The aircraft showed the upper limit of speed and the use of piston engines on fighters and on aircraft in general.

The Do-335 is a heavy German fighter-bomber from World War II, which was quite often referred to in various sources as Pfeil (German: Arrow). The Do-335 "Pfeil" was the fastest piston aircraft in history. This aircraft had a more than revolutionary design, although such an arrangement using two tandem engines was not completely new. By the end of the war, only 37 of these aircraft were assembled in Germany; they did not take active part in hostilities.

If it were possible to hold a competition for the most unusual aircraft designed during the Second World War, the Dornier Do-335 “Pfeil” would have an excellent chance of taking one of the prizes. Unlike most of its competitors, which, despite their advanced designs, did not have any noticeable combat value, the Do-335 was a very successful combat aircraft. The Do-335 "Pfeil" was one of the fastest piston-engined fighters in the entire history of aviation. If German designers managed to solve all the existing technical problems that plagued the fighter at all stages of its development and organize its mass production, then the Luftwaffe would have in its hands a machine of exceptional quality, capable of effectively resisting any Allied aircraft. Therefore, there is nothing strange in the fact that after the end of World War II, the Allies were very active in testing the Do-335 aircraft that fell into their hands. But rapid development jet aviation quickly made the Do-335 an irrelevant combat aircraft.

The design of this fighter was based on a tandem engine arrangement, which K. Dornier patented back in 1937. In accordance with the scheme of the famous German aircraft designer, in addition to the traditional front engine with a pulling propeller, a second engine with an extended shaft and a pushing propeller was located behind the cockpit. The pushing propeller was located behind the tail.

The Do-335 "Pfeil" was a multi-role aircraft, it was planned to be used as a heavy day fighter, high-speed bomber (with a bomb load of 500-1000 kg), night fighter (single and two-seat), reconnaissance aircraft and training aircraft. Do.335 was already the 3rd variation on the theme of using 2 engines on the line of symmetry of the aircraft - the rear engine drove the tail rotor located behind the cruciform tail. This unusual propeller position was not new; it was used back in 1911 by Tatin-Polhan in the Aero-Torpilla. But it is worth noting the fact that before the advent of the Do-335, no one had ever used such an arrangement of the rear propeller together with the use of an ordinary pulling propeller at the front, which actually ensured the Strela’s uniqueness among all other combat vehicles.

By the end of 1942, after the design was completed, preparations for the production of a new aircraft began in Germany. By the time the Do-335-V1 made its first flight, which took place on October 26, 1943, the Dornier company received an order for 14 prototype aircraft, 10 pre-production aircraft - Do-335a-0, 11 production aircraft - Do-335A-1 in the variant single-seat fighter-bombers, as well as 3 Do-335a-10 and -12 – two-seat training aircraft. After preliminary assessment aircraft controllability in Oberpapenhofen, the first machine was transferred to the test center in Rechlin, where it was to undergo official tests. Despite the fact that the plane experienced some “wobble” while flying at high speeds, the pilots from Rechlin were delighted with the flight qualities of the Do-335 fighter. German pilots noted the good maneuverability and especially the aircraft's acceleration characteristics and turning radius. The Do-335 could fly with one working front or rear propeller. If the nose engine was turned off, the aircraft's speed still remained impressive - up to 557 km/h.

The Do-335 was a low-wing aircraft of all-metal construction. The aircraft's wing was trapezoidal in shape, the wing sweep along the leading edge was 13°. The wing was equipped with one spar and working skin. The wing of the aircraft also contained compressed air cylinders and an armored hydraulic accumulator. The aircraft had a cruciform tail with a supporting stabilizer, with lower and upper fins. The aircraft's tail structure was all-metal, with the exception of the leading edges, which were made of wood and included a radio antenna.

The fuselage of the Do-335 fighter consisted of 4 parts: a pilot's cabin with a compartment for retracting the nose landing gear, a compartment with fuel tanks (in the two-seat version there was also a radio operator's cabin), a rear engine compartment and a tail section.

In the cockpit, some of the instruments were located on the left and right instrument consoles, each 300 mm wide. every. On the right panel there was an alarm panel for the operation of engine units and a control panel for the FuG-16 radio station. The pilot's emergency ejection lever was also located here. When this lever was activated, the upper fin and rear propeller were shot off, so that the pilot would not receive damage when colliding with them. On the left console there were control devices for the operation of the fuel inlet pump with a switch lever for the rear and front engines. The main instrument panel in front of the pilot's face housed flight instruments, which also made it possible to perform a blind flight.

Forward and downward visibility from the cockpit was provided at an angle of -5° to the horizontal; visibility to the sides was quite good, since the cockpit was located at the leading edge of the wing. On later fighters, visibility was further improved through the use of canopy blisters. Forward visibility, which was impaired by the curvilinearity of the visor panels, was planned to be improved in the future by installing flat glass. There was a gas tank behind the cockpit; its capacity in the two-seat version was reduced by the radio operator's cabin. Under the fuel tank there was a bomb bay, in which the aircraft in the night fighter version (single or double) had an additional gas tank.

The metal wing of the aircraft was trapezoidal in shape with rounded tips and consisted of 2 parts. Access to the wing joints was provided through special small hatches. The main wing spar had a box-shaped section. Special knives were mounted on the leading edge of the wing of the Do-335 fighter for cutting the cables of barrage balloons. At the leading edge of each of the two halves of the wing there was a protected fuel tank 3 meters long, which was installed in place through a special narrow long hatch located in the lower surface of the wing.

On the leading edge of the wing it is possible to install FuG-220 radar antennas; therefore, the leading edge of the wing was made of wood. A de-icer was not installed on it, although it was planned to install an electric defroster manufactured by Siemens or AEG. It was also planned to install a wing with a laminar profile on the fighter.

The plane's cruciform tail unit was unusual. The stabilizer and keel were of a two-spar design; the lower keel of the aircraft was equipped with a safety buffer, which was equipped with a shock absorber. Elevator control is rigid. The upper half of the vertical tail unit could be dropped in an emergency (when the pilot was thrown out of the cockpit). The landing gear of the aircraft was three-wheeled, the nose landing gear was retracted into the front part of the fuselage, back. And the main landing gear wheels retracted into the wing, but not completely. Therefore, the flaps covering the wheels of the main landing gear had knockouts.

In September 1944, Germany managed to form a special unit of Erprobungskommando 335, main task which was testing the Do-335 in combat conditions. Several Do-335A-0 and possibly Do-335A-1 aircraft were transferred to this unit. The main task of the pilots was to develop tactics for the effective use of the aircraft in the role of a high-speed bomber, interceptor and reconnaissance aircraft. Captain Alfon Mayer was appointed commander of this detachment. On October 26, 1944, a special RLM order was sent to numerous anti-aircraft batteries of the Reich, in which anti-aircraft gunners were warned about the appearance of a new German aircraft in the sky. This order revealed the characteristic features of the new aircraft: a tandem arrangement of engines and a cruciform tail unit.

It is worth noting that aircraft from Erprobungskommando 335 did not come into direct contact with Allied aircraft very often. Only a few such cases have been reported. According to unconfirmed information, in the fall of 1944, one Do-335 aircraft was damaged by enemy fighters and made an emergency landing near Reims. The loss of one Do-335 is also confirmed. On December 24, 1944, during a flight from Oberpfaffenhofen to Rechlin, a Do-335A-08 was lost; the plane disappeared in the Donefeld area. The pilot of this aircraft died, but the cause of the plane's death remained unknown. This could be either a meeting with enemy aircraft or a mechanical failure. Before the end of the war, two more pilots became victims of the aircraft, whose fighters crashed in March and April 1945.

In mid-April 1945, pilots of No. 3 Squadron RAF, flying Tempest fighters, were able to intercept a Do-335 Pfeil over the Elbe. The plane that was leaving them high speed, was first discovered by the French ace Pierre Closterman. Later, pilots from the 325th Fighter Group of the 15th US Air Force, who flew Mustang fighters, were able to spot him. In both of these cases, the German car was easily able to break away from its pursuers. One of the Do-335 aircraft captured by the Allies had signs of air victories won on the skin, but it is highly likely that these victories were won by the pilot even before he moved into the cockpit of this aircraft.

Flight characteristics of Do-335a-1:

Dimensions: wingspan – 13.8 m, length – 13.83 m, height – 5.0 m, wing area – 37.3 sq. m.

The empty weight of the aircraft is 7266 kg, take-off weight is 9600 kg.

Engine type – 2 PD Daimler-Benz DB 603E-1, power 2x1800 (1900) hp.

Maximum speed – 785 km/h, cruising speed – 682 km/h.

Practical flight range at cruising speed is 1390 km.

Service ceiling – 11,400 m.

Crew – 1 person.

Armament: 1x30-mm MK-103 cannon (70 rounds) and 2x15-mm MG-151 cannon (200 rounds per barrel)

Combat load: 1x500-kg SD-500 or RS-500 aerial bomb, 2x250-kg SC-250 aerial bomb in the bomb bay and 2x250-kg SC-250 aerial bomb on an external sling.

At the beginning of 1978, in Brazil, Embraer began designing an aircraft that later became known as EMB-312 Tucano. According to the developers, the main purpose of the Tucano was to train pilots, as well as be used as a light attack aircraft and patrol aircraft in “counterguerrilla” operations in the absence of opposition from fighters and modern air defense systems.

Initially, at the design stage, the task was set to minimize costs during operation and maintenance of the aircraft. Subsequently, "Tucano" became business card Brazilian aviation industry. Being one of the most successful and commercially successful modern combat training aircraft, it has received well-deserved recognition both in Brazil and abroad. It was this aircraft that in many ways became a kind of standard for the creators of other trainers and light multi-role combat aircraft with a turboprop engine.

The Tucano is built according to a normal aerodynamic design with a low-mounted straight wing and looks like piston fighters of the Second World War. Its “heart” is the Pratt-Whitney Canada RT6A-25C turboprop engine with a power of 750 hp. with three-blade reversible propeller automatically changing step. Fuel tanks with internal anti-knock coating with a total capacity of 694 liters are located in the wing.

The weapons were placed on four underwing pylons (up to 250 kg per pylon). These could be four hanging containers with 7.62 mm machine guns (ammunition capacity - 500 rounds per barrel), bombs, 70 mm NAR units.

The rational layout predetermined the success of the Tucano; the aircraft turned out to be quite light - its dry weight does not exceed 1870 kg. Normal take-off weight is 2550 kg, maximum - 3195 kg. The aircraft without external suspensions developed a maximum speed of 448 km/h and a cruising speed of 411 km/h. Practical flight range is 1840 km. The service life of the airframe of the EMB-312F modification is 10,000 hours.

Embraer EMB-312 Tucano

The first flight of the Tucano took place in August 1980, and in September 1983, production aircraft began to arrive in combat units of the Brazilian Air Force. Initially, the Brazilian Air Force ordered 133 aircraft. Middle Eastern countries – Egypt and Iraq – have shown interest in the turboprop jet trainer. According to the concluded contracts, 54 aircraft were delivered to Egypt and 80 to Iraq. The Tucano was assembled for buyers from the Middle East in Egypt at the AOI company.

Following Egypt and Iraq, EMB-312 was purchased for their air forces by: Argentina (30 aircraft), Venezuela (31), Honduras (12), Iran (25), Colombia (14), Paraguay (6), Peru (30). In 1993, the French Air Force purchased 50 EMB-312F aircraft. The training system for the French Air Force has an airframe with a fatigue life increased to 10,000 hours, French avionics, as well as a modified fuel refueling system, anti-icing system for the propeller and canopy.

In the second half of the 80s, the British company Short acquired a license to assemble the Tucano, which became major success Brazilian company Embraer. The modification for the Royal Air Force is distinguished by a more powerful Allied Signal TPE331 engine (1 x 1100 hp). Since July 1987, Short has built a total of 130 Tucanos, designated S312 in the UK.

Some buyers, such as Venezuela, purchased the aircraft in two versions: the T-27 training aircraft and the AT-27 light two-seat attack aircraft. Unlike training vehicles, the assault modification was sent to combat squadrons and had more advanced sights and light armor protection for the cockpit.

In total, more than 600 aircraft were built until 1996. In a number of countries, in addition to pilot training and training flights, Tucanos took an active part in hostilities. The aircraft was used to carry out bombing and assault strikes in local interstate conflicts, fought irregular rebel formations, carried out patrol and reconnaissance flights and suppressed drug trafficking. “Tucano” turned out to be quite good in the role of an interceptor fighter in the fight against the delivery of cocaine; it has forcibly landed and shot down a light aircraft with a cargo of drugs.

During the Iran-Iraq War, Tucanos operating at low altitudes carried out bombing attacks and were used as reconnaissance spotters. Quite effective actions of these light turboprop attack aircraft were noted during the border conflict between Peru and Ecuador in 1995 on the Senepa River. With precise strikes, the Tucano NAR supported the advance of the Peruvian commandos in the jungle. Using phosphorus ammunition, which produces white smoke clearly visible from the air, they “marked” targets for other, faster and heavier combat aircraft. Thanks to air superiority in this war, Peru managed to gain an upper hand over Ecuador.

The Venezuelan Air Force lost the most Tucanos in battle. During the anti-government military mutiny in November 1992, AT-27 rebels bombed and fired unguided missiles at troops remaining loyal to the president. At the same time, several light attack aircraft were shot down over Caracas by fire from 12.7 mm anti-aircraft machine guns and F-16A fighters.

Serial construction began in 2003 EMB-314 Super Tucano. The aircraft received a Pratt-Whitney Canada PT6A-68C engine with a power of 1600 hp. and a reinforced airframe. The empty weight of the aircraft increased to 2420 kg, and the length increased by almost one and a half meters. Normal take-off weight is 2890 kg, and maximum take-off weight is 3210 kg. The maximum speed increased to 557 km/h. The airframe's service life is 18,000 hours.

The aircraft is designed to operate in conditions of high temperature and humidity, has good takeoff and landing characteristics, which allows it to be based on unpaved runways of limited length. The cockpit is covered with Kevlar armor, providing protection from armor-piercing rifle bullets from a distance of 300 meters.

EMB-314 Super Tucano

The Super Tucano's armament became more powerful; built-in 12.7 mm machine guns with 200 rounds of ammunition per barrel appeared at the root of the wings. The combat load with a total weight of up to 1550 kg is placed on five suspension units; cannon and machine gun containers, unguided and guided missiles and bombs can be placed on them. To use guided weapons, a data display system is installed on the pilot’s helmet, integrated into the aircraft’s weapons control equipment. The system is based on the MIL-STD-553B digital bus and operates according to the HOTAS (Hand On Throttle and Stick) standard.

12.7 mm machine gun "Super Tucano"

During patrol flights of the first versions of the Tucano over the Amazon jungle, the need for special infrared reconnaissance and surveillance equipment was revealed, capable of identifying bases and camps of rebels and drug lords and recording their coordinates. The Super Tucano has several options for American and French-made reconnaissance containers, including a compact side-view radar. In total, the Brazilian Air Force ordered 99 aircraft. 66 aircraft have been ordered in the two-seat A-29B modification, the remaining 33 aircraft are single-seat A-29A.

Light single-seat attack aircraft A-29A Super Tucano

In addition to the combat training two-seat version, a purely attack single-seat version was created, designated A-29A. An additional 400-liter protected fuel tank is installed in the co-pilot's seat, which significantly increases the time spent in the air. According to information provided by the Embraer company, the single-seat Super Tucano with a search outboard container that detects thermal radiation, thanks to its increased flight range, has proven itself to be an excellent night fighter when intercepting light smugglers' aircraft. Tests have shown that it can also effectively combat helicopter gunships.

On June 3, 2009, there was a case of forced landing of a plane transporting drugs, which received wide publicity. Two Brazilian Super Tucanos intercepted a Cessna U206G transporting drugs from Bolivia. The smugglers' Cessna was intercepted in the Mori d'Oeste area, but its pilot disobeyed orders to follow the Brazilian Air Force planes. Only after warning bursts of 12.7 mm machine guns fired at the intruder aircraft did the Cessna land at Cacoal airport. 176 kg of cocaine were found on board.

The two-seat modification of the A-29B is equipped with various avionics and overhead containers necessary for monitoring the battlefield and using guided weapons. The two-seat light attack aircraft, due to the presence of a second crew member acting as a weapons operator and an observer pilot, turned out to be optimal for use in operations that require patrolling, moving into the strike phase. As a weapon carrier, the Super Tucano is used as part of the Amazon control system SIVAM (Sistema para Vigilancia de Amazonas), paired with EMB-145 reconnaissance aircraft.

As of 2014, more than 150 EMB-314 Super Tucano attack aircraft have logged more than 130,000 flight hours, including 18,000 hours in combat missions. According to the Embraer company, thanks to high maneuverability, low thermal signature and good survivability, the aircraft have proven themselves to be excellent during combat missions, and not a single A-29 has been lost to anti-aircraft fire. However, in a combat zone, Super Tucanos do not always perform strike functions; they are often used as reconnaissance and surveillance aircraft.

On August 5, 2011, the Brazilian armed forces launched Operation Agata on the border with Colombia. More than 3,000 military and police personnel, as well as 35 airplanes and helicopters, took part in it. The purpose of the operation was to suppress illegal timber extraction, wildlife trafficking, mining and drug trafficking. During Operation Super Tucano, several illegal runways were bombed with 500-pound bombs, rendering them unusable.

On September 15, 2011, Operation Agata 2 began in Brazil on the border with Uruguay, Argentina and Paraguay. During its course, Super Tucanos destroyed three airfields in the jungle and, together with F-5Tiger II fighters, intercepted 33 planes transporting drugs. Brazilian security forces seized 62 tons of drugs, made 3,000 arrests and seized more than 650 tons of weapons and explosives.

On November 2, 2011, Operation Agata-3 was launched. Its goal was to restore order on the border with Bolivia, Peru and Paraguay. The special operation was attended by 6,500 military and police officers, 10 boats, 200 cars and 70 aircraft. Agata 3 was the largest Brazilian special operation involving the army, navy and air force to combat illegal human trafficking and organized crime in the border area. In addition to the Super Tucano, AMX combat aircraft, F-5 Tiger II, AWACS aircraft and UAVs took part in the operation from the Air Force. On December 7, 2011, a Brazilian Ministry of Defense official reported that drug seizures had increased by 1,319% in the past six months compared to the previous period.

A-29B of the Colombian Air Force

Two-seat light attack aircraft A-29B were used very actively in Colombia. In January 2007, Colombian Air Force planes carried out a missile and bomb attack on a camp of the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia rebel movement. In 2011, operating in reconnaissance-combat pairs against strongholds of leftist rebels, Super Tucanos used Griffin laser-guided precision-guided munitions for the first time.

Thanks to advanced reconnaissance and strike systems supplied by the United States, the effectiveness of combat missions against insurgents and drug trafficking has increased significantly. As a result of airstrikes using precision-guided munitions, a number of rebel commanders were eliminated. In this regard, the activity of armed groups operating in the jungle has decreased significantly. Observers note that Colombian illegal groups have reduced the number of heavy weapons (mortars, machine guns and RPGs), as well as reduced numbers.

The Dominican Republic also uses its Super Tucanos to combat drug trafficking. After the country received its first turboprop aircraft in late 2009 and successfully intercepted several light aircraft carrying drugs, smugglers began to avoid flying into Dominican Republic airspace. Dominican A-29Bs were also reported to be patrolling over Haiti.

The US Special Operations Command expressed interest in purchasing the A-29B Super Tucano. In February 2013, the United States and the Brazilian Embraer entered into an agreement under which the Super Tucano, in a slightly modified form, will be built in the United States at the Embraer plant in Jacksonville, Florida. The task of these vehicles, equipped with advanced electronic equipment, will be air support for special units, reconnaissance and surveillance during anti-terrorist operations. Some of the aircraft built in the United States are intended as military assistance to Iraq and Afghanistan. In January 2016, the first four A-29Bs arrived in Afghanistan. Prior to this, Afghan pilots were trained in the United States at Moody Air Force Base in Georgia.

In 1978, five years earlier than the Brazilian Tucano, mass production of the Swiss Pilatus PC-7 began. In the same year, the first deliveries to Bolivia and Burma began. The two-seat training monoplane with a low wing and retractable tricycle landing gear was a success among flight and technical staff In total, more than 600 aircraft were built. The design of the Pilatus PC-7 has much in common with the piston Pilatus PC-3. It is symbolic that the Tucano and Pilatus used a very successful turboprop engine of the same model Pratt Whitney Canada PT6A-25C with a power of 750 hp

Pilatus PC-7

The RS-7 initially had a purely civilian purpose. Swiss legislation has serious restrictions regarding the supply of weapons abroad. Therefore, the Pilatuses received by foreign customers were modified on site in accordance with their own preferences and capabilities. The armed RS-7 can carry up to a ton of combat load on 6 external hardpoints. These can be machine gun containers, NAR, bombs and incendiary tanks. Before the advent of the EMB-312 Tucano, the Pilatus PC-7 had virtually no competitors and enjoyed enormous success in the global arms market. Everyone was happy, the Swiss sold it as a purely peaceful combat vehicle, and after minor modifications the customers received an effective and inexpensive anti-guerrilla attack aircraft.

Unlike the Brazilian firm Embraer, which advertises its aircraft as light counterinsurgency attack aircraft, the Swiss Pilatus Aircraft sells its aircraft as trainers and avoids mentioning their participation in combat operations. For this reason, despite the fact that the Pilatus career is full of combat episodes, the information in open sources a little about this. The largest armed conflict where they fought was the Iran-Iraq War. The Iraqi Air Force's Pilatus turboprops provided close air support to small units and corrected artillery fire. It is known that mustard gas was sprayed from several vehicles in areas densely populated by Kurds. The use of chemical weapons with the PC-7 caused the Swiss government to tighten control over the export of technical equipment, which in many ways opened the way for the Brazilian Tucano.

Beginning in 1982, Guatemalan Air Force PC-7s carried out strikes against rebel camps in the jungle. One plane was shot down by return fire from the ground, and at least one more, which received serious damage, had to be written off. Guatemalan Pilatus aircraft were actively used in combat missions until the end of the conflict in 1996.

The RS-7 of the Angolan Air Force played perhaps a key role in the liquidation of the Angolan opposition movement UNITA. Armed with light phosphorus bombs and NAR, turboprop attack aircraft were piloted by mercenary pilots of the South African company Executive Outcomes, invited by the Angolan government. Pilatus pilots, flying over the jungle at low altitudes, uncovered objects, and UNITA forward positions fired at them with NARs and marked them with phosphorus ammunition. After which the MiG-23 and the “bombers” An-26 and An-12 entered into action. This tactic greatly increased the accuracy and effectiveness of bombing.

In 1994, Mexican Air Force RS-7s launched missile attacks on Zapatista National Liberation Army (EZLN) camps. Human rights organizations provided evidence that many civilians were injured, and this ultimately became the reason for the ban imposed by the Swiss government on the sale of training aircraft to Mexico.

In the second half of the 1990s, the private military company Executive Outcomes used several PC-7s to provide close air support in combat operations in Sierra Leone.

The evolutionary development options for the Pilatus PC-7 were the Pilatus PC-9 and Pilatus PC-21. Serial production of the PC-9 began in 1985, with the Saudi Arabian Air Force being the first customer. The PC-9 was distinguished from the PC-7 by the Pratt-Whitney Canada RT6A-62 engine with a power of 1150 hp, a more durable airframe, improved aerodynamics and ejection seats. The combat load remained the same.

Pilatus PC-9

The RS-9 was ordered mainly by countries that had experience in operating the RS-7. Due to restrictions on sales to countries involved in armed conflicts or having problems with separatists, as well as competition with the Embraer EMB-312 Tucano, sales volumes of the Pilatus PC-9 did not exceed 250 units.

The Chadian Air Force PC-9s are known to have seen action on the border with Sudan, while the Myanmar Air Force has used them to fight insurgents. Aircraft of this type were also available in Angola, Oman and Saudi Arabia. These countries could most likely use the aircraft in combat as reconnaissance aircraft and light attack aircraft, but there are no reliable details.

The PC-9 is produced in the USA under license from Beechcraft Corporation under the designation T-6A Texan II. The American version differs from the RS-9 in the shape of the cockpit canopy. The number of CBs built in the USA many times exceeded the Swiss original and exceeded 700 units.

Several combat variants have been created on the basis of the T-6A. The T-6A Texan II NTA is designed to use unguided weapons - machine gun containers and self-propelled guns. The aircraft differs from the basic training device in the presence of hardpoints and a simple sight. The modernized T-6B Texan II, with the same armament, has a “glass cockpit” with LCD displays and more advanced sighting equipment. The T-6C Texan II has additional weapons hardpoints added and is intended for export sales. The T-6D Texan II, based on the T-6B and T-6C, is the latest modification of the multi-role training vehicle for the US Air Force.

AT-6B Wolverine

Designed specifically for strike duties, the AT-6B Wolverine is capable of carrying a wide range of guided aircraft weapons and various reconnaissance equipment on seven hardpoints. The AT-6B can be used for a variety of missions: close air support, advanced air guidance, precision strikes with guided munitions, surveillance and reconnaissance with the ability to accurately record coordinates, and transmit video and data streaming.

Compared to earlier versions, the AT-6B has a strengthened airframe structure and a number of additional technical solutions to increase survivability. The aircraft is equipped with a warning system missile attack, electronic warfare equipment control system ALQ-213, secure radio communication equipment ARC-210. Engine power increased to 1600 hp.

AT-6B Ground Maintenance

The AT-6B is reported to have performed better than the A-10 attack aircraft in a number of missions in close support of Special Forces.

T-6 turboprop aircraft of various modifications were supplied to Canada, Greece, Iraq, Israel, Mexico, Morocco, New Zealand and the UK. The widespread use of the T-6 as a light attack aircraft is hampered by its high price. So, without weapons, armor and reconnaissance and guidance equipment, the cost of the T-6 is about $500,000. The EMB-314 Super Tucano costs about the same, but with weapons. In addition, a number of sources mentioned that the Super Tucano is easier and cheaper to maintain. An indirect confirmation of this is that the US Special Operations Forces and the Afghan Air Force chose the Brazilian aircraft as a light attack aircraft.

Since 2008, customers have been supplied Pilatus PC-21. When creating the new training device, Pilatus designers relied on the experience gained from the PC family of machines. The management of the Swiss Pilatus Aircraft announced that the PC-21 was created in order to capture at least 50% of the global aircraft market. In reality, just over 130 aircraft have been sold to date.

Pilatus PC-21

Best aerodynamic performance, 1600 hp Pratt & Whitney Canada PT6A-68B engine. and the new wing provide the PC-21 with more high speed roll and maximum flight speed compared to the PC-9. The aircraft is equipped with a very advanced avionics and has the ability to adapt flight data to specific requirements.

In addition to the Swiss Air Force, the PC-21 was delivered to Australia, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Singapore and the UAE. As an option, the aircraft can accommodate five external hardpoints with a total load capacity of 1150 kg. However, in the current situation, the RS-21 cannot compete with Brazilian and American aircraft as a light “anti-guerrilla” attack aircraft.

PC-21 cabin

What all aircraft mentioned in this publication have in common is the use of very successful turboprop engines of various modifications of the Pratt & Whitney Canada PT6A family. Due to their weight and size characteristics, power and specific fuel consumption, these theater engines are ideally suited for training aircraft and light attack aircraft.

Historically, turboprop aircraft have been in great demand as “anti-insurgency” aircraft. Initially, they carried only unguided weapons: machine guns, rocket launchers, free-fall bombs and incendiary tanks. However, the desire to increase the accuracy of airstrikes, reduce vulnerability to fire from the ground and make light attack aircraft 24/7 has led to the fact that these vehicles began to carry very advanced and complex search and targeting systems and high-precision guided aircraft munitions. Thus, the cost of sighting and navigation equipment and weapons of the American AT-6B Wolverine is comparable to the cost of the aircraft itself.

Combat experience gained in a number of local conflicts and anti-terrorist campaigns has shown that a modern “anti-partisan” aircraft must have the following characteristics:

1. The maximum speed is no more than 700 km/h, and the operating speed is no more than 300-400 km/h. Otherwise, the pilot will experience a lack of time to aim, which, in general, became clear during the Second World War and was confirmed in Korea and Vietnam.

2. An “anti-partisan” aircraft must have armor protection for the cockpit and the most important parts from small arms and modern means countering MANPADS.

3. Depending on the assigned mission, the aircraft must be able to use a wide range of guided and unguided weapons, operate day and night, which requires a set of optoelectronic and radar mounted and built-in systems. When performing “anti-terrorist” missions and providing direct air support, a combat load weighing 1000-1500 kg is quite sufficient.

Comparing “Tucan-class” aircraft with the Su-25 and A-10 jet attack aircraft in service with the Air Force, it can be noted that at an “operating” speed of 500-600 km/h, there is often not enough time for visual target detection, taking into account the pilot’s reaction. Capable of carrying large " payload“Jet attack aircraft, created to fight armored vehicles in the “big war”, acting against various kinds of insurgents, often spend it irrationally.

Combat helicopters are better suited for performing “special missions”; their combat load is comparable to what turboprop attack aircraft can carry. But it should be recognized that due to its design features, both at a lower speed and at a higher cost, a helicopter is an easier target for anti-aircraft fire than a Toucan-class combat aircraft. In addition, the time spent by a turboprop attack aircraft in the target area, due to its significantly lower specific fuel consumption, can be many times longer than that of a helicopter.

An important factor, especially for third world countries, is that the cost per flight hour of a turboprop “counterinsurgency” attack aircraft can be several times less than that of a combat helicopter or jet combat aircraft when performing the same mission.

In various hotspots around the world, UAVs have been widely used over the past decade, giving rise to a veritable “drone boom.” On Voennoye Obozreniye, a number of comments have repeatedly expressed the opinion that light attack aircraft, or as they were even called “under-aircraft”, will in the near future be supplanted by remotely piloted ones aircraft. But reality demonstrates the exact opposite trend - interest in light, universal turboprop combat aircraft is only growing. Despite all their advantages, UAVs are more reconnaissance and surveillance vehicles and, in terms of their strike potential, cannot yet be compared with manned aircraft.

The experience of using American armed medium-class drones MQ-1 Predator and MQ-9 Reaper has demonstrated that these devices, capable of hanging in the air for hours, are excellent for one-time targeted strikes, such as eliminating militant leaders. But due to their limited carrying capacity, drones, as a rule, are not capable of providing effective fire support during special operations or “pressing fire” on attacking militants.

The undeniable advantages of RPVs compared to manned aircraft are lower operating costs and the absence of the risk of death or capture of pilots in the event of equipment failure or an aircraft or helicopter being hit by anti-aircraft weapons. However, in general, the situation with drones is not so good due to their high accident rate. According to data published in the American media, more than 70 RPVs were lost during the campaigns in Afghanistan and Iraq as of 2010. The cost of crashed and downed drones was almost $300 million. As a result, the money saved from lower operating costs was used to replenish the UAV fleet.

It turned out that the communication and data transmission channels of drones were vulnerable to interference and interception of the information they transmitted. The extremely lightweight design and the inability of attack and reconnaissance UAVs to perform sharp anti-aircraft maneuvers, combined with a narrow field of view of the camera and a significant response time to commands, makes them very vulnerable even in the event of minor damage. In addition, modern drones and control centers contain “critical technologies” and software that Americans are extremely reluctant to share. In this regard, the United States is offering its allies in the “anti-terrorism war” more flexible turboprop “anti-guerrilla” attack aircraft with a wide range of guided and unguided weapons.

Today, “Tucan-class” aircraft have competitors in the form of light combat aircraft created on the basis of agricultural aircraft. This once again confirms the increased interest in light attack aircraft. But in terms of the range of tasks they perform and flight data, “agricultural attack aircraft” cannot compete with “Tucan-class” aircraft.

to Favorites to Favorites from Favorites 7

The modern face of combat aviation is complex and expensive aviation systems. But along with such aircraft as the F-35 and PAK FA, there is now more and more talk about others - inexpensive but effective attack aircraft, created for “small” wars. For a modest appearance These machines contain great potential, and they do not plan to disappear from the arms market in the foreseeable future. Sukhoi Design Bureau design engineers Pavel Makarov and Andrei Stakhovich told the Zvezda TV channel about what future awaits them.

Small aircraft for big tasks

Oddly enough, in the modern world the prospects for turboprop attack aircraft are the highest, and this is dictated precisely by combat experience and demand on the international arms market. All countries of the world are interested in developing their own aviation, but many simply cannot afford 4th and especially 5th generation aircraft. At the same time, counter-guerrilla aviation makes it possible to simply and cheaply solve local problems of ensuring patrols, combating smuggling and terrorism.

It is important to note that currently no drone can fully solve these problems. Despite all the advantages, UAVs cannot be compared with manned aircraft in their strike potential. UAVs are reconnaissance and surveillance tools; they are excellent for one-time targeted strikes, but due to their limited carrying capacity, they are not capable of providing effective fire support during special operations or “pressing fire” on attacking militants, unlike counter-guerrilla aircraft.

In addition, as it turned out from the American experience of operating drones in the Middle East, the communication and data transmission channels of UAVs turned out to be vulnerable to interference and interception of the information they broadcast, and there are also problems with operators recognizing civilians and objects. In addition, the lightweight design and inability of attack and reconnaissance UAVs to perform sharp anti-aircraft maneuvers, combined with a narrow field of view of the camera and the presence of a delayed reaction to operator commands, make them very vulnerable even in the event of minor damage.

This, combined with a fairly high accident rate and high cost, makes the costs of replenishing the fleet of lost UAVs quite comparable to the costs of replenishing the fleet of manned aircraft.

It is also important that anti-guerrilla aircraft can be used as training aircraft, since they can perform all the tasks of a basic training aircraft for flight schools. Moreover, due to lower fuel consumption per flight hour, their cost will be lower than that of jet training aircraft.

From World War II to Vietnam

The concept of counter-guerrilla aviation was born in response to the demands of the times and contrary to the forecasts of military analysts. At the end of the Second World War, a world political system was established with two distinct centers of power - the USA and the USSR. The global conflict did not have clear prospects for both sides. But even with the awareness of this fact, all participants in the process were preparing for a new war, developing more and more complex weapons.

But imperceptibly for everyone, the type of military conflicts changed: the war ceased to be massive and widespread - conflicts broke out in certain regions, where paramilitary (partisan) formations very often acted against army units. In such conditions, using aviation equipment developed for the “big” war to support the advancing ground forces turned out to be impractical, expensive and in some cases ineffective.

The US Air Force in Vietnam was the first to face the problem of supporting advancing ground army units. Jet aircraft created for the war with the USSR turned out to be ineffective for supporting the army in the jungle or striking an enemy using guerrilla tactics, and helicopters were not mobile enough and were too visible during military operations. In turn, the converted training aircraft turned out to be poorly protected from air defense fire.

At first (for example, during the Korean War), the problem was solved by “old stock” - aircraft that remained in service from the Second World War, for example, the A-26 Invader piston bombers and the A-1 Skyraider attack aircraft. These aircraft were designed for completely different purposes and did not meet the requirements of the military: combat losses and depletion of service life made their “leaving the scene” only a matter of time.

Under these conditions, several programs were launched in the USA and Europe to create specific attack aircraft, which in the USA were called COIN (Counter-Insurgency - counter-guerrilla or counter-guerrilla). The main idea of ​​the program was that against small-sized and poorly protected targets, a light, cheap and multi-functional aircraft should be used, which can strike at “soft” (that is, poorly protected by air defense) targets, carry out patrols, and perform the functions of a light transport/communication aircraft , as well as various non-combat special tasks.

The result of these programs was a range of different combat vehicles to combat enemies poorly protected by air defense systems.

Product of time

Until the early 1980s of the 20th century, the “locomotives” in the creation of attack aircraft to meet the requirements of the COIN program were the United States and France. France sought to maintain influence in its African colonies, the United States used these machines for local wars for its interests in the territory of other countries.

Gradually, for France, the relevance of creating such aircraft for its air force disappeared (the colonies were lost) - all the machines were discontinued and put out of service (for example, the Potez-75 counter-guerrilla aircraft, the T-28S Fennec trainer aircraft).

But the French, it seems, are not going to leave the market: in 2011, the French company ATE presented the Pulsatrix light reconnaissance and attack aircraft at the Le Bourget air show. The company expects that the project will attract the attention of states that do not have sufficient funds to purchase specialized light attack aircraft.

In the United States, on the contrary, interest in counter-guerrilla aviation only intensified over time, and in the 1990s of the 20th century, a kind of boom in such aircraft began: over the next 20 years, several new aircraft were developed by private firms - A-22 Pirahna, Cessna AC- 208 Combat Caravan, V-1-A Vigilant, Scorpion, AT-802U, Archangel BPA, AT6-B.

One of the most famous aircraft created under the COIN program was the American attack aircraft OV-10 Bronco, which the Americans in Vietnam called a “workhorse.”

Russian light attack aircraft

For a long time in the USSR, the military rejected the very idea of ​​creating military equipment to fight the partisan (liberation) forces, and the creation abroad of aircraft of this class was explained by the desire of the capitalists to exploit and oppress the captured colonies. The situation changed during the war in Afghanistan.

Just as in the United States, domestic military leaders came to the conclusion that the military equipment created was not fully suitable for this conflict. But even then the concept of an anti-guerrilla aircraft (the military never introduced this classification not found in the official lexicon) large quantity supporters. And yet the work began - the first result was the Yak-52B aircraft (an attack modification of the Yak-52 training device).

The collapse of the USSR and subsequent transformations in our country put an end to all endeavors in this direction. Nevertheless, in the last decade of the 20th century, several interesting projects were created, such as, for example,. None of the samples went beyond flight prototypes, and some remained on paper. Light civil aircraft produced in the 1990s and 2000s, converted for patrol and strike missions, can be considered a partial implementation of the COIN concept in Russia.

For example, the Federal Border Guard Service of Russia ordered for control state border a small batch of SM-92P patrol aircraft, which are a modification of the SP-92 Finist civil aircraft armed with machine guns and bombs or NAR. But such aircraft have low survivability due to their relatively low flight speed and lack of protection and are a temporary solution on the “cheap and cheerful” principle.

The main burden of the fight against illegal armed groups in Russian aviation still rests on the shoulders of gradually becoming obsolete Su-25 attack aircraft and army aviation helicopters. But it should be noted that with a combat load comparable to anti-guerrilla aircraft, combat helicopters, due to their design features and lower speed, are an easier target for anti-aircraft fire, while having a higher cost.

In addition, the time spent by a turboprop attack aircraft in the target area, due to its significantly lower specific fuel consumption, can be many times longer than that of a helicopter or Su-25. An important factor is that the cost of a flight hour of a turboprop attack aircraft can be several times less than that of a combat helicopter or a jet combat aircraft when performing the same task.

This article is being written as the first in a series of articles and notes preceding the fourth part of Burden of the Empire - The Time of Heroes. In it, Rear Admiral Vorontsov will have to resolve, among other things, the issue of pacifying large territories of Persia and eastern Iraq (Iraq in the understanding of our world), destabilized as a result of a major armed rebellion. Territory - approximately thirty million people, a mass of refugees clustered around large cities, armed gangs consisting of supporters of the former Shah's regime and Islamic terrorists, both newcomers and locals, groups of terrorists waging war in the cities. In general, this is modern Iraq.

Warning - everything below is purely my personal opinion and is provided for the purpose of discussion. Perhaps someone will correct me and offer some other solutions.

So, stormtroopers. Oddly enough, counter-guerrilla attack aircraft have now been almost forgotten; the solution of tasks has been entrusted to jet fighter-bombers with precision weapons and helicopters. The solution is not the best, primarily from the point of view of the criterion efficiency - cost. Helicopters, as the Afghan experience shows, are excellent at shooting down even in the absence of MANPADS - but what will happen if terrorists have MANPADS? Helicopter turbines become clogged with dust, which reduces their already short service life. A helicopter requires complex and expensive Maintenance, consumes a lot of fuel, the weapons used are also quite expensive (if you use Hellfire type missiles). Thus, the terrorists manage to impose a war of attrition; for the ruble they invest in attack, they force them to spend twenty to thirty rubles on defense. Resistance, given the fanaticism of aggressive Islamists (Shiites and Wahhabis), can last a very long time; few people want to engage in peaceful construction in a country with a sluggish terrorist war - and thus the terrorists sooner or later win, forcing the defenders of order (in this case the army Russian Empire) and the Sovereign to think about the costs.
What options exist to solve this problem? In my opinion, we need to turn to the experience of the past and find cheap and effective answer options.
Below, I will present the most interesting, from my point of view, designs that can be applied in this case.

This is a Focke-Wulf 189, the famous Rama, converted into an assault version. Armament - two hundred kilograms of bombs and eight different machine guns. Engines - two Argus 410 465 horsepower. Partially armored, the level of armor can withstand a 12.7 caliber machine gun, the most common air defense weapon at that time.
Modernization: modern armor, weapons... for example, two or four Kord machine guns, two AGS-17 grenade launchers, NURS suspension units instead of bombs, modern PT6A-15AG engines from Pratt & Whitney Canada - seven hundred horsepower, the engine is optimized for agricultural aviation, therefore, with a long service life, easy to operate, unpretentious to fuel quality. Here is the first version of the attack aircraft
Second option.
We take the Basler BT-67 as a basis, naturally in the Russian version (this is Li-2, respectively). As you can see, this is an old familiar C-47, but with modern engines and avionics

We install a modern sighting system, local armor and weapons. In the original, the American AC-47 Gunship was armed with either three M134 Miniguns or five pairs of thirty-caliber machine guns. In our case, I think one 23 mm or 30 mm caliber gun and a pair of CORDs will be enough.

More powerful gunships like the AC-130 or in alternative history the Thunderer type are also needed

But only for some serious operations. And light gunships - there can be fifty or a hundred of them, they can be on duty in the airspace constantly, replacing each other and provide effective support at the request of platoon-company units with minimal costs.
3. Light landing aircraft - attack aircraft
This is a project of the Grunin Design Bureau - a ground support aircraft based on the Su-25 fuselage, called T710

The authors claim three tons of combat load, despite the fact that in the fuselage there is a landing cabin for 7 people. Quite an interesting solution - striking and then dropping paratroopers and an inspection team. They don’t do that now, but they did it in Rhodesia and not without success.
4. Projects of the same design bureau


T101 and T501. In T101 IMHO main mistake the fact is that the designers provided weapons that fire forward, instead of putting a couple of machine guns in the cabin, again creating a mini-gunship. It is ideal for a high-wing design. Well, the T501 is suitable as an ultra-light attack aircraft.
5. Heavy turboprop attack aircraft.
This is the North American project Piper Enforcer


But I give it here as an example. We will probably need to take something like the Il-2 as a basis, that is, an aircraft with an armored hull integrated into the design.

The Il10 aircraft (the latest modification of the Il-2) is equipped with a 1770 l/s engine, the Piper is equipped with a Lycoming YT55-L-9 with a power of 2455 l/s, and it weighs 377 kg. The AM-42 engine weighs under a ton. If the IL-2 is made single-seat (there is no need for a gunner to counter partisans) and a similar engine is installed, as well as modern armor, you can end up with an aircraft that will lift up to 4000-5000 kg of combat load (ten or even twelve hardpoints on the wings ) and will be invulnerable to 23 mm anti-aircraft guns - the maximum that militants can have.

Many people will immediately ask the question: why not drones. My answer is that such aircraft can be used not instead of, but together with drones. Wherein:
1. Have you seen what kind of airfields drones need and how they take off? The modernized Il-2 will be able to take off from a primer.
2. Armament. Drones use the same weapons as helicopters and jets - modern, expensive missiles and guided bombs
3. Drones require complex, expensive maintenance by highly qualified personnel.
4. Drones are not capable of providing long-term support, which a gunship is capable of.

The modern face of combat aviation is complex and expensive aviation systems. But along with such aircraft as the F-35 and PAK FA, there is now more and more talk about others - inexpensive but effective attack aircraft, created for “small” wars. Behind the modest appearance of these vehicles, great opportunities are hidden, and they do not plan to disappear from the arms market in the foreseeable future. Sukhoi Design Bureau design engineers Pavel Makarov and Andrei Stakhovich told the Zvezda TV channel about what future awaits them. Small aircraft for big tasks Oddly enough, in the modern world the prospects for turboprop attack aircraft are the highest, and this is dictated precisely by combat experience and demand on the international arms market. All countries of the world are interested in developing their own aviation, but many simply cannot afford 4th and especially 5th generation aircraft. At the same time, counter-guerrilla aviation makes it possible to simply and cheaply solve local problems of ensuring patrols, combating smuggling and terrorism. It is important to note that currently not a single drone can fully solve these problems. Despite all the advantages, UAVs cannot be compared with manned aircraft in their strike potential. Drones are reconnaissance and surveillance tools; they are excellent for one-time targeted strikes, but due to their limited carrying capacity, they are not capable of providing effective fire support during special operations or “pressing fire” on attacking militants, unlike counter-guerrilla aircraft. In addition, as it turned out from the American experience of operating drones in the Middle East, communication and data transmission channels of UAVs turned out to be vulnerable to interference and interception of the information they broadcast, and there are also problems with operator recognition of civilians and objects. In addition, the lightweight design and inability of attack reconnaissance UAVs to perform sharp anti-aircraft maneuvers, combined with a narrow field of view of the camera and the presence of a delayed reaction to operator commands, make them very vulnerable even in the event of minor damage. This, combined with a fairly high accident rate and high cost, makes the costs of replenishing the fleet of lost UAVs are quite comparable to the costs of replenishing the fleet of manned aircraft. It is also important that anti-guerrilla aircraft can be used as training aircraft, since they can perform all the tasks of a basic training aircraft for flight schools. Moreover, due to lower fuel consumption per flight hour, their cost will be lower than that of jet training aircraft. From World War II to Vietnam The concept of counter-guerrilla aviation was born in response to the demands of the times and contrary to the forecasts of military analysts. At the end of the Second World War, a world political system was established with two distinct centers of power - the USA and the USSR. The global conflict did not have clear prospects for both sides. But even with the awareness of this fact, all participants in the process were preparing for a new war, developing more and more complex weapons. But imperceptibly for everyone, the type of military conflicts changed: the war ceased to be massive and widespread - conflicts broke out in certain regions, where very often paramilitary forces acted against army units (partisan) formations. In such conditions, using aviation equipment developed for the “big” war to support the advancing ground forces turned out to be impractical, expensive and in some cases ineffective. The US Air Force in Vietnam was the first to face the problem of supporting the advancing ground army units. Jet aircraft created for the war with the USSR turned out to be ineffective for supporting the army in the jungle or striking an enemy using guerrilla tactics, and helicopters were not mobile enough and were too visible during military operations. In turn, the converted training aircraft turned out to be poorly protected from air defense fire. At first (for example, during the Korean War), the problem was solved by “old stocks” - aircraft that remained in service since the Second World War, for example, A-26 piston bombers Invader and A-1 Skyraider attack aircraft. These aircraft were designed for completely different purposes and did not meet the requirements of the military: combat losses and depletion of service life made their “leaving the scene” only a matter of time. Under these conditions, several programs were launched in the USA and Europe to create specific attack aircraft, which in the USA were called COIN (Counter-Insurgency - counter-guerrilla or anti-guerrilla). The main idea of ​​the program was that against small-sized and poorly protected targets, a light, cheap and multi-functional aircraft should be used, which can strike at “soft” (that is, poorly protected by air defense) targets, carry out patrols, and perform the functions of a light transport/communication aircraft , as well as various non-combat special missions. The result of these programs was a number of different combat vehicles to combat the enemy, poorly protected by air defense systems. Product of time Until the early 1980s, the “locomotives” in the creation of attack aircraft to meet the requirements of the COIN program were the United States and France. France sought to maintain influence in its African colonies, the United States used these machines for local wars for its interests on the territory of other countries. Gradually, for France, the relevance of creating such aircraft for its air force disappeared (the colonies were lost) - all machines were discontinued and withdrawn from production operation (for example, the Potez-75 anti-guerrilla aircraft, the T-28S Fennec training aircraft). But the French, it seems, are not going to leave the market: in 2011, the French company ATE presented the Pulsatrix light reconnaissance and attack aircraft at the Le Bourget air show. The company expects that the project will attract the attention of states that do not have sufficient funds to purchase specialized light attack aircraft. In the United States, on the contrary, interest in counterinsurgency aviation only intensified over time, and in the 1990s a kind of boom in such aircraft began: over the next 20 Over the years, several new aircraft have been developed by private firms - A-22 Pirahna, Cessna AC-208 Combat Caravan, V-1-A Vigilant, Scorpion, AT-802U, Archangel BPA, AT6-B. One of the most famous aircraft created by COIN program, became the American attack aircraft OV-10 Bronco, which the Americans in Vietnam called a “workhorse”. Russian light attack aircraft For a long time in the USSR, the military rejected the very idea of ​​​​creating military equipment to fight partisan (liberation) forces, and the creation abroad of aircraft of this class was explained by the desire of capitalists to exploit and oppress captured colonies. The situation changed during the war in Afghanistan. Just as in the United States, domestic military leaders came to the conclusion that the military equipment created was not fully suitable for this conflict. But even then, the concept of an anti-guerrilla aircraft (the military never introduced this classification into the official lexicon) did not find many supporters. And yet the work began - the first result was the Yak-52B aircraft (an attack modification of the Yak-52 training vehicle). The collapse of the USSR and subsequent transformations in our country put an end to all endeavors in this direction. Nevertheless, in the last decade of the 20th century, several interesting projects were created, such as, for example, the aircraft of the Grunin Design Bureau. None of the samples went beyond flight prototypes, and some remained on paper. The light civil aircraft produced in the 1990s and 2000s, converted for patrol and attack missions, can be considered a partial implementation of the COIN concept in Russia. For example, the Federal Border Guard Service of Russia ordered a small batch of SM-92P patrol aircraft, armed with machine guns and bombs, to control the state border or NAR modification of the civil aircraft SP-92 “Finist”. But such aircraft have low survivability due to their relatively low flight speed and lack of protection and are a temporary solution based on the “cheap and cheerful” principle. The main burden of the fight against illegal armed groups in Russian aviation still lies on the shoulders of the gradually aging Su-25 attack aircraft and army aviation helicopters. But it should be noted that with a combat load comparable to counter-guerrilla aircraft, combat helicopters, due to their design features and lower speed, are an easier target for anti-aircraft fire, while having a higher cost. In addition, the time spent by a turboprop attack aircraft in the target area is significantly lower specific fuel consumption can be many times greater than that of a helicopter or Su-25. An important factor is that the cost of a flight hour of a turboprop attack aircraft can be several times less than that of a combat helicopter or a jet combat aircraft when performing the same task. One and a half tons of bombs and missiles Analyzing the history of the creation of COIN class aircraft, we can distinguish three qualitatively different approaches to the creation of such aircraft. The first is the creation of a specialized attack aircraft from scratch. The advantage of this approach is the appearance of aircraft that fully satisfy customer requirements. Disadvantage - high cost of development and deployment serial production. Disadvantages also include narrow specialization machines. The second approach is the modification of an existing light civil aircraft or training vehicle for military needs. The advantages of this method are the relative low cost of production, since “almost the same aircraft” is already being produced and in operation. Disadvantages are not always high performance characteristics and often low survivability. The third approach is the creation of a multifunctional device, one of the tasks of which is to fight an enemy poorly protected by air defense systems. The advantages of this approach lie in both compliance with customer requirements for an attack aircraft and a large area of ​​its application for both military and civilian purposes (for example, in the initial training of pilots). The disadvantages include a higher cost than in the second approach. Combat experience has shown that such an aircraft should have a maximum speed of no more than 700 kilometers per hour, and a working speed of no more than 300–400 kilometers per hour (otherwise the pilot will experience a shortage time for aiming). The aircraft must have armor protection for the cockpit and the most important parts of the structure from small arms, modern means of countering MANPADS. Depending on the task, it must be able to use a wide range of guided and unguided weapons with a combat load of 1000–1500 kilograms, and also have quality power plant turboprop engine as more economical compared to turbojet and having lower visibility in the infrared range. Brazil, Argentina, USA, Russia? Today, light attack aircraft Pilatus PC-9M (Switzerland), Embraer EMB-314 Super Tucano (Brazil) and AT-802U (USA) are successfully produced and sold. In the United States, the new AT-6B (upgraded AT-6 Texan II) and IOMAX Archangel aircraft are actively promoting the military equipment market. In the United States, the Air Force command has begun developing requirements for a new attack aircraft, which will replace the outdated A-10 Thunderbolt II. According to Defense News, the possible project received conditional designation A-X. New close air support aircraft must use modern technologies, increasing its efficiency compared to the A-10. The A-29 Super Tucano (export version of the Embraer EMB-314 Super Tucano) and the AT-6 Texan II are being considered as existing aircraft that could become a platform for the new attack aircraft. South Africa is developing its own aircraft of this class, AHRLAC, in 2015 the prototype is sent for flight testing. The Argentine attack aircraft FMA IA.58 Pucara and the American OV-10 Bronco, previously discontinued, are currently being re-entered into service and undergoing modernization from the point in terms of improving the power plant and avionics. In domestic aviation, unfortunately, there are no aircraft of this class yet, although there is a need for such machines. “Counterguerrilla” attack aircraft will not disappear from the arms market, and it is too early to close this topic. The creation of full-fledged aircraft of this class can not only increase Russia’s defense capability, perhaps even in the future somewhat reducing the cost of defense and pilot training, but also allow it to occupy another niche in the world arms market. Interviewed by: Kirill Yablochkin