Why the Soviets never made something equivalent to the AC-130? They could've used the An-12 as base and installing:-D30 122mm Howitzer as their analog to the 105mm from the AC-130. The laser guided 122mm shells could also perform the role of Hellfire missiles recently added to the AC-130 for targeting moving targets.-2B9 Vasilek 82mm automatic mortar instead of the Bofors 40mm from the AC-130 for maximum soft target killing potential.-GSh-6-30 30mm gatling gun as their equivalent to the GAU-12 25mm of the AC-130
>>62508210Because they either didn’t need it, couldn’t afford it, or didn’t feel like integrating it into their doctrine.
For the same reason nobody else did. The AC130 is utterly reliant on total air dominance, and even then its dangerously vulnerable to ground fire and cannot fly during the day; the US has basically the only military that can produce the circumstances where it would be useful.
Russhits cannot into air superiority, which is what you need for these things
>>62508210>GSh-6-30 Isn't that the gun that was famous for vibrating aircraft to pieces when firing?
1. Too broke2. Too stupid3. Too lazyDon't ever forget that the reason Puccia is losing in Ukrain is becaise of one or a combination of the above. It is a fact of slavs.
>>62508264Yes. The MIG-27 was not originally designed to be armed with such a gun.The Soviets did the math on ground attack runs and realized that their earlier twin-barreled gun sucked ass and didn't have good effect on target.So they took a naval CIWS gun, modified it slightly, and shoehorned it into the MIG-27.Not only was the vibrations so severe that firing the gun would often break the instruments in the cockpit, the muzzle blast was so severe that it destroyed the landing lights on the plane any time the gun was fired.
>>62508228>>62508240/thread
>>62508210Russians never felt the need presumably
>>62508210Russians fight every conflict as if it was a full scale conventional war, hence why they turn every house in sight to rubble with artillery, regardless of what the enemy is like, so something like the AC-130 is completely doctrinally useless for them, as they see no need for a big defenseless aircraft being able to circle a town for hours whilst taking potshots at the enemy. Only nations like the US who can establish complete air superiority, hold it and do SEAD and DEAD to a degree where not even MANPADS are around anymore, and are fighting an irregular force who hides among the populace has any need for such a capability. Nations like Russia and China would just bomb and arty strike the town until everything inside it was dead, whilst the AC-130 is meant to be able to provide direct fire support inside of an entire town, whilst also keeping collateral damage to a minimum.
Because it is a useless piece of crap that will get blown out of the sky unless you are fighting against unarmed sand villagers who cannot fight back
faggot: the OP
>>62508210they made the caspian sea monster which is pretty cool
>>62508736wherever I am, I must also shake
>>62508210Because the AC-130 is a fundamentally bad idea.It's useful in one very specific scenario, you want to mow down insurgents with no air defense capabilities whatsoever while in difficult terrain.It's an Afghanistan machine and not much else.
>>62508835The gunship concept was developed in Vietnam.
>>62508842>mowing down insurgents with no air defense capabilities whatsoever while in difficult terrain
>>62508210soviet plans assumed they would operate with local air superiority at best and were using large numbers on tactical strike aircraft to absorb the losses, AC-130 is the antithesis of those requirements
>>62508210It is an absolute miracle they did not drop like flies in Afganistan given that one was lost to a SA-2.These things are extremely vulnerable to MANPADS and cannon fire.Everybody else understands that, except Americans, who think they can ensure the needed prerequisites for their operation.
>>62508210A weapon like this would mean you'd have to get up close and be accurate.The Soviet system was all about buck passing and avoiding responsibility.Hence their stand off, highly inaccurate rockets and artillery.It isn't about crews being afraid of combat, we've seen how the stupid bastards fling themselves at death en mass.It is about commanders having to explain why the mission was incomplete for innumerable reasons..
>>62508210AC-130 is deceptively flimsy when it doesn't have air superiority at its back; even turboprop trainers can shoot them down, so trying to take on the US with them when you can't guarantee their security is a non-starter.Maybe when the laser project comes online for the K model they'll have better standoff ability?
>>62508835>>62508842>>62508845>>mowing down insurgents with no air defense capabilities whatsoever>Vietnam>No air defense capabilities whatsoever
>>62508845Nigger wuuut? Why are you even on this board lmao.
>>62508210Commie pansies.
>>62508736>t.
>>62509784why did you post a selfie?
>>62508845you have to go back.
>>62508845>no air defense capabilities whatsoever>North VietnamNorth Vietnam had the densest IADS in the world at the time, supervised by soviet troops who looked on it as an opportunity to gather data and train. And even in the South, the NVA were well equipped with heavy AAA guns and occasionally even snuck a SAM in for funsies.
>>62508283Paper skies has a really good video on the MIG-27
>>62509809>why did you post a selfie?>immediate no ugo back.
>>62509861>go back.to fucking your mom?
>>62508216>couldn’t afford itLol, no. Some cargo planes with guns? Do you know how much military crap the Soviets built? Like delete one half their military spending and all the worse jokes about the Soviet economy and food / consumer goods shortages disappear. They built like two hundred thousand tanks over the Cold War and that is just one aspect of their military. It's not even just the wasted production capacity, they had like 5 million active soldiers in the 80's. They could have afforded cargo planes with guns easily if they just limited their insane "produce more" attitude and just had a normal reasonably well equipped military. They could have even afforded to live like people.
>>62509877>to fucking your mom?go back illiterate.
>>62508228if a real war kicks off, i'll be shocked to hear the AC-130 managed any combat success. even the chinese have to have AD competent enough to neutralize it... right?
You mean a bird that is useless against anything other than monkeys?It's a dogshit "weaponry", and as they usually joke, AC-130 was created for two reasons:1. Transformers2. Call of DutyPeople are right, they didn't invent a similar shit primarily because they couldn't afford it. Stupid commies couldn't afford shit. The country where the door handle of the refrigerator is the same as the door handle of any truck. They had these useless BTR-80 to fight against the rebels, and that was more or less enough. In real military btw these were useless. They still use it in wars (hinting at the current war in Eastern Europe), and guess what's the nickname of these machines (I am still talking about the BTR-80), it's "mobile coffin" (or "metal coffin", correct me if I'm wrong). If things were that bad so that they had to use an analogue of an AC-130, it would have meant it's too late, because in that case the USSR would have already fallen (in the state of Civil War), if you catch my point. Anyways, your call of duty machinery is a piece of dogshit. It's marketing for 80IQ southern yokels like you. You know, your kind of people who would literally think that Call of Duty is realistic.
>>62508210Have you seen the average Russian?
>>62509702The vietcong did not have good if any air defense. They were a mobile guerilla force.
>>62508210Because they could never guarantee the air supremacy needed for these fuckers to survive.
>>62514777>The vietcong did not have good if any air defense. They were a mobile guerilla force.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_aircraft_losses_of_the_Vietnam_War
>>62508228I think any military could have operated them in Afganistan style war.
>>62514815The NVA/NVAF and VC are 2 different things.
>>62508210Don't need direct fire when you have indirect fire
>>62509095>Everybody else understands that, except Americans, who think they can ensure the needed prerequisites for their operation.notsureifserious.jpg
>>62508210You know what I hate about the current version of the AC-130 Gunship? Removing the 25mm Gatling Gun
>>62508845Vietnam was probably the most dangerous airspace in the world at the time the spooky and later specter were born. And the Vietcong absolutely had AA capabilities.
>>62514828Stinger missiles, pal
>>62515777>Stinger missileYou couldn't put down a spooky with a stinger any more than you could sink a destroyer with a mortar shell. you have no idea how fucking big these things are
>>62516032destroyers don't keep their engines on the outside.
>>62509857if vietnam has such great air defense why would you ever get the idea to build a gunship?
>>62510686why did you post a selfie?
>>62516384Because Spectres typically didn’t fly missions in North Vietnam. That’s what the USAF had bombers for. They flew them in South Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia.
>>62518457so would you say that they were mowing down insurgents with little to no air defense capabilities in difficult terrain?
>>62518488They often flew with fighter escorts because several were shot down.
>>62518488They definitely had AA. 6 AC-130s were shot down over the course of the war.
>>62518512>>62518505so we're back to "it's a stupid idea, why would anyone do this"
>>62518532Nope, we’re back to (You) strawmanning again.
>>62518546so why did they come up with this idea and keep pursuing it when it didn't work very well?
>>62518532It wasn't a stupid idea, the US kept using AC-130s all the way to the end (and slightly after) the end of Vietnam and they continued to serve roles in both Iraq Wars and the GWOT and various other minor theaters. They fill a unique niche role as flying artillery batteries that has its place in US doctrine. The Soviets, on the other hand, never placed that much emphasis on tactical close air support beyond the Su-25. Outside of their strategic bomber force, they never really considered their air power to be an offensive striking force.
>>62518553It did work very well. It destroyed tens of thousands of gook vehicles.
>>62518573the life of a single US gunship crew is worth countless gook vehicles
>>62508210Soviets (and modern Russians) severely undervalued airpower in their doctrines
>>62508264And shoots like 11 moa from a static shipboard position (well at least the ao-18 upon which the gsh was based)>>62509702The gunships operated over the south. The vietkong was not smuggling fucking sa2s through the loatian jungle
>>62508583Except the time it killed a hundred Russians lamo.
>>62518766>lamo
>>62518110>why did you post a selfie?>butthurt fag immediately goes 'no u'
>>62508228Are these vulnerable to shoulder-mounted SAMs? I had the impression they were and don't understand how they can be used at all in modern times
>>62518566It's quite strange if you ask me, given how much of an emphasis they have towards groups like the VDV and helicopters you'd think they would've invested heavier into more ground pounders than the frogfoot, the fencer, and the even more suicidal flogger. Like am I crazy or is having a good fixed wing tactical bombing force necessary for successful helicopter operations?
>>62518981>calling others butthurt while posting soijaks
>>62518546He's right you know.
How would you feel about hopping into a dodgy russian plane with a dodgy russian canon firing Kims pissing hot 122mm loads (Extra kick). Id sooner play transfusion roulette with a bag of freddie mercurys blood thrown in
>>62519174Very much so. The worst post Vietnam US aerial shoot down incident involved a dozen us airmen getting ganked by an igla over Iraq
>>62520954*ac130 airmen
>>62508216putting an artillery gun into the side of a cargo plane was a crazy idea, even for that erawe out ivan'd ivan
>>62510686>illiterateyou are thread and picture illiteratehe was right on topic, and you assumed he was a russian... because??? only russians post russian hardware in your mind? there's a lot of retarded people on /k/ like you desuyou're all supremely stupid niggerfaggots btw, refrain from posting
>>62520996Just ignore them. /k/ is now flooded with noguns retards that use this board for their autistic sperg outs. You can literally post a picture of russian food and you will get flooded with replies calling you a russian shill. Just tell them to post a gun and you will see all of them short circuit.
>>62510789Some of China's units are still equipped with Korean War hand-me-downs because it's too big and unwieldy to modernize the entire PLA.
>>62508210This thing can get shot down with a good enough WWII auto cannon, it's only useful for blasting compounds during the night where you know the enemy only has small arms.It's a militia/civvie dozer, but not much else.
>>62508210Because it's terrible and slow and outdated.It can only be deployed against civilians with zero air defense Like Afghanistan
>>62508210the AC-130 is an imperialist weapon, it can only be used against an insurgency force that lacks any anti-air capability let alone aircraftthe Soviets never found themselves in such a conflict
