# Stavatti SM-27M COIN Airplane



## Matt308 (Aug 22, 2006)

Recently the DoD has been approached about Counter Insurgency Aircraft for both domestic and international sales. Stavatti of Idaho is a leading manufacturer that has responded to Requests for Proprosals (RFPs). Check out the SM-27M Machete that somes in turboprop, turbofan and low bypass jet engine configs.

MODEL: SM-27S MACHETE™ SM-27T MACHETE™


TYPE: 
SM-27S
SM-27T


Single Seat COIN/CAS/FAC
Two Seat Tandem COIN/CAS/FAC/AT



CONFIGURATION PROFILED: SM-27S/T LRIP For Export to Qualified U.S. Allies

POWERPLANT: 
Number and Type
Model
Shaft HorsePower (SHP)
Propelller Type
Propelller Diameter


Single, Three Shaft Turboprop 
Pratt Whitney Canada PW127G
2,290 @ 1,200 RPM
Dual 6-Blade Reversable Contra-Rotating Scimitar 
108-in



ACCOMMODATION: 
SM-27S
SM-27T


Single Pilot on Martin Baker MKUS.16L
Two Seat Tandem on Martin Baker MKUS.16L 



FLIGHT CONTROL SYSTEM: Mechanical with Automatic Yaw Dampening 



(1) x Oerlikon 30mm KCA with 250 rds
(1) x GD GAU-13/A 30mm Cannon with 250 rds
(1) x ATK 30mm M230LF with 250 rds
(1) x ATK 25mm Bushmaster III with 250 rds
(1) x ATK 50mm Bushmaster III with 250 rds


(2 to 4) x ATK 0.50 Caliber Bushmaster MG
(2 to 4) x FN Herstal 0.50 Caliber M3M
(1 to 2) x Dillion Aero 7.62mm M134



EXTERNAL ARMAMENT: Seven (7) External Hardpoints for 5,250 lbs Stores/Ordinance Using NATO Standard Lug Suspension











OVERALL SPAN:

OVERALL LENGTH:

OVERALL HEIGHT: 

GROSS WING AREA:

WING 
43 ft 0 in 
34 ft 0 in

12 ft 0 in

196.4 sq ft 

Leading Edge Sweep
Span
Area
Dihedral
Incidence
Aspect Ratio
Mean Aerodynamic Chord
Mean Airfoil

5° 
43 ft 0 in 
171 sq ft
2° 
0° 
8.9 
4 ft 7 in 
NACA 65(2)-415 Modified


----------



## R988 (Aug 23, 2006)

have to admit that is pretty cool, looks like a cross between an F/A-18, Su-27 and the XP-55.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Aug 23, 2006)

yeah does look pretty cool, for a foreign aircraft that is...


----------



## Matt308 (Aug 24, 2006)

Actually written up in Aviation Week as a viable candidate for a DoD RFP.


----------



## vikingBerserker (Aug 20, 2009)

I have to admit, it does look interesting.


----------



## B-17engineer (Aug 20, 2009)

Looks like the Su-27 more than anything ! Anyways cool bird! 8)


----------



## MrCreak (Aug 21, 2009)

Um, isn't the whole website a spoof/ fanboy dream?
Defense Tech: "LASER RIFLE" DESIGN A HOAX


The site (and designs) and very nice, but I doubt that there's any reality to them.


----------



## Matt308 (Aug 21, 2009)

Why yes it is.


----------



## Waynos (Aug 27, 2009)

Although the whole Stavatti site is nothing but someones wet dream (did aviation week really fall for it!?!?) There have been similar concepts in the real world. One of them was the BAe SABA canard pusher propfan CoIn design from the 1980,s


----------



## Matt308 (Aug 27, 2009)

Guys these "dreams" become the basis for reality. The only difference between now and the 1940s, is that these "fan boys" developed these "dreams" on computers instead of cocktail napkins. Don't dismiss these concepts out of hand.


----------



## Glider (Aug 27, 2009)

I am afraid that this is going to go nowhere, you might as well either;- 
a) Put the A10 back into production and get a proven system that no one as far as I know has ever knocked 
b) If you want a lower performance aircraft then go for a single seat jet along the lines of the Hawk 200. Going from memory and this was some time ago, the performance figures were similar to those touted for the Sm27

Both of the above will save you a whole heap of development costs which we all know will be both late and over budget. Plus you will get it quicker and no doubt cheaper


----------



## CharlesBronson (Aug 27, 2009)

Quite nice looking airplane thsi SM-27 but definately I cant see the need of an external powered machinegun or machinecannon like the ATK or bushmaster design, better keep with a single gas-revolve or several FN M3 MGs.

Might look unimportant but in this kind of COIN planes the fixed armement is vital.


----------



## Waynos (Aug 28, 2009)

Matt308 said:


> Guys these "dreams" become the basis for reality. The only difference between now and the 1940s, is that these "fan boys" developed these "dreams" on computers instead of cocktail napkins. Don't dismiss these concepts out of hand.



You can dismiss Stavatti out of hand because there is no such company. It is just a website a cyber fantasy world that is doing no harm, but should not be treated as in any way real. It also makes false claims such as having contracts with major real life companies. One of these is Raytheon and I can assure you, from a freind who works there who I asked about this several years ago, that Raytheon has never had anything to do with Stavatti as "they are not real, they do not exist". 

Taken as a bit of fun (which is what it is) its perfectly fine, but don't be deluded into thinking its a real design house.

Also Matt, may I ask, as a moderator on this site should you be posting stuff that is a blatant falsehood? Where is the credibility in saying;



> Recently the DoD has been approached about Counter Insurgency Aircraft for both domestic and international sales. * Stavatti of Idaho is a leading manufacturer *that has responded to Requests for Proprosals (RFPs). Check out the SM-27M Machete that somes in turboprop, turbofan and low bypass jet engine configs.



?


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Aug 28, 2009)

Waynos said:


> Also Matt, may I ask, as a moderator on this site should you be posting stuff that is a blatant falsehood?





Matt308 said:


> Actually written up in Aviation Week as a viable candidate for a DoD RFP.



Look at the date of his post. Here's more info...

http://www.stavatti.com/STAVATTI_STATEMENTS/STAVATTI_STATEMENT_063009.pdf

USAF officially launches light attack fighter comeback - The DEW Line


----------



## Waynos (Aug 28, 2009)

Fair do's FBJ. That was written a long time ago. I haven't seen the claim about Stavatti being a major manufacturer refuted though.

I am not sure why you put up the link to the Stavatti PDF? I am sure you realise they are not an actual aircraft manufacturer, much less a defence contractor, at all.

However getting back on thread and leaving the fantasy site behind, one design that could possibly be considered for a reincarnation might be the BAe SABA I mentioned earlier.

The acronym SABA stands for Small agile Battlefield Aircraft and it covers several different concepts dreamed up by BAe Kingston (historically better known as Hawker Aircraft Ltd) in 1987.

It was compact, highly manoeverable and intended for use over the battlefield. It was at that time, however, intended to carry no bombs but merely to be armed with A2A missiles and guns and its intended role was to clear the battlefield area of helicopters, Tilt Rotors, UAV's and tanks. Clearly was intended soley for use where air superiority had already been secured. I suppose a smart bomb capability would be de rigeur if it was ever revived

The parameters for it included low cost, low vulnerability, very high agility (180 degrees in 5 seconds), carefree handling, soft field operation, long endurance and all-weather and night operatio, the idea clearly being to afford the ground commander a virtually permanently on call air support element rather than the fast jets streaking in and out that is the norm.


There were three basic proposals, the propfan powered P.1233-1 and P.1238 and three separate jet proposals covered by the P.1234 project.

A point of interest among the jet versions is the P.1234-1's large ventral blended gun turret, with its 360 degree rotation it was to be coupled with the aircrafts high rate of roll and a helmet mounted sight to give unlimited field of fire, the P.1234-3 took this idea further with a similarly configured ventral 'hypervelocity missile' launcher.

The P.1234-2 was simply a jet powered comparison to the propfan designs using an ALF-501 turbofan.

Although NATO were for a time very keen on the idea, BAE themselves were not so confident and the programme simply lapsed, with no official cancellation ever occurring.

Some of this work is thought to have been carried over into the Corax, Raven and Taranis UAV and UCAV programmes. These designs however were all manned.

Here are the pics.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Aug 28, 2009)

Waynos said:


> Fair do's FBJ. That was written a long time ago. I haven't seen the claim about Stavatti being a major manufacturer refuted though.
> 
> I am not sure why you put up the link to the Stavatti PDF? I am sure you realise they are not an actual aircraft manufacturer, much less a defence contractor, at all.


A "major manufacturer" defently not. A defense contractor? Actually they are, they were, or attempted to be

http://www.stavatti.com/PDF/STAVATTI_DD2345_2004.pdf

Here's another web site that is still operating and current. I'm wondering if its just a bunch of guys who meet everyday at the "office," drink coffee and then head out to golf.

ABOUT STAVATTI AEROSPACE

But in the end...

Defense Tech: "LASER RIFLE" DESIGN A HOAX


----------



## Waynos (Aug 28, 2009)

FLYBOYJ said:


> A "major manufacturer" defently not. A defense contractor? Actually they are, they were, or attempted to be



No FBJ, None of the above.

Stavatti, as an entity, a thing, is TOTALLY fictitious. A plaything. Its like me, for example, having the 'Waynos Aircraft Corpration' and building a website with loads of imaginary backstory. I could post a pic of a maintenance hangar at Doncaster Airport and call it my manufacturing base. Really. That is all that Stavatti amounts to.

In 2002 they were going to fly a prototype in 2004, in 2004 it was going to fly in 2006, and so on, ad nauseum. There is nothing of substance behind the website. A guy I am acquainted with emailed him in 2004 to place a *non-refundable* deposit on a 'Sleek', which was a sportster and one of 6 different programmes under active development, including an F-22 replacement called the Stalma, if you beleive that crap. The guy refused to take the deposit but told my bud to keep an eye on the press. Yeah right! we reckon its because he knew he would be breaking the law if he accepted it, whereas all he's doing is having some fun.

Likewise my freind at Raytheon assures me that Stavattis claim to have contracts with them is totally falsified.

They haven't even bother filing *any* patents. Do you think that is reasonable for a genuine company, especially one that claims to be so far out on the cutting edge? Try a search here Trademark Electronic Search System (TESS)

All i got was "No TESS records were found to match the criteria of your query."

The name is not even trademarked!

I am disappointed to be debating someones well constructed fantasy, wouldn't you rather evaluate the real projects from a real company that I posted?


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Aug 28, 2009)

Waynos said:


> Stavatti, as an entity, a thing, is TOTALLY fictitious. A plaything. Its like me, for example, having the 'Waynos Aircraft Corpration' and building a website with loads of imaginary backstory. I could post a pic of a maintenance hangar at Doncaster Airport and call it my manufacturing base. Really. That is all that Stavatti amounts to.


That was my point...

They did file paperwork and do have what is called a Cage Code. That basically means they are recognized as a defense contractor or supplier, at least in the US


http://www.aviationweek.com/avnow/dmsBase/pdf/wad-208-vendor-index.pdf

Are they in fact a real company or capable of manufacturing anything? Read the last link I posted about them and their "Laser Rifle."


----------



## Waynos (Aug 28, 2009)

Oh, it looked as if you were saying they were real. How easy is it then to be recognised in the US as a defence contractor? It sounds like I could do it! To be fair I have designed a tactical stealth bomber based on the YF-23, so maybe I should give it a go  Honestly, that makes the DoD look slightly ridiculous


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Aug 28, 2009)

Waynos said:


> Oh, it looked as if you were saying they were real. How easy is it then to be recognised in the US as a defence contractor? It sounds like I could do it! To be fair I have designed a tactical stealth bomber based on the YF-23, so maybe I should give it a go  Honestly, that makes the DoD look slightly ridiculous


Actually if you apply for a DBA (Doing Business As) fill out a few government forms and pay a few bucks YOU can be a US defense contractor and bid on solicitations. For the most part you don't even needs a cage code to do that! Check this out.


https://www.fbo.gov/?tab=searchresults&s=opportunity&mode=list

Fill out a form and you could actually receive the package to bid on any of that stuff. Now if you win the bid, you'd better be able to fulfill the contract!


----------



## Waynos (Aug 28, 2009)

Hmmmm, yes, there is that one small detail to consider. 

Do you think any of the SABA proposals would have legs (not from me!) for a US COIN requirement? There are some interesting features but I think the most conventional, the twin boom one, might be a decent option.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Aug 28, 2009)

Waynos said:


> Hmmmm, yes, there is that one small detail to consider.
> 
> Do you think any of the SABA proposals would have legs (not from me!) for a US COIN requirement? There are some interesting features but I think the most conventional, the twin boom one, might be a decent option.


The only thing I see that might hold back a twin boom design is predictability which amounts to manufacturing costs, but then again The OV-10 was successfully produced, whether it made money for the manufacturer is another story.


----------



## Waynos (Aug 28, 2009)

FLYBOYJ said:


> The only thing I see that might hold back a twin boom design is predictability which amounts to manufacturing costs, but then again The OV-10 was successfully produced, whether it made money for the manufacturer is another story.



What do you mean by predictability?


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Aug 28, 2009)

Waynos said:


> What do you mean by predictability?


Damn spell checker - Produce-ability - the ability to manufacture the airframe in a timely and cost effective manner.


----------



## Clay_Allison (Aug 28, 2009)

Considering the disappointing lack of the aircraft industry to deliver ANYTHING cheaply any more after years of bloated contracts and mountains of red tape, calling Republic and asking for more A-10s is just the best solution to US Armed forces' problems.


----------



## Waynos (Aug 28, 2009)

FLYBOYJ said:


> Damn spell checker - Produce-ability - the ability to manufacture the airframe in a timely and cost effective manner.



Ah, thank you. Now I understand. It should be a fairly straightforward design to produce, no more difficult than the Vampire for example, with which I think it has more in common than with the OV-10, booms wise.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Aug 28, 2009)

Waynos said:


> Ah, thank you. Now I understand. It should be a fairly straightforward design to produce, no more difficult than the Vampire for example, with which I think it has more in common than with the OV-10, booms wise.



Actually twin boom aircraft always cost more because of the booms, extra tooling and if you think about it 2x the fuselage components, rigging, cables (or push rods) etc.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Aug 28, 2009)

Clay_Allison said:


> Considering the disappointing lack of the aircraft industry to deliver ANYTHING cheaply any more after years of bloated contracts and mountains of red tape, calling Republic and asking for more A-10s is just the best solution to US Armed forces' problems.


Not that simple - Republic doesn't exist anymore.


----------



## vikingBerserker (Aug 28, 2009)

Fairchild actually built the A-10 a number of years after acquiring Republic.

I wonder if they even still have the tooling and dies to make new ones. I kinda suspect not.


----------



## Matt308 (Aug 28, 2009)

Waynos said:


> Also Matt, may I ask, as a moderator on this site should you be posting stuff that is a blatant falsehood? Where is the credibility in saying;
> 
> 
> 
> ?



Hey **** you Waynos. If you had not taken my post out of context you would note that I specifically said IN 2000 F#cking six in which I posted:

"Recently the DoD has been approached about Counter Insurgency Aircraft for both domestic and international sales. Stavatti of Idaho is a leading manufacturer that has responded to Requests for Proprosals (RFPs)."

If you had any insight into requests for proposals in the US you would realize that any and every fantasy is submitted to get these gov't $$. If you had looked at the cartoon pics that might have clued you in to the fact that this is not even a paper airplane. I made no judgement on the "robustness" of the design.

So take your holier than thou attitude and shove it up your ass. My thread was meant for enterainment. Just like 99.9% of the other threads in this forum. Next time you wrap your backside around your shoulders regarding my credibility you can beg the other Mods to get your membership back.


----------

