Turbofan Killer Bee: Rutan ARES "Mudfighter" for U.S. Army Close Air Support
Вставка
- Опубліковано 28 вер 2024
- Legendary aircraft designer Burt Rutan reveals the secrets of his Model 151 ARES turbofan "Mudfighter" developed for U.S. Army Close Air Support (CAS) that should be ground-mobile in its own BATTLEBOX towed by a high-technology M113 Gavin light tank to provide maneuver air support (MAS) now lacking with the centralized, pampered USAF air base & bloated fighter-bombers-need-runways mentality.
www.combatrefor...
Killer Bee Clean-Sheet Designs
www.combatrefor...
ARES details
www.combatrefor...
In 1981, the U.S. Army requested a design study for a Low Cost Battlefield Attack Aircraft (LCBAA). Scaled Composites created the ARES testbed aircraft which used a single Pratt and Whitney Canada JT15D-5 turbofan engine (same as in the Beechjet / T-1A Jayhawk trainer), and a GAU-12/U 25mm Gatling gun.
www.scaled.com/...
The ARES Mudfighter is cleverly designed so its 25mm GAU-12U 25mm autocannon is on one side of the aircraft fuselage while the turbofan engine intake is on the other--this also puts the nose of the plane forward to prevent birds from going into the engine! Burt Rutan is a genius!
The ARES can also carry 2.75" Hydra 70mm rocket pods, small unguided and guided bombs and guided missiles on 4 underwing hardpoints--this could be air-to-air missiles like AIM-9 Sidewinders and conceivable beyond-visual range (BVR) AMRAM AIM-120s to sweep the low-level skies of enemy aircraft for a new U.S. Army Air Corps owned and operated by ground maneuver elements using the FINAB ground mobility system. Let the USAF own the skies above 10K and do the Douhetesque missions it wants to try to do.
This brilliant, "clean sheet" is what an unmanned/manned combat air vehicle (U/MCAV) that would be the Army's Fighter-In-A-Box (FINAB) for ground support with some air-to-air combat capabilities to overlap from low altitudes up to 10, 000 feet U.S. air supremacy in an expeditionary, nation-state war environment. Targets for the ARES Mudfighters would come from Army ground maneuver elements and USAF ground forward air controllers as well as STOL "Grasshopper" observation/attack planes with Airborne FACs--both Army and Air Force for maximum synergy.
www.combatrefor...
Wood Model (desktop)
cgi.ebay.com/Ru...
myworld.ebay.co...
Flying R/C Model (huge)
www.kamodels.co...
K&A Models Unlimited
P.O. Box 66527
Albuquerque, NM 87193-6527
info@kamodels.com
(505)994-8083
FAX -8138 - Наука та технологія
Rutan kills me. His company should be "Outside the Box" instead of "Scaled Composites".
Always wanted to meet this guy.
Such an elegant, simple design! I'd love a sport model of this without the gun; although the gun would be fun. Pure genius from Rutan! :-)
Genius at work. No more needs to be said.
Rutan is an aeronautical genius! I was lucky to meet him, when I took a ride out to his old shop...before he fled California. Too bad no one listens to him...
Myself, I would love a sport aircraft variant of this concept.
*WOOOSH*
Awesome, a few refinements and that would be the cats meow! Cooling ducts implemented into the exhaust pipe would help with the heat seeking threat. Its too bad Rutan didn't press this design or re-introduce it, but he has space travel on his mind right now. He(Rutan) could be the "Tony Stark" of the military aviation if he wanted it.
Mine too! He's one of the main reasons why I want to be an aerospace engineer!
I bet this thing was designed to be made from Composites and likely would have been much much less expensive to build than any conventional (riveted together) aircraft. I also can well imagine how the established defense contractor community (ala Lockheed Martin etc) greased a few wheels through familiar channels to stop this from becoming the selected design, no matter how much cheaper and/or batter this or ANY aircraft from potential new suppliers would or could have been...
Matthias Mederer Yes it's made of composites.
@HDaviator Sounds like you read Chuck Yeager's autobiography where he expressed exactly the same opinion after the Air Force passed on the F-20 Tigershark simply for the reason the manufacture did the specification & design itself without 400 "desk pilots" from the Pentagon being involved. Interesting that the Air force started out as the US Army Air Corps. and with the advent of the Cold War catapulted itself into a separate mission statement,and budgets. Talk about Government Waste !
It's not a warthog, but it looks like a cool little jet. Small, maneuverable, cheep and dirty. An excellent low cost, "force multiplier."
When included in a "strike package" that includes AH-64s, A-10, AC-130, and F-35 aicraft. For battle field domination. F-35 and A-10s for stand-off SAM suppression. The F-35 for AAW support, and the AH-64 for dealing with mobile AAA tanks.
That cheep little plane, mixes it all up. Adding more hard to hit, overhead fire power.
This man is/was a genius, truly!
This aircraft would be effective no doubt. It's small, relatively fast, composite structure (very little if any radar energy reflection) and very maneuverable. How it would deal with combat damage is difficult to say, but none of the modern military aircraft deal with combat damage very well. If you take a hit, chances are a vital system component is lost or damaged, there simply are no unneeded components in a modern combat aircraft system.
Burt Rutan's design of the ARES is sound.
Burt Rutan ,the best air tehnolg
Another fantastic BR design that, relatively inexpensively, did exactly what it was supposed to do. So, of course, our military wouldn’t want it.
Burt Rutan is a genious.
That is a impressive machine that could have replaced the warthog but I've never heard of it before. The only reason I come across it was by chance and there isn't much of anything about it I can find. The government doesn't want people thinking they can build there own militia because they have a monopoly on force and aren't willing to share.
@dynmicpara Yes indeed. How will we deal with them ?
At 8:05, you can hear the target being shredded by projectiles, then you hear the report of the Gatling gun. :)
These projectiles are around 4,5 times Taster than the speed of sound (4times+ airspeed of the plane).
I think they should rebuild the P-47 with modern weapons and equipment. That beast was a flying tank, there was a story that a rookie pilot was being engaged by a German ace flying a Bf-109. the German shot all of his ammunition into the P-47 and the plain was still flying!!! Truly an amazing aircraft, none the less I think updating the aerodynamics, weapons system, etc. would do it some good...
I heard that story too. The German pulled alongside him, saluted and waved, then flew away.
Why in the "F" hasn't the military adopted this a/c?? My God, this video is circa 1991, 1st Gulf War era. Cheap, well designed and lethal in the right hands. But no, we need the MEGA expensive F-35, right!?!?!?!
Nice.
Burt Rutan, the God of aircraft design!
I seriously want one. Really...
Impressive! But not expensive enough for the U.S. I'm sure ther will be plenty of foreign buyers?
Very cool and good burt
Looks very maneuverable and with that gun it would have been a great plane. How many hard points and what weight of bombs can it carry.
The Military, if they were Smart, would have contracted to have some 25 or so of these Aircraft built and ready for Special Operations around the world. Better this idea than wasting Military money on 'Dead-Dumb Projects. IMO
Who needs armor when you have this kind of maneuverability, this low? Just hide behind sage brushes, popping from one to another.
It's amazing how it can change pitch so quickly and follow the smallest details of the terrain, and literally hide behind boulders and sage brushes thanks to the forward swept canard
The ARES (The greek god of war, by the way) was designed to give the US Army its own organic air cover in situations where the USAF was to busy to help. If a production variant had entered service, it probably would have carried Sidewinder Aim-9s, Hellfires, etc.
That thing is so light that it isn't stable enough for the gun. Look at how it bucks when it fires. You can see the same thing in the gun site footage, the rounds jerk to the left when the pilot is trying to keep the pipper on the target. He's over-compensating at the end of the burst. Another reason they put the GAU-8 in the middle & moved the nose gear on the A-10. That bird was also manuvering clean, not "Christmas Tree'd" with TER's like the brass likes to do.
One negative I noticed was the recoil from firing the gun caused the plane to sway slightly.
If you check out videos of A10's there's no swaying.
no shit mr bleeding obvious ..thats because the A10 gun is mounted centrally
when the pilot flys god this plane the enemy see/hear it only when he's firing on it^^
damn I want to fly this thing!!!!!
Philippines Needs to get some of these to Protect it from Island (7,000 Plus Island)Grabbing Country...Awesome Fighter Jet !!!
Short bursts of gunfire are generally desirable in large aircraft as well. The pilot would need to kiss in a little right rudder to offset, no doubt.
Did you know the recoil of the GAU-8 on the A-10 is equivalent to the thrust of one of its engines? Not a new concept in mud-movers. :)
This thing is awesome, and we could acutally make 1000 of these for the cost of one of the Chair Forces-still in development-F-35. Hopefully someone will put this idea into production when we get invaded by the Chinese...and we will
wouldnt the bending of the flow in the tail pipe create a turning motion accting against the changing direction of the flow?
All those replacement aircraft for the a-,10 tbolt if manned, should be able to take the same hits-fly in battle /back to base if not remote control is mandatory!!
the fuel is tank is located in center of gravity or aerodynamic center?
I want one. This is one very cool little jet. I like the design, especially the thought put into preventing bird strikes. If the Army doesn't buy them, I'll take one. Of course, I'll have to figure out what to do with the gun port, I doubt they'll they will let me have the 20mm Gau-12. A GE M-134-B maybe, LOL!
If Burt Rutan can practicly replace the A10 using a small aircraft built around a tiny engine, I wonder what he could design around a Honeywell F125 engine (9.250lbs).
I bet that he would offer at least F15 if not F22 performance for a fraction of the cost!!
Make this shit-kicker unmanned and you'll have on helluva aircraft. Reaper and Predator will seem ancient in comparison.
Hey! That was MY idea! ;-) Okay, maybe my idea was to use a Long-EZ with nose-mounted machine guns as a ground support aircraft. My version of the Long-EZ had a motorcycle engine driving a ducted fan.
Perfect for Afghanistan, we need to revive this design.
@dynmicpara The A-10 was a total flop.....;) I love Burt.....
@WolfSaintSnake Same problem the A-10 had all along. But new avionics reto-fitted to the A-10 saved it from being scrapped years ago. The fire control takes over the planes steering to aim the plane on the target while firing then releases control back to pilot. This feature buys us many useful YEARS on a plane that otherwise would be sitting in Davis-Monthan waiting to be made into beer cans. Read Air&Space Magazine- WARTHOG- GATLING GUNSLINGER.
That gun, cannot compete with the GAU-8 30MM which is the mainstay of the A-10.
If the USAF refuses to upgrade AMERICA'S A-10s (more powerful engines, folding wings, 2nd seat enlisted JTAC observer) www.combatreform.org/aircommandos.htm and/or give these national assets to the U.S. Army to operate, we are going to have to start-over with armored eSTOL MUDFIGHTERS like this Rutan design. 25MM beats 0MM.
@dynmicpara Not sure why I said the A-10 was a total flop, must have been trolling that day. Maybe it was because the A-10 is so limited in speed and the design is so inefficient.
Was it ever actually used in combat?
Northrop Grumman called they said "shut the fuck up". No one makes billions on cost efficient designs.
They used this in Iron Eagle 3.
@dptp9lf I thought the same thing
Dirty deeds done dirt cheap. The enemy would LOSE by hitting these with expensive missiles.
Need for speed ... light and cost effective ?
Hell with that ... I want to drop out of the clouds at M2+ and be at M.85 or better as I appear unexpectedly and disappear back into the clouds rapidly at M2+ ...
light and cheap is fine ...IF AND ONLY IF ... it can have enough speed and be stealthy enough that you do not get pumped full of holes or fragged by a missle warhead ....
I am sure that this looked good to Rutan ... but ... no one was shooting at him ... good design thinking overall however ... creative ...
This plane was seen in the yawner of a movie "Iron Eagle III" which never should have been filmed. The cinematographers wanted a Messerschmitt 262 but none were available. Too bad they didn't cancel the stupid production!
wait this thing has the capacity to match an f35 so why in all creation would it be rejected
theres no reason for assimetric config
Trim those sideburns.
It's an excuse for a fighter. It will be good for fighting cclose range support, maybe shoot down civilian or military earlier generation fighters, but I doubt that they can get a lot of missiles into the aircraft, so you'd need a lot of them to overpower even a single F-15 with AMRAAMs ...
@8:02
Brrrrpppp
SHARK TIGER and MUD fighter would be deadly 29 mig
Wtf build a few of them that’s a mean mother is that rutan he is tha man some bonehead better look at this plane for a10 replacement
I'd fly it, but you need to use all that empty storage space for more belts linked ammunition. Fill it to the max with ammo and cut me loose. :-)
The ARES "Mudfighter" is not a good as the A-10.
cas yas
He can't compete. The USA requires an over priced asset with no possibility of being effective in the field of battle.
Wow, as impressive as ever. There is some fantastic thinking in this plane. I'd love to see Burt do a modern update on this concept! I love the fact that this was flying in 91, but it still looks like it comes from the future.
While this is a cool design, the military would never have bought it... If only because the AF brass is dominated by fighter pilots, who have no interest in the CAS mission, same reason they keep trying to kill off the A-10 but won't let the Army have them...its all about politics and egos....and thats not even getting into the issues with large corporations and their pet politicians...when votes are sold for the right price the effectiveness of anything no longer matters...so long as the corps get their contracts....
It doesn't cost nearly enough !!!! Oh, if only they would take this man seriously. We love you Burt! Keep the faith man!!
We need a couple of squadrons . Military jets are becoming prohibitively expensive items ! Imagine it dressed in camo , could be a real life "What If" . Wales UK
Naturally, it didn't go into production because it's too cheap and too effective. Military contractors, and the REMFs who count on being hired by them when they muster out of the service, want financial disasters like the F-35, which they can milk for decades.
-jcr
You are so correct. Our gubment doesn't want anything that works and is inexpensive.
As soon as you highlight your program as "cost effective", it's dead in Congress. Everybody's got to make their margins, and there aren't enough margins for blood-sucking vampires in DC.
Did anyone say just how little it would cost?
NSResponder I was going to sat the same thing. So I just gave you a thumbs up. 👍🏻😎
Burt Rutan is an unsung genius. Think of all the money he could have saved the amarican taxpayer.
I am really surprised a drone version never went into production.
Another great Rutan design. This would have been a good compliment to the A-10, not a replacement. A 2 seater could be used as a FAC to guide in Close Air Support. Now it looks like the military just wants fast jets (F35, F22, F18 Super Hornet) and drones.
Would make an excellent air contingent to a Joint Special Operations Task Force, without having to call up heavy logistics packages from the USAF.
Kevin Moore
Placing the F35 in the same category as the F22 and Super Hornet comes from the type of arrogance that loses wars. The F35 was made just to "dazzle" potential buyers and has no place anywhere in an effective Military arsenal... with all due respect
Brilliant asymmetry!
all branches would've benefit from this little bird. shame its needed.
Darrick P no its only useful in the army.
Intelligent design. I notice a nose down gyration from the gun firing. Lack of power redundency and armor are considerations for this application, but frankly the cost, weight, loss of manuverability, and size increase outweigh the increase in survivability ie.There are losses in conflict. Adversaries know this, numbers outweigh the small gains in sophistication! Why build 1 that will probably return and sit draining resources in repair, when you can send 10 and 7 return to fight tomorrow?
good pilots dont grow on trees
How many ARES could you get for one F-35?
How many ARES could be serviced relative to one F-35?
Bet its average time in air would be many multiples of that of the F-35.
Type of plane that basically anyone could fly and win with.
You are comparing apples to oranges. It doesn't matter how many Ares can be bought for price of a 35-- they are designed for different missions, so the military services need both.
We should have been buying these by the squadron!
ARES MUDfighter 1:72 Scale Model Kit
www.sharkit.com/sharkit/ares/ares.htm
This aircraft, if it had been put in service by the Air Force, would have literally been the AK 47 of the fighter world. Small scale, innovative, easy to mass produce, cheap, effective, and RELIABLE. You could have 100 of these absolutely terrorizing a battlefield for the cost of a (tiny) handful of A 10's. As Lenin once said, quantity has a quality unto its own. My only question, what's it got in the way of armor for the pilot?
It looks like it might be the answer to those gigantic Russian helicopters.
Is this aircraft being allowed in the USAF's Light Attack Aircraft "experiment" going on right now (Sept '17)? If not, why not?
Apply modern ejection system, avionics, weapons systems and power-plant and I'd confidently take her into combat, providing ground support any day/night of the week. Burt Rutan is an Aviation Gem!
(Dick Rutan deserves much credit as well, for so bravely test flying and pushing Burt's new designs to the maximum limits).
I would LOVE to take that thing for a spin, looks like a dream light attack aircraft... That and A-10 would scare the hell out of anyone.
Perfect plane for the Air National Guard. Who doesn't want to swap between crop dusting or airliners to this little hot rod?
100 times better than the F-35. Looks like it's designed for CAS. It doesn't look as robust as the A-10, but it looks smaller and lighter. Close air support mission should belong to U.S. Army and so should the A-10's. Looks like a great plane.
I wrote a letter to our defence minister suggesting opening a factory for ares fighters in cooperation with several other countries interested in COIN aircraft far superior to any attack chopper in existence. I proposed at least one squadron of 16 frames plus 8 in reserve/roster for a total of 24. As we had insurgency several times in the last 25 years it would have been a game changer
Pitty.
And the Airforce don't want the A-10 cause it's to ugly and not cost-efficient!? 😄
The A-10 developed as tank-killer proofed sturdy reliance way over several thousand times. If the Airforce still don't like the A-10 hand IT over to Army they LOVE her.
This bird no way can take as much fire as the A-10.
So, if the US Air Force didn't buy this, doesn't that mean other nations Air Force can?
...or the U.S. ARMY pussed out and didn't buy ARES mudfighters....
@egcroan Same story with the A-10. No one in the airforce wanted to be part of making a CAS plane afterall everything is about fighter right? So engineers took hold and built a super plane. REALLY bad PR for asses in the airforce.
The Army should still try and acquire this plane along with some AV8's for the XVIIIth Airborne Corps and other rapid Deployable forces. The Army should get its Expeditionary capability back from amphibious including Airborne on a larger scale, hybrid brigades able to perform all 3 combat ops amphibious air Assault and Airborne. It's also time for the Army to get it's fixed wing FAS/COIN back as in the days of WW2, bring back the Corps!(Army Air Corps)
MUDFIGHTERS for the U.S. Army operated away from easily destroyed FOB/air bases is a necessity since the pampered USAF refuses to give up its comfy living arrangements even though it means their DEATHS and MISSION FAILURES by TBATE and TBAM. The USAF couldn't even ground transport their precious few F-22s from an air base to prevent a mere hurricane destroying them!
The AV-8B Harrier II is no longer in production; its only VTOL with light payloads and is really a STOVL fighter-bomber. The F-35B with central lift fan and vectored thrust (VT) is supposed to be much more safer than vectored thrust-only Harriers. On land STOVL might be moot point if operating say F-20V Tigersharks with Vectored Thrust & Canards (VTC) like the F-15 MTD aka with eSTOL proved.
Too cheap, this was doomed from the start. The Air Force hates cheap systems because they make justifying expensive toys harder.
Add this one to the list of aircraft not put into production like the F-20 Tigershark that were awesome well thought out inexpensive designs...This one would be great for the OAX program.
Thanks anyway, Burt, but I am quite happy with the A-10.
@1madcanuck Not true. Their have been many successful designs with a single engine.
Ahead of it's time. Could definitely have been a great light attack craft for countries in South America
This would be a favorite of tin pot dictators all over the world. I wonder if that possibility had something to do with why the USAF didn't want it? That plus they REALLY wanted to ditch the CAS role.
These private venture aircraft were/are great. The Piranha was another great idea.
I couldn't see this being chosen by the US or another high budget military. That said I could see smaller countries loving something like this because they could build a large fleet that would be fairly effective against other small nations and perhaps enough to deter a larger nation from invading.
Would never be adopted because USAF OCD officers will say it is built crooked They are so conventional, the concept would make their heads explode
20 or so squad-fighters would have a devastating effect against a ground invasion force
I think, very affordable for spesific mission like CAS.
The countries that need your excellent plane cannot afford or maintain it. What a shame.
This should be upgraded and sold to other militaries if the US Defense Establishment ignores it. India? South Korea?