The Scorpion is a tandem-seat twinjet aircraft with an all-composite material fuselage designed for light attack and intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance missions. Production costs were minimized by using common commercial off the shelf technology, manufacturing resources and components developed for Cessna’s business jets; such as the flap drive mechanism is from the Cessna Citation XLS and Cessna Citation Mustang, the aileron drive mechanism is from the Citation X.[3][6][7][8][25] Textron AirLand calls the Scorpion an ISR/strike aircraft, instead of a “light attack” aircraft. The joint venture also states the Scorpion is intended to handle “non-traditional ISR” flights such as those performed by U.S. fighters in Iraq and Afghanistan. The Scorpion is designed to cheaply perform armed reconnaissance using sensors to cruise above 15,000 ft, higher than most ground fire can reach, and still be rugged enough to sustain minimal damage.[26]

The Scorpion is designed to be affordable, costing US$3,000 per flight hour, with a unit cost expected to be below US$20 million.[22]

Vs F-16 “more recent variants starting at $25 to $30 million but potentially reaching $60 to $70 million with improvements.” and $22,000 per hour.

Vid of it https://youtu.be/q7qwQGksyPk

They hope it will replace the A-10.

  • @fpslem
    link
    English
    1016 days ago

    It looks like the Scorpion was not selected by the USAF for the light-strike or patrolling craft role, in favor of pursuing turboprop options (Beechcraft AT-6 Wolverine and Embraer EMB-314 Super Tucano).

    • @Maggoty
      link
      English
      115 days ago

      And rightfully so. They are straight up better options.

        • @Maggoty
          link
          English
          015 days ago

          They were going with the Super Tuscano. I don’t know what happened. But somewhere in there they also decided to order 75 of them instead of something like half that number.

          • @fpslem
            link
            English
            114 days ago

            I think US military operations moved away from counter-insurgency to preparedness with conflicts with mechanized military forces that have actual air power, so a low-and-slow airframe wasn’t considered as necessary. That, and drones are filling a lot of the air coverage and surveillance gap (though no one on the ground will tell you there could ever be a complete replacement for the BRRRRRRRR of an A-10.)

            • @Maggoty
              link
              English
              014 days ago

              I would think the same thing but the order for 75 is the Sky Warden. An armed Air Tractor. Which doesn’t make sense to me.