BeechTalk - BT

Username Protected · **Posted:** 22 Jul 2016, 20:20

Quote:

“The goal was to create a very mission-relevant aircraft for today’s security environment that’s below $20 million in acquisition costs, and below $3,000 an hour to operate.”

http://www.wearethemighty.com/articles/ ... -cheap-jet

Username Protected · **Posted:** 22 Jul 2016, 20:50

I saw it flying last week in Wichita :thumbup:

Username Protected · **Posted:** 22 Jul 2016, 21:10

From the article:

. . . a Predator unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) costs about $13 million and $1,500 per hour to operate, while the conventional F-35A costs $98 million per unit and $42,200 an hour.

I know they're expensive, but this number shocked me. And that was in 2015!

Username Protected · **Posted:** 23 Jul 2016, 01:11

It's a toy and they love to play with it. Outside of the sales team everyone finds it to be a solution in search of a problem.

It is not practical in a high intensity conflict, just like the Texan.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 23 Jul 2016, 20:25

The USAF should buy 50 of them just for advanced training and interdiction roles. They are inexpensive and should work just fine for protecting national assets. When a VFR pilot wanders into a TFR, why send up a front line fighter when a pair of Scorpions would do the job better and for a fraction of the cost?

Username Protected · **Posted:** 23 Jul 2016, 22:18

John,

You've never been to Washington, have you?

Username Protected · **Posted:** 24 Jul 2016, 08:33

Username Protected wrote:

John,

You've never been to Washington, have you?

If you mean the logic and reason problem, I agree...

Username Protected · **Posted:** 24 Jul 2016, 15:00

Username Protected wrote:

The USAF should buy 50 of them just for advanced training and interdiction roles. They are inexpensive and should work just fine for protecting national assets. When a VFR pilot wanders into a TFR, why send up a front line fighter when a pair of Scorpions would do the job better and for a fraction of the cost?

John,

I agree that we need a lower cost option. This project was a huge chance to pull that off and a step in the right direction. Unfortunately the execution is questionable, the scorpion is slower than a CJ-4 and would struggle to intercept anything turbine powered.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 24 Jul 2016, 15:17

Username Protected wrote:

When a VFR pilot wanders into a TFR, why send up a front line fighter when a pair of Scorpions would do the job better and for a fraction of the cost?

John,

I agree that we need a lower cost option. This project was a huge chance to pull that off and a step in the right direction. Unfortunately the execution is questionable, the scorpion is slower than a CJ-4 and would struggle to intercept anything turbine powered.[/quote]

Curious if any of the post 9-11 intercepts have been anything that beats 300 KTAS. Pretty sure they've all been prop.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 25 Jul 2016, 19:27

Seems like being able to fly 14 plane/hours of these versus one plane/hour of F35 would make more mundane duties, like patrolling VIP airspace closures a no brainer.

Just back of the napkin math of a 30-mile radius TFR, means 188 miles of circumference. 4 planes capable of 450kts orbiting the periphery would be within 6 minutes of intercept of anything violating the TFR.

5 hours TOS would seemingly be useful for border operations. The speed is plenty for smuggling interdiction and so on.

It's not just straight up hour/hour costs, as the whole program has to be budgeted, from training to support, to logistics, basing and on and on.

But I have to think that a lot of routine security work could easily scale down to this, allowing more missions and coverage of work that doesn't involve actual warfare.

It's not going to work against the Russians or the Chinese airforces or forces owning such aircraft, but it seems like shrinking the bills for run of the mill would be a good idea.

Besides, there's a chance I might get to have some stick time in one if they become commonplace someday.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 25 Jul 2016, 20:27

Username Protected wrote:

... 4 planes capable of 450kts orbiting the periphery would be within 6 minutes of intercept of anything violating the TFR.

And here I thought a TFR promoter was like a unicorn around these parts ... :beechslap:

Username Protected · **Posted:** 25 Jul 2016, 21:52

Username Protected wrote:

... 4 planes capable of 450kts orbiting the periphery would be within 6 minutes of intercept of anything violating the TFR.

And here I thought a TFR promoter was like a unicorn around these parts ... :beechslap:

Username Protected · **Posted:** 25 Jul 2016, 21:56

Username Protected wrote:

I'm not a TFR promoter, but if we're gonna have the damnable things, then we ought to at least do it on a budget of some kind.

You clearly do not understand how the planned expansion of government works.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 26 Jul 2016, 10:04

Username Protected wrote:

I'm not a TFR promoter, but if we're gonna have the damnable things, then we ought to at least do it on a budget of some kind.

You clearly do not understand how the planned expansion of government works.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 26 Jul 2016, 18:58

Username Protected wrote:

The USAF should buy 50 of them just for advanced training and interdiction roles. They are inexpensive and should work just fine for protecting national assets. When a VFR pilot wanders into a TFR, why send up a front line fighter when a pair of Scorpions would do the job better and for a fraction of the cost?

Why do you think we were flying the OV-10 over Syria? Something had to convince the brass that we could do it on the cheap. This is going to happen, just without the Scorpion

.
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... ft-427769/

Edit: First we need money. If anyone is serious, then we'll have money.

The Textron Scorpion Lives!