• There seems to be an uptick in Political comments in recent months. Those of us who are long time members of the site know that Political and Religious content has been banned for years. Nothing has changed. Please leave all political and religious comments out of the forums.

    If you recently joined the forums you were not presented with this restriction in the terms of service. This was due to a conversion error when we went from vBulletin to Xenforo. We have updated our terms of service to reflect these corrections.

    Please note any post refering to a politician will be considered political even if it is intended to be humor. Our experience is these topics have a way of dividing the forums and causing deep resentment among members. It is a poison to the community. We appreciate compliance with the rules.

    The Staff of SOH

  • Server side Maintenance is done. We still have an update to the forum software to run but that one will have to wait for a better time.

Its official : Super Tucanos for the Us Air Force LAS Program !!!

im a "beech fan"..i love the B58 barron,and the kingair family..but have never been a fan of the AT-6II..its just a PC-9/21 in beech clothes,,but ive allways loved the look of the emb 312 or the A-29...just looks "cool"...looks aggresive,and like a "combat" plane should...the LAS is sort of a combat plane...kinda sorta...but the AT-6II just looks like a trainer...
 
Dose "firm-fixed price delivery order contract" mean the price tag won't quad dropple in a year?
 
Personally I think this is a good move. We haven't had this kind of capability since the OV-10 retired(light attack/observation capability). The A-29 is combat proven and very expandable in terms of systems and weapons, especially with the Small Diameter Bomb packages and future JAGM. With the FLIR turret & backseat observer, it can perform real time manned surveillance capability direct/overhead. It was not a big surprise that the Super Tucano beat out the AT-6. It's numbers are simply much better and that was clearly demonstrated. I expect that in time, we can with almost certainty expect to see the aircraft implemented as a replacement (missionwise) for platforms like the AH-64 in higher altitude/mountainous terrain where helicopters are suffer significant limitations in weight/performance that won't affect the A-29. Over time I expect we'll be seeing much more than the original 20 on order now and seeing them in all branches.
 
Allen said:
Dose "firm-fixed price delivery order contract" mean the price tag won't quad dropple in a year?
Click to expand...

Yes, Firm Fixed Price is a contract vehicle which delivers set order for set price. There are advantages but there are also disadvantages. The contractor will deliver only what they're asked to deliver. That sounds good, until you want to make modifications later, or your requirement changes. In the case of an order that may take up to a decade to fill.....that's quite a risk.

We run full-fixed price contracts on our manpower at my work. In other words, we area contracting for a capability, not a number of personnel. Sometimes we disagree with the contractor on the number of personnel required to fulfill a capability and there's not a whole lot we can do about it. So, Firm Fixed Price can work, looks good on paper, and briefs well. It can also be a nightmare, penny wise, and pound foolish.

You really are trying to predict the future....not so easy except in hindsight, where everyone's a genius.
 
Hawker Beechcraft says the U.S. Air Force hasn't given a fair shake to its bid to provide up to 55 airplanes for light air support, and on Tuesday, Hawker said it's taking the argument to federal court. The company said it has asked the Air Force -- twice -- to explain its choice, with no response, and late last week the Government Accountability Office declined Hawker's request to review the decision. The elimination of Hawker's AT-6 single-engine turboprop leaves only Embraer's Super Tocano in contention for the contract, which is worth nearly $1 billion. "We were relying on [the GAO] investigation to provide transparency into what has been a bidding process of inconsistent, irregular and constantly changing requirements," said Bill Boisture, Hawker Beechcraft CEO. "We find ourselves still without answers, which is unacceptable, and continue to believe that our exclusion from this important contract was made without basis in process or fact." Hawker argues that the AT-6 has already been evaluated and proven capable during testing with the Air National Guard, and adds that the contract should go to a U.S. company, helping to preserve 1,400 domestic jobs. The company has posted an AT-6 website where supporters can send letters to congressional representatives and the Department of Defense asking them not to "outsource our jobs and our National Security to Brazil." Embraer has said it will do the final assembly of its Super Tucanos in Jacksonville, Fla., if it gets the contract, employing about 50 people.
 
brad kaste said:
Hawker Beechcraft says the U.S. Air Force hasn't given a fair shake to its bid to provide up to 55 airplanes for light air support, and on Tuesday, Hawker said it's taking the argument to federal court. The company said it has asked the Air Force -- twice -- to explain its choice, with no response, and late last week the Government Accountability Office declined Hawker's request to review the decision. The elimination of Hawker's AT-6 single-engine turboprop leaves only Embraer's Super Tocano in contention for the contract, which is worth nearly $1 billion. "We were relying on [the GAO] investigation to provide transparency into what has been a bidding process of inconsistent, irregular and constantly changing requirements," said Bill Boisture, Hawker Beechcraft CEO. "We find ourselves still without answers, which is unacceptable, and continue to believe that our exclusion from this important contract was made without basis in process or fact." Hawker argues that the AT-6 has already been evaluated and proven capable during testing with the Air National Guard, and adds that the contract should go to a U.S. company, helping to preserve 1,400 domestic jobs. The company has posted an AT-6 website where supporters can send letters to congressional representatives and the Department of Defense asking them not to "outsource our jobs and our National Security to Brazil." Embraer has said it will do the final assembly of its Super Tucanos in Jacksonville, Fla., if it gets the contract, employing about 50 people.
Click to expand...

I saw this. So again the clear loser is crying foul (like Boeing did in the Tanker contract) and taking the decision to court to get another competition set in placed 100% rigged so the loser can now win. Typical but as always, it's never who makes the best product, it's who can either outbid and/or what the politicians want out of the deal. Such mess is why the Military of the most powerful Nation on Earth has been stuck with one of the worst service rifles ever designed for the last 40+ years. :icon_lol:

The Super Tucano won just as the A330 MRTT won fair and square. Not unlike some of our Aircraft winning foreign competitions which are often based on merits of a design and not politics.
 
Problem is..are these defense companies really interested in the US Armed force welfare or they are just in it for the bucks?
AT-6 is a prototype, if you look at the pictures you can clearly see how inadequate the airframe is..just check Beech´s page..it´s taking off from rough terrain, the main gear is so low and the FLIR is so close to the ground..and it´s not even carrying ordnance..then check the A-29´s with 4 MK82´s and you´ll see what i´m talking about.Beech´s product needs a redesign which will cost hundreds of mills to create and then evaluate and the certificate which will give us AT LEAST 4 years before it even sits on an US airbase..while A-29´s are already available and might be ready to do the job in less than a year.
Anyway...

I have access to some REAL A-29´s..here are some pics:

DSCN4170.jpg


DSCN4171.jpg




Prowler

PS: I forgot to add, the A-29 is 80% US made components, the design is Brazilian, but all the avionics, electronics and such, are US made
 
Prowler1111 said:
Problem is..are these defense companies really interested in the US Armed force welfare or they are just in it for the bucks?
AT-6 is a prototype, if you look at the pictures you can clearly see how inadequate the airframe is..just check Beech´s page..it´s taking off from rough terrain, the main gear is so low and the FLIR is so close to the ground..and it´s not even carrying ordnance..then check the A-29´s with 4 MK82´s and you´ll see what i´m talking about.Beech´s product needs a redesign which will cost hundreds of mills to create and then evaluate and the certificate which will give us AT LEAST 4 years before it even sits on an US airbase..while A-29´s are already available and might be ready to do the job in less than a year.
Anyway...

I have access to some REAL A-29´s..here are some pics:

DSCN4170.jpg


DSCN4171.jpg




Prowler

PS: I forgot to add, the A-29 is 80% US made components, the design is Brazilian, but all the avionics, electronics and such, are US made
Click to expand...

Great points Prowler. I absolutely agree! BTW, I am super jealous of you guy's(FAE) Super Tucano paint jobs! LOL. Also, can the FAE Super Tucano's actually carry those Python 3's?
 
StormILM said:
I saw this. So again the clear loser is crying foul (like Boeing did in the Tanker contract) and taking the decision to court to get another competition set in placed 100% rigged so the loser can now win. Typical but as always, it's never who makes the best product, it's who can either outbid and/or what the politicians want out of the deal. Such mess is why the Military of the most powerful Nation on Earth has been stuck with one of the worst service rifles ever designed for the last 40+ years. :icon_lol:

The Super Tucano won just as the A330 MRTT won fair and square. Not unlike some of our Aircraft winning foreign competitions which are often based on merits of a design and not politics.
Click to expand...

Yep. it is a crazy situation, that's for sure. As you said before, with the A-29 the numbers look better; perhaps more importantly it is an aircraft already in the service of 6 countries and combat proven. I'm sure the AT-6 could well be developed into a fine aircraft, but my understanding is that part of the requirement was for an "off the shelf" aircraft, which it clearly isn't. Sadly I think this one may run & run.
 
What has happened to the American airplane industry...have we loss our initiative and drive to create our own airplanes instead of buying forguien airplanes?


Cheers

Casey
 
StormILM said:
Great points Prowler. I absolutely agree! BTW, I am super jealous of you guy's(FAE) Super Tucano paint jobs! LOL. Also, can the FAE Super Tucano's actually carry those Python 3's?
Click to expand...

Yup, original ST are rigged for "Piranhas"AIM which are based in the AIM-9G, but FAE instead rigged them for Phyton III missiles, and currently (that i know of) they are intending to rig them for Phyton IV which is basically FAE´s main IR/AIM

Best regards

Prowler
 
casey jones said:
What has happened to the American airplane industry...have we loss our initiative and drive to create our own airplanes instead of buying forguien airplanes?


Cheers

Casey
Click to expand...

well lets face it, sure the planes are good, but the cost just goes out of control, there constantly delayed, stuff always needs fixing, lawsuits to get the contract requirements changed to make the looser the winner etc etc etc. Theres a distinctive lack of "heres a plane, it does X,Y and Z and will cost exactly $XX for XX amount of aircraft, its ready to go and combat proven, you can have em by the end of year", its all prototypes, advanced designs, concepts etc, which whilst they may be really good on paper, aint even built half the time, are a lot more expensive, will be delayed, and wont be ready for 5-10 years. You have to ask yourself, at the end of the day would you rather have an airforce with combat proven forigen built planes, or no airforce at all cos all the contracts have been terminated due to cost and overruns?
 
casey jones said:
What has happened to the American airplane industry...have we loss our initiative and drive to create our own airplanes instead of buying forguien airplanes?


Cheers

Casey
Click to expand...

OK, maybe I'm missing something here. Back in 2009 Air Force Materiel Command chief Gen. Donald J. Hoffman said "In an attempt to speed up the aircraft acquisition process, the service will likely select an in-production platform, at least for initial buys"; more recently it was stated explicitly that the requirement required a non-developmental solution - the AT-6 is plainly not a non-developmental solution.

So the initiative & drive is there to create the airplanes; but in this instance a quick fix is needed, proven solution rather than proposed (and likely very good) solution that may encounter problems.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top