Quote:
Originally Posted by rcaf_777
I choses the Mustang due to is size, beacuse your going to have take it apart to have fit underground for storage, the mustang will just fit a 40 Ft Seacan, I also though the MP would'nt want to attractive attention by building a some what modern frontline combat aircraft.
|
RCAF,
I think MP aircraft (rotor and pro-driven) can be fitted with fusion-electric motors, even jet propulsion (via MHD turbine). Because this gets into "HAAM expensive" territory I don't see MP aircraft aircraft as being common but there could be some useful ones stashed here and there, say, a dozen or so.
As far as technical notes go a Mustang with a fusion-electric power plant would be less vulnerable but there are probably platforms that give you a much better bang for your buck. Further, like the Bronco the Spad/Skyraider can have passenger seats (12) installed in the rear fuselage or be used as an air ambulance. If you're looking for ground attack aircraft that isn't used by the US or a front-line aircraft, other contenders might be a licenced version of the FMA IA 58 Pucará for "foreign military sales".
The Bronco was technically a front-line aircraft in the canon timeline, although it was being replaced by OV-37s and Warthogs in the 80's. Assuming the Project expects to be activated some time in the 90's or later, the Bronco is no longer going to be a front line platform. The Skyraider much less so, of course.
It's important to remember that almost
no Project equipment or weapons need be former military surplus or relics, and government intervention need rarely be an issue, if at all. Military weapons and vehicles are built by private companies all the time, in fact, they pretty much all are. (That is, via "defense contractors".)
"Morrow Aerospace" (a hypothetical wholly-owned subsidiary of Morrow Industries) could build armed Broncos under licence (that is, legally) from North American-Rockwell International (if it isn't already a COT-owned company) for "foreign military sales/export", "technology demonstrators" and/or "prototypes offered for future USAF/USMC military sales". Presuming that Morrow Industries is already a major US defence contractor, as long as the paperwork is in order and the taxes paid the US government wouldn't think twice.
In the real world, Boeing is developing the OV-10X to offer to the USAF and because of growing interest from foreign customers; it's not like they worry about the feds breaking down their doors, guns drawn!
It's unlikely that new Spads/Skyraiders could be built, but they are common enough and some Morrrow/COT company could be contracted to refurbish and update some found in a warehouse for a 3rd-world US ally (Guatamala? Colombia? Indonesia?) as COIN aircraft under some US-funded 80's drug war/communist insurgency program. Of course, the orders eventually "fall through" (due to bribery, corruption, budge cuts, etc.) and Morrow Industries is left holding the bag. The same slight-of-hand could be used to legitimately and legally build Broncos that are diverted for Project use.
Actually operating out of a bolthole or similar small cramped installation would be the least desirable option under almost any circumstances. With STOL aircraft the teams using COIN aircraft would first try and secure aboveground facilities, preferably at an airport or air base and then move the aircraft there in a disassembled or partially assembled state. If that's not possible, STOL aircraft like the Bronco could operate out of any group of buildings big enough to store it, given a suitably straight stretch of pavement. Teams need to get out and see the world more...
Tony