Miragedriver
Brigadier
Yes. It unfortunately got rolled into this thread together with the Argentine Mirage replacement thread.
Low-cost, muti-role aircraft for small militaries
- Thread starter Miragedriver
- Start date
Yes. It unfortunately got rolled into this thread together with the Argentine Mirage replacement thread.
TerraN_EmpirE
Tyrant King
Textron AirLand will now also produce a trainer variant of it's Scorpion ISR / light strike plane. Slightly shorter wings and other aerodynamic changes to sacrifices some endurance for better performance.
That plane is then supposed to enter the T-X program. The variant is then probably gonig to be on the low end of contenders.
But certainly a good new option for other potential customers with a smaller budget.
That plane is then supposed to enter the T-X program. The variant is then probably gonig to be on the low end of contenders.
But certainly a good new option for other potential customers with a smaller budget.
Miragedriver
Brigadier
Interesting article from BBC News
Back to bottling my Grenache
The low-cost fighters to serve tomorrow’s air forces
Fighter jets, like the Lockheed F-35, are becoming increasingly expensive. Is it possible to make something much cheaper? Angus Batey reports on a new breed of plane poised to take to the skies.
At this summer's Farnborough Air Show in England, the talk was dominated by the mishaps of one plane: the Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II, also known as the Joint Strike Fighter. Due to be adopted by major air forces in the decades to come, it was supposed to be the star of the show. But in the end, the $100m-a-unit jet failed to turn up to its coming-out party after an engine fire in one of the production models grounded the fleet.
But another new jet fighter, which had taken less than two years to design, build and fly, . The 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
As Textron AirLand president Bill Anderson has said, the majority of work devoted to designing and developing fighters over the last several decades has focused on creating expensive, sophisticated machines. Whether it's Lockheed’s and , the or the , the designs have reflected the desire for advanced performance over affordability. Yet in today's economic environment, cost is becoming an unavoidably compelling issue for even the richest western nations.
Budget busters
Textron aren’t the only ones creating the tech to address this issue. The single jet fighter is a Chinese design, currently being built in collaboration with its sole export customer, Pakistan, and is said to be available for around the same per-plane price of US$20m. Meanwhile, a Russian design, the Yak-130, has also been touted as a low-cost plane to carry out everything from air combat to reconnaissance, as well as train pilots.
This isn't the first time plane-makers have offered cheaper designs. The list of current and former operators of the Russian MiG-21 – a 1950s design still going strong today - reads like a who's who of the former Soviet bloc. And other nations who have more recently bought China’s of this old Soviet model show that cheap fighter planes are still a prized purchase for cash-strapped air forces.
The US used to create such designs as well; in the 1960s and 70s, air forces that couldn’t afford the heavy, twin-engined F-4 Phantom were offered the light, adaptable . The F-5 ended up serving in more than 30 air forces, and a reverse-engineered version has just entered service with the Iranian Air Force.
There are three main classes of potential customers for planes like the Scorpion, which has a top speed of around 520mph. The first are air forces who want a small jet aircraft capable of carrying out a range of strike and intelligence-gathering missions, and who have either never flown combat jets before or are looking to replace older aircraft. The second are countries who already have, or are developing, high-end fighter forces, but who might buy fewer of the more expensive jets to obtain a larger number of cheaper aircraft. The third are the major military powers who will need the advanced jets for simpler missions in low-risk environments.
But how exactly do you make something as complex and technologically challenging as a fighter plane cheaper? Textron looked to its existing suppliers and used components that were already in production, rather than designing everything from scratch (the F-35, for example, uses an engine which was developed especially for the aircraft). The development team was deliberately kept very small, so Anderson and Scorpion chief designer, Dale Tutt, could make decisions quickly.
"Once we'd developed the initial design concept we set high-level design requirements for the team, and we didn't overburden them with a lot of detailed requirements," Tutt says. “We didn't have to invest time in developing, for example, a new engine or ejection seat. We were able to focus on putting those components together for the airplane and get it flying."
Patrol role
Textron also had the advantage of not having to meet the requirements of a specific nation or an air force. This meant that the development team could make changes to the design if they felt it would help the overall project.
"A great example is [British ejection-seat specialists] Martin Baker," says Anderson. "They sent a group of engineers over and they looked at our cockpit cup design, and they said, 'Well, our seat's not gonna work. It'll be several million dollars and 18 months for us to redesign it. But if you can give us about five more inches of volume - three in length and two in width – it will work.' So guess what we did? We made the cockpit tub a little bigger."
The Scorpion followed its Farnborough appearance with a demonstration at an exercise in Textron's home state of Kansas, designed to simulate the aftermath of a natural disaster (a major tornado strike) on the region. The jet wasn't used in a fighter role: instead it supplied full-motion video surveillance footage to ground commanders, in a role much like the one carried out today by drones in Afghanistan. Textron wants to enter the Scorpion in the competition the US Air Force will run next year to buy 350 jet trainers to replace its obsolete fleet of T-38s, which have been serving since the 1960s. It also points to additional roles, such as border surveillance, humanitarian assistance and maritime patrol, as jobs the jet can also comfortably carry out.
"Even among the very wealthy countries we're speaking to, everyone is recognising we have to become more economical," Anderson stresses. "No doubt we need high-end fighters: but pilots need to fly, and we can't afford the airplanes we have and to fly the pilots enough to make them combat-sufficient. I think most countries recognise that you don't always need a high-end aircraft.”
Back to bottling my Grenache
Miragedriver
Brigadier
It's a competitive market out there, and low-tech aircraft just is not the strong suit these days. Many countries could never afford or maintain anything available in America or Western Europe. For a lot of Third World technicians, you have to admit, that JF-17 is hard to beat. It's comparatively inexpensive, and can be maintained with limited resources under a trained specialist. And the Chinese are easy to do business with: they will swap equipment for mineral wealth, and they won't hassle you about human rights or refuse to sell you spare parts like most Western European nations (well except France, unless they are pressured). Many countries find the JF-17sufficient, for keeping watch on their own airspace, especially when their neighbors have nothing better. And if your biggest task isn't deterring invasion but rather the suppression of your own people, even cheaper and simpler aircraft (such as the J-7/FTC-2000) might work for you.
For NATO members, or prospective members, the ability to project air power on overseas missions makes used F-16 best cheap choice, I think. It can carry an good payload, and is robust in its capabilities. There are also aircraft such as the Gripen that make sense for countries facing well-armed adversaries, but who need concern themselves only with defending their own airspace.
Of course, sometimes events take you by surprise, and air forces are called upon to perform duties they never expected. During the UN-mandated suppression of the Katangan secessionists in the early Sixties it was India, Sweden and Ethiopia who provided air power, due to the fact that no Congolese could denounce them as colonialist meddlers in Africa.
In any case, how long has it been, since the US or Western Europe produced and sold a simpler, less costly fighter solely or mostly for export? Was the F-5E Tiger II, or the Mirage V the last of that kind? I imagine the F-35 will be our last manned fighter anyway? Maybe in future the world get back to producing more aircraft for export and more UAVs.
Back to bottling my Grenache to pay the national debit
For NATO members, or prospective members, the ability to project air power on overseas missions makes used F-16 best cheap choice, I think. It can carry an good payload, and is robust in its capabilities. There are also aircraft such as the Gripen that make sense for countries facing well-armed adversaries, but who need concern themselves only with defending their own airspace.
Of course, sometimes events take you by surprise, and air forces are called upon to perform duties they never expected. During the UN-mandated suppression of the Katangan secessionists in the early Sixties it was India, Sweden and Ethiopia who provided air power, due to the fact that no Congolese could denounce them as colonialist meddlers in Africa.
In any case, how long has it been, since the US or Western Europe produced and sold a simpler, less costly fighter solely or mostly for export? Was the F-5E Tiger II, or the Mirage V the last of that kind? I imagine the F-35 will be our last manned fighter anyway? Maybe in future the world get back to producing more aircraft for export and more UAVs.
Back to bottling my Grenache to pay the national debit
Miragedriver
Brigadier
T-50 is a very nice aircraft. The last production line has tagged 21 million USD per plane for the T-50.
TA-50: US$25 million (2011)
FA-50: US$30 million (2012)
Back to bottling my Grenache
TA-50: US$25 million (2011)
FA-50: US$30 million (2012)
Back to bottling my Grenache
Miragedriver
Brigadier
It's too bad the Swiss Piranha never got off the ground.
It would have been a useful light fighter (even smaller than the Gripen) and much more affordable. That would have been a true successor to the F-5E.
Back to bottling my Grenache
It would have been a useful light fighter (even smaller than the Gripen) and much more affordable. That would have been a true successor to the F-5E.
Back to bottling my Grenache
Miragedriver
Brigadier
F-5E. The best used low-cost combat aircraft
Description: F-5 Freedom Fighter is a twin-engine, supersonic combat aircraft intended for ground attack missions. It is powered by two General Electric J85 turbojet engines rated at 4,000+ pounds with afterburning. The J85 engines for the F-5E/F models are rated at 5,000+ pounds of thrust. F-5A Freedom Fighter and F-5B two-seat trainer were provided as a modern low-cost combat aircraft for European and Asian US allies under Military Assistance Program (MAP). More than 1,200 F-5A/Bs were produced under MAP.
F-5E/F Tiger II is an improved version of F-5A/B introduced in 1974 with over 1,300 aircraft coming off the production line. It features improved engines and avionics. F-5G or F-20 Tigershark was a further development of F-5 equipped with APG-66 radar and F404 engines which was ultimately cancelled.
In the 2000s Embraer was carrying out the Brazilian Air Force (FAB) F-5BR/F-5M modernization program which will see 46 surviving F-5E/F aircraft turned into F-5EM (single-seater) and F-5FM (two-seater) ensuring another 15 years of operational availability. The F-5M aircraft is a the most sophisticated version of the F-5 aircraft produced so far and a truly all weather, day and night multi-role aircraft capable of exchanging data securely with the R-99 A early warning aircraft and ground control stations. Externally, the new aircraft highlights a larger nose cone that accommodates the new and bigger radar antenna.
The upgraded F-5Ms feature a new avionics package covering INS/GPS-based navigation, armaments, aiming and self-defense systems; HOTAS (Hands On Throttle and Stick); LCD displays; Helmet Mounted Displays (HMDs); Radar Warning Receiver (RWR); encrypted radio communications; cockpit lighting systems compatible with nigh vision goggles; On-Board Oxygen Generation System (OBOGS); new computers; and new multi-mode long-range air-to-air and air-to-ground radar. These aircraft are undergoing structural improvements and their armaments are standardized with other FAB weaponry.
Back to bottling my Grenache
Description: F-5 Freedom Fighter is a twin-engine, supersonic combat aircraft intended for ground attack missions. It is powered by two General Electric J85 turbojet engines rated at 4,000+ pounds with afterburning. The J85 engines for the F-5E/F models are rated at 5,000+ pounds of thrust. F-5A Freedom Fighter and F-5B two-seat trainer were provided as a modern low-cost combat aircraft for European and Asian US allies under Military Assistance Program (MAP). More than 1,200 F-5A/Bs were produced under MAP.
F-5E/F Tiger II is an improved version of F-5A/B introduced in 1974 with over 1,300 aircraft coming off the production line. It features improved engines and avionics. F-5G or F-20 Tigershark was a further development of F-5 equipped with APG-66 radar and F404 engines which was ultimately cancelled.
In the 2000s Embraer was carrying out the Brazilian Air Force (FAB) F-5BR/F-5M modernization program which will see 46 surviving F-5E/F aircraft turned into F-5EM (single-seater) and F-5FM (two-seater) ensuring another 15 years of operational availability. The F-5M aircraft is a the most sophisticated version of the F-5 aircraft produced so far and a truly all weather, day and night multi-role aircraft capable of exchanging data securely with the R-99 A early warning aircraft and ground control stations. Externally, the new aircraft highlights a larger nose cone that accommodates the new and bigger radar antenna.
The upgraded F-5Ms feature a new avionics package covering INS/GPS-based navigation, armaments, aiming and self-defense systems; HOTAS (Hands On Throttle and Stick); LCD displays; Helmet Mounted Displays (HMDs); Radar Warning Receiver (RWR); encrypted radio communications; cockpit lighting systems compatible with nigh vision goggles; On-Board Oxygen Generation System (OBOGS); new computers; and new multi-mode long-range air-to-air and air-to-ground radar. These aircraft are undergoing structural improvements and their armaments are standardized with other FAB weaponry.
Back to bottling my Grenache
Miragedriver
Brigadier
Light Weight Fighters / Attack Aircraft
Intermediate Jet Trainers
India, HAL
EUEADS
EU + Brazil, Alenia/Embraer
ROKKAI, Lockheed
TurkeyTAI, Saab
Italy Alenia
China, Guizhou
USA, Textron
China, Hongdu
China, Chengdu
Russia, YAK
Czech Republic Aero/Boeing
EU, BAe
India, HAL
China+Pak, Nanchang PAC
(Globalsecurity) A lightweight fighter or attack aircraft should be small, maneuverable, and relatively inexpensive, while having a combat radius similar to that of its heavier brethren. Such aircraft are ideal for replacing the many existing fighters used by smaller air forces around the world, which would find it difficult to effectively operate the complex types that meet US needs. Many of these aircraft have to air-to-air and air-to-ground capabilities, while some cut costs by not including the radar needed for air-to-air engagements, providing only air-to-ground capabilities In many cases these aircraft are also trainers, and may serve as the low end for an air force operating a high-low mix of combat aircraft.
Since the end of World War II, the United States has been assisting friendly foreign countries in establishing and maintaining adequate defensive postures, consistent with their economic stability and growth, to maintain internal security and resist external aggression. The underlying reason for furnishing such assistance is based upon the tenet that the security and economic well-being of friendly foreign nations is essential to the security of the United States. For over two decades the United States provided its friends and allies abroad various models of the Northrop lightweight fighter aircraft — a simple and fairly inexpensive fighter of good but limited capabilities. Chosen by 30 countries, Northrop or its licensed partners abroad had produced 2,500 aircraft in more than 20 different model configurations to meet the specific defense requirements of recipient nations. Replacements for many of the earlier models would be required in the 1980s, and many countries were looking for an aircraft more advanced than the current F-5E.
In 1971 the Air Force started its last lightweight fighter program, which produced the F-16 Fighting Falcon and (eventually) the F-18. With the F-16 and F-15, the service settled on a “high/low” mix of aircraft to replace Vietnam-era fighters. It procured more than 1,000 F-15s and F-15Es and more than twice that number of F-16s. The Air Force wanted the F-22 Raptor and F-35 Joint Strike Fighter to follow a similar high/low strategy, but as JSF costs grew, it turned into a high-high mix. The F-35 emerged from the US Common Afordable Lightweight Fighter Project, a strictly. American venture, announced in 1993, but it didn't turn out that way.
In the 1970s, the effectiveness of arms sales in preserving peace and securing US national interests was questioned more frequently. The Congress expressed its sense that the President should open arms trade control talks with leading arms-supplying nations, bring the debate to the floor of the United Nations, and generally use the power and prestige of his office to press for cooperative action among all nations to check and control the international sale and distribution of conventional weapons. Legislation was passed that would deny security assistance to governments which engaged in a consistent pattern of gross violations of internationally recognized human rights.
A growing criticism of arms sales was that recipients were purchasing arms with scarce resources which should be used to address more urgent economic and social needs at home. Basic US policy thus evolved to deny the sale of sophisticated weapons to such countries where a serious threat to security could not be validated.
President Carter's policy, announced on 19 May 1977, was in large measure a continuation and further development of those Congressional initiatives of the early 1970s. Mr. Carter declared that the use of conventional arms transfers would be viewed as an "exceptional foreign policy implement" to be used only in those instances where it could be clearly demonstrated that the transfer contributed to US national security interests. The United States would not be the first supplier to introduce into a region newly developed, advanced weapons systems that would create a new or significantly higher combat capability. Further, these weapons systems would not be exported until they were operationally deployed with US forces.
On 4 January 1980, the Carter Administration announced a revision of its policy on the development of fighter aircraft specifically for export. This exception opened the way formally for submission of industry proposals for development and production of a new intermediate export fighter which was to be designated the F-X. Until this point, Carter's arms transfer policy had explicitly prohibited development or significant modification of advanced weapons systems solely for export, however, late in his term he was to realize that the sale of the F-X would be in the national interest and, thus, compatible with US arms transfer policy.
See part two below
Intermediate Jet Trainers
India, HAL
EUEADS
EU + Brazil, Alenia/Embraer
ROKKAI, Lockheed
TurkeyTAI, Saab
Italy Alenia
China, Guizhou
USA, Textron
China, Hongdu
China, Chengdu
Russia, YAK
Czech Republic Aero/Boeing
EU, BAe
India, HAL
China+Pak, Nanchang PAC
(Globalsecurity) A lightweight fighter or attack aircraft should be small, maneuverable, and relatively inexpensive, while having a combat radius similar to that of its heavier brethren. Such aircraft are ideal for replacing the many existing fighters used by smaller air forces around the world, which would find it difficult to effectively operate the complex types that meet US needs. Many of these aircraft have to air-to-air and air-to-ground capabilities, while some cut costs by not including the radar needed for air-to-air engagements, providing only air-to-ground capabilities In many cases these aircraft are also trainers, and may serve as the low end for an air force operating a high-low mix of combat aircraft.
Since the end of World War II, the United States has been assisting friendly foreign countries in establishing and maintaining adequate defensive postures, consistent with their economic stability and growth, to maintain internal security and resist external aggression. The underlying reason for furnishing such assistance is based upon the tenet that the security and economic well-being of friendly foreign nations is essential to the security of the United States. For over two decades the United States provided its friends and allies abroad various models of the Northrop lightweight fighter aircraft — a simple and fairly inexpensive fighter of good but limited capabilities. Chosen by 30 countries, Northrop or its licensed partners abroad had produced 2,500 aircraft in more than 20 different model configurations to meet the specific defense requirements of recipient nations. Replacements for many of the earlier models would be required in the 1980s, and many countries were looking for an aircraft more advanced than the current F-5E.
In 1971 the Air Force started its last lightweight fighter program, which produced the F-16 Fighting Falcon and (eventually) the F-18. With the F-16 and F-15, the service settled on a “high/low” mix of aircraft to replace Vietnam-era fighters. It procured more than 1,000 F-15s and F-15Es and more than twice that number of F-16s. The Air Force wanted the F-22 Raptor and F-35 Joint Strike Fighter to follow a similar high/low strategy, but as JSF costs grew, it turned into a high-high mix. The F-35 emerged from the US Common Afordable Lightweight Fighter Project, a strictly. American venture, announced in 1993, but it didn't turn out that way.
In the 1970s, the effectiveness of arms sales in preserving peace and securing US national interests was questioned more frequently. The Congress expressed its sense that the President should open arms trade control talks with leading arms-supplying nations, bring the debate to the floor of the United Nations, and generally use the power and prestige of his office to press for cooperative action among all nations to check and control the international sale and distribution of conventional weapons. Legislation was passed that would deny security assistance to governments which engaged in a consistent pattern of gross violations of internationally recognized human rights.
A growing criticism of arms sales was that recipients were purchasing arms with scarce resources which should be used to address more urgent economic and social needs at home. Basic US policy thus evolved to deny the sale of sophisticated weapons to such countries where a serious threat to security could not be validated.
President Carter's policy, announced on 19 May 1977, was in large measure a continuation and further development of those Congressional initiatives of the early 1970s. Mr. Carter declared that the use of conventional arms transfers would be viewed as an "exceptional foreign policy implement" to be used only in those instances where it could be clearly demonstrated that the transfer contributed to US national security interests. The United States would not be the first supplier to introduce into a region newly developed, advanced weapons systems that would create a new or significantly higher combat capability. Further, these weapons systems would not be exported until they were operationally deployed with US forces.
On 4 January 1980, the Carter Administration announced a revision of its policy on the development of fighter aircraft specifically for export. This exception opened the way formally for submission of industry proposals for development and production of a new intermediate export fighter which was to be designated the F-X. Until this point, Carter's arms transfer policy had explicitly prohibited development or significant modification of advanced weapons systems solely for export, however, late in his term he was to realize that the sale of the F-X would be in the national interest and, thus, compatible with US arms transfer policy.
See part two below