The return of the 'Freedom Fighter'?

Many readers will recall the Northrop F-5A/B of the 1960's, dubbed the 'Freedom Fighter', and its further developed siblings, the F-5E/F Tiger II of the 1970's.  They were designed as lightweight, low-cost fighter-bombers, to be supplied to US allies who lacked the technological infrastructure to operate higher-performance, more complex aircraft, or which could not afford them.  They were an extremely successful design, and many upgraded examples are still flying in the air forces of Botswana, Brazil, Iran, Kenya, South Korea, Switzerland, Taiwan and elsewhere.  The trainer version of the aircraft, known as the T-38 Talon, is still the USAF's only dedicated supersonic training aircraft.

Here's a 1960's promotional film from Northrop highlighting the F-5A's capabilities.

Other companies tried to produce low-cost, simple combat aircraft, with some success.  Cessna developed its T-37 Tweet trainer into the A-37 Dragonfly light strike aircraft, which saw service during the Vietnam War.  It was later exported to several countries.  The video clip below shows a former South Vietnamese Air Force A-37, filmed at an air show in New Zealand.

It looks like these lightweight, simple strike aircraft are about to be joined by a modern successor.  Textron Corp., parent company of Cessna and Bell Helicopter, has partnered with Airland Enterprises to develop - at their own expense - a new lightweight strike aircraft that can also be used for 'homeland security'-type missions.

They're calling it the Scorpion - a name that will be familiar to aviation enthusiasts from the late 1940's and 1950's.  Its internal bay will have a capacity of up to 3,000 pounds of weapons and/or sensors and/or fuel, plus up to 6,200 pounds on six underwing stations.

However, it'll almost certainly never carry that much in total - its empty weight is given as 11,800 pounds, and its maximum takeoff weight at 21,250 pounds, meaning it can carry a maximum payload of 9,450 pounds, including pilot(s), fuel, weapons, any special sensors or guidance pods, etc.  It'll probably carry 2,000 to 4,000 pounds of ordnance on typical missions.  Nevertheless, this is a significant capability, given modern precision-guided weapons.  For example, if it carries the 250lb. Small Diameter Bomb, it could easily load eight to twelve of them, with a high probability of most of them hitting their targets.  It's been portrayed with sensor turrets front and rear (see below), meaning it could guide such weapons to their targets itself if needed, or designate targets for weapons dropped by other aircraft.

A news report cited at the company's Web site had this to say:

It takes a gutsy move for a company to pitch a brand new, clean-sheet aircraft to the Pentagon for a set of requirements it has not even said it wants, and to present this idea while defense spending in the U.S. faces massive cuts.

But, that is exactly what a newly formed joint venture between Textron and a young company—AirLand Enterprises, formed in 2011—is doing. Textron is best known for its Cessna business jets and turboprops, as well as Bell Helicopter’s long experience with rotorcraft. Its partner, AirLand, however, was formed by a small group of investors, including retired defense officials, to explore a new concept for light attack.

. . .

The Scorpion demonstrator is intended to whet the U.S. Air Force’s appetite with the promise of a low procurement and operating cost. The pitch is for this aircraft, which is optimized for 5-hr. endurance with onboard intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR) collectors and weapons, to handle the Air Force’s low-end missions such as U.S.-based interdiction, quick-reaction natural disaster support and air sovereignty patrols. The goal is to field an aircraft capable of operating for less than $3,000 per flying hour; the company declined to cite a target unit cost. By contrast, the Pentagon in June cited the cost per flying hour of the F-16, which currently performs many of these missions, as $24,899.

There's more at the link.

This is a very interesting development.  No price for the aircraft has yet been revealed, but the very successful single-engined turboprop Embraer EMB 314 Super Tucano is available for $10-$12 million apiece, depending on sensor and avionics fit.  If the Scorpion uses commercially available components and engines (and economical 4,000lb.-class turbofan engines are commonplace on larger executive jets), it could conceivably come in at not much higher than that price level - perhaps $15 million for an adequately-equipped aircraft, or up to $20 million for a really well-equipped one with lots of electronics on board.  It would offer a lot more speed and load capacity than the Super Tucano, plus longer endurance and greater versatility.

The operating cost per hour is a very significant motivating factor.  As noted above, if the Scorpion hits its target running cost of no more than $3,000 per hour, that'll be more than eight times less than a contemporary single-engined fighter such as the F-16.  As for fifth-generation aircraft like the F-22 or F-35, there's no comparison at all.  The USAF might well field some of these as light strike aircraft for the Air National Guard, saving a bundle on maintaining its aircrews' flight status, and equip them with avionics that aren't all that dissimilar to the front-line combat aircraft they might fly in time of war.  They would even deploy the same weapons, in many cases.  Furthermore, in operating theaters like Afghanistan, where there are few air defenses to worry about and 'fast movers' are really overkill, these lighter, slower aircraft would come into their own.

It's also interesting to consider the Scorpion as a potential jet trainer.  It's already a two-seater, so altering the cockpit configuration to suit an instructor-and-student combination wouldn't be much of a stretch.  The T-38 Talon trainer was developed out of the F-5B fighter-bomber, and the A-37 Dragonfly was the reverse - a strike aircraft developed from the T-37 Tweet trainer.  Could the process be repeated again with the Scorpion?  This would have significant cost advantages for cash-strapped countries, which could buy Scorpions as both light strike aircraft and advanced trainers.  Aircraft performing the latter function would retain their weapons capability, so that in time of need they could be 'mobilized' as additional combat aircraft.

There's another aspect to consider.  This could easily be developed into an optionally piloted aircraft, so that instead of sending vulnerable aircrew out on a long surveillance mission over potentially hostile terrain or in potentially hazardous conditions, the aircraft could be treated as a UAV and dispatched under the control of a pilot sitting safely on the ground.  I daresay that wouldn't be too much of a stretch.

There are several publicity videos of the new aircraft on YouTube.  Here's one - a time-lapse showing the assembly of the prototype.

I'll be watching the further development of this aircraft with considerable interest.

Peter