Perhaps for more complex missions, using a legacy platform. Destruction of enemy air defense. Operation without relying on autonomous systems, or communication systems. Able to adapt its attack by using data from passive sensors.
But its a dangerous mission. Its probably not worth it. Too much risk to pilots. MQ-25 is a superior weapon IMO.
>Why not just use a drone?
Because the super taco can take off from austere and makeshift runways while drones require more infrastructure. And most large drones require a massive box for the pilot to sit in.
Hot take: OP is right and poor frick airforces would be better served by a high-low mix of TB-2 alike drone and Hawk 200 or FA-50 light jet fighter. You can dunk on poors and terrorists with drones just fine, but having a high subsonic jet might be handy if Dumbfrickistan Air Force ever needs to intercept a wayward passenger liner or whatever
>and Hawk 200 or FA-50 light jet fighter. You can dunk on poors and terrorists with drones just fine,
I guess you forgot how expensive those are and how extra training they require.
They're expensive but the alternative is to end up in a position like the Irish Air Force where you have to admit to the USAF you can't actually intercept a hijacked business jet over your own capital
In the Irish case its actually even sadder, they can't intercept a Cessna 172, but I assume a Super Tuc can do that easily
>but the alternative is to end up in a position like the Irish Air Force
The IAF is trash because they don't like spending money on defense. The Brits and the USAF pretty much police their air space.
Yes and I'm saying if they wanted to spend money to actually fix it they might consider a light jet over a turboprop so they can actually perform intercepts. Hawk 200s would be a logical step that gives them access to AMRAAM.
Anon if they ever got their shit together, they would buy F-16Vs
12 months ago
Anonymous
Do you think there's no space for an armed trainer between combat drones and a fully capable supersonic multirole fighter?
12 months ago
Anonymous
Maybe for counter terrorist activity but not for defending your air space.
12 months ago
Anonymous
But Ireland is surrounded by friendly nations and only needs to defend it's airspace against subsonic threats like hijacked aircraft. Maybe a Bear could reach them but that's still subsonic. The KA-50 is still cheaper that the F-16V, while being supersonic; and the F-16 production line is backlogged years out.
drone pilot = 5000 miles away sipping a dicksuck light latte supreme with lawyer looking over xir shoulder
manual pilot = chugging monsters at the dusty fob with the boys ready to fight together to the bitter end
Simple as, it's all about the human factors autists don't consider.
>because combat drones are something afghan goatherders can't service and maintain
Do you know what the Togo Air Force, Rwanda Air Force, Djibouti Air Force and Malian Air Force have in common?
They operate TB-2. The Taliban absolutely could if they weren't arms embargoed.
It requires less infrastructure to operate than a drone, no complex radio transmitters are needed to control it, just a guy who graduated flight school. Its also cheap, so it beats out VTOLs and rotorcraft for poorgays.
>huehuehue obrigado for yu dollars janqui
gee, I wonder ~~*who*~~ approved this purchase
drones aren't sovl and zased
To be super... Super Tucano!!!
what does that even mean
To be a Tucano that is Super
sexo
For some reason I absolutely love the Super Tucano.
Same. It's super aesthetic.
Perhaps for more complex missions, using a legacy platform. Destruction of enemy air defense. Operation without relying on autonomous systems, or communication systems. Able to adapt its attack by using data from passive sensors.
But its a dangerous mission. Its probably not worth it. Too much risk to pilots. MQ-25 is a superior weapon IMO.
>Super SEADcano
That's not a thing but it'd be funny if it was
With the guided 70mm rockets that are coming out I think its possible. Could be very cost effective. idk
it's cheap, versatile, and utilitarian against low tech opponents.
it'll be useful in africa, s. america, and parts of asia
to look fricking sick and be a cost effective tool against even poorer enemies.
You wouldn't get it
>Why not just use a drone?
Because the super taco can take off from austere and makeshift runways while drones require more infrastructure. And most large drones require a massive box for the pilot to sit in.
Hot take: OP is right and poor frick airforces would be better served by a high-low mix of TB-2 alike drone and Hawk 200 or FA-50 light jet fighter. You can dunk on poors and terrorists with drones just fine, but having a high subsonic jet might be handy if Dumbfrickistan Air Force ever needs to intercept a wayward passenger liner or whatever
>and Hawk 200 or FA-50 light jet fighter. You can dunk on poors and terrorists with drones just fine,
I guess you forgot how expensive those are and how extra training they require.
They're expensive but the alternative is to end up in a position like the Irish Air Force where you have to admit to the USAF you can't actually intercept a hijacked business jet over your own capital
In the Irish case its actually even sadder, they can't intercept a Cessna 172, but I assume a Super Tuc can do that easily
>but the alternative is to end up in a position like the Irish Air Force
The IAF is trash because they don't like spending money on defense. The Brits and the USAF pretty much police their air space.
Yes and I'm saying if they wanted to spend money to actually fix it they might consider a light jet over a turboprop so they can actually perform intercepts. Hawk 200s would be a logical step that gives them access to AMRAAM.
Anon if they ever got their shit together, they would buy F-16Vs
Do you think there's no space for an armed trainer between combat drones and a fully capable supersonic multirole fighter?
Maybe for counter terrorist activity but not for defending your air space.
But Ireland is surrounded by friendly nations and only needs to defend it's airspace against subsonic threats like hijacked aircraft. Maybe a Bear could reach them but that's still subsonic. The KA-50 is still cheaper that the F-16V, while being supersonic; and the F-16 production line is backlogged years out.
drone pilot = 5000 miles away sipping a dicksuck light latte supreme with lawyer looking over xir shoulder
manual pilot = chugging monsters at the dusty fob with the boys ready to fight together to the bitter end
Simple as, it's all about the human factors autists don't consider.
because combat drones are something afghan goatherders can't service and maintain, while tucano is essentially a simple trainer aircraft
>because combat drones are something afghan goatherders can't service and maintain
Do you know what the Togo Air Force, Rwanda Air Force, Djibouti Air Force and Malian Air Force have in common?
They operate TB-2. The Taliban absolutely could if they weren't arms embargoed.
millions must fly
It requires less infrastructure to operate than a drone, no complex radio transmitters are needed to control it, just a guy who graduated flight school. Its also cheap, so it beats out VTOLs and rotorcraft for poorgays.