Interesting Article on Low-Cost Fighters

[killbilly]

From the BBC:
http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20140903-low-cost-fighter-jets-take-off

From the article:

The Textron Scorpion costs $20m, still not exactly a bargain by most people's standards, but a fifth of the cost of the F-35. It suggests that not every advanced defence project has to necessarily come in years late and billions over budget – and points to a new twist in not only the future of fighter-jet design, but also in more humanitarian roles that a budget jet could carry out.

Interesting story. We talk about the roles and feasibility of different systems around here, and I thought this was neat because I learned something new about some jets that I didn't even know existed.

 

[Cessnaflyer]

It can dash to 450 knots to intercept!

I think for smaller countries it would be a great tool. For the US I never see this as replacing anything we have now.

 

[jskibo]

Seems to be developed using company funds. Kick in FAR based contract requirements and the constant service scope creep during acquisition and that price would skyrocket.

 

[Groundpounder]

It can dash to 450 knots to intercept!

I think for smaller countries it would be a great tool. For the US I never see this as replacing anything we have now.

How fast is the A-10?

 

[killbilly]

It can dash to 450 knots to intercept!

I think for smaller countries it would be a great tool. For the US I never see this as replacing anything we have now.

Didn't read the article did you?

EDIT - sorry. being flippant. The article asserts what you said here.

 

[Cessnaflyer]

Didn't read the article did you?

I did but they only talk about replacing the Tweet.

The test of a tornado is kinda of ridiculous because a drone would be able to handle a video feed much better.

 

[MikeD]

Not too much a new concept, as the Northrop F-5 fighter jet filled a similar concept for smaller countries that needed a cheap, but very capable, basic fighter/bomber jet.

 

[Cessnaflyer]

Not too much a new concept, as the Northrop F-5 fighter jet filled a similar concept for smaller countries that needed a cheap, but very capable, basic fighter/bomber jet.

You mean the MiG-28?

 

[MikeD]

You mean the MiG-28?

I do, but no one's been that close before to see one.

 

[killbilly]

Not too much a new concept, as the Northrop F-5 fighter jet filled a similar concept for smaller countries that needed a cheap, but very capable, basic fighter/bomber jet.

Mike - do you recall why the F-20 Tigershark was a non-starter? You're not that much older than I am, but as I recall, it was a great airplane that just couldn't find a market.

 

[MikeD]

Mike - do you recall why the F-20 Tigershark was a non-starter? You're not that much older than I am, but as I recall, it was a great airplane that just couldn't find a market.

Great jet, but competing with the F-16 which was already established and which the AF had purchased was a hard hill to climb. The fact the USAF didn't want it made it difficult to build and sell for export. And 2 out of the 3 prototypes crashing during demonstration flights, sealed the deal. Sad because it was a very capable airframe for its time.

 

[MikeD]

Great jet, the F-20

 

[Cessnaflyer]

Great jet, the F-20

That cartridge starter would've been great on all the T-28's I had to start at the FBO. Getting under that thing with a little wrench and the one engine howling really sucked!

 

[CFIT99]

my cousin is one of the R&D pilots for this program (he is an A10 driver in the guard)

 

[MikeD]

That cartridge starter would've been great on all the T-28's I had to start at the FBO. Getting under that thing with a little wrench and the one engine howling really sucked!

T-38s you mean? You talking the flipping the diverter valve?

 

[Boris Badenov]

Is this really news? It seems like the Europeans have been building little disposable subsonic attack/trainers for decades. BaE Hawk, L-39, Dassault AlphaJet, etc etc etc. What makes this thing so different?

 

[killbilly]

Is this really news? It seems like the Europeans have been building little disposable subsonic attack/trainers for decades. BaE Hawk, L-39, Dassault AlphaJet, etc etc etc. What makes this thing so different?

Probably nothing.

But it was news to me and I thought it might be interesting to others.

 

[Cessnaflyer]

T-38s you mean? You talking the flipping the diverter valve?

Sorry, yes! Hit the wrong key.

 

[hook_dupin]

Is this really news? It seems like the Europeans have been building little disposable subsonic attack/trainers for decades. BaE Hawk, L-39, Dassault AlphaJet, etc etc etc. What makes this thing so different?

One thing that has changed is that solid state avionics and electronically-scanned radars are now enabling some very capable classes of fighters for middle tier nations. The same is true on the SAM side.

 

[Pilot Fighter]

Mike - do you recall why the F-20 Tigershark was a non-starter? You're not that much older than I am, but as I recall, it was a great airplane that just couldn't find a market.

In the wake of the fall of the Shah's Iran, we started to second-guess the wisdom of selling our frontline stuff. This attitude was short-lived and nobody had an interest in the F-20 when the F-16 was on the table...with friendly finance terms.