Military Review

"Counterpartis Aviation". Part 1

29



After the end of the Second World War, which radically changed the balance of power in the world, there was an increase in national liberation movements. The peoples of countries that for a long time were colonies of European powers, began the struggle for independence. In states that are not formally colonies, left-wing movements became more active, especially in Latin America.

In order to combat the armed groups of the opposition in order to maintain the existing order and prevent "communist expansion", the leadership of these countries actively used the armed forces, including Aviation.

At first, it was usually piston fighters and bombers of the Second World War period, which were supplied in considerable quantities by the United States and Great Britain to their allies as part of military assistance. These relatively simple aircraft were quite suitable for such tasks and were operated for a long time by the air forces of the Third World countries. So the American-made fighter F-51 Mustang took to the air as part of the Air Force of El Salvador to 1974 year.

In the course of the American aggression in Vietnam, it soon became clear that modern jet fighters and bombers created for the “big war” with the USSR correspond little to the realities of this conflict.
Of course, Stratoforthress, Phantoms and Thunderchiefs could destroy objects on the territory of the DRV, but their effectiveness in the Viet Cong squads in the jungle was extremely low.

Under these conditions, the old A-1 “Skyrader” piston attack aircraft and the Inveider A-26 bombers proved to be in great demand.
Due to the low flight speed, the presence of powerful weapons and a decent bomb load, they could act with high efficiency just a few dozen meters from the location of their troops. A fuel-efficient engines allowed for a long patrol in the air.

Skyraders showed high efficiency in providing direct support to ground forces, but were best known for participating in search and rescue operations.

"Counterpartis Aviation". Part 1

Piston attack aircraft A-1 "Sky Trader"


The low minimum speed and long time spent in the air allowed the A-1 attack aircraft to escort rescue helicopters, including over North Vietnam. Having reached the area where the downed pilot was located, the Skyraders began patrolling and, if necessary, suppressed the enemy’s anti-aircraft positions. In this role, they were used practically until the end of the war.

The twin-engine A-26 fought in Indochina before the start of the 70's, operating mainly at night against transport convoys on the Ho Chi Minh Trail and supporting advanced bases.


Modernized “Vietnamese version” A-26 “Invader”


Taking into account the “night specifics”, the “Inveyders” installed new coherent and navigation equipment, as well as night vision devices. The rear defensive firing point was dismantled, instead, offensive weapons were reinforced.



In addition to specialized percussion machines, the T-28 Troyan TCF was widely used. Taking into account the experience of hostilities, a lightweight AT-28D percussion with enhanced weaponry and armor protection was created.



T-28D "Troyan"


The presence on board the "Troyan" second member of the crew not engaged in piloting predetermined the use of this aircraft as a reconnaissance spotter and coordinator of the actions of other attack aircraft during strikes.


Joint flight of A-1 and T-28


At the initial stage of the war in Vietnam, the light O-170 Bird Dog, created on the basis of the civil “Cessna-1”, was used as a close intelligence officer and spotter. The aircraft was serially produced from 1948 to 1956 year.


O-1 Bird Dog


This light aircraft could land and take off to unprepared grounds, for which he needed minimum distances to run and run. In addition to reconnaissance tasks, he was involved in evacuating the wounded, delivering reports and as a radio relay station.



Initially, O-1 Bird Dog was used over the line of contact with the enemy as unarmed, purely reconnaissance aircraft, but, given the frequent shelling from the ground, they began to hang launchers for unguided rockets. To designate targets on the ground, the pilots took incendiary phosphate grenades with them.

Without armor, low-speed O-1 and their crews suffered very serious losses. At the end of the 60-x, these aircraft were replaced in the American reconnaissance squadrons in Vietnam with more advanced aircraft. But as part of the Air Force of South Vietnam, they were actively used until the last days of the war.


Downed Saigon O-1


The case of 29's April 1975 of the year from besieged Saigon, Major of the Air Forces of South Vietnam, Buang Lang, is widely known. Who uploaded his wife and five children in a double Cessna O-1 Bird Dog. Having a minimum fuel balance, having detected the Midway aircraft carrier at sea, the pilot dropped a note asking to clean the deck for landing. To do this, I had to push several UH-1 helicopters into the sea.



Currently, O-1 Bird Dog Major Boang Lang is on display at the National Museum of Naval Aviation in Pensacola, Florida.

To replace the O-1 Bird Dog by the American company Cessna, an reconnaissance and target designation aircraft O-337 Skymaster was developed on the basis of the Cessna Civil Aircraft Model 2 Super Skymaster. Mass production began in March 1967 of the year and ended in June 1970 of the year. Total was built 532 aircraft.


O-2 Skymaster


The O-2 Skymaster was a two-beam monoplane with a six-seater cabin, a high wing and a three-post retractable landing gear with a nose strut. It is equipped with two engines, one of which leads the nasal pulling screw, the second - the tail pushing. The advantage of this scheme is that in case of failure of one of the engines, there is no asymmetry of thrust and unfolding moment (what happens if the engines are located on the wings).

Underwing pylons for NUR, bombs, napalm tanks and rifle caliber machine guns were installed on the plane. O-2 was tasked with detecting the target, marking it with fire, and adjusting the fire to the target. Part of the aircraft from the loudspeakers installed on them was used for the purpose of psychological warfare.

O-2 Skymaster proved to be a good idea, compared with the predecessors of O-1 Bird Dog, they had a higher flight speed and more powerful weapons.



The presence of two engines on the plane made the flight safer. At the same time, the aircraft based on the civilian model was very vulnerable to shelling from the ground. Since the end of the 60-x air defense detachments "Viet Cong" significantly increased due to large-caliber machine guns DShK, ZGU installations and MANPADS "Strela-2".

However, O-2 Skymaster participated in hostilities before the end of the war and was in service with the United States until 1990. A significant number of these aircraft were transferred to the Allies.

Another aircraft of a similar purpose that took part in the hostilities in Vietnam was created by Grumman, taking into account the operating experience of reconnaissance spotters - OV-1 Mohawk.
Its development began after the end of the Korean War. The armed forces needed a well-protected, double, twin-engine turboprop instrumental reconnaissance aircraft, equipped with the most modern reconnaissance equipment, with the possibility of shortened takeoff and landing.


OV-1 "Mohawk"


The aircraft received the official designation OV-1 "Mohawk" in accordance with the tradition of assigning the names of Indian tribes to aircraft of the US Army. In total, 1959 to 1970 year was built 380 aircraft.

The appearance of "Mohawk" identified three basic requirements: providing a good overview, high security of the crew and basic systems, good take-off and landing characteristics.
"Mohawk" was completed with four underwing pylons, allowing to apply a wide range of weapons, weighing up to 1678 kg.



In 1962, the first Mohawk OV-1 arrived in Vietnam, and a year later, the results of combat tests were summarized, showing that Mohawk was excellent for counterguerrilla operations. High speed, low noise and modern photographic equipment contributed to the successful implementation of reconnaissance flights. The maximum number of Mohawks simultaneously deployed in Vietnam reached 80 units, and they were used mainly over the territory of South Vietnam, without crossing the demarcation line. Suspended containers with side-looking radar and infrared sensors made it possible to uncover non-observable targets, greatly increasing the effectiveness of intelligence.



Intensive use of "Mohawks" in Vietnam led to quite high losses. All Americans lost in Indochina 63-x OV-1.

Unlike other types of aircraft, the Mohawks were not handed over to the South Vietnamese, remaining in service with only American squadrons. In the US armed forces, these aircraft were operated until the 1996 year, including in the version of radio intelligence.

Back at the start of the 60, the Pentagon announced a competition within the COIN program (Counter-Insurgency-anti-guerrilla) to develop an aircraft for use in limited military conflicts. The task involved the creation of a two-engine twin-engined aircraft with a shortened take-off and landing, capable of being operated both from aircraft carriers and from improvised unpaved platforms. Especially low cost and security of the machine from the fire of small rifle weapons.

The main tasks identified the attack on ground targets, direct aviation support of their troops, reconnaissance, escort helicopters. It was planned to use the aircraft for advanced observation and guidance.

The winner of the competition in August 1964-th recognized the project of the company "North American". According to test results, the 1966-m aircraft entered service with the US Air Force and Marine Corps. In the armed forces, the aircraft received the designation OV-10A and its own name "Bronco". Total for the US armed forces was built 271 aircraft. Serial production of the aircraft was completed in the 1976 year.


OV-10 "Bronco"


Rifle armament includes four machine guns M60 caliber 7,62-mm, mounted in containers. The choice of infantry, rather than aircraft machine guns, due to the desire to avoid problems with the replenishment of ammunition in the field. On 7, suspension assemblies could be located: suspended containers with cannons, rockets, bombs and incendiary tanks with a total weight of up to 1600 kg.



The main operator of the Bronco in Southeast Asia was the Marine Corps. A number of aircraft used by the army.
ОV-10 showed very high efficiency in combat operations, it favorably differed from its predecessors by booking, survivability, speed and armament. The plane had good maneuverability, excellent visibility from the cockpit, it was almost impossible to knock it out of small arms. In addition, the OV-10 had a very short call response time.



For a long time, the Bronco was a kind of benchmark for a light anti-guerrilla attack aircraft. As part of the Air Force of other countries participated in anti-insurgency operations and military coups.
- Venezuela: participation in an attempted military coup in 1992, while a quarter of the OV-10 air fleet of the Venezuelan Air Force was lost.
- Indonesia: against partisans in East Timor.
- Colombia: participation in the local civil war.
- Morocco: against the partisans of POLISARIO in Western Sahara.
- Thailand: in the border conflict with Laos, and against local partisans.
- Philippines: participation in an attempted military coup in the 1987 year, as well as in anti-terrorist operations on Mindanao.



In the US, the OV-10 was finally retired in 1994. Some of the decommissioned aircraft were used by government anti-narcotics organizations and in fire aviation.

In Vietnam's 1967, the American lightweight double attack aircraft A-37 Dragonfly “debuted”. It was developed by Cessna based on T-37.


A-37 Dragonfly


The design of the A-37 returned to the idea of ​​the attack aircraft as a well-armored aircraft with direct support from the troops, which subsequently developed during the development of the Su-25 and A-10 attack aircraft.
However, the first modification of the A-37A attack aircraft had insufficient protection, which was significantly strengthened on the next model A-37B. Over the years production from 1963 to 1975, the 577 stormtroopers were built.



The design of the A-37B differed from the first model in that the airframe was designed for 9-multiple overloads, the capacity of internal fuel tanks was significantly increased, the aircraft could carry four additional tanks with a total capacity of 1516 liters, and equipment for air refueling was installed. The power plant consisted of two General Electric J85-GE-17A turbojet engines with a weight increased to 2,850 kg (12.7 kN) each. The aircraft was equipped with a GAU-7,62B / A Minigun 2-machine-gun in the bow with easy access and eight underwing nodes of the outer suspension, designed for various types of weapons with a total weight of 2268 kg. To protect the crew of two people around the cab was installed armored protection from multi-layered nylon. Fuel tanks were protected. Coherent, navigation and sighting equipment was improved.


Placing the 7,62-mm machine gun GAU-2B / A Minigun in the bow A-37


Lightweight and relatively cheap "Dragonfly" perfectly manifested itself as an aircraft of direct aviation support, combining high precision strikes, with resistance to combat damage.
There were practically no losses from small arms fire. Most of the 22 A-37 shot down in Southeast Asia were hit by heavy anti-aircraft machine guns and MANPADS.



After the capitulation of Saigon 95 A-37 of the South Vietnamese Air Force, the winners got it. As part of the DRV Air Force, they were operated until the end of the 80-x. In the spring of 1976, one of the A-37В aircraft captured in Vietnam was brought to study in the USSR, where, after many-sided tests, it was highly appreciated.

In the US, the Dragonfly in the OA-37B version was operated until the 1994 year.
The aircraft were in service with a number of countries in Asia and Latin America, where they were actively used in internal dismantling. In some places, A-37 are still in the air.

Based on:
http://www.cc.gatech.edu/~tpilsch/AirOps/O2.html
http://www.arms-expo.ru/055057052124050055049051055.html
http://airspot.ru/catalogue/aircrafts/type/
Author:
Articles from this series:
"Counterpartis Aviation". Part 1
"Counterpartis Aviation". Part 2
29 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Professor
    Professor 24 March 2014 09: 22
    +14
    Excellent article. good I look forward to continuing about modern attack aircraft.
    1. Bongo
      24 March 2014 13: 25
      +5
      Thank you professor! To be continued tomorrow.
      1. dustycat
        dustycat 24 March 2014 16: 41
        +6
        The article is good.

        An interesting use of kapron as armor.
        Always did not understand how nobody did this.
        An turns out to be done.
        1. Bongo
          25 March 2014 05: 27
          +1
          Quote: dustycat
          An interesting use of kapron as an armor. I never understood why nobody did it.

          The first American body armor was just from kapron.
  2. gallville
    gallville 24 March 2014 09: 32
    +3
    withdrawal of A-10 attack aircraft from the Air Force

    http://vpk.name/news/106866_a10__samyii_urodlivyii_i_samyii_krasivyii_samolet_na
    _planete.html # m226571
    Amen!!!
  3. Russ69
    Russ69 24 March 2014 09: 55
    +8
    Given the specifics of the military confrontation in our time, such aircraft should have a place in the Air Force.
    1. And Us Rat
      And Us Rat 24 March 2014 10: 23
      +6
      Quote: Russ69
      Given the specifics of the military confrontation in our time, such aircraft should have a place in the Air Force.

      New shift on the way
      1. Russ69
        Russ69 24 March 2014 15: 22
        +2
        Quote: And Us Rat
        New shift on the way

        I know, it’s a pity we have so far deaf ....
        1. Commodus
          Commodus 24 March 2014 15: 42
          +1
          In general, I think that you can simply blow off the dust from the old IL10 and save on the glider at least. Of course, everything else will have to be changed, a more powerful engine, a Bronekapsulu for the crew, a modern Breo, it will cost two times less than 25, and in operation at field airfields it will be 5 times cheaper. Yes, and too many of these machines are not needed. 40-60 pieces would be enough.
  4. SkyMaXX
    SkyMaXX 24 March 2014 10: 25
    +7
    Waiting for an article. I really like attack aircraft of this class, I am especially interested in OV-10, the layout is very interesting. By the way, notice what always distinguishes attack aircraft from other aircraft in terms of flight model?
    Tail. In attack aircraft, it is most often a very large, larger horizontal steering wheel.
    1. erg
      erg 24 March 2014 12: 53
      +4
      I’ll fix it a bit. It’s more correct to say the tail, not the tail. Large in area is the vertical plumage or keel. The rudder (or rudder in the horizontal plane), which is correspondingly smaller in area than the keel, is pivotally attached to it. Although occasionally there is a pattern with an all-turning keel, which simultaneously serves as a rudder (the scheme is typical for small aircraft, and was widely used during the first world and the 20s of the 20th century. So vertical plumage, all-turning with a small fork, is typical for 2) .Large vertical tail area provides better road stability, balancing with respect to the vertical axis, controllability. What is needed for attack aircraft, since they operate at low altitudes, at low speeds, and aerobatics are not required to be twisted, since they are not intended for air combat. In general, for small aircraft flying at low speeds, the same plumage is characteristic precisely for imparting stability. But by the way, supersonic fighters, such as the Mig-29, also have a large area of ​​vertical tail. The flip side is greater aerodynamic drag. By the way, in small aircraft, they use another way to give stability. The fuselage is made rectangular in cross section. So that it has flat sides that works, as does the keel.
  5. Salamander
    Salamander 24 March 2014 10: 37
    +6
    Good article! good I look forward to continuing!
  6. misham1978
    misham1978 24 March 2014 11: 23
    +4
    Pts interesting article. What about us? As far as I remember, they tried to do something from the YTS-52 TCB ?. Of course, the USSR did not wage war against partisans, except for Afghanistan and a showdown with the forest brothers and the Basmachi. Our specialists could not study the American experience. Numerous friends of the USSR waged counter-guerrilla wars in Asia, Africa and LatAmerica. The use of light attack aircraft is much preferable to crocodiles MI-24
  7. thrush75
    thrush75 24 March 2014 12: 13
    +6
    Very interesting! I would like to read more about the "Bronco" - in many ways a legendary aircraft. It's a shame that Russia has no analogues of such aircraft. Although many local conflicts indicate their necessity. And despite factors such as price and simplicity, the patrol time is so generally Of course, this is not an IL-2, but other tasks.
    1. Argon
      Argon 24 March 2014 14: 13
      +4
      I’m not when I didn’t like the name “Anti-partisan aircraft”, this term does not quite express the essence of the idea of ​​such a machine. Our name is “army aviation”, it is also rather “vague.” The Soviet analogue of such machines, the Su-25, turned out to be of course less successful (although more unversional) mainly due to the relatively low VPH (and in fact the impossibility of working from the ground). The reason for this is in the creation of a machine on the basis of a universal subsonic platform, which was supposed to be first "aerobatic" then "UTS", and only later (I will) light attack aircraft at the disposal of generals "far" from the Air Force. And I must say that the conclusions from the Afghan experience were made (a rather rare case in the pre-collapse USSR). Research was conducted on two topics, a full-fledged attack aircraft, the current Su-39, and a machine operated from the ground In isolation from the bases of permanent deployment, to reduce the cost, they took the technological base of the T-8 as a basis, it became clear that with the traditional layout the machine "would not work", a two-girder scheme (like "Bronco) was worked out, incl. and with a theater of operations, there was not enough strength to ensure the given survivability. As a result, a very interesting "triplane" scheme appeared both under the turbojet engine and under the theater of operations. However, in the mid-90s, the work was stopped.
  8. corporal
    corporal 24 March 2014 13: 14
    +4
    Great cars! And not expensive. For local conflicts, that's it. It is strange that the Unas after the Caucasian mess somehow do not think about this class of aircraft. Although drones can block them now? Or not?
    1. Bongo
      24 March 2014 13: 27
      +2
      While they can’t, about it will be in the second part.
  9. The comment was deleted.
  10. Lone gunman
    Lone gunman 24 March 2014 13: 22
    +1
    Rotary-winged vehicles are good, but combat aircraft ... I don't know, with partisans ... as a "border guard" with a light weapon, yes, for example, a super toucan A-29 or EMB-314 "Super Tucano",

    As for me
  11. Gray 43
    Gray 43 24 March 2014 13: 36
    +5
    The article is interesting, thanks for the work, in Russia this work is done mainly by helicopters and "Rooks", isn't the western experience really useful? What do specialists think in the field of application of such aircraft?
  12. ivanovbg
    ivanovbg 24 March 2014 15: 43
    +3
    I have not seen infrared monitoring devices (thermal imagers) on any of the aircraft listed above, and in the counter-guerrilla warfare it is very important. Partisans, as a rule, don’t have heavy equipment, but to find cars from the air or just a group of insurgents at night is practically possible only in the infrared range.
    1. Bongo
      25 March 2014 05: 48
      +3
      Quote: ivanovbg
      I haven’t seen infrared monitoring devices (thermal imagers) on any of the aircraft listed.

      You just did not read the article carefully, at least the part concerning OV-1 "Mohawk".
  13. badger1974
    badger1974 24 March 2014 17: 58
    +5
    the article is excellent, we are waiting for the second part, but on the first I dare to assure the members of the forum. that this type of military aviation is hardly suitable for the Russian Air Force, first it is a problem of freely "walking" weapons in the form of MANPADS (I remind you that warehouses of the Ukrainian Armed Forces were looted in the outskirts in February), about 1000 sets of "Needles" are walking around, and they are also widely supplied in various regions "interesting" for Russia, a large number of all sorts of "stingers", "Blow" and RBS, each in its own range makes up an almost complete "mowing" of such anti-partisan aircraft, so it is useless to sing bravado for such aircraft in Russia, even small army aviation and good-quality attack aircraft will be much more effective at high costs than complete inefficiency at slightly lower costs (and much more for me)
    1. Assistant
      Assistant 24 March 2014 23: 19
      +2
      before it is a problem of freely "walking" weapons in the form of MANPADS


      And what information is there about the effectiveness of using MANPADS against piston aircraft? It seems that A-26, O-1, O-2 should have seen the beginning of the MANPADS era.
      1. badger1974
        badger1974 25 March 2014 08: 30
        +1
        there is infa in the "literate murzilki" that the Anglo-Saxons lost about 2 aircraft from the Strela-200 MANPADS in Vietnam, most of them whirlwinds, this despite the fact that the two had for their time the IR-GOS unreliable, especially in a rather "unpleasant" climate, "needle" and "stinger" has a dual-band "deep-cooled" seeker in the IR and UV ranges, and an excellent electronic base,
        1. Assistant
          Assistant 25 March 2014 22: 17
          0
          And there is infa, which helicopter models? For Bell Hugh has a gas turbine.
          1. Bongo
            26 March 2014 02: 10
            +2
            Quote: Assistant
            And there is infa, which helicopter models? For Bell Hugh has a gas turbine.

            Until the last days of the Vietnam War, piston UH-34 were used.
          2. badger1974
            badger1974 26 March 2014 10: 45
            +3
            S-55 and S-58. This is a Sikorsky piston, in the Vietnam War the most workhorse, because of how he "ate" petrol from a Jeep (that is, he could sit down and drain himself gasoline from any vehicles), and the Mohawk demanded jet fuel, and Werluind "In the design set was two orders of magnitude higher than the mohawk, because the loss of Sikorsky was an order of magnitude less in Vietnam
  14. Earnest
    Earnest 24 March 2014 21: 03
    +6
    Quote: badger1974
    the article is excellent, we are waiting for the second part, but on the first I dare to assure the members of the forum. that this type of military aviation is hardly suitable for the Russian Air Force, first it is a problem of freely "walking" MANPADS, ... even so small army aviation and good-quality attack aircraft will be much more effective at high costs than complete inefficiency at slightly lower costs

    I do not pretend to be true, but MANPADS can also create problems for the Su-25, so the message is probably not very correct. But the smooth transition of thought to shock UAVs as a non-alternative option "losing a piece of iron without human casualties" would be interesting - the operator will always survive, despite the romance of the pilot's profession. Does it make sense for us to follow this path? Read the opinion of experts.
    1. badger1974
      badger1974 25 March 2014 08: 49
      0
      "comb" often came to bases with torn nozzles of nozzles, for "anti-guerrilla" - such damage is a verdict on the battlefield, let's have no illusions, the UAV also has a lot of complaints, and especially in the light of recent events
  15. Sledgehammer
    Sledgehammer 25 March 2014 01: 44
    +2
    Great article good
    Something like OV-10 would be useful in Chechnya.
    1. Fiero
      Fiero 25 March 2014 02: 38
      +1
      In Chechnya, something like MiG-27M / K and Su-17M4 would be useful))
  16. Bongo
    25 March 2014 05: 36
    +4
    Quote: Assistant
    And what information is there about the effectiveness of using MANPADS against piston aircraft? It seems that A-26, O-1, O-2 should have seen the beginning of the MANPADS era.

    Aircraft with piston engines were a heavier target for Strela-2 MANPADS compared to jet aircraft due to their lower thermal signature. As for the aircraft: A-26, O-1 and O-2, I have no data, but they were used against the A-1 and AS-119. The last AS-119 aircraft shot down in the Vietnam War was hit by a missile from a MANPADS.
  17. Bongo
    25 March 2014 05: 43
    +1
    Quote: badger1974
    this type of combat aviation is hardly suitable for the Russian Air Force, first it is the problem of freely "walking" weapons in the form of MANPADS

    Volodya, I'm sorry, but I can't agree with you. Modern MANPADS are certainly a very formidable weapon, but it is not worth making a "wunderwaffe" out of it. MANPADS pose an even greater threat to helicopters than to light attack aircraft, but no one refuses to use turntables. In addition, for the competent use of MANPADS, certain skills and endurance are needed. This weapon is not as easy to use as shown in the movies.
    1. badger1974
      badger1974 25 March 2014 08: 56
      +1
      Seryoga, I cited MANPADS as an example of the fact that now more or less self-respecting gangs can have, and more specifically, a pickup with DShK or M2 around the world is a dime a dozen, besides, artisanal twin Pk or M60 will turn the flight of a "counterpartisan", if not completely, then with a forced landing, I will specifically keep silent about the 7.62 gatling, for a good-quality attack aircraft, this is not a problem
      1. Bongo
        25 March 2014 13: 25
        +1
        Quote: badger1974
        ikap with DShK or M2 around the world is a dime a dozen, besides, handicraft twin Pk or M60 will turn the flight of a "counter-partisan", if not completely, then with a forced landing,

        Volodya, if you talk like that, then you can agree to the point that all low-flying air targets are doomed. However, in practice this does not happen. A light turboprop attack aircraft is quite possible to protect at least from small arms. Moreover, his infrared signature will be significantly less than that of a reactive one, which means less vulnerability to MANPADS. You can build a ground attack aircraft with a propeller, in which case the hot air from the engine will be further blurred.
        1. badger1974
          badger1974 26 March 2014 10: 59
          0
          Seryoga, don't tell me, the deeply cooled GOS (that cooled matrix) is capable of tracking a sparrow. the question is only in the signature of the target's radiation, and the electronics of MANPADS are engaged in screening, and the electronics are striding by leaps and bounds, and I will add, the infrastructure must be kept alive on an ongoing basis, and I personally choose the Mi-24 than some cessna or Yak-18 toucans, the more Mi- 24 is more useful, the landing and pick-up of the assault force is not given to the "anti-guerrilla" air,
          1. Bongo
            26 March 2014 15: 14
            +2
            Both the turntables and the "toucan", in my opinion, have their own niche, light attack aircraft have the right to life, especially since their use can be very diverse (like patrol and TCB) I will not argue about the usefulness, but it is worth comparing the cost of a kilogram of combat load to goals. Who do you think it will be cheaper, as well as the cost of the life cycle. In addition, in practice, troops are not carried on the Mi-24.
  18. Leisure
    Leisure 25 March 2014 08: 01
    0
    This niche is now occupied by drones.
    1. badger1974
      badger1974 25 March 2014 11: 01
      +2
      the author promises in the second article about UAVs. then we’ll discuss