Military Review

Aviation against tanks (part of 14)

55



In the post-war period, with the advent of the “jet era”, combat aircraft with piston engines remained in service for quite some time in the USA and Great Britain. So, the American piston attack aircraft A-1 Skyraider, which made its first flight in March 1945, was used by the American armed forces until 1972. And in Korea, along with the reactive Thunderjets and Sabers, the piston Mustangs and Corsairs flew. The fact that the Americans were in no hurry to abandon the seemingly hopelessly outdated aircraft was associated with the low efficiency of jet fighter-bombers in carrying out immediate tasks aviation support. Too high a speed of jet aircraft made it difficult to detect point targets. And low fuel efficiency at first and low payload did not allow to surpass the machines created during the Second World War.

In the 50-60 years, not a single combat aircraft was designed to be used over the battlefield and combat armored vehicles in conditions of strong anti-aircraft resistance. In the West, they relied on jet fighters-bombers with a cruising flight speed of 750-900 km / h.

In the 50s, the main strike aircraft of the NATO countries was the F-84 Thunderjet. The first truly effective modification was the F-84E. A fighter-bomber with a maximum take-off weight of 10250 kg could take a combat load with a weight of 1450 kg. The combat radius without PTB was 440 km. The Thunderjet, which first flew into the air in February 1946, was one of the first American fighter jets, and had a straight wing. In this regard, its maximum speed at the ground did not exceed 996 km / h, but at the same time, due to its good maneuverability, the aircraft was well suited to the role of a fighter-bomber.


F-84G


The Thunderjet’s built-in armament consisted of six 12,7 mm machine guns. Air bombs weighing up to 454 kg or 16 mm NAR could be placed on the external sling. Very often during the fighting on the Korean peninsula, the F-127 attacked targets with 84HVAR missiles. These missiles, adopted in 5, could be successfully used to combat tanks.

Aviation against tanks (part of 14)

F-84E strikes NAR on a goal in Korea [/ i


Due to the high efficiency of 127-mm unguided missiles during the fighting, the number of suspended NARs on the F-84 was doubled. However, the losses of the North Korean tank crews directly from the strikes of combat aviation of the “UN troops” were relatively small.


[i] T-34-85 on a bridge destroyed by American aircraft


The offensive impulse of military units of the DPRK and the "Chinese people's volunteers" dried up when the supply of ammunition, fuel and food was stopped. American aircraft successfully destroyed bridges, ferries, trashed railway junctions and convoys. Thus, not being able to effectively deal with tanks on the battlefield, fighter-bombers made their progress without proper rear support impossible.


F-86F


Another fairly common western fighter-bomber was the Saber F-86F modifications. In the middle of the 50-x in the United States has already begun the production of supersonic combat aircraft, and therefore subsonic fighters actively transferred to the allies.



On four suspension nodes, the F-86F could carry napalm tanks or bombs with a total weight of up to 2200 kg. From the very beginning of the mass production of the fighter of this modification, the 16 NAR 5HVAR suspension was available; in 60-ies, units with 70-mm unguided Mk 4 FFAR missiles were introduced into its armament. Built-in weapons consisted of 6 heavy machine guns or four 20-mm guns. The plane with a maximum take-off weight of 8 230 kg at the ground developed the speed of 1106 km / h.

The main advantage of the “Sabr” over the “Thunderjet” was the greater thrust-to-weight ratio, which gave a better rate of climb and good take-off and landing characteristics. Although the flight data of the F-86F was higher, the strike capabilities of the machines were about the same.

The approximate analogue of Thunderjet was the French Dassault MD-450 Ouragan company. The aircraft with a maximum take-off weight of about 8000 kg, accelerated from the ground to 940 km / h. Combat radius of action - 400 km. Built-in weapons included four 20-mm guns. On two suspension nodes were placed bombs weighing up to 454 kg or NAR.


MD-450 Ouragan


Although the total circulation of the built "Hurricanes" was approximately 350 units, the aircraft actively participated in the hostilities. In addition to the French Air Force, he was in service with Israel, India and El Salvador.

A good potential in the fight against armored had a British Hawker Hunter. This subsonic fighter, which first flew into the air in the summer of 1951, was to carry out the air defense of the British Isles, receiving commands from ground radar stations. However, as an air defense fighter due to the increased speed of the Soviet bombers, the Hunter was very quickly outdated. At the same time, it was relatively simple, had a sturdy, well-made glider and powerful built-in armament, consisting of a four-barreled battery 30-mm guns "Aden" with 150 ammunition shells on the barrel and good maneuverability at low altitudes. Fighter-bomber Hunter FGA.9 with a maximum take-off weight of 12000 kg, could take a combat load of 2700 kg weight. The combat radius reached 600 km. Maximum ground speed is 980 km / h.


NAR launch from Hunter fighter-bomber


The conservative British retained the same unguided missiles that the Typhoon and Tempests pilots destroyed German tanks as part of the Hunter’s weapons. Fighter-bomber "Hunter" on antitank capabilities significantly superior to Saber and Thunderjet. This aircraft has proven itself very well in the Arab-Israeli and Indo-Pakistani conflicts, remaining in the ranks until the beginning of the 90-s. Simultaneously with the "Hunters" in India and the Arab countries, Soviet fighters, Su-7B bombers, were in service, and it was possible to compare the two vehicles in actual combat, including when attacking armored vehicles. It turned out that the "Hunter" with a lower maximum flight speed, due to better maneuverability, is more suitable for operations at low altitude as an aircraft of direct aviation support. He could take more bombs and rockets and, with equal caliber of guns, had a greater mass of volley. In the Indian Air Force at the beginning of the 70's, the existing “Hunters” adapted 68-mm cumulative French-produced CAPs and Soviet cluster bombs equipped with PTAB for suspension. This, in turn, significantly increased the anti-tank potential of the fighter-bomber. When attacking a point target, the review from the Hunter cockpit was better. The combat survivability of the machines was about the same level, but the Su-7B, due to the higher flight speed, could quickly get out of the range of the anti-aircraft artillery.



The Hunter strike options were valued for reliability, simple and relatively inexpensive maintenance, and unpretentiousness to the quality of the runways. It is noteworthy that the former Swiss “Hunters” are still used by the American private military aviation company ATAK, to imitate the exercises of Russian attack aircraft.

Before the start of the 60s, the air forces of the NATO countries mainly were dominated by American and British combat aircraft, which by no means satisfied the European aircraft manufacturers. In France, MD-454 Mystère IV and Super Mystère were used as fighter bombers, which were descended from the Hurricane.


Super Mystère B2 Fighter-Bomber


The French Misters were solid middling; they did not shine with very high flight data or original technical solutions, but they were quite appropriate for their purpose. Although the French fighter-bombers of the first generation performed well in the Indo-Pakistani and Arab-Israeli wars, they did not find buyers in Europe.

The Super Mister, loaded with fuel and weapons, weighed 11660 kg. At the same time he could take up to a ton of combat load. Built-in weapons - two 30-mm DEFA 552 guns with 150 rounds of ammunition per barrel. Maximum airspeed at high altitude, without external suspensions - 1250 km / h. Combat radius - 440 km.

In the second half of the 50-x competition was announced for a single lightweight strike aircraft of NATO. The generals wanted to get a light fighter-bomber with flight data of the American F-86F, but more adapted for operations at low altitudes and better forward-down view. The plane was supposed to be able to conduct a defensive air battle with Soviet fighters. The built-in armament was to consist of 6 heavy machine guns, 4 20-mm guns or 2 30-mm guns. Combat load: 12 unguided 127-mm missiles, or two 225 kg bombs, or two napalm tanks, or two hanging machine-gun cannons, weighing up to 225 kg each. Great attention was paid to survivability and resistance to combat damage. The cabin of the aircraft from the front hemisphere should have been covered with frontal bulletproof glass, as well as to have protection of the lower and rear walls. Tanks with fuel had to withstand a chamber without leaks 12,7-mm bullets, fuel lines and other important equipment were proposed to be placed in the least vulnerable areas for anti-aircraft fire. The onboard radio-electronic equipment of the light strike aircraft was provided for as simple as possible, providing the possibility of using during the day and in simple meteorological conditions. The minimum cost of the aircraft itself and its life cycle were specifically stipulated. A prerequisite was the possibility of basing on unpaved airfields and independence from a complex airfield infrastructure.

The competition was attended by interested European and American aircraft manufacturers. Projects were funded by the United States, France and Italy. At the same time, the French strenuously pushed their Dassault Mystere 26, while the British were counting on a victory for Hawker Hunter. To their deep disappointment, Italian Aeritalia FIAT G. 1957 was declared the winner at the end of 91 of the year. This plane was in many ways reminiscent of the American "Saber". Moreover, a number of technical solutions and nodes were simply copied from the F-86.

The Italian G.91 turned out to be very light, its maximum take-off weight was record low - 5500 kg. In the horizontal flight, the plane could reach speeds of 1050 km / h, the combat radius was 320 km. Originally built-in weapons included four 12,7-mm machine guns. On the four suspension assemblies under the wing there was a combat load of 680 kg mass. To increase the flight range, instead of armament, two discharged fuel tanks with a capacity of 450 liters were suspended.

Military tests of the G.91 pre-production batch, conducted by the Italian Air Force in 1959, demonstrated the aircraft’s simplicity for home-based conditions and the ability to operate from poorly prepared unpaved runways. All ground equipment necessary for flight preparation was transported on ordinary trucks, and could be quickly deployed to a new location. The launch of the aircraft engine was carried out by a starter with a pyro cartridge and did not require compressed air or a power supply connection. The entire training cycle of a fighter-bomber for a new combat flight took no more than 20 minutes.

According to the “cost-effectiveness” criterion in 60-ies, G.91 almost ideally suited the role of a mass light fighter-bomber and fully complied with the requirements for a single NATO strike aircraft, but due to national egoism and political disagreements, it was not widely used. In addition to the Italian Air Force, G.91 adopted in the "Luftwaffe".


West Germanic G.91R-3


German light attack aircraft differed from the Italian machines with enhanced built-in armament, consisting of two 30-mm DEFA 552 cannons with an 152 projectile ammunition. The wing of the German cars strengthened, which made it possible to accommodate two additional pylons of weapons.

Operation G.91 in Germany continued until the beginning of the 80-x, the pilots loved these simple and reliable machines and subsequently reluctantly transplanted to the supersonic "Phantoms" and "Starfighters". Due to the good maneuverability of the G.91 point targets, it was not only superior to many of its peers, but also much more complex and expensive combat aircraft that appeared in the 70-80-s. During the exercise, the Luftwaffe light attack aircraft repeatedly demonstrated the ability to accurately fire off cannons and NAR on decommissioned tanks at the range. Confirmation that G.91 was really a very successful aircraft, is the fact that several vehicles were tested in flight research centers in the US, UK and France. Italian cars everywhere have received positive reviews, but it did not go further. However, it is difficult to imagine that in 60-s, even if very successful, but developed and built in Italy, the combat aircraft was put into service in leading aviation Western countries. Despite the declared unity of NATO, orders for their own air forces have always been too tasty for national aircraft-building corporations to share with anyone.

On the basis of a more durable and roomy double training G.91T-3 in 1966, the lightweight G.91Y fighter-bomber with cardinally improved flight and combat characteristics was created. During test flights, its speed at high altitude came very close to the sound barrier, but flights in the altitude range 1500-3000 meters with speed 850-900 km / h were considered optimal.


G.91Y


On the plane installed two turbojet engines General Electric J85-GE-13, previously used on the F-5A fighter. Thanks to the use of a larger wing area with automatic slats throughout its span, it was possible to significantly increase maneuverability and take-off and landing characteristics. The strength characteristics of the wing allowed to increase the number of suspension points to six. Compared to G.91, the maximum take-off weight increased by more than 50%, while the weight of the combat load increased by 70%. Despite the increased fuel consumption, the flight range of the aircraft increased, helped by an increase in the capacity of the fuel tanks by 1500 liters.

Due to the combination of low cost and quite good flight and combat characteristics, the G.91Y aroused interest among foreign buyers. But relatively poor Italy could not supply aircraft on credit, and exert the same political pressure as the overseas "big brother". As a result, in addition to the Italian Air Force, who ordered the 75 aircraft, there were no other buyers for this reasonably successful car. It is safe to say that if G.91 was created in the USA, it would be much more widespread, could be involved in many armed conflicts and, possibly, would be in operation until now. Subsequently, some technical and conceptual solutions worked out on the G.91Y were used to create the Italian-Brazilian light attack aircraft AMX.

In 50-60-ies, the improvement of combat aviation proceeded along the path of increasing the speed, altitude and range of the flight and increasing the weight of the combat load. As a result, heavy supersonic F-70 Phantom II, F-4 Thunderchief and F-105 Aardvark became the main US Air Force impact machines at the beginning of the 111's. These vehicles were optimally suited for delivering tactical nuclear bombs and striking conventional munitions at enemy troop convoys, headquarters, airfields, transportation hubs, warehouses, fuel depots, and other important targets. But for the provision of direct aviation support, and even more so the struggle with tanks on the battlefield, heavy and expensive aircraft were of little use. Supersonic fighter-bombers could successfully solve the problem of isolating the battlefield, but for the immediate destruction of armored vehicles in combat formations required relatively light and maneuverable combat aircraft. As a result, the Americans were forced to retrain the F-100 Super Saber fighter-bomber for the name of the best. This supersonic fighter was of the same age and exemplary analogue of the Soviet MiG-19. An aircraft with a maximum take-off weight of 15800 kg could take on six underwing pylons to 3400 kg of bombing or other weapons. There were also four built-in 20-mm guns. The maximum speed is 1390 km / h.


Start NAR with F-100D on target in Vietnam


“Super Saber” was very actively used by the US Air Force during the fighting in Southeast Asia and the French Air Force in Algeria. Compared to the F-4 and F-105, which had a higher payload capacity, the F-100 showed much better accuracy in air strikes. What was especially important when operating near the line of contact.

Almost simultaneously with the F-100 fighter, the A-4 Skyhawk light attack aircraft developed for the US Navy and USMC was adopted. With relatively small size single-engine "Skyhawk" had a fairly high combat potential. The maximum speed was 1080 km / h. Combat radius - 420 km. With a maximum take-off mass of 11130 kg, he could take on the 4400 kg payload on five suspension nodes. Including four LAU-10 four-charge launchers for 127-mm NAR Zuni. These rocket projectiles in terms of weight and size characteristics, launch range and the destructive effect of the high-explosive fragmentation warhead are close to the Soviet NAR C-13.


NAR Zuni


Apart from the piston "Skyrader", of all the aircraft that were in the American armed forces, by the beginning of the Vietnam War, "Skyhawks" were best suited for fire support of ground forces and the destruction of mobile targets on the battlefield.


Start NAR Zuni with A-4F


However, during the Doomsday War in 1973, Israeli A-4, operating against Syrian and Egyptian tanks, suffered heavy losses. The Soviet-style air defense system revealed the high vulnerability of light unarmored attack aircraft. If the US "Skyhawks" were mainly intended for use on aircraft carriers, then in Israel, which became the largest foreign customer (263 aircraft), these machines were considered solely as attack aircraft, designed for action on the front and rear of the enemy.

For the Israeli Air Force on the basis of the A-4E, a special modification of the A-4H was created. This vehicle was equipped with a more powerful Pratt & Whitney J52-P-8A engine with a thrust of 41 kN and improved avionics, and a number of measures to improve combat survivability were implemented on this modification. In order to increase the anti-tank potential, the 20-mm American guns were replaced by two 30-mm ones. Although the 55-mm armor-piercing shells were ineffective against Soviet tanks T-62, T-3 and IS-30M, they easily penetrated the relatively thin armor of the BTR-152, BTR-60 and BMP-1. In addition to the onboard cannons, the Israeli Skyhawks used unguided missiles and cluster bombs with cumulative submunitions on armored vehicles.

To replace the A-4 Skyhawk in 1967, the US Navy’s A-7 Corsair II began shipping to the US Navy’s deck assault squadrons. This machine was developed on the basis of the F-8 Crusader deck fighter. Compared to the light skyhook, it was a larger aircraft equipped with perfect avionics. Its maximum take-off weight was 19000 kg, and the possible weight of the suspended bombs was 5442 kg. Combat radius - 700 km.


Drop bombs with A-7D


Although the "Corsair" was created by order of the Navy, because of its relatively high characteristics, it was adopted by the Air Force. An attack aircraft very actively fought in Vietnam, making about 13000 combat missions. In the squadron specializing in search and rescue of pilots, the jet "Corsair" replaced the piston "Skyrader".

In the mid-80s, as part of a project to develop a promising anti-tank attack aircraft designed to replace the A-10 Thunderbolt II based on the A-7D, the design of the supersonic A-7P began. A radically modernized attack aircraft with a fuselage of increased length due to the installation of a Pratt & Whitney F100-PW-200 turbojet engine with an afterburner thrust of 10778 kgf was supposed to be turned into a highly effective modern combat aircraft of the battlefield. The new power plant in combination with additional armor was to significantly increase the combat survivability of the aircraft, improve its maneuverability and acceleration characteristics.

The company Ling-Temco-Vought planned to build X-NUMX attack aircraft A-337P, using the elements of the airframe serial A-7D. At the same time, the cost of one aircraft was only $ 7 million, which is several times less than the cost of purchasing a new attack aircraft with similar combat capabilities. As planned by the designers, the upgraded attack aircraft should have maneuverability comparable to Thunderbolt, with much higher speed data. On tests that began in 6,2, the experienced YA-1989P exceeded the speed of sound, speeding up to the 7M. According to preliminary calculations, the aircraft with four AIM-1,04L Sidewinder air combat could have a maximum speed of more than 9M. However, after about a year and a half, in connection with the end of the Cold War and the reduction of defense spending, the program was closed.

In the middle of 60's, the United Kingdom and France concluded an agreement on the creation of a joint aircraft of direct aviation support. At the first stage of creating a new shock machine, the sides strongly disagreed on the technical appearance and flight data of the aircraft. So, the French were quite comfortable with an inexpensive light attack aircraft, comparable in size and capabilities to the Italian G.91. At the same time, the British wanted to have a supersonic fighter-bomber with a laser range finder-pointer and advanced navigation equipment, providing combat use at any time of the day. In addition, at the first stage, the British insisted on a variant with a variable geometry of the wing, but due to the increased cost of the project and the delay in development, it was subsequently abandoned. However, the partners were unanimous in one thing - the plane had to have an excellent view forward — downward and powerful strike armament. Prototype construction began in the second half of 1966. The UK placed an order for 165 combat and 35 two-seat training aircraft. The French Air Force wanted 160 combat aircraft and 40 sparks. The shipments of the first production vehicles to the combat squadrons began in 1972.


French fighter-bomber "Jaguar A"


The aircraft destined for the British Royal Air Force (RAF) and the French Armée de l'Air were significantly different in their avionics. If the French decided to go on the way to reduce the cost of the project and get by with the minimum necessary sighting and navigation equipment, then the British Jaguar GR.Mk.1 had a built-in laser range-finder and indicator on the windshield. Externally, the British and French "Jaguars" differed in the shape of the bow, the French had it more rounded.

The Jaguars of all modifications installed the TACAN navigation system and VOR / ILS landing equipment, meter and decimeter radio stations, equipment for state recognition and warning of radar exposure, onboard computers. The French Jaguar A had a Decca RDN72 Doppler radar and an ELDIA data recording system. British single Jaguar GR.Mk.1 equipped PRNK Marconi Avionics NAVWASS with information output on the windshield. Navigation information on British aircraft after processing the onboard computer was displayed on the indicator "moving map", which greatly facilitated the withdrawal of the aircraft to the target in conditions of poor visibility and during flights at extremely low altitudes. In the course of long-range raids, fighter-bombers could replenish their fuel with the help of an in-flight refueling system. At first, the reliability of the propulsion system, consisting of two Rolls-Royce / Turbomeca Adour Mk 102 TRDDFs with the unforced 2435 kgf and 3630 kgf, left a lot to be desired at the afterburner. However, by the middle of 70's, the main problems were resolved.


British Jaguar GR.Mk.1


Certain differences were in the composition of weapons. French fighter-bombers armed themselves with two 30-mm cannon DEFA 553, and British 30-mm ADEN Mk4 with a total ammunition 260-300 shells. Both artillery systems were created based on German developments from the Second World War and had a rate of fire of 1300-1400 rounds / min.



A combat weight of up to 4763 kg could be placed on five external nodes. On British machines, air combat missiles were placed on pylons above the wing. The Jaguars could carry a wide range of guided and unmanaged weapons. At the same time the main anti-tank weapons They were 68-70-mm NAR with cumulative warheads and cluster bombs equipped with anti-tank mines and miniature cumulative bombs.

The aircraft was adapted for action at low altitudes. Its maximum ground speed was 1300 km / h. At the height of 11000 m - 1600 km / h. With a supply of fuel in the internal tanks 3337 liters of combat radius, depending on the profile of the flight and the combat load was 560-1280 km.

The first in 1977 year in the battle "Jaguars" tested the French. In the 70-80-ies France entered into a series of armed conflicts in Africa. If in Mauritania, Senegal and Gabon bombardment attacks on various types of partisan formations occurred with great efficiency without a loss, then in an attempt to counter Libyan armored vehicles in Chad three aircraft were shot down. The Libyan units operated under an air defense umbrella that included not only anti-aircraft artillery, but also mobile square-to-ground air defense systems.


French Jaguar A squadron 4 / 11 Jura flying over Chad


Although the Jaguars during their combat career showed very good resistance to combat damage, in the absence of armor and special measures to increase survivability, the use of aircraft of this type as an anti-tank attack aircraft was fraught with great losses. The experience of using the French, British and Indian "Jaguars" against an enemy with an organized air defense system showed that the pilots of fighter-bomber achieved the greatest success when striking cluster troop munitions and destroying critical targets with high-precision aviation weapons. The main anti-tank weapon of the French "Jaguars" during the "Storm in the Desert" became the cluster anti-tank bombs of the American production MK-20 Rockeye.


Cassette aerial bomb MK-20 Rockeye


In the 220-kg cluster bombs contain about 247 compact cumulative fragmentation submunitions Mk 118 Mod 1. each weighing 600 g, with armor penetration along the normal 190 mm. When dumping from a height of 900 m, one cluster bomb covers an area approximately corresponding to a football field.


Preparing for combat use of cluster bomb BL755


British fighter-bombers used 278 kg BL755 cassettes, each of which contained 147 cumulative fragmentation elements. The moment of disclosure of the cassette after a reset is determined using a radar altimeter. At the same time, small-sized bombs weighing about 1 kg are pushed out at certain intervals from the cylindrical compartments with a pyrotechnic device.



Depending on the height of the opening and the frequency of ejection from the compartments, the covering area is 50-200 m². In addition to the cumulative fragmentation bombs, there is a variant BL755, equipped with 49 anti-tank mines. Often, when attacking Iraqi armored vehicles, both versions were used simultaneously.

In the middle of the 70-s, the main striking force of the Luftwaffe was the American-made F-4F Phantom II and F-104G Starfighter fighter jets. If the main "children's sores" "Phantom" by the time it was eliminated and it really was a fairly perfect combat aircraft, the use of "Starfighter" as a fighter-bomber was absolutely unjustified. Although its own air force, after a short period of operation in the fighter-interceptor version, abandoned the “Star Fighter”, the Americans managed to push the F-104G as a multifunctional combat aircraft in the German Air Force.


F-104G


Starfighter, which had swift outlines, looked very impressive during demonstration flights, but the plane with short thin straight wings had an unprecedented wing load - up to 715 kg / m². In this regard, the maneuverability of a thirteen-ton aircraft left much to be desired, and flights at low altitude, common to a bomber fighter, were deadly dangerous. Of the 916 F-104G set by the Luftwaffe, about a third of it was lost in accidents and disasters. Naturally, such a situation could not suit the West German generals. The Luftwaffe needed an inexpensive and simple combat aircraft capable of operating at low altitudes against tank wedges of the Warsaw Pact armies. The Italian-German G.91 completely satisfied these requirements, but by the beginning of the 70's he had become morally and physically obsolete.

At the end of 1969, an agreement was reached between France and the Federal Republic of Germany on the joint development of a lightweight shock twin-engined subsonic combat aircraft, which could also be used as a training aircraft. The machine, developed on the basis of projects Breguet Br.126 and Dornier P.375, received the designation Alpha Jet. At the first stage, it was planned that in each country participating in the project, 200 aircraft would be built. The requirements for the tactical and technical characteristics of the Alpha Jet were developed on the basis of the peculiarities of the fighting in the European theater, where there were more than 10000 units of Soviet armored vehicles and powerful military air defense, represented by both self-propelled anti-aircraft artillery systems and medium-range and short-range mobile air defense systems. And the course of the hostilities itself should have been distinguished by its dynamism and transience, as well as the need to combat the landings and block the enemy’s reserves approach.

The construction of light attack aircraft should have been carried out in two countries. In France, Dassault Aviation was identified as a manufacturer, and in Germany, Dornier was identified. Although the aircraft was originally planned to install American General Electric J85 TRDs, which were well-proven on TC-T-38 and F-5 fighters, the French insisted on using their own Larzac 04-C6, 1300 kgf. To avoid damage to one projectile engines were maximally spaced around the sides.

A simple and reliable hydraulic control system provides excellent piloting in all ranges of heights and speeds. During the test flights, the pilots noted that the “Alpha Jet” is difficult to drive into a tailspin, and he leaves it on his own when removing effort from the control stick and pedals. Considering the specificity of the use of the aircraft and flights at low altitudes in the zone of increased turbulence, the safety margin of the structure was very significant, the maximum calculated overloads are from + 12 to -6 units. During test flights, the Alpha Jet repeatedly exceeded the speed of sound during a dive, while maintaining adequate control, and there was no tendency to turn over or to delay in a dive. In the military units, the maximum speed without external hangers was limited to 930 km / h. The maneuverable characteristics of the attack aircraft made it possible to successfully conduct a close air combat with all types of fighters that were available at NATO in the middle of the 70's.

The first production Alpha Jet Es entered French squadrons in December 1977, and Alpha Jet A in the Luftwaffe six months later. The aircraft intended for operation in Germany and in France, differed in the composition of the avionics and weapons. The French focused on the use of two-seater jets as training aircraft. And the Germans in the first place needed a full-fledged light anti-tank attack aircraft. In this regard, the aircraft, built at the enterprise "Dornier", had a more advanced sighting and navigation system. France ordered 176, and FDR 175 aircraft. Another 33 Alpha Jet 1В very similar in composition to avionics of the French Alpha Jet E was delivered to Belgium.


Light attack aircraft "Alpha Jet", owned by "Luftwaffe"


The equipment of the German "Alpha Jet" includes: TACAN navigation equipment, radio compass and blind landing equipment. The composition of avionics allows flying at night and in poor visibility conditions. The weapon control system, with a laser range finder built into the nose, with a target designator, makes it possible to automatically calculate the point of impact when bombing, launching unguided rockets and firing a cannon at land and air targets.


27 mm cannon Mauser VK 27


On the Luftwaffe planes, the 27-mm Mauser VK 27 gun with 150 rounds of ammunition is suspended in the suspended ventral container. When the weight of the gun without shells is about 100 kg, it has a firing rate of up to 1700 rds / min. An armor-piercing projectile with plastic leading corbels weighing 260 g leaves the barrel at a speed of 1100 m / s. An armor-piercing projectile with a hard-alloy core at a distance of 500 m along the normal is able to penetrate 40 mm armor. At the head of the projectile in front of the core there is a crushable part filled with cerium metal. At the time of the destruction of the projectile soft cerium, which has a pyrophoric effect, ignites spontaneously and when penetrating armor gives a good incendiary effect. The armor penetration capability of the 27-mm projectile is not enough to confidently fight medium tanks, but when firing on lightly armored vehicles, the effectiveness of the damage can be high.


Early version of weapons Alpha Jet A


The armament of the West German aircraft, located on the five external suspension nodes with a total weight of up to 2500 kg, can be quite diverse, which allows solving a wide range of tasks. The West German command in the selection of the composition of the attack aircraft weapons paid great attention to anti-tank orientation. In addition to the cannon and the NAR, cluster bombs with cumulative ammunition and anti-tank mines were designed to combat Soviet armored vehicles. Also, “Alpha Jet” is able to carry hanging containers with 7,62 — 12,7-mm machine guns, bombs weighing up to 454 kg, napalm tanks and even sea mines. Depending on the mass of the combat load and the flight profile, the combat radius can be from 400 to 1000 km. When using outboard fuel tanks during reconnaissance missions, the range can reach 1300 km. With a sufficiently high combat load and flight range the aircraft turned out to be relatively light, the maximum take-off weight is 8000 kg.

The aircraft was well suited for basing on field unpaved airfields. Alpha Jet did not require sophisticated ground equipment, and the re-combat departure time was reduced to a minimum. In order to reduce the length of the run on the limited-length lanes, the Luftwaffe attack planes were installed landing hooks that clung to the landing for brake cable systems, similar to those used in carrier-based aircraft.

French aircraft were mainly used for training purposes. Since the Jaguar was the main striking machine in the French Air Force, the Alpha Jet E weapon was rarely suspended. However, it is possible to use the DEFA 30 553-mm cannon in the ventral container, the NAR and the bombs.



From the very beginning, the French side insisted on designing only a two-seater car, although the Germans were completely satisfied with the single-seater light attack aircraft. Not wanting to incur the additional cost of creating a single-seat modification, the Luftwaffe generals agreed with the two-seater cabin. The layout and placement of the cockpit provided a good forward-down view. The seat of the second member of the crew is located with some excess over the front, which provides an overview and allows you to independently carry out landing. Later, during the aerospace show, where the Alpha Jet was exhibited, it was repeatedly stated that the presence of aircraft controls in the second cockpit increases survivability, as in the event of a failure of the main pilot, the second can take control. In addition, as shown by the experience of local wars, the two-seater is much more likely to dodge an anti-aircraft missile and avoid defeat by anti-aircraft artillery fire. Since the pilot has a significantly reduced field of view during a ground target attack, the second member of the crew is able to inform about the danger in time, which gives enough time to perform an anti-missile or anti-aircraft maneuver, or allows them to evade an attack from a fighter.

Simultaneously with the entry into the flight units of the Alpha Jet A attack aircraft, the remaining G.91R-3 was decommissioned. Pilots with flight experience on the Fiat, noted that at a comparable maximum speed, the Alpha Jet is a much more maneuverable aircraft with significantly greater combat effectiveness.



The Luftwaffe pilots particularly liked the attacker's ability to replay fighters in air combat. With competent tactics of air combat, the Alpha Jet could become a very difficult adversary. Repeated training air battles with the F-104G, Mirage III, F-5E fighters and even with the latest F-16A at ​​that time showed that if the attack aircraft crew detected the fighter on time and then got up at low speed, turn his sight became very difficult. If the fighter pilot tried to repeat the maneuver and was drawn into the battle on turns, then he himself soon came under attack.

According to the characteristics of horizontal maneuverability, only the British “Harrier” VTOL aircraft could be compared to the “Alpha Jet”. But with comparable combat effectiveness of ground targets, the cost of the Harrier itself, its operating costs and preparation time for combat mission were much higher. Despite the seemingly modest flight data on the background of supersonic machines stuffed with sophisticated electronics, the West German light attack aircraft fully complied with the requirements set for it and showed very high indicators on the “cost-effectiveness” criterion.

Although the maneuverability characteristics of the Alpha Jet at the ground surpassed all existing NATO combat aircraft at that time, the saturation of the European theater of military air defense weapons made the survival of a German attack aircraft problematic. In conjunction with this, a program to increase combat survivability was launched at the beginning of 80's. Measures were taken to reduce radar and thermal visibility. On the upgraded aircraft installed devices for shooting heat traps and dipole reflectors, as well as the American suspension equipment for making active jamming stations targeting anti-aircraft missiles. The structure of weapons introduced American guided missiles AGM-65 Maverick, capable of destroying point targets on the battlefield, beyond the limits of the anti-aircraft installations.

I must say that the resistance to combat damage at Alpha Jet was initially not bad. The well-thought-out layout, the duplicated hydraulic system and the separated engines, even with the defeat of the Strela-2 MANPADS, gave chances to return to their own airfield, but tanks and fuel lines required additional protection against lumbago.


Model Single Alpha Jet C


The calculations showed that in case of failure of the double cabin, the released mass reserve could be directed to increase security. The single version of the attack aircraft received the designation Alpha Jet C. It differed from the basic two-seat modification with an armored cab that withstand shelling from 12,7-mm machine guns and a straight wing with six suspension nodes and more powerful engines. Fuel tanks and fuel lines were supposed to hold rifle caliber armor-piercing bullets. It was assumed that the combat effectiveness of a single attack aircraft compared with the Alpha Jet A will double. In the case of the project in the "Luftwaffe" could appear attack aircraft, comparable in its characteristics with the Soviet Su-25. The specialists of the Dornier Company carried out a rather deep study of the project documentation, but when the question arose of building a prototype, there was no money in the military budget of Germany.

To be continued ...

Based on:
http://techno-story.ru/articles/aircrafts/424-reaktivnyj-grom-nad-koreej-f-84-thunderjet
http://www.fighter-planes.com/info/g91.htm
https://www.copybook.com/news/sale-or-scrap-israels-military-equipment-disposals
https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/munitions/mk20.htm
http://en.valka.cz/topic/view/64335/GBR-BL-755
Author:
Articles from this series:
Aviation against tanks (part of 1)
Aviation against tanks (part of 2)
Aviation against tanks (part of 3)
Aviation against tanks (part of 4)
Aviation against tanks (part of 5)
Aviation against tanks (part of 6)
Aviation against tanks (part of 7)
Aviation against tanks (part of 8)
Aviation against tanks (part of 9)
Aviation against tanks (part of 10)
Aviation against tanks (part of 11)
Aviation against tanks (part of 12)
Aviation against tanks (part of 13)
55 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. igordok
    igordok 28 November 2017 15: 34 New
    12
    Thank you.
    After reading about the Korean War, I remembered the button accordion.

    I wonder if the series "Tanks against aviation" will be? winked
    1. Bongo
      28 November 2017 16: 40 New
      +5
      Quote: igordok
      After reading about the Korean War, I remembered the button accordion.

      Thanks, laughed! lol good
      Quote: igordok
      I wonder if the series "Tanks against aviation" will be?

      But you must? what
  2. Nikolaevich I
    Nikolaevich I 28 November 2017 16: 09 New
    +7
    Mentioning the A-4 “Skyhawk” and the A-7 “Corsair”, one could “due to decency” (at least “in passing”) mention the “intermediate” A-6 “Intruder” ... The plane left its noticeable mark in the history of strike aircraft, although not anti-tank ...
    1. Bongo
      28 November 2017 16: 34 New
      +4
      Quote: Nikolaevich I
      Mentioning the A-4 “Skyhawk” and the A-7 “Corsair”, one could “due to decency” (at least “in passing”) mention the “intermediate” A-6 “Intruder” ... The plane left its noticeable mark in the history of strike aircraft, although not anti-tank ...

      Sorry, but the Intruder is a deck bomber, but it’s not a ground attack aircraft. No. Then I would have to talk about the A-3 and A-5, and generally list all the American percussion machines. hi
      1. Nikolaevich I
        Nikolaevich I 28 November 2017 17: 22 New
        +6
        Well, ento. How to “take a look! Still, the“ index ”was at the“ Intruder ”-“ assault ”(A-6)! Both in military manuals and in newspaper reports from the time of the Vietnam War this eroplan was called an attack plane ... And, if “Wikipedia” (or who else?), Deigned to rename “Intruder” into a bomber, then these are the problems of her and her “admirers!” BTW: The famous Su-34 was originally called a fighter-bomber (!); But, in connection with “ the elimination of "fighter-bomber, as a" class ". suddenly turned out to be a bomber! So what is it tepericha ... in previous print media "extort" the word "fighter" from the phrase IS (Su-7, Su-17, MiG-27, su-34)? And when, during the fighting in Chechnya, the "valiant military" suddenly realized that they were in vain about $ # @ ^ u Su-17 and MiG-27, it was ordered to turn these airplanes under the nickname “attack aircraft!” What do you call a yacht, is it ..... ???
        1. venik
          venik 28 November 2017 18: 19 New
          +2
          Quote: Nikolaevich I
          at ento.how to “take a look! Still, the“ index ”was at the“ Intruder ”-“ assault ”(A-6)! Both in military directories and in newspaper reports from the Vietnam War this eroplan was called a ground attack aircraft ... And if Wikipedia (or who else?) Deigned to rename Intruder into a bomber

          ==============
          Well, actually the "Jane's All The World Aircraft" directory positioned the "Intruder" EXACTLY as "attack plane"! That is exactly what we were taught!
          Well, what about Wikipedia - soit"-"pedia"and IS !!
          To perceive this "source" as "the ultimate truth" can only ..... "clown" with a "American" education!
          PS You are - absolutely right!
        2. iouris
          iouris 29 November 2017 02: 08 New
          +1
          I am sure that such a class of airplanes as the "fighter-bomber" was not and never is. The complex and the crew performs either one or another task. I can say the same about the "flying car". After taking off from the ground, this is an aircraft with all the ensuing consequences, and for a "traffic cop" it is a "wheeled vehicle."
          1. Nikolaevich I
            Nikolaevich I 29 November 2017 02: 18 New
            +3
            Well what can I say ?! He may refer to V. Shukshin (or rather, characters of V. Shukshin’s stories): “... the Soviet authorities put an end to the shamans, and they reproach!”
      2. tchoni
        tchoni 28 November 2017 22: 04 New
        +2
        Yes, Nikolaitch is right here. A6 attention can not be bypassed.
        1. iouris
          iouris 29 November 2017 02: 30 New
          +2
          Quote: tchoni
          A6 attention can not be bypassed.

          Well, a series of articles seems to reveal a very specific topic. Remind me at least one episode in the long track record of “Intruder”, where he fights with tanks. I think they are not. And the question is connected with the fact that the author spreads his thoughts, going beyond the boundaries outlined by him. The topic needs to be changed. As an option, on strike aircraft. I think so.
          1. Bongo
            29 November 2017 07: 04 New
            +5
            Quote: iouris
            Remind me at least one episode in the long track record of “Intruder”, where he fights with tanks. I think they are not.

            Given how widely A-6 was used in hostilities, they certainly are. Another question is that the "Intruders" did not specifically hunt for tanks on the battlefield, but engaged in the "isolation of the battlefield" or the bombardment of places of concentration of enemy troops. With the same success as the A-6, you can record the B-52 in "anti-tank aircraft", because these bombers also have destroyed armored vehicles.
    2. Cherry Nine
      Cherry Nine 28 November 2017 22: 47 New
      +3
      Oh, by the way, where's my favorite Cessna A-37 Dragonfly? Forgot baby, or the line has not reached yet? Ali overlooked?
      1. Bongo
        29 November 2017 02: 29 New
        +2
        Quote: Cherry Nine
        Oh, by the way, where's my favorite Cessna A-37 Dragonfly? Forgot baby, or the line has not reached yet? Ali overlooked?

        She is here: "Counterpartis Aviation". Part 1 (clickable) In the same publication, I tried to consider vehicles with a pronounced anti-tank potential. The A-6 bomber and the light anti-guerrilla A-37 do not fall into this row. hi
        1. Cherry Nine
          Cherry Nine 29 November 2017 09: 15 New
          0
          Quote: Bongo
          light anti-guerrilla A-37 do not fall into this row

          I do not agree.
          In that article, you emphasize the relationship between the butterfly and the armored attack aircraft, such as the Il-2, and the warthog. Just this, it seems to me, is the correct line of development for the battlefield planes, while the mentioned assault cyber or phantom2, not to mention Starfighter, is a dream of reason leading through assault Falcon to assault lightning.
          In terms of flight characteristics and load, the butterfly is quite an analogue of the same Alphadget. But counterguerrilla or anti-tank use is a matter of political circumstances, rather.
          By the way
          the modernized attack aircraft should have maneuverability comparable to the Thunderbolt

          Speech about A10? I just thought about the P47 at first and hung.
          1. Cherry Nine
            Cherry Nine 29 November 2017 14: 56 New
            +2
            Quote: Cherry Nine
            kinship of a butterfly

            Dragonflies, of course.
        2. novel66
          novel66 30 November 2017 14: 52 New
          +4
          is "impala" also counterguerrilla?
          1. Bongo
            30 November 2017 15: 32 New
            +1
            Quote: novel xnumx
            is "impala" also counterguerrilla?

            That's it! yes
            "Counterpartis Aviation". Part 2 hi
            1. novel66
              novel66 30 November 2017 18: 16 New
              +3
              thanks again for the loop. continued encore!
            2. novel66
              novel66 30 November 2017 18: 49 New
              +4
              there is no "impala" crying
              1. Bongo
                1 December 2017 05: 20 New
                +1
                Quote: novel xnumx
                there is no "impala"

                Damn, call! Confused with Pukara, the very old became bad ... recourse Probably have to write for you about the South African Air Force as compensation. hi
                1. novel66
                  novel66 1 December 2017 09: 28 New
                  +4
                  come on! I already ran through the tops myself - here in VO even an article was about using "impalas" as a helicopter hunter. fought, in general, the machine
  3. Amurets
    Amurets 28 November 2017 16: 10 New
    +2
    Sergei. Thank you, a very complete review of post-war fighter bombers. But it struck me that the F-104G "flying iron" was used as a fighter-bomber. Firsov, in the book of the 100th series fighters, says that Canadians used these planes of their own construction as fighter-bombers. “After France left the NATO military organization, Canadians had to look for other airfields in Europe. In 1970, the number of Canadian CF-104 squadrons in Europe was reduced to three. At the same time, the planes were converted from nuclear weapons into conventional fighter bombers. they again put in a 20-mm M.61 gun and electronic warfare equipment. The last Canadian CF-104 was removed from service in 1986 - they were replaced by CF-18 Hornets. "
    1. Bongo
      28 November 2017 16: 41 New
      +4
      Quote: Amurets
      Sergei. Thank you, a very complete review of post-war fighter bombers.

      Very short review! request
      1. Amurets
        Amurets 28 November 2017 23: 04 New
        +1
        Quote: Bongo
        Very short review!

        We did not understand each other. I meant that with such a list of vehicles that were used as attack aircraft and fighter-bombers, it is very easy to find a description of a specific aircraft.
      2. Nikolaevich I
        Nikolaevich I 29 November 2017 01: 19 New
        +2
        Quote: Bongo
        Sergei. Thank you, a very complete review of post-war fighter bombers.
        Very short review!

        Well .... well ... actually ... the Etandar and Super Etandar fighter-bombers are not “mentioned” ... (And the Super Etandar is the hero of the Falkland War ... and in other places and they fought a little time ...). Yes, and about A-37 people are not sad for nothing. But in general, this is not to rebuke the author ... because the author has his own "narrative plan (!) wink We have so .... "separate questions" ... what
        1. Bongo
          29 November 2017 02: 31 New
          +3
          Quote: Nikolaevich I
          Well ... actually ... something ... the Etandar and Super Etandar fighter-bombers are not "mentioned" ..

          Maybe of course I missed something or I don’t understand request But in the Falklands, aviation did not fight against the EMNIP tanks. No.
          1. Nikolaevich I
            Nikolaevich I 29 November 2017 03: 27 New
            +3
            Quote: Bongo
            in the Falklands, aviation did not fight against the EMNIP tanks.

            You're right! That's why I “emphasized” that: “not as a reproach, but“ in passing ”, as a“ separate question ”! And, as Iouris noted, the article draws more attention to the topic:“ Attack aircraft ”.
    2. venik
      venik 28 November 2017 18: 41 New
      +2
      Quote: Amurets
      But I was struck by the fact that the "flying iron" F-104G was used as a fighter -

      ========
      Well, actually USED! The plane, by the way, had outstanding flight characteristics ..... Alas, "multiplied" by the phenomenal "accident rate"! I remembered the old GDR-ovsky comedy, where "the protagonist! - an engineer from the GDR came to visit relatives in Germany .... And those" aristocrats "had an estate near the airfield where the F-104 Starfighters were based, with enviable regularity" collapsing "..... on the territory of the" estate "....
      After another explosion, the engineer’s "cousin" issued a "pearl" - "I hope, at least this time -" he "did not get into the greenhouse !!! .......
      1. Amurets
        Amurets 28 November 2017 22: 44 New
        +2
        Quote: venik
        The plane, by the way, had outstanding flight characteristics ..... Alas, "multiplied" by the phenomenal "accident rate"!
        Here I completely agree with you, but on German planes.
        The same Firsov writes that Canadian-made airplanes were more reliable: “True, you need to consider that Norway and Denmark used mainly Canadian-made Starfighters. By the way, the losses of the Canadian F-104s were low in Greece, where they approached very carefully the development of a new aircraft, and in Spain, where they were not at all.
        Canadians chose the F-104 in 1959 to replace the Sabers F-86 (or CL-13). The plane was produced at Canadeira Ltd. under the designation CF-104. Many Canadian Starfighters were supplied under NATO military assistance to Europe (up to 140 F-104G). "
        1. Bongo
          29 November 2017 07: 10 New
          +4
          Quote: Amurets
          it should be noted that Norway and Denmark used mainly Canadian-made Starfighters. By the way, the losses of the “Canadian” F-104 were low both in Greece, where they approached the development of a new aircraft very carefully, and in Spain, where they were not at all.

          Nikolay, the matter is not in the manufacturer, but in the method of application. The high accident rate of the F-104G in Germany was associated with low-altitude flights, if the Starfighters were used as air defense fighter interceptors, the accident rate turned out to be small. By the way, the first MiG-21, Su-7Б and Su-9 also fought very often.
          1. Amurets
            Amurets 29 November 2017 08: 18 New
            +2
            Quote: Bongo
            By the way, the first MiG-21, Su-7B and Su-9 also fought very often.

            Sergei. Hi. I don’t know about MiG-21, I won’t argue, but I agree on Sukhoi’s planes, and the Su-11 was the most emergency. I read about this with authoritative authors: Antsielovich, "Next to Sukhoi." N. Yakubovich, V. Ilyushin. B, Ilyushin_ legendary personality, the first chief pilot of the Sukhoi Design Bureau. "Another illustrious designer Pavel Osipovich Sukhoi, in 1956, at first suggested a promising pilot to continue testing the experimental S-1 and S-2 with swept wings and T-3 prototype interceptor with a triangular wing (it so happened that the aircraft just recreated Sukhoi Design Bureau experienced military pilots invited from the Air Force Research Institute.) Ilyushin coped with the task.A year later, when the T-43 (in the series - SU-9) appeared at the airport, the general designer entrusted Ilyushin with the first flight, and, moreover, called for permanent work. Ilyushin Jr. became a "full-time" tester of the Moscow engineering plant "Kulon" - a Sukhov "company" - and its chief pilot. "
            http://chtoby-pomnili.net/page.php?id=167
          2. venik
            venik 29 November 2017 12: 41 New
            +1
            Quote: Bongo
            Nikolay, the matter is not in the manufacturer, but in the method of application. The high accident rate of the F-104G in Germany was associated with low-altitude flights,

            =========
            Well, Sergey - as usual, they took off the "language" !!!!! I just wanted to note that the high (even the "highest"!) "Accident rate" of the German "Starfighters" was due not only (and not so much) to the "low quality" of the aircraft, but to the "application features"!
            - Firstly - the Germans “raided”, was (and is) - higher than that of the Norwegians, Danes, Spaniards and Greeks ....
            - Secondly, the weather conditions in Germany are rather complicated: you can take off when the weather is clear, and you can land in fog or low clouds ...
            - Thirdly - “whatever one may say” - and the “Fritzs” are “cool” people, like us, risk averse and certain “adventures”. And - quite ready to "squeeze" out of the car - "maximum" and take risks ...
            Here is the “result”: Starfighter was a very complicated machine! Especially during take-off and landing - a very high speed and control complexity at low speeds ..... (I’m not talking about the rest!)
      2. Nikolaevich I
        Nikolaevich I 29 November 2017 00: 54 New
        +3
        Quote: venik
        After another explosion, the engineer’s "cousin" issued a "pearl" - "I hope, at least this time -" he "did not get into the greenhouse !!! .......

        Yes .... there was a thing ...! As soon as I remember, a reprint from a German newspaper in the Soviet ...: "Messenger" runs up to the pilot (F-104) with the words: "Take off for you!" ... The pilot replies: "Give me a testament to add a couple of minutes!" There was a lot of such “irony” in the German press!
    3. iouris
      iouris 30 November 2017 13: 21 New
      +2
      Quote: Amurets
      F-104G "flying iron" was used as a fighter-bomber

      In fact, the F-104 was designed as a lightweight fighter to gain air supremacy. Its Soviet counterpart is the MiG-19.
      To be precise, the pilots of Germany called the F-104G "Ural bomber." He was regarded as a carrier of nuclear weapons capable of reaching the territory of the USSR. The "conversion" of the F-104 to the F-104G led to disastrous consequences. Nevertheless, the leadership of the Luftwaffe did not pay attention to the high accident rate. During this period, similar approaches were applied in our country.
      1. Amurets
        Amurets 30 November 2017 14: 11 New
        +1
        Quote: iouris
        In fact, the F-104 was designed as a lightweight fighter to gain air supremacy. Its Soviet counterpart is the MiG-19.

        Well, I would say the MiG-21. EMNIP In the 80s there was an article in MK magazine about the first serial 2-wing fighter jets and that Claren Johnson, Artyom Mikoyan and Marcel Dasso approached the creation of these legendary machines in different ways. For the rest, I agree with you.
      2. Bongo
        30 November 2017 14: 13 New
        +2
        Quote: iouris
        In fact, the F-104 was designed as a lightweight fighter to gain air supremacy. Its Soviet counterpart is the MiG-19.

        Sorry, but in chronology and performance characteristics, the American analogue of the MiG-19 is the F-100. But otherwise, I agree with you. yes
  4. DimerVladimer
    DimerVladimer 28 November 2017 17: 03 New
    +3
    G. 91 spark
    at the air museum near Rimini - last year he photographed - an elegant airplane.
    1. DimerVladimer
      DimerVladimer 28 November 2017 17: 07 New
      +3
      he is a training view from the left in the coloring of the Italian Air Force
  5. BAI
    BAI 28 November 2017 17: 05 New
    +1
    The time frame stretched from the war, to "Desert Storm." But no combat experience.
  6. DimerVladimer
    DimerVladimer 28 November 2017 17: 07 New
    +4
    Well, F-104 to the company in the same place near Rimini.


    Pay attention to the C-75 anti-aircraft missile below to the right - as if at the intersection :))
  7. sivuch
    sivuch 28 November 2017 17: 16 New
    +5
    Sergey, Skyhawk was not unarmored, it just turned out to be insufficient -
    http://tm.ru.net/wiki/Douglas_A-4_Skyhawk
    The cockpit is armored, the outer steel armor is on the outer contours of the cockpit, the frontal armored glass [1]. Ensuring the protection of the pilot from ground fire ZPU 14,5 mm from a distance of 300 m [2]. The booking mass was 450 kg, or 5,5 percent of the normal take-off mass.
  8. spech
    spech 28 November 2017 18: 03 New
    +1
    Preparing for combat use of cluster bomb BL755

    But the inscription "INERT" suggests otherwise.
    PS as always excellent good
  9. venik
    venik 28 November 2017 18: 12 New
    +2
    Good evening, Sergey!
    The article (as usual) is very interesting! There is information that I honestly did not know! Thanks for that!
    Unfortunately - there is not enough time to "delve into the details" .... But, anyway - THANKS! (A little “unload” - and “I’ll climb with my 5 copecks”) .....
  10. Alf
    Alf 28 November 2017 20: 03 New
    +2
    Quote: BAI
    But no combat experience.

    Well it's written right there-
    To be continued ...
  11. polpot
    polpot 28 November 2017 21: 29 New
    +2
    Thanks a lot for another interesting article.
  12. Type 63
    Type 63 28 November 2017 23: 43 New
    +1
    But what about the F-9F Panther?
  13. iouris
    iouris 29 November 2017 02: 02 New
    +3
    Aviation against tank industry enterprises. Aviation against tanks during transportation. Aviation against tank columns on the march. But aviation against tanks on the battlefield ... Tanks protect effective air defense systems, so there is a point in the article "Tanks against aviation".
    1. Bongo
      29 November 2017 02: 34 New
      +3
      Quote: iouris
      therefore, the meaning of the article "Tanks against aviation" is.

      Air defense is one of my favorite topics, and it has been written about it quite a few. If you wish, take a look at my profile. hi
  14. venik
    venik 29 November 2017 13: 05 New
    +2
    Sergei!
    Well, finally, "burst" with its problems - and ... the promised "5 cents":
    ---------
    Alas! "Fiat-G91.Y" was purchased by "Aeronautica Militare" in the quantity not 77, but total 56 (!) Pieces .... But in vain - the machine is was good! This triggered the problem of "American engines" - the "states" - very diligently control the export of military products with American "elements" ... So at one time Israel was banned from supplying "Kfirs" to South Africa (due to the presence of licensed American P&W engines on these)! ! There were other cases ... I think, and that with "Fiats" it could not do without it ...
    ------------------
    "Fiat" G-91 - were in service with not only Italy and Germany - but also Portugal. The latter - were used during the war for the independence of Angola and Mozambique. They have proven themselves - not bad. But 6 cars were lost. № - sales of MANPADS "Strela-2", another 3 - from the fire DShK.
    Another - “Jaguars” (at least French) often used the AS-30 and “AS-30” “air-to-ground” missile launchers, the first ones with a radio command guidance system and the second ones (in the L modification) ) - with a semi-active laser, used during the Desert Storm and the war against Yugoslavia (in the Bosnian operation).

    The effect was excellent - out of 60 starts - 58 direct hits !!! True, the missile is not designed to "work against tanks", but had a high "penetrating" ability - approx. 2 m of concrete (before the fuse “!!!” According to some reports in Bosnia, it was also used against “moving armored targets”!
  15. Ice
    Ice 1 December 2017 12: 56 New
    0
    And why is SU-25 so similar to AlphaJet?
    And AlphaJet came out earlier.
    They stole the idea from the Westerners?
    1. Bongo
      1 December 2017 13: 49 New
      +2
      Quote: Ice
      And why is SU-25 so similar to AlphaJet?

      The design of the Su-25 began in the late 60's. Vulnerability reduction solutions are on the surface.
  16. Dekabrev
    Dekabrev 1 December 2017 23: 20 New
    0
    Excuse me. A-10 is about the same age as the alpha jet. Or A-10 - this is not anti-aircraft? Or about A-10 in the sequel?
    1. zyablik.olga
      zyablik.olga 2 December 2017 02: 19 New
      +2
      Quote: Dekabrev
      Excuse me. A-10 is about the same age as the alpha jet. Or A-10 - this is not anti-aircraft? Or about A-10 in the sequel?

      As far as I know, Seryozha has highlighted a separate part to the American A-10. Should be next week.
  17. Dekabrev
    Dekabrev 1 December 2017 23: 31 New
    +2
    Thanks to the author, of course, but thanks to igordok separately, for the tank against the plane! This is from the heart! I haven’t laughed like that for a long time.
    1. Mordvin 3
      Mordvin 3 1 December 2017 23: 58 New
      +3
      This is the movie "A Long Way Home."