Then they came out with the A 10 which was supposed to be obsolete 30 yours ago!! The Air Force announced they were retiring the A 10. The US Army said, "Can we have them?" Air Farce then said "I think we'll keep them!!"
The A1 was so well designed. In all truthfulness, we could take the original plans out them into a CAD system and modernize the airframe with a few changes. Then, we could use modern manufacturing to make 1500-2000 of these aircraft again. Ukraine, US Air Force, Marine Corp and possibly Navy could use these for low cost close air support missions. They would be far far better than the crop dusters that have been made into CAS platforms. The turbine engines just cannot handle damage and keep operating. The radial engine is far superior for dirt fields and so are tail wheel aircraft. I guarantee a modern A-1 would be an outstanding aircraft. If production numbers were 25 a month with an initial production run of 500, we could keep the price around $6,000,000 per aircraft. Figure on $10,000,000 per aircraft which would include spare engines, parts and maintenance. I’d probably contact Embraer, Bombardier, Cessna, Beachcraft (Textron), Piper. The goal would be to establish the highest quality at the lowest price with an initial run of 1000 aircraft and then a low production follow on of 5 a month indefinitely. What kind of updates? (1) The radial would be made far more efficient and easier to operate through electronic fuel, ignition and a single thrust lever vs power lever /mixture and manual prop control. Technology is capable of maximizing power and efficiency based on sensors tied to the engines control. This makes the pilots job a lot easier. (2) the flight controls would be redundant/separated fly by wire. This would be less expensive, lighter weight and far more reliable. (3) I’d make the cockpit for two crew similar to the new F-15EX. This would help the pilot when performing deep strikes with precision guided weapons. It also works better when operation in the Wild Weasel/ EW warfare mission. BUT many missions only require 1 crew member. I’d also have the same ejection seats from the F-15. I would build out an internal fuselage option similar to the AD-5 but not the side by side crew seats of that variant. The passenger or medical evacuation area would sit lower and the entry exit would be the side door.
I love the Skyraider. It was one great bird
It truly was.
Then they came out with the A 10 which was supposed to be obsolete 30 yours ago!! The Air Force announced they were retiring the A 10. The US Army said, "Can we have them?" Air Farce then said "I think we'll keep them!!"
@@tootired76 this comment is hilarious because the Air Force is considering using prop planes not unlike the skyraider to replace the A-10 for CAS
this things airbrake is terrifying
Yes, they are enormous.
The A1 was so well designed. In all truthfulness, we could take the original plans out them into a CAD system and modernize the airframe with a few changes. Then, we could use modern manufacturing to make 1500-2000 of these aircraft again. Ukraine, US Air Force, Marine Corp and possibly Navy could use these for low cost close air support missions. They would be far far better than the crop dusters that have been made into CAS platforms. The turbine engines just cannot handle damage and keep operating. The radial engine is far superior for dirt fields and so are tail wheel aircraft.
I guarantee a modern A-1 would be an outstanding aircraft. If production numbers were 25 a month with an initial production run of 500, we could keep the price around $6,000,000 per aircraft. Figure on $10,000,000 per aircraft which would include spare engines, parts and maintenance. I’d probably contact Embraer, Bombardier, Cessna, Beachcraft (Textron), Piper. The goal would be to establish the highest quality at the lowest price with an initial run of 1000 aircraft and then a low production follow on of 5 a month indefinitely.
What kind of updates? (1) The radial would be made far more efficient and easier to operate through electronic fuel, ignition and a single thrust lever vs power lever /mixture and manual prop control. Technology is capable of maximizing power and efficiency based on sensors tied to the engines control. This makes the pilots job a lot easier. (2) the flight controls would be redundant/separated fly by wire. This would be less expensive, lighter weight and far more reliable. (3) I’d make the cockpit for two crew similar to the new F-15EX. This would help the pilot when performing deep strikes with precision guided weapons. It also works better when operation in the Wild Weasel/ EW warfare mission. BUT many missions only require 1 crew member. I’d also have the same ejection seats from the F-15.
I would build out an internal fuselage option similar to the AD-5 but not the side by side crew seats of that variant. The passenger or medical evacuation area would sit lower and the entry exit would be the side door.
Good story, but ya need to scrap the Bot & have a real human narrate.
I have scrapped that voice on my newer videos.