|
|
Kfir mishap averted
Full News Article
panzer
Joined: Oct 2006 Posts: 31 Member Profile
|
12 Jan 2007 00:24:49 GMT Report for Abuse
|
Hi Eksath,
I'm sorry, I meant the Pucaras involved in the Falklands conflict and not the Pucaras that were in SL. During the Falklands campaign 24 Pucaras were lost: 11 were destroyed by the S.A.S, 2 destroyed in the air, and 11 were captured. I brought this up just to say that the Pucaras really didn't get a chance to prove themselves during the Falklands. |
Eksath
Joined: Dec 2006 Posts: 453 Member Profile
|
12 Jan 2007 03:12:59 GMT Report for Abuse
|
Panzer.
You raise a valid question. However, I need to point out the lack of air superiority over the battlefield cannot leave the Pucura's record blameless. The British ground forces despite the open terrain of the Falklands were not subjected to any hardship by the presence of almost 22+ Pucuras in the vicinity. Here are the two that WERE shot down with the incident details.
May 21st
Pucara of FAA Grupo 3 shot down over Susintimacy Mountains by Stinger SAM fired by D Sqdn SAS.
May 25th
Pucara of FAA Grupo 3 shot down at Goose Green by fire from 2 Para (5.10 pm). Lt Cruzado ejects and becomes POW.
9 were destroyed on the ground, 2 in the air (i believe) and 11 captured...All in all a dismal performance for the squadron and type. Don't you think? :-) |
SenaM Senior Member
Joined: Aug 2006 Posts: 1908 Member Profile
|
12 Jan 2007 04:26:30 GMT Report for Abuse
|
As regards the PUCARA's performance up to the time of its withdrawal from service .. I have heard from SLAF officers, who were involved in maintenance as well as in operations.
As I understand it, the PUCARA was greatly feared by the LTTE .. believe it was doing an 'excellent' job as a CAS aircraft, up to the time it was with-drawn. It seems to have had 'spares problems' .. in particular with the engine. The aircraft had two (02)Turbomeca 'Astazou' type engines .. not very reliable. In fact the aircraft manufacturer seems to have had plans for installing two US made Garrett TPE-331s, but could not get necessary US Govt approval.
My belief is that the PUCARA still has 'potential' in the kind of 'war' we are fighting .. but the engine should be 'up-dated' to a Garrett or PT6A type engine. Most important .. it must be equipped with a good 'anti-missile' self-protection suite. |
Saervek
Joined: Dec 2006 Posts: 102 Member Profile
|
13 Jan 2007 08:20:45 GMT Report for Abuse
|
Hello guys and gal, hope you all had a great New Year.
Personally I'm non-committal on the Pucara, but I think some of whats been said about it is rather harsh.
The Pucara is a COIN aircraft, it shouldn't be asked to prove its mettle against a carrier battlegroup. As I recall the main reason that the Pucara was deployed there in the first place was because the runway wasn't long enough for other, better aircraft. Indeed, its other support was T-34Cs (trainers) and a unit of Aermacchi MB399As (trainers/LCA). I think the Pucara also had the distinction of shooting down the only Argentine A2A kill of the war, a Westland Scout.
Most of the successful strikes on British warships were flown by A-4 Skyhawks, Super Etendards, and IAI Daggers/Finger, operating mostly from Patagonia (not sure if the Mirage IIIs and EE Canberras scored any hits). If it were possible, the Argentines would have based these aircraft at the Falklands, not Pucaras and trainers.
At the end of the day, the Argentines lost the Falklands not because of the Pucara, but because they never expected the British to strike back. I don't think they bothered to seriously fortify their position, or include much by the way of air defense. That is a failure of leadership, not of the plane.
Likewise, as has already been pointed out, the Pucaras were mostly lost on the ground. That is an example of poor base security, not a problem with the plane. After all, we lost a number MiG-27Ms and Kfirs at Katunayake, but no one would suggest that was the fault of the plane, would they? |
Eksath
Joined: Dec 2006 Posts: 453 Member Profile
|
13 Jan 2007 13:33:47 GMT Report for Abuse
|
Saervek,
The Pucura was never expected to take on the air assets of the RAF and RN however it was expected to effectively support Argentinian ground forces to fight the British troops on the round. As pointed out previously, it barely did that. The Pucuras should have been out harassing the ground forces successfully and that never really happend. Even though there were only 2 shootdowns by ground forces, the following number of losses to SAMS (Rapiers and Blowpipe) and small arms fire tell the story of the Pucura (and all the other AAF aircraft in the Falklands:
Approx. 109 Argentine aircraft were lost during the entire war.
SAMs = 38 percent of them
British Harriers' kills= 28 percent
Small-arms fire or captured/destroyed on the ground = 34 percent
A well trained and equiped enemy was be able to neutralize the threat of the Pucura in 1980 which is basically a 1960s design. We are almost 27 years later and the technology has changed but the flight profile of the Pucura has not. Why would we introduce this aricraft into a theatre with a well motivated enemy who have the terrain and knowledge on their side when we have an existing asset of better capability?
SLAF is its arsenal a heck of a gunship that is rugged and quite a workhorse. Also, the SLAF has 10+ years of combat experience in it AND a sizeable inventory (-=12). Take a look at these cursory numbers of specs. See how they stack up? Why would you want to introduce another fix wing type to a fleet with all the issues of cost,training and maintenance. SL is not a rich country. Edited By - Eksath - 13 Jan 2007 13:45:37 GMT |
Eksath
Joined: Dec 2006 Posts: 453 Member Profile
|
13 Jan 2007 13:42:48 GMT Report for Abuse
|
Check out how these simple specs stack up. Which one makes sense now? Also, throw in the problem of getting parts for an exotic type from an country far away. Now you can see why the Mi-24 is present in numbers and will continue to do so for a while.
Pucura specs:
Max Speed: 270 kt / 311 mph
Max Range: 350 km / 217 miles
Weight: empty 4,020 kg / 8,862 lb
maximum take-off 6,800 kg / 14,991 lb
Armament: two 20-mm Hispano MS 804 cannon with 270 rounds per gun and four 7.62-mm (0.3in) FN M2-30 machine-guns with 900 rounds per gun, plus provision for up to 1500 kg (3,307 Ib) of disposable stores carried on three hardpoints
Mi-24 specs:
Capacity: 8 troops or 4 stretchers
Empty weight: 18,740 lb (8,500 kg)
Max takeoff weight: 26 455 lb (12,000 kg)
Powerplant: 2× Isotov TV-3 turbines, 2,200hp (1,600 kW) each
Performance
Maximum speed: 208 mph (335 km/h)
Range: 280 miles (450 km)
Armament
12.7 mm YaKB-12.7 Yakushev-Borzov multi-barrel machinegun
1,500 kg of bombs
4× Anti-tank guided missiles (AT-2 Swatter or AT-6 Spiral)
4× 57 mm S-5 rocket pods or 4× 80 mm S-8 rocket pods
2× 23 mm twin barrel cannon pods or
4× external fuel tanks
here are some pictures of the MI-24 in SL
http://www.airliners.net/open.file/0491041/L/
http://www.airliners.net/open.file/0491042/L/
http://www.airliners.net/open.file/0514774/L/
http://www.airliners.net/open.file/0485005/L/
http://www.airliners.net/open.file/0499757/L/ |
Saervek
Joined: Dec 2006 Posts: 102 Member Profile
|
13 Jan 2007 15:35:22 GMT Report for Abuse
|
Eksath,
Actually buddy I'm neither for nor against reintroducing the Pucara, I just wanted to point out that it was unfair to evaluate the aircraft in a conflict it was not designed for, and whose employment (by the Argentine Air Force) was dubious in any case.
One other point is that we would be rather remiss to make a comparison between British Air Defence capability and that of the ltte, you wouldn't expect the same level of sophistication from the ltte as T Battery/12 AD Reg. Indeed, we are yet to see any kind of serious air defence from the ltte at all in this war (2005-?) (as far as I am aware).
Personally I don't expect to see the Pucara making a reappearance, if for no other reason than the fact that if anyone really wants a light combat aircraft, they could just use those K-8 Karakorum's that we bought... I think we got a new batch in 2006 as replacements didn't we?
BTW does anyone know if the SLAF opted for PL-7s with those K-8s? Not that I'd care to be defending Sri Lankan airspace against the InAF in a jet trainer, but hey its the thought that counts. |
panzer
Joined: Oct 2006 Posts: 31 Member Profile
|
13 Jan 2007 18:52:03 GMT Report for Abuse
|
Hello Guys & Girls,
I think we maybe going a bit off topic with this Pucara business.
Any news about whats happening a Vakarai? |
SenaM Senior Member
Joined: Aug 2006 Posts: 1908 Member Profile
|
14 Jan 2007 16:07:57 GMT Report for Abuse
|
Eksath is arguing from the stand-point of 'acquisition' of fresh Pucara a'cft .. however, that is not the case. We have already paid for them .. these are our 'assets' .. for us to do the 'best' we can with them.
What I was saying was that 'with-drawing these a'cft from service' was a bad decision. (There were after all 2 'fly-worthy' airframes, which were pushed into a corner of a hangar, and forgotten - to remain as 'hangar queens', or to be used at some future date as 'decorative' devices at entrances to Air Bases).
Argentinian AF has had the most experience with these machines. Whatever their performance in the Falklands War, the Argentinians still think highly of the IA58 Pucara. FMA (Fabrique Militaire Argentine) had built some 106 machines .. there are still over 60 IA58s in the Argentinian Air Force, and they have no intention of 'scrapping' them. Rather, they have in mind an 'avionics' up-date for their IA58s, and retaining them for a few more years. (To say 'they are a 1960s design' may not be very appropriate .. The Kfir, which derives from the Dassault Mirage also goes back to this vintage .. the Mig 23/27 is a design of the '70s, and even the Mi-24 is by no means of recent origin .. All good designs, appreciated by discerning operators). Edited By - SenaM - 14 Jan 2007 16:11:35 GMT |
Mig-29C
Joined: Jun 2005 Posts: 543 Member Profile
|
14 Jan 2007 20:26:39 GMT Report for Abuse
|
A good day to all the Sri Lankans..
I hope all the forum members had a very joyful & reflective Christmas and New Year :o)
I only got back to the States on the 13th so a ''sorry'' for the late reply to your questions..
Ms. Su33
After reading your comments on the MIG27's GSh-6-30 gun's automatic modes - does it mean it acquires movig targets and automatically locks onto them? If so does the MI24s gun (whatever it is) do the same using its ComPass? I know its rockets are unguided though.
The PrNK-23 system does offer a limited degree of target tracking capability once a target is manually selected by the pilot when in the automatic gun mode. The system cannot automatically prioritise and track multiple targets primarily because the MiG-27D does not possess a conventional planar radar antenna. Once a target is cued using the piper the PrNK-23 tracks the target using the Kylon-PM laser rangefinder - which broadly has the following limits +/- 60deg in azimuth by +/- 20deg vertically. The PrNK-23 system measures several variables like the aircraft's heading, altitude, true ground speed, angle of attack, bank and pitch angle - data taken from the inertial navigation system (INS), data from the central aerodynamic unit (the device that converts analogue dynamic and static pressure data into digital values) as well as data from the Kylon-PM laser rangefinder/designator. The data is processed by the Orbita 10-15-23M digital computer and presented via the S-17VG-1 on to the HUD to show the moving target and impact point of a round from the GSh-6-30 cannon.
The Mi-24V uses its 12.7mm YakB four-barrelled machine gun slightly differently to the way the MiG-27D uses its GSh-6-30 cannon. The gun, mounted on a remote controlled USPU-24 powered chin turrent (movable +/-120 deg in azimuth and +20 and -40 degress in the vertical) is slaved to a KPS-53AV optical sight on a rotate able column in front of the weapons-system operator's seat. Once again the pilot has to manually designate the target and track it using the KPS-53AV optical sight via the USPU-24 powered chin turret. The sight is integrated to an analogue processor that is interfaced to the air-pressure and angle-of-attack sensors. The processor calculates corrections for helicopter and target movement, as well as ballistics of the gun. The optical sight measures the distance to the target once its selected by the pilot.
The CoMPASS IV on SLAF Mi-24V's fulfils a different role to the KPS-53AV optical sight /12.7mm YakB gun combination. The CoMPASS IV sensor is an all weather day/night FLIR system compared to the KPS-53A FLIR/LLTV sensor of the Raduga-F fire-control system, and has a lot more additional targeting capabilities. The CoMPASS IV can however automatically track and prioritise a target without the pilot doing so. The CoMPASS IV uses an advanced version of the centroid/edge-tracking method. Once the target is prioritised and selected the 12.7mm gun automatically tracks it via the remotely controlled USPU-24 powered chin turrent.
Regarding Mr. Mig29, I reckon he's giving a demo on how to use the latest HISAR SLAF got
The SLAF has not received any additional SAR aircraft..
CR843 the SLAF Beech HISAR has been grounded for the last 2 months pending immediate critical repairs to its SAR radar and associated electronics. The Beech SIGINT (CR842) has not faired any better either, it to is on the ground pending semi/critical maintenance on its electronic systems..
However these assets should be air worthy in a couple of months..
I know SLA uses the Raytheon AN/TPQ 36 radar plots for counter battery fire. Any idea how they work?
Like you said Ms. Su33 the AN/TPQ-36 Firefinder uses a phased array radar to track the projectile munition through its initial linear upward trajectory prior to reaching apogee. The radar pings the target several hundred times a minute, measuring the projectiles velocity, angle of attack, heading and RCS (radar cross-section). The onboard tracking software analyzes the track data and then extrapolates the round's point of origin. This calculated point of origin is then reported to the operator with northing and easting map coordinates, thus allowing friendly artillery to direct counterbattery fire towards the enemy artillery.
A key element when employing Firefinder is to ensure adequate visibility of the radar's target (i.e., the enemy projectile). The Firefinder must observe a significant portion of the threat projectile's upward trajectory to accurately determine the weapon's aim point if the operator is to guarantee a low CEP. The radar beams also must be positioned above the intervening terrain to maximize elevation coverage and minimize ground clutter returns.
Once Firefinder acquires an incoming projectile, determines their origin, extrapolates the point of impact and reports these acquisitions to the operator whether or not they violate a zone. If the acquisition violates an established zone, the radar sends a fire mission to the supported FCE (Fire Control elements) using an FM;CFF (fire mission; call-for-fire) message format. If the acquisition does not violate an established zone, the radar generates an intelligence report using the ATI;CDR (artillery targeting intelligence; coordinates report) format.
Firefinder is limited to 99 acquisitions in the buffer. Based on this, Firefinder includes a location-averaging function that can be activated by the radar operator. With location averaging enabled, the Firefinder computer averages all detections from a 238m radius and converts that into a single average grid cell.
Hope this answers your questions :o)
p.s. I don't work for Raytheon, I don't know where members In this forum got the idea that I did..
Mr. b2spirit
Is there any possibility of mounting more of those canons in other hard points that are designed to carry rocket pods and bombs.....other than direct tactical air strikes....the cannon can be more useful in Close Air Support Roles. Am i correct mig-29? Specially in taking out enemy mortar units and troop reinforcements...i guess they are cheaper than employing bombs.
The MiG-27 has the option of carrying 2 types of podded guns on its starboard and port outboard wing glove pylons. The SPPU-22 - twin 23mm cannon pack and SPPU-6 - 23mm 6 barrelled rotary cannon.
The SPPU-22 carries one GSh-23 cannon with 260 rounds and permits adjustment in elevation only, from 0deg to -30deg. The SPPU-6 for the GSh-6-23 rotary cannon with 500 rounds permits 0deg to -45deg elevation and +/- 45deg in azimuth.
The SPPU-22 and SPPU-6 are used in the ground attack role and the elevation is varied by computer according to a programme set by the pilot which requires the plane to fly at a certain height and speed to maintain accuracy. Once the gun is on target, the computer theoretically keeps it there as the plane flies straight and level. The pods can also be fitted to point and fire backwards as well as forwards. When mounted to fire backwards It seems these pods are used in flak suppression; some spray the ground positions on the in-run and the rear-facing ones spray them again as they are climbing away.
can you explain capabilities of the fire finder RADARS that our Army is using. I think we bought them from Raytheon
see my reply to Ms. Su33.
Hope this answers your questions.
Mr. Rataperata
and I saw on Divaina that 2 of 4 Mig 27 arrived yesterday .. but I thought that they were already arrived long time ago..
if Mig29 can confirm this ..
and when we gona get the other 2 Migs...?cause according to him these Jets were prepared to long time ago.. so they should be here.. BTW any of yours know that how do they brought them to SL .. are they shipped from Ukraine..???
and I still have no info about the remaining 3 Mig 27 ...
The MiG's came on a leased Russian An-124 in a dismantled state. The aircraft are currently being re-assembled in Sri Lanka by Ukrainian Engineers and Technicians.
The 4 aircraft should be airworthy soon.
The 3 older SLAF MiG-27D'S will be shipped to the Ukraine very soon.. They should be back sometime in April/May at the earliest.
hope this helps
Unfortunately this is all I can contribute for today..
I shall join the present discussion on this thread and reveal other details and developments with the SLAF on a later date when time permits..
Take care everyone.. Edited By - Mig-29C - 2 Feb 2007 10:13:20 GMT |
|