A-50 Boar -> Stealth A-10 Concept

[ollys_aviation]

I don't know where to post this anymore but, I figured it would fit in the bar. The first of 2 iterative designs that are focused on the role and look of the A-10! I've seen so many concepts online with 3 notable ones, made by many social media compatriots! I had to give it a go! Let me know what you think! And yes there is room for S-Ducts.

 

[EmoBirb]

Looks awesome, although I think instead of the gun a singular large EOTS would be more adequate for this days and age. Love the inclusion of the internal weapons bays though, I think many people overlooked these in past concepts. Although they are crucial if you want to operate such an aircraft in a somewhat contested environment. You're leaning into the "subsonic F-35" direction I think is correct if one thinks about adapting the A-10 mission for the 21st century.

 

[ollys_aviation]

Looks awesome, although I think instead of the gun a singular large EOTS would be more adequate for this days and age. Love the inclusion of the internal weapons bays though, I think many people overlooked these in past concepts. Although they are crucial if you want to operate such an aircraft in a somewhat contested environment. You're leaning into the "subsonic F-35" direction I think is correct if one thinks about adapting the A-10 mission for the 21st century.

Thanks!! Had to add the gun to keep it somwhere in the realm of the A10 but you get what I was going for

 

[Scott Kenny]

It's not going to be very stealthy with all those weapons hanging in the breeze. You're going to need internal weapons bays and/or dedicated Enclosed Weapons Pods.

Now, I think it should still have a gun, for use when the enemy is within 100m. Those times should not happen often, but they do happen. IMO the 25mm from the F-35 is adequate with proper ammunition. The USAF has complained about the specialist equipment needed for the A-10's GAU-8, while with a 25mm you could reload from the same machine as the F-35 uses.

It should also have an EOTS to support APKWS, Hellfires/JAGMs, various LGBs, and to give the plane the coordinates for JDAMs.

IMO it also needs a terrain-following radar plus a high-detail obstacle-avoidance radar to look for power lines or other aerial cabling.

 

[ollys_aviation]

It's not going to be very stealthy with all those weapons hanging in the breeze. You're going to need internal weapons bays and/or dedicated Enclosed Weapons Pods.

Now, I think it should still have a gun, for use when the enemy is within 100m. Those times should not happen often, but they do happen. IMO the 25mm from the F-35 is adequate with proper ammunition. The USAF has complained about the specialist equipment needed for the A-10's GAU-8, while with a 25mm you could reload from the same machine as the F-35 uses.

It should also have an EOTS to support APKWS, Hellfires/JAGMs, various LGBs, and to give the plane the coordinates for JDAMs.

IMO it also needs a terrain-following radar plus a high-detail obstacle-avoidance radar to look for power lines or other aerial cabling.

Idk why so many people don't actually look at the plane and then comment, there are internal weapons bays, also the added weapons on the exterior are to make it look better in the renders, the F-35 has a beastmode anyways idk why people are so hooked on that lmfao. The gun is also just for looks, these are obvious things.

 

[ollys_aviation]

Heres an alternate variant!

 

[EmoBirb]

You're going to need internal weapons bays and/or dedicated Enclosed Weapons Pods.

IWBs are already included, external payload is just extra.

It should also have an EOTS

It is present, I just referred to a large central one earlier for aesthetic reasons. But Olly placed various electro optical sensors across the aircraft.

 

[EmoBirb]

Thanks!! Had to add the gun to keep it somwhere in the realm of the A10 but you get what I was going for

Have you considered a shallow angle V-Tail at one point? It would work well with regards to aesthetics I'd say, or would that have been to far of a departure for what you were going for?

 

[Scott Kenny]

View attachment 795983
IWBs are already included, external payload is just extra.

4x2000lb, AKA 4x4SDB?

 

[EmoBirb]

4x2000lb, AKA 4x4SDB?

I dunno the dimensions of the bays on the model.

 

[Scott Kenny]

@ollys_aviation how big are the internal weapons bays? 4x2000 aka 4x4xSDB?

 

[EmoBirb]

idk why people are so hooked on that lmfao.

You haven't seen people on social media comment on pictures of stealth aircraft with drop tanks then, I assume. It's much worse x)

 

[ollys_aviation]

Have you considered a shallow angle V-Tail at one point? It would work well with regards to aesthetics I'd say, or would that have been to far of a departure for what you were going for?

I did! But alas, it went too far from the original idea so I figured going all in on the standard shape would be better!

 

[ollys_aviation]

@ollys_aviation how big are the internal weapons bays? 4x2000 aka 4x4xSDB?

Yes, big enough to house 2000lb bombs in each bay door

 

[GruntFox]

The reality is that a future A-10 analog won't be anything like an A-10. What it's more likely to resemble is the F-111... and flies high and fast.

That's why, in many of my settings, the A-10 replacement wasn't just an A-10 given a stealthy airframe; it's often just taking the F-111's base concept and making it stealthy as heck, filled to the brim with sensors.

 

[Scott Kenny]

The reality is that a future A-10 analog won't be anything like an A-10. What it's more likely to resemble is the F-111... and flies high and fast.

That's why, in many of my settings, the A-10 replacement wasn't just an A-10 given a stealthy airframe; it's often just taking the F-111's base concept and making it stealthy as heck, filled to the brim with sensors.

I've honestly been assuming that the replacement for the A-10 will be an Army-operated tilt-rotor, operating as the quarterback for a whole set of drones:

• A couple of VLO or even ELO sensorcraft, comparable to the TACIT BLUE in role, as the spotters for the whole CAS ecosystem. They would also have a couple of EOTS eyeballs in addition to their radars. These may also be operating as BACN nodes. I'm thinking these would be pretty small, possibly as small as an AGM-158 but probably closer to Predator or Reaper sized.
• Then there's the flock of attack drones, holding whatever weapons are going to be used, but for sake of argument we'll call them Hellfires/JAGMs/ALEs and Hydra 70s/APKWS.

And the quarterback tilt-rotor is the only thing in the group with a gun. Because while firing into a troops-in-contact situation is not common, it happens often enough to require specialized weapons for the job.

 

[GruntFox]

I've honestly been assuming that the replacement for the A-10 will be an Army-operated tilt-rotor, operating as the quarterback for a whole set of drones:

• A couple of VLO or even ELO sensorcraft, comparable to the TACIT BLUE in role, as the spotters for the whole CAS ecosystem. They would also have a couple of EOTS eyeballs in addition to their radars. These may also be operating as BACN nodes. I'm thinking these would be pretty small, possibly as small as an AGM-158 but probably closer to Predator or Reaper sized.
• Then there's the flock of attack drones, holding whatever weapons are going to be used, but for sake of argument we'll call them Hellfires/JAGMs/ALEs and Hydra 70s/APKWS.

And the quarterback tilt-rotor is the only thing in the group with a gun. Because while firing into a troops-in-contact situation is not common, it happens often enough to require specialized weapons for the job.

No, EWAR is going to make any drone that isn't fitted with an AGI useless as the drone's importance continues to be hammered into heads (I'll be unsurprised if there's gear out there that can literally turn drones -even SATLINKED ones- to the opposing side with a keystroke, given that some Iranian-backed insurgents managed to down a US SATLINK stealth drone a while back). This also ignores that 'low and slow' is very dead, as helicopter doctrine has been completely transformed from what it originally was to 'hide far behind friendly lines and spam indirect fire as much as possible and hope that an enemy MANPAD team doesn't show up'.

CAS is all about where the ordinance lands, not how close the aircraft is.

So, in essence, due to the conditions of the modern battlefield, the only way to get any air support is to be high and fast, where the aircraft has the advantage of energy over SAMs.

 

[Scott Kenny]

No, EWAR is going to make any drone that isn't fitted with an AGI useless as the drone's importance continues to be hammered into heads (I'll be unsurprised if there's gear out there that can literally turn drones -even SATLINKED ones- to the opposing side with a keystroke, given that some Iranian-backed insurgents managed to down a US SATLINK stealth drone a while back).

I'd like to know how EWAR is getting past one-time-pad encryption.

It's my understanding that the Iranian "backing" was a lot more than just backing. National level attack via GPS spoofing.

CAS is all about where the ordinance lands, not how close the aircraft is.

Correct.

CAS is also literally engaging the enemy while the enemy is within rifle range of friendlies.

So, in essence, due to the conditions of the modern battlefield, the only way to get any air support is to be high and fast, where the aircraft has the advantage of energy over SAMs.

Disagree, but we're getting way off topic.

 

[GruntFox]

I'd like to know how EWAR is getting past one-time-pad encryption.

... that is logistically impossible for a massive drone fleet, and that's before including the human element into the equation.

It's my understanding that the Iranian "backing" was a lot more than just backing. National level attack via GPS spoofing.

From what I've read, the insurgents did most of the work; the Iranians (at a minimum) gave them pointers and - depending on who you ask - software. Mind you, that this is with equipment that wouldn't be out of place in the average electronics shop.

Given how much of a force multiplier drones are proving to be, it'll be a matter of time before someone (or some group) develops something to remove all but AGI drones from the board entirely.

Correct.

CAS is also literally engaging the enemy while the enemy is within rifle range of friendlies.

Something that people don't want to accept. They would rather listen to the Reformers who seemingly can't get away from WW2, no matter what.

Disagree, but we're getting way off topic.

Sadly, history says otherwise; even NATO had to agree that 'low and slow' is dead after Desert Storm (the majority of air losses were due to low and slow operations). Serbia hammered home that a semi-competent air defense network can effectively nullify air operations (Serbian ground and helicopter units were operating with impunity despite NATO air forces flying overhead).

That means the A-50 is toast in anything resembling a modern battlefield.

 

[Scott Kenny]

... that is logistically impossible for a massive drone fleet, and that's before including the human element into the equation.

You do not know what you're talking about.

Every grunt's SINCGARS radio operates on OTP encryption. Every day has a specific crypto load. Same applies to the rest of the radios in the US military.

If the US can manage to handle OTP encryption for most of 1mil grunts, the US can handle OTP encryption for a couple thousand drones.

 

[GruntFox]

You do not know what you're talking about.

Every grunt's SINCGARS radio operates on OTP encryption. Every day has a specific crypto load. Same applies to the rest of the radios in the US military.

If the US can manage to handle OTP encryption for most of 1mil grunts, the US can handle OTP encryption for a couple thousand drones.

[raises eyebrow]
As far as I know, OTP encryption isn't that widespread.

 

[Avimimus]

My thoughts:
- The move to low bypass ratio engines would limit range, time-on-target, and ability to loiter on-call.
- The aerodynamic surfaces are pretty close together (in particular, the box-wing design should lose a lot of aerodynamic efficiency with that close reverse stagger).
- The A-10 was originally a design that would use terrain masking for daylight attacks while accepting a high risk of loss due to ground fire. I'm not sure how these stealth features make sense in that context. I can't help but think that something like a stealth Panavia Tornado might make more sense.
- The design looks cool.

 

[Scott Kenny]

My thoughts:
- The move to low bypass ratio engines would limit range, time-on-target, and ability to loiter on-call.
- The aerodynamic surfaces are pretty close together (in particular, the box-wing design should lose a lot of aerodynamic efficiency with that close reverse stagger).
- The A-10 was originally a design that would use terrain masking for daylight attacks while accepting a high risk of loss due to ground fire. I'm not sure how these stealth features make sense in that context. I can't help but think that something like a stealth Panavia Tornado might make more sense.
- The design looks cool.

Agreed on all points.

- Higher bypass ratios mean slower spool-up times, which gets annoying (compare spool time of 737 Classics to anything with an F101 or F110). Going to a 2:1 or 3:1 BPR using an F414 core might be an option. I'm picturing an F110 fan section bolted to an F414 core, whatever that bypass ratio actually works out to.

- No suggestions for aerodynamics.

- I don't believe that a stealthy aircraft would lurk down in the weeds. The catch is if the USAF demands a gun with a big ammo bay or not.

- If the USAF doesn't demand a gun, that makes life easy. Build the NG ATA cranked kite design and let it drop 16x+ SDBs all over the enemy (or design a tiny BRA to hold all the SDBs that will physically fit into the bays**) from medium altitude.​

​

** I've got a reference for the ATA weapons bays that put the main bays at 185" long by 34" wide and 25" deep, times two bays. That makes for ~24x SDBs per bay, depending on what you assume for negative space around them for the rack. 7" square 72" long means a rack 3 deep and 4 wide, with 2 in tandem.​

​

- If the USAF does demand a gun, you're going to need a less stealthy shape than the NG ATA. Something a lot closer to the F-35, though I'd want a longer aircraft with bay space for different self-defense weapons. 4x AGM-122B Sidearm small ARMs, to smite any annoying Zeus that wants to rear its ugly head. Or any of the EO command guided SAMs that want to announce their presence.​

 

[publiusr]

The USAF has complained about the specialist equipment needed for the A-10's GAU-8

They squawk about everything --that's why A-10 should go to the Army.

Let the USAF have their little crop-duster whatsit.

 

[Avimimus]

- I don't believe that a stealthy aircraft would lurk down in the weeds. The catch is if the USAF demands a gun with a big ammo bay or not.

Thanks!

The one logical case for lurking down in the weeds is that it lets you focus on optimising stealth primarily against look-down-shoot-down threats... which might allow for producing a cheaper penetrating platform.

 

[Scott Kenny]

Thanks!

The one logical case for lurking down in the weeds is that it lets you focus on optimising stealth primarily against look-down-shoot-down threats... which might allow for producing a cheaper penetrating platform.

Stealth doesn't really work well down in the weeds. This was the ATA/A-12 problem. USN didn't realize that stealth works best up at altitude, they thought you still needed to fly down in the weeds like the A-6 (or F-111).

 

[Avimimus]

Stealth doesn't really work well down in the weeds. This was the ATA/A-12 problem. USN didn't realize that stealth works best up at altitude, they thought you still needed to fly down in the weeds like the A-6 (or F-111).

Why is this though? Relatively shorter distances to the radar?

 

[Scott Kenny]

Why is this though? Relatively shorter distances to the radar?

That, plus maneuvering to avoid terrain means big control surface movements giving glints and the whole plane giving glints.

For stealth, you want to keep your smallest-return lined up with the major threat radar.

 

[Avimimus]

That, plus maneuvering to avoid terrain means big control surface movements giving glints and the whole plane giving glints.

For stealth, you want to keep your smallest-return lined up with the major threat radar.

It is interesting to think of a design that could mask control surfaces as viewed from above... Something like a highly swept delta with all moving horizontal stabilisers underneath it with a high degree of vertical separation? That said, the design would need to be altering its attitude as a whole to allow terrain following.

 

[Scott Kenny]

It is interesting to think of a design that could mask control surfaces as viewed from above... Something like a highly swept delta with all moving horizontal stabilisers underneath it with a high degree of vertical separation? That said, the design would need to be altering its attitude as a whole to allow terrain following.

That's the problem.

As the plane maneuvers to avoid terrain, the flatter dorsal and ventral surfaces get exposed and your RCS blossoms.

 

[Avimimus]

That's the problem.

As the plane maneuvers to avoid terrain, the flatter dorsal and ventral surfaces get exposed and your RCS blossoms.

But if flying nape of the earth sensors from below are largely removed and engagement windows from the sides are also minimised... so the big challenge is dealing with the dorsal surface (and look-down-shoot-down weapons - which largely undermined the idea of low-altitude penetration).

 

[GruntFox]

But if flying nape of the earth sensors from below are largely removed and engagement windows from the sides are also minimised... so the big challenge is dealing with the dorsal surface (and look-down-shoot-down weapons - which largely undermined the idea of low-altitude penetration).

That's what networking is for. As I said elsewhere, we're getting to the point where sensor density is the value of 'yes', meaning the primary goal of aircraft design now is to be high and fast, and to minimize the time it takes to get detected and locked on.