"Mustang Revisited – Did the USAF Really Consider" Topic

… Modernized P-51s For Use In The 1980s?

"WHILE THE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE remains on the cutting edge of advanced fighter technology, when it comes to low-level ground attack and light reconnaissance, it's recently found itself looking to the past for inspiration.

During the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the U.S. military discovered that many of its front-line warplanes came up short in counter-insurgency warfare. Super-sonic fourth and fifth generation fighter-bombers simply weren't cut out for the sorts of low-speed, terrain hugging flying required to eyeball and destroy enemy combatants, particularly those hiding in rugged environments. So in 2009, the Pentagon set out to find low-cost combat aircraft that could perform these roles on today's (and tomorrow's) battlefields. It became known as the Light Attack/Armed Reconnaissance (LAAR) and Light Air Support (LAS) program. Amazingly, old-fashioned, propeller-driven aircraft seemed to fit the bill on all counts…"

link

Full article here
link

Amicalement
Armand

No doubt it would certainly be better than the Super Tucan, which isn't (and yes, I know it's Tucano).

A single rifle bullet will down a P-51, if hit in the right/wrong spot.

Radial engine aircraft are far superior for close air support, due to the fact they can take a hit, and keep flying, unlike in-line engines.

Unless the spend umpteen hundred million dollars to turn it into a jet.

If you really must insist on reviving an old warbird design for COIN, why go with a P-51 when an A-1 Skyraider would fit the bill much better.

Even a very small USAF order would have done wonders for export – so no surprise they pushed so hard.

Amen on the SPAD!

A10?

Update the SBD Dauntless.

"A single rifle bullet will down a P-51, if hit in the right/wrong spot"

To be fair thats true of just about any single seater :)

Step 1 for building a successor to the Skyraider: start with the T56 engine from a C130 (lots of them in service, so excellent parts availability, plus lots of people who know how to fix them). 4500hp, plus potential jet thrust from the exhaust.

Step 2: build super-strong airframe, able to bounce 14.5mm and take lots of hits from 20mm and 23mm.

Might need to use inverted gull wings like Stuka or Corsair to give prop clearance.

outer pylons on the wings for rockets and missiles, inner pylons masked by the prop are for bombs and fuel tanks.

guns are a pair of M230 30mm Chain guns and a pair of GAU19 .50cal gatlings.

Challenge will be teaching pilots how to drive a 4500hp tail-dragger.

I seem to recall picures of a turboprop engined P-51 years ago that was being developed for COIN operations back during the Vietnam era.
Don`t think the project went anywhere though.
In the here and now, why not just eliminate the pilot and build the thing as a drone?
That does seem to be more where the technology is going at the moment.

Ah! Here we are, in the end the project was passed to the Piper company but died due to lack of interest by the USAF.
link

In the here and now, why not just eliminate the pilot and build the thing as a drone?

Better situational awareness in a manned bird. almost-impossible-to-describe better.

Drone pilots/controllers only have a ~10deg field of vision and one sensor.

Manned birds have the pilot's FOV which is a good 180deg wide, plus the same sensor as the drone for getting close-ups of the targets.

Perhaps an A-1 Skyraider Drone?

"Drone pilots/controllers only have a ~10deg field of vision and one sensor."

In theory, a drone can have total 360deg vision with no blind spots from things like wings, tails, canopy frames or the simple human preference for being head up whilst seated! Of course you would need to equip the pilot with at least a further pair of eyeballs and perhaps an additional processing unit (brain). But with Genetic Engineering, that need only be a matter of time…

Seriously though, all the photos I have seen of drone operating seats have at least six screens in front of the pilot showing a mix of live video and other information. And from the config of the position I would expect that it is actually a two man operation? So you have effectively total 360 observation with the added ground attack benefits of being able to look down without having to be able to see through your own seat!

Yes – but one screen is for video games, one for facebook and one for porn….leaves only three for the business at hand.

I abhor the drone program and think it does the opposite of what it is claimed to do – causing more problems than it solves in the long run.

With manned aircraft those making the decisions have to balance the risk of casualties versus the gains – with a drone they can be less discriminating.

Nothing wrong with drones in themselves if they were used more sparingly and with a better strategy, you can't 'uninvent' them. It's not the drones but the strategy. How much is Obama's fault is moot. The C-in-C gets shown a list of options none of which are good. So he goes with the least bad.

I wonder what Americans will feel about drones when one is used to attack the United States? I'm not wishing it on them but it does seem inevitable. Of course if the US had never employed drones at all it would not prevent them being the target of drone attacks in the future.

Thorny problem for sure. Maybe an ethical foreign policy would help? Just an idea.

Oh I think drones are very much here to stay. Politically they are very much an "easy" choice. How much publicity has the drone campaign over Afghanistan and Pakistan had? Virtually none. The occasional snippet of how an "Al Qeada leader" has been "taken out". No possibility of a downed pilot being paraded on TV and little interest in collateral damage on the early evening news.

But I think you are unfair on the professionalism of the drone pilots/operators, I read with interest how many of them, though never in any physical danger suffer similar rates of PTSD as combat pilots. And I think that is down to them being very aware of the life/death decisions they make when they use their weapons load.

It is a modern extrapolation of the long favoured British tactic/strategy of "Gunboat Dimplomacy". Disagree with a bunch of Johnny Foreigners? Hove up off shore in a big gun toting warship and shell seven bells out of one of their ports or preferably their capital city until Johnny F has a change of opinion. Yes the drone gives you more precision but the principle of "power projection" holds true.

"Ethical Foreign Policy"?

No such thing. Self interest and power.

Depressing thing the human animal.

I think many Americans would favour an ethical foreign policy if they were aware of how much harm their unethical foreign policy had caused them – and will continue to cause them long into the future.

It's a cop out to blame it on human nature or pretend its inevitable.

America is not alone in abusing power. Britain was just as bad in its day – though now is reduced to being Uncle Sam's LT.

But US intervention in numerous small wars, dirty wars, coups and terrorist campaigns since WW2 has made the world less stable and the US people have suffered because of it.

BTW – joking about the drone operators – obviously. PTSD is a real problem for them and they have my sympathy.

My point is the drone campaign is making matters worse – not better. I hope the next president reigns it in substantially.

I know we are supposed to avoid politics on TMP but modern topics always have a political dimension. The best we can do is keep it civil.

But US intervention in numerous small wars, dirty wars, coups and terrorist campaigns since WW2 has made the world less stable and the US people have suffered because of it.

A world that is stable under the boot heels of our committed enemies is not to our advantage. Better to keep the ball in play.

Any drone pilot that makes a claim of PTSD is full of it. There's no possible way for them to face actual traumatic threat, unless they count driving to work every day. I'm actually surprised they don't give those "pilots" the old-style orange flight suits for use, as they'd help to hide Cheetohs stains and Mountain dew spills much easier than the sage green zoom bags.

The big problem, the one that keeps drones from CAS, is that the operator may have a potential 360 degree view, but it's a 2-D view. A human flying CAS has 3-D view and can better adapt to the situation, especially when he's had some experience with the mission.

I also concur with the T-56 powerplant as the basis for a new build. It's extremely reliable, efficient, well-supported, and there are literally tens of thousands of current and former mechs who have experience with them. heck, as the P-3's are retired, there'll be a LOT available for spares, cores, etc.

As much as I detest drones, there is a place for them. Perhaps someday technology will advance sufficiently for them to be used in the CAS mission, but for the present time, it's simply not a good use for them.

The US has no committed enemies it didn't play a major role in creating or outright invented.

Sure – it has enemies now and it has to act accordingly. But let's not fall for the 'What did we do? Why do they hate us?' line.

Anyway. I'm not trying to provoke a political argument. I accept others opinions will differ.

The US has no committed enemies it didn't play a major role in creating or outright invented.

So, the US is the original source of all conflict? Shyeah.

Anyway. I'm not trying to provoke a political argument. I accept others opinions will differ.

Done deal.

The US has no committed enemies it didn't play a major role in creating or outright invented.

Sure – it has enemies now and it has to act accordingly. But let's not fall for the 'What did we do? Why do they hate us?' line.

Anyway. I'm not trying to provoke a political argument. I accept others opinions will differ.

Facepalm.

single-source research never ends well for anyone.

As far as those 6 computer screens go, one is usually critical flight instruments, one is radar/Google Earth display, one is the aircraft armaments and fuel status display. You might have 3 screens available for sensor images, but I've only ever seen one screen for the sensor images in the publicity pics.

I suspect that one screen is the chat panel between the pilots, maintainers, and anyone trying to call in the drone for CAS. If the sensors allowed it, I'd rather have one screen constantly showing the wide-angle view, and a second screen for close-ups of where the laser is pointing.

=====
@TKindred: No, I'd agree with a drone pilot claiming PTSD, but I draw a line between Post-traumatic stress and combat stress disorders.

PTSD is about what horrible things happened that you had no control over.

CSD is about what horrible things you did to stay alive.

It's the difference between the medic being haunted by the faces of all those that didn't make it (PTSD), and the sniper being haunted by the faces of all those that he killed (CSD). Though I'm not a pshrink, I'd think that those are two separate stressors.