What does /k/ think of the new armed Airtractor? http://www

Cost efficient way to fight wars like the one we see now in Iraq/Syria.

>>32697179
It sligthly looks similar to the Soviet IL-2

>>32697179
If it can fire missiles and drop bombs and be less expensive than a jet and not get shot down it'd probably be a prudent idea to adopt it at least in some capacity.

>>32697179
Someone please put a John Deere paint job on this and a confederate flag instead of the UAE flag

Wouldn't a Hind be more cost-effective?

File: 1481589644689.jpg (20KB, 459x308px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 459x308px

>>32697179
ugly and functional

>>32698770
Do you have any idea how much maintenance helicopters require?

File: Afghan_Air_Force_Embraer_A-29_Super_Tucano_(YA-1407).jpg (183KB, 804x603px) Image search: [Google]

183KB, 804x603px

Prop planes seem to be getting more popular with countries with drug/insurgent problems.
the afghans got their first A-29 Super Tucanos last year.

>>32698383
Heh, it kinda does.
>>32698770
Lolno

>>32697179
Ugly but useful and cheap.
Plus it's far more advanced than it looks.
$400 per flight hour is also cheap as shit compared to the F35s 40,000 an hour cost or 11K for the a10

>>32698770
No.

>>32699075
looks like KAF

>>32699008

5.

>>32697179
>its literally a crop duster with bombs.
Airtractor a shit.
Super tucano number one.

>>32697179

>That EO mount

Is it supposed ot be single use? Because this thing will get crushed into shit on the first takeoff when plane hits a slight bump on the field

>>32703977
If you don't want to see Jihad John get cropdusted with Willy Pete, then get fucked.

>>32703986
How? It's fixed gear with no suspension

>>32699075
... is that add-on armor plate on the cockpit sides?

If so, I wonder if they use composite or metal?

>>32698383
would be awesome to fit an IL-2 with a laser pod and JDAMS

>>32703986
Was thinking the same thing, it cannot land in a field and the pilot would have to be verrryyyyy gentle with the touchdown on a hard runway.

>>32704081
it's flexible, this is how it can land without breaking.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uNjNGkPo9B4
Low pass when ?

Interesting idea, but Airtractor seems a poor application.

Super Tucano, AT-6B, and OV-10 Bronco can do the job better at a similar price.

I definitely think that light attack prop planes armed with guided munitions have a place in a modern air force. Use your jets to achieve air dominance and deep strike, while your props are used for interdiction and close air support.

When you're fighting people who don't even have AAA even a Cessna is an effective bombing platform.

>>32707075

Good luck finding an OV-10 up for sale or restarting production

>>32698770
helicopters are maintenance nightmares.

Spiritual Successor to the IL-2.

The battlefield will always need loitering, slow air support for COIN.

>>32707075
Its more about organic CAS that you can have more of.

In the end it doesn't really matter that much if it is a Cessna, Piper Cub or some other brand.

File: images.jpg (6KB, 300x168px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 300x168px

>implying a crop duster can't be baddass

File: Piper_PA48_Enforcer_USAF.jpg (271KB, 1800x1179px) Image search: [Google]

271KB, 1800x1179px

I always liked this prop job.

>>32697179
Seems like a well intentioned extremely bad idea.

Right now, if we are bombing irregular forces, we are completely untouchable.

Now, we are intentionally bringing ourselves down to their military level, letting every faggot with anything bigger than a battle rifle take a crack at our CAS birds. Training pilots is expensive, so is losing or damaging airframes, not to meantion the outrage if a pilot gets beheaded because the military wants to put them in WW2 era technology.

>>32712510
>All CAS-dedicated platforms should be optionally-manned

>>32712539
No, they should be 100% unmanned.

You gain nothing from having a meatbag in the seat. He will be looking at a tiny ass MFD, or worse, trying to eyeball combatants at 300 mph 500 feet up.

>>32698363
>Cost efficient way to fight wars like the one we see now in Iraq/Syria.

Reall? what does one unit cost and what does one Igla/Strela MANPAD unit cost? DO the math and then come bACK:

>>32699885
Why on earth does running a jet cost that much? gas prices aren't that bad, right?

>>32697179
For a moment I thought that Trudeau finally found the replacement for F-35.

>>32712584
Maintenance.

Parts need to be replaced after every flight, and you need a group of guys to do it.

>>32712617
Parts dont need to be replaced on every flight, but everything is checked.

Reapers have some of the cheapest flight hours anyways.

Jesus H Godancing Christ... it looks like Lockheed Skunk Works got shot back in time and told to redesign the Stuka. What an ugly fucking asshole of an aircraft.

Which means it will be cost-effective and terrifying, natch.

>>32712633
Seems like a good way to get pilots killed.

If you want low and slow, use a drone.

>>32712675
Now if only there was a good way to get Phil (and tripfags in general) killed...

>>32712575
>What is installing an MWS
>What is having flares
>what is flying above a minimum ceiling to avoid MANPADS

You can mitigate the risks of MANPADS by not being a retard

[spoiler]Singular for MANPADS is still MANPADS you fucking moron[/spoiler]

>>32712675
I honestly don't understand why the A-10 hasn't been replaced. CAS platforms that are faster and at less risk of being shot down exist and are in use with the USAF.
On top of that if shit hits the fan the A-10 is useless in contested airspace

>>32712891
Actual memes are keeping it alive. Thats it.

USAF wanted to kill it years ago. Congress said MUH GUNZ and kept it funded.

>>32707075
http://802u.com/sites/default/files/AT-802U_Brochure_07_10.pdf

I want one already.

>10 hour loiter

Not to mention you could probably have one of these fully armed, fueled, and in the air in under 20 minutes.

>>32712938

Cause it does an awesome fucking job is why it hasn't been replaced. You are fucking retarded if you believe anything else.

>>32712952
Does the job but it's unfit for purpose in future wars and too expensive for just blatting brownies with a gun

>>32712952
Except it does a pretty terrible job compared to modern systems.

>>32712891
A CAS platform needs loiter time, the capability to fly around at low speeds that would stall a fighter - the ability to fly low and slow.
Both parties are idiots, they should have stopped beating around the bush and called a RFP for a dedicated CAS aircraft

>>32712989
What makes the A-10 better than, say and Apache?

If you need a GBU or JDAM the Apache can always ask an F-16/F-15 to deliver one since in a battlespace there'll almost always be one nearby

>>32712989
We have that aircraft, its called the fucking reaper.

The thing is that the Air Tractor doesn't seem to have a proper market. They are claiming it can be armed with shit like Hellfires and such but the market for these are border patrols in third world countries and people wanting cheap as fuck CAS vs enemies with no AA.

That means you are going to suck MAXIMUM dick vs anything with a 12.7mm since these things only move at 200 MPH to around a 400 mile combat radius when in the civilian loadout. I doubt they would triple the speed for a military model and I bet the cost doesn't justify the shitty ass specs.

You may as well just buy a bunch of cheap shitty cropdusters and rig them with under the wing M2s and iron bombs if you want cheap CAS . They wouldn't cost $4 million+ either.

File: 800px-South_Dakota_M-18B_Dromader.jpg (46KB, 800x388px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 800x388px

>strudy
>resistant
>cheap to maintain, easy to repair
>rugged design
>high payload
>tiny cabin easy to armor
>Dromader gona Dromad

This should have been done decades ago.

File: C.jpg (467KB, 1280x827px) Image search: [Google]

467KB, 1280x827px

The Rhodesian's did it properly.

>>32699008
'bout tree fiddy

File: c2.jpg (103KB, 1036x294px) Image search: [Google]

103KB, 1036x294px

>>32713063

File: c3.jpg (228KB, 1417x900px) Image search: [Google]

228KB, 1417x900px

>>32713083

>>32712510
Are you retarded?

This isn't for military forces with good aircraft.

>>32713041
Heh! Just checked wiki, says here Croats used Dromaders as combat planes during Croatian War of Independence, rigged them quickly to carry bombs under wings.

>>32712633
I'm surprised such a hick like you has never seen a crop duster before

File: 1484794120849.jpg (27KB, 397x191px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 397x191px

oh fugg nicc lituning doo :DD

>>32712887
Flares haven't been effective in decades.

>>32712994
>What makes the A-10 better than, say and Apache?
It can loiter hours more and drop GBU/JDAM from outside MANPADS range.

>>32713035
>You may as well just buy a bunch of cheap shitty cropdusters and rig them with under the wing M2s and iron bombs if you want cheap CAS .
This is what Airtractor is.

File: 13494895_1264206116953281_7376314887732916420_n.jpg (123KB, 960x720px) Image search: [Google]

123KB, 960x720px

>>32713089

>>32713090
The USAF has it.

Maybe as a trainer so USAF can teach shit tier nations how to into air strikes?

>>32713127
Wew laddy.

Flairs have become just as sophisticated as missiles.

>>32713155

Except it's at a price range where it is competing with Tuscanos without 1/5th the capabilities.

There's a reason these cheap crop-duster CAS don't get bought by even the most frugal nation and thats because you can't have a sub-WW2 capability prop fighter when every insurgent can get his hands on post WW2 tech.

I would love to see one of these try and bomb an ISIS convoy from its terrible flight ceiling using its iron bombs or trying to strafe it when the ISIS gunners have equivalent or better equipment.

The only thing it has going for it is the Hellfire capability and even that isn't really going to sell these when Hellfires can be launched from dozens of cheaper platforms that aren't shitty CAS based.

It lacks any role in even a 3rd world military.


It's too slow to avoid ground fire.
It flies too low to avoid MANPADs and AA.
It doesn't have the armour to tank AK fire which is the PRIMARY FUCKING WEAPON OF EVERY MILITIA IN THE WORLD.
It doesn't have the range to do CAS.
It doesn't have the payload to do CAS.
It's not cheap enough to undercut a Tuscano which carries way more shit with a better range and ceiling as well as flight speed and has been proven to work.

If it cost $1 million for the basic model then you MIGHT get some buyers for the anti-drug runner crowd but the only merit of the aircraft is the running cost per flight hour and that's not enough to warrant it.

There's a reason alot of drug busters just fly commercial planes and helicopters while operating door guns and that's because they work fine for next to nothing. That's what this has to compete with and it just doesn't match up.

File: Yakovlev-Yak-130.jpg (198KB, 1200x812px) Image search: [Google]

198KB, 1200x812px

>>32697179
gtfo of the way for the cutest and deadliest plane ever.

>>32713219
FLARES are practically useless against cooled IR imaging seekers, and will continue to be forever until we figure out how to make aircraft-shaped flares or some other countermeasure.

This isn't the 70s.

File: 800px-Iraqi_Air_Force_C-172.jpg (78KB, 800x533px) Image search: [Google]

78KB, 800x533px

>>32707075
Cessna would've been a better choice imo

>>32713220
No it won't be competing with tucano's price

Super tucano cost like 17 million dollar a pop these days. The air tractor could've cost like a couple of million at most

Militarized Cessna cost like a million dollar each

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northrop_F-5
>Unit cost F-5E: US$2.1 million[3]

there you go. /thread

File: f-20tigershark.jpg (280KB, 1024x461px) Image search: [Google]

280KB, 1024x461px

>>32713221

pfffffffft, nice try Ivan.

>>32712575
Turboprops are no more vulnerable to man-pads then fighter jets.

>>32712584
As someone who's them before signing up i can tell you that air tractors are both extremely hardy and maintenance friendly comparative to jets. Also the fuel usage on a jet engine is ridiculous comparative to a turboprop engine.

>>32713225
N
O
P
E

>>32713147
An apache can launch a hellfire from outside MANPADS range

this rigged cropduster thingy looks like a good idea for security firms operating in Africa tee bee ech

>cheap
>easy to maintain
>kinda looks like a civilian plane when unloaded
>can run reconnaissance
>can drop bombs
could be some solid ground support if paired with a decent strategy

>>32713587
Not an argument.

IR missiles with Imaging seekers don't function by "Ooh look, thats hot, better go there!" anymore.

File: gripen-dispensing_chaff_from_bol_2340_1316.jpg (101KB, 1170x658px) Image search: [Google]

101KB, 1170x658px

>>32714126
The swedes have this new IR countermeasure where it disperses a cloud of non-pyrotechnic chaff-like IR emitters, I assume the purpose is to occlude the relatively low resolution imaging seeker of the missile

>>32714337
Pictured is chaff but the flares work in a similar manner, the flares are supposedly a lot more expensive than regular ones, could just be jew tricks from saab

>>32714346
Unless the seeker is totally blinded, imaging IR won't be fooled by any flare.

Perfectly possible that they're great against uncooled older seekers, but I don't see this or chaff working agained cooled ones, they're just not interested or fooled by IR signatures that aren't plane shaped.

>>32714381
It really boils down to fooling the algorithm that decides what is a plane and what is not, they can obviously ignore bright point sources like old flares or imaging would offer little benefit over the older models, the swede 'flare' creates a cloud of IR return instead of a single very hot point source

>>32714126
>impliying you cant blind the seeker
>impliying you cant spoof the seeker

Where did you pick up this meme anyways? I suppose you think DIRCM is a meme too?

File: IIRseeker.jpg (3KB, 320x236px) Image search: [Google]

3KB, 320x236px

>>32714517
Didn't say DIRCM was a meme, I specifically said I was talking about flares multiple times.

They're higher resolution than you would imagine.

>>32714381
I heard that the Americans specifically designed their seekers to not be spoofed by their flares that they put on aircraft.

But because they only tested it on western flare dispensers the missiles can still be spoofed by Chinese and Russian ones which are generally shittier and the flares burn with varying degrees of intensity

>>32714536
Im aware of seeker resolution increasing, you are apperently completely unaware about advancement in flare tech.

>>32714564
DIRCM isn't "flare tech".

But no, the resolution of IIR seekers has massively improved, but the effectiveness of chaff and flares has not. Steps, sure. But not nearly as quickly as seekers.

>>32714577
>DIRCM isn't "flare tech".

Oh really? Well, you clearly have no fucking clue what you are talking about, because there are flares that work on the same exact principal.

This is where you get upset, by the way.

>>32714616
>Flares
>DIRECTED ir countermeasure

no

>>32714879
>no

Yes

There are flares specifically designed for IIR missiles, using the same concept against them.

>>32714927
Like saying a grenade is directional.

>>32713305
>Turboprops are no more vulnerable to man-pads then fighter jets.

kek other than being much slower and having a lower ceiling of operation.

>payload

Who cares? Light craft are a force multiplier as an air Fac.

>>32713305
Lower ceiling.
Slower.
Less countermeasures.
Rate of climb and dive speeds are fucking abysmal.

MANPADs eat choppers and turboprops alive. Especially these crop-duster CAS wannabe planes that can't outrange them.

>>32713967

God fucking no. They lack the payload for ground support and the fact they hold NO native weaponry and have to carry a weapons pod means that they are next to useless.

That's why Tuscanos are vastly superior and the best option for anyone wanting CAS on a budget. At least they have .50 cals built into the design so they have something to use once they've dropped their payload.

It's massively important for CAS to be able to actually provide CAS for long periods of time and converted crop-dusters just can't do that by just putting pylons and systems on them.

If someone made a light CAS plane from the ground up that was basically a cheaper and more rudimentary Tuscano with a 7.62mm proof bathtub for the pilot then it'd be the best of both worlds but currently there's no need for a crop-duster that can carry 2 rocket pods and nothing else.

>>32713305
Eh, I'd say they're slightly more vulnerable only because they are slower. That being said, MANPADS are really an anti rotary wing weapon. They can work against fixed wing of course, but it's never been much of a threat historically

>>32697179
10/10 would fly along Texas/Mexican border stopping drugs with extreme prejudice.

It gives me a low-intensity conflict boner, we should of had these for years.

>>32707075
>I definitely think that light attack prop planes armed with guided munitions have a place in a modern air force.

only as a drone

>>32698363
>Cost efficient way to fight wars like the one we see now in Iraq/Syria.

Unless your enemy has manpads or something.

File: 8fc2935f50c5490a0fca43c01f49239e.jpg (1MB, 1600x1067px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1600x1067px

seems like pic related is what you guys actually want

>>32714517
>I suppose you think DIRCM is a meme too?

Name one operational aircraft that uses DIRCM.

>>32715520
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_AC-130

File: 1462175292196.jpg (17KB, 590x300px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 590x300px

>>32715514
yup.

>>32712949
You have obviously never fueled a plane. That alone will take at least ten, probably longer depending on the fuel quantity. Munitions will take for-fucking-ever, and you can't really do both simultaneously. Especially since the plane might actually tip over if you try to load on wing before the other. Lears, for example (wider wheel base) have a pretty small limit on the differential weight you can put on a side.

>>32713147
An A-10 only carries 6000 pounds of fuel, and it'll take 30-45 minutes to get where it needs to be. It has maybe an hour of loiter time realistically, likely less, just like any plane that's not a bomber.

>>32715520
Northrop Grumman Guardian is used on a small amount of commercial aircraft.

Flares are largely ineffective against more modern AtA IR missiles, but they can still be used effectively against simpler MANPADS IR missiles. They're mostly focused on preventing shootdowns from really old soviet IR SAMS in the ME.

>>32715520
Every USAF 737 that's flown into the airport I work at. And the one MH-47G.

>>32715681
>Flares are largely ineffective against more modern AtA IR missiles

Just false man. Modern flairs are more than the flares of old, just like modern IR missiles are not like the missiles of old.

>>32697179

Plane USAF needed about decade ago.

>>32715643
That's what makes the strike eagle so great for that area. CAn be anywhere very quickly and it has a ton of gas to loiter with, plus the guy in the backseat to concentrate on targeting and comms with the JTAC while the guy in the front can concentrate on the flying.

>>32715886
Yeah, Strike Eagles are pretty cool.

>>32715734
They release in bursts to blind the missile completely. If you look at the geometry, however, an IIR seeker with HOBS capability will almost always be able to see the aircraft, maneuvering or otherwise when it moves from behind the wall of countermeasures or the missile flies through them. This, of course, helps to avoid the missile, but only if fired rear-aspect, and only in a very small window of effectiveness range wise. It's much more likely the missile is fired from the front or side, and/or has enough energy to kill the target after defeating the countermeasures.

>>32716349

There are flares specifically designed to overload the IIR sensor.

Comon man, they are hardly new.

>>32716405
>overload the IIR sensor

Are they also designed to fly to the missile and stick themselves onto the seeker head? 'Cause that's the only way your blinding a missile from miles away without a laser or setting off a nuke in your cockpit.

Imaging IR seekers are still fairly new, the AIM9X entered service in 2003, excluding new developments such as DIRCM, most IR countermeasures in use were designed against older generation of missiles, which would simply track a point with their rotating mirror assembly or similar

>>32716505
I shine a spot light directly into your cam, what happens?

Same concept.

>>32716537
Not in fighter jets, senfam. Flare improvements are made every year.

>>32713221
Nice Aermacchi, Ivan

>>32717456
From two or more nautical miles away? I see a spot of light next to the target,you fucking idiot.

>>32715057
>MANPADs eat choppers and turboprops alive.
Only if they come into their engagement envelope. Same could be said about A-10. But any turboprop and A-10 could sit above 15000ft.

>>32715643
11000 lbs internally, 12000 lbs externally. 23000 lbs total. Loiter fuel flow is below 3000lbs/hour.

>>32716405
>There are flares specifically designed to overload the IIR sensor.
It is impossible because of physics.

>>32720284
A-10s don't carry externals unless it is a ferry. They don't have the thrust to get airborne with externals + any munitions whatsoever.