Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Got To Be The Ugliest Thing Flying

But I wouldn't want to be on the receiving end either.

Meet the AT-802U Sky Warden.








https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zo...-for-special-ops-armed-overwatch-mission

I kinda like it. It's like a gun jeep with wings.

I thought they would pick the Embraer Super Tucano.

When it saves the lives of some ground troops, it will be the most beautiful bird they've ever seen.

Maybe the ugliest aircraft.

Nancy Pelosi has got to be the ugliest THING flying.

I don't think the Super Tucano has the load capability, maneuverability, or the loiter time of the Air Tractor.

Couple the AT with the L3Harris electronics suite and it is an awesome airplane

Seems like the boys wanted the Tucano too.

It sure looks like an AT-802 trainer with the second seat.

Agg Cat crop dusting plane.

Those big turboprops can haul a pretty heavy load of electronics and ordnance, if need be. Added to the agility of the Ag Cat, it oughta be a pretty handy tool.

I bet the zoomies in the AF hate it. It likely doesn't cost enough to interest them.

So, it's an armed slow FAC. With 21st Century goodies replacing the Mk-1 eyeball. I think I know that mission.

Put some inverted gull wings on it and it will bear a strong resemblance to the German JU-87 Stuka.

Kinda thinking I would rather have an A-10 if it was my ass in the seat.

My initial thought was "that thing looks like a German design. Willi Messerschmidt would approve."

modified crop duster seems apt I guess.

Air Tractor

Uglier than a Wilga?

So, how does one make a $150K aircraft cost millions and millions of $$$?

And it is still highly vulnerable to small arms fire! We've come a long way baby!

mini wart hog

Well, the Warthog is a very functional platform AND it has retractable landing gear. Cockpit of this thing looks like a new style of cell phone. They doing this to ensure the pilot NEVER looks outside the cockpit?

looks kind of like the "Fighters" that we sell to places like Brazil...

I’d to see a full tactical performance run along the southern border……numerous times! memtb

Was expecting a pic of Nancy Pelosi on a plane.....

Millions of dollars worth of avionics.

^^^THIS^^^

I'm not a pilot, but this was my first thought.

If Shaft flew a plane......

Says all you need to know about the DOD. 20 years after something is desperately needed it finally gets purchased. In the meantime high cost high value machines have been run into the ground fighting goat herders. Serious DOD reform has been needed for the last 30 years, but instead we got "Transformational" change that have hollowed out various parts of the US's defense capabilities.

I vote for A-10 also!

30 years of spares and support. You're not buying a plane, you're buying a weapon system that will be judged on mission readiness and capability and that requires support.

Different mission entirely. The A-10 is all attack, not much for recce. A slow FAC is just the opposite. The FAC mission is to find 'em, mark 'em, and bring in the heavy hitters to kill 'em. The addition of some weapons for "instant response" is something we 'Nam FACs always wished we had (and OV-10 guys did have to a small degree). There are times when even a small hit solves a lot of problems, especially with close support of grunts.

From their website, 16,000 pounds gross wt, 8,000 pounds payload, 8 hour endurance. Impressive.

Survivablility? --- A lot of armor, too.

Burns 71 gph at patrolling speed--180 knots at 10,000 feet.

Pretty impressive. If I had one I'd admire it. Couldn't afford to fly it.

Anything this administration does has to be PDS.

Problem is, with today technology, anything that low and slow (including the A-10) is nothing but a flying grape.

It wouldn’t require a lot of lead from ground fire. Even if it’s in its tightest turn against a MANPAD, it doesn’t go anywhere; there’s no track crossing rate. Pop a flare and it’s not very far behind you.

Okay, not to be Debbie Downer but I see two problems. First, it would be entirely useless in any sort of near peer fight and lots of fights against well equipped goat herders because it is so slow as to be dead meat with almost any sort of AA. Second, better hope the enemy is close because if the fight is very far from the airfield, it will be over by the time that thing gets there.

Other than that, it looks like it would be a lot of fun.

I just knew this was about Pelosi's Tiawon trip...

I could take it out with my Remington 7400

Imagine what a cartel player might throw at it?

Ohhhhhhhhhh…..youre going to deploy that on a real battlefield? Mmmkay

We’ve been passing out Stingers for 30 years like Now-and-Laters

I was in a Pilatus a month ago again, incredible proper I’m surprised they didn’t refinedown to meet the need wanted.
Looking at the choice I wonder if part of the decision was based on eventually making it an unmanned aircraft. With the evolution of drones, could this this be a crossover so to speak.

Osky

https://www.defensenews.com/air/202...s-sky-warden-for-armed-overwatch-effort/

AFSOC commander Lt. Gen. Jim Slife said last year he hopes Armed Overwatch aircraft will be suited to pressure extremist groups in places like Africa, in which the airspace is essentially uncontested.

That means no surface to air threat either and with it's sensors it should be able to stay above small arms fire.

I was going to say it seems there are unmanned drones these days that can do this same mission with better capabilities, as much payload, equal or better loitering times, better "eyes in the sky", and did I mention unmanned?

This looks like an answer to a question somebody asked a very long time ago and someone finally decided to try it out just for fun....

We just sent about 27 million manpads to the Ukraine. There is no longer any such thing as uncontested air space.

I like it! Looks like a crop duster with rotary guns!

And nothing comes close to “ugly-beauty” like an A-10!!

I think it looks pretty badass.

Looks like they took a crop duster and pimped it out for gunfighting.

It looks like a spinoff of Erik Prince's project. Way to much to cut and paste but a pretty good background on trying to get these planes into Africa.

Echo Papa

We could have saved a lot of money and just taken all of the A-29 Super Tacanos we left in Afghanistan since this was their primary use there.

I have avoided making any comments about whether it's needed, or could do the job, or even if it is survivable. I'm a half century off that battlefield environment. If there are any smart people left in the military, I'm going to assume they've analyzed this and thought it was a good idea.

The thing that got my attention was that they now have GUIDED 2.75" rockets. Astounding.

Interesting concept. Except I thought that the next generation of drones that are being developed, (drones are always evolving), was gonna take over lots of "sky warden" roles.

Yep, Biden left 20 over there at $30 million a copy.

Interesting it talks about "permissive environment" as well. I wonder tho, what's the cost to operate a drone vs this particular piece of kit? Replace it should it be lost/battle damaged? etc.

Ag roots might mean the ability to canabalize indig acft to keep it flying at the long end of a supply chain. Wonder if that's also part of the idea?

And you missed completely on both counts.

It's just not intended to fight against other aircraft or against any kind of anti aircraft capability. It's essentially an assist to ground forces working against insurgent/CI or militia forces.

And as for being late for the fight, special ops doesn't work that way. They never fight fair, or re-actively.
If a mission is laid on, they'll plan for air assets to be in place, likely just over the horizon, before the insertion of ground forces takes place. The crew of the CAS aircraft will be on station, fully aware of the environment and what awaits the ground forces probably before the ground forces board the bus to the LZ. And yeah... ISR capability is valued more than weapons in most cases.
It's one of the prime reasons for concern about loiter time capability.

In my opinion, The weapons on board this aircraft are not even designed for real combat. They're designed to smooth the way to the XP in the event of a contested extraction

That was my thought when I saw the title of the thread. GD

I give it two years until interest is gone. Then on to another toy.

As I said, there is nowhere from here on out where there won’t be anti-air capability. We just sent enough manpads to the Ukraine to keep the goat herder insurgent market supplied for the next twenty years.

And the aircraft is already on station before the ground forces even board the bus, I guess all the goat herders will know where to congregate and what is coming.

Even goat herders these days have smart phones and access to technology that would have been Buck Rogers stuff as little as fifteen years ago.

It’s just a boondoggle that no one will want to fly nor buy.

That big nose reminds me of an 80s Jaguar.

That's one of the reasons for it. From the article:

"Indeed, the crop duster roots of the AT-802U should make this aircraft, in particular, extremely useful in very small-footprint operations in extremely spartan locales with tiny rough runways. Furthermore, the fact that Air Tractors operate all around the world means supportability should be easy and reliable."



Seems like the whole point of this is to operate away from any well established US base.

So, basically, the Moon and Mars??

I'll bet a bunch of Texas crop dusters would love to have a couple of mini guns or a rocket pod slung under their wings. They would probably line up around the block for a chance to volunteer to patrol the Rio Grande for a few hours.

We're sending stuff to Ukraine, and that's a fact. I don't know about your claim of 27M.
Germany sent 1500 Strela 2M (Grail) missiles. These are a copy of the Redeye.
No doubt the US is sending Stingers. But I doubt, due to the nature of the weapon, that it's going anywhere in huge numbers.

How may aircraft sorties do you figure are generated daily in this war?

To be sure, I wouldn't care to face even a grail, or redeye if flying in a small slow airplane.

I think your numbers are off by orders of magnitude.

No schit? You got Asperger’s or something?

It seems to me that there’s a place for low tech air to ground support for the type of engagements we’ve been in over the past 3+ decades. The fast movers and warthogs are great but they aren’t perfect for every situation.

Everything doesn’t have to go Mach 3 and cost $100,000 per hour to fly. If the helicopter is a useful tool for air to ground support then these turboprops should be too. Nobody would argue that helicopters aren’t useful in CAS missions and we know that they ain’t considered “fast movers” so I don’t know why these types of aircraft wouldn’t also be useful.

They are useful and will continue to be useful. These types of aircraft have been used for years in support of Navy Specwar. Not as obvious and to this extent, but they have been around a long time. They tend to look like private aircraft but aren't parked where private aircraft should be.

But the self-appointed experts here on the Fire think they know better.

Thirty million for a focking Tucano? I mean, they are nifty little airplanes, but holy fack!

Saw that snout, instant reaction was, "About time they tried an Ag Wagon." There are a number of turbine AGs flying around Montana and whenever I see one, I head for it hoping for a free airshow. Such lovely flying.

On the other hand, with the rate of drone improvement in C and C and situational awareness, I still have to question having live pilots that can be shot down and killed/tortured/etc. We are getting close to a time when you could have pilots in an AWACs over a battlespace, with drone fighters rotating in and out of hot action.

Ag Tractor crop spray plane

Way to dispose of left-over Agent Orange?

I pretty much have a constant air show going at this time of year. On my way home from work last week I saw 2 Air Tractors and a chopper spraying within10 minutes. Caught one of the choppers reloading a couple of years back. If I can find the pic I'll post it up.

In reference to this and subsequent other related posts, the only real "benefit" I see in this is buying cheap seats for pilots: according to Airforce SOCOM commander, $10k per hour. A bargain I guess compared to $68k for the F22, $39k for the F35, $16k for the F-16 and our three major bombers range from $52k to $69k. For comparison the Navy & MC F/A-18 is $10.5k and btw, the Airforce A-10 is only $6k.

However, they better have lots of that kool-ade they're drinking saved up for the for the pilots cause that's a mission that will go to hell in a heartbeat. Armor capabilities not really defined so probably 'tolerant' of light small arms, no ejection seat capability nor crash attenuation noted, and no low-signature attributes; it should be understood that this not a high-intensity environment aircraft, not medium-intensity, nor even a sustained low intensity environment; this is designed for a no-intensity, low-level quick shoot and scoot mission. The airforce brass is optimistically selling this as a "permissive environment aircraft for use around the FEBA" (forward edge of the battle area). Well now they're talking conventional arms battlefield where the term "permissive" to blue-suiters relates to opposing aircraft . . . but when you add conventional opfor ground components things quickly revert to high intensity. There's no way to make any aircraft totally immune to modern air defense systems. I would like to see the requirements statement as defined for this system's contract award as there is a sh-tpot load of gaps in all the announcement hype.

Rocky is too modest about his experiences but he can tell you what massed fires from conventional 'obsolete' auto-cannons can do to an airplane, even one with all the bells and whistles.

it wasnt made to be beautiful.

Reminds me of a KLR 650.

No... They're not....
This aircraft, used as intended will never see action against any conventional force
It is purely a spec-ops asset intended for low-intensity asymmetrical warfare.
Auto-cannons my ass... These are to be used at the behest of the jaky boys from Eglin, and parts thereabout.
FEBA? Nobody warned you about cheap dope?

LOL ..... At first it reminded me of the A-1 Skyraider aka The Spad.

I should of said a Flying KLR🤣

Johnw is more correct than many others here. The environment for this plane will be more like the early to mid days of Vietnam, when the mission was to find the enemy and then direct other assets against them. Ground fire was from small arms to at most heavy machine guns. In those years, our planes had no armor, no offensive nor defensive weapons, and no ejection seats. And there was certainly no electronic wizardry. We had paper maps and eyeballs. And yet, we managed to be highly successful and survivable.

Special Ops is sneaky pete stuff, not major conflict. It is also VERY different from any other air mission. So are Special Ops people. In my opinion, pilots in that role will be pawing the ground to get into this plane.

Hey guys……it gives the guys in Olney Texas something to do!!

I'm not a pilot so take this with a grain of salt -

Reasonable to assume the power output of this acft will be higher than the civilian ag use rating?

Looks to be a hell of a fun plane to fly - spraying crops. Add more power - can't imagine it getting boring

I see aircraft such as this being used to assist against hardened but under equipped and underfed militias who are the recipients of fat wallet gifts of Advisors and Weapons. Such fat wallet gifts might enable Adoum, the dissident Erdimi loyalist from Aouzou, and his 28 best buds to strike against anti-terror coalition forces in Libya.

If a pre-positioned ranger team from Livorno can get boots and equipment on the ground in time they can disrupt delivery plans, and just maybe rendition a Kosovan or Chechnyan advisor to the "proper authorities".

There is a lot of crap going down in Central and South America, Africa, Yemen, Philippines, etc that would be a good fit for a moderately armed (if laser-guided bombs are moderate) reconnaissance aircraft. But with the proliferation of MPADs, that environment is rapidly shrinking. I was amazed that we didn't see more MPADs in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Syria.

At the end of the day, UCAVs are taking over this role. They have plenty of lethal and reconnaissance capabilities, extensive loiter times, and they keep pilots out of harm's way. Look at the path that Iran and Turkey are taking. Not sure investing in piloted reconnaissance A/C has much future.

I was just about to type that.

The UCAV is absolutely a useful item in the specwar tool chest. And I'm a civilian drone fan, user, and youtuber.

But... And I have friends (well, children of friends) in that role and from their experiences I can tell you that the UCAV costs way more to operate than what the AT 802U is predicted to cost.

The UCAVs are remotely operated and there is a time lag in communications and control function. And they focus on what they're told to focus on. They can miss things that are useful to ground elements.
The focus thing can be overcome with layered overflights, but this adds great cost and complexity. And will never be as quick to recognize and respond to changing conditions as eyes over the action

The commonly utilized UCAVs are not nearly the weapons platform that the SkyWarden aircraft is. There are some heavy duty UAV weapons platforms out there. They are not commonly used because they are not commonly considered useful.

You want the duty operator out of Creech? Who was partying in Vegas (my apologies Matt) til 8 hours before he reported for duty?
Or do you want Rod and Tony, who are circling a couple of miles out, with their eyes, ears, and equipment all working for you?

The only problem is Rob and Tony are now missile magnets with the proliferation of relatively inexpensive MPAD systems. Just how many Rob and Tony's are we willing to lose in order to collect signal and/or photograph intelligence? And also consider that Rob and Tony are expensive and time consuming to produce.

And ranger teams are cheap and expendable?

The threat of the stinger missile is real, and serious. But there are defenses against it, and distance is the primary and surest defense.
I'm pretty certain that a stinger in Ukraine can't shoot down an aircraft operating in Angola.
I'm also relatively confident that as long as hostilities endure in Ukraine that they are keeping hold of the stingers they have.
Near as I can tell, the US actually sent 2000 stingers to Ukraine. Which, due to the nature of the weapon is quite a lot. But they are not everywhere. and not everyone has access to them.

Germany was also reported to have sent stingers, but a detailed report stated that the missiles sent were the Strela M.
Less reliable. Less dangerous. Older technology. Still significant...

The worldwide threat of the manpad is overstated in this context. There are a lot of them, but we have a pretty good idea who has them and who doesn't.
It's a really big planet with a lot of empty spaces. I don't yet foresee a day in which every would be troublemaker walks the desert with a shoulder fired SA guided missile.

Interesting that you mention Angola as an example. It wouldn't be too much of a surprise to find lots of Gadhafi's weapons circulating throughout the African continent. Team Hillary didn't buy them all after all.

Anyhow, moving A/C, pilots, weapons, and support crews around the map isn't a snap of a finger either.

They also require rigorous training. There are many reports of manpad failures simply due to poor firing practices.

The one time I had one fired at me is an example. The NVA guy fired his Strella when I was considerably less than 100 yards from him. With no time to even arm up, much less acquire my heat signature, the missile just zoomed past my cockpit and went on its way. (Had he waited until I was half a mile away, I would not be here, probably.)

The most dangerous American weapon Libya ever had ahold of was Ed Wilson.

Missiles this, auto-cannons that. You just gotta love the Fire's armchair quarterbacks who don't know jack-$chit about Spec Ops warfare dissing an aircraft that they (Spec Ops) requested and spec'd out the requirements for. Effing posers.

I contracted in Kabul in 18-19 and we still had US contractors as the front seaters on the them back then and the Afghans in the rear seats from the ones I talked with. I honestly don’t know if the Afghans fully flew them or not.

Thought I was gonna see a California Condor when I opened this thread!

I wonder how many Ed Wilson's are running around today training and arming the next anti-American terror group...