Military Review

Spitfires over Kyiv - is it a reality?

Spitfires over Kyiv - is it a reality?

“To effectively destroy enemy unmanned aerial vehicles, “Ukrainians will have enough Spitfire fighters, it’s a pity that we don’t produce them anymore”Boris Johnson, former British Prime Minister, said.

Oh yes, from the over-extensive British prime minister (albeit a former one) during his reign, we heard a lot of ... extraordinary things. But this time, Boris was right. Well… almost right. Of course, a certain excess took place, but where today without such?

So what did Johnson mean when he talked about Spitfires? And he, oddly enough, had in mind exactly the Spitfires! Yes, those same Supermarine Spitfires that proved themselves well in the skies of World War II and deservedly entered the pantheon of the best fighters.

A total of 20 Spitfires were built, including two-seat trainers. At the moment, 351 aircraft are in a state of airworthiness (according to other sources, 44 aircraft).

And Johnson proposes to give these planes to Ukraine.

Stupidity? Not at all. A little misunderstanding caused by the lack of military practice, but what to take from these European journalists who have become politicians, right?

At the same time, repeatedly (the last time not so long ago, here: "Shahed" - "Barvinok" over Russian cities: prospects and options и "Shaheds" over Russia: how to deal with them) I spoke about the methods of combating UAVs, which we may also come to.

In light of these alignments, Johnson's proposal is not as much of a joke as some have thought. In the joke of the former prime minister, there is very little joke, as such, and a lot of rationalism, if you think it through correctly.

So, the Spitfire in the Mk IXE version, equipped with a Rolls-Royce Merlin 66 engine with a power of 1575 hp, developed a speed of almost 650 km / h at an altitude of 6 m, and the practical ceiling of the car reached 400 km.

The fighter was armed with two 20-mm Hispano Mk.II cannons with 120 rounds of ammunition per barrel and two 12,7-mm Browning M2 machine guns with 250 rounds of ammunition per barrel. There could be options with four guns (the ammunition then consisted of 145 shells for guns closer to the wing root and 135 shells for the outer ones) or four Browning machine guns of 7,62 mm caliber and 350 rounds of ammunition per barrel.

Say, there were better planes? Yes they were. But this most massive Spitfire at the time of 1943, and he fought pretty well. "Nine" served until the very end of the war.

In such a detailed set of weapons and performance characteristics lies the essence.

Let's take some Western-made UAVs. Just for an example and because there is more data about them. The American reconnaissance and strike MQ-9 Reaper is equipped with a turboprop engine that accelerates the device to a speed of more than 400 km / h.

The practical ceiling of the Reaper is 13 thousand meters, but they actually fly lower. The MQ-1C "Grey Eagle" has a lower speed of 250 km / h and a ceiling of 8 meters, but it carries a decent set of weapons. And the Turkish "Bayraktar" TB800 has similar characteristics.

Here, in my opinion, the most important thing is the height at which these very small devices operate in comparison with the aircraft. We have already said that not every air defense system can confidently detect and destroy a MALE / HALE class drone, and the efficiency of aircraft will not be very high due to speed.

Helicopters, on the contrary, are not suitable for countermeasures both in height and in speed. Our same beautiful Ka-52, which has a maximum speed of 350 km/h, may simply not catch up with the same MQ-9 on a catch-up course. And to dream that a helicopter will be able to climb to a height of 7-8 thousand meters and work effectively there ... No, this machine was created for completely different tasks.

But the piston fighter operates quite successfully in the entire range of altitudes and speeds mentioned, its armament allows you to make a sieve out of any unmanned aerial vehicle in a matter of seconds. 7,62mm machine guns can be especially effective. They will just spit out a cloud of bullets, from which something will fly into the drone. And the ammunition load of the same Spitfire of 280 shells and 500 rounds looks somewhat heavier than the 480 shells of the F-22 or 150 shells of the Su-35. Despite the fact that the b / c of the American aircraft seems to be higher, the six-barreled gun will spit it all out in two seconds. And 80 shells per barrel is not so much.

Well, it’s not worth talking about how much it costs to hunt for UAVs on a modern fighter. $60 for an hour of flight is overkill. This is for the F-35, 4+ generation fighters will cost less, but not in the way we would like.

And if we are talking about the interception of UAVs like the Iranian "Shaheds", then there is generally melancholy and sadness. They are even smaller than strike and strategic reconnaissance, and it is even more difficult to deal with them. And to use modern fighters of the 4th and 5th generations on them - it’s generally pointless to transfer the resource of aircraft, you know what.

Of course, Johnson's idea of ​​using eighty-year-old aircraft in combat mode is foolish bravado. No one really knows what resource these frankly museum exhibits have left, and there is no need to talk about providing them with spare parts and consumables. 44 The Spitfire Is a Treasure stories, and it's great that they can fly at least for demonstration and fact-finding purposes. And for them there is gasoline, oils, candles, filters and everything else.

But only a person who knows nothing about aviation could offer to use them to perform combat missions.

However, even in such a proposal by Johnson there is a rational bean.

And the sound idea is that in the fight against relatively small in size and slow in aviation By the standards of targets such as UAVs, modern piston aircraft can be sent.

Swiss RS-9 "Pilatus", Brazilian EMB-312 "Toucan" and EMB-314 "Super Toucan" - if not a panacea, then quite a possible scenario for the development of further events. I would gladly add a Russian aircraft to this list, but alas, we have nothing similar. Although we still have a lot ahead of us and it was worth being prepared for anything.

RS-9 "Pilatus"

EMB-312 "Toucan"

EMB-314 "Super Toucan"

"Pilatus" and "Toucan" are proven machines, let's say, of the last generation, originally from the 20th century. But the "Super Toucan" is real.

EMB-314 "Super Toucan" is a light attack aircraft from the Brazilian company Embraer.

The machine is equipped with a Pratt & Whitney PT6A-68/3 turboprop engine with a power of as much as 1600 hp, which accelerates the aircraft to almost 600 km/h and lifts the ceiling above 10 meters. In general, it is quite comparable to the Spitfire, only the Super Toucan has goggles for night flights, a digital control system weapons, a system for displaying data on a helmet for pilots, ejection seats and many other useful modern bells and whistles.

The armament of the aircraft consists of two 12,7 mm FN Herstal M3 machine guns and a 20 mm cannon in a hanging container on the fuselage assembly. Plus, you can still hang about a ton of other weapons.

In general, it’s quite such a drone fighter, which will be more than easy to do. Given the presence of radars and a second crew member who will work to search for targets without distracting the pilot from control.

Of course, it is worth remembering that even such UAV hunters will not be able to do anything if there is no established and well-thought-out air defense system. The destruction of the target must still be preceded by its detection.

We need not just air defense radars capable of working on small targets, but to do this over the entire range of UAV flight altitudes. Plus, it does not hurt at all, and even the optical channel will be very useful. The experience of Ukraine shows how important mobility is. That is, the presence of a sufficient number of mobile radars that will work as guidance stations for both aviation and air defense systems.

By the way, about the accompanying air defense systems. In these articles, an opinion has already been expressed about how anti-drone air defense is seen. Automatic guns with a caliber of 30 mm and above are stupid, because they will not provide the proper density of fire, but will ruin the consumption of ammunition. Some Russian media sang the praises of the new "Derivation".

“A very promising means for combating strike UAVs is the domestic Derivation-Air Defense complex, equipped with a 57-mm automatic cannon with a high rate of fire.”

It remains only to wait until this "Derivation" will be in metal and in an amount exceeding the parade calculation. Well, what happened with "Armata", "Kurganets" and other "Coalitions". I suspect we won't see it very soon.

But a 57mm programmable fuse projectile is no worse than a 76mm anti-aircraft projectile. Maybe. It will be possible to find out exactly when the projectile will be made and tested. So far, everything is from the area of ​​\uXNUMXb\uXNUMXbtales about the "Armata".

In general, the destruction of an UAV that costs several hundred dollars with a more expensive weapon such as a rocket for several tens of thousands of dollars is not smart. This is a war of attrition, so weapons should be inexpensive.

Now many will remember about electronic warfare, but alas, electronic warfare kits are not so cheap, they are found and amazed absolutely calmly, but they can cause less harm than they are expected to do. The narrow beam of the promoted “Krasukha” may simply not catch the “moped” rattling somewhere above, and even capturing what? Maybe nothing. If the drone flies according to the program laid down in it in the inertial navigation system, then it does not need either satellites, or communication with the operator, or telemetry. And he is not afraid of electronic warfare.

By the way, Ukraine showed it perfectly. What, the Armed Forces of Ukraine do not have electronic warfare systems? There is. Did they help a lot against the "Shaheds"? No. Simply because in order to suppress something flying, it must have equipment that can be affected by a beam of simulated waves. And if it is not there, then kilowatts can be burned in vain as much as you like, but a rumbler with a bag of explosives will fly to the right place slowly, but inevitably.

So if the sound pickup installations and batteries of large-caliber anti-aircraft guns described in previous articles, sowing sectors with thousands of fragments deadly for UAVs, are not very fantastic, then a propeller-driven aircraft (an option is a subsonic flying machine like our Yak-130 or Japanese Fuji F7) with machine guns and modern filling - not so much humor as it seemed at first.

Humor, not humor, performed by the original Boris Johnson, but it is unlikely, of course, that we will see Spitfires chasing Shahedas and Calibers over Kyiv. But "Toucans" and "Pegasuses" - it is quite possible.

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, regularly additional information about the special operation in Ukraine, a large amount of information, videos, something that does not fall on the site:

Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Dilettante grandfather
    Dilettante grandfather 1 December 2022 05: 20
    In order to control even a Spitfire, even a Toucan, even an An-2, a pilot is needed. But with this, the enemy, as I understand it, has problems. So I don’t think that the West will supply aviation to the Armed Forces of Ukraine. No, you can, of course, put mercenaries at the helm, the same Poles. But in this way, NATO countries can lose, in addition to ammunition from warehouses, also qualified specialists: our air defense is working, and the Aerospace Forces are not asleep.
    1. Civil
      Civil 1 December 2022 07: 03
      Drones must fight drones, air defense drones in the form of a grid with constant replacement for recharging.
      1. Dilettante grandfather
        Dilettante grandfather 1 December 2022 09: 05
        air defense drones in the form of a grid
        That is, to fly and catch enemy drones with a net? laughing
        1. Civil
          Civil 1 December 2022 09: 37
          Quote: Grandfather is an amateur
          air defense drones in the form of a grid
          That is, to fly and catch enemy drones with a net? laughing

          The "grid" refers to the location of the drones relative to each other. But how cheerfully they laughed and joked 10,5,3,1 years ago over my proposals to resolve issues with UAVs. I watch connoisseurs of a steam engine and a trouble-free bow and arrow, everything does not let go. You can deny scientific progress in the field of armaments as much as you like. BUT he can't be stopped.
          1. Dilettante grandfather
            Dilettante grandfather 1 December 2022 11: 46
            But how cheerfully they laughed and joked 10,5,3,1 years ago over my proposals to resolve issues with UAVs.
            Did you voice these proposals at the General Staff? Or maybe in the State Duma? Security Council? .. If not, then excuse me, but such proposals are not worth much if they are made in the media.
            1. Civil
              Civil 1 December 2022 12: 29
              Quote: Grandfather is an amateur
              But how cheerfully they laughed and joked 10,5,3,1 years ago over my proposals to resolve issues with UAVs.
              Did you voice these proposals at the General Staff? Or maybe in the State Duma? Security Council? .. If not, then excuse me, but such proposals are not worth much if they are made in the media.

              Aliens do not go there.
            2. Warrior with machine gun
              Warrior with machine gun 4 December 2022 21: 19
              In all the instances you have listed above, it seems that they are not interested in efficiency, they prefer it expensively and inefficiently ...
          2. KolVisin
            KolVisin 20 January 2023 12: 23
            "...and there's nothing new under the sun" wink
      2. novel66
        novel66 1 December 2022 11: 21
        And against air defense drones, use other drones even smaller and meaner
    2. flyer
      flyer 16 January 2023 08: 53
      They employ "disposable" specialists in many positions. They will recruit mobilized from some school, make a couple of test flights with them and fly.
  2. Bad_gr
    Bad_gr 1 December 2022 05: 54
    Chasing every drone across the sky is a waste of time. Drones do not have beaten routes, there is no flight schedule, therefore it is impossible to determine the place where the duty aircraft should be located, which will shoot down the drone.
    If the drone is strategic, then it’s not a pity for it to have missiles, but if it’s a small dirty trick, then it must be fought with the help of anti-aircraft guns with shells with remote detonation. Well, EW here in addition - in Iran they somehow managed to put a strategist with it, not to mention fire spotters, such as quadrocopters, who are constantly in touch with the operator.
    1. Ka-52
      Ka-52 1 December 2022 07: 43
      Drones do not have beaten routes, there is no flight schedule, therefore it is impossible to determine the place where the duty aircraft should be located, which will shoot down the drone.

      theoretically, it is necessary to constantly have a pair on duty in the air over each of the strategic areas. What will require the number of cars and pilots (on patrol, on duty at the airfield and vacationers). In addition, a clear search system is required.
      and targeting. Now the Ukrainian air defense cannot afford to sit with constantly working detection radars. UAV operators always have a backup ace up their sleeve - switching to low-altitude flight.
      Therefore, this idea sees through holes the size of Kyiv.
    2. Michael
      Michael 1 December 2022 12: 34
      Quote: Bad_gr
      Chasing every drone across the sky is a waste of time. Drones do not have beaten routes, there is no flight schedule, therefore it is impossible to determine the place where the duty aircraft should be located, which will shoot down the drone.

      Therefore, it is urgent to build and use barrage balloons so that the drones have a minimum of routes. In addition, balloons and airships DRO are needed.
    3. voyaka uh
      voyaka uh 3 December 2022 02: 29
      "then you have to fight him with the help of anti-aircraft guns with shells with remote detonation" ///
      At the same time, anti-aircraft guns should be guided by radar + computer = FCS, which is five times more expensive than the anti-aircraft gun itself.
      And still, not much time ...
      Quadcopters are too fast and nimble.
      Only a bunch of radar-laser has time to detect and guide targets, and damage small drones.
  3. Vladimir80
    Vladimir80 1 December 2022 06: 19
    The only positive article for this morning - had fun from the heart!
    In continuation, we can write that an effective way to deal with enemy aircraft carriers is wooden galleys (they are almost invisible to the radar), under cover of night we quietly swim up and drill a hole below the waterline. It's sarcasm, if anything.
    ps why reinvent the wheel, all methods of dealing with drones such as geraniums have long been available, only the United States has not yet put them on the outskirts in the right amount.
    1. novel66
      novel66 1 December 2022 11: 23
      And, for example, not a galley, but something almost completely plastic, sitting low in the water, and a coating against the radar, and a 100 kilogram of explosives of a directed explosion?
      1. volodimer
        volodimer 1 December 2022 13: 44
        Destroyer "Cole" 2000 bomb attack.
        There was an article on VO:
        On a new level, this is an underwater / semi-submerged drone. In the likeness of those with which Sevastopol was attacked.
        1. evgen1221
          evgen1221 1 December 2022 14: 09
          Again, aviks and destroyers also do not go on the same route on schedule, you still need to find it and catch up. UAV marine ocean to sow?
          1. volodimer
            volodimer 2 December 2022 22: 47
            In Yemen, "Cole" was caught unready, in Sevastopol, regular booms worked. Those. in fact, it will work out effectively .. A torpedo attack by a submarine ... We returned to the starting point.
  4. demiurg
    demiurg 1 December 2022 06: 23
    Faith does not allow or worldview to make a high-speed drone with machine guns?
    Why carry a pilot? Pilatus and Airtractor are incredibly redundant for such purposes.
    If you do anti-drone air defense, then a drone with a speed of about 500-600 km / h and about the same range, with a pair of rifle-caliber machine guns, possibly in a turret, will suffice. This is less than a ton of weight, and five times cheaper than an airtractor.
    1. evgen1221
      evgen1221 1 December 2022 14: 11
      And his stadium-sized antenna will be screwed somewhere, how will he find a single drone and go to it?
    2. voyaka uh
      voyaka uh 3 December 2022 02: 37
      "five times cheaper than an airtractor." ///
      It won't work out cheaper. This machine gun fighter drone
      must somehow see their goals, pursue them
      and hit from their machine guns. Means: radar, computer and optical instruments on it. And these are three costs of the glider itself, if not more.
  5. Mavrikiy
    Mavrikiy 1 December 2022 07: 31
    And Johnson proposes to give these planes to Ukraine.
    fool Keep a national rarity for 70 years and give it to the hand-ass for destruction? fool
  6. LastPS
    LastPS 1 December 2022 08: 46
    The author says this as if Johnson directly stated that it was necessary to transfer the spitfires to Ukraine, causing a pre-stroke state in all aviation fans, meanwhile he simply said that the spitfires would have coped with the drones. No, they wouldn’t have coped with those UAVs that the Russian army uses, because the problem is primarily with geraniums, and a thing the size of a moped is simply absolutely impossible to notice from a spitfire, and even if there is an OLS, this is a difficult task, the speed of this letadly is also minimal in terms of by the standards of aviation, how much is the stall speed sleeping there? In general, I have no idea in what kind of war the tukano-class can fight against attack UAVs. These machines are only effective against partisans who do not have MANPADS, or they only have MANPADS and you can throw KABs outside their range, they have no place in real wars.
    1. Kriso Sborshik
      Kriso Sborshik 1 December 2022 10: 01
      As an aviation veteran in VarTander, I can confidently say that an ammunition load of 150-250 shells is enough for a couple of minutes of dense kneading. I have no idea how it is physically possible to hit a drone the size of a sofa with such ammunition.
    2. Sergey Aleksandrovich
      Sergey Aleksandrovich 1 December 2022 11: 51
      As the drones in Ukraine noticed, even the MiG-29 was raised to intercept them. So the problem does not look like you describe it.
      1. LastPS
        LastPS 26 December 2022 20: 49
        Even if the problem of visibility is removed, there are still factors that will cause problems. For example, the fact that a piston flying at an altitude of 200 meters above a modern battlefield will very quickly go into a state of scrap metal.
  7. wlkw
    wlkw 1 December 2022 08: 50
    Things are unlikely to reach the Spitfires, not economically. It seems to me that simply existing serial drones will be given more universalism, that is, the ability to aim and attack their own kind. I think that's the way it will be.
  8. Farewell
    Farewell 1 December 2022 09: 06
    Pilatus, Tucano and Supertucano are piston planes... facepalm.
    1. futurohunter
      futurohunter 2 December 2022 18: 21
      Not piston. Screw. They have turboprop engines. And they were immediately placed on the supertukano
  9. User_neydobniu
    User_neydobniu 1 December 2022 09: 08
    In order to attack a target, it must be detected, it is quite difficult to do this with an UALV, therefore, you will have to put a radar on a piston aircraft for search, it will not work without reconfiguring the machine ... Using a WWII fighter as a modern UALV, given its size, is also not option
    So what kind of healthy grain the author is talking about is not at all clear
  10. Sergey Aleksandrovich
    Sergey Aleksandrovich 1 December 2022 09: 19
    By the end of the article, the author still remembered the Yak-130, but for some reason forgot about the Su-25.
  11. kor1vet1974
    kor1vet1974 1 December 2022 09: 43
    So they lived up to the time of "Guardian Birds" by R. Sheckley.
  12. Negro
    Negro 1 December 2022 10: 18
    Pretty minor issue.

    If there is a task of national air defense, then the main difficulty is the creation of a continuous radar field and an air defense control system on a national scale. If it is, then in general it makes no difference to install ground launchers or make some kind of air points with missiles based on maize or transport workers. Doing cannon fights is irrational - too much fuss with each rocket, arrange a V-1 style fight.
    1. Biggi_2006
      Biggi_2006 1 December 2022 14: 37
      V-1 was shot down, flying up close and somersaulting with its wing. It was uncomfortable to shoot a ton of schneiderite from cannons; in case of an accidental detonation, the warhead swept away all aircraft within a radius of 200 meters.
      1. Negro
        Negro 1 December 2022 17: 04
        Not always. The V had a very high speed for a piston fighter. By default, they fired from a gentle dive. Rolling over is already the hussar of English pilots.
      2. futurohunter
        futurohunter 2 December 2022 13: 18

        Well, yes, it was. Yes, and you still need to get into this Fau ... And here it is guaranteed
        1. The comment was deleted.
  13. Bingo
    Bingo 1 December 2022 11: 21
    For the native troops, screw attack aircraft were already offered. Jonsor developed the theme. and in the end it will be:
    1. futurohunter
      futurohunter 2 December 2022 10: 19
      Laughter-laughter, but nevertheless:

      Photo from the trenches of the First World War ...
  14. Viktor Sergeev
    Viktor Sergeev 1 December 2022 11: 46
    Damn, I wrote a month ago that I need to set up production of I15. Maneuverability, low cost, ease of development and control. Although it is better to create something with a pusher propeller and put modern detection systems in front, albeit weak ones, on the wings a battery of 8-10 7,62 machine guns and we get a monster for destroying UAVs.
    1. single-n
      single-n 1 December 2022 15: 21
      Would you like to be the first to shoot at a drone with 50 kg of explosives from machine gun-type forward weapons? At what distance can its fragments fly apart? Or do you hope to hit from a kilometer? During WWII, the range of opening fire is good if 200 meters for similar targets. And the British generally preferred to turn the wing of the V-1 aircraft over than to shoot at the risk of dying from the explosion of the "drone". Of course, there were much more explosives there, but still we are talking about tens of kg. It's like a dozen 152 mm shells. rush together.
      1. your1970
        your1970 2 December 2022 00: 26
        Quote: Single-n
        Would you like to be the first to shoot at a drone with 50 kg of explosives from machine gun-type forward weapons? At what distance can its fragments fly apart? Or do you hope to hit from a kilometer? During WWII, the range of opening fire is good if 200 meters for similar targets. And the British generally preferred to turn the wing of the V-1 aircraft over than to shoot at the risk of dying from the explosion of the "drone". Of course, there were much more explosives there, but still we are talking about tens of kg. It's like a dozen 152 mm shells. rush together.
        - this is much more than 100 kg of explosives ....
        1. single-n
          single-n 2 December 2022 08: 02
          In the Russian OF 152 mm projectile from 6 to 8 kg of explosives. So it's from 60 to 80 kg, about as much Geranium-like and drag.
      2. futurohunter
        futurohunter 2 December 2022 13: 20
        It is enough to make holes in its wings ... - a leaky drone will not be able to fly. By the way, the probability of hitting the fuse is not so high. And the backache of the charge does not mean its explosion at all. The same TNT allows backache
        1. single-n
          single-n 2 December 2022 13: 45
          And how to get ONLY into the wing from a machine gun, but while moving at a speed of several tens of kilometers and not from the hands or the turret, but from a fixed installation? Drones are not such a big target. And if the interception takes place at low altitudes, then the main problem for the pilot will be the fight against the most effective air defense at all times. With earth :)
          And about the explosives in the drone. Is it really just TNT? Can't there be such a bug?
          Plastite-4 is insensitive to impact, friction and thermal effects (its sensitivity is only slightly higher than that of TNT). When shot with a rifle bullet, generally[i][/i], does not explode or catch fire

          Maybe it's still not worth risking the pilot in vain.
          1. futurohunter
            futurohunter 2 December 2022 15: 54
            I’m exactly saying that this is not V-1 for you, there are no such quantities of explosives, even when shooting just at a drone from a machine gun (and even more so from a 23-mm cannon), there will be fatal damage to the airframe (at least the wings, at least the fuselage), damage to the control equipment is possible, but hitting the fuse is unlikely. In addition, the drone warhead is not optimized for hitting air targets, and it is possible to protect from flying fragments that the aircraft, that the arrow on the turntable
            1. single-n
              single-n 2 December 2022 16: 16
              In general, I agree. Perhaps the explosion is not so terrible. But the question arises in the interception itself. 1 local unit will not be able to patrol for a long time. And to raise the plane to intercept from the ground is the time. You can simply miss it. Yes, and why bother the pilot with the approach is not the goal. Wasting time on a turn. If the turret allows you to attack on any courses. Therefore, my personal opinion is that the best option would be something like a "mosquito" or me-110 Where a pair of shooter pilots can patrol the area for a long time and calmly shoot targets from any angle of attack. Yes, and auxiliary equipment will fit many times more. And due to 2 engines, survivability will also grow. After all, you can always run into a DRG with a single MANPADS.
              1. futurohunter
                futurohunter 2 December 2022 17: 51
                You still won’t have time to intercept a cruise missile - the speed is high, there is only an air defense system, or a jet fighter will have time (at a speed no less than the same L-39).
                Loitering is stupid - just burn fuel in vain. Although the turntables can just barrage near the most valuable objects. In any case, it is better to take off to attack the detected target.
                I suggested that it is possible to implement now. This is in stock.
                Where will you get the "mosquito" or the Me-110? And why are you not satisfied with the same L-39?
                And even if there are the same miracle fighters of the Second World War. On Mosquito, the weapons are motionless - there were no turrets. Yes, and Messer will not be able to shoot "from any angle." And what kind of DRGs if we defend our territory? As far as I understand, that's what it was about? And a modern MANPADS will hit your pistons very well. For their engines also radiate well in the IR range. The wood-burning Mosquito will immediately flare up, but the Messer will simply fall. And 2 engines will not help anything if the wing turns into a sieve.
                So, fantasize as much as you like, but do not pretend to realize your fantasies.
                1. single-n
                  single-n 3 December 2022 16: 48
                  1) I gave ME-110 as an example. The stump is clear that no one is going to fly EXACTLY on this.
                  2. And what about cruise missiles? We are talking about drones, and their speed is no more than 300 km.
                  3. l-39 is a good car. but here are a couple of things
                  a) Stall speed: 160 km / h (with flaps and landing gear extended) What is the speed of the "geranium" (Speed: 150-180 km / h). Will the plane attack it at speeds close to loss of control at low altitudes? He doesn't have a turret. Only course weapons. Wonderful!
                  b) the weight of the weapons of the l-39 is 800 kg. in the complete absence of protection. The same ancient me-110 had the ability to carry up to 2 tons of bombs + defensive weapons + armor. At the same time, the me-110 has a shorter takeoff and mileage. That is, it will be easier with airfields.
                  C) the me-110 flew quite calmly on 1 engine at a speed of about 350 km. Given that the distance between the engines is almost 10 meters + body. It will be difficult to hit both engines of 1 MANPADS. But where will the l-39 fly? Stone down?
                  And about barrage. How long does it take for an aircraft to take off, gain speed and approach the target? 5 minutes, 10, 20? And if there is a delay during takeoff. During this time, even a slow-moving "geranium" will fly several tens of kilometers. Maybe there will be no point in intercepting. In addition, an aircraft in the air can itself help in detection. The presence of a crew of 2-3 people and a decent margin in terms of carrying capacity for additional equipment makes it quite possible to establish tracking of the territory.
                  And once again I say that I do not propose to use EXACTLY ME-110. It is quite possible to search for and remake civilian or transport vehicles of this type. Can design quickly. Fortunately, there is no need for a revolution. It is quite possible to drive away in a few months.
                  1. futurohunter
                    futurohunter 4 December 2022 19: 56
                    Even if you follow your logic:
                    3a. At a speed of 250 km / h, it is quite possible to aim and hit your drone. And how, in your opinion, ground attack aircraft operate at speeds of 700-800 km / h?
                    b) l-39 flew and fly from poor field airfields, they can take off from the roads. Your messer will not take off from an unprepared clearing, you still need to prepare an aerodrome for it
                    C) MANPADS will aim at the heat of any engine of your Messer, and in the event of an explosion, it will make a sieve out of this wing, or even tear it off. And how will the second engine help you then? MANPADS do not hit the engine - learn the materiel - but explodes next to the plane. Her goal is not to kill the engine, but to make a sieve out of the plane. Even if the cockpit of the aircraft is armored from the T-72, but the center section and wings are not armored. How far will your surviving crew fly?
                    I don’t discuss the rest - I have already suggested all the suitable options
                    1. single-n
                      single-n 5 December 2022 12: 03
                      a. At a speed of 250 km / h, it is quite possible to aim and hit your drone.

                      Yes, you certainly may. But first you need to take off, then lie on a course, pick up speed, then fly, slow down, go to the target. You do not propose to attack on a collision course? You can simply not have time to turn it off.
                      Your messer will not take off from an unprepared clearing, you still need to prepare an aerodrome for it
                      And what prevents the Messer from taking off from the road? Religion or the traffic police :) By the way, his run is 80-100 meters less than that of the L-39.
                      Well, you don't like the me-110. and a vegetable with it.
                      Take at least the same AN-28. It costs a penny, it just takes off from the garden. The range is not worse than that of the l-39. Carrying capacity is not less. Certainly less speed.
                      You can also dig among the turboprop attack aircraft. Something like the OV-10 Bronco. It has a really small radius.
                      MANPADS will aim at the heat of any engine of your Messer, and in the event of an explosion, it will make a sieve out of this wing, or even tear it off
                      Will it work? I looked at the photo of the aircraft after the attack from MANPADS. Of course, those whose wing flew off were not included in the photo :) But so that the floor of the plane would be blown apart either. Basically dviglo in the trash and a dozen penetrations nearby. Xs how the wing will survive it. But somehow it survived the shelling from machine guns, including large-caliber ones, of that era. A bunch of pictures when the planes of those years flew all in bullet holes. There, the score went to tens, if not hundreds of hits. Of course, if something larger than the "Stinger" arrives, then most likely the Khan's flyer.
                      1. futurohunter
                        futurohunter 5 December 2022 17: 33
                        But first you need to take off
                        I don't see any problems here

                        And what prevents the Messer from taking off from the road?
                        The most important thing is the absence of messers laughing And the reasoning "from the point of view of banal erudition ..." does not make much sense

                        Let's take at least the same AN-28
                        First, there are few of them left. By the way, more in Ukraine)) Secondly, if you want to arm it with little bloodshed, this is again a machine gun ... only in the window, not at the door (the landing gear and engine nacelle will greatly limit the firing sector. And in the heat of battle, you can accidentally plane to get)

                        Something like OV-10 Bronco
                        There are no such aircraft in Russia. The only distant analogue - the turbojet An-74 with onboard weapons - calmly patrolled the Sea of ​​Okhotsk and sank poachers' boats.

                        Will it work?
                        It will turn out. Usually, a MANPADS missile hitting a passenger plane is fatal to it. Your messenger is in the same situation. In their time, there were no MANPADS. And the hit of a large-caliber projectile in the wing (for example, from the Yak-18T or Airacobra) usually sent them into a chaotic fall. A MANPADS burst near the wing of your Messer is similar to a hit by such a projectile. "Dviglo", as you put it, will just survive a MANPADS hit (maybe, however, the radiator will be beaten with shrapnel). But the wing on which this "dviglo" stands - no
      3. LastPS
        LastPS 2 December 2022 20: 24
        And as soon as the bombers were shot down in WWII, there were much more explosives there.
  15. Viktor Sergeev
    Viktor Sergeev 1 December 2022 11: 47
    The author, yes, Ukraine does not have electronic warfare systems, junk.
  16. iouris
    iouris 1 December 2022 12: 05
    It's all BSC. Does life exist on Mars?
  17. Zaurbek
    Zaurbek 1 December 2022 12: 08
    We can think of such a fighter. Something tells me that the 2th country should like the idea with Geranium-404. And all this can fly in our direction. And it will become a problem with a radius of 2000 km.
    It is possible to make all the avionics and weapons on the basis of the VK2500 on the Ka52 and Mi28. Moreover, the era of large UAVs such as Orion and Bayraktar has gone to the masses and many already have them, but everyone will have them.
    And such an attack aircraft may well replace the Ka52 themselves and, in part, the Su25. At an incomparably cheaper price and the cost of a flight hour.
  18. garik77
    garik77 1 December 2022 13: 17
    There are many blunders in the text: "Modeled waves" What is this?
    "extensive British prime minister" Who is this?
    1. futurohunter
      futurohunter 2 December 2022 18: 23
      Yes, the author always always amuses with his knowledge ... Probably, he has read magazines like "Pistols" and "Airplanes" ... Buffoon - he is such a buffoon!
      And if the Prime Minister of Bryukan eats a lot, then yes, he will grow extensively in breadth laughing
  19. Pushkar
    Pushkar 1 December 2022 13: 34
    I remember the arrival of Rust, the same problems - there was no interceptor for such a low-speed target. Or maybe it is worth arming and equipping the Yak-130?
    1. evgen1221
      evgen1221 1 December 2022 14: 18
      Well, mention Rust in vain, there was enough helicopter to direct the already spotted sesna, there it’s exactly what, maybe, let the other authorities decide, and not me, it turned out. And instead of a boom and a UAV with a yadrenbaton in the Kremlin, they could have been prezimlitsya if they knew how our air defense guards the sky after a Boeing.
    2. Biggi_2006
      Biggi_2006 1 December 2022 14: 33
      The arrival of Rust was a GBshnoy operation to discredit and eliminate the command of the armed forces of the objectionable triumvirate Gorbachev-Yakovlev-Shevardnadze.
      Rust was led at gunpoint from the very border, there was a categorical ban on shooting him down, such as a lost Yak-12. In Africa, they perfectly brought down packs of Cessnas from jet fighters, incl. and missiles.
    3. rtv
      rtv 2 December 2022 12: 04
      Everything was very simple there, the generals were afraid to shoot down Rust - because they had recently shot down a Korean Boeing (KAL007) over the La Perouse Strait. They shot down as expected because it was officially recognized that the Boeing pilots acted with violations and knowingly (in the decision of the American court it was written "wishful misconduct"). However, the hype in the world led to the fact that the generals got very badly on the head. Therefore, with Rust, no one was ready to give the order to hit the target.

      Interestingly, the sea always throws debris ashore, after a shipwreck, or a plane crash. Because the ships are all insured, then the local population calmly sorts out what is thrown ashore, a little cynical, but the locals feed on the sea / ocean and in this way (imagine for yourself if the ship was thrown ashore - there is so much good). This is what I mean - on Moneron (an island south of Sakhalin not far from the crash site of this Boeing) and on Cape Crillon (the southern point of Sakhalin), people said that only old rubbish like worn-out shoes was thrown ashore, there was nothing like people's luggage - as if they just stuffed unnecessary rubbish for the sake of appearance.
    4. Illanatol
      Illanatol 3 December 2022 09: 08
      Quote: Pushkar
      I remember the arrival of Rust, the same problems - there was no interceptor for such a low-speed target.

      Interception was not a problem.
      There was a ban (after the incident with the South Korean Boeing) to shoot down civilian aircraft without special permission (which was not).
  20. Biggi_2006
    Biggi_2006 1 December 2022 14: 28
    You need to shoot down drones with drones. A return to propeller-driven aircraft will not give anything. .
  21. single-n
    single-n 1 December 2022 15: 10
    Here, machines like Me-110 or Do-217 would be more suitable. Capable of loitering for hours and having a turret. Because hitting a bunch of explosives from a course weapon is a so-so idea. And so fly yourself on a parallel course at 500 meters, but shoot. Yes, you can shove more detection tools onto a twin-engine. If you really stubbornly, then you can make carriers of interceptor drones out of these machines. He flew 5-10 km to the target and poisoned a high-speed kamikaze to intercept.
    1. ycuce234-san
      ycuce234-san 1 December 2022 21: 54
      Quote: Single-n
      Here, machines like Me-110 or Do-217 would be more suitable.

      Light class gunships. But modern, with a laser instead of a gun and a radar.
      1. Alexander Fomichev
        Alexander Fomichev 2 December 2022 01: 02
        Man, gray gloomy clouds, pink clouds, whirlwinds and negative temp. they are not friends with "virtual" lasers .. There are still NO plasma stoves and toroidal hyperboloids. */ I wanted to "BUY" .. pay.
        1. ycuce234-san
          ycuce234-san 2 December 2022 07: 50
          70% of the year is clear both at night and during the day. You can be secure 70% of the time or insecure 100%. Aviation in the early 20th century there was also the concept of non-flying weather.
    2. futurohunter
      futurohunter 2 December 2022 18: 25
      If you really stubbornly, then you can take the Me-110 from the collector and from the city ... and sticks sculpts Do-217 (because there are none left, even in private collections)
    3. Eule
      Eule 3 December 2022 21: 38
      There is only one problem - in order to invent or build new aircraft during the war, socialism is needed in the country. A twin-engine light interceptor is a great idea. Only arm 5,45 with bunker-powered machine guns.
      Not 7,,62x54, since his bullet is lethal for a person at 4 km, but 5,45 quickly loses speed in the air, and an accidental injury to a passerby 3 km from the battlefield will be easier. Yes, and shells falling from the sky will also be easier.
      And for UAVs, many 5,45 bullets will work no worse.
  22. ifdru74
    ifdru74 1 December 2022 15: 52
    The author again draws the attention of the community to such an important topic as the economics of war. It is necessary to chase the conditional "Iranian mopeds" on equipment similar in cost of operation. And here turboprop or piston aircraft can "play". In modern technologies, it is not a problem to implement a composite glider driven by a propeller rotated by a turbine or a piston engine, with a range of stable flight speeds close to that of a UAV, it can be convenient. If you equip it with search tools for small targets and integrate it into an air defense system, then you can get yourself a pretty good fighter for drones and helicopters. If you put armor on it and equip it with suspension shocks to destroy ground targets, you will get a good attack aircraft. And all this, combined with the low cost per flight hour, will make the economy of war frugal. Whether it is necessary to make such an aircraft manned is a debatable issue. It is quite possible to release their free hunt on air targets that incorrectly respond to a friend or foe request.
    1. LastPS
      LastPS 2 December 2022 20: 34
      Only this will not work in Ukraine, where there are a lot of MANPADS and SPAAGs, which may be outdated, but not against a nearly a century old aircraft, albeit from new materials.
      1. ifdru74
        ifdru74 20 December 2022 23: 48
        If we have an inconspicuous target (minimum EPR and IR range, "bionic" circuits) with a piston or turbo engine, which costs like a moped, the operation and repair of which cost a little more than nothing, and the pilot for which can be trained in a couple of tens of hours (the main thing so that it takes off and does not drop ammunition on the runway), then in the event of a long war, these mopeds will fly, because the loss of a moped will never compare with the loss of a turbojet fighter-bomber. I about it.
        And if an autopilot is built into such a "moped", which will bring the moped to the target and allow you to perform a combat mission in a controlled mode, then this is just a child prodigy. And if the autopilot can independently fly in an anti-aircraft maneuver and not fly in a straight line, then this is generally super. And it's not that unrealizable at the current technical level.
  23. dnepropetrovsk
    dnepropetrovsk 1 December 2022 18: 58
    But there is a problem. How to shoot down "Maviki"? Raise jet planes? Shoot with S-300? In my meager sofa-strategic mind))) "Shilka", "Tunguska", "Pantsir" are better suited here. That is, a small-caliber gun with remote detonation ammunition or heavy machine guns with a high density of fire. That's just the radar should detect small targets and aim at them. Rockets are not good for this. An infrared homing head will not capture them, and the price of any missile with a Mavik is incomparable. So, in my opinion, the infantry needs to determine the installations of the ZU-23-2 on the chassis of an SUV and put a small radar there with the ability to target it.
    1. Alexander Fomichev
      Alexander Fomichev 2 December 2022 01: 07
      Dear friend, you are ours. Even at 380 km. From the air, "fields" and "notches" from below rewind abruptly if you don't change course... AT auto..'lambo..' even at 4 km/h due to the "highway effect" this is far from being the case. What kind of "garbage" 4xXNUMX has become familiar to you, so that they have time to "smart" from it and understand somewhere out of hell what ... to get into. Only AIR-AIR, or some kind of "StarStreak" trilinear .. expensive, and with an alert via "ONLINE" ... but the course is still .. will not be ideal ...
    2. Pablo Blade
      Pablo Blade 2 December 2022 12: 14
      Maviki still needs to be discovered in some way. In order to bring down
  24. Monar
    Monar 1 December 2022 19: 07
    Yes, what a lunatic. Well, they shoot down part of the "kamikzev" from the ground. From assault rifles and machine guns. in Cueva. And then there's the "Super Toucan" scribbling from all its trunks at the peak ... Phantasmagoria.
    1. Alexander Fomichev
      Alexander Fomichev 2 December 2022 01: 12
      People from the LDNR clearly state DO NOT KILL. YOU look at the sky right now and try to "concentrate", .. do not forget about the "scatter" when firing from automatic weapons. weapons.. since 2015. there is a ban on shooting at drones, due to damage from falling bullets, and near the "0" effect. */ Do you think the armed guys in the trenches "in vain" dodge the drone at 50m, holding the Machine Gun in their hands:?
      1. Monar
        Monar 5 December 2022 06: 23
        I did not know about the ban in the LDNR. And how the Kueva police scribble in long bursts, they showed from all the irons.
  25. Prisoner
    Prisoner 1 December 2022 21: 23
    Hot air balloons and Panas grandfathers with berdans in a basket. The main thing is not to forget the canister of vodka, the shmat of lard and the loaf of bread to throw in there.
  26. Dick
    Dick 1 December 2022 21: 23
    "Everything new is well-forgotten old." old truth
  27. highlight
    highlight 1 December 2022 23: 39
    We need 2 types of aircraft on the same airframe and units with a theater of operations.
    Interceptor for low and medium-speed UAVs and drones when receiving external target designation from AWACS and ground-based radars as a fast carrier of anti-aircraft missiles. The principle is a cheap high-speed carrier with a large number of different missiles from expensive and powerful to MANPADS and a Yakb machine-gun mount. In fact, this is a flying version of the shell, only more mobile and having a greater range due to the fact that it flies higher than the shell :) The Americans had such a variant of the Misslayer subsonic deck interceptor, from which the complex and expensive F14 grew.
    Stormtrooper. Now, with the development of ATGM search and sighting devices, they have become more efficient and more expensive and are asked not only to hand over a motorized rifle, but to put them on a mobile platform. And what is more mobile than a fairly fast and unpretentious aircraft? Which can get by on a dirt or medium scall asphalt runway. In fact, to fasten an aircraft with a decent supply of missiles and an additional observation camera in the IR spectrum to the ATGM for the operator, we will get a fairly cheap and versatile strike aircraft. On which you can quickly prepare crews. It will complement attack helicopters by being cheaper to manufacture and operate.
    An unmanned version with an internal combustion engine should work as a reconnaissance aircraft. In fact, attack air regiments should have at least one squadron of reconnaissance strike vehicles with relay machines and give target designations not only to their pilots on strike and unmanned vehicles, but also to assigned artillery and jet units. But if you start introducing more expensive and complex UAVs than mavics, then it’s easier to start with aviation units as an addition to manned ones.
  28. YOUR
    YOUR 2 December 2022 06: 56
    In general, the destruction of an UAV that costs several hundred dollars with a more expensive weapon such as a rocket for several tens of thousands of dollars is not smart. This is a war of attrition, so weapons should be inexpensive.

    Such is modernity, when from a plane worth $100 million they shoot a rocket worth $1 million at a tent worth $10.
    And further. This UAV worth several hundred dollars will cause trouble for several million dollars, so firing expensive missiles at cheap plastic airplanes is justified.
    1. Dimax-nemo
      Dimax-nemo 2 December 2022 07: 36
      Until you go bankrupt because you have to respond with a $1 million shot for every $50 shot. several orders of magnitude more than the enemy. America can afford to shoot A LOT of guided bombs and $50 shells at a dugout with bast-workers for one platoon. The rest are not true. Ukraine-all the more not a fact.
  29. Dimax-nemo
    Dimax-nemo 2 December 2022 07: 28
    To combat the KR, we created a MiG-31 with an SLA that allows you to attack 4 targets simultaneously. Neither the Tucano nor the Spitfire have a radar capable of autonomously detecting what they need to shoot down, nor a missile weapon that would allow multiple targets to be attacked simultaneously. Moreover, it is not at all a fact that it is now possible to create such missiles that were at least no more expensive than a "delta" with an engine from a trike.
  30. Illanatol
    Illanatol 2 December 2022 09: 06
    And a sensible idea is that modern piston aircraft can be sent to fight against relatively small in size and slow-moving by aviation standards targets such as UAVs.

    Not so healthy. Should Brazil buy them? Brazilians use them against bandits, what else are such rarities capable of. Set up your own production? Not so cheap.
    Especially when you consider that there will be a lot of such "interceptors" for drones.
    The most rational against drones is to use other drones armed with heavy machine guns and, possibly, short-range air-to-air missiles. Such anti-drones will cost much less than the revived "spitfires" ("yaks", "shops" ... underline as necessary), and training the operator of such a drone will cost much less than training a pilot. In principle, an advanced gamer can handle such a thing.
  31. futurohunter
    futurohunter 2 December 2022 10: 08
    Strange article... I don't know what planet the author lives on...
    ...As well as forum visitors who bombarded the thread with "combat fantasies" laughing
    Probably no one knows about the considerable fleet of L-39s left over from Soviet times. And weapons can be hung on this aircraft, including GSh-23 hanging guns in a container.

    And the flight hour of the turbojet "Albatross" will not be much more expensive than the turboprop "Tukano" and "Pilatus".
    And yet, he probably knows nothing about a huge fleet of combat helicopters. And you don’t even need to drive the monstrous Ka-52 or Mi-28, the simpler Mi-24/35 or Mi-8AMTSh are enough. For them, fighting drones will be like training in a shooting range.

    Yes, at least take the Mi-2, Ka-26/32 or Ansat (less fuel consumption). Put a machine gun in the door, plant paratroopers and fly with them to training.

    All the same, it will be more useful than wasting cartridges at firing ranges.
    In Soviet times, they also did such a miracle:
    I think it’s not a problem to make such a pepelats even now ... The fleet of such aircraft is quietly living out its life, mainly in private hands.
    So there is no problem here.
    The article is just an excuse to laugh at the narrow-mindedness and incompetence of individual figures ...
  32. Martin
    Martin 2 December 2022 16: 41
    I kept waiting until the very end of the article, as the author would describe the protection of the Spitfires themselves from enemy air defense. Not wait.
    So: how many shot down "spitfires" will be accounted for by a dozen shot down "geraniums"? And now the same question, but in US dollars. Or in rubles.
    1. futurohunter
      futurohunter 2 December 2022 18: 29
      Not only ground defense. Sushki-30/35 will also hunt ... They will only be surprised - what kind of low-speed target is this? Too fast for a helicopter, too slow for a combat aircraft, too small for transport, and too maneuverable. All the same, they will only be seen on the radar screen ...
  33. futurohunter
    futurohunter 2 December 2022 18: 34
    I suggest getting from museums:

    I think the arrogant people just lay around laughing You can fly up closer with a hatchet drone ... with a hatchet
    Or park on it with wheels
  34. futurohunter
    futurohunter 2 December 2022 18: 44
    To walk - so to walk!

    Here's one you need! You don't even need to waste ammo.
  35. Old Doctor
    Old Doctor 2 December 2022 18: 44
    I ask knowledgeable people not to brand me with shame and bad words, but to enlighten me. The Spitfire has cannons and machine guns in its wings. Those. the distance between them is large, and the UAV seems to be small. Those. The UAV may be between the tracks of machine guns and cannons. About 50 years ago I read in a magazine - cannons and machine guns were placed in the wings at a slight angle to the longitudinal axis of the aircraft, i.e. At some distance, the tracks converged heap. But it is not always possible to reach the optimal distance for shooting. And one more question. There will be Spitfires or the aforementioned modern propeller-driven aircraft. But then modern air defense can effectively deal with them. Or not?
    1. futurohunter
      futurohunter 2 December 2022 18: 53
      I don't even want to discuss the idea. Through and through. Spitfires, just to fly for fun... Until the first Russian rocket (it doesn't matter which one)
      1. Old Doctor
        Old Doctor 2 December 2022 18: 56
        But, you see, the plane is beautiful. And after all, they kept it in flight condition. Memory!
        1. The comment was deleted.
    2. LastPS
      LastPS 2 December 2022 20: 48
      Ah here is normal same questions, essentially. Everything is as you describe, although theoretically, if we want to drive drones on a spitfire, then it will be possible to put a smarter sight, which will show us the lead and the ideal shooting distance, ils and ols will help us. Well, the idea is nonsense, because, as you rightly noted, MANPADS and ZSUs are on the alert.
      1. futurohunter
        futurohunter 2 December 2022 23: 23
        Modern (if it is actually modern) air defense can fight any aircraft. The question is tactics ... With a massive raid, modern air defense can choke (as was the case in Israel)
      2. the same doctor
        the same doctor 4 January 2023 15: 09
        There is no need to bring the idea to the point of absurdity by literal reading and the requirement of universality of application. Above its territory and hundreds of kilometers from the front - it is quite applicable.
  36. the same doctor
    the same doctor 4 January 2023 15: 03
    The author is absolutely right. Moreover, against the martyrs, an analogue of the I-16 would fit. But for their effective use, these fighters must immediately be made remote-controlled. A slight change in the psychology of the designers will make this idea viable.
    A car without a person will fit into 200-500 kg of weight and an engine with a capacity of 300 horses.
    The main idea of ​​​​Johnson and the author of the article: each weapon needs its own counterweight. It is not good to hammer nails with microscopes.
  37. Glagol1
    Glagol1 14 January 2023 15: 53
    Yak-130 with suspended machine guns on pylons. Better than 7,62. The cost of a sortie is average, it keeps well in the air at low speeds, the cockpit visibility is excellent.
  38. The comment was deleted.