Skip to comments.AT-6 Seen As Versatile Combat Aircraft
Posted on 05/18/2011 8:09:29 PM PDT by sukhoi-30mki
AT-6 Seen As Versatile Combat Aircraft
By David Fulghum
The turboprop-powered T-6 Texan II began life as a trainer and then morphed into the AT-6 light attack aircraft for the Greek air force. Now, as the AT-6B/C, it is promising to become an inexpensive path to network-centric operations, precision strike and advanced surveillance for other air forces.
Nor is there a foreseeable end to the development potential envisioned for the two-seater. It offers 1,600 shp, 5-6-hr. endurance and an A-10C cockpita combination thats being created by the team of Hawker Beechcraft and Lockheed Martin.
As for what a light attack platform should be, the debate is over, declares Daniel Hinson, AT-6 demonstration and test manager and chief test pilot. The answer, he contends, is an affordable manned platform that is toughened to the demands of pilot training and that lends itself to integrating niche features that include precision weapons as well as advanced intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR) capabilities.
The next great debate will be to define light attack weapons, Hinson says. There are weapons in the inventory but they dont take advantage of the platforms long persistence, ISR sensors or the ability to stay overhead and deliver ordnance over and over.
Producing the right weapons effects is the cornerstone of light attack.
If you are talking about counter-insurgency target sets, you want to be able to pick the right weapon and place it precisely where and when it needs to be there, Hinson says. That requires persistence and network-centric command and control. Users also can take advantage of the turboprops low cost, austere-field operations and its ability to use small weapons that produce the needed lethality.
To increase endurance, the team is looking at ways to add fuel without penalizing the aircrafts aerodynamics.
Were working on putting 325 lb. of extra internal fuel in the wings, which would give another 45 min. to an hour of flight, says Hinson. I flew 4.6 hr. and still had 400 lb. of gas. That was with the IR/EO [infrared/electro-optical] turret and external fuel tanks, but not weapons. If the mission is ISR, we can stand out there a long time. Five hours is very doable and four is a pretty good standard. Being able to hang out in the battle with the same guys on station without having to cycle out for inflight refueling provides an amazing [amount of continuity] for an airborne mission.
A second imperative for the AT-6 program is to leverage prior Defense Department spending on people, programs, logistics, platforms and training systems.
Weve taken the EO/IR sensor [feature] out of the MC-12W ISR aircraft and we have integrated all of those capabilities, Hinson says. That means the Defense Department is familiar with every part were putting on the aircraft.
For actual combat use, the AT-6 is considered to be in the right altitude band to give the best tradeoff between avoiding threats and staying close enough to see the fight.
Were networked into the land battle with the A-10s and F-16s, says Derek Hess, director of the AT-6 light attack program. We will have the ability to exchange still images, nine-line messages and streaming video as well as the flexibility of a helmet-mounted cueing system, he adds.
Right now specialized missions are the focus of the interaction of this aircraft and its capabilities. They include joint terminal attack controller training, intelligence processing and dissemination training while serving as a surrogate [unmanned] platform for U.S. peacetime training missions, says Hinson. The mission set lends itself to homeland defense missions like border and port security, counter-narcoterrorism, maritime patrol, disaster area imagery or search and rescue.
Several key piecesdefensive survival equipment (missile warning and countermeasures systems) and the Scorpion helmet-mounted cueing systemare drawing particularly intense scrutiny.
When you tie it into a network-centric, weapons-delivery platform, the package becomes a significant force multiplier, Hinson says. When you talk about having Forward Air Controller-Airborne [FAC-A capabilities] in both [front and rear] cockpits, it is huge. We are A-10-centric, so a second cockpit is something that continues the evolution of capabilities as new tactics, techniques and procedures emerge.
Another part of the AT-6 concept involves introducing advanced communications. The AT-6 program was able to fly as part of intercept missions using a classified situational awareness data-link network (SADL). As a participant in an air-sovereignty alert, the aircraft detected and intercepted contacts.
We locked up tracks and intercepted unknown aircraft using the [SADL] network . . . over Washington with air defense pilots on board, Hinson says. We can also exercise the full-motion video capability with a digital common multi-band data link. The SADL radio functioned as an A-10 would; therefore any message upgrade that would be integrated into the A-10 could also be integrated into the AT-6.
Of particular interest is the Link-16 and SADL J16.0, a J-series message carrying an image. The idea is to send images and streaming video via a Rover-compatible system, which is important for ISR and FAC-A missions. Other possible roles include network analysis and long-term electronic surveillance.
With the J-series messaging on the AT-6, [data] lends itself to exportability throughout the entire fielded infrastructure in any theater you could imagine to include special operations forces on the ground without a lot of support, Hinson says. We can establish and make those nodes in the network come to life and immediately distribute intelligence and targeting information beyond the local network.
Electronic warfare and network attack also become possible with the networked, A-10C cockpits installation in the AT-6.
We are a node by virtue of the fact that we are in the network, whether it is distributed by a ground station or a King Air or any of the other systems that are out there, Hess says. We have the flexibility to use that node in the network in a variety of ways. That includes using future systems that increase the number and size of antennas or using distributed antennas as nodes in an electronic battle management network. We look forward to a future where we can take advantage of a small aircraft with full network capability, because the potential is enormous.
There are also interesting matches in the combat arena, particularly when the AT-6B is paired with additional sensors on a larger, standoff support aircraft.
Light attack aircraft and a King Air-based platform using off-the-shelf data links [offer the ability] to rapidly work data between platforms to generate and prosecute target sets in the irregular warfare environment, says Hinson.
Moreover, the aircrafts long endurance at low speeds allows it to move closer to the target and monitor its emissions longer.
The ability to get close increases operational flexibility, particularly since we are not dependent on satellites or external data links or [unmanned aerial system] support vehicles, Hess says. We also have self-defenses and armor so that we can afford to take some risk. You also have a man in the back who can step in. Theres loads of potential there.
That brings up the possibility of arming the AT-6 with air-to-air missiles.
The AIM-120 [medium-range air-to-air missile] would be a stretch, but we certainly have plans for the AIM-9X, Hinson says. Its certainly possible.
Artwork: Hawker Beechcraft
(It's a T-28D for you young whipper-snappers. That's a B-17 engine hanging off the front.)
Looks like a WW2 bird (even leaving out the nose art).
I suppose looks are deceiving....
Air medals, valor and Purple Hearts; in appreciation for those who do God's work.
T-28A/B/C Engine Pratt & Whitney R-1820. Not familiar with Ds. Great plane to fly, fully acrobatic and forgiving. Go Navy!
Sort of a Spitfire/Mustang look to it. Funny how we’re going back to a platform that’s 70 years old.
It’ll be hard to beat the A-10’s cost and firepower.
The “D” had added hardpoints for ordnance plus an ejection seat (Martin-Baker, IIRC)
Yeah, the T-28 was a kick to fly! When did you go through Pensacola?
As to the “forgiving”, it was kinda interesting in spin recovery. Put in the corrections and it would go another 3/4 turn, pause briefly, then snap into the opposite rotation if you didn’t center the rudder pedals ASAP.
Fun bird to fly, though. GOBS of torque!
Thanks, that’s a new adaptation to me. Super reliable aircraft.
Somebody in our neighborhood has an original AT-6. They bring it out on weekends to practice aerobatics over the golf course.
The sound of that P&W Wasp engine is unmistakable -- an intrusive, whining buzz.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but they built that plane to accommodate that engine, no?
Kind of like building the Wart Hog around that enormous gatling gun....
That explains a great deal.
For a second there I thought I was looking at a P-51.
Wondering why it has to be a two seater? A-10 pilots fly their missions alone.
I believe the idea behind the T-28 was to give student pilots experience in high torque aircraft prior to jumping into a monster like the AD-1 Skyraider with the R-3350-26W 2,800 hp engine.
All of the student pilots I knew were unable to hold the brakes on the T-28 during their first engine run-up. It would either creep forward, or they’d let one brake slip and it would pivot around the other gear.
I had a buddy trying to learn a maneuver called “Approach Turn Stall Recovery”. The correct proceedure was to lower the nose, level the wings and give it 36” MAP (power). He kept getting it wrong, got frustrated and slammed the throttle to the stop, 48” MAP.
The resultant 1425 hp, or thereabouts, torque-rolled the aircraft 720 degrees, two complete rolls before he could catch it.
I talked to the private owner of a T-28 at Sun-n-Fun one year who had previously owned a P-51. I asked him how the T-28 compared and he said that it was very similar in power to an early P-51A.
Got a teeny bit of stick time on one a few weeks ago.
I'm just frustrated because I know some of the guys that worked on the Tucano project and then got the rug pulled out from under them by the Kansas congressional delegation right before they were going to deploy.
The engine intake is on the opposite side of the fuselage from the gun muzzle. Otherwise the engine would flame out from the muzzle blast and gasses.
And the Navy/Marine version, the SNJ
“Wondering why it has to be a two seater? A-10 pilots fly their missions alone.”
It is based on a trainer.
Interesting. Thank you for sharing this.
The Pilatus PC-7 itself is 1950’s vintage Pilatus PC-3 which has been retrofitted with a turbo prop engine in place of the original 260 horsepower Lycoming piston engine so the design goes back a long, long way.
It's an excellent training aircraft but the basic airframe could be a bit too small to carry enough weaponry to be effective compared to Embraer Tucano, although it would be a better choice for the ISR role than the much larger Tucano
Very sadly, yes. Politics, again, and our team suffers.
Aviation Week just ran a story that procurement of 15 airframes is being held-up for a bunch of congressional/bureaucratic mumbo-jumbo reasons. When and if the AT-6B/C gets into service will be a miracle.
What pit does Lockheed have their suction in? They have done such great job on delivery of the F-22 and F-35 they are being given another preferential shot at this project? Why?
Seems like the OV-10 or something like that would be better.
We still could have done the Embraer yesterday, assembling kits in the U.S. I think the LUH-72 was done almost the same way with Eurocopter, until EADS finished a U.S. manufacturing facility. The Lakota contract was for a lot more aircraft than this COIN project.
Reported PCola 10/73. One interesting T-28B spin recovery was made around 1975 at NAS Corpus Christi. Pilot was unable to regain control during spin so he prepared to parachute out. Ready-set, open canopy .. which slides back. The spin stopped immediate. Pilot reported back to base, “In, up and complete”.. Grand Pa Pettibones heard all about it.
Not quite. the Greek T6A NTA is jus a T-6A with extra hardpoints, To turn it into the AT-6B is going to require similar work that turned the T-37A into the A-37B
I’m aware of that, but the back seat area could be configured for equipment or additional fuel.
The A10 can’t be appreciated without a demo. It’s agility is almost beyond belief.
I totally agree. It’s beyond awesome.
I reported into Pensacola July 73. ended up flying CH-53D (mostly) with HMH-461.
One T-28 instructor had an interesting entry into the “Funny Things the Students Did” book.
“Student Initiated spin at 13,000’ MSL.
Student froze with stick full aft.
Student did not respond to verbal commands to center stick.
Instructor was unable to push stick forward with both hands pressure.
Instructor finally succeeded in getting foot behind stick and kicking it out of student’s grip.
Recovered from spin at 5,000’ MSL. (Note: Training Command SOP requires bailout if Spin not recovered by 5,000’ AGL.)
Returned to altitude to resume spin training.
Student successfully recovered this time.
Student did four successful spin recoveries.”
Talk about EARNING your flight pay!
If they’ve got any sense they will enable it to be configured both ways, When you don’t need an artillery spotter or some other pax in the back seat, it’s nice to have the option of extra gear or fuel.
Exceptionally crazy job. This stud went props to VRC 50 flying C-1A CODs .. Many traps, many engine failures. One time I had to fly from Iwakuni to Atsugi for repairs. Only there could I get the RMI, VOR, TACAN,etc repaired. Flew at night on airways using only a wet compass and ADF. Fudged all reports.
I flew a CH-53 out to the USS Coronado, then rode her to Rosy Roads, PR for 6 weeks of supporting an artillery battalion training over on Vieques.
My wife came down for a visit & stayed with me in the BOQ. The Navy was running a daily COD run to St Thomas to support a radar station, so we grabbed two “Space-A” seats on the C-1.
My wife thought that flight was a hoot! Spent the day wandering around St Thomas & hob-nobbing with the rich tourists, then caught the C-1 back to RR, PR. Wonderful vacation!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.