OT: US Air Force AT-6 Wolverine
Not sure if anyone pays attention to this sort of thing, but as a retired AF pilot, this sort of thing is exciting to me. BUT the part that may be of interest to the board is the name designation of the latest addition to the Air Force's inventory.
The base aircraft is used as a primary trainer, but they've added the "attack" moniker to it, light attack used to support ground troops in a very maneuverable aircraft that operates close to the ground. The AT-6 Wolverine is very aptly named, IMO.
If you'd like more info on it, if it is of any interest to you: https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/39302/the-air-force-finally-has-i…
Thanks for your service!
mildly similar to a P-51, but smaller of course.
what the numbers on it - altitude/speed/weight, etc. ?
Here are some of the numbers for the T-6 Texan trainer version, my guess is that the numbers on the Wolverine aren't quite as good because it's weighted down more and has some additional drag components on it:
- Cruise speed: 320 mph (510 km/h, 280 kn)
- Never exceed speed: 364 mph (586 km/h, 316 kn)
- Range: 1,000 mi (1,700 km, 900 nmi)
- Service ceiling: 31,000 ft (9,400 m)
- g limits: +7.0g −3.5g
One of my great regrets was not getting back into AETC and flying that vs. the amazing, but POS Tweet that I FAIPed in.
Almost wondering if they souped up the engines the way they did with the AT-37. That would give it better performance, but I assume the G-Limits would be lower based on the payload they carry.
This is the "Texan II" a relatively modern turboprop powered aircraft - it's unrelated to the WWII vintage T-6. Bigger than a P-51 although they sort of look vaguely similar.
Make more A-10s
Looks like they're keeping the A-10s around until 2040 and are going through an upgrade, but I don't think they'll be making more. It's WAYYYY to expensive to spin up an assembly line on it, but keeping it around is a good thing. The potential replacement, however, would NOT be anything like the AT-6 though.
AT 10. A flying Canon., Death from above and nearly indestructible
The A-10's gatling cannon next to a VW.
The Warthog is one of my favorites:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairchild_Republic_A-10_Thunderbolt_II
I'm surprised they went back on this decision. I'm glad they did, since I love that particular aircraft. This seems like a relatively low-budget decision as compared to the sheer cost of engaging in modern warfare these days.
Yes, but this fills in a line between helicopter and A-10 support and likely allows for forward observation, similarly to the old OV-10. The more that the military moves towards counterinsurgencies, the more planes like this will have roles again.
Beat Air Force !
How about a flyover next fall with a few of these!
USAF hasn't got the memo that close air support and recon can be accomplished in a budget friendly manner with unmanned vehicles. There is a reason the Navy (Marines) and Army are investing in their own close air support technologies--neither service thinks the USAF is committed to the mission. Nevertheless, it's a nice little tech niche to prop up FMS (foreign military sales) to some of our more checkered partners and flexible dev platform.
An AT-6 is better for CAS than a Reaper and cheaper than an A-10. An WAYYY cheaper than ground pounding with an F-35 in an uncontested airspace.
"Maybe so sir. . .but not today.." - "Maverick" Pete Mitchell
what did you fly?
Warthog?
I actually flew C130s, the backbone of deterrence! ?
Four fans of freedom baby!!!
I used to live near Yokota -- plenty of 130's in and out of there.
I was at Yokota from 03-05
Fellow Herc bubba. Plus one to you sir!
Back at you, brother!!
Highly debatable ?
Ahhhh, what do you know....
March 23rd, 2021 at 12:05 AM ^
Yay, for a plane called Wolverine, but what's really the reason for it? It's supposed to help our allies, but the A-29 Super Tucano exists. I followed a link in the article to this one, and I'm wondering, is the Air Force just doing this to show they're doing something? It seems they're really not interested in having a bunch of these or similar planes. From the end of the article (which was posted two years ago):
All told, the Air Force’s light attack program might not be officially canceled, but there appears to be no plans at present for the service to fly the planes in combat itself. What the service is left with is a wholly unnecessary program to help allies do what they’re already doing while ignoring its own internal demands. In other words, the idea that there is more need for experimentation is laughable. We needed a fleet of these aircraft not just yesterday, but well over a decade ago.
You’re such a nerd GW
Takes one... Or something...