https://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news ... k-aircraft

https://bmpd.livejournal.com/4428939.html

https://aviationweek.com/shownews/dubai ... y-aircraft

What a beast of an aircraft. I wonder who could be a potential operator of this highly capable platform ? I assume they conducted extensive market research before launching this project. Two countries that have active insurgencies, Nigeria and the Philippines, just recently purchased the Super Tucano so they are not in play. Afghanistan also previously could have used a bomb truck like this but not anymore. Not to mention many smaller nations are beginning to field armed UAV's from countries like Turkey and China. What other potential customers could there be that need an aircraft like this ? Look at what a spectacular failure the Textron Scorpion program was or how poorly the attack version of the AT-6B has fared. A project like this from an obscure weapons company with no real track record has a high chance of failure.

Wow. That is the largest and most powerful CAS single engine prop since the A-1 Skyraider. In theory, a configuration like this should be capable of speeds in excess of 400 mph.

Oh, interesting situation for Pilatus if this takes off. The PC-21M can take up to 1150 kg of armament, but this behemoth takes about 2000 kg.

I'm almost surprised they didn't slap a PW150 on it (think A2D Skyshark)

flyingturtle wrote:

Oh, interesting situation for Pilatus if this takes off. The PC-21M can take up to 1150 kg of armament, but this behemoth takes about 2000 kg.

Pilatus with its turboprop training aircraft does not really compete in the CAS role. The PC-21 and the new PC-7 MKX are flying simulators, no bomb trucks.
This competes more against the likes of the Super Tucano or the new Indian HTT-40.

The number of countries that can use and operate this in a threat environment that would allow it to operate relatively unhindered is extremely small. There's a big problem with the proliferation of MANPADS out there, and this thing would be a sitting duck for someone with a MANPAD. Think thousands of missiles and launchers have gone missing from various stockpiles in recent years from a number of conflict zones, and they've most likely ended up in the black market.

Looks exceptionally crude. When does the prototype fly?

ThePointblank wrote:

The number of countries that can use and operate this in a threat environment that would allow it to operate relatively unhindered is extremely small. There's a big problem with the proliferation of MANPADS out there, and this thing would be a sitting duck for someone with a MANPAD. Think thousands of missiles and launchers have gone missing from various stockpiles in recent years from a number of conflict zones, and they've most likely ended up in the black market.

If that is real where are the news reports of MAPADS being used in attacks? Surly the frenchies in Africa would have had more issues with MANPADS if there were so many on the open market, attacks in Philippines, any other place no smart dude would go on a holiday?

SeamanBeaumont wrote:

ThePointblank wrote:

The number of countries that can use and operate this in a threat environment that would allow it to operate relatively unhindered is extremely small. There's a big problem with the proliferation of MANPADS out there, and this thing would be a sitting duck for someone with a MANPAD. Think thousands of missiles and launchers have gone missing from various stockpiles in recent years from a number of conflict zones, and they've most likely ended up in the black market.

If that is real where are the news reports of MAPADS being used in attacks? Surly the frenchies in Africa would have had more issues with MANPADS if there were so many on the open market, attacks in Philippines, any other place no smart dude would go on a holiday?

This RAND report describes the current state of affairs:

https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR4304.html

Literally tens of thousands in countries that are right now unstable, and many more in other countries that either have issues with proliferation, or instability.

ThePointblank wrote:

SeamanBeaumont wrote:

ThePointblank wrote:

The number of countries that can use and operate this in a threat environment that would allow it to operate relatively unhindered is extremely small. There's a big problem with the proliferation of MANPADS out there, and this thing would be a sitting duck for someone with a MANPAD. Think thousands of missiles and launchers have gone missing from various stockpiles in recent years from a number of conflict zones, and they've most likely ended up in the black market.

If that is real where are the news reports of MAPADS being used in attacks? Surly the frenchies in Africa would have had more issues with MANPADS if there were so many on the open market, attacks in Philippines, any other place no smart dude would go on a holiday?

This RAND report describes the current state of affairs:

https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR4304.html

Literally tens of thousands in countries that are right now unstable, and many more in other countries that either have issues with proliferation, or instability.

Sure dude but they aren't being used. If there are so many on the BM then why no increase in attacks?

SeamanBeaumont wrote:

ThePointblank wrote:

SeamanBeaumont wrote:

If that is real where are the news reports of MAPADS being used in attacks? Surly the frenchies in Africa would have had more issues with MANPADS if there were so many on the open market, attacks in Philippines, any other place no smart dude would go on a holiday?

This RAND report describes the current state of affairs:

https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR4304.html

Literally tens of thousands in countries that are right now unstable, and many more in other countries that either have issues with proliferation, or instability.

Sure dude but they aren't being used. If there are so many on the BM then why no increase in attacks?

They are being used; see page 10 of the report, which gives a geographical overview of where confirmed attacks have occurred against civilian aircraft. Also, per the report, there have been an average of 1.4 attacks annually against civilian aircraft. Far more have occurred against military targets, plus more that are unconfirmed. So far, the majority of attacks have been with first or second generation systems, which are less capable, but there is a very high risk that more sophisticated weapons could end up on the black market because a number of states that have the more sophisticated weapons in inventory are right now fairly unstable.

The UAE contracted to buy 20 of the B-250 apparently back around 2018. It’s an Abu Dhabi based company so my suspicion would be it is sort of a pet project of some royal family member etc., and they will get some sort of procurement domestically.

“ At the last edition of Dubai Airshow, Calidus was contracted by the UAE defense ministry to supply 20 B-250s to the UAE military.”

https://aviationweek.com/shownews/dubai ... y-aircraft

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/4 ... tack-plane

A good summary and analysis of this project.

My question is ... who needs to deliver a 2,000lb bomb via turboprop?

If the goal is to do anti-insurgency or counter-air, something like a 250 lb laser guided bomb or small/cheap missile seems a much better choice to take out a Toyota truck or small house. (I'm sure there is some occasion, I just think it's not often. And when it happens, it's probably better delivered by a fast jet.)

A Super Tuscano can carry 5 bombs up to 3,300 lbs total.

ThePointblank wrote:

SeamanBeaumont wrote:

ThePointblank wrote:

This RAND report describes the current state of affairs:

https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR4304.html

Literally tens of thousands in countries that are right now unstable, and many more in other countries that either have issues with proliferation, or instability.

Sure dude but they aren't being used. If there are so many on the BM then why no increase in attacks?

They are being used; see page 10 of the report, which gives a geographical overview of where confirmed attacks have occurred against civilian aircraft. Also, per the report, there have been an average of 1.4 attacks annually against civilian aircraft. Far more have occurred against military targets, plus more that are unconfirmed. So far, the majority of attacks have been with first or second generation systems, which are less capable, but there is a very high risk that more sophisticated weapons could end up on the black market because a number of states that have the more sophisticated weapons in inventory are right now fairly unstable.

The report clearly shows that the most recent time period has the fewest numbers of MANPADS attacks by far.

Spacepope wrote:

ThePointblank wrote:

SeamanBeaumont wrote:

Sure dude but they aren't being used. If there are so many on the BM then why no increase in attacks?

They are being used; see page 10 of the report, which gives a geographical overview of where confirmed attacks have occurred against civilian aircraft. Also, per the report, there have been an average of 1.4 attacks annually against civilian aircraft. Far more have occurred against military targets, plus more that are unconfirmed. So far, the majority of attacks have been with first or second generation systems, which are less capable, but there is a very high risk that more sophisticated weapons could end up on the black market because a number of states that have the more sophisticated weapons in inventory are right now fairly unstable.

The report clearly shows that the most recent time period has the fewest numbers of MANPADS attacks by far.

And that is my deal. If there are so many floating around after Libya etc why aren't they being used or at the very least an increase compared to historical numbers.

SeamanBeaumont wrote:

Spacepope wrote:

ThePointblank wrote:

They are being used; see page 10 of the report, which gives a geographical overview of where confirmed attacks have occurred against civilian aircraft. Also, per the report, there have been an average of 1.4 attacks annually against civilian aircraft. Far more have occurred against military targets, plus more that are unconfirmed. So far, the majority of attacks have been with first or second generation systems, which are less capable, but there is a very high risk that more sophisticated weapons could end up on the black market because a number of states that have the more sophisticated weapons in inventory are right now fairly unstable.

The report clearly shows that the most recent time period has the fewest numbers of MANPADS attacks by far.

And that is my deal. If there are so many floating around after Libya etc why aren't they being used or at the very least an increase compared to historical numbers.

Yeah that's the whole MANPADS boogeyman. You remember the ooga-booga after we invaded Afghanistan about the taliban plinking our helicopters with Stingers leftover from the Mujahadeen days which...... never ended up happening.

Libya and Syria are an absolute mess but in Syria we've seen some Chinese/Nork units employed sporadically and not for years. Libyan factions have much more sophisticated systems and MI-8/24s aren't raining from the skies. Heck, they couldn't even get used when France was running wild with Gazelles a few years back expending their entire HOT missile inventory on Ghadaffi forces.

This aircraft could do a few things (like better hiding that big honking exhaust above wing) to reduce IR signature, but it's clearly designed for minimally contested airspace.

Spacepope wrote:

SeamanBeaumont wrote:

Spacepope wrote:

The report clearly shows that the most recent time period has the fewest numbers of MANPADS attacks by far.

And that is my deal. If there are so many floating around after Libya etc why aren't they being used or at the very least an increase compared to historical numbers.

Yeah that's the whole MANPADS boogeyman. You remember the ooga-booga after we invaded Afghanistan about the taliban plinking our helicopters with Stingers leftover from the Mujahadeen days which...... never ended up happening.

Libya and Syria are an absolute mess but in Syria we've seen some Chinese/Nork units employed sporadically and not for years. Libyan factions have much more sophisticated systems and MI-8/24s aren't raining from the skies. Heck, they couldn't even get used when France was running wild with Gazelles a few years back expending their entire HOT missile inventory on Ghadaffi forces.

This aircraft could do a few things (like better hiding that big honking exhaust above wing) to reduce IR signature, but it's clearly designed for minimally contested airspace.

Incorrect. A number of helicopter losses in Afghanistan are now being attributed to to MANPADS losses, as the US led coalition generally downplayed or even denied any SAM attack by Taliban insurgents.

In fact, the Wikileaks war logs dump revealed that a 2007 downing of a CH-47 Chinook in 2007 was due to a MANPADS, and the escorting AH-64's were also fired at with more MANPADS, though they managed to evade them. In all, at least 10 instances of aircraft coming under attack from MANPADS were recorded, but were never revealed to the public until the war log leak occurred.

ThePointblank wrote:

Spacepope wrote:

SeamanBeaumont wrote:

And that is my deal. If there are so many floating around after Libya etc why aren't they being used or at the very least an increase compared to historical numbers.

Yeah that's the whole MANPADS boogeyman. You remember the ooga-booga after we invaded Afghanistan about the taliban plinking our helicopters with Stingers leftover from the Mujahadeen days which...... never ended up happening.

Libya and Syria are an absolute mess but in Syria we've seen some Chinese/Nork units employed sporadically and not for years. Libyan factions have much more sophisticated systems and MI-8/24s aren't raining from the skies. Heck, they couldn't even get used when France was running wild with Gazelles a few years back expending their entire HOT missile inventory on Ghadaffi forces.

This aircraft could do a few things (like better hiding that big honking exhaust above wing) to reduce IR signature, but it's clearly designed for minimally contested airspace.

Incorrect. A number of helicopter losses in Afghanistan are now being attributed to to MANPADS losses, as the US led coalition generally downplayed or even denied any SAM attack by Taliban insurgents.

In fact, the Wikileaks war logs dump revealed that a 2007 downing of a CH-47 Chinook in 2007 was due to a MANPADS, and the escorting AH-64's were also fired at with more MANPADS, though they managed to evade them. In all, at least 10 instances of aircraft coming under attack from MANPADS were recorded, but were never revealed to the public until the war log leak occurred.

So, one downing in 20 years, with a half of a MANPADS used per year.

Dust was more dangerous.

Single fixed wing turboprops seem valid to me for the lower threat situations. It's clear various army and air forces are considering it or these wouldn't be popping up. But it seems to be a dozen ordered here, a dozen there kind of thing. If missiles are flying, these shouldn't be.

I have to laugh 75 years after WW2 here comes the P-51 Mustang neo.

Spacepope wrote:

ThePointblank wrote:

Spacepope wrote:

Yeah that's the whole MANPADS boogeyman. You remember the ooga-booga after we invaded Afghanistan about the taliban plinking our helicopters with Stingers leftover from the Mujahadeen days which...... never ended up happening.

Libya and Syria are an absolute mess but in Syria we've seen some Chinese/Nork units employed sporadically and not for years. Libyan factions have much more sophisticated systems and MI-8/24s aren't raining from the skies. Heck, they couldn't even get used when France was running wild with Gazelles a few years back expending their entire HOT missile inventory on Ghadaffi forces.

This aircraft could do a few things (like better hiding that big honking exhaust above wing) to reduce IR signature, but it's clearly designed for minimally contested airspace.

Incorrect. A number of helicopter losses in Afghanistan are now being attributed to to MANPADS losses, as the US led coalition generally downplayed or even denied any SAM attack by Taliban insurgents.

In fact, the Wikileaks war logs dump revealed that a 2007 downing of a CH-47 Chinook in 2007 was due to a MANPADS, and the escorting AH-64's were also fired at with more MANPADS, though they managed to evade them. In all, at least 10 instances of aircraft coming under attack from MANPADS were recorded, but were never revealed to the public until the war log leak occurred.

So, one downing in 20 years, with a half of a MANPADS used per year.

Dust was more dangerous.

If you read the article even more, it details a 2006 attack on a Black Hawk medivac helicopter, which also makes the comment that per the war logs, it was the second attack that month. Subsequently, there were a total of 10 near misses over the next 9 months, including an attack on a C-130 Hercules flying at low altitude.

ThePointblank wrote:

Spacepope wrote:

ThePointblank wrote:

Incorrect. A number of helicopter losses in Afghanistan are now being attributed to to MANPADS losses, as the US led coalition generally downplayed or even denied any SAM attack by Taliban insurgents.

In fact, the Wikileaks war logs dump revealed that a 2007 downing of a CH-47 Chinook in 2007 was due to a MANPADS, and the escorting AH-64's were also fired at with more MANPADS, though they managed to evade them. In all, at least 10 instances of aircraft coming under attack from MANPADS were recorded, but were never revealed to the public until the war log leak occurred.

So, one downing in 20 years, with a half of a MANPADS used per year.

Dust was more dangerous.

If you read the article even more, it details a 2006 attack on a Black Hawk medivac helicopter, which also makes the comment that per the war logs, it was the second attack that month. Subsequently, there were a total of 10 near misses over the next 9 months, including an attack on a C-130 Hercules flying at low altitude.

That is 15 years ago before the apparent flood of weapons on the market because of springing Arabs. Nothing glamorous nor trending increase in attacks since.

JayinKitsap wrote:

Single fixed wing turboprops seem valid to me for the lower threat situations. It's clear various army and air forces are considering it or these wouldn't be popping up. But it seems to be a dozen ordered here, a dozen there kind of thing. If missiles are flying, these shouldn't be.

I have to laugh 75 years after WW2 here comes the P-51 Mustang neo.

Yes, absolutely. You’d think some of these would be more along the line of the F-82 though (the ‘double mustang’). I don’t expect a radial engine revival a la P-46, but it is a bit surprising a huge turboprop would be so preferred by default, but that is the case globally for the contenders it seems (except perhaps for the nascent/still born “Bronco II” and it’s precursors).

I don't know about this aircraft, but a modern turboprop with A2D Skyshark performance (500+ mph) would most definitely be worthwhile, it could handle subsonic attack jets their ass in maneuverability, acceleration, endurance and be very close in top speed. The engine is there already in the 7500 shp GE38, and use the swept prop from the NASA ATP engine (flight tested) That's good for mach .9.

JayinKitsap wrote:

I have to laugh 75 years after WW2 here comes the P-51 Mustang neo.

Nothing new under the sun, etc. etc.