Wow...Just wow.

[Minuteman]

As noted before, was a great airplane. Would've worked just fine were it not for the USAFs aversion to anything with a tailwheel and a prop.

I'm realize they made it work all throughout WWII, but it seems like having the hard points at an angle to the ground (as on a tailwheel airplane) would make it more difficult to load.

 

[OhioStatePilot]

USAF has an aversion to anything that doesn't cost less than 50 million dollars it seems.

:rotfl:

 

[MikeD]

I'm realize they made it work all throughout WWII, but it seems like having the hard points at an angle to the ground (as on a tailwheel airplane) would make it more difficult to load.

Not too much difference IMHO, in the sense that the types of ordnance this plane would be carrying likely would be light enough to be hand loaded and not require loading vehicles, etc, unless maybe 500lb Mk-82 bombs or similar. Just my opinion though.

 

[BillErvin]

As noted before, was a great airplane. Would've worked just fine were it not for the USAFs aversion to anything with a tailwheel and a prop.

And they won't let the army have anything with fixed wings and guns, probably afraid some W4 would out fly them and steal the show:bandit:.

 

[mjg407]

USAF has an aversion to anything that doesn't cost less than 50 million dollars it seems.

Yep, the F-20 was a great low cost plane too.

 

[WacoFan]

Here is the hoss!

Brochure available here - couldn't embed or save it:
http://i302.photobucket.com/albums/nn119/jnalsup/AT-802U_3.jpg

 

[ctab5060X]

Here is the hoss!

:rawk::rawk:
:nana2::nana2:
:beer:
:drool::drool:

 

[t-cart]

Cooooool!!