Welcome to the WWII Forums! Log in or Sign up to interact with the community.

WW2 era fighters in modern Close Support-COIN role

Discussion in 'Air Warfare' started by Robinson phpbb3, Dec 11, 2007.

  1. Robinson phpbb3

    Robinson phpbb3 New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2005
    Messages:
    82
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Adelaide, Australia
    via TanksinWW2
    Hey guys

    Haven't been here in ages. Hope all are well. I am in the process of writing some short 'fantasy' stories set in no particular era.

    I am curious to gauge opinions, ideas and thoughts of say WW2 fighters in Close support and COIN. Where supplies, parts and no fatigue of machinery is an issue. How would these aircraft do in such a role today dealing with more modern AA defences.

    What would be needed to say have a FW -190 capable in such a role as an example.

    Thanks again

    Kym
     
  2. majorwoody10

    majorwoody10 New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2005
    Messages:
    1,898
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    ca.usa
    via TanksinWW2
    i think radar directed aaa would chop em up pretty good but if all that aaa were supressed by f16s , the jabos and jugs would do just dandy and for a fraction of the cost of an apache or warthog

    .hell, a beech bonanza or cessna 210 would be deady with modern guided munitions and some armour plate .cost 200,000 bucks , so you could feild 50 bonanzas for the cost of one apache and fix them for a lot less too . of course the us army couldnt own them cause the have fixed wings . intersevice politics .
     
  3. Ricky

    Ricky Active Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    Messages:
    11,710
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Luton, UK
    via TanksinWW2
    Gosh, a trip down memory lane! Hi Robinson. :D


    Ok, WW2 fighter-bombers as modern COIN aircraft...

    Well, given that plently of light, slow craft are used for that these days, they would be no more susceptable to losses than those - they're probably a bit faster which will actually help. However, their payload will be much less, which will make them less effective. In addition, they would need to be extensively re-worked to allow for such things as guided bombs, missiles, etc. And as for their avionics...

    For a modern example:

    EMB-314 Super Tucano
     
  4. JCalhoun

    JCalhoun New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2004
    Messages:
    1,911
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Mobile, Alabama- Heart of Dixie
    via TanksinWW2
    Douglass Skyraider!

    It came a tad late for combat in WW2 but was still a very good close support aircraft during the Korean and Vietnam wars. It was even credited to shooting down a North Vietnamese AF MiG though it was never meant to be a dogfighter.

    When the USN decided to phase them out in the late 1960's, the USAF bought several from the USN for service as CAS & Air Rescue roles. Many were also given to the VNAF.
     
  5. Robinson phpbb3

    Robinson phpbb3 New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2005
    Messages:
    82
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Adelaide, Australia
    via TanksinWW2
    Hey guys thanks for the replies.

    It would be an interesting 'realm' to see such aircraft take to the sky again.

    I often wonder how some JU-88's would do in the COIN role during the 60's and 70's much as the B-26 was used. Or some Mosquitoes.

    radar guided AAA and men on the ground being armed with more automatic weaponry would be more of a danger to these aircraft not to mention the shoulder launched SAM.

    Some things that were over looked in Iron Eagles 3 :p

    Ok guys if you had to build up your Air arm with some pre-45 era aircraft to be used on the 'modern' battlefeld, waht would you chose and in what role.


    Kym
     
  6. majorwoody10

    majorwoody10 New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2005
    Messages:
    1,898
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    ca.usa
    via TanksinWW2
    imo ,coin opperated aircraft are best suited for the super market , for small boys to ride in ...attack arcraft should be ones that can actually fly .
     
  7. JCalhoun

    JCalhoun New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2004
    Messages:
    1,911
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Mobile, Alabama- Heart of Dixie
    via TanksinWW2
    :lol: :lol:
     
  8. Ebar

    Ebar New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2004
    Messages:
    2,006
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    On a space station in geosynchronous orbit above y
    via TanksinWW2
    I wonder how well heat seekers work on detecting piston engines?
     
  9. Lone Wolf

    Lone Wolf New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2006
    Messages:
    788
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Merseyside, UK
    via TanksinWW2
    The Argentine Pucara comes pretty close to the mark. It saw action in the Falklands but little was really learned there as British special forces blew most of them up on the ground.

    It's interesting, though, that the Pucara is designated a counter insurgency aircraft which is a useful limited role for such a type and it is not actually intended for it to go up against modern military anti aircraft defences - which kind of answers your question.
     
  10. Ricky

    Ricky Active Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    Messages:
    11,710
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Luton, UK
    via TanksinWW2
    Ah, yes, as COIN they are fine, on a modern battlefiels their survivability is limited...
     
  11. Robinson phpbb3

    Robinson phpbb3 New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2005
    Messages:
    82
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Adelaide, Australia
    via TanksinWW2
    So if you guys had a defence force and for whatever reason you could
    draw on some pre-45 aircaft. And logistics and munitions were no problem, what aircraft would you select ?

    The scenario is, you are a 'good guy' government and just recently you have been experiencing a growing insurgency problem in the mountain and jungle regions in your countries West.
    You are combating two distinct groups an organised crime-rebel movement that funds itself by kidnapping and drug dealing.
    The other group is better equiped and more organised, a Maoist style revolutionary army bent on turning back the clock and creating a left wing utopia.

    Kym
     
  12. Simonr1978

    Simonr1978 New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2004
    Messages:
    3,392
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Kent, UK
    via TanksinWW2
    Obviously you've got to go late war on this one, anyone would have to be mad to pick something like the Fairey Battle out of choice.

    Personally, I'd go for the a choice between the A-26 Invader, history showed her to be a versatile plane and of course she was used for COIN purposes in the B26K incarnation or the Tupolev Tu2 which my bet is could have been as versatile if the situation had demanded it.

    I'd go for twin engines and multi-crew personally, because I reckon you'll need as much wing space for disposable stores as possible and internal space will be handy for modern electronics. Anything smaller than a twin and you may run into space issues, anything larger and you're making a bigger target.
     
  13. Ricky

    Ricky Active Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    Messages:
    11,710
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Luton, UK
    via TanksinWW2
    How about the old favourite, the Bristol Beaufighter?

    Proven track record, lots of guns, lots of space for stores.
     
  14. Commando

    Commando recruit

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2007
    Messages:
    494
    Likes Received:
    0
    via TanksinWW2
    Definitely!
     
  15. Simonr1978

    Simonr1978 New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2004
    Messages:
    3,392
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Kent, UK
    via TanksinWW2
    Looses out a bit on load carrying though, a stock A-26 can carry 6,000lbs, quite a bit more that the Beaufighter (Although a very quick google doesn't reveal much in terms of weight, but the TF-X carried a torpedo and up to 8 RPs under the wings which I guess comes in at quite a bit less).

    The Beaufighter would be a reasonable pick, given the choice between that or an A-26 or a Tu-2 and to me the Beau comes a distinct 3rd.
     
  16. Ricky

    Ricky Active Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    Messages:
    11,710
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Luton, UK
    via TanksinWW2
    True.
     
  17. majorwoody10

    majorwoody10 New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2005
    Messages:
    1,898
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    ca.usa
    via TanksinWW2
    i notice in my sim game the beau has an enlisted man faceing aft with a small bubble canopy but NO GUNS , this does seem a bit of an oversight ...even a single ww1 vintage lewis gun would be better than shooting only hateful glances ..
     
  18. Simonr1978

    Simonr1978 New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2004
    Messages:
    3,392
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Kent, UK
    via TanksinWW2
    Early Beaus did as did some Fulmars IIRC, though it wasn't unique to have guns removed, I believe the He219 also originally had a rear mounted Mg131 which wasn't fitted to most production aircraft, and the rear mounted Mgs in the Bf110 and Ju87B seemed largely ineffective.

    I can't help wondering if it was partly a confidence thing, if the crew knew they had a gun to the rear they might go a bit easier on evasive manouevres to give the gunner a chance to line up a burst although in reality a single gunner with one or two rifle calibre MGs wasn't going to be enough to even the odds against a fighter carrying a much heavier fixed forward firing armament, whereas the extra effort put into dodging tracer might just buy enough time to escape or for another friendly to get involved.
     
  19. Simonr1978

    Simonr1978 New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2004
    Messages:
    3,392
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Kent, UK
    via TanksinWW2
    Unfortunately the choice of later war British Mediums/Lights tends to be more than a little uninspired. It seems offhand that the last worthwhile mass produced medium/light bomber we produced was the Mossie, slightly later attempts like the Buckingham seem, well, frankly embarrassing. It seems almost like once lend-lease Mitchells and Marauders became a possibility for the medium/attack role the British aero industry just lost interest in new designs until post war.

    If the choice was to go for a pre-'43 plane, that opens the field more than a little, as it is there are potential contenders there from the Luftwaffe arsenal too, but glancing over the figures, on paper I'd have to pick the Tu-2 closely followed by the A-26 which both seem head and shoulders above their contemporaries, although the P-61 would be another good choice.
     
  20. Robinson phpbb3

    Robinson phpbb3 New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2005
    Messages:
    82
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Adelaide, Australia
    via TanksinWW2
    The B-26K is a natural as it was successful in this role into the 70s.

    The Typhoon would no doubt be good as a rocket bus and I would like to use some late model ground attack FW-190s for COIN and 'mopping up'.

    The P-61 would be a good night intruder and gun straffer against rebel 'convoys' in those 3am raid's much needed to keep the bad guy on his toes.

    Though like it is said above if they have radar guided AAA or shoulder launched SAM's it would be a problem, but surely if used in conjunction with more modern counter - measures this could help sustain the aircrafts battle field survivalability.

    Kym
     

Share This Page