AF goes with the Super Tucano for LAS

DA SWO

SOWT
Verified SOF
Joined
Aug 18, 2007
Messages
10,448
Location
San Antonio Texas
AF picked the Super Tucano over the Beech AT-6. Good move IMO.

Beech is suing, but hopefully the courts kick it out quickly.

Tuesday January 03, 2012
Super Tucano Picked as Light Air Support Platform: The Air Force selected the A-29 Super Tucano as the Light Air Support platform, awarding Sierra Nevada of Sparks, Nev., a $355 million contract to supply 20 Super Tucanos and associated equipment and support services. The Air Force is procuring these aircraft for the Afghan air force to serve in roles like advanced flight training, aerial reconnaissance, and light air support. Sierra Nevada is teamed with Brazil's Embraer, the Super Tucano manufacturer. Embraer will build the aircraft in Jacksonville, Fla., with delivery expected by the end of April 2014. "We are honored by this decision and the opportunity to serve our country," said Taco Gilbert, Sierra Nevada executive, in the company's release on Dec. 30, the same day as the LAS award notice. Meanwhile, Hawker Beechcraft announced that it expects to learn as soon as Jan. 11 whether a federal judge will grant the company's request for a temporary restraining order to preclude the Air Force from moving forward with LAS. Hawker last week filed a federal suit against the Air Force after the Government Accountability Office dismissed the company's protest over the Air Force's exclusion of the company's AT-6 aircraft from further consideration.

AFA Press Release is below:

http://www.airforce-magazine.com/DR...ary 2012/January 03 2012/pix010312tucano.aspx
 
So they are buying them to go to the Afghan Air Force? I thought that whole region was covered in Soviet/Russian type equipment, would this not lead to a logistical nightmare once the US pulls out of the stan? I mean it would seem smarter for them to get their parts from next door, other than around the globe.?

I am all about keeping the money in the USA, but I would think the same style contract could be done on Russian equipment (being that this is a plane that is produced in Brazil and is merly being assembled in the USA, or did did I read that wrong?).
 
So they are buying them to go to the Afghan Air Force? I thought that whole region was covered in Soviet/Russian type equipment, would this not lead to a logistical nightmare once the US pulls out of the stan? I mean it would seem smarter for them to get their parts from next door, other than around the globe.?

Yes and no on the composition. The cargo aircraft being purchased is the C-27, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aeritalia_G.222. This is being used to replace An-32 and whatever else they had. It looks like their rotary-wing assets will remain Russian (Mi-17/ Mi-35) and their fixed-wing assets will be a mix from other nations. I'd have to dig, but I don't think Russia has anything comparable to the Super Tucano or AT-6.
 
So they are buying them to go to the Afghan Air Force? I thought that whole region was covered in Soviet/Russian type equipment, would this not lead to a logistical nightmare once the US pulls out of the stan? I mean it would seem smarter for them to get their parts from next door, other than around the globe.?

I am all about keeping the money in the USA, but I would think the same style contract could be done on Russian equipment (being that this is a plane that is produced in Brazil and is merly being assembled in the USA, or did did I read that wrong?).

The last thing we should do is introduce more Russian equipment into the AO.

The article hasn't restated it, but the original RFP also included aircraft for CentAm/SouthAM Foreign Military Sales (FMS) Program aircraft. That's why I think the Super Tucano was/is a better fit (again keeping Soviet/Russian equipment out of the AO).

I don't have a problem with building the plane in the US, wish it was TX and not FL.
 
It seems like the Air Force is coming awfully late to the table with this. Aren't we leaving Afghanistan next year (Panetta) or two years from now (Pres. Obama)? Can the Air Force even get this airframes delivered by then? And even once they get into theater, if there aren't Americans on the ground permanently to do the maintenance and training, all of those muti-million dollar planes will be rusted hulks parked on the end of Bagram airfield, stripped down to to bones for scrap.
 
It seems like the Air Force is coming awfully late to the table with this. Aren't we leaving Afghanistan next year (Panetta) or two years from now (Pres. Obama)? Can the Air Force even get this airframes delivered by then? And even once they get into theater, if there aren't Americans on the ground permanently to do the maintenance and training, all of those muti-million dollar planes will be rusted hulks parked on the end of Bagram airfield, stripped down to to bones for scrap.
Again, the initial buy is for Afghanistan, the whole program is bigger then one shit hole country.

I hope the GAO agrees with the AF and Beech-Hawker can suck cock.
 
Looks like the award is finally out. Production to begin next summer at 2 planes per month. 20 aircraft in the initial buy, 10 months, so spring of 2015 they are all fielded. Somewhere in there we have to train pilots and maintainers....

Yep, everyone's going home in 2014. :rolleyes:

http://jacksonville.com/news/metro/...ract-jacksonville-build-attack-support-planes

Jacksonville finally landed an airplane assembly plant when the Air Force awarded a hotly contested contract to a consortium that will assemble planes at Jacksonville International Airport.
Sierra Nevada Corp. of Sparks, Nev., and Embraer, based in Brazil, will build the A-29 Super Tucano aircraft, creating 50 jobs here.
“Amid all the concern over federal budget cuts, this is some good news for Jacksonville,” U.S. Sen. Bill Nelson, D-Fla., said Wednesday in an email from his office.
The light attack support aircraft will be used by the Afghanistan military.
Sierra Nevada said the initial order for 20 planes has a contract value of $427.5 million. Future orders could drive up the contract to around $950 million, according to U.S. Rep. Ander Crenshaw, R-Fla.
 
I would have like to have something like that here. I love fast movers but it's good to be versatile.
 
It would be a great aircraft for initial JTAC Quals, low speed and the ability to make multiple passes over a range. Cheaper then an A-10 or F-16.
 
Both aircraft are seemingly capable platforms with their advantages and disadvantages. My big issue is why did the price of the AT-6 increase ~20% over the original award bid price in 2011 (announced Dec 2011 - $355.1M vs Feb 2013 - $427.4). There does not seem to be any notable changes in scope. S0, that is an issue that requires explanation.
 
Dear USAF,

Please bring back the A-1 Skyraider or the P-47 Thunderbolt for air-to-ground attack capability.

love,
Viper1
 
I hate to say this and it goes almost against all logic but.....in reality the B-52 is almost the ideal CAS platform. It can stay on station hours upon hours and carry a shitload of ordnance. That, coupled with the sniper pod it's hard to beat....
 
Dear USAF,

Please bring back the A-1 Skyraider or the P-47 Thunderbolt for air-to-ground attack capability.

love,
Viper1

O/A-10.

I hate to say this and it goes almost against all logic but.....in reality the B-52 is almost the ideal CAS platform. It can stay on station hours upon hours and carry a shitload of ordnance. That, coupled with the sniper pod it's hard to beat....

How does the B-1 stack up?
 
Bone is amazing and I agree on the B-52 just from the stories my Dad told me about Vietnam and what my team guys have said about it on previous deployments. Bone and Hawg are my two best friends right now...well three if you include the JTAC that controls them.
 
Back
Top