Sukhoi S-80 as COD aircraft?

Look at that poor plane, wish I could save it from the scrap.

Burt Rutan didn’t design the first twin boom high wing twin prop aircraft. The S-80 has one wing at the front, not two wings. The rear wing between the booms is for bracing the rear body for releasing loads from the rear door.

From the thread “Rutan at Edwards?”:

Scaled Composites Model 33 Advanced Technology Tactical Transport (ATTT) demonstrator, N133SC on the Edwards Air Force Base south base flightline on October 25, 2003. http://www.air-and-space.com/Rutan.htm

I just had a thought, if this could be used as a COD plane, what are the chances of it being used as an AWACS plane as well? I mean the tail would have to change so as not to interfere with thwe radar signal and stuff, but it could be done, right?

It looks a lot like the Advanced Technology Tactical Transport (ATTT) proof-of-concept demonstrator too.

What won’t Bert Rutan get involved with?

The S-80 is a very attractive aircraft, it reminds me of the Bronco COIN aircraft.

It looks a lot like the Advanced Technology Tactical Transport (ATTT) proof-of-concept demonstrator too. http://www.scaled.com/projects/ATTT.html

Guys: I thought long and hard about COD planes before I gave my answer and now I will justify it…

C-2 Greyhound: NO, the US wants to keep these in their service. They don’t have many and they are always complaining that there aren’t enough of them around, the USN will be taking one squadron out of service to have them undergo modifications (including the eight bladed Hartzell props), before putting them back in service and having them go untill 2025. The slack is to be taken up by a redeployment of the other squadrons to cover the areas, this will see some C-2’s based here in Australia on detachments to cover the sea swaps.

Merlin: Again no, with French pride at stake and EADS being involved in the NH-90 project that is why I listed the smaller helo for the role.

V-22: If the french do opt for this machine it will be a long way off. It’s just starting to be accepted in a limited capacity role with the US, there is still much work to be done with these machines before they are available for export. Australia has had it’s eye on these machiones for sometime as well and we have more of a chance at buying them than France has atm.

The reason I sugested the US-3 Viking, is because the American’s are retiring them at a fast rate and have started talking with other countries in an effort to off load them. France could buy some and have themconverted to the COD role (or even buy those that are in storage). The only problems I can see are pollitical. But in all honesty it would be the best option for French COD and British COD for that matter (though I think they’d opt for Merlins).

As for Russian and the S-80 as a COD, I don’t know, don’t get me wrong, it’s a great plane and all (I even looked at buying it for a private venture down here). The only thing is, can it take off loaded in the short run that carrier ops offer?

I believe the Osprey V-22 tiltrotor may be the preferred platform for any mid-sized Aircraft Carrier……

Regards

Hammer.

That would be the smart thing to do. A COD aircraft have a superlong life due to the way they are used….iirc isn’t the C2s supposed to keep going until 2020? However, would they want something with a ramp? Maybe a couple of Merlins? French pride?

The C2 production line was briefly restarted in the Reagan administration.

This or they might score some US-3 Vikings from the Yanks

That would be the smart thing to do. A COD aircraft have a superlong life due to the way they are used….iirc isn’t the C2s supposed to keep going until 2020? However, would they want something with a ramp? Maybe a couple of Merlins? French pride?

Sorry Vortex – I just have a bee in my bonnet about Sukhoi. 😀

The number of times I see it written as capitals – e.g. SU-27

It should be Su – the first two letters of Pavel Sukhoi’s last name.

Then they write ‘an Su-27’ e.g. ‘an ess you 27’ – when it should be ‘a Su-27’ e.g. ‘a Soo 27’.

It can’t be that difficult to get right can it ?? 😎

I know I am being anal – I’ll get my coat……… :rolleyes:

Ken

ok…capital S lower case u twenty seven:D

yeeeeeaaaahhhhh anyway back on topic.

As for the French I think it will either come down to the NH-90 being used for COD much like the Super Frelon was used back in the old days. This or they might score some US-3 Vikings from the Yanks

we can spell it out right? 😉

Sorry Vortex – I just have a bee in my bonnet about Sukhoi. 😀

The number of times I see it written as capitals – e.g. SU-27

It should be Su – the first two letters of Pavel Sukhoi’s last name.

Then they write ‘an Su-27’ e.g. ‘an ess you 27’ – when it should be ‘a Su-27’ e.g. ‘a Soo 27’.

It can’t be that difficult to get right can it ?? 😎

I know I am being anal – I’ll get my coat……… :rolleyes:

Ken

Thanks flanker man, Thanks for clearing that up.

Can anyone think of a european equivalent that could serve as a Carrier based COD and support? ie: What will the french use on their new carrier? CN-235?

As soon as the project enters service – or is produced, it gains the ‘Su’ (pronounced Soo, not Ess You) prefix.

we can spell it out right? 😉

According to the brochure I picked up at MAKS, it is now officially the Su-80GP..

Just thought I’d let you know…..

For info…….the letters ‘S’ & ‘T’ are Sukhoi in-house designations for straight (S) or delta/triangular (T) winged projects – e.g S-37, S-80, T6, T10 etc.

As soon as the project enters service – or is produced, it gains the ‘Su’ (pronounced Soo, not Ess You) prefix.

There are exceptions of course…………….

Ken

The S-80 is a very attractive aircraft, it reminds me of the Bronco COIN aircraft.

Apparently the S-80 could have folding wings and its tail booms could fold up and forward to save space.

If the Carrier was operating Su33’s and Su-34’s anyway, would a support version of the flanker be more practicle?

The British considered a COD role for the AVRO 748

Before the RN’s last big carrier project was cancelled in the mid-1960s, Hawker Siddeley made an attempt to promote the H.S.748 as a candidate for a COD aircraft. They proposed a strengthened landing gear and adopted a folding wing for the design.

Even with the wings folded, it still would have been far too large to fit on the elevators of CVA-01. This 748 would have been a rare “deck park only” carrier aircraft.

Compared to the 748 the Sukhoi S-80 is a bit more compact…..

In any event, the Soviets considered far more conventional carier based fixed wing COD/ASW/Tanker proposals. I recently started a thread in the Modern Military Aviation section about the “Taifun” turbofan proposal and the “P-42” turboprop.

http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/showthread.php?t=48718