Stavatti Aerospace set to generate some lift?

[draganm]

hello, I'm new to the forum and admittedly found it due to the thread topic. I would have preferred to jump into a previous discussion on this topic but unfortunately that thread was locked. I saw that discussion generated a lot of heated debate, but I am not here to argue. A quick search shows the last topic was from 2015.

I have no connection or vested interest in Stavatti, but this happened recently and it's why I'm following this now.
http://www.janes.com/article/71775/stavatti-moves-closer-to-machete-production-in-serbia

A quick background, Yugoslavia was an odd little country that tried to straddle the line between NATO and the USSR. If the cold war was a tug-of-war, then Yugoslavia was one of the ropes, and paid the price eventually. At it's height in the 1980's, , it was capable of manufacturing jet aircraft and helicopters, powered by license built Rolls Royce Viper Turbojets. It started building a modern Gen-4 fighter aircraft before the Republic imploded. Today, most of that capability is lost although some of the test-facilities like the large wind tunnel I believe are still operational in Serbia. The only aircraft being manufactured there currently is a small prop trainer, the Lasta 95.

Now Stavatti, I won't waste time going over this as a lot has already been said. here
https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,9308.15.html
and here
https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,24343.msg252607.html#msg252607

they did actually acquire their first developmental aircraft recently, the Javelin prototype from the now defunct Aviation Technology Group. That first flew 12 years ago, not sure if it's still airworthy?
http://defence-blog.com/news/stavatti-aerospace-unveils-new-javelin-military-jet-trainer-for-usaf-t-x-competition.html

here is the scope of their partnership with Yugoimport SPDR

http://www.stavatti.com/stavatti-enters-into-a-strategic-partnership-with-jugoimport-utva/

My questions to the good folks here
The whole push-prop design. Very few modern aircraft built using it, and aside from some push-pull flying boxcar thing from Vietnam, no modern military has ever used one AFAIK? From what I could gather, the rear prop tends to act as a very effective stabilizer, which is not very desirable in a combat aircraft. Then again, the Machette is intended as a COIN, so maybe maneuverability is not a primary concern? ? Is it possible that the newest computer based design and virtual-testing software could give this old idea a new life?

Second, the Pratt & Whitney Canada PW150. This engine seems pretty Universal, but how readily available is it really? Seems like in this political climate, any country can be declared a "rogue nation" at the drop of a hat and embargo's imposed, especially on "dual-use" equipment like turbine engines. is this really the best choice for a power-plant when tens of millions of dollars on the line?

thanks.

 

[royabulgaf]

A lot to
cover. Although the engine is manufactured in Canada, I am sure there is some US content, and it is probably not easy to replace. I understand that Airbus is having trouble selling some airliners to Iran with US approval due to certain parts. However, this is the way it goes. There is always China or Russia if they are concerned about those things. Look, I am 66 years old and I've been getting Air International since it was RAF Flying Review. This magazine is full of of companies with big dreams, great blueprints, and investors to fleece. I'm also reminded of some outfit that created a homebuilt supersonic sportplane. It went through more corporate reorganizations, bankruptcies, etc than completed airplanes.
Stavratti is know on this and other forums for years. The question was always was this outfit just someone who created a virtual aerospace company for his own amusement, someone with big ideas and no clue of the work, time, and capital required to go from a snappy website to aircraft in mass production, or a con man. It's somewhere between 2 and 3. Just don't give him any money you can't afford to throw away.

 

[hesham]

Welcome aboard Draganm,and nice find.

 

[draganm]

Welcome aboard Draganm,and nice find.

thanks

Look, I am 66 years old and I've been getting Air International since it was RAF Flying Review. This magazine is full of of companies with big dreams, great blueprints, and investors to fleece. I'm also reminded of some outfit that created a homebuilt supersonic sportplane. It went through more corporate reorganizations, bankruptcies, etc than completed airplanes.

no argument from me there , the number of companies that have not only come up with amazing designs, but actually created and flew promising prototypes, and then still went bankrupt is amazing.

Stavatti is known on this and other forums for years. The question was always was this outfit just someone who created a virtual aerospace company for his own amusement, someone with big ideas and no clue of the work, time, and capital required to go from a snappy website to aircraft in mass production, or a con man. It's somewhere between 2 and 3. Just don't give him any money you can't afford to throw away.

I don't know, but IMHO, based on other posts from people here who have corresponded with him, I would tentatively pin it at somewhere between 1 and 2.
2 things have greatly changed the game here.

1) he is partnered with RUD now and has a flying prototype.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ATG_Javelin
Granted it's not "his prototype" and that partnership with another "hobby firm" is negligible, but the prototype itself is not. It was built with investment from an International state sponsored firm, Israeli Aerospace Industries and was always intended as a military trainer. I have no illusions about it winning USAF TX, it will never achieve more there than gain some exposure there (and that's probably the entire intention ). However the global players now who could wind up buying it are many new emerging economic blocks. The global situation is more unstable than ever, and if you're small country that could be the focus of a "regime change" operation, even a small air force could be the difference between being seen as a sitting duck or place you further down the list of easy targets. To do this, somewhere between a prop trainer and your Mig's or JF-17's you need a LIFT aircraft . While some would argue that field is full, if you take away things that a major superpower can instantly cripple with an embargo, your choices shrink drastically.

2) Stavatti now has a State sponsored partnership with a country that is currently building aircraft and has a history producing Jets. This is huge IMO. For Stavatti it's the infrastructure and Capitol he's been looking for. For Yugoimport SPDR it's a chance to access a working prototype, possibly license to build a current Turbofan design, and possibly more investment from Western backers. I would love to know where the Javelin is, my 1st guess is in pieces at the Utva factory.

Granted there's many things can and probably will go wrong, but it's not the same "photoshop company" it was even 2 years ago.

 

[hesham]

That's new one,right ?.

 

[draganm]

That's new one,right ?.

no that's an old pic. I believe it's the prototype and only one built.

 

[draganm]

I realized I strayed from the premise from the first post of the Machette turbo-prop production to the Javelin LIFT concept. I think it raises the prospect of this possible scenario
The Machette is what has made the news in Janes Defense article, with a hypothetical sale to the Philippines. This is almost certainly the aircraft Beskar wants to build.
The Javelin is what Yugoimport is interested in, although a Turbo-prop COIN is not without market possibilities of it's own. The De-mothballing of the OV-10's recently being a case in point.

https://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/ov-10-broncos-were-sent-to-fight-isis-and-they-kicked-a-1764407068

 

[kcran567]

How can OV-10s kick A$$ against ISIS when they had highest casualty rates in vietnam? Small arms fire brought them down very easily.

Sound like PR lies to me to sell obsolete designs. The aerospace industry truly is degenerating.

 

[djfawcett]

That's new one,right ?.

no that's an old pic. I believe it's the prototype and only one built.

no that is a foam mockup

 

[draganm]

Well I'm no expert on the OV-10 Bronco, I just know they brought 2 back and ISIS didn't manage to down either one. Their losses in Vietnam were high but they also lost more than twice as many Skyraiders ,4 times as many F105's , and 5 times as many F4 Phantoms.
I think for successful operation of this type of slower moving COIN aircraft such as OV10 or Machette, where you benefit from the high loiters times and excellent Pilot to ground observability, a low threat environment is required.

For a State wishing to acquire such a platform, doesn't seem like many options out there to choose from except the Embraer super Tucano. The Iraqi army went so far as to even weaponize a pair of Cessna 208's.


Something just doesn't look right when your launching missiles from a plane with fixed tricycle landing gear

 

[dan_inbox]

How can OV-10s kick A$$ against ISIS when they had highest casualty rates in vietnam? Small arms fire brought them down very easily.

Maybe the jungle is less thick in Iraq than in Nam? Which reduces the need for low-and-slow predictable-path straffing runs.

Maybe the local tendency to expend gobs of ammunition without aiming helps, too. Who knows.

 

[DWG]

How can OV-10s kick A$$ against ISIS when they had highest casualty rates in vietnam? Small arms fire brought them down very easily.

Sound like PR lies to me to sell obsolete designs. The aerospace industry truly is degenerating.

We aren't in the early 70s any more. In Vietnam the OV-10s had an extremely limited weapons capability, Zunis and M-60s, and that brought them into the weapons range of a fairly disciplined opponent. In Syria and Iraq, they were likely using APKWS from stand-off ranges, or designating from even further out. As a surrogate to develop CONOPS for SOCOM's light attack project they're perfectly adequate.

 

[Eagle2009]

draganm,

Actually, those Cessna 208s came from the US equipped to carry AGM-114s. While they were designed for small air arms like the then "new" Iraqi Air Force, the Iraqis themselves had nothing to do with the design.

Officially known as AC-208s, they are built by ATK and have been sold to the Iraqi and Lebanese air forces.

 

[riggerrob]

The logic behind arming Cessna Caravans or crop-dusters is to out-gun the local ISIS/Al Queda/drug lords/etc. but not the USAF in case the USAF has to invade a second time.