What's new

9 Hard Points Not Enough

MastanKhan

PDF VETERAN
Joined
Dec 26, 2005
Messages
21,269
Reaction score
166
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
Hi,

Seems like to most Pakistanis and Indians---9 hard points are not enough---but here in the U S----some are thinking for an inexpensive replacement of the A10 warthog with the Textron Scorpion--.

A plane with 7 hrd points---some 500 knots top speed etc etc etc-----enjoy the article


Could This Airplane Replace the A-10 Warthog? (TXT)

Could This Airplane Replace the A-10 Warthog?
By Rich Smith | More Articles
March 15, 2015 | Comments (168)
a10_large.JPG

The Fairchild Republic A-10 Thunderbolt. Armed and... in danger? Photo source: Wikimedia Commons.
After more than four decades in service, the A-10 Warthog is due for a replacement. So says the U.S. Air Combat Command.
What's more, ACC says it's already "thinking about" fielding such a replacement. But what might that replacement be?
Last week, we got a clue. As reported by Reuters, the Air Force has recently begun evaluating Textron's (NYSE: TXT ) Scorpion fighter jet as a potential 21st-century replacement for the 20th-century Warthog.
Quoting Air Force Gen. Herbert Carlisle, head of ACC, Reuters reports that the Air Force has done "some research" on Textron's new budget-priced Scorpion. And Carlisle thinks the plane just might be what the Air Force needs to perform close-air support in "contested environments" that could prove lethal to the A-10.
But what exactly is Scorpion, and how does it stack up against the A-10 Thunderbolt Warthog?
scorpion-1_large.jpg

Source: Textron AirLand.
Introducing ScorpionTextron describes Scorpion as a modern "surveillance and strike" aircraft boasting:
  • twin turbofan engines, producing 8,000 lbs. of combined thrust
  • a 45,000-foot top altitude
  • a top speed of 520 mph
  • six hard points for carrying weapons on its wings (6,200 lbs. capacity)
  • room for 3,000 lbs. more payload in an internal weapons bay
  • a flyaway cost of less than $20 million -- and an hourly operations cost of about $3,000
Relative to the A-10 Warthog, Textron's Scorpion has about half as much engine power -- but also half the weight. The aircraft's range is roughly equal to the A-10's, but the Scorpion is a better "sprinter," featuring both a faster maximum speed and a slower "stall speed" -- important for flying low-and-slow on ground support missions.
Of course, the biggest difference between Scorpion and the A-10 Warthog is the absence of a "big gun" -- specifically, the 30 mm GAU-8 Avenger rotary cannon that is both the A-10's primary weapon and its defining feature. Designed to kill Soviet tanks in a circa-1980s Cold War confrontation -- and actually used to destroy nearly 900 Soviet-vintage Iraqi tanks in the 1990s Gulf War I -- the A-10's big gun is notably absent from Textron's Scorpion.
a10-gun_large.jpg

Close-up shot of the A-10 Warthog's very big gun. Photo source: Omono via Wikimedia Commons.
But can Scorpion replace the A-10 Warthog without it?
Scorpion's biggest fanBill Anderson, president of Textron AirLand, thinks so. In a recent phone conversation, Anderson pointed out that Textron originally developed Scorpion to perform a "Multi Mission, ISR/strike platform" role. It thus was not designed to duplicate the A-10's mission; it prefers using precision weapons to attack ground targets from a safe distance out of range of enemy defenses.
That fact addresses the Air Force's concerns about the A-10 Warthog's survivability. And flying high and fast, Scorpion might be a good candidate to take over the A-10's role in some threat environments.
As Anderson explains it, "two abilities are critical" for any aircraft performing close-air support: "The ability to communicate with ground forces, and the ability to find and fix a target." Anderson argues that "Scorpion is very good in both these roles, and can loiter up to five hours," providing ground support as needed through its suite of high-tech, standoff weapons. What's more, while the aircraft doesn't carry an integrated 30 mm cannon, its modular design permits it to carry one or even two cannon "pods" on its wings, to provide a strafing ability when there's a need to get up close and personal.
scorpion-underside_large.jpg

Textron's Scorpion: No big gun, but room for more than a few big bombs. Photo source: Textron AirLand.
A budget-priced fighter jet for tight fiscal timesMost crucially, Textron's Scorpion is both cheap to buy and cheap to fly, and designed to permit easy upgrades over time. This addresses the big problem with modern fighter jets, in that they cost a fortune, take forever to develop, and by the time they're introduced, they're often stuck using out-of-date technology.
Citing research from DARPA, Anderson notes that, in decades past, it was possible to design and build a new fighter jet in five to 10 years. These days, it takes closer to 20 years to bring a new concept to market. Thus, technology that was cutting-edge when the Lockheed Martin's F-22 Raptor and F-35 Lightning II were first envisioned, for example, is now already becoming obsolete -- just as the planes are starting to fly.
To address this problem, Textron built Scorpion with off-the-shelf parts -- taking fully vetted "mature high technology" that is already available, and assembling it into a jet that's modern today -- and can be upgraded as technology advances tomorrow. This permitted an exceptionally fast turnaround time in developing the plane. As Anderson describes it, "From the time we got the 'go' signal, from a clean slate, it took 23 months for Scorpion to take its first test flight."
An attractive propositionAs a result, the Scorpion is nearly as cheap to buy as it is to fly. Extrapolating from historical U.S. Air Force data, the current-day cost of a new A-10 would be approximately $18.6 million -- roughly equal to Scorpion's price tag. Theoretically, at least, the Air Force could swap its entire fleet of old A-10s for shiny new Scorpions at a cost of less than $6 billion. (And incidentally, that would be worth about 40% of a year's revenues to Textron.)
They might even be tempted to make such a switch. Air Force figures show that, per flight hour, it costs $17,716 to operate an A-10 Warthog -- whereas Textron says Scorpion will cost just one-sixth of that, giving the Air Force a much reduced operating cost.
Granted, for die-hard supporters of the A-10 Warthog -- and they are legion -- anything less than a full-fledged A-10 probably isn't going to cut it as a replacement for the aging warbird. But for a U.S. Air Force that's increasingly strapped for cash, with much of its budget tied up buying high-end F-35 fighter jets, Textron's Scorpion seems to offer a way to perform low-tech, low-and-slow close-air support on a budget.
Now all Textron has to do is convince the Air Force to buy it.
You can't afford to miss this"Made in China" -- an all too familiar phrase. But not for much longer: There's a radical new technology out there, one that's already being employed by the U.S. Air Force, BMW, and even Nike. Respected publications like The Economist have compared this disruptive invention to the steam engine and the printing press; Business Insider calls it "the next trillion dollar industry." Watch The Motley Fool's shocking video presentation to learn about the next great wave of technological innovation, one that could bring an end to "Made In China" for good. Click here!

scorpion-trick_large.jpg

Scorpion: It can do tricks. But for close-air support missions, will it do the trick? Photo source: Textron AirLand.
Rich Smith does not own shares of, nor is he short, any company named above. You can find him on CAPS, publicly pontificating under the handle TMFDitty, where he's currently ranked No. 293 out of more than 75,000 rated members.
The Motley Fool owns shares of Textron,. Try any of our Foolish newsletter services free for 30 days. We Fools may not all hold the same opinions, but we all believe that considering a diverse range of insights makes us better investors. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.


The Next Industry To Crumble...
Imagine owning Amazon.com (up over an insane 4,000% since 2001) when Internet sales rendered big-box retailers obsolete...
Or Apple (up over a mindboggling 6,000% since 2004) when smartphones made landlines irrelevant.
Now an industry 99% of us use daily is set to implode... And 3 established companies are perfectly positioned to take advantage of this game-changing economic shift. That's why I urge you to click below to find out which industry is going the way of the dinosaur... and how YOU can take advantage.
 
as much as I like the idea I don't think A-10 pilots would like flying this jet.

you are going from one of the most feared and durable jets in the A-10 to a wimp. the A-10 cockpit is surrounded by a bathtub like titanium shell!! does the Scorpion offer such protection???


A-10_driver_KC_battle_damage_02.jpg



5888543266_a61c4cbe14_b.jpg



I got a even cheaper alternative which is the Bronco





ov10xcombinedpages.jpg


switch out the hellfires for griffin or LAHAT and you got a decent cheap COIN/CAS aircraft
 
o yara u cant compare our position to them! their threat perception has been changed since the kicking they received in afghanistan and iraq. Their pentagon got budget cuts/reduced budget by their gov, thats why they are dumping this rather expansive and maintenance nightmare air craft. They would hardly ever deploy their troops ever in this region and ME like this.

In south asia the things r different just 9 hard points for PAF against the hordes is not very enough.
 
Hi,

I think the U S should start production of the A 10 one more time---there is nothing out there with so much fire power and destruction---plus the ability to survive under extreme duress---.

o


In south asia the things r different just 9 hard points for PAF against the hordes is not very enough.

Hi,

Truthfully---the JF 17 is not enough against the hordes either.
 
Hi,

I think the U S should start production of the A 10 one more time---there is nothing out there with so much fire power and destruction---plus the ability to survive under extreme duress---.



Hi,

Truthfully---the JF 17 is not enough against the hordes either.
if it gets better and better which it is getting. More payload and hard points with powerful engine is the key.
 
Hi,

I think the U S should start production of the A 10 one more time---there is nothing out there with so much fire power and destruction---plus the ability to survive under extreme duress---.



Hi,

Truthfully---the JF 17 is not enough against the hordes either.


you don't that much firepower to kill some terrorists.


A-10 was meant to deal with hordes of soviet tanks rushing into West Europe which never happened.
 
you don't that much firepower to kill some terrorists.


A-10 was meant to deal with hordes of soviet tanks rushing into West Europe which never happened.


Hi,

You are correct---but this aircraft can still be used for the coming conflicts in the next 50 yeas---. Th problem with major weapons systems is---that you can acquire them the day you forced into a war---and as there is no real replacement of this aircraft.

This aircraft is 25---30 million a piece---a 100 of these newly produced aircraft will be a big asset to deploy in case of a conflict.
 
Hi,

You are correct---but this aircraft can still be used for the coming conflicts in the next 50 yeas---. Th problem with major weapons systems is---that you can acquire them the day you forced into a war---and as there is no real replacement of this aircraft.

This aircraft is 25---30 million a piece---a 100 of these newly produced aircraft will be a big asset to deploy in case of a conflict.
Mastan sahab.......a noob question from me

Generally the radars on this jet are quite weak with lesser range...........is it possible that an AWACS will track a jet and feed the info to this small fighter so that they can say fire a bvr

Sorry for the off-topic post
 
Hi,

You are correct---but this aircraft can still be used for the coming conflicts in the next 50 yeas---. Th problem with major weapons systems is---that you can acquire them the day you forced into a war---and as there is no real replacement of this aircraft.

This aircraft is 25---30 million a piece---a 100 of these newly produced aircraft will be a big asset to deploy in case of a conflict.


problem I have with the A-10 is the loiter time, sensors, still moving to fast rather have a prop driven CAS, and it's still quite expensive to operate per hour.


I'd keep a few squandrons, but I'd like to switch to either more of a UAV for CAS or OV-10X
 
Mastan sahab.......a noob question from me

Generally the radars on this jet are quite weak with lesser range...........is it possible that an AWACS will track a jet and feed the info to this small fighter so that they can say fire a bvr

Sorry for the off-topic post

Hi,

The radars on none of the modern aircraft is weak---the limitaton is in the weapons that the aircraft carries. Till 10 years ago----the average aircraft could not see beyond---15--20 km. Now they are looking at around 100 + km---.

And then you have data link between the aircraft----so where is the problem!

problem I have with the A-10 is the loiter time, sensors, still moving to fast rather have a prop driven CAS, and it's still quite expensive to operate per hour.


I'd keep a few squandrons, but I'd like to switch to either more of a UAV for CAS or OV-10X


Hi,

Its biggest asset is the security it provides the pilot for one---the amount of abuse it an take for another---as you showed in the pictures---. Also the fear it creates in the mind of the enemy.
 
Hi,

Seems like to most Pakistanis and Indians---9 hard points are not enough---but here in the U S----some are thinking for an inexpensive replacement of the A10 warthog with the Textron Scorpion--.

A plane with 7 hrd points---some 500 knots top speed etc etc etc-----enjoy the article


Could This Airplane Replace the A-10 Warthog? (TXT)

Could This Airplane Replace the A-10 Warthog?
By Rich Smith | More Articles
March 15, 2015 | Comments (168)
a10_large.JPG

The Fairchild Republic A-10 Thunderbolt. Armed and... in danger? Photo source: Wikimedia Commons.
After more than four decades in service, the A-10 Warthog is due for a replacement. So says the U.S. Air Combat Command.
What's more, ACC says it's already "thinking about" fielding such a replacement. But what might that replacement be?
Last week, we got a clue. As reported by Reuters, the Air Force has recently begun evaluating Textron's (NYSE: TXT ) Scorpion fighter jet as a potential 21st-century replacement for the 20th-century Warthog.
Quoting Air Force Gen. Herbert Carlisle, head of ACC, Reuters reports that the Air Force has done "some research" on Textron's new budget-priced Scorpion. And Carlisle thinks the plane just might be what the Air Force needs to perform close-air support in "contested environments" that could prove lethal to the A-10.
But what exactly is Scorpion, and how does it stack up against the A-10 Thunderbolt Warthog?
scorpion-1_large.jpg

Source: Textron AirLand.
Introducing ScorpionTextron describes Scorpion as a modern "surveillance and strike" aircraft boasting:
  • twin turbofan engines, producing 8,000 lbs. of combined thrust
  • a 45,000-foot top altitude
  • a top speed of 520 mph
  • six hard points for carrying weapons on its wings (6,200 lbs. capacity)
  • room for 3,000 lbs. more payload in an internal weapons bay
  • a flyaway cost of less than $20 million -- and an hourly operations cost of about $3,000
Relative to the A-10 Warthog, Textron's Scorpion has about half as much engine power -- but also half the weight. The aircraft's range is roughly equal to the A-10's, but the Scorpion is a better "sprinter," featuring both a faster maximum speed and a slower "stall speed" -- important for flying low-and-slow on ground support missions.
Of course, the biggest difference between Scorpion and the A-10 Warthog is the absence of a "big gun" -- specifically, the 30 mm GAU-8 Avenger rotary cannon that is both the A-10's primary weapon and its defining feature. Designed to kill Soviet tanks in a circa-1980s Cold War confrontation -- and actually used to destroy nearly 900 Soviet-vintage Iraqi tanks in the 1990s Gulf War I -- the A-10's big gun is notably absent from Textron's Scorpion.
a10-gun_large.jpg

Close-up shot of the A-10 Warthog's very big gun. Photo source: Omono via Wikimedia Commons.
But can Scorpion replace the A-10 Warthog without it?
Scorpion's biggest fanBill Anderson, president of Textron AirLand, thinks so. In a recent phone conversation, Anderson pointed out that Textron originally developed Scorpion to perform a "Multi Mission, ISR/strike platform" role. It thus was not designed to duplicate the A-10's mission; it prefers using precision weapons to attack ground targets from a safe distance out of range of enemy defenses.
That fact addresses the Air Force's concerns about the A-10 Warthog's survivability. And flying high and fast, Scorpion might be a good candidate to take over the A-10's role in some threat environments.
As Anderson explains it, "two abilities are critical" for any aircraft performing close-air support: "The ability to communicate with ground forces, and the ability to find and fix a target." Anderson argues that "Scorpion is very good in both these roles, and can loiter up to five hours," providing ground support as needed through its suite of high-tech, standoff weapons. What's more, while the aircraft doesn't carry an integrated 30 mm cannon, its modular design permits it to carry one or even two cannon "pods" on its wings, to provide a strafing ability when there's a need to get up close and personal.
scorpion-underside_large.jpg

Textron's Scorpion: No big gun, but room for more than a few big bombs. Photo source: Textron AirLand.
A budget-priced fighter jet for tight fiscal timesMost crucially, Textron's Scorpion is both cheap to buy and cheap to fly, and designed to permit easy upgrades over time. This addresses the big problem with modern fighter jets, in that they cost a fortune, take forever to develop, and by the time they're introduced, they're often stuck using out-of-date technology.
Citing research from DARPA, Anderson notes that, in decades past, it was possible to design and build a new fighter jet in five to 10 years. These days, it takes closer to 20 years to bring a new concept to market. Thus, technology that was cutting-edge when the Lockheed Martin's F-22 Raptor and F-35 Lightning II were first envisioned, for example, is now already becoming obsolete -- just as the planes are starting to fly.
To address this problem, Textron built Scorpion with off-the-shelf parts -- taking fully vetted "mature high technology" that is already available, and assembling it into a jet that's modern today -- and can be upgraded as technology advances tomorrow. This permitted an exceptionally fast turnaround time in developing the plane. As Anderson describes it, "From the time we got the 'go' signal, from a clean slate, it took 23 months for Scorpion to take its first test flight."
An attractive propositionAs a result, the Scorpion is nearly as cheap to buy as it is to fly. Extrapolating from historical U.S. Air Force data, the current-day cost of a new A-10 would be approximately $18.6 million -- roughly equal to Scorpion's price tag. Theoretically, at least, the Air Force could swap its entire fleet of old A-10s for shiny new Scorpions at a cost of less than $6 billion. (And incidentally, that would be worth about 40% of a year's revenues to Textron.)
They might even be tempted to make such a switch. Air Force figures show that, per flight hour, it costs $17,716 to operate an A-10 Warthog -- whereas Textron says Scorpion will cost just one-sixth of that, giving the Air Force a much reduced operating cost.
Granted, for die-hard supporters of the A-10 Warthog -- and they are legion -- anything less than a full-fledged A-10 probably isn't going to cut it as a replacement for the aging warbird. But for a U.S. Air Force that's increasingly strapped for cash, with much of its budget tied up buying high-end F-35 fighter jets, Textron's Scorpion seems to offer a way to perform low-tech, low-and-slow close-air support on a budget.
Now all Textron has to do is convince the Air Force to buy it.
You can't afford to miss this"Made in China" -- an all too familiar phrase. But not for much longer: There's a radical new technology out there, one that's already being employed by the U.S. Air Force, BMW, and even Nike. Respected publications like The Economist have compared this disruptive invention to the steam engine and the printing press; Business Insider calls it "the next trillion dollar industry." Watch The Motley Fool's shocking video presentation to learn about the next great wave of technological innovation, one that could bring an end to "Made In China" for good. Click here!

scorpion-trick_large.jpg

Scorpion: It can do tricks. But for close-air support missions, will it do the trick? Photo source: Textron AirLand.
Rich Smith does not own shares of, nor is he short, any company named above. You can find him on CAPS, publicly pontificating under the handle TMFDitty, where he's currently ranked No. 293 out of more than 75,000 rated members.
The Motley Fool owns shares of Textron,. Try any of our Foolish newsletter services free for 30 days. We Fools may not all hold the same opinions, but we all believe that considering a diverse range of insights makes us better investors. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.


The Next Industry To Crumble...
Imagine owning Amazon.com (up over an insane 4,000% since 2001) when Internet sales rendered big-box retailers obsolete...
Or Apple (up over a mindboggling 6,000% since 2004) when smartphones made landlines irrelevant.
Now an industry 99% of us use daily is set to implode... And 3 established companies are perfectly positioned to take advantage of this game-changing economic shift. That's why I urge you to click below to find out which industry is going the way of the dinosaur... and how YOU can take advantage.
There is no alternative to A-10 ...It carries a lot and can take a lot of punishment as well ...It's the real buster ...Scorpion looks a bit namby pamby as compared to the A-10 ....!
 

Back
Top Bottom