Turboprop fighter

[KonTim]

Has anyone considered the idea of a modern turboprop fighter aircraft?It would be useful in roles like CAS,BAI,helicopter-hunter,"low level" air superiority,even engaging similar aircrafts or slow-COIN and CAS aircraft like A-10 or OV-10.


Something like SM-27/47 Machete.


http://www.stavatti.com/MACHETE_HOME.html


Has any other similar project been put under consideration?

 

[Kryptid]

A few of the designs proposed for the A-X program (what would eventually become the A-10) had propellers: http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,2615.0.html

 

[Avimimus]

You might want to look at some of the light battlefield fighter concepts:
http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php?topic=170.0

It isn't unusually to see props in these designs. Survivability against MANPADs is probably not much greater than the Pucara though (which does look great on paper).

 

[Abraham Gubler]

Something like SM-27/47 Machete.

If you want something like the Stavatti designs go look up the fictional page.

 

[royabulgaf]

It seems stuff like this is around now in the various armed versions of single-turboprop trainers.

 

[KonTim]

Has anyone think the possibility of reviving old frames of WWII fighters?We have see it already by the example of PA-48 Enforcer(a reviving version of P-51 Mustang).A turboprop version of Spitfire or Bf-109 or Yak-9 in out of discussion?

 

[Jemiba]

Not really a fighter, but a post war turboprop conversion of an attacker we had here :
http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,14077.msg138534.html#msg138534

And the K + W C-3605 was based on a pre-war "multirole" aircraft, used as recce a/c and
as fighter bomber. But of course, in its later guise, it had lost its combat role.

 

[Avimimus]

Has anyone think the possibility of reviving old frames of WWII fighters?We have see it already by the example of PA-48 Enforcer(a reviving version of P-51 Mustang).A turboprop version of Spitfire or Bf-109 or Yak-9 in out of discussion?

Turboprops are limited in altitude and speed. For the roles which currently exist at those altitudes/speeds there are better airframes.

 

[Bill Walker]

The armed version of the Super Tucano has performance approaching a WW2 prop fighter. It will always be a niche market though as a combat airplane. If you want to defeat a Super Tucano in A to A a basic jet trainer, at about the same price, would do quite nicely. Also, remember that many modern business jets and RJs can outrun any turboprop, so turboprops are no good for defending national airspace. Again, a cheap jet would do nicely.

WW2 aircraft had, by modern standards, some nasty handling characteristics. I doubt you could get any sort of FAR certification for a new built Spitfire or Bf109 today, without major changes to the aircraft.

 

[famvburg]

If it were to be for a military, FAR certification doesn't matter.

 

[Bill Walker]

If it were to be for a military, FAR certification doesn't matter.

It does, ever since MIL-HDBK-516B was released in 2005. The general FAR requirements are also reflected, in some way, in documents like MIL-STD-1797A and JSSG-2001, even if they don't use the word "FAR".

 

[Deane Joyce]

Something like SM-27/47 Machete.

If you want something like the Stavatti designs go look up the fictional page.

Dude, What are you saying, mate? LOL I know it has been a few years, so just give me a bell to discuss. Since I came on board in 2011, Chris and I ( meh, and others... well ok, lots of people) have been working hard on completing the engineering of his designs so that it can be handed off to a manufacturing team, with a "go and build it" instruction. To do the same in a Boeing or a Lock Mart you would have to spend 20 million USD, maybe more.

To give you a feel, one of the problematic items has been the gun. The perception is (so it may be false) is that GD are a pain in the ass to work with regarding the GAU-12, so we have actually been looking at ( and working with) the Rheinmetall KDG 35mm as an alternative

This puppy

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gyWX-ttsxCs

The KDG is a big gun, but it fires the AHEAD round. This creates Volumetric efficiency over and above the GAU-8 ( A-10), as the GAU-8 covers 1200m square meters in a rectangular fires pattern 200m long and 6 m wide per gun run (?...notes?). The KDG gives us the option to create a pre-programmed dispersion pattern that doesn't have to be rectangular and can use about 26 rnds to cover the same area as opposed to 120 rounds from the A-10....

Want to know the problem or "gap"?.... average cost of an A-10 gun run is , wot? 5000 USD per run? something like that.. The AHEAD round costs 100's per shell... no worky cost-wise.

back to the drawing board.

I am all ears as to what you think is a good thing..

Do you still cover the Adavanced Assault Rifle thingy the Australians were making?

cheers

Deane