Blitzfighter / Bushwacker / ATLAS lightweight attack studies

[Coiler]

I'm not sure what program "Bushwacker" is referring to in the thread title, but my recollection is that there was a Piper Aircraft 1977-78 program of the same name.

It was called the Enforcer.

 

[whatismoo]

USAF did not have any competent CAS doctrine in WW2, so go to the people that did.

Elwood Quesada slander!

 

[Scott Kenny]

Elwood Quesada slander!

You mean the guy who strapped 3x Bazookas to the wings of his Airborne Observation Post? Without orders?

 

[whatismoo]

You mean the guy who strapped 3x Bazookas to the wings of his Airborne Observation Post? Without orders?

No? I mean Lt Gen Elwood "Pete" Quesada, CB, CBE, commander of IX TAC in N-W Europe who did (or at least presided over) a lot of innovative work with integrating and training dedicated FACs and improving air battle management with microwave radar, among other things. You're (I assume) thinking of LTCOL Charles Carpenter.

ALSO! German CAS during WWII was dogshit, and the entire penny packet 'flying artillery' nonsense was suicidal in an age where you need a strike package to get through enemy air defenses.

 

[Scott Kenny]

ALSO! German CAS during WWII was dogshit, and the entire penny packet 'flying artillery' nonsense was suicidal in an age where you need a strike package to get through enemy air defenses.

Remember that the A-10's mission brief was written around Vietnam CAS and CSAR escort missions, not Europe.

 

[apparition13]

Remember that the A-10's mission brief was written around Vietnam CAS and CSAR escort missions, not Europe.

It wouldn't need the GAU-8 for that. The initial 1967 brief might have been for VN, but detailed requirements from 1970 were for Europe as well. The YA-9 and YA-10 first flew, and had their fly off, in 1972, which is before the 1973 Yom Kippur war demonstrated the effectiveness of modern (for the time) air defenses against CAS. Which is why the Israelis looked started developing the Lavi for their CAS platform.

Even then they would still have been useful as mobile anti-tank teams to stop a breakthrough. If all of them flying at the time had been shot down, but they had been instrumental in stopping a Soviet invasion, they would have been worth it.

Which is a long way of saying a guns-only Blitzfighter doesn't make that much sense by the late 70s, but something small, cheap, fast, and able to use fire and forget missiles like WASP or the Swedish RB83 (and anti-radiation versions of those) could be. And you'll notice the Atlas designs have mission packs that include hypervelocity missiles or ECM pods (one or the other, so I presume they'd operate in teams with some jamming while others attack), while the similar SABA designs from the UK also have provisions for smart rounds, so the guns-only small and cheap idea had quickly been replaced by smart rounds, ecm, small, and cheap-but-not-quite-that-cheap.

 

[apparition13]

Remember that the A-10's mission brief was written around Vietnam CAS and CSAR escort missions, not Europe.

It wouldn't need the GAU-8 for that. The initial 1967 brief might have been for VN, but detailed requirements from 1970 were for Europe as well. The YA-9 and YA-10 first flew, and had their fly off, in 1972, which is before the 1973 Yom Kippur war demonstrated the effectiveness of modern (for the time) air defenses against CAS. Which is why the Israelis looked started developing the Lavi for their CAS platform.

Even then they would still have been useful as mobile anti-tank teams to stop a breakthrough. If all of them flying at the time had been shot down, but they had been instrumental in stopping a Soviet invasion, they would have been worth it.

Which is a long way of saying a guns-only Blitzfighter doesn't make that much sense by the late 70s, but something small, cheap, fast, and able to use fire and forget missiles like WASP or the Swedish RB83 (and anti-radiation versions of those) could be. The closest we actually got to something like that is the AMX, which is quite similar to the SAAB 38, but it didn't have anything like the RB83 missile, and it wasn't exactly cheap.

 

[Firefinder]

Even if the A10 was design for Nam.

The designers fail to learn a VERY important lesson from Nam.

If you CANT SEE the target.

You payload is worthless.

The absolute mauling the likes of the Tram A6s and B-58Gs did under Programs like Tropic Moon and Lead sled with their FLIR, Low light optics, and SLAR to the North compare their none equipment counterparts prove that. Those tests took place in 1966 to 70, more then enough to to go into the AX Program as a NEED as seen by the Army AH56.

Hell Lead Sled was started for just that reason after the fast jets fail to FIND a convoy of some 500 trucks the observers were giving the grid coordinates to.

And yet the A10 didn't get any fucking sensors of note til it got hang the Litening target pods in the mid 2000s.

And while it could use the Mavericks as an jury rig deal, it was extremely sub optimal and didn't do anything for the gun or other ordance.

In the forest and clouds of Europe the A10 wouldn't have done that much better then the fast Fighters did in Nam honestly.

The Above applies for the Blitzfighter cause like the A10

The Mark 1 Eyeball was it's only sensor.

 

[apparition13]

Even if the A10 was design for Nam.

The designers fail to learn a VERY important lesson from Nam.

If you CANT SEE the target.

You payload is worthless.

The absolute mauling the likes of the Tram A6s and B-58Gs did under Programs like Tropic Moon and Lead sled with their FLIR, Low light optics, and SLAR to the North compare their none equipment counterparts prove that. Those tests took place in 1966 to 70, more then enough to to go into the AX Program as a NEED as seen by the Army AH56.

Hell Lead Sled was started for just that reason after the fast jets fail to FIND a convoy of some 500 trucks the observers were giving the grid coordinates to.

And yet the A10 didn't get any fucking sensors of note til it got hang the Litening target pods in the mid 2000s.

And while it could use the Mavericks as an jury rig deal, it was extremely sub optimal and didn't do anything for the gun or other ordance.

In the forest and clouds of Europe the A10 wouldn't have done that much better then the fast Fighters did in Nam honestly.

The Above applies for the Blitzfighter cause like the A10

The Mark 1 Eyeball was it's only sensor.

Originally yes, but by the time you get to the ATLAS designs from Vought that has changed. Post 14 in this thread shows an FLIR installation, and 15 shows a swappable nose with various sensors types.

You are right about the A-10 though. The NAW/A-10B should have absolutely gone forward, and at a minimum the proposed buy of 180 replacing an equivalent number of A-10As should have been made.