http://theaviationist.com/2014/04/10/scorpion-low-speed-interception/Cessna’s parent company Textron Scorpion is a low cost Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance (ISR)/Strike aircraft with a cruising speed of up to 450 knots.
Developed in about 2 years, the aircraft has a ferry range of 2,400 NM (nautical miles) and a payload of 3,000 lbs internal stores as well as underwing PGMs (Precision Guided Munitions), is pitched for ISR and homeland security mission set.
Indeed, the “affordable warplane for low-threat missions” has shown its impressive stability and responsiveness by intercepting a Cessna 182 flying at extremely low speed: 120 KCAS (Knots Calibrated Air Speed).
The two-seater with twin tails, a two 8,000 lb turbofan engines, straight wings and all-composite fuselage seems be a perfect match for the “low-cost combat plane to contain the cost of prolonged operations,” whose need emerged during Libya Air War 2011.
Even if it is unclear whether such platform has real chances to see active service within the U.S. or any other country’s air arm, for sure the image of the mock interception on the C182 shows that the Scorpion would be capable to perform, if needed, even the SMI (Slow Mover Interceptor) role.
I've posted here before about this little bird. It's kind of interesting, internal weapons bays, able to cruise at 450 kts, is very, very cheap, yet can employ pretty much all the weapons in the USAF arsenal. Maybe it isn't a bad way to go for places that aren't denied areas, or once air superiority is completely established. Who knows, just something to think about none the less, and obviosly the folks at Cessna think there is potential of some sort with it.
In uncontested airspace where the F15/16/A10/etc cost 30,000 per hour to operate, just to provide overwatch and drop the occasional bomb or burst of cannon fire, why not have a plane that can do all that for less than 3000$ per hour, 1/10 the cost? I'm not saying it's perfect, but it isn't the worst idea I've seen, to be sure, especially with the cost of defense and the current issues around that.
I also read today that even if there needs to be a radar and supersonic flight capable version for intercepting airborne threats, it can easily and cheaply be done with this design by adding more powerful engines and a bit of wing sweep - they've already done the specs for it supposedly. It would no doubt cost a little more to operate, but not much more. The current version has plug and play removable wings, so a redesign for a supersonic capable interceptor was obviously considered from the start. The current air to ground/surveillance version has a reconfigurable internal bay that can hold up to 3000lb of equipment/ordinance, and the 6 hardpoints under the wings can hold an additional 3200lbs, giving it a 6000lb+ capability for sensors/weapons. That isn't too bad, and having 2 pilots is a great idea, something I know Eagl and Mace here have spoken about at great length, regarding crew workload and the advantages of having two guys in the cockpit.
There's a pile of pilots, enthusiast, x-military, etc here - there has to be some good opinions for and against this type of aircraft from those here. Comments?
