactical twinjet, which was announced earlier this year. The Scorpion took off from McConnell Air Force Base in Wichita, Kansas, and flew for 1.4 hours. "The flight was completed according to plan," said test pilot Dan Hinson. "Having flown many tactical aircraft throughout my 23-year career with the U.S. Navy and with other aircraft manufacturers, I can say that the Scorpion compares very favorably to more costly aircraft currently used for low-threat missions."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Textron [Cessna] AirLand Scorpion Has “Doubtful” Future In The U.S.
Dave Majumdar at the War Is Boring (12/11) blog writes about the Textron AirLand Scorpion jet fighter, a jet designed for “low-intensity warfare” that few in the public has heard of and that has “doubtful” prospects when it comes to the Defense Department purchasing it. Textron CEO Scott Donnelly said if there were a customer, it could come into production by 2015. However, Majumdar questions why the U.S. Air Force would purchase the plane when it is currently trying to end the “much more sophisticated and capable A-10” program and is not looking for “anything” in that same category. Majumdar thinks there may be foreign buyers, but reiterates it is still “highly doubtful” the U.S. will purchase it.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
[Textron-Cessna-AirLand] Scorpion Jet Takes Flight
(P. Bergqvist, 12/12/2013, Flying) This morning, Textron AirLand successfully completed the first flight of the Scorpion, the company's new tactical twinjet, which was announced earlier this year. The Scorpion took off from McConnell Air Force Base in Wichita, Kansas, and flew for 1.4 hours. "The flight was completed according to plan," said test pilot Dan Hinson. "Having flown many tactical aircraft throughout my 23-year career with the U.S. Navy and with other aircraft manufacturers, I can say that the Scorpion compares very favorably to more costly aircraft currently used for low-threat missions."
12-15-2013, 06:57 PM
#50
Moderate Moderator
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: Curator at Static Display
Posts: 5,681
COIN Aircraft
As a former OV-10 guy, I hope they don't go with the OV-10G.
Horribly draggy airplane. Rugged, but handling in roll is horrid. The original airplane had a wingspan about 10 feet shorter, and only spoilers (half-circle roll-up type) for lateral control.
After the prototype flew---poorly---they added extra wing, and installed ailerons in the new section. It still has the spoilers.
VERY heavy in roll, despite servo-tabs. Non-boosted controls. Rudder and elevator are OK.
Un-pressurized cockpit. The seats go through the glass in an ejection with a canopy-piercer; no explosive cord. NO air conditioning of any sort. There is a gracious "Air Scoop" in front of the windscreen to bring in fresh jungle or desert air, depending on your theater of operations.
It gets pretty freaking hot in there.
Because the cockpit is between the two props, it is very loud. We were told it is over 120 db inside the cockpit.
Pros: rugged. Con: the above, plus engine-out can be a handful. STOL capabilities usually can't be used because if you lose an engine, you are well below single-engine control speed. (We weren't allowed to do short field takeoffs or landings of the shortest sort by regulation in the Air Force).
The Tucano and AT-6: I'm friends with an Air Force guy who worked on the Tucano project with the Marines and Navy at Fallon. He said those on the project (himself included) who flew both preferred the Tucano, even though the systems were added-in piecemeal. He said the AT-6 had that polished look to it, but was over-engineered and contracted, making it ridiculously expensive. The Tucano factory just added in the stuff the test group asked for, even if wires were running down the cockpit.
I think both those airplanes are a little too small for weapons ground-clearance (for loading and landing). I'd like to see something a little bigger, but not quite as big as a Skyraider.
I still like the Piper Enforcer; essentially a turboprop P-51. It has nine hardpoints. Piper PA-48 Enforcer - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Want to go with another product from North American Aviation? Make a turboprop P-82 Twin Mustang. If engined with two PT-6s, it could carry 4000lbs of ordnance, top speed over 400 knots, range of 2000 miles, and fly at 35,000 ft.
It would be nice to have the extra engine when droning over the mountains of Afghanistan.
North American F-82 Twin Mustang - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Horribly draggy airplane. Rugged, but handling in roll is horrid. The original airplane had a wingspan about 10 feet shorter, and only spoilers (half-circle roll-up type) for lateral control.
After the prototype flew---poorly---they added extra wing, and installed ailerons in the new section. It still has the spoilers.
VERY heavy in roll, despite servo-tabs. Non-boosted controls. Rudder and elevator are OK.
Un-pressurized cockpit. The seats go through the glass in an ejection with a canopy-piercer; no explosive cord. NO air conditioning of any sort. There is a gracious "Air Scoop" in front of the windscreen to bring in fresh jungle or desert air, depending on your theater of operations.
It gets pretty freaking hot in there.
Because the cockpit is between the two props, it is very loud. We were told it is over 120 db inside the cockpit.
Pros: rugged. Con: the above, plus engine-out can be a handful. STOL capabilities usually can't be used because if you lose an engine, you are well below single-engine control speed. (We weren't allowed to do short field takeoffs or landings of the shortest sort by regulation in the Air Force).
The Tucano and AT-6: I'm friends with an Air Force guy who worked on the Tucano project with the Marines and Navy at Fallon. He said those on the project (himself included) who flew both preferred the Tucano, even though the systems were added-in piecemeal. He said the AT-6 had that polished look to it, but was over-engineered and contracted, making it ridiculously expensive. The Tucano factory just added in the stuff the test group asked for, even if wires were running down the cockpit.
I think both those airplanes are a little too small for weapons ground-clearance (for loading and landing). I'd like to see something a little bigger, but not quite as big as a Skyraider.
I still like the Piper Enforcer; essentially a turboprop P-51. It has nine hardpoints. Piper PA-48 Enforcer - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Want to go with another product from North American Aviation? Make a turboprop P-82 Twin Mustang. If engined with two PT-6s, it could carry 4000lbs of ordnance, top speed over 400 knots, range of 2000 miles, and fly at 35,000 ft.
It would be nice to have the extra engine when droning over the mountains of Afghanistan.
North American F-82 Twin Mustang - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
turk
Flight Schools and Training
29
01-13-2012 05:58 AM
