The Super Tucano is a COIN aircraft which is deemed suitable for Afghan forces, and the Texan II is the COIN aircraft found suitable by US politicians. While armed aircraft may be fine for Afghans, or the Marine Corps, not so for the US Army. There's an agreement or three.
USMC adopts OV-1 Mohawk
- Thread starter Burton K Wheeler
- Start date
The Super Tucano is a COIN aircraft which is deemed suitable for Afghan forces, and the Texan II is the COIN aircraft found suitable by US politicians. While armed aircraft may be fine for Afghans, or the Marine Corps, not so for the US Army. There's an agreement or three.
Burton K Wheeler
Moderator
And nothing low-tech or designed for CAS is deemed suitable for procurement by the Air Force, unless they're specifically doing it to spite the Army. See the A-10, developed just so the Army couldn't have a dedicated attack helicopter, and the C-27, which went straight from the assembly line to the desert just so the Army couldn't have more fixed-wing aircraft.
AD-1
8,000 pound war load (call it 7,000 since it will be necessary to add a LANTIRN pod. Depending on distance to OPAREA loiter up to 6+ hours (roughly 50% more than the OV-1). Proven combat record, tough as a $2 steak.
To this day the U.S. (and, frankly, most military forces) have been trying to come up with a better COIN Platform and have uniformly failed. The Super Tucano is a YAT-28 with wingtip tanks added and half the war load. The YAT-28E was rejected as being inferior to the AD-1.
YAT-28E
The Spad is as low tech as it gets. It would fairly easy to change it over to a turboshaft, assuming that was desired. The Lycoming T-55 series (the same engine series used in the YAT-28E) is smaller and considerably lighter than Wright R-3350 (1,800 pounds, which can be shifted to war load) and the aircraft balance would need to be adjusted.
Crying shame the aircraft was simply thrown away because it wasn't pointy.
Burton K Wheeler
Moderator
I didn't think about the inferiority in weapons load of the Tucano/AT-6 compared to the Skyraider. A perfect-world CAS aircraft would have to have the forward base ability of the OV-10 and Harrier, sensors and electronics comparable to the AH-64 if not more, a 20/25 mm gun and plenty of ammo for it, plus a bomb load at minimum that of the Harrier (4.5 tons) and preferably closer to that of the A-10 (8 tons). It should also be a high-wing turboprop with lots of loiter ability that can float above. Survivability of the airframe is the one thing from the A-10 we can sacrifice, since A-10s proved not particularly survivable in Iraq and adding more armor than the A-10 would probably be too much for any airframe.
All of that calls for something very different than a Tucano, though still cheaper than most jets or helicopters.
For a lot of reasons, I'm not particularly enamored of the A-10 as a CAS aircraft. Ultimately, a jet just isn't right for the job, and a lot of the things an A-10 can do that a turboprop couldn't should be done by an F-16 anyway.
What is more interesting is that a turboshaft engine swap allows fuel commonality, a straight spare parts logistical tail (the Lycoming T-55 series is the same engine used in the C-47) and the potential for a horsepower boost over the R-3350 allowing even more munitions to be carried, or an additional drop tank or two to increase loiter. The AD-1 also had variants with up to four crewmen (LOTS of space in that fuselage).
EDIT: NOT the C-47. The CH-47 Chinook helicopter. FML
Last edited:
Burton K Wheeler
Moderator
Interesting an updated Skyraider hasn't popped up in all the chat of future COIN aircraft, since every other post-WWII light attack plane has been suggested. There's even a manufacturer trying to sell the Air Force an updated OV-1 with an Apache chin gun turret and sensor ball, as well as updated OV-10 and A-37 variants being entered in the Light Support Aircraft competition.
The Spad was never really loved by the Air Force, unlike most of the other aircraft that have been brought up for possible reintroduction. That tracked back to the fact, stupid as it may seem, to the fact that instead of being the A-1 right from the start, it was the AD1 (Attack Douglas 1) meaning it was NAVY design. It was also shockingly old school, even in the early 50s it was a relic of a different era. It was about as far from "The Right Stuff" as you could get, something that both the USAF fighter AND bomber community hated. Even the fleet disliked it, every Skyraider was one less F4 or A6 it could into inventory. About the only folks who liked the aircraft were the pilots who flew it and Jolly Green Giant community since it was the aircraft that did the overwhelming majority of the close support for rescue missions.
PJs can't buy their own drinks in any bar frequented by pilots, more than one PJ paid for a Spad driver's beer.
Burton K Wheeler
Moderator
I think the Air Force hates pretty much all the light support aircraft that have been suggested, and the only thing they'd hate worse is the Army getting them instead. The biggest difference I see between the AD-1 and old-school attack aircraft like the Bronco and Dragonfly is size. The Mohawk is the only one that's been revived that's the same size. I suspect its advantage over the Skyraider is that it was in service much more recently and would require much smaller changes to be brought back, and its loiter characteristic making it useful for more than just the attack mission.
The engine which powered the YAT-28 is the same engine which you recommend for the A-1, with updates. It was designed by Anselm Franz, who built the Jumo 004 for Germany. The Turbo-Skyraider was powered by an Allison T-40, and was a failure. The main thing is that the C-47 isn't at all the same as the CH-47.
I can NOT believe I left off the "H" from the Chinook's designation.
Burton K Wheeler
Moderator
Hmm hmm hmm, someone had exactly my idea for an attack aircraft:
https://www.defensetech.org/2009/07/21/secret-program-works-to-field-seal-plane/
I'd read bits and pieces about this elsewhere. They used boneyard OV-10 Broncos for technology demonstrators as well.
EDIT: This article talks about Super Tucanos, but another thing I read said the vision was a cross between the A-1 and the OV-10, which is essentially what I described. Loiter and sensors of an OV-1/OV-10, weapons load of an A-1
https://www.defensetech.org/2009/07/21/secret-program-works-to-field-seal-plane/
I'd read bits and pieces about this elsewhere. They used boneyard OV-10 Broncos for technology demonstrators as well.
EDIT: This article talks about Super Tucanos, but another thing I read said the vision was a cross between the A-1 and the OV-10, which is essentially what I described. Loiter and sensors of an OV-1/OV-10, weapons load of an A-1
Burton K Wheeler
Moderator
So apparently Grumman did design* a tandem Mohawk a lot like @Just Leo 's idea for the LARA competition in 1963 which wound up giving us the OV-10 Bronco. I get the impression it wasn't selected because the original vision for LARA was a very light and simple aircraft with a 20-foot wingspan that would have a mission a bit more like an attack helicopter than anything else, but I'm not 100% sure if that was all there was to it.
I can't find a book reference to it that isn't just in passing. I did find while searching for more on the 134R that four-seat and tiltrotor Mohawks were also conceived but never built.
http://www.whatifmodellers.com/index.php?topic=30599.0
Here's another LARA thread from the same forum, this one just for CalBear: http://www.whatifmodellers.com/index.php?topic=41467.0
I can't find a book reference to it that isn't just in passing. I did find while searching for more on the 134R that four-seat and tiltrotor Mohawks were also conceived but never built.
http://www.whatifmodellers.com/index.php?topic=30599.0
Here's another LARA thread from the same forum, this one just for CalBear: http://www.whatifmodellers.com/index.php?topic=41467.0
Last edited:
The competition for the LARA was the Convair Model 48, shown here during testing of the failed Bloodhound Olfactory Sensor feature.(tongue in cheek) Convair were probably in a snit after buying all that political clout and still not getting the contract.
The Mohawk 134R was just a paper proposal, as was the THREE seat tandem cockpit (two & one) with an extra operator, as was the perceived but not conceived tilt-rotor. (no coitus involved) Or maybe there was? It was sort of Luft '46 without swastikas. Various engine combinations
too. Waste of paper. Convair wasted paper too.
Burton K Wheeler
Moderator
The original USMC concept for LARA was a fixed-wing jeep which could operate at the battalion level and be broken down to fit on the back of a truck. If the USMC had adopted the Mohawk in 1958 maybe an armed DHC Beaver or something like that could have been adopted for LARA instead. Or the USMC could have just used a helicopter.
Burton K Wheeler
Moderator
Do you mean it was a waste because Rockwell was going to win regardless, or because the Convair and Grumman designs were inherently flawed by comparison?
Last edited:
Depending on fuel consumption it could be the ultimate COIN aircraft, also be able to eat helos all day & night & 14 hours on Sunday.
Burton K Wheeler
Moderator
Probably a more fruitful source of AH speculation than the Mohawk, honestly. Did you see the three-seat version with a M197 20mm turret slaved to a FLIR ball that I linked upthread?
Archibald
Banned
I did a 1/72 scale model of the beast a decade ago. Still have it on my shelf. I do hope you can see the pictures, because Photobucket... well you know (bite his lips not to curse in French and English while Calbear is lurking around).
http://s68.photobucket.com/user/Archibaldlecter/library/Skyraider II?sort=3&page=1
http://photobucket.com/gallery/user...F0aDpTa3lyYWlkZXIgSUkvMTAzXzMwNDkuanBn/?ref=1
It was a fun build. The Skyraider I used as basis had a separate R-3350, and, interestingly enough, the T-56 fit the nose like a glove.
I added some small vertical surfaces (think Canadair CL-415) because torque, my god, with so much power and that huge propeller... contraprops would probably be better.
I put a crapload of A2G ammunitions under the wings, plus AIM-9s.
It should be able to fly pretty fast, clean, or haul an entire ammunition depot under its wings.
The final product looks very much like a Lance Armstrong Tucano, or a Rafael Nadal Pilatus PC-21.
http://s68.photobucket.com/user/Archibaldlecter/library/Skyraider II?sort=3&page=1
http://photobucket.com/gallery/user...F0aDpTa3lyYWlkZXIgSUkvMTAzXzMwNDkuanBn/?ref=1
It was a fun build. The Skyraider I used as basis had a separate R-3350, and, interestingly enough, the T-56 fit the nose like a glove.
I added some small vertical surfaces (think Canadair CL-415) because torque, my god, with so much power and that huge propeller... contraprops would probably be better.
I put a crapload of A2G ammunitions under the wings, plus AIM-9s.
It should be able to fly pretty fast, clean, or haul an entire ammunition depot under its wings.
The final product looks very much like a Lance Armstrong Tucano, or a Rafael Nadal Pilatus PC-21.
Last edited:
Burton K Wheeler
Moderator
I did a 1/72 scale model of the beast a decade ago. Still have it on my shelf. I do hope you can see the pictures, because Photobucket... well you know (bite his lips not to curse in French and English while Calbear is lurking around).
http://s68.photobucket.com/user/Archibaldlecter/library/Skyraider II?sort=3&page=1
http://photobucket.com/gallery/user...F0aDpTa3lyYWlkZXIgSUkvMTAzXzMwNDkuanBn/?ref=1
It was a fun build.
I added some small vertical surfaces because torque, my god, with so much power (5500 hp) and that huge propeller... contraprops would probably be better.
I put a crapload of A2G ammunitions under the wings, plus AIM-9s.
It looks very much like a Lance Armstrong Tucano, or a Rafael Nadal Pilatus PC-21.
Needs wingtip fuel tanks and underwing gunpods for full COIN style points.