Russia Defence Forum

Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Future gunships for Russian Air Force

    The-thing-next-door
    The-thing-next-door

    Posts : 902
    Points : 956
    Join date : 2017-09-18
    Location : Uranus

    Future gunships for Russian Air Force - Page 2 Empty Re: Future gunships for Russian Air Force

    Post  The-thing-next-door on Thu Jan 14, 2021 3:30 pm

    Now here is an idea, they could use high altitude airships to drop a glider variant of the FOAB from very high altitudes.
    PhSt
    PhSt

    Posts : 353
    Points : 357
    Join date : 2019-04-02

    Future gunships for Russian Air Force - Page 2 Empty Re: Future gunships for Russian Air Force

    Post  PhSt on Thu Jan 14, 2021 5:06 pm

    The-thing-next-door wrote:Now here is an idea, they could use high altitude airships to drop a glider variant of the FOAB from very high altitudes.

    Future gunships for Russian Air Force - Page 2 Command-and-conquer-red-alert-2-hd-wallpaper-preview

    GarryB, LMFS and Hole like this post

    LMFS
    LMFS

    Posts : 2777
    Points : 2779
    Join date : 2018-03-03

    Future gunships for Russian Air Force - Page 2 Empty Re: Future gunships for Russian Air Force

    Post  LMFS on Thu Jan 14, 2021 5:28 pm

    No need for FOABs. A transport plane flying higher than 5 km with 57 mm guns that have a way longer range (without even considering shooting from altitude makes range a trivial issue) than MAPADS can cover a big area and make sure the West's war on the cheap on Russia's allies is crushed. It is not necessary to be flying Sukhois when a cheaper plane can stay hours and hours above the battlefield and make sure no one will raise their head or they will lose it. That allows the friendly ground forces to advance way faster and with way less losses. Big bombs have a huge blast radius that prevent allied forces from being supported effectively, 57 mm is ideal. Some guided rockets would be great too, maybe some area weapon too but normally it will not be as effective, once your enemy knows there is a gunship above they will disperse as much as possible. Most important part is targetting, with good data links, abundant covering of the battlefield with UAVs and all other available platforms and advanced all weather multispectral automatic target recognition on board the gunship.

    Hole likes this post

    Hole
    Hole

    Posts : 3676
    Points : 3674
    Join date : 2018-03-24
    Age : 44
    Location : Merkelland

    Future gunships for Russian Air Force - Page 2 Empty Re: Future gunships for Russian Air Force

    Post  Hole on Thu Jan 14, 2021 8:47 pm

    The Il-112V should be able to carry 2 57mm high or low velocity guns.
    The Il-276 could add a 120mm gun-mortar.

    Under the wings? Hermes/Klenok. Guided glide bombs. Suicide drones. thumbsup
    Isos
    Isos

    Posts : 6954
    Points : 6944
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Future gunships for Russian Air Force - Page 2 Empty Re: Future gunships for Russian Air Force

    Post  Isos on Thu Jan 14, 2021 10:49 pm

    Hole wrote:The Il-112V should be able to carry 2 57mm high or low velocity guns.
    The Il-276 could add a 120mm gun-mortar.

    Under the wings? Hermes/Klenok. Guided glide bombs. Suicide drones. thumbsup

    Or they could simply carry tens if not hundreds of those guided bombs developed for drones and a laser pod under the wings.

    Better precision and more effective like we saw in NK and they could launch them from very high.

    Actually a su-25 could carry some ten per weapon pylon bringing the total number carried to 50 or more.

    No need for more than that.
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 27463
    Points : 27995
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Future gunships for Russian Air Force - Page 2 Empty Re: Future gunships for Russian Air Force

    Post  GarryB on Fri Jan 15, 2021 5:21 am

    It changes nothing and has yet to be proven because the only use was from il 76.

    That's an unguided bomb. If there id an AD nearby or a fighter with amraam missiles it's a dead bomber.

    The actual drop was secret and no footage was released so most news agencies used the only footage of giant conventional bombs... an American daisy cutter rolling out the back of a C-130... no other footage was shown so a bomb rolling out the back of clearly a transport plane it was assumed it was either dropped by an An-12 or Il-76... it was neither.

    It was dropped by a Blackjack... the daisy cutter was used to clear a large area of heavy jungle to create a new helicopter base or artillery base in Vietnam... that is not what the Russians intend to use their new bomb for.

    One of the reported uses will be against suspected chem or bio labs with the heat and longer combustion time of a thermobaric weapon neutralising the dangerous substances as well as destroying the equipment and personel.

    It could also be used as a super TOS to defeat large areas of minefields or boobytrapped areas.

    It would be useful to take on underground facilities you are not sure exactly where they are... you will know where the entrances and air vents are but not clear about where the tunnels and underground rooms actually are... a large thermobaric bomb over such a place would consume most of the oxygen in the air around it suffocating some of the people in and around...

    In terms of shock and awe it would look like a nuke...

    Now here is an idea, they could use high altitude airships to drop a glider variant of the FOAB from very high altitudes.

    Being thermobaric a high altitude launch with wings to glide will extend standoff range, but high altitude release would be more use for ground penetrating anti bunker bombs...

    Better precision and more effective like we saw in NK and they could launch them from very high.

    With precision guidance you don't need a 44 ton bomb to take out a small light vehicle or group of people, and as long as that precision guidance does not make the bombs super expensive then you could carry enormous numbers of these weapons in combat.

    The two problems are finding the targets to hit and getting the weapons on target... UAVs more specifically HALEs meant the eyes could remain very high and hard to see for very long periods... in fact use a few and you have continuous eyes on the battlefield, but the time difference between seeing the target and getting bombers or attack aircraft to hit that target meant the target often escaped, so HALES and MALES became armed...

    Modern HALEs can have enormous flight ranges and excellent endurance periods but needed custom designed small guided weapons to make them effective... being able to fly 20,000km and stay in the air 48 hours at a time is no good if you run out of weapons after hour number 4...

    An Airship can't fly fast but it can orbit a target area for weeks and would have the capacity to carry enormous numbers of very small guided weapons... both in weight capacity and volume capacity... and of course you can use that airship for controlling UAVs and even ground based drones that need line of sight datalinks... the whole top of the airship could be solar panels with electric motors and batteries and hydrogen fuel cells... it could operate at different altitudes as needed... it could even utilise high altitude jet streams to move into position quickly...

    From an altitude of 20km then glide bombs and guns and even missiles like Shturm would have excellent performance... you could probably take out the HE warhead of Shturm and replace it with a 9kg DU bar and use it as a diving top attack weapon to defeat armour...

    Glide weapons would have excellent performance and even ballistic weapons would have amazing reach and performance... laser command detonating rounds for airbursts and kinetic rounds for penetrating vehicles or buildings or bunkers...
    Hole
    Hole

    Posts : 3676
    Points : 3674
    Join date : 2018-03-24
    Age : 44
    Location : Merkelland

    Future gunships for Russian Air Force - Page 2 Empty Re: Future gunships for Russian Air Force

    Post  Hole on Fri Jan 15, 2021 12:21 pm

    Isos wrote:
    Hole wrote:The Il-112V should be able to carry 2 57mm high or low velocity guns.
    The Il-276 could add a 120mm gun-mortar.

    Under the wings? Hermes/Klenok. Guided glide bombs. Suicide drones. thumbsup

    Or they could simply carry tens if not hundreds of those guided bombs developed for drones and a laser pod under the wings.

    Better precision and more effective like we saw in NK and they could launch them from very high.

    Actually a su-25 could carry some ten per weapon pylon bringing the total number carried to 50 or more.

    No need for more than that.

    Yeah! But keep the 57mm guns and add a 23mm Gatling. Just for fun. Twisted Evil
    PapaDragon
    PapaDragon

    Posts : 10005
    Points : 10083
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    Future gunships for Russian Air Force - Page 2 Empty Re: Future gunships for Russian Air Force

    Post  PapaDragon on Fri Jan 15, 2021 3:53 pm


    If they are doing this then they should do it right

    Use Il-76, install whatever gun is needed from 30mm gatling to 57mm (or bigger), make them double and stuff rest of the capacity with bombs

    Il-76 is proven workhorse and is back in production, payload and range are more than sufficient

    Overall Russia shouldn't​ need more than 10 gunships in total
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 27463
    Points : 27995
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Future gunships for Russian Air Force - Page 2 Empty Re: Future gunships for Russian Air Force

    Post  GarryB on Sat Jan 16, 2021 5:24 am

    With their Gefest & T bombing system I would say ditch the guns... a 105mm gun is a method of delivering a 20kg bomb of HE to a target 20km away... but in a plane it makes more sense to just carry the HE payload in the form of a bomb with no propellent charge or gun barrel... roll it out the back of the aircraft in flight... to reach a target 20km away turn and fly in that direction... in fact have a pneumatic gun or EMALS cats that fires bomb backwards at the speed the aircraft is flying at... so essentially the bomb stops and drops down vertically at enormous speeds... and you can carry bombs of any size for any target including guided bombs, glide bombs, laser homing bombs, optically guided bombs, satellite guided bombs, or just precision aimed dumb bombs for area targets... plus of course cluster bombs and smart munitions...

    In fact what you could do is develop a frame like the ones fitted to cargo planes for carrying people in three or four levels of seats, or water for fire fighting or fuel for inflight refuelling... you could have a bomber rack conveyer system that could be fitted to any current cargo plane... the Il-276 is just a shorter Il-476 so a shorter rack system could be used, or you could design them to feed from another rack so put one rack in the Il276 and two racks in the Il-476 so you drop bombs from the rear rack while the front rack feeds its bombs into the rear rack to reload it... the Slon could have four racks... depending on its size.

    I say leave the 57mm guns for the Su-57s... imagine the 7kg HE round of the 57mm grenade launcher with a full calibre triple shaped charge payload for anti armour top attack, plus the APFSDS round as well, though some sort of sabot that vapourises on firing so there are no engine ingestion issues... it would be a potent system.. the ground based weapon has a 120 round auto feed system... perhaps a lengthened fuselage with 240 rounds ready to fire... a sniper rather than a gatling gun type set up....

    Sponsored content

    Future gunships for Russian Air Force - Page 2 Empty Re: Future gunships for Russian Air Force

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Tue Jan 26, 2021 6:56 pm