Cheap Aircraft for Resistance Fighters
Cheap Aircraft for Resistance Fighters
I could be asking a dumb question.
Could a air superiority fighter of any nation, or air defence system take out an expertly flown extra 300. That is, if an Extra 300 got bounced by an F16 or similiar, could the high g turning ability of the Extra keep it in the fight long enough to hold off an attack by a jet fighter.
There is a video of a Pucara (correction OV10 Bronco) beign taken on by an F16 and it manage to hold out for quite some time before being shot down due to it's low speed and tight turn radius. There is also a story of several raids on airfields by biplanes I think in the Vietnam war that proved near imposible to engage due to the sub 100kt speed and turning ability, especialy at tree top height. Are small composite aircraft harder to see with radar?
Thus, I was wondering of the viability of designing a version of an Extra type aircraft with 2 x fuselage mounted light machine guns. Something like .303 with 400 rpg. yes it would reguire some type of interupter mechanism. A 2 seat Extra 300NG with the 2 guns under the belly and ammunition storeage in the front cockpit seems to be the go.They wouldn't win a war but could prove an extreme irratitant and destraction to a conventional military force. Especially if there were hundreds of them.
The next size up I was immagining would be a modern day carbon fibre Mosquito with 2000 hp Pt6's and 4 x .50 Cal machine guns.
Thoughts anyone.
Could a air superiority fighter of any nation, or air defence system take out an expertly flown extra 300. That is, if an Extra 300 got bounced by an F16 or similiar, could the high g turning ability of the Extra keep it in the fight long enough to hold off an attack by a jet fighter.
There is a video of a Pucara (correction OV10 Bronco) beign taken on by an F16 and it manage to hold out for quite some time before being shot down due to it's low speed and tight turn radius. There is also a story of several raids on airfields by biplanes I think in the Vietnam war that proved near imposible to engage due to the sub 100kt speed and turning ability, especialy at tree top height. Are small composite aircraft harder to see with radar?
Thus, I was wondering of the viability of designing a version of an Extra type aircraft with 2 x fuselage mounted light machine guns. Something like .303 with 400 rpg. yes it would reguire some type of interupter mechanism. A 2 seat Extra 300NG with the 2 guns under the belly and ammunition storeage in the front cockpit seems to be the go.They wouldn't win a war but could prove an extreme irratitant and destraction to a conventional military force. Especially if there were hundreds of them.
The next size up I was immagining would be a modern day carbon fibre Mosquito with 2000 hp Pt6's and 4 x .50 Cal machine guns.
Thoughts anyone.
Last edited by nomorecatering; 24th Feb 2022 at 11:49.
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
You either have a helmet mounted sight for firing a missile over your shoulder or you extend out of the fight, gain energy then turn back in and blow them away with a missile while they fly pretty circles in the air.
Modern short range missiles can pull far more G than any aircraft and don’t need a tail aspect for a lock.
Modern short range missiles can pull far more G than any aircraft and don’t need a tail aspect for a lock.
But would a radar guided missle detect a flea sized Extra, especially if it was flying between trees, can a heat seeking missle detct the heat signature from the exhaust of a piston engine? if a high speed fighter can do a turn to put it out of the turning capability of missle, I would have thought an unlimited category aerobatic aircraft with it's ability do literaly square turns would be even harder. I admit my knowledge of missle is of the Vietnam era however. I stand to be corrected.
Most of my knowledge comes from articles such as this.
http://www.ausairpower.net/TE-Evading-Missiles.html
This clip explains what I mean about maneouverability of these aircraft.at low level. I cant imagine any missle flying at 2000 mph matching the directional/angle changes of these aircraft.
Most of my knowledge comes from articles such as this.
http://www.ausairpower.net/TE-Evading-Missiles.html
This clip explains what I mean about maneouverability of these aircraft.at low level. I cant imagine any missle flying at 2000 mph matching the directional/angle changes of these aircraft.
Last edited by nomorecatering; 24th Feb 2022 at 12:16.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 32,868
Received 2,817 Likes
on
1,200 Posts
They tried the Lightning against a Spitfire but a Lightning isn’t a F16 in any sense.
https://theaviationgeekclub.com/ligh...the-two-types/
https://theaviationgeekclub.com/ligh...the-two-types/
OP,
What is the mission of the aircraft?
Light ground support?
Air superiority?
Something like a Cessna Caravan could be used for extraction of wounded or ground support.
Small turbine aircraft are being sold to 3rd world dictatorships for ground support and suppression roles.
To “fight” a fighter with a light civilian aircraft and you’d need to catch them on the ramp or taxing with a weapon load.
That’s essentially a suicide mission.
A light machine gun on a light aircraft is not going to have the range to do anything or the ballistics. A shoulder fired missile strapped to the fuselage of a light twin will work…once.
My suggestion would be to use a Piper Seminole as they’re no good for anything else anyway
Honestly you’ll be better off using drones, weaponizing commercially available or home building simple one way attack drones like the Houthi rebels in Yemen are currently doing.
What is the mission of the aircraft?
Light ground support?
Air superiority?
Something like a Cessna Caravan could be used for extraction of wounded or ground support.
Small turbine aircraft are being sold to 3rd world dictatorships for ground support and suppression roles.
To “fight” a fighter with a light civilian aircraft and you’d need to catch them on the ramp or taxing with a weapon load.
That’s essentially a suicide mission.
A light machine gun on a light aircraft is not going to have the range to do anything or the ballistics. A shoulder fired missile strapped to the fuselage of a light twin will work…once.
My suggestion would be to use a Piper Seminole as they’re no good for anything else anyway
Honestly you’ll be better off using drones, weaponizing commercially available or home building simple one way attack drones like the Houthi rebels in Yemen are currently doing.
Last edited by B2N2; 24th Feb 2022 at 13:31.
Aircraft are the very last thing that insurgents need - aircraft need bases, lots of expensive repair (even the cheapest aircraft) and skilled support. They're relatively easy to track and when you hit them a small amount of damage puts them or their bases out of action
AFAIK no real insurgent air force has existed other than as a small irritant. Even naval actions is tough although the Tamil Tigers caused the Sri Lankan Govt a lot of pain that way
AFAIK no real insurgent air force has existed other than as a small irritant. Even naval actions is tough although the Tamil Tigers caused the Sri Lankan Govt a lot of pain that way
We are about to see the effectiveness of shoulder launched missiles against tanks and aircraft in the Ukraine. Hoping they're really good and the Ukes have lots in the right hands
NMC
What exactly would be the point of these aircraft? Just to get airborne and not get killed?
Whilst they would be tricky to shoot with an A-A gun if they were doing their best Aeros display that is not really how BFM works. Especially not with missiles and a little thing called tactics.
Also, the kind of gun that an Extra could carry would be pretty puny and not really worth the hassle. You’d be surprised at how A-G gunnery can be very up close and personal and the kind of calibre you’re talking about with it’s associated range would leave the aircraft open to all manner of ground fire.
So basically if you just wanted to take off and buzz around seeing how long you could live I think you’d be better off finding a better hobby.
Finally, as has already been mentioned, if all you want to do is saturate the sky, use drones.
BV
Whilst they would be tricky to shoot with an A-A gun if they were doing their best Aeros display that is not really how BFM works. Especially not with missiles and a little thing called tactics.
Also, the kind of gun that an Extra could carry would be pretty puny and not really worth the hassle. You’d be surprised at how A-G gunnery can be very up close and personal and the kind of calibre you’re talking about with it’s associated range would leave the aircraft open to all manner of ground fire.
So basically if you just wanted to take off and buzz around seeing how long you could live I think you’d be better off finding a better hobby.
Finally, as has already been mentioned, if all you want to do is saturate the sky, use drones.
BV
What was the question?
I’m not sure the example of Malmo MFI-9s from 1968 really answers the original question.
An Extra 300 could only really wield such a small calibre weapon that you may as well just give the weapon to the infantry.
BV
An Extra 300 could only really wield such a small calibre weapon that you may as well just give the weapon to the infantry.
BV
"Google 'Malmo MFI-9' where armed light aircraft similar to Bolkows were used in the Biafran war in 1968.."
Good fro PR but made not the slightest difference to the war or it's outcome
Good fro PR but made not the slightest difference to the war or it's outcome
But would a radar guided missle detect a flea sized Extra, especially if it was flying between trees, can a heat seeking missle detct the heat signature from the exhaust of a piston engine? if a high speed fighter can do a turn to put it out of the turning capability of missle, I would have thought an unlimited category aerobatic aircraft with it's ability do literaly square turns would be even harder. I admit my knowledge of missle is of the Vietnam era however. I stand to be corrected.
Most of my knowledge comes from articles such as this.
Evading the Guided Missile
This clip explains what I mean about maneouverability of these aircraft.at low level. I cant imagine any missle flying at 2000 mph matching the directional/angle changes of these aircraft.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xvvvv51duVE
Most of my knowledge comes from articles such as this.
Evading the Guided Missile
This clip explains what I mean about maneouverability of these aircraft.at low level. I cant imagine any missle flying at 2000 mph matching the directional/angle changes of these aircraft.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xvvvv51duVE
No high G turns if you want to keep the wings on…
NMC
You obviously have little knowledge of modern short range air to air missiles. Have a watch of this video to update your thinking that seems to be based around 1970s/1980s Sidewinder tech:
Also, putting anything like a Stinger onto an Extra 300 would make it handle like a dog (very draggy) and as others have said the puny machine gun you could fit (with significant airframe strengthening required) would further reduce the performance.
Anyone who has done modern fighter affiliation against a tactical mobility aircraft or helicopter knows the real truth. Oddly enough it’s normally only the crews of these aircraft that puff their chests out to say that they are hard to shoot down - some call that living in denial, right up to the point where it happens for real and there is a smoking heap on the ground.
You obviously have little knowledge of modern short range air to air missiles. Have a watch of this video to update your thinking that seems to be based around 1970s/1980s Sidewinder tech:
Also, putting anything like a Stinger onto an Extra 300 would make it handle like a dog (very draggy) and as others have said the puny machine gun you could fit (with significant airframe strengthening required) would further reduce the performance.
Anyone who has done modern fighter affiliation against a tactical mobility aircraft or helicopter knows the real truth. Oddly enough it’s normally only the crews of these aircraft that puff their chests out to say that they are hard to shoot down - some call that living in denial, right up to the point where it happens for real and there is a smoking heap on the ground.
Maybe this might be the go then.
I'm not talking about a war winner, or an A-10 tank buster, or even battle space domination. You are correct, if it was about 1v1 FCM against a gen 4 fighter, the result is set in stone. What I'm talking about is harrasment. The element of surprise. Get bounced, it's game over. Possible suicide missions....absolutely.
I've worked on farms where ag aircraft are operating. They are down in the weeds, less than 30 feet agl. behind the trees. Sometimes you can hear them, but you can't see them until they are on top of you. I have backseated on an AT-802. The pilot demonstrated to me what ultra low flying is like. Under power lines, under overhanging tree branches, between trees. You don't understand what it's like until you do it for real.
During WW2, the French Resistance used assassins on bicycles. Pedalling down a street they would spot their mark, whip out a pistol and a single shot hopefully to the head then escape by using crowds and back alleys for cover. By the accounts I have read, it didn't have any material effect, but it did rattle the Germans quite significantly.
War is not won by a single heroic act (except in US war movies - they always have to have the singular hero).
War is won by multiple players nawing away, little bite by little bite.
I'm not talking about a war winner, or an A-10 tank buster, or even battle space domination. You are correct, if it was about 1v1 FCM against a gen 4 fighter, the result is set in stone. What I'm talking about is harrasment. The element of surprise. Get bounced, it's game over. Possible suicide missions....absolutely.
I've worked on farms where ag aircraft are operating. They are down in the weeds, less than 30 feet agl. behind the trees. Sometimes you can hear them, but you can't see them until they are on top of you. I have backseated on an AT-802. The pilot demonstrated to me what ultra low flying is like. Under power lines, under overhanging tree branches, between trees. You don't understand what it's like until you do it for real.
During WW2, the French Resistance used assassins on bicycles. Pedalling down a street they would spot their mark, whip out a pistol and a single shot hopefully to the head then escape by using crowds and back alleys for cover. By the accounts I have read, it didn't have any material effect, but it did rattle the Germans quite significantly.
War is not won by a single heroic act (except in US war movies - they always have to have the singular hero).
War is won by multiple players nawing away, little bite by little bite.
Ok, what is rhe definition of cheap? The cost of the weapons systems on the above AT-802 are probably way above the airframe price. The Super Tucano having a price tag too.
As the Tamils discovered you can get an awful lot of suicide bombers for the price of a modern piece of hi-tech kit
Air Defence 1.01 continues…
Flying at 30ft isn’t going to save you, neither is hiding behind a tree line (unless you land as you have to come out eventually!). A modern look down-shoot down multimode pulse Doppler radar will detect and then support a missile to target even at 30ft. The modern air to air missile is going to come down from above, so your so-called ‘hiding’ at 30ft just won’t work.
There is an old story called Occam’s Razor, which applies to your hair brained idea. There are lots of folks that are subject matter experts on air defence that look for an advantage in the next air to air war, if your idea was goer then we would have seen it already. There are so many flaws in your plan of using an Extra 300 or crop spraying aircraft that I simply run out of the energy to point them all out (much of which has been said already). If it were so obvious then every Air Force would be fielding cheap aircraft to outfox their adversaries - oddly enough they aren’t!
Flying at 30ft isn’t going to save you, neither is hiding behind a tree line (unless you land as you have to come out eventually!). A modern look down-shoot down multimode pulse Doppler radar will detect and then support a missile to target even at 30ft. The modern air to air missile is going to come down from above, so your so-called ‘hiding’ at 30ft just won’t work.
There is an old story called Occam’s Razor, which applies to your hair brained idea. There are lots of folks that are subject matter experts on air defence that look for an advantage in the next air to air war, if your idea was goer then we would have seen it already. There are so many flaws in your plan of using an Extra 300 or crop spraying aircraft that I simply run out of the energy to point them all out (much of which has been said already). If it were so obvious then every Air Force would be fielding cheap aircraft to outfox their adversaries - oddly enough they aren’t!