Me likey...Budget Attack Jet

[Kokopelli]

I like that.. Sorta looks like an Crusader nose and cockpit, a Tomcat fuselage and a Advark wing.. all but tiny..

[FromMyColdDeadHand]

Looks cool, I'd rather have an OV-10X

http://www.ov-10bronco.net/Technical...rd_2009_01.pdf

[crusader377]

Kind of looks like an F-15's baby brother at 1/10th the hourly operating cost of an F-16.

I wonder if they'd consider making a civilian-legal version?

http://www.cnn.com/2013/09/17/tech/i...html?hpt=hp_t3

Cool idea and I think a light affordable coin aircraft definitely has a place in the USAF but it is never going to happen. The Pentagon is obsessed with the F-35 and are cutting large numbers of useful aircraft like the F-15C, A-10, B-1B etc.. along with scaling back future programs like the NGB in order to fund that white elephant. There is no way an aircraft like this will go anywhere no matter how affordable or capable it may be. Also, it is not built by the normal corporate welfare queens of the defense industry and has no political backing.

[HES]

All I gotta do is win the PowerBall tomorrow night

[Grand58742]

Novel concept, but looks to be pretty limited on ordnance load for a CAS type.

No unit coast available right now according to an Aviation Week article. $3000 an hour maintenance cost which isn't too bad, but when compared to the Super Tucano with roughly the same ordnance load at $500 an hour seems pricey. And the only thing this Scorpion has on the Tucano is speed so far. But overall it does appear to follow the LAAR parameters, but with no official RFP, Textron is kind of guessing at it.

It'll be interesting to see if this one "flies" (no pun intended) with allied and friendly forces. Survivability would have to be in the forefront of any design these days, especially one performing CAS, recon and interdiction type missions. But cost versus benefit, most friendly foreign air forces without a major need for speed would probably look towards a prop type since maintenance would be easier and costs would be kept down.

Just not seeing the USAF even for the ANG look into it seriously. Another air frame type that will cut into the F-35 budget? That'll fly like a lead balloon (pun intended this time).

[Gutshot John]

Honestly I don't care what the military applications are. They should be self-evident. Isn't the Tucano a prop? I'm not a pilot but I presume that makes it cheaper to operate.

Mostly I just want one.

[Grand58742]

Honestly I don't care what the military applications are. They should be self-evident. Isn't the Tucano a prop? I'm not a pilot but I presume that makes it cheaper to operate.

Mostly I just want one.

Meh, if you're going to go, go big:

http://www.raptoraviation.com/aircra...ges/Mig29.html

[Gutshot John]

Meh, if you're going to go, go big:

http://www.raptoraviation.com/aircra...ges/Mig29.html

Way more than I need.

Maintenance costs on Mig29s are obscene, nevermind you'd have to import every part you'd ever need (way more paperwork than I'd want). Of course I'd never trust my life to anything built, let alone designed during the Soviet era.

An "inexpensive" jet as described in the OP, that looks cool, is "reasonable" to operate (half the hourly cost of a G5), and will turn a few heads would be awesome if I ever won the lottery...of course that all assumes that they'd make a civilian model.

[jaxman7]

Looks cool, I'd rather have an OV-10X

http://www.ov-10bronco.net/Technical...rd_2009_01.pdf

Always loved the OV-10. Sort of a modern version of the P-61.

-Jax

[Army Chief]

Kind of like a modern day F5..

Didn't bother to mention it earlier, but my thoughts tracked along very similar lines. I suspect this machine will see some market successes abroad, but will likely be shunned by our own Air Force because it doesn't conform to any particular package of requirements that they created.

Role-wise, until the performance characteristics of the jet are really quantified, it is hard to know how well it might augment or replace anything already in service, anyway. Even with the obvious efficiencies involved, you still have the acquisition, fielding and maintenance/contract costs to consider, which might be a significant hurdle in the current environment.

Of course, I might not have read closely-enough, as I suspect Textron would have already tried to account for these variables, but I suspect this one is destined to remain a cool concept that will ultimately wear the war paint of a few nations other than our own.

AC