Super Tucano batch arrives in Afghanistan

113
The Afghan Air Force received from the US the first batch of light combat aircraft A-29 Super Tucano, reports MIC with reference to the Afghan Defense Ministry.



“Afghan pilots received four A-29 Super Tucano aircraft, which in the coming days will begin to provide air support to the Afghan security forces,” the report said.

Earlier it was reported that the Pentagon bought 20 of such aircraft specifically for the transfer of the Afghan Air Force. At the end of 2015, Afghan pilots were trained at the US Air Force Base in Georgia.

Help Agency: “A-29 Super Tucano is a multipurpose light attack aircraft developed by Embraer, a Brazilian company, based on the TCB EMB-314 Super Tucano. Maximum take-off weight of the aircraft - 5200 kg, wing span - 11,14 m, engine power - 1х1600 hp, maximum speed - 590 km / h, practical range - 1330 km, practical ceiling - 10670 person. Armed with two built-in 2-mm machine guns, it can carry guided and unguided rockets and bombs on hangers. ”

  • http://bastion-karpenko.ru/
Our news channels

Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest news and the most important events of the day.

113 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. -6
    16 January 2016 08: 45
    Flying unarmored trough. Again the trash was fused to the Afghans.
    1. +47
      16 January 2016 08: 48
      Quote: Alez
      Flying unarmored trough. Again the trash was fused to the Afghans.

      Drive in the mountains of militias will do, but according to the criterion of price-effectiveness and even more so.
      1. +5
        16 January 2016 09: 05
        Drive in the mountains of militias will do, but according to the criterion of price-effectiveness and even more so.

        Yeah ... speed ... the height of combat work is not impressive just for portable anti-aircraft systems a good target ...
        from two points enter and will fall as well as helicopters of the Ukrainian Armed Forces in Donbass.
        1. +7
          16 January 2016 09: 09
          Quote: The same LYOKHA
          speed ... the height of combat work is not impressive

          Still impressive. Compare with the helicopters used by the Afghans.

          Quote: The same LYOKHA
          just for portable anti-aircraft systems, the target is good ..

          And where did the militia of MANPADS come from? Will the CIA throw them again?

          Quote: The same LYOKHA
          from two points enter and will fall as well as helicopters of the Ukrainian Armed Forces in Donbass.

          There and Boeing shot down on a train. Afghan militias are not capable of this.
          1. 0
            16 January 2016 09: 21
            And where did the militia of MANPADS come from? Will the CIA throw them again?


            the Saudis will buy ... there is finally a black market.
            A couple of MANPADS militias may well get hold of ...
            it’s harder to just find a comfortable position to successfully bring down these light attack aircraft ...
            although on the approaches to the airfield, an ambush can be arranged.
            1. +4
              16 January 2016 09: 25
              Quote: The same LYOKHA
              the Saudis will buy ... there is finally a black market.

              The Saudis are not interested. The black market has not helped them yet. Why would it help now?

              Quote: The same LYOKHA
              A couple of MANPADS militias may well get hold of ...

              Turning a turntable is even easier.
              1. +2
                16 January 2016 09: 30
                Why would it help now?

                They promise somewhere to blow up something in exchange for MANPADS .... business is nothing personal ...
                Well, time will tell ... the Taliban are inventive people ... they’ll come up with some kind of dirty trick.
                1. -2
                  16 January 2016 13: 11
                  If they put the trough of America, then it immediately becomes a formidable fighting flying monster !!!
                  And then authoritative specialists appear confirming the unsurpassed power of this trough.
                  Soooo very effective in ... more.
                  1. 0
                    16 January 2016 17: 45
                    As I understand it, this aircraft, more precisely the LHC, has been produced for a long time, therefore, taking into account the American habit of transferring everything to green papers, the effectiveness of this LHC is beyond doubt.
                    The other side of the question: the creation of such a piston aircraft in the Russian Federation is an almost impossible thing. The same An-2 flies on Wright-Cyclone engines, I think, 1936.
                    1. +2
                      16 January 2016 21: 24
                      Quote: iouris
                      As I understand it, this aircraft, more precisely the LHC, has been produced for a long time, therefore, taking into account the American habit of transferring everything to green papers, the effectiveness of this LHC is beyond doubt.
                      The other side of the question: the creation of such a piston aircraft in the Russian Federation is an almost impossible thing. The same An-2 flies on Wright-Cyclone engines, I think, 1936.
                      - Sorry for amateurism, but in terms of performance characteristics how does this SuperTukano differ from the same IL-2 from the Second World War? And have they really lost their competencies in piston aircraft engine manufacturing? Although it is not necessary. If you drive the Papuans when it is no longer necessary to test the newly created weapon systems, which are actually redundant even for ISIS fighters, then it is most optimal to create attack UAVs of different sizes (the process is underway) and upgrade the same Yak-130 for these purposes. And the Brazilians are not hard to buy - they did not announce sanctions and are not going to announce.
                      1. 0
                        16 January 2016 23: 55
                        Very, very different from IL-2. And on the performance characteristics and conceptually.
                    2. +1
                      16 January 2016 23: 54
                      An-2 post-war machine. It was mass-produced from the 49th. The Super Tucano has a theater engine (turbine with a propeller, if in a simple way). And, in the Russian Federation they can build anything, there would be a desire.
              2. +5
                16 January 2016 10: 45
                A very effective option, the main thing is cheap, and even if it has a better chance of being shot down, it is still more profitable than sending a V-52 to every gang.
              3. +1
                16 January 2016 17: 44
                Professor offer our air force against the Palestinians such a plane
                1. +1
                  16 January 2016 20: 26
                  Quote: Lex.
                  Professor offer our air force against the Palestinians such a plane

                  What for? The Air Force and I already have everything in a bundle.

                  Quote: yushch
                  No need to bother, professor, it was about the GOS MANPADS, and not ATGMs.

                  No need to mow under the fool. For MANPADS have their own GOS, and their own ATGM.

                  Quote: yushch
                  otya real professor himself will never take the nickname of the same name.

                  I am a professor of sour cabbage soup. This is common knowledge. wink

                  Quote: yushch
                  .I will probably surprise you, but the role of the thermos in which the engine is located is played by the cooling system, which in one way or another discharges heat from the engine to the atmosphere.

                  Your ignorance does not surprise me in the least. Dumping heat into the atmosphere, the object "glows". It's elementary.

                  Quote: zennon
                  During the multi-colored Muslim revolutions, in particular the Libyan Arab Spring, arsenals were looted in a number of countries. Yes, you yourself know that.

                  I know. However, the shelf life of those MANPADS has already expired. You can’t fix them on your knee. Syria is an example.

                  Quote: Tusv
                  What is the difference between a militia and a terrorist?

                  Nothing.
                  Quote: avt
                  And really - Why?

                  To the president on his birthday.

                  Quote: avt
                  And how many of these “Tukans” are there in the IDF and how many of them are you polishing Gaza?

                  I do not know. Cruise missiles are not fired at.

                  Quote: iouris
                  And how many shekels does it cost to intercept penny missiles made by extremists (of course) with the help of the "Iron Cumpole"?

                  How much were you willing to give in order to find a super cheap jar from under Kola in which the BB that destroyed your ship over Sinai was located? There we are. We look not at how much the Hamas rocket costs, but how much harm it can bring.
              4. +1
                16 January 2016 17: 44
                Professor offer our air force against the Palestinians such a plane
              5. 0
                20 January 2016 11: 36
                it’s harder, and reactive
            2. +4
              16 January 2016 09: 26
              it’s harder to just find a comfortable position to successfully bring down these light attack aircraft ...
              although on the approaches to the airfield, an ambush can be arranged.

              Well then cancel the aircraft?
              1. +3
                16 January 2016 09: 33
                Well then cancel the aircraft?


                In no case... smile ... it’s cheaper to buy Taliban leaders ... at least for the time of the departure of these attack aircraft.

                The war is not decided by the supply of a dozen light attack aircraft,
                all the more so in AFGHANISTAN where everything is so intricately intertwined in a society of diverse tribes.
            3. -3
              16 January 2016 09: 51
              I put on the fact that they will buy MANPADS from the Chinese.
              Although it is more guaranteed you can dump it with Cornet or an analogue (just don’t need to yell that it’s unrealistic - it's difficult).
              The problem with dumping this aircraft from MANPADS is that with a sharp drop in engine speed for infrared MANPADS, it will become invisible (as confirmed by the Falkland crisis).
              Given that the reduction and landing occurs on very small gases, it is easier to lay down with the DShK on the axis of the strip.
              Or catch it on takeoff and set when the speed is guaranteed full.
              1. +2
                16 January 2016 09: 56
                Quote: dustycat
                I put on the fact that they will buy MANPADS from the Chinese.

                The Chinese do not support the militias in Afghanistan.

                Quote: dustycat
                Although it is more guaranteed you can dump it with Cornet or an analogue (just don’t need to yell that it’s unrealistic - it's difficult).

                Stop fantasizing.

                Quote: dustycat
                The problem with dumping this aircraft from MANPADS is that with a sharp drop in engine speed for infrared MANPADS, it will become invisible (as confirmed by the Falkland crisis).

                Seriously? with a sharp reset of engine speed, he manages to cool? lol
                1. Darkoff
                  +6
                  16 January 2016 10: 51
                  Quote: professor

                  Seriously? with a sharp reset of engine speed, he manages to cool? lol

                  It was about the intensity of the exhaust. The engine is hidden in a well-cooled atmosphere of the fuselage.
                  1. +2
                    16 January 2016 11: 25
                    Quote: DarkOFF
                    It was about the intensity of the exhaust. The engine is hidden in a well-cooled atmosphere of the fuselage.

                    Well-cooled means with good heat transfer. Those. intense heat transfer to the atmosphere. Hello from the GOS. wink

                    Quote: yushch
                    The first time I hear that the thermal GOS MANPADS are induced on a hot engine, and not a heat stream from it.

                    Do you have an engine in a thermos or slowed down and your engine became invisible?

                    Quote: yushch
                    In this case, MANPADS could be used against armored vehicles.

                    IR GOS and so are used in anti-tank systems. Is this news for you?

                    Quote: aleks26
                    There’s nothing to compare. The combat capabilities of helicopters such as MI-24 / MI-8 and their various clones far exceed the capabilities of this pepelats.

                    1. Papelac is just a rotorcraft by definition.
                    2. Compare the combat capabilities of the Crocodile and this aircraft.

                    Quote: avt
                    The campaign decided that the spirits with their experience of REAL battles since the times of the USSR and the presence of MZA are akin to the Hamaz people? Or what other "intifada heroes" with a "revolutionary" sling?

                    Well, okay. Alien enemies are always weak, and their enemies are the strongest in the world. Look how these "khamaSovtsy" hammer the regular army of Assad.
                    1. +3
                      16 January 2016 12: 03
                      No need to bother, professor, it was about the GOS MANPADS, not ATGMs. And you shouldn’t be smart either, although a real professor will never take a nickname of his own. I will surprise you, but the role of the thermos in which the engine is located is played by the cooling system, which in one way or another, it removes heat from the engine's operation into the atmosphere. Therefore, the GOS MANPADS is aimed at the thermal spectrum of the ejection of a jet stream or the exhaust of a turboprop engine.
                2. +2
                  16 January 2016 11: 06
                  [quote = professor] [quote = dustycat]
                  Seriously? with a sharp reset of engine speed, he manages to cool? lol[/ Quote]

                  The first time I heard that a thermal GOS MANPADS are aimed at a hot engine, and not a heat stream from it. In this case, MANPADS could be used against armored vehicles.
                  1. +6
                    16 January 2016 11: 26
                    Quote: yushch
                    GOS MANPADS are aimed at the hot engine, not the heat stream from it

                    IKGSN are induced by thermal radiation of a certain range.
                    Quote: yushch
                    case MANPADS could be used against armored vehicles.

                    A gamble, a small mass of warheads, and the warhead itself is a high-explosive fragmentation with a circular expansion of fragments.
                  2. +3
                    16 January 2016 11: 39
                    [quote = yushch] [quote = professor] [quote = dustycat]
                    Seriously? with a sharp reset of engine speed, he manages to cool? lol[/ Quote]

                    For the first time I hear that thermal GOS MANPADS are aimed at the hot engine, and not the heat stream from it. In this case, MANPADS could be used against armored vehicles. [/ Quote]

                    IR heads are aimed at "contrast".
                    At least they can pay a visit to a cigarette - if meters behind 40.
                    By BTR \ BMP - there are cases of successful use. failure is guaranteed.
                    There were also cases on tanks - but the effect is not enough.
                    1. +1
                      16 January 2016 12: 07
                      [quote = mav1971] [quote = yushch] [quote = professor] [quote = dustycat]
                      Seriously? with a sharp reset of engine speed, he manages to cool? lol[/ Quote]

                      For the first time I hear that thermal GOS MANPADS are aimed at the hot engine, and not the heat stream from it. In this case, MANPADS could be used against armored vehicles. [/ Quote]

                      IR heads are aimed at "contrast".
                      At least they can pay a visit to a cigarette - if meters behind 40.
                      By BTR \ BMP - there are cases of successful use. failure is guaranteed.
                      There were cases on tanks too - but the effect is not enough. [/ Quote]

                      Regarding the successful use of MANPADS in armored vehicles, I heard this tale from my battalion commander when I came to serve as the commander of an air defense squadron of a platoon in the 1st battalion of the 21st Airborne Brigade. He did not give concrete evidence, but simply referred to his Afghan experience.
              2. +4
                16 January 2016 10: 51
                If they buy MANPADS, they will spend them on slow, tasty and very tempting goals - for example, Chinuki, CH-53, BlackHawks and others who give a steady grip, slowly flies.

                Try to capture the toucan, there is a small signature. Plus, it can operate above 3000 meters.
                1. +1
                  16 January 2016 15: 17
                  current there is a mountainous region, at the theater of action far beyond 1000 OVER
              3. 0
                16 January 2016 23: 59
                Was this aircraft notorious during the Falkland War for becoming the first victim of the Stinger MANPADS?
          2. PAM
            +7
            16 January 2016 10: 19
            in principle, for patrolling and destroying communications in the controlled territories of terrorists and all kinds of separatists, the plane should be good, cheap both in operation (a good replacement for a helicopter flies a little faster and less noisy and the hour of operation should be several times less) and for the price, the question is only how many for all kinds of systems and training years. and those. personnel cut down by Americans from Iraq?
            In the mountains, when flying at low average altitudes, any device will be at risk of MANPADS destruction, be it an antediluvian whatnot, or at least a modern fighter.
          3. +2
            16 January 2016 10: 59
            Quote: professor
            Compare with the helicopters used by the Afghans.

            There’s nothing to compare. The combat capabilities of helicopters such as MI-24 / MI-8 and their various clones far exceed the capabilities of this pepelats. In terms of armament, load, reservation, and a set of tasks to be solved. Toucano has only one plus - ease of use.
          4. +2
            16 January 2016 15: 32
            Quote: professor
            And where did the militia of MANPADS come from? Will the CIA throw them again?

            During the multi-colored Muslim revolutions, in particular the Libyan Arab Spring, arsenals were looted in a number of countries. Yes, you yourself know that. The answer is obvious. Yes and shots taken by independent Turkish journalists about how Turkey transports weapons under the guise of humanitarian aid to the whole world It’s another matter that I myself am sympathetic to a light helicopter attack aircraft. It is not expensive, it can carry tons and a half loads. The speed is twice as high as that of helicopters. We would have worked like that. With our traditions, we could have composed a chic car. Hang a pair of 30-mm cannons. And for export, that’s it. You just need a good theater of action in 1800-2000 kW ...
            1. 0
              16 January 2016 20: 16
              but why compose, along the IL-2 is not very different from this aircraft. Although if you take IL2 and stuff modern materials into it, you can also get a good car. and indeed in Afghanistan, the level of education just pulls on the Second World War. so it’s not surprising that cars with a propeller
          5. 0
            20 January 2016 11: 25
            But they don’t have a Su-25, 30mm gun holes that haven’t disappeared anywhere, just like the illumination on the radar ... professor, the largest damaging elements of the BUK are half as many - in Israel, all hutspas have more brains?
        2. RDX
          0
          17 January 2016 12: 09
          yes you will knock him down from a karamultuk, and from the hip)))
      2. +3
        16 January 2016 09: 52
        Quote: professor
        Quote: Alez
        Flying unarmored trough. Again the trash was fused to the Afghans.

        Drive in the mountains of militias will do, but according to the criterion of price-effectiveness and even more so.

        The plane was created specifically for counter-guerrilla warfare, but not in the mountains, so that there it will not be effective (I thought that only we "work out as always") belay
        1. +6
          16 January 2016 09: 56
          Quote: NIKNN
          but not in the mountains, so that there it will not be effective (

          Ага.
        2. +14
          16 January 2016 10: 55
          Quote: NIKNN
          The plane was created specifically for counter-guerrilla warfare, but not in the mountains, so that there it will not be effective (I thought that only we "work out as always")

          Greetings Nikolay! Sorry, but I don't think so. The vulnerability of light attack aircraft is greatly exaggerated, and in any case it is lower than that of combat helicopters. At present, the same "Super Tucano" have a very wide range of weapons, including controlled ones, which makes it possible to deliver strikes without entering the zone of fire of the ZGU and DShK.
          At one time, I dedicated a series of publications to similar aircraft, look if you're interested.
          Modern anti-guerrilla aircraft. Part 1
          http://topwar.ru/51864-sovremennye-protivopartizanskie-samolety-chast-1-ya.html
          Modern anti-guerrilla aircraft. Part 2
          http://topwar.ru/51986-sovremennye-protivopartizanskie-samolety-chast-2-ya.html
          Are the “Ganships” back?
          http://topwar.ru/58313-ganshipy-vozvraschayutsya-.html
          "Counterpartis Aviation". Part 1
          http://topwar.ru/42151-protivopartizanskaya-aviaciya-chast-1-ya.html
          "Counterpartis Aviation". Part 2
          http://topwar.ru/42219-protivopartizanskaya-aviaciya-chast-2-ya.html
          1. +2
            16 January 2016 18: 12
            Quote: Bongo
            At one time, I dedicated a series of publications to similar planes,

            So these were your articles?! Very interesting, I read it with pleasure. I personally am very impressed with this idea. It would be necessary for our military to consider this issue. What a smart car, given our traditions, could be composed! Just need a good theater.
      3. -2
        16 January 2016 10: 01
        Oh, what are you talking about. Here, even MANPADS are not needed - they will suffer from conventional small arms. Mujahideen from grandfather flintlocks will land such a maize.
        1) Lack of reservation.
        2) The absence of sane weapons with a sufficient (safe) range.

        Unless, as a scout, use it, and even then, only for visual observation.
        Not ... this type of technology is no longer relevant, alas. Although I really like, I love small aircraft.
        1. +7
          16 January 2016 12: 06
          Yeah, a lot of "messengers" in the Second World War were knocked out of ordinary small arms.
          1. 0
            16 January 2016 17: 49
            There was a case: there is a whole chapter in the poem "Vasily Turkin".
          2. 0
            18 January 2016 12: 45
            Do you think you didn’t shoot down ???
            other times, other possibilities, different density of fire.
            Now they have not only DShKs.
      4. 0
        16 January 2016 10: 19
        Iron iron, and a downed pilot? Does he also have a price?
      5. 0
        16 January 2016 10: 38
        you can drive on partisans with something similar to silt 2, but on this you can easily run into the line from a machine gun or machine gun.
      6. avt
        +2
        16 January 2016 11: 14
        Quote: professor
        Drive in the mountains of militias will do, but according to the criterion of price-effectiveness and even more so.

        laughing The campaign decided that the spirits with their experience of REAL battles since the times of the USSR and the presence of MZA are akin to the Hamaz people? Or what other "intifada heroes" with a "revolutionary" sling? I would like to look at that idiot who will stick his nose into the mountains on this training, storm gorges, and even at the Pamir Tajiks in Pandsher.
        Quote: The same LYOKHA
        h for portable anti-aircraft systems the target is good ...

        Why waste expensive equipment on THIS? There are a lot of DShK, ZPU-1, ZPU-2, ZPU-4, but ZU -23-2 is generally enough for the eyes - only the feathers will fly in different directions from this “attack aircraft.” They have had calculations for all this old equipment for years wars have been prepared for more than one generation. What, what, but spirits know how to shoot. "Earlier it was reported that the Pentagon purchased 20 such aircraft specifically for transfer to the Afghan Navy." That's exactly what ONLY AFGHANIAN NAVY laughing these airplanes will come in handy ... for an Afghan aircraft carrier. laughing In short - for those gods, sho is no good for us, well, if you don’t pay the Russians again for the Milew turntables - there will be enough Mac Kane kondrashka.
      7. +2
        16 January 2016 11: 53
        Quote: professor
        Drive in the mountains of militias will do, but according to the criterion of price-effectiveness and even more so.

        I agree. For the Aghan army just right.
        Quote: Alez
        Flying unarmored trough. Again the trash was fused to the Afghans.

        You offer them to supply F-35 or at least F-15? lol
      8. +3
        16 January 2016 13: 22
        Quote: Professor
        Drive in the mountains of militias

        What is the difference between a militia and a terrorist? A militia frees his land. The terrorist scares foreign lands. Something like this
      9. +2
        16 January 2016 17: 41
        This enterprise is doubtful, against arrows, and dshk doesn’t have so many chances for the USSR to use the yak-5? but nothing happened
        http://topwar.ru/81046-yak-52b-nesostoyavshiysya-borec-s-partizanami.html
      10. The comment was deleted.
        1. +1
          16 January 2016 17: 45
          Quote: Lex.
          This enterprise is doubtful, against arrows, and dshk doesn’t have so many chances for the USSR to use the yak-5? but nothing happened

          Comrades from Israel confirm my arguments ... These cans are designed for other purposes!
      11. 0
        18 January 2016 00: 57
        They flew on something similar in the middle of the last century ... a bit old hi
    2. -6
      16 January 2016 09: 13
      straying from any slingshot, now everyone has automatic rifles, so the fire density is higher than in 2mv, and as for the MANPADS, this is their client with a probability close to 1c, it’s even a pity to launch a rocket, it’s not possible to integrate the past into the present ...
      1. +19
        16 January 2016 10: 34
        Quote: Sveles
        , now all have machine guns, so the density of fire is higher

        If I had a gun in my hands, and this would fly at me .... I would prefer to take refuge rather than tempt fate. A bomb or a rocket kills the same way, regardless of whether it is dropped from a Tu-160 or a maize.
        1. +3
          16 January 2016 11: 05
          Quote: WUA 518
          If I had a gun in my hands, and this would fly at me .... I would prefer to take refuge rather than tempt fate.

          They have a different mentality. All the will of Allah. An honorable death and you are in the hands of gentle gentlemen. So not everyone will hide.
        2. 0
          16 January 2016 11: 10
          Quote: WUA 518
          if I had a gun in my hands, and this would fly at me ...


          people like you don’t take into astronauts, and you don’t even need to be in the army, but if a company fired from automatic rifles on this pterodactyl, then there will be a sieve, however, several mujahideen will be enough ...
          1. +4
            16 January 2016 11: 34
            Quote: Sveles
            people like you don’t take in astronauts,

            Never torn there.
            Quote: Sveles
            Yes, and the army is also not worth it

            This is not for you to decide, and I have already served mine.
            Quote: Sveles
            but if a company fires from automatic weapons

            Heroes posthumously. The average height of combat use is such a term familiar?
    3. +11
      16 January 2016 09: 40
      With its maneuverability, low speed and small size, in the mountains it will be more effective than jet ones. A good tool for fine jewelry.
    4. +6
      16 January 2016 10: 06
      Quote: Alez
      Again the trash was fused to the Afghans.


      This is not trash, but a vehicle for inspecting poppy plantations!
    5. +6
      16 January 2016 12: 06
      Quote: Alez
      Flying unarmored trough.

      If they sold the An-2, you would now give a lecture here on the cool capabilities of the An-2.
      Quote: Alez
      Again the trash was fused to the Afghans.


      Afghanistan didn’t pay a penny for these planes. The Pentagon paid. So, it’s fused like an incorrect wording
    6. 0
      16 January 2016 17: 24
      And if our "Hephaestus" is installed on it? Again, isn't this the company, which, in principle, is Boeing, has fused SSJ-100 in Russia and has already released a more advanced competitor version?
    7. wow
      +1
      16 January 2016 20: 57
      In my opinion, a very good airplane for solving some problems.
  2. +9
    16 January 2016 08: 47
    Something I have a vague suspicion about the account of these aircraft ... But are you going to transport heroin?
    1. 0
      16 January 2016 22: 33
      One hundred% what are the Taliban all for gerych!
  3. +6
    16 January 2016 08: 47
    well, driving the igil and the Taliban in the mountains is quite enough.
    1. +3
      16 January 2016 08: 59
      Quote: wasjasibirjac
      well, driving the igil and the Taliban in the mountains is quite enough.

      Well, I don’t know ... In Afghanistan, the masters of the dushmans were knocking ours, and this can be full of holes in Kalash!
      for other purposes these planes are clearly!
      1. +14
        16 January 2016 09: 32
        Quote: MIKHAN
        and this can from Kalash can be full of holes!

        Guys, well, you sort of figure it out! Then you are ready to send any training aircraft to war. A little article about the Yak-130, right there: Let's go to Syria !!!! And why didn’t this aircraft please you? Turboprop light attack aircraft. Enhanced in the fight against partisans, there is experience in the use and operation, there are weapons, there are on-board equipment. What's the matter then?
        1. +7
          16 January 2016 10: 03
          Quote: WUA 518
          What's the matter then?

          In dushmans ... They shoot accurately! hi
          1. +6
            16 January 2016 10: 20
            Quote: MIKHAN
            In dushmans ... They shoot accurately!

            Vital, as it were, is more a myth than the truth. Here is a link on the losses of our Air Force in Afghanistan, check out and see how much aircraft was lost from small arms fire. http://dic.academic.ru/dic.nsf/ruwiki/369301
          2. 0
            16 January 2016 11: 58
            Quote: MIKHAN
            MIKHAN (9) RU Today, 10: 03 ↑

            Quote: WUA 518
            What's the matter then?

            In dushmans ... They shoot accurately! hi

            Shoot at a ground target and aerial targets are two big differences. Dushmans are accustomed to shoot at 2D, so to speak, and aviation is already 3D. Although there was a case in Iraq when a local Apache shot down a Apache with a rifle wassat . hi
            1. +4
              16 January 2016 12: 12
              Shoot at a ground target and aerial targets are two big differences. Dushmans are accustomed to shoot at 2D, so to speak, and aviation is already 3D. Although there was a case in Iraq when a local Apache shot down a Apache with a rifle

              there was a case in Iraq that a local helicopter in the garden found a fallen helicopter in his garden

              "Apache Hunter" said that he did not shoot down a helicopter, and that the story itself was fabricated by the Iraqi authorities in order to raise the morale of the army, RIA Novosti reports, citing the Kuwaiti newspaper Ar-Rai Al-Amm.
              In an interview with the newspaper, Iraqi peasant Ali Abid bin Mangash said that he found the Apache without a crew in his field on March 22. He reported this to the authorities, and by noon, an Iraqi television crew and a high-ranking representative of the Baath Party arrived in the field.
            2. avt
              +2
              16 January 2016 12: 14
              Quote: Horst78
              Shoot at a ground target and aerial targets are two big differences. Dushmans are used to shoot in 2D, so to speak, and aviation is already 3D.

              laughing In general, had a living spirit ?? I don’t ask how to shoot them. And then judging by
              Quote: Horst78
              so to speak in 2D, and aviation is already 3D.

              Somehow it comes to mind - ,, Mom!
              He is not punk, he is not hippy, he is not heavy metal,
              He is not a major, not a party-goer, mom, he is not a Buddhist,
              He doesn't smell glue, he doesn't smoke grass,
              He will beat any kung fu theorist. "BUT! Only on the Internet, or at the extreme in the 3D cinema laughing
              1. +1
                16 January 2016 12: 48
                Quote: avt

                laughing Do you have to see a living spirit ?? I don’t ask how to shoot them. And then judging by
                Quote: Horst78
                so to speak in 2D, and aviation is already 3D.

                Understand humor laughing In geometry, they probably gave 3 at school? laughing
                1. avt
                  +3
                  16 January 2016 13: 54
                  Quote: Horst78
                  In geometry, they probably gave 3 at school?
                  Of the exact sciences, he was not friends with physics because of its relativity. wassat Well, if it’s very interesting. Well, and as an Alaverdi Taki how to look at the spirit of the Afghan?
                  Quote: Jovanni
                  . Maybe this is necessary for the basmachi ...

                  Here the Baspachians, especially from the 20s and 30s, had enough of R-3 and other biplanes, and then they shot at them somehow, but it’s really possible to disperse the current crap only on the Internet, or in the movies, in the movie and, in general, like Ramba - this knife is enough, and with a bow it’s scary to think at all what you can do laughing Speaking of cinema - watch the old film "The Dawns Here Are Quiet", well, if the spirits don't feel like looking for the chronicle of the Afghan won, the ZPU-4 crew was removed there.
                  1. 0
                    17 January 2016 04: 36
                    Quote: avt
                    avt (3) RU Yesterday, 13: 54 ↑

                    Quote: Horst78
                    In geometry, they probably gave 3 at school?
                    Of the exact sciences, he was not friends with physics because of its relativity wassat

                    Physics is just an exact discipline. But mathematics is a complete mess. What is the difference between a round square and a square circle?
  4. +5
    16 January 2016 08: 48
    I remembered something: ... a good snack - sauerkraut, and it’s not a shame to serve it up, and they’ll eat it up - it’s not a pity ... Maybe this is necessary for the basmachi ...
    1. The comment was deleted.
    2. +9
      16 January 2016 09: 34
      ... but you must have meat snacks at home fellow
      1. +1
        16 January 2016 11: 11
        This is the device! ... The first time I SEE THIS. Thank you for the photo. If it’s not difficult to drop the link to the source.
        1. The comment was deleted.
        2. +1
          16 January 2016 18: 30
          Sorry, but this was a long time ago - I won’t find it! Or maybe it's a selfie ... lol
      2. +2
        16 January 2016 11: 23
        Shooting with this "crap" is probably very effective, well, okay. I'm more interested in the reloading process ... in the air ... in combat.
        Quote: a.hamster55
        ... but you must have meat snacks at home fellow
  5. +5
    16 January 2016 08: 51
    Chasing the highlanders is enough, but you still need to get into the small-sized goal, if there is anything, of course.
  6. +6
    16 January 2016 08: 54
    Quote: Alez
    Flying unarmored trough. Again the trash was fused to the Afghans.


    Well, how's the trough ..? Flies, can carry a couple of bombs, NURS blocks can be pulled back again. It’s just one of the few things that Afghans can be taught to fly in a short time, they also need to be served somehow. And as for armored, so such aircraft in general units. Well, the Afghans will not pull more sophisticated equipment ... Then, as I understand it, the planes are new, specially ordered for them.
  7. -2
    16 January 2016 08: 56
    How do the staffers not quit? Do they really not understand that the establishment of democracy in Afghanistan cannot be resolved by military means?
    Price war

    In the course of hostilities and terrorist acts to date, 13700 Afghan military and police officers, 3420 NATO troops have died, of which 2175 American soldiers and officers. Losses of the opposite side, the Taliban and al-Qaeda militants, according to various sources, range from 20 thousand to 35 thousand.

    About 40 thousand civilians died. At the same time, from the actions of anti-government forces - about 70%, the remaining 30% on the conscience of NATO, UN and government forces. There were casualties in Pakistan, where as a result of the bombing killed about 3500 civilians who had nothing to do with terrorists.

    War has a monetary value. Since 2001, the United States has spent only 104 billion dollars on the creation of institutions of power, as well as on financial injections into the economy of Afghanistan.
  8. +4
    16 January 2016 08: 57
    How many are there? 20 pcs. Let's see how long they run under the control of the Afghans.
    1. +5
      16 January 2016 09: 26
      Quote: LÄRZ
      Let's see how long they run under the control of the Afghans

      Afghan pilots on this plane are trained in the United States. According to experts, the plane is very unpretentious in maintenance.
    2. avt
      0
      16 January 2016 11: 32
      Quote: LÄRZ
      How many are there? 20 pcs. Let's see how long they run under the control of the Afghans.

      Somewhere in the hangar at Bagram airfield? For a long time, local Afghans are not morons - theorists. This is here on the site, headed by the Professor, to argue by type
      Quote: made13
      Chasing the highlanders is enough, but you still need to get into the small-sized goal, if there is anything, of course.
      can. Since the time the troops of the USSR were brought in, REALLY, and not on the Internet and not with keys, but the DShK, KPV and ZU-23 have been fighting, I’m not talking about MANPADS, so it’s definitely not among the pilots to go where the spirits really sit. So if they lose it, then when they are covered with RSom from the adjacent mountains, they can even level it up, put it on fire and put it on fire towards the airport five or ten pieces, run away, then let it go again.
  9. +2
    16 January 2016 08: 59
    IL-2, only with a turboprop engine, it is strange that there is no armor
  10. +3
    16 January 2016 09: 00
    Nice bug - I would drive, sorry not a millionaire .. recourse
  11. +2
    16 January 2016 09: 06
    Yes, yes, the last century, but what difference does it make than bombing bandits from a height of 6 thousand meters! But, probably not cheap, in comparison with the F-35!
    1. +1
      16 January 2016 10: 52
      Quote: Stas157
      what difference does it make than to bomb bandits from a height of 6 thousand meters!

      And papadet from such a height? Or have bliss guided bombs? Not even funny.
  12. +1
    16 January 2016 09: 07
    Quote: Tjeck
    Nice bug - I would drive, sorry not a millionaire ..

    Almost the same thing came to mind :)
  13. +4
    16 January 2016 09: 11
    It seems to me that something similar would also come in handy in Syria, it’s cheap and cheerful to drive carts and fuel trucks. It is only necessary that he could hang longer in the air - on a free hunt.
    1. +1
      16 January 2016 09: 18
      Quote: lexx2038
      It seems to me that something similar would also come in handy in Syria, it’s cheap and cheerful to drive carts and fuel trucks. It is only necessary that he could hang longer in the air - on a free hunt.

      What for? In Syria, you can cruise missiles worth 10 missiles - one Super Tucano aircraft.
      1. avt
        +1
        16 January 2016 12: 26
        Quote: professor
        What for? In Syria, you can cruise missiles worth 10 missiles - one Super Tucano aircraft.

        And really - Why? And how many of these "Tukans" are there in the IDF and how many of them are you polishing Gaza? wassat
      2. +3
        16 January 2016 17: 38
        And how many shekels does it cost to intercept penny missiles made by extremists (of course) with the help of the "Iron Cumpole"?
        1. avt
          +1
          16 January 2016 18: 38
          Quote: iouris
          And how many shekels does it cost to intercept penny missiles made by extremists (of course) with the help of the "Iron Cumpole"?

          laughing good By criterion
          Quote: professor
          and according to the criterion of price-effectiveness and even more so.
          to intercept converted water pipes.
  14. +2
    16 January 2016 09: 12
    He has technical characteristics close to IL-2. So it’s suitable for that war.
    1. 0
      16 January 2016 09: 39
      Quote: Avis24
      He has technical characteristics close to IL-2. So for that war


      Well, what are you talking about, carry one bomb?
      1. +2
        16 January 2016 10: 05
        Why one at a time?
        A large bum of type 100 or 500 is needed for hollowing fortifications and fortifications.
        Practice shows that for driving someone like mujahideen / partisans and their caravans in the mountains, 1-2 kg shrapnel bombs or 40-60 mm caliber NURS or napalm packaged in 20-30 kg packs are more efficient.
        And this is a decent amount of loading in pieces.
        Well, to throw 500kg from hovering with 5-9 thousand and a rotorcraft is possible.
        Especially since there are a lot of such goals in the mountains.
  15. +6
    16 January 2016 09: 27
    This is not IL-2, it is a shock UAV for the poor. Accordingly, the goals are similar, to shine TPV, to adjust artillery fire, to strike with GBU or free-falling ones.

    The question is, what kind of ECO does the Afghan have, if modern Tales, then the machine is very good and advanced. If the old TPV / NVD of the past generation, then worse.
  16. +1
    16 January 2016 09: 34
    If there is an American pilot in the kit for each aircraft, then it makes sense. If the pilot is not included, then all this in vain ...
  17. 0
    16 January 2016 09: 38
    Miracles, at such a price, it would be better if our Yak 130 were adapted, there’s more sense. In order to take 3-4 tons of bombs onto someone’s head, our plane will fly one, and this needs two. The stall speed is almost the same, while the maximum speed does not go into any comparison. Well, the landlord’s business, apparently someone who shared with someone.
    1. +6
      16 January 2016 09: 44
      Quote: Ros 56
      In order to take someone 3-4 tons of bombs to our head, our plane will fly one

      Well, yes, in order to drop 3-4 tons of bombs on a Toyota with a DShK, you need something very high-tech.
    2. +7
      16 January 2016 09: 53
      For starters, Tucano has long been on the market, working in 16 countries, including the USA, there is a history of application, training programs, good results in the development of banana republics. The aircraft is serial and is completed under the customer with the latest set of equipment.

      The Yak-130 is a clean training aircraft that does not have a normal ECO, cannot use guided bombs, moreover, only OKB crew boards generally flew using pencils / cast iron and guns. Combat sides and pilots learn to fly exclusively.

      Impact modification has only to be created. At the same time, it was bought initially, as soon as possible in operation. That is, only serial options were considered. There, Super Tucano had a competitor only IL-2 (which, according to the IL-2 concept) - CombatTractor, but it was dismissed as complicated and heavy for Afghanistan.
  18. +3
    16 January 2016 09: 44
    Why argue in vain. Time will show all the pros and cons. The main thing is that they bought the United States for the Afghans, but they don’t look at the gifted horse in the mouth.
  19. +4
    16 January 2016 09: 58
    Our attack aircraft IL-10 model 1944 was no worse. If you stay, then you can sell to Afghanistan. Hitlerites beat and with dushmany would have dealt.
    1. +7
      16 January 2016 10: 11
      Quote: Dzerzhinsky
      If you stay, then you can sell to Afghanistan.

      Do you think they stayed or not?
      1. +3
        16 January 2016 19: 29
        Quote: WUA 518
        Do you think they stayed or not?

        San drinks But you and I have already discussed all this a couple of years ago winked laughing
  20. +2
    16 January 2016 10: 33
    In terms of parameters, Il 10 is better, but not armored. Well, the Americans in the Second World War used unarmored heavy fighters such as "Tempest" and "Corsair" for attacks, and ours and plywood-percale Yaks. Who does not believe, I advise you to read the memoirs of the pilots of the squadron "Normandie-Niemen".
  21. 0
    16 January 2016 11: 14
    And who will fly on them?
  22. +1
    16 January 2016 11: 26
    Do these aircraft have experience in real combat? Where did they fight, tell me who is in the know.
    1. 0
      16 January 2016 17: 51
      Designed for use in South America. The United States has many goals there.
  23. +3
    16 January 2016 11: 35
    Maybe you should think and make a modern vision of the IL-10M
    if he had such parameters 70 years ago, then what can be done today.
    Wingspan, m 14.00
    Length, m 11.87
    Height, m ​​4.24
    Wing area, m2 33.00
    Weight, kg
    empty 5570 aircraft
    normal takeoff 7100
    Engine type 1 PD Mikulin AM-42
    Power, hp
    flight 1 x 1750
    take-off 1 x 2000
    Maximum speed km / h
    off the ground xnumx
    at height 512
    Practical range, km 1070
    Rate of climb, m / min 476
    Practical ceiling, m 7000
    Crew 2
    Armament: four 23-mm NR-23 cannons, fixed, dual in the wing (600 rounds), on the back of the shooter one B-20 EN cannon (150 rounds).
    Bomb load: 400-600 kg caliber from 1 to 100 kg in the bomb section of the center section.
    Eight RS-82 shells or four PC-132 shells could be suspended under the wing.
    1. +1
      16 January 2016 15: 41
      In modern conditions, in the absence of a specific front line and a smeared, large or focal battle area, small aircraft are of little use because of the small radius of action.
      In Syria, for example, the Su-34 was very useful because of the large radius.
      There are no MiG-29 fighters in Syria. Although they are multifunctional, they do not fly far, therefore they use the Su-30, which cannot work on the ground, but the radius is large.
      And there is another good class of aircraft from the Americans: ship-gun. Like a transporter with a cannon shooting down a side down. It flies in a circle at an inaccessible height and knocks down all highlighted or coordinate targets. In Syria, this would be very useful.
      1. avt
        +3
        16 January 2016 21: 23
        Quote: Genry
        MiG-29 fighters in Syria are not.

        Oh yeah !? wassat And who just now participated in a joint Su-25! ?? laughing
        Quote: Genry
        Therefore, they use the Su-30, which can not work on the ground, but the radius is large.

        Yah !??? So ours cannot, but there are no others there, to work on the land ???
        Quote: Genry
        And there is another good class of aircraft from the Americans: ship-gun.

        Maybe Ganship, Spectrum? Could he even be reluctant to teach materiel, at least to work as a search engine, and then to sprinkle comments?
      2. +3
        17 January 2016 06: 05
        Quote: Genry
        MiG-29 fighters in Syria are not.

        How is it not, and what is it at the airfield near Damascus? what
  24. +6
    16 January 2016 19: 25
    "Donated" Tucano "under the hood is not looked."
  25. -1
    16 January 2016 21: 22
    They would have taken the 109th Messer into service. lol
  26. +5
    17 January 2016 08: 44
    In vain "foolishness" about the "piston" aircraft. In fact, the efficiency of aviation technology not least depends on such a criterion as "efficiency-cost", but according to this criterion, "piston" aircraft are out of competition. The purchase price of a "piston" aircraft is lower than that of a jet aircraft, but most importantly, the cost of its operation is simply incomparable with the same cost of a jet aircraft. A "piston" aircraft consumes several times less fuel than a jet aircraft, a much more "plaque" of the engine, repairs are also easier and cheaper. The time of post-flight and pre-flight service for a "piston" aircraft is much less than that of a jet. In addition, the training of flight and technical personnel is simpler and there are not such high requirements for them. So, there is no need to laugh at the "piston" "outdated" aircraft. By the way, during the Vietnam War, the "piston" attack aircraft A-1 "Skyraider" http://topwar.ru/28278-a-1-skayreyder-posledniy-iz-mogikan.html was one of the most efficient aircraft and successfully competed on missions with their more modern jet cousins.
    1. +4
      17 January 2016 08: 50
      Quote: Monster_Fat
      In vain "foolishness" about the "piston" aircraft. In fact, the efficiency of aviation technology not least of all depends on such a criterion as "efficiency-cost", but according to this criterion, "piston" aircraft are out of competition.

      I agree with you, it was as a result of the combat use of the A-1 in Southeast Asia that many "anti-guerrilla" light attack aircraft were created. With the correct tactics of use, these machines are hardly vulnerable to anti-aircraft fire and MANPADS, and measures to increase survivability allow them to "keep" damage from small arms. But still, a turboprop engine is preferable for such machines. hi
      1. -1
        18 January 2016 13: 00
        You will now agree on the superiority of horse-drawn weapon systems over modern technology.
        Did they replay airplanes on a computer?
        It should be enough of the fact that in no normal army is such a class of aircraft armed. Just because she has no use, however much you would like. As I said, the maximum is intelligence. This trough will not find combat use, and even in the mountains.
        for two reasons:
        1) The armaments and performance characteristics of this aircraft will not allow serious damage to the enemy, who hid in the mountains
        2) these planes will stray from improvised means.

        Well, add here the absolute uselessness in auxiliary appointments - evacuate neither the wounded, nor deliver the cargo, nor land the troops.
  27. 0
    18 January 2016 12: 51
    I read enthusiastic comments and came to the conclusion that there are a lot of people who don’t know a damn thing about the capabilities of aviation and counteracting the air threat, nor tactics, nor knowing and understanding the conditions for using this trough (and for a modern war this is trough), with a complete absence understanding what Afghanistan and the Mujahideen are.

"Right Sector" (banned in Russia), "Ukrainian Insurgent Army" (UPA) (banned in Russia), ISIS (banned in Russia), "Jabhat Fatah al-Sham" formerly "Jabhat al-Nusra" (banned in Russia) , Taliban (banned in Russia), Al-Qaeda (banned in Russia), Anti-Corruption Foundation (banned in Russia), Navalny Headquarters (banned in Russia), Facebook (banned in Russia), Instagram (banned in Russia), Meta (banned in Russia), Misanthropic Division (banned in Russia), Azov (banned in Russia), Muslim Brotherhood (banned in Russia), Aum Shinrikyo (banned in Russia), AUE (banned in Russia), UNA-UNSO (banned in Russia), Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People (banned in Russia), Legion “Freedom of Russia” (armed formation, recognized as terrorist in the Russian Federation and banned)

“Non-profit organizations, unregistered public associations or individuals performing the functions of a foreign agent,” as well as media outlets performing the functions of a foreign agent: “Medusa”; "Voice of America"; "Realities"; "Present time"; "Radio Freedom"; Ponomarev; Savitskaya; Markelov; Kamalyagin; Apakhonchich; Makarevich; Dud; Gordon; Zhdanov; Medvedev; Fedorov; "Owl"; "Alliance of Doctors"; "RKK" "Levada Center"; "Memorial"; "Voice"; "Person and law"; "Rain"; "Mediazone"; "Deutsche Welle"; QMS "Caucasian Knot"; "Insider"; "New Newspaper"