Useless against Russia: US Air Force abandoned the purchase of attack aircraft with propellers


The US Air Force decided to abandon the purchase of 300 light attack aircraft with propellers. This is explained by the fact that the Pentagon’s long-term strategy is increasingly shifting toward the confrontation of the “great power” with “countries close to itself”, such as Russia and China. At the same time, these aircraft were intended to fight terrorism. And against Russia, as stated, such aircraft are useless.


The corresponding decision was announced by Spokeswoman for the Air Force Anna Stefanek. However, it is planned to search for equipment that can become an alternative to turboprop attack aircraft. Previously, two units of Textron AT-6 Wolverines and Sierra Nevada A-29 Super Tucanos were purchased. Of these, the winner of a promising contract was to be selected.

It was planned to use the new low-cost attack aircraft in cases where the risk of using the F-35 would not be justified. In particular, due to the low speed, but the long flight, it was expected that the new aircraft would be ideal for patrolling the area during the fight against militants.

But in 2018, a new priority goal was identified in Washington - the confrontation of the armed forces of the Russian Federation and China. With the new approach, the Pentagon realized that the attack aircraft would not bring much benefit. Instead, the command of special operations will acquire 75 unnamed model aircraft.

At the same time, the Air Force intends to write off 44 A-10 attack aircraft from among the "oldest." In total, 237 Warthogs will remain at the disposal of the US military.

Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

83 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Vladimir_2U 13 February 2020 05: 47 New
    • 11
    • 7
    +4
    And then, for a penny with the videoconferencing will not work!
    300 light attack aircraft with propellers
    Helicopters are also with propellers, urgently refuse to pin..os, otherwise it is not logical! )))
    1. Victor_B 13 February 2020 06: 04 New
      • 4
      • 3
      +1
      Carlsons won't help you!
      1. krot 13 February 2020 18: 16 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        And what are they like that? It seems like zealously tearing these planes to take to the service, supposedly awesome)))) And then to the ballista, they will descend with spears)) What are not the Romans? laughing
    2. 4ekist 13 February 2020 10: 43 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Such aircraft can be quite used on the set of films about the war.
    3. The comment was deleted.
  2. Same lech 13 February 2020 05: 51 New
    • 9
    • 4
    +5
    Against the Shells, these attack aircraft are like ducks and geese ... the stump is clear that our Willows will flip them into the air.
    It remains to apply them only against the Taliban or somewhere in the places of aboriginal residence without air defense equipment.
    1. seregatara1969 13 February 2020 07: 10 New
      • 4
      • 2
      +2
      But it’s interesting - how many kilometers will a night hunter see this hummer? And from what time can it land?
      1. Zaurbek 13 February 2020 07: 21 New
        • 8
        • 8
        0
        Not the fact that he sees and not the fact that he will land ....
    2. Lipchanin 13 February 2020 07: 18 New
      • 2
      • 2
      0
      Quote: The same Lech
      It remains to use them only against the Taliban or somewhere in the places of residence of the natives without the means of air defense

      And they are not going to fight them
      At the same time, these aircraft were intended to fight terrorism. And against Russia, as stated, such aircraft are useless.
    3. figwam 13 February 2020 10: 21 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      US Air Force abandoned the purchase of propeller attack aircraft

      Another cut dough.
    4. Maestro Alexander 13 February 2020 11: 12 New
      • 1
      • 1
      0
      The Pentagon also wanted to buy them from Embriere for these purposes (at least officially).
  3. Mavrikiy 13 February 2020 05: 52 New
    • 2
    • 3
    -1
    Useless against Russia: US Air Force abandoned attack aircraft with propellers
    Yes, let the boys play war games.
  4. Tank jacket 13 February 2020 05: 56 New
    • 10
    • 9
    +1
    Aircraft carriers, F-35, Patriot, are also useless against Russia to abandon them too? wassat
    1. Same lech 13 February 2020 05: 58 New
      • 3
      • 1
      +2
      Aircraft carriers, F-35, Patriot, are also useless against Russia to abandon them too?

      Who knows.. what .if the development of hypersound and laser systems goes by leaps and bounds, then these types of weapons will turn out to be useless.
      1. YOUR 13 February 2020 06: 09 New
        • 6
        • 2
        +4
        In order for these tools not to be useless, reconnaissance and target designation tools must go in 10-mile steps.
        And we have the old A-50s only 14 in service and 8 in storage. The A-100 already from 2010, or from 2014, promised to begin deliveries to the troops in 2016, but unfortunately, as usual, things are still there.
        1. Same lech 13 February 2020 06: 12 New
          • 2
          • 5
          -3
          In order for these tools not to be useless, reconnaissance and target designation tools must go in 10-mile steps.

          I agree.
          A-50 and A-100 will also be vulnerable to attack ... glow in the air like Christmas trees for weapons ... I would not bet on them ... we need more reliable means of intelligence.
          1. Kelwin 13 February 2020 06: 18 New
            • 4
            • 0
            +4
            Or focus on the means of destruction of the so-called decision centers. The point is to drive a trifle, to hammer through the regional KP and that’s it, a blank spot in the operational space ...
          2. Private-K 13 February 2020 08: 35 New
            • 1
            • 1
            0
            And what will bring down Russian aircraft AWACS?
            What weapons, from which platform?
            Announce the list.
            1. Same lech 13 February 2020 09: 15 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              f-22 ... there was an article on this subject.
              1. Private-K 13 February 2020 09: 27 New
                • 6
                • 1
                +5
                Bad answer. F22 with AIM120 need to get to the A-50 at a distance of 100-120 km. Who would allow him that? Air battle with growing up. cover fighters are inevitable and the result is not a foregone conclusion. But you need to cleanly take - Chik - and remove the A-50 from the flight mission. But this is not.
                And here everything is logical. The United States (for others, and there’s no talk) never even bothered with such a problem as the destruction of aircraft DRLOU pr-ka. And the USSR and, after that, the Russian Federation - got confused. And they did something. And for the foreseeable future, the Russian Federation will see a platform and a rocket for such a specialized purpose from a very long distance.
                That is, in real life and for the foreseeable future, the United States has nothing to quickly and clearly destroy the Russian DRLOU system.
                1. Same lech 13 February 2020 09: 29 New
                  • 0
                  • 0
                  0
                  So it is claimed that the F-22 is invisible to our radars with an EPR of 0.000 ... there from a certain date. smile ... or something.
                  1. Private-K 13 February 2020 09: 41 New
                    • 5
                    • 1
                    +4
                    Aw don't have to troll me bully
              2. PSih2097 13 February 2020 17: 57 New
                • 0
                • 0
                0
                Quote: The same Lech
                f-22 ... there was an article on this subject.

                for this, the "raptor" must fly into the territory of the Russian Federation, and this is like Casus Belli ...
                Further, as the info slipped, that the A-100 sees a predator for 100 km, well, the AWACS plane does not fly alone, it is accompanied by 31 MiGs or Sushki 35 ...
          3. mister-red 13 February 2020 22: 12 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            It’s interesting, what will these Christmas trees bring down if they patrol in the depths of their territory, where air-to-air missiles cannot reach?
      2. Tank jacket 13 February 2020 06: 17 New
        • 2
        • 1
        +1
        Alex, hi You seem to have been on the VO site for a long time. There are materials about the uselessness of the weapons I have listed.
        1. Same lech 13 February 2020 06: 19 New
          • 3
          • 3
          0
          You seem to have been on the VO site for a long time. There are materials about the uselessness of the weapons I have listed.


          Yes, I am so foolish smile Thinking in the morning doesn’t work.
    2. Lipchanin 13 February 2020 07: 21 New
      • 1
      • 5
      -4
      Quote: Tank jacket
      Aircraft carriers

      On the needles
      , F-35, Patriot,

      Buy colormet
      are also useless against Russia

      So puff because of the fence
      1. bessmertniy 13 February 2020 08: 55 New
        • 4
        • 1
        +3
        In principle, it makes sense for the Americans to disband their Armed Forces altogether, realizing that they are ineffective against China and Russia. wassat
        1. Maestro Alexander 13 February 2020 12: 03 New
          • 1
          • 1
          0
          Hai be. And then we cho, shoot bottles, shole? Nah ... so not interesting. laughing
          1. bessmertniy 13 February 2020 12: 05 New
            • 1
            • 0
            +1
            Well, if they don’t want to live, then hi. lol
      2. PSih2097 13 February 2020 18: 00 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Quote: Lipchanin
        Quote: Tank jacket
        F-35, Patriot,

        Buy colormet

        the amount will be orders of magnitude less than the cost of the finished product ...
  5. Maestro Alexander 13 February 2020 06: 02 New
    • 4
    • 1
    +3
    With the new approach, the Pentagon realized that the attack aircraft would not bring much benefit.


    "What propellers, John? !! They can also be" removed "with an attic colt! .."

    PS I paraphrase the quote: "The Pentagon regained consciousness."
  6. Kelwin 13 February 2020 06: 09 New
    • 4
    • 0
    +4
    Take biplanes, it is economically viable, they don’t even uncover the zushka))
  7. Amateur 13 February 2020 06: 24 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    So like Supertoucans they want to buy pots and pans. Now refuse or vice versa +300 pcs. buy fellow
    1. Grits 13 February 2020 06: 35 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      Quote: Amateur
      So like Supertoucans they want to buy pots and pans. Now refuse or vice versa +300 pcs. buy

      Now the mattresses will breathe quietly that they could push the unnecessary stuff to the brothers for lack of reason.
  8. KCA
    KCA 13 February 2020 06: 31 New
    • 2
    • 2
    0
    We read the news that they want to shorten the R-28M to MI-74, and immediately the meaning disappeared
  9. rotmistr60 13 February 2020 06: 38 New
    • 4
    • 0
    +4
    against Russia, as stated, such aircraft are useless.
    You would think that they really planned to use these aircraft in a possible war with Russia. Another excuse, because obviously there is no demand for these aircraft, but in order to get out of the situation with their heads held high, they decided to refer to Russia.
  10. axiles100682 13 February 2020 06: 42 New
    • 1
    • 1
    0
    . Who knows what the next war will be like, how long it will take, several minutes or several years? An attack aircraft is certainly necessary as direct support on the battlefield. But about the return to the propeller, the Americans certainly got excited, in my opinion you need to create a new plane based on ours " The gradations of their "Warthog."
    PS. Why did they make it double?
    1. PSih2097 13 February 2020 18: 10 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Quote: axiles100682
      in my opinion, you need to create a new plane based on our "Graduation of Theirs" Warthog. "
      PS. Why did they make it double?

      Well, ours made this one in the amount of 1 + 3 pieces, so what? He went to the army - No.

  11. svp67 13 February 2020 06: 58 New
    • 1
    • 1
    0
    Instead, the command of special operations will acquire 75 unnamed model aircraft.
    Interesting, interesting, and how did the Senate Defense Committee approve such a purchase?
  12. Free wind 13 February 2020 06: 59 New
    • 5
    • 2
    +3
    During the Vietnam War, piston planes with propellers were used quite successfully, there were more than jet ones, their operation is cheaper than helicopters, the ceiling is several times higher, try to shoot down an airplane flying at an altitude of 8-10 km. The range is many times greater, in terms of cruising and maximum speed surpass any helicopter. Since now most of the designs are trying to be made of composites, its visibility is not high. Yes, and the thermal visibility of such aircraft is much lower than that of turntables, the Americans very much respected obsolete corsairs and skyraders, they were very tenacious and carried a lot of weapons. Cons minimum speed is higher and landing on an unprepared site is impossible. It’s quite an evil pinocchio. By the way, in Vietnam, the US officers lost thousands more than one and a half helicopters than airplanes. Of course, our "Rook" and the American "Warthog" have much more opportunities. But turboprop aircraft can argue with helicopters. Moreover, the evolution of weapons is spiraling. Well, let's say the infantry began to be booked in the distant past, then they refused the reservation, now they are again booking at a new level. So here it is. smile
    1. rocket757 13 February 2020 07: 24 New
      • 1
      • 1
      0
      Quote: Free Wind
      During the Vietnam War,

      They didn’t seem to aim ... for the "light" opponent. Although, where is that easy opponent left?
      By the way, for the Shell and others, the corresponding class, our air defense systems, this is a goal at a time.
      It all depends on the quality of the training of the opponents and the equipment equipped with means of destruction / defense.
      An “easy walk” is not foreseen for anyone.
    2. Same lech 13 February 2020 07: 33 New
      • 5
      • 0
      +5
      airplane flying at an altitude of 8-10 km.

      I don’t think that they will hang out at these heights ... 3-6 km is their glade.
      1. Free wind 13 February 2020 08: 15 New
        • 0
        • 1
        -1
        And what prevents you from dropping a guided bomb from an altitude of 9 km and dumping it in a quiet one, and you won’t tell him like in the terminator "astana baba."
        1. Same lech 13 February 2020 08: 18 New
          • 3
          • 2
          +1
          And what prevents you from dropping a guided bomb from a height of 9 km and dumping in a quiet

          Speed ​​piston attack aircraft and missiles with Buk ... S-300, S-400 ... smile what is the probability of survival of these aircraft? ... almost zero ... will be shot down before he can drop this bomb.
          You can try to slip into the folds of the terrain at low altitudes ... but as the practice of the Khmeimim base with drones shows ... even this will not work ... Shells will stop any attempt.
          1. Maestro Alexander 13 February 2020 11: 17 New
            • 1
            • 1
            0
            Not at all ... The practical ceiling of these coffee grinders is 10 meters, the speed is about 500 km / h.
            And they are not piston. These are turboprop products from Emriere (Brazil). The combat load of 1,5 tons.
            1. your1970 13 February 2020 19: 45 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              And ???? !!! further what ??? at least three times turboprop-Americans REFUSED from them !!!!
  13. rocket757 13 February 2020 07: 16 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    The US Air Force decided to abandon the purchase of 300 light attack aircraft with propellers. This is explained by the fact that the Pentagon’s long-term strategy is increasingly shifting toward the confrontation of a “great power” with “countries close to itself”

    decided not to trade in trifles or guessed it \ realized that they have nothing to catch with this technique?
  14. Thrifty 13 February 2020 07: 26 New
    • 2
    • 1
    +1
    Would they sell them a Li2 license? lol
    1. Avior 13 February 2020 07: 47 New
      • 5
      • 0
      +5
      To sell a license for Lee 2, you must first buy a license for DC-3 smile
      Or is the old one still valid?
      Then selling a license for Li-2 is a great deal smile
    2. Wolga 14 February 2020 14: 41 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Douglas DC-3?
  15. Ros 56 13 February 2020 07: 30 New
    • 5
    • 1
    +4
    Why the boobies are tormented, they would contact us at DOSAAF and they would be happy.
  16. Lamata 13 February 2020 08: 10 New
    • 1
    • 1
    0
    Duc against less toothy countries can quite a device.
  17. Cowbra 13 February 2020 08: 52 New
    • 6
    • 1
    +5
    I translate from the mattress into Russian: On a screw, cheap, attack aircraft - you won’t get much done. Spit. that the USA wars all wars from the 45th exclusively against natives with self-propelled guns, against which the light anti-guerrilla Super Tucano was developed - but cutting them is inconvenient!
    The experience of recent military campaigns showed on the one hand that the use of 4th and 5th generation fighter-bombers is a very costly thing, and on the other hand, for example, the loss of 4 U.S. military in Niger is directly related to the lack of air support.

    It seems to me, gentlemen, it was a comedy (s)
    And unfinished, army-army, but the other day
    The command of the special forces of the American army plans to purchase 75 light attack aircraft type A-29 "SuperTukano"
    1. Alexey RA 13 February 2020 15: 06 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Quote: Cowbra
      The command of the special forces of the American army plans to purchase 75 light attack aircraft type A-29 "SuperTukano"

      Hmmm ... and will the Air Force allow the army to have armed aircraft? EMNIP, there was already a story with Bronco.
      1. Cowbra 13 February 2020 15: 16 New
        • 0
        • 1
        -1
        We live in an amazing time when permissions are not particularly asked, and the rules are not followed. There was already a conversation that the forces of special operations themselves would not fly on them, but that they would put the militants from the Academy - and everything was clean
  18. Grigory_45 13 February 2020 08: 59 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Useless against Russia: US Air Force abandoned the purchase of attack aircraft with propellers

    naturally, against a country with serious air defense, these aircraft, at least at the initial stage of the war, are useless from the word at all. But if anti-aircraft defense is flushed out, or against countries that did not initially have it, against gangs and partisans, it’s quite an apparatus for itself. Toucan-class aircraft will be able to compete with helicopters for themselves, and with regard to striking the ground and the complexity of maintenance, the aircraft will have an advantage.
    The Americans didn’t buy these cars to fight Russia - they aren’t as dumb as they are. To fight the partisans - all sorts of Taliban and others there. And also for the supply of "allies" - for actions in Afghanistan, Africa ...
  19. voyaka uh 13 February 2020 10: 59 New
    • 4
    • 0
    +4
    Refused from a useless purchase.
    It struck me that they generally had such an idea about propeller airplanes.
    1. Maestro Alexander 13 February 2020 11: 54 New
      • 2
      • 1
      +1
      It struck me that they generally had such an idea about propeller airplanes.

      The Pentagon planned to buy them from Brazil another 8–9 years ago for Afghanistan (as they officially claimed, “to fight the terrorists who had thrown down their twin towers”), since one take-off of a tukanuk costs 4-5 times cheaper than the same F-16, for example. And according to the TTX, it would seem that for the Afghan "topography" they would not be bad.
      Now the "wind" has changed, the "toucans" do not channel. no I already wrote about the Colt and the Attic above.
      1. Tuzik 13 February 2020 12: 13 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        Quote: Maestro Alexander
        ... since one take-off of a toucan is 4-5 times cheaper than the same F-16 ...

        And if you compare with the MQ-9? The drone is already a big plus.
    2. Alexey RA 13 February 2020 16: 58 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Quote: voyaka uh
      It struck me that they generally had such an idea about propeller airplanes.

      So even the US Air Force’s budget is not rubber.

      The ancient "Bronco" in operation was five times cheaper than the strike UAV. smile
      Actually, it was the experimental use of Bronco in 2015 that gave the Air Force the idea that in counter-guerrilla wars (now the main ones for the USA), a helicopter attack aircraft is the best solution on the basis of the cost-effectiveness criterion.
      1. voyaka uh 13 February 2020 18: 15 New
        • 1
        • 1
        0
        "the best solution on the basis of cost-effectiveness." ///
        ----
        This is until they knock him down, and a large-scale operation to pull the pilot (or pilot’s body) from the crash site does not begin. Such huge amounts are spent here that all previous savings go down the drain.
        And to bring down Bronco is so easy that any illiterate peasant with MANPADS to cope with this.
        1. Wolga 14 February 2020 14: 56 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          Not a competent peasant - DOES NOT have MANPADS, DOES NOT know how to use them ... But to bring down Bronco is not easy. I wouldn’t like that. Look for the sake of interest statistics or something ... Or there will be screams of Shilka and S-300. They don’t have such equipment, and if so, it will be knocked out by other more advanced means of destruction before Bronco enters the battle. Again, heaped up “warm” and “soft” ... Tucano class aircraft, as mentioned earlier, are intended for counter-guerrilla operations, with all the ensuing tasks. To confuse them with engines of the end of the era of piston aircraft is stupid. These machines have a 21st century level design with all materials and technologies, the same is true in terms of counteracting MANPADS. It is naive to believe that they will not be put "thermal traps" from MANPADS ...
          1. voyaka uh 14 February 2020 18: 41 New
            • 1
            • 0
            +1
            "the same is true of the means of counteracting MANPADS. It is naive to believe that they will not be put" heat traps "from MANPADS" ///
            ---
            Heat traps no longer work. In GOS missiles put a video camera.
            Countermeasures like a laser cannot be placed on such a small plane. These attack aircraft are completely defenseless against any anti-aircraft missiles.
            1. Wolga 15 February 2020 01: 00 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              Not - ANY anti-aircraft missiles, but from the most modern, which means - more expensive. If you follow your logic, then no helicopter can counteract MANPADS - but they are released and they fly ... You are well aware that for every tricky nut ...
              1. voyaka uh 15 February 2020 02: 30 New
                • 1
                • 0
                +1
                To large military transport helicopters (and aircraft)
                just began to put laser counteraction systems
                small anti-aircraft missiles. These systems are massive. Only
                a large platform pulls them.
                And without them ... Syria is an example. Helicopters shoot down effortlessly.
                You can’t attach a defense system to a small attack aircraft.
                You can’t even put a radar on them. Only in drone version
                we can talk about a screw machine.
                1. Tuzik 16 February 2020 14: 12 New
                  • 0
                  • 0
                  0
                  And how much does such a system weigh?
                  1. voyaka uh 16 February 2020 14: 21 New
                    • 1
                    • 0
                    +1
                    Come on, here it is, the Israeli Flight Guard, under the passenger liner:

                    Even the F-16 could hardly pull such a thing
                    1. Tuzik 16 February 2020 14: 35 New
                      • 1
                      • 0
                      +1
                      Dimensional contraption, but the weight may be small. Fighters think it is not needed. Spoil the hell out of all the aerodynamics
  20. Host Tavern 13 February 2020 12: 02 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    The US Air Force decided to abandon the purchase of 300 light attack aircraft with propellers.

    So let patrols be carried out on "gyro scooters".
    1. Super 13 February 2020 13: 59 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Let them go on trampolines. Correctly Rogozin said.
  21. Super 13 February 2020 13: 58 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    It’s clear that it’s useless. And by the way, nobody pays attention — unlike other countries in Russia, it’s the Air-Space-forces and not just the Air Force. That is, these same Americans are already behind in development.
  22. Mikhail3 13 February 2020 14: 32 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    I hope that the Americans will not experience doubts about the decision made. Refused and refused, very good.
  23. VicktorVR 13 February 2020 14: 42 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Dusty Fields Field :)
  24. Real Vugluskr 13 February 2020 16: 33 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Yes, let’s finally finally gash ORCA, as in C&C!
    1. Alexey RA 13 February 2020 17: 27 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Quote: Real Vugluskr
      Yes, let’s finally finally gash ORCA, as in C&C!

      And I even know how they will respond to such a move with us. smile
      Kirov reporting! ©
    2. PSih2097 13 February 2020 18: 21 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Quote: Real Vugluskr
      Yes, let’s finally finally gash ORCA, as in C&C!

      no, it’s not necessary, but then they will somehow get to it (the drawings are good on the Internet) ...

      1. Alexey RA 13 February 2020 19: 09 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        Quote: PSih2097
        no, it’s not necessary, but then they will somehow get to it (the drawings are good on the Internet) ...

        Isn’t it already?
        1. PSih2097 13 February 2020 19: 55 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          Quote: Alexey RA
          Isn’t it already?

          it's about us, not about the USE ... there for similar cases they can send to the tower ... That's the problem ...
  25. lvov_aleksey 13 February 2020 23: 51 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    that again the star-striped cowards are trying to prove something
  26. Old26 14 February 2020 17: 58 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    The US Air Force decided to abandon the purchase of 300 light attack aircraft with propellers. This is explained by the fact that the Pentagon’s long-term strategy is increasingly shifting toward the confrontation of the “great power” with “countries close to itself”, such as Russia and China. At the same time, these aircraft were intended to fight terrorism. And against Russia, as stated, such aircraft are useless.

    Is terrorism anymore? And the Americans will not conduct military operations against the enemy leading a guerrilla war? All their lives, such attack aircraft were designated as COIN / COIN, which stands for Counter insurgency - counterinsurgency.

    It was planned to use the new low-cost attack aircraft in cases where the risk of using the F-35 would not be justified. In particular, due to the low speed, but the long flight, it was expected that the new aircraft would be ideal for patrolling the area during the fight against militants.

    That's right. And such aircraft would not be superfluous in both Chechen wars, when it was necessary to drive small groups on the "greenback"

    But in 2018, a new priority goal was identified in Washington - the confrontation of the armed forces of the Russian Federation and China. With the new approach, the Pentagon realized that the attack aircraft would not bring much benefit. Instead, the command of special operations will acquire 75 unnamed model aircraft.

    Well, Americans are unlikely to refuse to “dictate their will” to everyone. Local conflicts in which they participated and will participate will be oh how many. And not in each of them it will be beneficial to use F-35 ...

    Quote: The same Lech
    Against the Shells, these attack aircraft are like ducks and geese ... the stump is clear that our Willows will flip them into the air.
    It remains to apply them only against the Taliban or somewhere in the places of aboriginal residence without air defense equipment.

    And will each platoon in our country be covered by "Carapace" or "Verba"? In addition, such attack aircraft, approaching the target at low altitude will be a very difficult target. Firstly, it is very difficult to hear, secondly, the minimum range of destruction of the same “Verba” is 1 m. If not a steppe or a desert, then such an attack aircraft has a lot of chances to approach unnoticed. And sometimes it’s cheaper to use it than an aircraft of class F-2 or our SU-500/35/30

    Quote: The same Lech
    Who knows .. what. If the development of hypersound and laser systems goes by leaps and bounds then these types of weapons will be useless.

    Of course of course. As soon as they develop by leaps and bounds, these systems will be useless. This already happened when they said that aviation was useless, and cannon weapons on airplanes were useless. And such light attack aircraft will be useless. But no. They have been using them for more than half a century and will continue to be used. Because there will be no hypersonic MANPADS in every platoon or squad, just as there will be no lasers in the same platoon or squad to defeat such targets ...

    Quote: The same Lech
    A-50 and A-100 will also be vulnerable to attack ... glow in the air like Christmas trees for weapons ...

    Well, and if his radar sees a ground target in 40-50 km, then what will you hit him with? After all, such attack aircraft are needed when a counter-guerrilla war is already underway, or when those attack aircraft that are now in the army and are unlikely to have a difficult air defense zone will be knocked out ...
    Although, of course, it would be worthwhile to think about creating an AWACS aircraft of the Hokaya or Gulf Stream type. Something light, relatively cheap. And not only deploy AWACS aircraft on such "small" vehicles, but also reconnaissance vehicles ....

    Quote: The same Lech
    So it is claimed that the F-22 is invisible to our radars with an EPR of 0.000 ... there from a certain date. smile ... or something.

    Damn, how much can this chewing gum about invisibility chew ???? am Well it doesn’t INVISIBLE airplanes. Aircraft created using the STELS technology - subtle. No, the same thing is repeated every time ....

    Quote: Free Wind
    During the Vietnam War, piston planes with propellers were used quite successfully, there were more than jet ones, their operation was cheaper than helicopters, the ceiling was several times higher ,,,,, The range was many times greater, in terms of cruising and maximum speed they surpass any helicopter. Since now they are trying to make the majority of designs from composites, its visibility is not high. And the thermal signature of such aircraft is much lower than that of turntables

    I completely agree with you, Alexander. We sometimes treat all such news from the “Supostat” from the standpoint of “hi-hahonki”, dismissively. But after all, a war is not only about fights of aircraft with anti-aircraft weapons, an exchange of nuclear strikes, etc. Even after the exchange of nuclear strikes, the war may not stop and go on for years. And not the fact that only Russia or China will always be the enemy.
    At one time, there was a unit in Sukhoi Design Bureau that was engaged in research on aircraft, more precisely, on loan day attack aircraft. The son of the head of this unit a few years ago on his own site posted computer drawings of such machines, which were intended to be created in the post-nuclear era. When to create the same SU-25 attack aircraft would not have been possible, but there would have been spare parts and fragments of the fuselage, wings. It is clear that all this is somewhat exaggerated, but nevertheless it is worth getting acquainted with this material.
  27. Vladimirsky 14 February 2020 20: 07 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    So it seems like we shoot down rockets without problems? And then the PROPELLER ...
  28. Voltsky 14 February 2020 20: 26 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    like an attack aircraft, implies air supremacy and an attack on the Papuans
  29. Klingon 24 February 2020 13: 21 New
    • 0
    • 1
    -1
    in flight, these Toucans slightly resemble the German Stuck U-87.
    - striped toucans refused, but I'm almost sure that I know who wants to buy them wassat