Return of the Bronco

Hacker15e said:
"Look at the B-52" for what.

The BUFF is limping along until it can be replaced by a more capable successor. Yes, it has tons of EA/EP, and that works for it in some non-contested or lightly defended environments.

It is DOA in a real double-digit SAM IADS if there is a real major theater war. It is supposed to be a "strategic bomber", meaning operating far inside the FLOT/FSCL to strike deep at bad-guy strategic interests. Against the current peer-threats, it is not capable of that, unless you consider massive losses of airframes and lives in the attempt to accomplish the mission an acceptable outcome (hence the need for B-2).
Click to expand...

The B-52 is an argument many of those wanting to save the A-10 use, when the comparison doesn't stand side by side. Only the H-model B-52 is left, and those didn't see any major combat until Afghanistan, spending most of their lives sitting nuclear alert during Vietnam and Desert Storm. The D/F model, which was used heavily in Vietnam, and the G model which was used in Vietnam and Desert Storm, were retired in 1984 and 1994 respectively, due to being worn out from their heavy use. Even the current H models, while great as bomb trucks in permissive airspace, indeed would have serious survivability issues going against a modern IADS, it would mostly have to be a standoff shooter. The B-52 remains namely due to it being the only other bomber that supports its end of the nuclear triad, along with the B-2.

The OV-10 would be nice, but is restricted to the same kinds of permissive airspace the A-10 is.
 
deadstick said:
image-3623923630.jpg

If we're talking other options, let's not forget about this light attack aircraft: :cool:
Click to expand...
 
MikeD said:
Agreed, if they want to put money towards that. Be alot of expense for what few OV-10s there are. None sitting in the boneyard.
Click to expand...

No reason they wouldn't, they try putting them on just about everything else. A small perk of having an administration afraid of casualties in a war they're saying they're not really fighting.
 

I'd hardly call it a light attack. When Dad flew those out of Da Nang in '68, they were only armed with phosphorus rockets so as to mark targets for the real airplanes — usually F-4 Phantoms.
 
Cessna AC208 would be a much more sustainable platform, cheap to keep, and you can carry an observer or passengers (like the Bronco)....As a former Cobra driver (AH-1) a multi roll/mission aircraft in a third world -Scheiße-hole is the way to go.... On the other hand, sign me up to fly an A1E!!!
 
Last edited:
El Kabong said:
Cessna AC208 would be a much more sustainable platform, cheap to keep, and you can carry an observer or passengers (like the Bronco)....As a former Cobra driver (AH-1) a multi roll/mission aircraft in a third world hole is the way to go.... On the other hand, sign me up to fly an A1E!!!
Click to expand...

Funny because that's exactly what the AVFID guys in the 5th Special Ops Squadron think. Which is why we've funded armed 208 programs in half a dozen African and South American countries to give them some form of precision strike without trying to get them spun up on a full up attack plane. What these people need and can handle is a long persistent ISR platform with teeth. The planes like Bronco and Super Tacano just look way cooler doing the same job, putting a hellfire on a group of buttholes digging holes for IEDs or setting up an ambush.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Hacker15e said:
The plus for the Bronco is that it isn't single engine...which is a LIMFAC when it comes to even small arms SAFIRE.
Click to expand...

True but with these crappy 3rd world air forces the bigger limfac seems to always be their disaster of a logistics/MX program to support their fleet.

Delivering a hellfire from 5-7k is gonna negate any threat short of a big gun or missile that won't care how many engines you've got. I'd be more worried about them trying to find parts for something that isn't in production. After seeing the parts issues with the Bronco first hand with the Phils getting people to get on the 208 with one of the most common turbo prop motors in existence just makes a lot of sense. It ain't sexy, but it'll deliver the mail. And give them persistent ISR which is a far bigger piece of the puzzle than people give credit too.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
jtrain609 said:
Hasn't textron created an aircraft for this exact purpose?

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/a...in-scorpion-jet-as-textron-seeks-usaf-417101/
Click to expand...

Honestly unless by an act of God that jet gets tapped for the T-X program (and it's a long shot in that field) I think Textron has built the next F-20. It's a plane of great performance but it's damn near impossible to just make a jet in an already over saturated market of small light tactical jets and be successful when none of the major world militaries had any interest in acquiring it in the first place.

Aircraft are historically developed/purchased by our military from the military submitting a list of requirements for a mission type to manufacturers seeking to fill that list and submissions best meeting those requirements being selected for further bidding, not the other way around.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Lawman said:
Honestly unless by an act of God that jet gets tapped for the T-X program (and it's a long shot in that field) I think Textron has built the next F-20. It's a plane of great performance but it's damn near impossible to just make a jet in an already over saturated market of small light tactical jets and be successful when none of the major world militaries had any interest in acquiring it in the first place.

Aircraft are historically developed/purchased by our military from the military submitting a list of requirements for a mission type to manufacturers seeking to fill that list and submissions best meeting those requirements being selected for further bidding, not the other way around.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...


I think I read it's already out of the running for T-X.
 
deadstick said:
I think I read it's already out of the running for T-X.
Click to expand...

It wouldn't surprise me. The list of things the Air Force wants T-X to do is just far and above that jet. My money is on TA-50. Even though the general consensus on that jet is its a lot of extra stuff and extra dollars you don't need in a trainer... Like that ever stopped us in a procurement program before.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top