Low Cost Combat Aircraft - are they really feasible ?
Bit of a ramble - so bear with me.
One area of military aviation that has always fascinated me is the increasing cost of developing, building, and supporting modern combat aircraft. With aircraft like the Gripen now representing the "low" end of the advanced combat aircraft market at an estimated $70m per unit and even an F-16 rolling in at around $80m depending on the support package, costs are spiraling, let's not even get started on the true unit cost of a Typhoon or an F-35.
One aircraft I have studied in some detail is the De Havilland Venom, a diminutive 1950s era fighter that in spite of a price tag that at today's prices would likely not find you a seat in a new Cessna yet was still capable of flying 1,000 miles unrefuelled, able to climb to 55,000 feet, and haul thousand pound weapons into combat. Such was the low cost of this aircraft that many of the final FB.4 variant were literally lifted over airfield perimeters by crane and dumped unceremoniously on scrap piles after just a couple of years service. They were seen as disposable.
I found an obscure analysis document a few years ago that listed the original unit cost of several aircraft converted to today's prices, and one that stuck in my mind was the A-4C Skyhawk analysis that priced out at just north of $2m today - and that for an aircraft with relatively modern(ish) equipment. Today we have aircraft like the Textron AirLand Scorpion - a sort of low cost A-10 made from off-the-shelf components and designed for those dirty wars that pilots in Africa and South America have so much experience of. The Scorpion appears to be the spiritual successor to aircraft like the Strikemaster and the A-37 Dragonfly and yet it still carries with it a unit cost of around $20m. An honorable mention also goes out to the Chinese/Pakistan JF-17 Thunder with its estimated $28m price tag.
So is it feasible to build a viable combat aircraft for $10m, or even $5m ? I know there are many, many variables - what type of combat aircraft, how many would you build, and for what mission - not to mention the fact that we now have guided weapons that cost a million dollars or more per unit. Then of course there is the question of finding pilots willing to fly such aircraft.
The aircraft this question brings to mind are types such as the SIAI Marchetti Warrior, the old A-1E Skyraider, the proposed Stavatti SM-27 (projected to cost $15m each), and the Super Tucano (at around $12m each). So do they now define the "low-point" and is it even feasible to try and define a low-point or are we effectively forced into buying larger, more technologically complex and therefore more expensive combat aircraft for any given mission. Finally, is there any technology in the pipeline that could dramatically reduce the cost and complexity of combat aircraft design and manufacture or is the era of truly low-cost combat aircraft at an end ?
I'd appreciate your thoughts.