Military Review

Ganshipa: a stylish means of dealing with barmalei

85



The heavily armed aircraft or ganships (owing their appearance and development - like many of today's weapons systems - to the bloody lessons of the Vietnam War) have always been a kind of niche opportunity, although extremely useful in current asymmetric counterinsurgency operations.

A traditional gunship is, as a rule, a rather low-speed platform (with no exceptions with a screw engine) with a long duration of flight, with a powerful direct-fire rifle-gun armament installed on the sides, which fires at ground and surface targets obliquely (down and sideways), and not like the rest of the aircraft ahead. Flying in a roll with roll, with weapons, aimed at the top of an imaginary "cone", whose guide circle it "flies around", the ganship conducts continuous high-precision fire, which can be kept for quite a long time at one point. This is not possible with traditional forward-directed weapons, when firing from low altitudes or even when diving.

Most rotorcraft, often called "ganship helicopters," are not such, since they lack large-caliber, side-directed armaments, they are more comparable to direct aircraft aviation support and fight against rebels. Likewise, counter-insurgency aircraft such as the Embraer A-29 Super TUCANO or IOMAX ARCHANGEL are not ganships, since their weapons are more likely to go forward, and they also have a relatively modest caliber.

If larger military transport planes are used as the basis for the gunships, large-caliber weapons can be installed with sufficient ammunition for continuous firing, as well as heavy and durable mounts and aiming systems guaranteeing the highest accuracy, which can be sufficient to avoid excessive indirect losses even when firing targets in populated areas.

The roles of ganships

The ganships are usually used in counterinsurgency tasks, to support special operations forces, guard borders, and perform internal security tasks. Since the gunships need to locate and fire at small point targets, they are usually equipped with a complete set of aiming systems and sensors, and this at the same time provides useful additional opportunities for observation, reconnaissance and information gathering.

On the other hand, the relatively low speed and regular and predictable flight patterns (as well as the limited range of their main armament, which prevents flights over enemy areas of anti-aircraft systems or MANPADS) makes them extremely vulnerable even to relatively primitive air defense systems. During the Vietnam War, the US Air Force lost in combat six AU-130A / E, twelve AU-47D and five AC-119S, mainly from anti-aircraft fire.

During Operation Storm in the Desert, the AC-130H ganships mainly took part in night operations; when such a plane continued to perform the task after dawn, it was shot down from Strela-2 MANPADS. Thus, the ganships are mostly limited to actions in a favorable environment in terms of lack of air defense weapons, although they can be extremely useful against opponents who do not have air defense systems and MANPADS. Therefore, these aircraft were intensively used in Iraq and Afghanistan, driving the “bogeleys” over the mountains and deserts.

The largest hand-held operator is the United States Air Force, whose Special Operations Command (AFSOC) operates three C-130 HERCULES armed variants in service with two advanced units of the 1-th special-wing air operations wing in Florida and two squadrons of the 27-th special wing operations at an air base in new mexico.

These units operate AC-130U SPOOKY (Hurlburt), AC-130W STINGER II (Cannon) and the new AC-130J GHOSTRIDER (to be adopted this year).

The original version of the AC-130A HERCULES was developed to replace the Douglas AC-47 gunship (Gunship I project) in order to increase the duration of the flight and increase firepower.

Although the AU-47 (based on the Douglas DC-3 “Dakota” - short-haul transport aircraft) was retired from the US Air Force in 1969, the remaining aircraft were transferred to the Allies, including the Vietnamese, Laotian, Cambodian Air Forces and later the Air Forces of Salvador. Other air forces launched their own refinements of the Dakota gandership, including Indonesia, Rhodesia, South Africa and Taiwan. Some of the South African aircraft have a 20-mm cannon, and not machine guns caliber 5,56 or 7,62 mm.


Ganshipa: a stylish means of dealing with barmalei

Military transport aircraft AC-47, developed on the basis of the passenger DC-3

A pair of DAKOTA Salvadoran handovers, which according to some information still remain in service, are armed with three 12,7-mm machine guns, while the Colombian air forces are still operating five Basler BT-67 turboprop in the ganship configuration. These so-called avions fantasmas (“ghost planes”) are armed with a GAU-12,7 / A 19-mm machine gun, connected to a thermal infrared front view system, and also carried on board the bomb. At least one aircraft was reportedly seen with one GAU-19 / A machine gun and one 20-mm cannon, possibly the French M621.

The first gunship HERCULES received its first baptism of fire at an air base in South Vietnam in September 1967. AU-130A was initially armed with four guns 7,62-mm GAU-2 / A and four sextuple 20-mm cannons M61 VULCAN, and later two guns 7,62-mm GAU-2 / A, two 20-mm guns and two M61 VULCAN 40- mm guns L / 60 Bofors.

Later models AC-130E and AC-130H were armed with two 20-mm M61 VULCAN cannons, one 40-mm Bofors L / 60 cannon and one 105-mm M102 howitzer, after 1994, the 20-mm gun was replaced. After 2000, one 25-mm gun GAU-12 EQUALIZER replaced a pair of original 20-mm guns. The third-generation AC-130U aircraft had the same armament onboard, but were equipped with an advanced fire control system, including synthetic aperture radar for early detection and identification of targets in any weather, as well as high-resolution multi-spectral television sensors and infrared cameras. The new version also differed increased ammunition. AC-130U Ganship actually replaced the remaining AC-130A aircraft that were removed from service in the 1995 year.

In 2007, AFSOC commenced a short-term program to upgrade the armament of the AC-130H and AC-130U aircraft. Four of the X-NUMX AC-17U gunships were refined as the AC-130U Plus 130 test platforms for the new weapon configuration — in this case, the 4-mm GAU-25 / U and the 12-mm Bofors gun were replaced with two 40-mm Mk30 BUSHMAS guns Mk44 BUSHMAS / U guns. Initially, there were also plans to replace the 105-mm howitzer 120-mm M120 mortar with official loading and the installation of AGM-114 HELLFIRE rockets, advanced Precision Kill Weapon System unguided missiles or a GBU-44V VIPER STRIKE adjustable bomb (planning), so that you can carry out attacks out of reach of enemy weapons.

However, the implementation of this rearmament scheme was canceled and the aircraft were refined to the standard configuration, although when the US Air Force launched the Dragon Spear program to create an intermediate ganship, 30-mm Orbital ATK Mk44 BUSHMASTER II gun, HELLFIRE missiles and VIPER STRIKE bombs were the first candidates.

Dragon Spear Program

The goal of the Dragon Spear program was to preserve the combat capabilities in connection with the upcoming decommissioning of the AC-130H / U fleet. This problem was particularly acute after the decommissioning of the eighth aircraft AC-130H (the latter was removed from service in the 2015 year).

In 2010, the company L-3 Communications received a contract worth 61 million dollars for the installation of precision weapons on eight aircraft MC-130W COMBAT SPEAR Special Forces to transform them into intermediate gangships Dragon Spear. But, while the new gunship was equipped with wing assemblies of the suspension, allowing to hang the GBU-39 Small-Diameter Bomb (SDB), GBU-53 / B (SDB II) small-caliber bombs, AGM-114 HELLFIRE missiles, and also had the opportunity for the installation of a GUNSLINGER pallet system with an integrated set of sensors and communication systems and 10 common launch tubes on the rear ramp for various precision weapons, including the GBU-44V VIPER STRIKE or AGM-176 GRIFFIN Small Tactical Munition (STM), it had only one gun with an optional mount for one 30-mm gun BUSHMASTER II.

Such an emphasis on guided remote armament was made on the basis of the combat experience obtained, which showed that the AC-130 ganships, as a rule, operate in the daytime at high altitudes, and this, by and large, makes the gun ineffective.

The first gunship MC-130W Dragon Spear entered service in March 2010 of the year and in May 2012 of the year was renamed AC-130W STINGER II. In total, 14 aircraft were converted to this configuration.


The AC-130J GHOSTRIDER was ranked as the heaviest gunship in stories. On board, he carries 30-mm and 105-mm cannons, AGM-176A GRIFFIN missiles, HELLFIRE missiles and GBU-39 SDB bombs.

GHOSTRIDER

While the intermediate project AC-130W allowed the US Air Force to continue intensive use of its gunships, even taking into account the decommissioning of the outdated AC-130H, the planned gunship HERCULES should have been based on the C-130J glider, but with its two-seater glass cabin, digital electronics, Rolls-Royce AE 2100 D3 turboprop engines and composite saber blades for propellers from Dowty R391.

Successful transformation program Combat Spear in Dragon Spear allowed to determine the direction of further development. The new AC-130J GHOSTRIDER gunship, based on the MC-130J COMBAT SHADOW II aircraft, had to be equipped with a special-purpose weapons kit for high-precision strike, so that they could get offensive capabilities. For this, new aircraft were taken, not “used”, while the equipment and the weapon set were similar to the equipment and the weapon kit of the AC-130W, although it was later decided that the new gunship was in addition to the Bushmaster’s 30 gun and various smart bombs will be equipped with an 105-mm howitzer, since it was concluded that 105-mm projectiles will be more accurate and cheaper than SDB bombs.

The United States Air Force will initially acquire 16 new AC-130J hand-crank arms, thereby increasing the hand-gun fleet to 33 vehicles. After the planned decommissioning of aircraft AC-130H, excluding the “intermediate” AC-130W, in its pure form, the size of the hunt fleet will increase by 8 machines. Ultimately, the AC-32J GHOSTRIDER 130 ganship will replace the 37 operating models AC-130H SPECTER, AC-130U SPOOKY and AC-130W STINGER II, after which the gunship park will have a unified overall configuration. The United States Air Force hopes to remove the last existing gunship in 2022 year.

The first aircraft MC-130J was delivered to Eglin airbase to refine the configuration of the AC-130J in January 2013 of the year, and it made its first flight as the AC-130J in January of the 2014 year. Initial combat readiness was scheduled for 2017 year, but was postponed to a later date after the incident during the test flight, when the limit loads on the body of an experienced machine were exceeded, after which it was sent for full disassembly.

The second AC-130J was deployed to the AFSOC Air Force Base in Florida in July 2015 for operational tests. As in the case of the first AC-130J, the 105-mm gun was not installed on it; it will begin to install on this model from the third machine.

In the future, the US Air Force wants to add a weapon of directed energy to the AC-130J gunship instead of the 30-mm cannon, as well as an active containment system for controlling crowd actions from the air and a one-time UAV to meet the requirement for an off-board sensory system. Rayton’s drone COYOTE is designed for targeting and reconnaissance purposes, it has a flight duration of one hour, although requirements include a flight duration of four hours.

In June 2016, the Special Operations Forces Command SOCOM contracted Dynetics to integrate the adjustable GBU-69 / B Small Glide Munition bombs into the AC-130J gunship. This small planning bomb without an engine with GPS and semi-active laser guidance can be dropped from common launch guides and has a more powerful warhead compared to HELLFIRE and GRIFFIN missiles.

The US Air Force is not the only type of armed forces operating an armed Hercules aircraft, just like the AC-130J version is not the first armed version of the C-130J Super Hercules. The Marine Corps is planning to eventually integrate the HARVEST HAWK (HERCULES Airborne Weapons Kit) underboard rollout system into its KC-130J tankers, which will enhance not only the reconnaissance capabilities of the KS-130J tankers, but also their firepower by installing an automatic cannon. . The HARVEST HAWK system is in fact the predecessor of the Dragon Spear program and became the basis for the modifications of the AC-130W and AC-130J models.

Other improvements to the HARVEST HAWK program include the replacement of the AAQ-30 Observation and Aiming Optoelectronic Station with a more advanced MX-20 system (the same is on the new P-8 POSEIDON anti-submarine aircraft), a new pallet for the Mission Operator Pallet, based on the AC pallet -130J, and LINK 16 communication channel, whereas, in accordance with the Capability III refinement program, it is proposed to add a modular 30-mm cannon installed in the side door. Marine Corps also plans to integrate the new dual-mode (laser / radar guidance) JAGM missile.


Anti-submarine aircraft P-8 POSEIDON equipped with a sight-sighting optical-electronic station MX-20

MC-27J PRAETORIAN

HERCULES is not the only gunship on the planet, or even the only gunship in the United States. The Marine Corps is planning to equip its MV-22 OSPREY converters and even tried to mount an 30-mm cannon on them, although it will not be used as a weapon for firing from the side, which would make it a typical gunship.

Before dwelling on the AC-130W and AC-130J models, the AFSOC command, in order to satisfy its AC-XX demand, thought about purchasing a variant of the C-27J SPARTAN transport plane from Lockheed Martin Alenia Tactical Transport Systems (LMATTS) as a replacement for its outdated AC- 130H SPECTER. AFSOC had planned to buy the AC-16J STINGER II 27 handovers in the 2011-2015 years.


The main tasks of the AC-130W STINGER II ganship are the direct air support and isolation of the combat area from the air

But AC-27J fell victim to financial cuts and the Air Force decided to stop with the standard HERCULES aircraft as the basis of its future ganships, although in 2013, SOCOM tested the PZL C-145A SKYTRUCK aircraft in a variant of the ganship, which was armed with dual GAU- 12,7-mm machine guns 18.

Although the US Air Force decided not to buy the AC-27J, Alenia developed the C-27J Spartan version of the multi-purpose gunship MC-27J to meet the needs of other customers.

Gunship MС-27J is designed to perform tasks of command, control, reconnaissance, surveillance and information gathering, as well as fire support, having on board a roll-out 30-mm Orbital ATU GAU-23 gun. This is a variant of the gun Mk44 BUSHMASTER, mounted on the AC-130W. The MC-27J variant will also be converted for installation on the ramp of a system of tubular launchers that will allow you to fire with highly accurate weapons, including Raytheon GRIFFIN-B and MBDA VIPER-E missiles.





In the tailgate of the MC-27J on a standard 463L pallet, an 30-mm GAU-23 gun is installed



Monitors pointing guns in the cockpit (above). Control switch cocking the opening of fire on the pilot's steering wheel (below)

The first customer of the MC-27J PRAETORIAN was the Italian Air Force, which converted three of its C-27J gantries into the Praetorian configuration and, if necessary, converted three more aircraft that the systems from the Praetorian configuration could accept. The first Italian gunship MC-27J passed operational tests in Afghanistan in the 2014 year, and at the moment it carries out military service in Italian aviation.

The basic C-27J military transport aircraft from the very beginning of its development fought strong competitors in the face of the CASA CN235 and CASA C295 models (photo below) of Airbus Defense & Space (DS). The armed MC-27J may also be under competitive pressure from gunships converted from Airbus tactical transport aircraft.



Ganship CN235

The AC-235 gunship program began in February 2011, when ATC announced the creation of a joint venture with the King Abdullah II Design and Development Bureau of Jordan to convert two previously owned Spanish military transport aircraft CN235 into the AC-235 ganship configuration for the Jordanian Command special operations forces.

Gunship AC-235 has a light-weight, rotating 30-mm Orbital ATK MXNMXLF cannon installed on board, suspension assemblies of various weapons, including AGM-230 HELLFIRE and unguided 114-mm missiles. The aircraft is equipped with a Thales I-MASTER Ku-band synthesized aperture radar, ground-based moving targets indicator in the turret under the fuselage on the right side and a L-70 Wescam IVIX-3 optical-electronic station with a laser pointer on the left side.

The aircraft was reworked with the United States, and the first aircraft made its first flight in the ganship configuration in December 2013 of the year and flew to its place of service in Jordan in May 2014 of the year. Both aircraft are in service with the 32 Squadron of the aviation brigade.


The AC-235 light gantry for relatively little money provides improved capabilities for defensive operations, counterinsurgency operations and border security.

The success of the AC-235 program led to the decision to convert one of the larger Jordanian transport aircraft CASA C295 into a hunt of a similar configuration. It also suggested Airbus DS to offer its own version of the “factory gang” to meet the requirements of an unnamed customer from the Middle East.

This aircraft will be a much simpler hunt - with a pair of 12,7-mm machine guns on a turret in the rear doors and fire control systems or reconnaissance and surveillance. The company also developed more advanced modifications of handrails based on the C295 light transport aircraft with a set of sensors and weapon systems, including an integrated FITS tactical system from the Airbus DS, a synthetic aperture radar, two optical-electronic optical reconnaissance stations installed in the 20-mm or 30-mm cannon and four underwing assemblies for various controlled weapons, including air-to-surface missiles AGM-114 HELLFIRE or Roketsan L-UMTAS, laser-guided missiles, including, R oketsan CIRIT and various laser-guided bombs.

Remarkable

Despite the fact that some Soviet and modern Russian multi-purpose and attack helicopters belong to the ganships according to American terminology, there are no strict equivalents of the “ganship” in the Russian-speaking official business vocabulary due to a fundamentally different historical path of development of aviation in general and aircraft supporting the ground forces in particular in no small measure due to the expeditionary method of warfare traditional for the US Armed Forces.

On the materials of the sites:
www.nationaldefensemagazine.org
www.lockheedmartin.com
www.thalesgroup.com
www.boeing.com
www.airbus.com
www.orbitalatk.com
www.militaryfactory.com
www.globalsecurity.org
www.flightglobal.com
www.airwar.ru
pinterest.com
alex-ichim.deviantart.com
www.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
Author:
85 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Clueless
    Clueless 4 September 2017 06: 06
    +7
    It’s a pity we don’t have such, they would be useful in Syria. All the same, cheaper than wetting barmalei missiles
    1. Vadim Kurbatov
      Vadim Kurbatov 4 September 2017 06: 12
      +10
      More expensive and dangerous fighter il attack aircraft is much more difficult to knock down with a MANPADS than a gunship
      1. corporal
        corporal 4 September 2017 06: 49
        +5
        Quote: Vadim Kurbatov
        knock down with MANPADS

        I remember that here they were rapturously discussing "President-S", which is precisely imprisoned for various air defense systems.
        If this is not a "cut and rollback" wassat from KRET, why not put one on ganships?
        1. Vadim Kurbatov
          Vadim Kurbatov 4 September 2017 07: 02
          +5
          So besides the air defense system and the air defense system there is also a standard cannon defense in the form of a zu-23 2 and nobody canceled and will not cancel the shelling from large-caliber machine guns
          1. corporal
            corporal 4 September 2017 07: 13
            +5
            Quote: Vadim Kurbatov
            zu-23 2 and even shelling with large-caliber machine guns

            From 105 mm it is possible to work from such heights, to which 23-25-30-35 and especially 14,5 do not reach
            1. Vadim Kurbatov
              Vadim Kurbatov 4 September 2017 08: 04
              +2
              ganships more often fly at an altitude of 2-2.5 kilometers since another 20 mm gun should work out
          2. mirag2
            mirag2 4 September 2017 07: 15
            +4
            Catch the video for the article:
          3. Now we are free
            Now we are free 4 September 2017 14: 45
            +6
            -Tommy, why do you need such a big trunk?
            -This is to win completely.
            -Win completely? ..
            (From the movie "Big Jackpot") laughing

            Yes, Ganships are good for hanging over the battlefield and hammering into the Stone Age anyone who opposes ground allied forces. It was good in the already broken and weakened to the impossible: Iraq, Afghanistan and other Zambia. BUT if the enemy has at least a minimally well-organized air defense, "Spuki" and other "Ghosts" are extremely vulnerable to fire from the ground, I can’t imagine how Ganship will survive a salvo from him from the Dzhigit or if it gets into its fatty belly 57 mm " Gift "with the good old S-60 which forgive me range of a direct shot of 6 kilometers ... Also, the Ganship’s carcass can be seriously damaged if it enters a lineup of such small but extremely effective installations as ZU-23-2 (this is not 12,2 or even 14,5 KPVT. If the enemy has such systems as OSA "AKM," Arrow 10 "," Shilka "M4 (I'm not talking about all sorts of" Torahs "," Tunguska "," Armor ") like" Ganships "it is better not to approach the database at all (if at all to rise into the air).

            Summary, but the car is good to drive the "Mad Mahmuds" in the desert, who have a maximum of 12 mm -14 mm heavy machine guns (manually guided) or early versions of the Arrows, Eagle, RedAev, and Stingers, but for he does not fit the fight against regular combat units that have at least some proper air defense, for he himself begins to imagine: a large, slow-moving, weakly armored, coveted target ...
            1. cast iron
              cast iron 4 September 2017 22: 42
              0
              You are confused. At 57mm armor-piercing projectile, the range of a direct shot at a target with a height of 2m is only 1100 m. But the maximum range for anti-aircraft targets is 6000m with a maximum height of 4000m. At such distances it is unlikely to hit an air target.
      2. db1967
        db1967 6 September 2017 14: 18
        0
        Shoot-bomb from a height of 5.500m +.
        Professional anti-aircraft guns with 76 mm or more guns are unlikely to survive in the world.
        120mm with Nona with adjustable ammunition.
    2. Lopatov
      Lopatov 4 September 2017 08: 03
      +11
      This topic has surfaced more than once on the site: according to the experience of the Americans, Ganships are one of the most expensive aircraft to operate.
      1. IvanTheTerrible
        IvanTheTerrible 4 September 2017 09: 47
        0
        Naturally: the higher the payload, the more fuel is burned and ammunition consumed.
        1. Lopatov
          Lopatov 4 September 2017 10: 57
          +8
          "Payload"? I'm afraid the same F-16 will have more than the AC-130.
          The idiom “the best is the enemy of the good” is perfectly applicable here.
          Initially, the Ganships were refitted old military transport aircraft. Cheap, angry and at that time, effective. Almost immediately, they began to re-equip the new military-technical cooperation. It was already more expensive. Well, then they started building “ganships” from scratch. Maximally stuffing them with electronics and weapons. And I had to forget about cheapness.
          Even for the Americans they were a little expensive, for example, the US Marine Corps “Wishlist” could not be satisfied for financial reasons, and they had to purchase a trimmed-down kit for remaking refueling aircraft like “ganships” in airfield conditions. With the ability to quickly reverse transform
          1. IvanTheTerrible
            IvanTheTerrible 4 September 2017 11: 07
            +5
            "Payload"? I'm afraid the same F-16 will have more than the AC-130.

            F-16C Block 50 - Max. takeoff weight: 42,300 lb (19,200 kg)
            AC-130A - Loaded weight: 122,400 lb (55,520 kg)
            The old man AC-130 lifts almost three times more.
            Departures are so expensive, among other things, because this ganship has 13 crew members on board, which means 13 salaries and insurance.
            1. cariperpaint
              cariperpaint 4 September 2017 12: 32
              +2
              in another's airspace this pepelats also needs to be protected
            2. PROXOR
              PROXOR 4 September 2017 13: 39
              +4
              You do not consider the total carrying capacity, namely combat. The guns weigh. Equipment and so on.
            3. Lopatov
              Lopatov 4 September 2017 15: 26
              +5
              Quote: IvanTheTerrible
              The old man AC-130 lifts almost three times more.

              What raises?
              And let's count? "Volley weight" for GAU-8: 3000 shells x 0,378 kg = 1134 kg
              For L-60 256 shells x 0.9 kg = 230,4 kg
              For M-102 98 shells x 14.97 kg = 1467,06 kg
              Total weight of a full salvo of all guns 2.8 tons.
              And the F-16C seems to have a bomb load of up to 7.8 tons. Not counting the BC for the gun. Even if half goes to all kinds of containers and PTB, it’s still a lot more.
      2. Michael HORNET
        Michael HORNET 5 September 2017 08: 53
        0
        It turns out that the price of an airplane hour for the ganship is LESS than for a heavy impact UAV of the Reaper type! This is unexpected) at the same time he is much more effective than the Reaper and can work for a long time, covering the operation. In general, for counter-guerrilla actions it’s a terrible thing, MANPADS are still not so frequent among irregulars — they won’t be able to cope with yokes in the Philippines for six months.
        1. Lopatov
          Lopatov 5 September 2017 09: 18
          +1
          Quote: Michael HORNET
          It turns out that the price of an airplane hour for the ganship is LESS than for a heavy impact UAV of the Reaper type!

          You looked something wrong. At Ganship, an airplane hour costs 46 thousand dollars, at Reaper - 4.8 thousand dollars.
          So it is necessary to compare the effectiveness of one "Ganship" and nine "Reapers".

          You, apparently, looked at the cost of the flight hour RQ-4B. This is a GlobalHook scout,
      3. db1967
        db1967 6 September 2017 14: 22
        0
        But the "little ganship" laughing Bronco is the cheapest.
        1. Lopatov
          Lopatov 6 September 2017 15: 26
          0
          Bronco is a reconnaissance spotter. No wonder he is "OV"
    3. Boris Chernikov
      Boris Chernikov 5 September 2017 19: 42
      0
      they’re predominantly wet with bombs, and given the fact that the barmalei have 57 mm guns, it’s possible to rake, as an option, it would be enough to reinforce the air-force system by putting the fuselage firing module on mi-24/35 or mi-8 helicopters.
  2. The comment was deleted.
    1. Vadim Kurbatov
      Vadim Kurbatov 4 September 2017 06: 20
      +1
      against those who have nothing at all except an assault rifle and RPG since a person with brains can even play pranks on a plane even with a large-caliber machine gun
      1. demiurg
        demiurg 4 September 2017 06: 40
        +3
        It is especially interesting why ganship is needed when the drone quietly performs the same tasks for much less money.
        1. Vadim Kurbatov
          Vadim Kurbatov 4 September 2017 07: 03
          0
          The drone has less ammunition than ganship
          1. demiurg
            demiurg 4 September 2017 07: 06
            +3
            At the cost of ganship, you can build a dozen and a half (slight exaggeration) quite decent in the load of drones that can control a much larger area. Plus there is no risk of losing the crew.
            1. Lopatov
              Lopatov 4 September 2017 08: 19
              0
              The flight hour of one Ganship costs more than the flight hour of nine combat UAVs
  3. demiurg
    demiurg 4 September 2017 06: 19
    0
    Who is it against? Against partisans who do not even have an arrow / stinger?
  4. Strashila
    Strashila 4 September 2017 06: 35
    +4
    With a dozen of our country, such cars would be useful, not only to drive all sorts of Mujahideen, but to restrain them to support border guards on the seas of poachers.
  5. DesToeR
    DesToeR 4 September 2017 07: 57
    +2
    Funnel type element can realize ka50 / 52 helicopter. So what about uniqueness is somehow not very
  6. Mik13
    Mik13 4 September 2017 08: 08
    +4
    Flying in a combat U-turn with a roll, with weapons pointing to the top of an imaginary “cone”, whose guiding circle it “flies around”, the ganship conducts continuous high-precision fire, which can be held for quite some time at one point.

    I'll take a step: a military U-turn is such a figure of aerobatics that not every ganship will do.

    And in the text - correctly use the term "steady reversal"
  7. Molot1979
    Molot1979 4 September 2017 08: 16
    +3
    This is where it is in our world that rebels wound up with no MANPADS?
    1. demiurg
      demiurg 4 September 2017 10: 00
      +1
      Quote: Molot1979
      This is where it is in our world that rebels wound up with no MANPADS?

      Stumble on a photo on the Internet. There are tons of places where the rebels have our 57mm anti-aircraft guns, which is 5km in height. Well, if without poise.
      And already 23-14mm almost in everyone in the garden are dug.
      1. seos
        seos 4 September 2017 15: 13
        0
        57mm anti-aircraft guns 12 km in height ...
  8. san4es
    san4es 4 September 2017 08: 44
    +3
    Lockheed AC-130 Ghostrider Gunship
    1. dokusib
      dokusib 5 September 2017 04: 40
      0
      After the video, there was a feeling that all these ammunition and fuel can be spent with greater efficiency.
  9. Strashila
    Strashila 4 September 2017 09: 17
    +2
    Quote: DesToeR
    Funnel type element can realize ka50 / 52 helicopter. So what about uniqueness is somehow not very

    You can modify and MI26 under the helicopter fire support, it is fire, and not shock attack. Set up an additional reservation, increase the fuel supply, anti-MANPADS systems, additional optical detection systems, a pair of 30 mm guns ... he doesn’t need to twist the funnel, it can freeze. The site discussed the topic "Golden Eagle" for MI8 ... this is from this series.
    1. Boris Chernikov
      Boris Chernikov 5 September 2017 19: 46
      +1
      the problem is that the car feels safe - it must fly at a height of, say, 5 km at least .. there will be no sense in such a range from 30 mm
  10. slaventi
    slaventi 4 September 2017 09: 24
    +2
    All these American "Ganships" can fly where there is no enemy air defense. To pacify the rebellious natives. And their terrorist formations such as Isil ..
  11. Monarchist
    Monarchist 4 September 2017 10: 30
    +2
    Quote: Vadim Kurbatov
    More expensive and dangerous fighter il attack aircraft is much more difficult to knock down with a MANPADS than a gunship

    Vadim, but what do you think: do the Americans know that there are MANPADS that can bring down ganship? They know all MANPADS better than you, but they build ganships
    1. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA 4 September 2017 12: 11
      +5
      Quote: Monarchist
      Vadim, but what do you think: do the Americans know that there are MANPADS that can bring down ganship? They know all MANPADS better than you, but they build ganships

      And you look at the ganships development trend described in the article: less artillery, more URO. In fact, gunships are turning into "missile gunboats" - since gun systems are ineffective at new safe firing ranges.
      In addition, the Americans sometimes continue to build "by inertia" - the money is allocated, the budget must be mastered. The history of littoralniks is an example of this - for a long time there have been no opponents and the conditions under which they were designed, and the construction is underway. Even though "cheap multi-functional ship to replace the Zumwalt in low-intensity war zones"Now it requires itself to cover with Zumwalt or Burke to work in precisely such areas. The reason, by the way, is the same as forcing the ganships to move farther away from the target - spreading URO around the world. If the ganships had to react to the spread of MANPADS, then "littoralnikam" - on the coastal SCRC made in China and third world countries (a copy of the Chinese copy of the European anti-ship missiles, as it turned out, still flies and gets smile ).
      In addition, the construction / purchase stop is too noticeable an event that immediately raises a number of very unpleasant questions from a wide range of amateurs from the Senate and Congress - why the military did not foresee such a development of events, did not predict the situation for at least 5 years, and budget money for non-operational weapons systems. And shoulder straps can fly. And if you continue the construction, then everything seems to be fine (for 2-3 specialists understand the general situation) ... and then it will be possible to knock out money for modernization as well. smile
      1. Vadim Kurbatov
        Vadim Kurbatov 5 September 2017 10: 08
        0
        So this is not a fire support plane coming out, but an ordinary drummer or attack aircraft will come out
    2. Vadim Kurbatov
      Vadim Kurbatov 5 September 2017 10: 06
      0
      only 40 units were built, and then only 15-16 aircraft of this type are in service, the maximum ceiling of this unit is 7 kilometers
  12. Monarchist
    Monarchist 4 September 2017 10: 56
    +1
    An interesting system, but I didn’t enter what would be better than a helicopter? A large supply of fuel, but to calculate the operating costs of the cost of gunship and helicopter.
    What same Dakota will be better than Apache?
    1. Arikkhab
      Arikkhab 4 September 2017 12: 15
      +3
      probably: range / patrol time / payload
    2. Michael HORNET
      Michael HORNET 5 September 2017 08: 50
      0
      It is necessary to calculate simply. If such an emphasis is placed on a 30 mm cannon, then maybe it is no better. Ganship's whole point was still in 40mm + 105 mm, the missiles and bombs on it look ridiculous - there are more fast and cheap airplanes for this in flight hour. We, too, need to build such ones, for the future zergrash igra in the open spaces of the KZ it will be just that. As for the Mi-26 as a carrier - it is necessary to consider and experiment
  13. svp67
    svp67 4 September 2017 10: 56
    +3
    Ganshipa: a stylish means of dealing with barmalei
    Just that STYLISH, as "barmalei" and in response, perhaps they can send, unlike the "Indians" and "farmers" ....
  14. NickiShnapi
    NickiShnapi 4 September 2017 11: 55
    +1
    To make an expensive babaholka which is effective only against Papuans with sticks, this is so American.
  15. Kostyan84
    Kostyan84 4 September 2017 12: 43
    +1
    In my opinion, the SU-25 is cheaper and more efficient.
    1. KCA
      KCA 5 September 2017 04: 47
      +1
      The Three Rooks are definitely cheaper, and unloading NURSs and bombs from the suspension is more efficient, and equipping them on a good journey the next time they’re faster
  16. DesToeR
    DesToeR 4 September 2017 14: 09
    +1
    Quote: Strashila
    You can modify the MI26 under a fire support helicopter

    So the essence of the “funnel” element is in angular movement relative to the enemy with his own weapons constantly pointing at him. Hanging is not a problem, but you can easily catch the "answer". The advantage of the aircraft is the ability to install large-caliber artillery, a large number of equipment, high flight speed and a longer range.
  17. garri-lin
    garri-lin 4 September 2017 14: 14
    +4
    Brothers! I don’t own Photoshop. Who knows how to press on the sides of silt 76 three modules of Bakhcha U. Put on the net let them get nervous in the Pentagon.
  18. Anchonsha
    Anchonsha 4 September 2017 14: 27
    +2
    Well, well, these Sychships now in Syria would burn in the sky one by one. At that time, the rebels did not have MANPADS against vile mericans. Already in Afghanistan, vile Merikans armed the Taliban with their SAMs against our helicopters.
    1. voyaka uh
      voyaka uh 4 September 2017 17: 43
      +3
      "The current ship’s forces in Syria would burn in the sky one by one" ////

      Well, helicopters do not burn. Who cares?
      War against the Papuans without air defense.
      1. The brightest
        The brightest 22 September 2017 07: 53
        0
        This is since when in Syria helicopters do not burn and planes do not fall, regularly. And it is a high maneuverable and protected. And this cow will be just a duck in the dash.
  19. voyaka uh
    voyaka uh 4 September 2017 14: 31
    +4
    Oddly enough, ganships have a bright future.
    On heavy aircraft it’s easy to install combat lasers.
    Attacking ground targets - times. But most important: protective lasers
    from all types of missiles attacking the aircraft — both MANPADS and air-to-air missiles.
    For circular protection, 2-3 turrets will be required: above and below.
    But the bandura is big. Neither weight nor size is a hindrance.
    Then it will be possible to bring down such an aircraft only at close range from cannons
    or machine guns.
    1. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA 4 September 2017 16: 17
      0
      Quote: voyaka uh
      Then it will be possible to bring down such an aircraft only at close range from cannons
      or machine guns.

      I'm afraid that then the good old RCTU and protected warheads will be used. Or something like Starstreak.
      In short, instead of homing with its vulnerable GOS, there will be a correction of the trajectory of the rocket from the ground.
    2. demiurg
      demiurg 4 September 2017 16: 58
      0
      Well, if we assume that sooner or later the lasers will appear, then it will be very simple to bring down the laser ganship, with the same laser of much lower power.
      1. voyaka uh
        voyaka uh 4 September 2017 17: 41
        +2
        Yes, you can shoot down. But a laser of much greater power.
        It’s not necessary to burn a GOS of an approaching rocket.
        But to fill up a large plane - you really need to strain.
        1. Lopatov
          Lopatov 4 September 2017 19: 55
          0
          Quote: voyaka uh
          It’s not necessary to burn a GOS of an approaching rocket.

          Now "on hand" there are a lot of MANPADS and man-portable air defense systems with laser beam control. And the same Iran managed to use Swedish air defense systems of this type very, very effectively.

          And against them, the laser is practically useless.
          And against the three two-centimeter “copies” of the “Starstrik” and a powerful laser, you get tormented. Moreover, their speed is 4M
          1. voyaka uh
            voyaka uh 5 September 2017 11: 18
            0
            "And the laser against them is practically useless" ///

            I don’t understand why ... What's the difference how the approaching is controlled
            rocket? For a laser, this is a "fast moving, dangerously approaching object."
            Comp and leads the target and commands the shooting. People are out of work. Do not have time.
            The shells of explosive rockets are thin, it is quite possible to have time to burn through.
            4 Mach on a collision course? In missile defense for ICBMs 12 + 7 = 19 MAX - the total BR velocity
            and missile defense. And yet they manage to get in ( laughing sometimes!).
            1. Lopatov
              Lopatov 5 September 2017 11: 44
              +1
              Quote: voyaka uh
              Who cares how the approaching is controlled
              rocket?

              If this is an IR seeker, then the lvzer can disable it.
              If it is laser beam like, for example, on Starstrike, the receiver is located in the stern of the rocket, aimed at the launch, therefore, it is impossible to damage.

              Now the defeat of the "spear". Not only does it fly at a speed of the order of 1700 m / s, it is very difficult to detect. 20-cm "circle" when viewed from the side of the target, not radiating in the UV range, since there is no engine, with a minimum EPR. But to destroy the default "refractory" targets (high speed) you need a fairly long time, of the order of several seconds.

              So the laser is just useless
              1. voyaka uh
                voyaka uh 6 September 2017 16: 47
                +1
                "20 cm" circle "when viewed from the side of the target, not radiating in the UV range,
                since there is no engine, with a minimum EPR "///

                But it is also supposed to bring down from a minimum distance. The beast goes to the catcher.
                So: difficult, but not hopeless.
                1. Lopatov
                  Lopatov 6 September 2017 16: 57
                  0
                  Quote: voyaka uh
                  But it is also supposed to bring down from a minimum distance.

                  Which "spear" will fly faster than the laser system works?
                  1. voyaka uh
                    voyaka uh 7 September 2017 08: 57
                    0
                    But the laser has a serious advantage in achieving the goal: the speed of light. wink
        2. Vard
          Vard 29 September 2017 03: 54
          0
          A missile is a very difficult target, due to its small dimension and rapid movement .. in addition, it can be twisted ... and the plane in this regard, a large and almost motionless target ...
    3. Blackgrifon
      Blackgrifon 4 September 2017 21: 18
      0
      Quote: voyaka uh
      Then it will be possible to bring down such an aircraft only at close range from cannons
      or machine guns.

      Or a massive missile salvo. But this requires the organization of a full-fledged ambush or more or less systemic air defense.
    4. Michael HORNET
      Michael HORNET 5 September 2017 08: 45
      0
      Yes, in general, a useful thing in the light of modern and future hybrid wars. At 5 km in height there are not many common weapons
    5. CorvusCoraks
      CorvusCoraks 10 September 2017 18: 21
      0
      Quote: voyaka uh
      Oddly enough, ganships have a bright future.
      On heavy aircraft it’s easy to install combat lasers.
      Attacking ground targets - times. But most important: protective lasers
      from all types of missiles attacking the aircraft — both MANPADS and air-to-air missiles.
      For circular protection, 2-3 turrets will be required: above and below.

      I’m afraid that by that time the potential enemy will already have combat lasers for shooting down ganships with overcoming their laser protection laughing
  20. Disorder
    Disorder 4 September 2017 16: 12
    +1
    The flying artillery battery so far has only distinguished itself by the shooting of a defenseless hospital. And against the barmalei A-10 Thunderbolt and OV-10 Bronco work.
    1. Lopatov
      Lopatov 4 September 2017 19: 45
      0
      Quote: Trouble
      and OV-10 Bronco.

      As far as I heard, “Bronco” did not work like drums, only for their intended purpose as reconnaissance spotters.
  21. Plombir
    Plombir 4 September 2017 18: 02
    +1
    It is called beautifully, essentially a ram. Why the hell are we such pepelats? Pin. Osam toad skins nowhere to put, so they are cast out. Accustomed to fight with the unarmed. With a normally armed adversary, these pepelats are generally disposable.
  22. Sektant
    Sektant 4 September 2017 21: 14
    0
    Cameron's "Terminator" seems to be coming true
  23. mobidik69
    mobidik69 5 September 2017 09: 28
    0
    the campaign is just a big target for MANPADS ...
  24. SerZh1972
    SerZh1972 5 September 2017 11: 28
    0
    Effective only against the Papuans.
  25. DimerVladimer
    DimerVladimer 5 September 2017 11: 41
    0
    Ganship - so big, so slow, at low altitude - it seems he just attracts DShK shells - an ideal target for an ambush of 3-4 DShKs.
    1. serg.shishkov2015
      serg.shishkov2015 11 September 2017 09: 22
      0
      or ZPU-4 with KPVT!
  26. Div Divich
    Div Divich 5 September 2017 13: 52
    0
    Russia has helicopters for these needs, they are actively used now in Syria.
  27. zyablik.olga
    zyablik.olga 5 September 2017 15: 04
    +2
    The article is a “hodgepodge” from the publications of Sergey Linnik (Vngo). The author does not own a lot of errors and inaccuracies of a technical nature. negative
  28. Zaurbek
    Zaurbek 5 September 2017 16: 36
    0
    There was a good AN-72P aircraft, but now, before the adoption of the Il-112, we do not have a platform.

  29. bagr69
    bagr69 6 September 2017 08: 56
    0
    If you are sure that nothing will fly back, then yes ...
  30. irazum
    irazum 6 September 2017 10: 13
    0
    Aircraft are definitely needed, but such a target for MZA and MANPADS!
  31. pzkrfv4
    pzkrfv4 7 September 2017 18: 12
    0
    [quote] [/ quote] Initially, there were also plans to replace the 105-mm howitzer with a 120-mm mortar M120 of state loading

    A mortar on an airplane is something ...
  32. RoTTor
    RoTTor 27 September 2017 01: 24
    0
    An-140-100 is great for conversion to ganship
  33. MatrixLine
    MatrixLine 30 March 2018 20: 02
    0