Super Tucanos instead of F-35s????

[Alvis 3.14159]

Heard an interview on the radio the other day where a Professor at the Military College of Canada was advocating Canada should buy the Super Tucano instead of the F-35.  His logic was that since NORAD has stressed "Low and slow" aircraft as something that may be future targets, the Tucano would be well suited to intercept them. He glossed over the threat of Bear bombers and seemed to think the Super Tucano would be a good CAS aircraft for the Forces to use. I found most of his points to border on the silly (How exactly do you intercept a Learjet with a 200 mile headstart with a Tucano?) and since this topic went into stupid political posturing on ARC over the fact it was broadcast on the CBC, I never got much feedback on the positive aspects of the Super (or non-super) Tucano.

Oh right...the Prof stated Canada already uses the Tucano as the CT-156...funny...10 seconds of Google cleared that up for me right off. He lost most of his credibility with me on that gaffe.

Alvis pi

[anthonyp]

I have the mental image of a Super Tucano with Meteors under its wings using them as both radar and booster rocket.  It takes a particularly drunk Canadian Forces pilot to successfully complete an intercept.

[GTX]

I have the mental image of a Super Tucano with Meteors under its wings using them as both radar and booster rocket. 

Dare you to model it (or anything close to it)!

regards,

Greg

[anthonyp]

Need a couple more Meteors first (and another Tucano).  Amraams would do OK, but there's something about the Meteor that makes the whole mental picture just utterly ridiculous.

[chrisonord]

Do it, you know it is your destiny
Chris.

[Alvis 3.14159]

Wouldn't you know, both the Airfix and PM kit are both OOP! Thank goodness for the horde!

Alvis Pi

[kitnut617]

Oh right...the Prof stated Canada already uses the Tucano as the CT-156...funny...10 seconds of Google cleared that up for me right off. He lost most of his credibility with me on that gaffe.

Alvis pi

Yes we don't use the Tucano do we, the CT-156 is a Raytheon Harvard II.  I was going to build a Tucano and a Harvard II as a Choco and Winjeel sometime ago, but it got shelved for a while----

[Radish]

mmmmmmmmm.

Sopwith Camel with 'winders.....I can do that one!!

[ChernayaAkula]

<...> He glossed over the threat of Bear bombers <...>

With good reason. The Bear's top speed is almost twice as fast as the Tucano's top speed.  Even at its cruising speed, the Bear is almost 300kph faster.

As a CAS aircraft, I guess the Tucano can make sense. In some theatres. As long as the opponent has little or no air defences. Or in a peace-keeping mission, monitoring things from the air with good endurance. On the other hand, IIRC, the Ethiopians encountered SA-6 and ZSU-23-4 operated by the Islamic Courts Union (a non-state actor!) over Somalia. While both systems are not really cutting edge, I don't know how a Tucano would fare against them.

[deathjester]

<...> He glossed over the threat of Bear bombers <...>

With good reason. The Bear's top speed is almost twice as fast as the Tucano's top speed.  Even at its cruising speed, the Bear is almost 300kph faster.

As a CAS aircraft, I guess the Tucano can make sense. In some theatres. As long as the opponent has little or no air defences. Or in a peace-keeping mission, monitoring things from the air with good endurance. On the other hand, IIRC, the Ethiopians encountered SA-6 and ZSU-23-4 operated by the Islamic Courts Union (a non-state actor!) over Somalia. While both systems are not really cutting edge, I don't know how a Tucano would fare against them.

I should imagine it would fare rather badly.  Especially the ZSU23-4.

[rickshaw]

<...> He glossed over the threat of Bear bombers <...>

With good reason. The Bear's top speed is almost twice as fast as the Tucano's top speed.  Even at its cruising speed, the Bear is almost 300kph faster.

As a CAS aircraft, I guess the Tucano can make sense. In some theatres. As long as the opponent has little or no air defences. Or in a peace-keeping mission, monitoring things from the air with good endurance. On the other hand, IIRC, the Ethiopians encountered SA-6 and ZSU-23-4 operated by the Islamic Courts Union (a non-state actor!) over Somalia. While both systems are not really cutting edge, I don't know how a Tucano would fare against them.

Interesting.  SA-6s?  You mean this?



[interestingly, in light of the recent UK defence cuts that particular vehicle is owned by the RAF! ]

Or do you mean SA-7?  This?

[ChernayaAkula]

You read correctly. SA-6 Gainful!  See page 9 under II. A. 7. of THIS REPORT to the UN Security Council. This would seem to confirm it, but I think I read it somewhere else first. At around the time the Ethiopians started to take part in the mess.

[anthonyp]

Now knowing the Bear is that much faster, I'm seeing SRAM solid rocket motors strapped on the fuselage like JATO bottles, except used like nitrous on race cars.  Again, the drunken Canadian Ace makes a name for himself, just now the control stick is replaced with a Nintendo 64 controller and he thinks he's playing Mario Cart.

"Flying red and green tortise shells incoming!!!  AAAAIIIIEEEEEEEE!!!!!!"

[rickshaw]

You read correctly. SA-6 Gainful!  See page 9 under II. A. 7. of THIS REPORT to the UN Security Council. This would seem to confirm it, but I think I read it somewhere else first. At around the time the Ethiopians started to take part in the mess.

Interesting.  They must be using it in the visually guided mode.  I simply cannot see them being able to maintain (or use for long) a STRAIGHT FLUSH radar system.  Even with its 1960s level of technology, it would be as far as I understand it, beyond the capabilities of the Islamic Courts movement to maintain such a system for very long.  While the visual mode would make such a large missile quite a surprise to an aircraft flying at a relatively high altitude, being able to acquire and maintain a lock on would be difficult.

Even so, while I can see the Somalis getting a few, I can't see the Taleban or other insurgent groups getting any.   Everybody basically ignores Somalia as much as possible and they have access to the sea so they could slip some in.  The Taleban would have a bit more of a hard time driving one of these over the passes from Pakistan, I think (I hope!).   

[Fulcrum]

If I was that professor I would have suggested Flankers instead of Super Tucanos. Flankers could be multi-role with larger range than F-35 & CF-18's. Then again, it is just simple thinking.

If I was advising the Ethiopians & AU, I would suggest some cheap SEAD aircraft(Su-27's with ALARM's or HARM's or Mig-23's with the same armament). But the only losses so far with regards to the peacekeeping mission are caused by SA-7's(1 Ethiopian Mi-24 & 2-3 civilian-operated IL-76's.The SA-6 & ZSU-23-4's are either destroyed or non-operational(maybe with French &/or American "help")

AMISOM would have MAJOR problems had they are kept operational or properly-maintained.

Even so, while I can see the Somalis getting a few, I can't see the Taleban or other insurgent groups getting any. The Taleban would have a bit more of a hard time driving one of these over the passes from Pakistan, I think (I hope!).   

It depends on the stability of the Pakistani gov't & military, if they go under(I truly hope that it never happens) NATO would have an extremely awlful time dealing with newly-heavily-armed, ex-Pakistani army tailban guerillas.

It depends on what equipment you are suppling to a country who could go under & be a future threat(like Saudi Arabia with it's newest batch of weapons about to be suppiled by the U.S. ).