General Dynamics / McDonnell Douglas Avenger II
1991
Back to the Virtual Aircraft Museum
  BOMBERVirtual Aircraft Museum / USA / General Dynamics  

General Dynamics / McDonnell Douglas Avenger II

General Dynamics and McDonnell Douglas appropriated the name of an earlier Grumman product for their proposed stealth replacement for the A-6 Intruder all-weather attack bomber. Sadly, the Avenger II was not destined to be a classic like the wartime TBF. Intended to use more sophisticated stealth techniques than the USAF's F-117A Nighthawk, the A-12 was a trapezoidal shape with smooth, rather than faceted, surfaces for scattering radar beams. It would have carried more weapons than the F-117 and had an air-to-air capability. Developed largely in secrecy and without proper oversight, the cost rose to a reported $100 million per aircraft. The Avenger II was cancelled by Defense Secretary Dick Cheney in January 1991, just before the Gulf War and a few months before the prototype's expected first flight. Four senior naval officers were forced into retirement over the fiasco. The Navy eventually wound up with the Super Hornet, in many ways a less capable aircraft than the Intruder, which was retired in 1996 without an immediate replacement. The Navy sued the contractors and the contractors sued back for more. The issue has been in and out of the courts ever since.

Few images of the A-12 other than artists' impressions and mock-up photos ever emerged, and more than $2 billion was spent for little tangible result.


Specification 
 CREW2
 ENGINE2 x 5900kg General Electric F412-400 turbofan engines
 DIMENSIONS
    Wingspan21.41 m70 ft 3 in
    Length11.35 m37 ft 3 in
    Height3.44 m11 ft 3 in
 PERFORMANCE
    Max. speed933 km/h580 mph

Comments 
Lester, hartness57(@)yahoo.com, 07.09.2008

Well Troy, it seems that your rant brought out a bit of the illiterate side of people. It would be nice if military equipment were designed and purchased using functionality as a deciding factor, rather than being decided in smoke-filled rooms with politicians rubbing each other's backs. But I wouldn't count on that happening in our lifetimes.

nick, 19.08.2008

you ur an tawt the us and your Australia will work 2 geth
er

nick, 19.08.2008

shat up

Troy, troyzadude69(@)hotmail.com, 16.06.2008

Bureaucratic bulls**t!! Capable aircraft don't mean s**t if some one isn't going to make money off them!! Australia's RAAF is living with the same thing. Replacing the incredible F-111 with the lacklustre Super Hornet!! An aircraft that can't do half the things that the F-111 can, despite it's age!! Boeing should stick with airliners!! Unfortunately, they seem to own every other manufacturer now too!! Storng-arming Australia into buying the Super Hornet might save their profit margin, but what about our defence capability!! Okay, it's not entirely Boeing's doing, Australia did have some idiot politicians in power at the time who let it happen, but we had the choice of the Dassault Rafale, SAAB Grippen, Eurofighter Typhoon and now we also have the option of the F-22 Raptor, but this decision was made wholly and solely on Boeing's continuing contribution to Australia's aeronautical industry-if you don't buy our s**t, we're out of here!!! Never mind about Australia's military air supremacy in the South-East Asian region!! Which just happens to be as strategically important to the US and UK as it is to Australia. Wouldn't you think that it would be in all the allies interests (Australia, USA, UK etc.) to keep the RAAF as capable as possible? Apparently, money is all that matters and while us, the lay-persons, bear the brunt of any future conflict, the powers that be of Boeing and the Government will be sitting sweetly in their bunkers sipping champagne. Wake up world, wake up Australia, Wake up America-if we're to fight together, let's have the tools to fight together!! That's it, I'm done on my little rant, but anyone who might read this, just think about it!! PLEASE!!! When it comes to war, do we want to win or run away with billions of dollars regardless of the victors?

Do you have any comments about this aircraft ?

Name    E-mail


COMPANY
PROFILE


FACTS AND FIGURES

© The use of composite materials did not bring the expected weight savings and it is thought the A-12 was 30% over its desired weight by the time it was cancelled.

© The radar would have been a sophisticated Inverse Synthetic Aperture system, but development problems with this contributed to the huge cost overruns.

© The shape of the A-12 was more akin to that of the B-2 than the F-117. It did lead to the nickname of 'Flying Dorito', however.



All rhe World's Rotorcraft AVIATION TOP 100 - www.avitop.com Avitop.com