A-1J "The Hassler"
Fri Oct 23, 2009 12:43 pm
USFG PHOTO
A Douglas A-1J Skyraider (USN BuNo. 142063) named "The Hasler" of the 602nd Special Operations Squadron (USAF) over South Vietnam in 1968/69.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fri Oct 23, 2009 1:12 pm
Nice photo. Love the airplane, not the oil leak. One question; If the Marines had already phased out their Skyraiders before Vietnam as did the Air Force, what in the heck was supposed to be the bigger and better replacement for the Skyraider in the pre-Vietnam era?
I have a picture of a Beechcraft AT-6b that is now in production. Funny how as we go into 2010 , I would much rather fly ground support or COIN missions in an A-1 than an AT-6B!
I have a picture of a Beechcraft AT-6b that is now in production. Funny how as we go into 2010 , I would much rather fly ground support or COIN missions in an A-1 than an AT-6B!
Fri Oct 23, 2009 1:44 pm
What year did the Marines discontinue flying the A-1? The Navy's last combat sortie was either 68 or 69. The USAF flew them to (nearly) the bitter end. There were combat sorties flown in 72 but the introduction of the SA-7 wreaked havoc on the A-1.
As far as a replacement goes, you probably already know that the Pentagon isn't always concerned about such details. I assume the Navy/Marines felt that the A-4, A-7 and A-6 would pull up the slack - and, in many ways, it worked out.
The AF obviously didn't have a design, which is one reason they acquired A-1s from the Navy. The other, of course, is because the VNAF already had A-1s from way back when they were also getting F8Fs.
The AF replaced the Skyraider with another Navy design - the A-7. The A-10 was on the drawing board but wouldn't fly until 75. That began the love/hate relationship the USAF had with the A-10 community from 79 to Desert Storm. They talked about getting rid of the A-10 and replacing it with a CAS version of the F-16 ....
As far as a replacement goes, you probably already know that the Pentagon isn't always concerned about such details. I assume the Navy/Marines felt that the A-4, A-7 and A-6 would pull up the slack - and, in many ways, it worked out.
The AF obviously didn't have a design, which is one reason they acquired A-1s from the Navy. The other, of course, is because the VNAF already had A-1s from way back when they were also getting F8Fs.
The AF replaced the Skyraider with another Navy design - the A-7. The A-10 was on the drawing board but wouldn't fly until 75. That began the love/hate relationship the USAF had with the A-10 community from 79 to Desert Storm. They talked about getting rid of the A-10 and replacing it with a CAS version of the F-16 ....
Fri Oct 23, 2009 2:07 pm
I read in my AFA update that Hawker Beechcraft Corp. has started work on a second development attack version of its T-6 trainer and expects to complete by year's end initial flight testing of the first prototype for USAF's new Light Attack/Armed Reconnaissance aircraft. The USAF wants to achieve initial operating capability in 2013. Potential competitors for the planned 100-aircraft LAAR program include Embraer's Super Tucano, reportedly already under consideration by the US Navy for special operations missions, and Alenia's M346.
Air Force Magazine says the aircraft must be able to operate from dirt fields at forward operating locations where the pilots will find jet fuel and not much else. The aircraft must be capable of employing a variety of air-to-ground weapons and munitions, including aerial gunnery, at least two 500-pound class precision munitions, 2.75-inch rockets, and flares. This new aircraft is to have dual, tandem seats with dual controls for both pilots, enabling it to function as either a combat or training aircraft, and its supposed to be armored against small-arms fire.
Air Force Magazine says the aircraft must be able to operate from dirt fields at forward operating locations where the pilots will find jet fuel and not much else. The aircraft must be capable of employing a variety of air-to-ground weapons and munitions, including aerial gunnery, at least two 500-pound class precision munitions, 2.75-inch rockets, and flares. This new aircraft is to have dual, tandem seats with dual controls for both pilots, enabling it to function as either a combat or training aircraft, and its supposed to be armored against small-arms fire.
Sun Oct 25, 2009 6:54 pm
If it ain't leakin, it ain't runnin.
Sat Oct 31, 2009 11:00 am
Robbie Stuart wrote:Air Force Magazine says the aircraft must be able to operate from dirt fields at forward operating locations where the pilots will find jet fuel and not much else. The aircraft must be capable of employing a variety of air-to-ground weapons and munitions, including aerial gunnery, at least two 500-pound class precision munitions, 2.75-inch rockets, and flares. This new aircraft is to have dual, tandem seats with dual controls for both pilots, enabling it to function as either a combat or training aircraft, and its supposed to be armored against small-arms fire.
Umm... sure sounds like an OV-10 Bronco to me!
Sat Oct 31, 2009 11:21 am
Merlin_FAC wrote:Robbie Stuart wrote:Air Force Magazine says the aircraft must be able to operate from dirt fields at forward operating locations where the pilots will find jet fuel and not much else. The aircraft must be capable of employing a variety of air-to-ground weapons and munitions, including aerial gunnery, at least two 500-pound class precision munitions, 2.75-inch rockets, and flares. This new aircraft is to have dual, tandem seats with dual controls for both pilots, enabling it to function as either a combat or training aircraft, and its supposed to be armored against small-arms fire.
Umm... sure sounds like an OV-10 Bronco to me!
New-Build OV-10s were considered and dismissed at a $50M per acft pricetag and the US DoD even asked Boeing if new-build Skyraiders were a possibility and they responded they didn't have the capability to build 'em. Too bad...I would've come out of USAF retirement to fly 'em! The Beech-Raytheon AT-6 Texan II will have wing strength/fatigue issues once the ordnance/stores are loaded on the hardpoints. Doesn't mean it's out of the running though. The winds may be blowing in US DoD for a built-under-license COIN Super Tucano under a Northrop-Grumman or Lockheed-Martin brand mantle to win out.
Sat Oct 31, 2009 12:21 pm
T33driver wrote:New-Build OV-10s were considered and dismissed at a $50M per acft pricetag and the US DoD even asked Boeing if new-build Skyraiders were a possibility and they responded they didn't have the capability to build 'em. Too bad...I would've come out of USAF retirement to fly 'em! The Beech-Raytheon AT-6 Texan II will have wing strength/fatigue issues once the ordnance/stores are loaded on the hardpoints. Doesn't mean it's out of the running though. The winds may be blowing in US DoD for a built-under-license COIN Super Tucano under a Northrop-Grumman or Lockheed-Martin brand mantle to win out.
Do you have a source for this, especially the info about the OV-10X?