PLA-MKIIMercurius, you’re very knowledgeable about this, what would you advise a rookie to read so as to get up to speed with EW? Question open to others here as well. I must admit, my knowledge is pretty limited beyond basic jamming techniques and DRFM and active cancellation. I think I need a deeper understanding to go forward.
PLA-MKIIYou referring to turning it into some type of low-bypass turbofan?
You think that would be possible with a motor that small?
What about something like the Adour….would that fit in the A-5? I’m thinking not, but I can’t think of another small turbofan unless you can take something off of a smaller business jet…
Sallam (peace) my apologies for the late reply, been rather busy with end of year stuff.
Don’t think the Adour would fit, what is perhaps most practical is to use new engines of the same kind, still apparently in production in China (?) to support her A-5s. They are apparently unbelievably cheap. Down-tune the engines perhaps and tell the pilots to go easy on the afterburner…
The lack of range would not be that big an issue in terms of the Indo-Pak (or perhaps soon Pak-NATO) scenario.
Would certainly prove useful to scare away Appaches or even A-10s and AC-130s.
Incidentally I wrote all this up into an article and it will soon be published insh’Allah (God Willing) by a Pakistan Army publication and it will be coming at the nick of time when the PA is rather mad at the PAF so this may have some good usefulness.
well for what its worth I think this will be a great idea !
But only for a war of attrition which is mostly likely never gonna happen.It would have been a even better idea in the early 90s late 80s scenario ( if PAF got its proposed f-16s which were ultimately embargoed) when the indian army did not have such formidable SAMs.But full marks for creativity !
However given PAFs lack of combat planes they mght use a A-5 on a oneway mission to lob a tactical nuke on a huge indian formation
Thanks Nastle, its always a pleasure to hear good things about my ideas. I’ve been dreaming about military strategy and tactics from the age of 7 and this is sort of the thing I dig and consequently appreciate a pat in the back so to speak.
If you recall the armed helo attacks of the Syrians in the Bekaa Valley even with a complete superiority of the IDF-AF and how effective they were despite the attrition, I think there just may be a role for CAS still left against a well-armed conventional enemy.
You don’t need an A-5 for tactical battlefield nukes. Pakistan builds basketball sized tactical nukes and uses these: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nasr_%28missile%29 to deliver them.
With Turbofans, that would be a L-15 attacker version, actually the L15 was once considered to get the “Q-6” designation if PLAAF inducts it as a replacement of Q-5(A-5) .
Pinko, L-15s would be nice but expensive (for Pakistan Army Aviation). Further, they are not armored nor rugged and simple to operate like the Q-5. The materials used also are more advanced which tend to do well for reducing airframe weight but not do particularly well for taking ack-ack
But yes, in an ideal world L-15s would be awesome as a base platform for building this kind of a CAS plane.
With Turbofans, that would be a L-15 attacker version, actually the L15 was once considered to get the “Q-6” designation if PLAAF inducts it as a replacement of Q-5(A-5) .
Madrat, not a PS expert but this is what I managed with good ol’ MS Paint :o) these are not for big turbofans but basic mods for low level strike and CAS. large slats are designed for slow speed handling and are non-uniform to counter and utilize the excess sweep of the MiG-19 wing. Wings stubbier “chopped off” for better low altitude handling. Up-armored particularly in vital areas. Remove internal belly tank for an internal weapons bay.
PLA-MKIIMad Rat, certainly not a step up to the FC-1, 21KN versus 83+Kn. (AI-222 vs RD-93)
PLA-MKIIThe biggest limitation I’d say this airframe has is the engines….is there an engine type that could replace the Tumanski clones that the Q-5 uses?
Agree with you there Phantom, afraid i can’t think of a solution in terms of an alternative engine. Best thing I can think of is to add an extra fan…
PLA-MKIIBrilliant and thank you Hotdog.
As the author notes:
Which is why ‘fighters’ are _the worst provider_ of CAS because you can simply never count on them _being there_, from hour to hour as the theater commander retasks them.
Music to my ears.
And:
Hellfire alone would have been a miracle ATGW option)
Which is precisely what I want – no need for JDAMs, big guns… keep it simple….
able to do the job, not least because it was a 400 knot
The Q-5 could fly at 400 knots it has an area ruled fuselage that makes it as fast as the MiG-19s down low (not up high). With the mods I have proposed, it would be even faster down low (at the expense of altitude performance).
Proof:
At the time of the kill, the estimated flight parameters were: F-4 speed over 1.2 mach (800+ kts); MiG-19 speed mach 0.77 (500 kts); altitude above terrain 500 feet; slant range 200-300 feet; and flight path crossing angle 90 degrees.
I would disagree with the author about having a radar in the nose – in this kind of environment, you don’t want to be an emitter, rather it may be better to have passive sensors (like RWR) and be linked in some form to the national C4I.
Admittedly the big let down of the A-5 would be the range – but fortunately, unlike in the author’s case, the A-5 does not need to fly down from England or France to deal with an East German / WP threat. Here the A-5s could fly out of the national motorway system that runs all the way down from Islamabad to Karachi. Put everything in big trucks and you have mobile air bases… (that’s a radical idea, I would imagine they would go for something more conventional as small semi-prepared FOBs for the Pakistan Army Aviation).
Fortunately NV devices have come a long way since the 2nd Generation the author had to deal with and the A-5s cockpit glass is not as thick as an A-10s.. (An A-10 can apparently survive a burst from a ZSU).
Now, I want to bring up the Falklands were a small, nippy, not overly armoured or armed aircraft did wonders for CAS. They did not have the greatest range, and were not the fastest in the sky, did not even have radars, but worked right and good. Pity the fools that retired them early.
PS: I don’t eat much gravy, having traveled and lived across the globe, my cooking has become nondescript.
PLA-MKIIFrom Hui Tong’s site. Always interesting to see updates on such an old aircraft – apparently now with HUD and all kinds of other gizmo’s.
PLA-MKIIPLA-MKIITaken from The Pakistani Dragon’s post on Pakistan Defence Forum:
PLA-MKIIBut wouldn’t it be quite noisy?
Nic
Don’t have an answer to that I am afraid : )
Probably not as noisy, going by the diesel engined cars recently being produced and the technology leap in terms of noise dampening techniques (see Airbus and Embraer for instance) and of course, noise cancelling…
PLA-MKIIJBoyle, agree on the Skyraider point completely.
How to power a modern Skyraider? Turboprop most likely.
Interesting what PLA said about aero diesels. Germany used to make powerful diesels back prewar. I remember there was a company called Zoche that was attempting to interest the market with a 150hp and a doubled up 300 hp engine.
Are there any other diesel plans out there?
Enjoy my friend:
http://www.deltahawkengines.com/
Buy one today 😉 More:
http://www.dair.co.uk/
Why a good diesel aero engine would be efficient at slow and low
What big brother has to say on this. Has helped get an SMA aero diesel engine to get FAA certified.
A smart Australian thinking on the same lines: http://www.billzilla.org/ideas4.htm
NASA has made something too
What interests me with diesels is that their drawback of not being able to fly high – due to freezing issues is not an issue for a low flying CAS plane. Also, diesels give very high torque… benefits of which were discussed earlier, but also that at low speed, would give great agility and STOL performance (???)
biggest advantage for me – share the same logistics as the rest of the grunt force.
PLA-MKIIPoint is the PAF is not the USSR or PRC. There are limited funds to spare amongst limited airframes. Can PAF afford another specialized type? I think not. Its better off with its existing fighters and adding these PGMs to those planes, rather than making a plane which relies on low level attacks.
I totally agree with this, no argument here. Actually this is exactly why all throughout I have been arguing for Army Aviation not PAF – PAF’s funds are for fighting the enemy air force, the army’s funds are for busting enemy tanks, whether with CAS, other tanks, TDs, ATGMs or RPG-7s for that matter. (at least, this is how I see it, I know the USAF/US Army disagree and have a fixed wing / rotary wing division).
What I meant is you try to stay out of the AD bubble and if you do have to go low, make a single pass and scamper. The A-5 will lack the sensors and the efficiency to operate effectively in this manner.
I would like to know more about this part of your answer – what kind of sensors would you suggest for an Su-25 like plane?
One forum member on another forum suggested E/O sensors and removal of all others. I believe the A-5s already have domestic Pakistani RWR…
PLA-MKIIyou can try to explain as much as you want, but some how PLA-MKII will find some way to justify a re-modified CAS A-5 that’s somehow supposed to be cheaper than operating JF-17s or attack helicopters. and invulnerable to Indian AD.
That’s not my argument – no CAS aircraft is invulnerable. Even if we took your suggestion and had dedicated JF-17s, they too would not be invulnerable.
I would say that no one who follows and has knowledge of the Pakistani armed forces would say that JF-17s would be ever proposed for Pakistan Army Aviation. Nor would anyone who has knowledge of the IAF-PAF scenario say that the PAF will ever conduct CAS during a future conflict, given the size and quality of the assets on the IAF side.
PLA-MKIITeer, I’m actually talking about stand off ATGMs if you take a quick scan of my posts.
The A-5s are very fast, down low, particularly. Faster than a lot of CAS platforms out there. Their downside is poor fuel economy, but as you said, a quick pass and not for deep strike but “near CAS” would negate that.
PLA-MKIIVery interesting discussion, I’ve been thinking of what would be better – a prop or a ducted fan for sometime.
I wonder what other advantages piston engined fighters had, or was it only torque?
Recently there has been a small move (in commercial craft) for diesel engined planes. That is something I have been very interested in as it would zap logistics lines, as far as fuel is concerned.
PLA-MKIIWell Hotdog, I guess you’re not sold on the idea 🙂 I didn’t change the scenario, Sens did. I merely responded WITHIN his painted scenario.
Sens, the CAS platform will obviously have ATGMs, in fact I would imagine that it would be its primary weapon! Did you think I was suggesting gun/unguided rocket kills?
I think the A-5s are very “rough and ready” as compared to say, an F-16. They are relatively simple aircraft and should pose much less of a challenge for Army Aviation. Consider that Army Aviation is already flying Cobras… those too need certain level of expertise, resources and basing to operate.
PAF would not want to divert the JF-17 for such roles. A-5s they don’t need. I agree with Hotdog that there MAY be some form of institutional rivalry that would negate such a move – as has been amply observed between the USAF and US Army, not to mention other armed services.
However, I’m hoping they would see beyond that… as long as the money for this did not come from the AF…
I think the Army just may want its own CAS planes.
Between gentlemen, no need to get worked up. This is merely a paper exercise, just a thought to argue over and discuss, some pipe dreams if you will… nothing I’m taking to the JCOAS about.
There is a difference between “should” or “would” or “could”.
Sign In
