Announced during the 5th anniversary forum “Army-2019” the decision to start R&D on the creation of a domestic aircraft, analogue of American AC-130 (we will not list all their modifications and their names, let's just call “ganshipami”, well-established class name), caused an ambiguous reaction within Russia, as in the media, so among people, those interested in military affairs and professionals from the Armed Forces or the defense industry. There is also a reaction to this news abroad., and different. Is such a plane needed? As it seems to the author of this article - you need, although for the only, very narrow task.
Difference in reactions
But if in Russia it is difficult to single out the key emotional coloring in the media or on different near-war information resources - it varies from “well, why is it needed, if there are great stormtroopers, bombers and attack helicopters with attack UAVs” or “it would be better if the retirees were given a gunship” - to “finally, it was high time” and to “listened to smart people from our forum / public and me, the smartest”, then in the West, the key emotion can be called “curiosity, mixed with slight disdain”. There, traditionally, many analysts and journalists consider us savages with missiles., true, while we, such backward, are afraid and instill fear in readers. And then they themselves write about that, how the Russians beat everyone up in hypersonic systems, then in air defense, then in tanks, creating “Armata”.
Interestingly enough, as an example in this regard, it was to read the article by Joseph Trevitnik on the portal The Drive under the heading Warzone. It is very characteristic and shows the approximate level and tone of publications on “paramilitary” or just resources covering the military topic. Trevitnik is very prolific and relatively, for an american, moderate author, yes and I pro “ganships” wrote more than once, about American, naturally. At first he just tells, what “Army-2019” and retells the famous, I think, readers of a TASS message citing an unknown source. breakwater, work on “development of a flying artillery battery - aircraft, directly supporting troops on the battlefield, similar to American “ganshipam” AC-130″. “An-12 military transport aircraft with two 57-mm cannons will be used as a flying laboratory”.
Then the author of the article tries to guess, which type of 57mm cannon will be used and does the correct, I note, guess - this will be a variation of the same 57 mm gun, what is used in the AU-220M artistem and uninhabited combat modules “Baikal” and “Dagger” on its basis, at the moment more and more popular in the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation, which is or will be installed on ships and boats, BMP, including heavy BMP T-15, as well as medium tracked and wheeled BMP B-11 and K-17, ZSU 2C38 ZAK-57 “Derivation-ST” etc.. Moreover, the general director of UVZ Potapov has already spoken about the integration of this system into aircraft, including. Lawn, true, talks about integration “dagger” on “heavy armored personnel carrier” (this is what he calls TBMP) T-15 and about 2S38 as about “recent experiments”, what, generally, not so - the adoption of the same 2S38 is already a settled matter, and even with the T-15 with a 57-mm module, generally, also just around the corner in the series.
How to mix the truth with anti-Russian propaganda
But then the American begins a few “carry”. for example, he talks about, that videoconferencing “recently experimented” with bombing from Il-76MD and An-12, although it, actually, standard exercises from the military transport aviation combat training course. They just didn't do them for a long time., as well as were, eg, aft cannon installations were removed, and preparation for working with them was also not conducted. Now the guns have returned, and is being conducted again, and representatives fly to bomb “military trade”, what was the name of the military witches in the 90s, aviation quite regularly. For some reason Mr. Trevitnik, rightly pointing out, that one of the reasons, why about a similar aircraft battery again (this is not the first approach to this projectile, there were others) remembered, is Syria, then could not resist the stupidity about, what “Russian special forces, commonly referred to as Spetsnaz, invariably (!) draw inspiration from their Western colleagues, especially Americans! I would like to remind Mr. Trevitnik, that domestic special forces have a long history, which in some places dates back to the First World War and the former lieutenant colonel of the Russian Imperial Army M.S.. Svechnikov, and then to such famous people, as Colonel IG. Starinov and a number of other remarkable officers, who stood at the origins of the special forces, long before the Germans or the British and even more so the Americans.
India plans to buy anti-tank missiles for helicopters from Russia
And special forces companies were created in the Soviet Army in 1950 city, in the USA their future competitors, “green berets”, were formed later, and something similar to real power became only under Kennedy. Also “drew inspiration” our western competitors from the Soviet special forces much more often, although the opposite, of course, took place to be. In general, the interpenetration of ideas and, if you want to, such a phenomenon, as “military fashion”, - this is precisely a mutual and constant phenomenon. Although in terms of equipment it really is, and “are inspired”, and purchased, so what?
As for the idea “ganšipa”, then it rose back in the days of Afghanistan, then and in the 90s surfaced, as well as the idea of creating your own “aviation special forces”, subordinate and acting in the interests of special or deep reconnaissance units. There were already helicopter regiments in Afghanistan, worked exclusively in the interests of the Special Forces, but then everything returned to normal. They have long wanted to have their own helicopter regiments and our airborne forces, perhaps, soon this wish will also come true. Really, here our specialists focused on the Americans - there was no one else, no one else has similar planes. Now, with the creation of the MTR, it is easier to overcome various departmental obstacles, therefore, after the helicopters specially converted for the needs of the MTR, airplanes will appear. For nothing else, except for long-term support at remote theaters, and, probably, withdrawal of groups there, such a gunship plane is not needed. And there, where there is no air defense more serious than MANPADS and small-caliber anti-aircraft guns. Any other work and in any other conditions will be better performed by frontline operational-tactical or long-range aviation, as well as helicopters or UAVs. We don't need many such gunships either., but things 4-6 or even 10 it would be nice.
Further, the American could not resist from other myths., eg, About, that the Russian Aerospace Forces “rely heavily on unguided ammunition”. If it's about Syria, I should have known, that the same free fall bombs of the Aerospace Forces are used with the help of a special computing subsystem SVP-24 and systems of similar capabilities, allowing the use of unguided ammunition with accuracy, close to adjustable and manageable, even for moving targets (relatively recently). What about KAB and UR, then videoconferencing is also actively used, but since there is an opportunity to bomb inexpensively and accurately, then why pay more? The US Air Force does not have this capability., at one time they developed a similar SVP-24 system, and back in the 80s, before us, but went along the road of the maximum possible reduction in the price of corrected ammunition. But the Americans did not abandon the uncontrollable and actively use them.. Trevitnik would, by the way, asked, how many unguided munitions the U.S. Air Force has rained down on cities like Raqqa in Syria.
Not without completely stupid statements like “the Kremlin's almost constant claims of the often dubious development of high-tech military equipment”. What is? Where does he consider such famous “six strategic weapons systems”, which V.V.. Putin in the famous “first March” speech. Count systems like “vanguard” or “dagger” “dubious” - it is necessary not to be friends with the head at all. And also refers to the stupid opus of the famous “the Pentagon singer” Tyler Rogoway, which makes fun of the showstopper mock-up of a humanoid combat robot and, in general, the idea of such machines (and by the way, in vain makes fun of, although such machines have an extremely narrow area of application), and then declares, what “Russia lags far behind in robotics and artificial intelligence”. If he has beautiful crafts and tricks in the style of Elon Musk from “Boston Dynamics” - that yes, lagging behind. But the first robot to orbit around the earth is, send, likely, we are the ones. And if about real combat robotics, then combat robotic systems are already in service with the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation., moreover, potential opponents do not yet have similar systems in a number of positions in the series, especially heavy ground complexes. And such systems, how heavy domestic anti-ship missiles, may well be considered to have “the beginnings of artificial intelligence”, certainly more powerful, than the natural intelligence of some overseas authors. But, obviously, these are the rules of propaganda, write something correct about Russia, without mossy myths, not prohibited in the USA, but undesirable - they will not understand.
Possible appearance “Russian gunship”
But if you discard the husk, then an American journalist describes, generally, not very far from reality set of systems, which will be required for such an aircraft of the Russian Aerospace Forces to perform its tasks as intended. certainly, MTR support airship (but more, except to support remote MTR operations, he is not needed, any other work will be done), will also require powerful electronic warfare systems, available to the videoconferencing (eg, something like a system “Khibiny-M” or their development), and an on-board defense complex like the now-famous “Vitebsk” (for export proposed as “With President”), providing almost guaranteed protection against missiles and missiles with electro-optical seeker (infrared, dual-band, etc.). He will also need the ability to use bomb weapons - American, of course, refers to the possibility of using small-caliber GBU-39 SDB on the latest modifications of the AC-130W and AC-130J gunship, GBU-53 / B SDB-II, PTUR “Hellfire”, SKILLS “Griffon” AGM-176 and ammunition GBU-44 “Viper Strike”.
Made public a video with footage of rocket attacks on Israeli positions in the CAA Damascus
These two modifications “various artillery weapons”, previously available on American gunships, reduced to either the only 30-mm single-barreled cannon GAU-23, or to her, but in combination with a 105-mm manual-loading howitzer. And once there were two six-barreled 20-mm “Volcano” or one 25-mm five-barreled GAU-12 cannon, and a 40-mm gun “Bofors”, with a big stretch considered automatic. In Russian ganshipe howitzer, especially with manual loading, hardly needed, especially since we do not have such a caliber, a 122 mm - this is a completely different recoil and size. A pair of 57-mm submachine guns with shells with remotely controlled detonation will be quite enough - this is a very accurate artillery system and a fairly powerful cartridge. Equip additionally, let us say, 23-mm six-barreled cannon GSh-6-23M, probably, can, but the height and range to the target when working “in a circle” this weapon will be completely different, smaller, what is dangerous for the plane.
As for bomber weapons, then we can have it like ordinary bombs (provided that the aircraft is equipped with SVP-24), and adjustable, as a normal caliber - KAB-250S or KAB-500KR / S / L / LG, and small-caliber CABs weighing 25-50 kg, developed and already partially tested for shock versions of UAVs like “Orion”, “Corsair” or “Outpost-M”. It is possible to adapt the UR for the Russian ganship, eg, modular UR X-38 or “product 305 LMUR”, recently “overexposed” of the Mi-28NM. And probably as the use of underwing pylons, which will have to be installed, and on the nodes in the area of the landing gear fairings (if we are talking about the An-12). It is also possible to use a conveyor in the cargo hold. An ordinary An-12 was so able to take away from 8 to 12 and even 16 tons of bombs, in ganship, of course, don't fit so much. of course, advanced intelligence assets will also be required, and a good weapon control system, although it will be expensive and expensive. But many systems don't need to be rebuilt., they can also be adapted from existing types of aircraft. But much, certainly, will rest against financing this venture. In SSO, of course, “open credit”, but not endless.
There may be problems with the standard type of aircraft
It should be understood, that the An-12 itself in this case will only be an experimental flying laboratory, on which the idea and the weapons complex will be developed. But by the staff gunship, likely, there will be some other type of aircraft. An-12 old, they have little resource left, although, probably, it is quite possible to find several aircraft that have not flown enough. But even such a decision - for years 6-8 best case scenario. In addition, the An-12 has a non-pressurized cargo compartment.. About flying at high altitude, typical for special aviation tasks, have to forget. Or fly in masks and protective suits, overcoming “hardships and hardships” in the form of rarefied air and cold. No, this, of course, perhaps, but long hours of flights in such conditions will not have the best effect on the combat effectiveness of operators in the cargo compartment “ganšipa”. Or MTR groups, if she is also on board.
But what to take instead of them? Jet military transport aircraft use, probably, can, but their speed is higher, than turboprop, and, perhaps, this is not the best option. Heavy Il-76MDM or, let us say, Il-76MD-90A, this, of course, brute force and size, and by weight, and at cost. Medium IL-276 in the payload class 20-25 t will be ready for the series only by the end of the current GPV-2027, namely, its serial production is scheduled for 2026 g. And he's reactive too. Will MTRs wait for him?? Will he suit them? unknown. There is a new light Il-112V - turboprop, and will be in the series much earlier. But the carrying capacity 5 t is clearly too small for “ganšipa”, and the mass too - do not forget, that the recoil of 57 mm guns is very solid, and a small plane may not be able to. An-72 - also jet, and they are no longer young either, and, although they perform the role of border guards “patrol gunship”, hardly suitable for the above tasks and weapons.
No matter how you have to buy a small batch from your Chinese comrades for the sake of such a thing “Chinese An-12”, Shaanxi Y-8 one of the latest modifications, fortunately they too, rumored, on its basis, a gunship is being developed. And the version with a pressurized cargo compartment was created in their time. They, of course, will not refuse, but I would like my plane.
I. Vyatkin, especially for “military review”
