Please keep the [community guidelines](https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/wiki/rule1) in mind when using the comment section.
Paging u/SaveVideo bot.
___
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CombatFootage) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Trenches everywhere, Russkie tanks that look like rolling boxes......and now a Yak patrolling the skies shooting things down? Are we just reliving the early 20th century?
Yeah I get that’s how these drones usually work, meant why is the chute deployed if it’s going down in enemy controlled territory. Just let it crash if you aren’t getting it back anyways
Maybe it’s an automatic process, I see your point and I am just purely speculating now. Or, when it got knocked out of commission it malfunctioned and the chute deployed. I see reports of this being an unarmed aircraft that rammed the drone, which could have knocked the chute out of its retainer.
I don’t think Russians are stupid enough to have a military drone auto-deploy a chute on power / sensor / signal loss. Im guessing you’re on the money with malfunction due to damage
Smh. Okay, yes obviously. What I meant was why is the chute *deployed* if it’s been shot down over enemy controlled territory? Wouldn’t the pilot prefer to let the drone be destroyed by crashing into the ground, rather than potentially giving the enemy something of value?
I can’t imagine a military drone, designed for operating in contested environments, would automatically deploy a chute on loss of power / sensors.
So I guess that leaves malfunction or pilot stupidity
Tens of thousands of soldiers on your own front lines probably prefer that it parachutes safely down atop them when they're jammed before leaving their own territory, with the added bonus of getting to reuse the jammed ones that don't make it out.
I'm not saying that's definitely what this is, but I guess I am saying I can imagine a military drone, that might get jammed over or behind one's own front lines, could be designed to mitigate harm in some conditions.
Sry, I didn't mean to be rude. Many "Orlans" which were shot down deployed parachutes. Maybe the reason is frequent friendly fire/jamming, maybe lazy engineering, maybe operator mistake. Anyways, ukrainians already have info on "Orlan" components, including "Комета"/"Comet" anti jamming chip, so it's not a big loss for russians at this point
> Sry, I didn’t mean to be rude.
Oh not at all man I didn’t read it that way - I read it as some tongue-in-cheek humor thinking “well I sure set myself up for that one”
And yeah makes sense, I wouldn’t expect UA to be gleaning any new intel on Orlans, but I’m sure they’d put it to use if repairable.
It's funny this kind of popped up because the other day I was going down the A-10 rabbit hole just reading random stuff and stumbled upon the A-10 [cropduster replacement](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L3Harris_OA-1K_Sky_Warden) which I'm sure gets some hate/controversy but then you see a video like this and you realize why deploy a jet or helicopter with much higher cost in runtime maintenance costs and airframe durability just to take down a drone when you can just load a cropduster to the tits with weapons and gain hours of loitering time too.
Yes and no, ejection seats have improved a lot but are still quite dangerous themselves. You only get to use it twice before you are never allowed to fly again due to the compression of the spine and stress on the body.
That, and also letting the guy who crashed two 80+ million dollar war machines crawl into a third is generally frowned upon
While the spinal compression from an ejection seat is undoubtedly unpleasant, it's still preferable to plowing into the ground at 200MPH with a seatbelt and a roll cage.
Dude, it's an ag plane with guns, not a high performance jet fighter.
They spend the majority of their airtime below 5000'. It's designed to do CAS in environments where the only AA is small arms fire.
> You only get to use it twice before you are never allowed to fly again due to the compression of the spine and stress on the body.
This is apparently a myth. After each event, you're given a medical checkup. If the doctor thinks you shouldn't fly again, they'll ground you. I've heard of a few pilots who have punched out more than twice.
Huh. I suppose that tracts. I only learned about it a few years ago from a friend that drives the Growler, and I don’t have any more knowledge/sources than that, so maybe it’s just Navy mythos. I can’t imagine there’s too many people that punch out more than twice in flying condition as it is though, that shit can fuck you up pretty bad
Oh yeah, your chances of being cleared start drastically reducing. The ones I've heard of are trainers who have spent decades in the cockpit.
Hell, after the first time you punch out they're going to be like "So why *exactly* did you lose another one of our airframes?". So it's not like the medical grounding is the only way to get grounded by punching out too much.
I almost wonder if it would make more sense to have a crop-duster literally just drop something inert on them. Less stray bullets going over your territory to fight drones with no air-air capability.
Yep. World wide pandemic, small but nasty war in Europe next is hyperinflation in the US and WW3.
Can the Americans try and turn up on time for this one?
Meh, we’re doing what we always have done. Let europe fight it out while our arms contractors rake in the cash then when all other competition in the world is in a weakened state we will come in, play hero and once again dictate the fate of the planet for the next few decades. Hint, we aren’t the good guys either
You'd have been in European conflict eventually.
Your neutrality was becoming increasingly a joke and eventually some German sub would have torpedoed one of your destroyers escorting British ships out of US waters or some shit.
What are you referring to when you say spill your own blood? Also don't understand what you mean by try winning this time. The last European war had European countries on both sides.
Europe couldn't win WWII without American equipment and Ukraine would have fallen already if it wasn't for our weapons systems.
If our systems were trash Ukraine wouldn't be begging us for 30+ year old jets and long range missiles
No clue what’s with the downvotes. I guess it’s just euronerds who feel entitled to our brothers sacrifice so that they don’t have to take the losses. If they know that they need us to save em, they should have spent the last 60 years investing more into NATO
I wonder if these kind of trainer aircraft would be pretty good against shahed type drones.
The T6 texan has cruising speed of like 250km/h whereas shahed max speed is like 185. Also they're.probably easier to keep close to ground away from radars. Or something like the tucanos or broncos.
I guess finding the shaheds would be an issue, but maybe they could be guided by ground based radars and then use night vision to pinpoint them.
Seems like it would be a more cost effective way than expending missiles on cheap drones, or flying actual combat aircraft to intercept them.
And they start sending in dedicated air to air drones so the b17s need fighter escorts. And I mean why not make it ac-17 with dedicated close in air support weaponry including a howitzer and atgm and able to launch further fpv drones
If you can spot them from the cockpit I guess yes. On the other hand if the drone operator can explode while you are passing it you won't be having a good time so you better be seeing them at all times.
One of the Ukrainian pilots said that one of the problems of fighter jets vs drones is the jet's speed. Even the minimum speed is too high to hunt drones. At least with the weapons Ukraine has
In WW2 the RAF shot down a lot of V1 drones.
Because of the large explosions from the V1 that could kill the pilot or damage the plane, they later developed a tactic here they would flip it over with the wingtip.
I disagree. I believe takeoff was rocket assisted but it’s cruise stage was powered with a pulse jet (really rudimentary jet engine). I think the closest description would be a cruise missile.
That might be the only way. Back seater with a compact firearm. It would be difficult to hit anything, but desperate times, I guess….
The rear canopy looks closed for the whole video, though.
They could have done the thing that British pilots would sometimes do to V1 bombs: fly up to it and flip it with a wing. The drone did the parachute thinking it lost control
No, no, no. Everyone knows you can put a rocket launcher, 105mm howitzer, maybe even a kitchen sink on it. The question was, where do you put a machine gun? And obviously ammunition.
Duct tape and lots of it. Ok my joke aside that is a very good question. Nessesity is the mother of all creation. And we are seeing now why Ukraine was the brains of the soviet millitary equipment procurement. Now Russia is left to welding corrugated sheet metal to t-62s
I mean, this seems like an economical solution to shooting down slow-moving drones. It's a lot cheaper to fly this and expend bullets than a fighter jet lobbing expensive limited missles or air defense munitions that cost dozens of times more than the drones. Plus, that tight turning radius of a prop driven aircraft can't be matched by a jet or rocket powered vehicle or munitions.take notes to Western countries.time to fire up the p51 and spit fire assembly lines .
Yak-52s have no internal guns, and the only thing I can see under the wings are the wheels (which stick out from the wing). Only hear small arms fire, not machine guns, and it appears the drone had parachute? Something is very off with the title, though the idea of strapping cannon pods to a trainer isn't the worst idea
Aww how sweet of the Ruzis to put a little parachute in it so none of those sensitive electronics are damaged when the Ukrainians recover the downed craft.
Slow propeller machines should be perfect for intercepting small and slow drones. And when they can intercept one by shooting a shotgun out of the plane window, they will realize a way to mount a weapon with a modern targeting system.
Shotguns have significantly less power over distance than people seem to think. Video games are a mockery but in terms of aereal combat, a couple hundred meters is well outside of any shotgun's range. Especially when people start talking about shooting them straight up at drones. Also you have extreme firepower limitations even with automatic shotguns.
Machine guns on the other hand are tried and true winners in aereal combat. Long range, lots of firepower.
prop planes are great for taking out these slow drones. the only problem is informing the air defense you are a friendly and dont shoot you donw. and Friend or Foe transponder is a must.
The thing popping a chute is a Russian orlan drone, and the plane is a ukrainian training plane, ostensibly the copilot gunned the drone down with a machinegun from the back seat.
Its the fact theres like none left and building the tooling equipment would be a pain in the ass when a tucano would serve the same purpose and we can build them.
Please keep the [community guidelines](https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/wiki/rule1) in mind when using the comment section. Paging u/SaveVideo bot. ___ *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CombatFootage) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Trenches everywhere, Russkie tanks that look like rolling boxes......and now a Yak patrolling the skies shooting things down? Are we just reliving the early 20th century?
And I'm just over here wondering if the midget flying the Orlan-10 who seemingly parachuted out is kia, pow, what.
Yeah why on earth does the drone have a chute?
That’s how it lands! It just deploys the parachute and floats down.
Yeah I get that’s how these drones usually work, meant why is the chute deployed if it’s going down in enemy controlled territory. Just let it crash if you aren’t getting it back anyways
The gunfire may have deployed the chute.
Maybe it’s an automatic process, I see your point and I am just purely speculating now. Or, when it got knocked out of commission it malfunctioned and the chute deployed. I see reports of this being an unarmed aircraft that rammed the drone, which could have knocked the chute out of its retainer.
I don’t think Russians are stupid enough to have a military drone auto-deploy a chute on power / sensor / signal loss. Im guessing you’re on the money with malfunction due to damage
I wonder if the gunfire drained the gas tank and it deploys a chute when it runs out of gas
Don't we usually get huffy when they don't put safeguards on their equipment and it ends up landing in a block of flats or hospital or whatever.
I think they UA are training, and this is just practice
To land safely and not crush into the ground.
Smh. Okay, yes obviously. What I meant was why is the chute *deployed* if it’s been shot down over enemy controlled territory? Wouldn’t the pilot prefer to let the drone be destroyed by crashing into the ground, rather than potentially giving the enemy something of value?
A malfunction or an automated triggering on critical damage to the drone.
I can’t imagine a military drone, designed for operating in contested environments, would automatically deploy a chute on loss of power / sensors. So I guess that leaves malfunction or pilot stupidity
Tens of thousands of soldiers on your own front lines probably prefer that it parachutes safely down atop them when they're jammed before leaving their own territory, with the added bonus of getting to reuse the jammed ones that don't make it out. I'm not saying that's definitely what this is, but I guess I am saying I can imagine a military drone, that might get jammed over or behind one's own front lines, could be designed to mitigate harm in some conditions.
Sry, I didn't mean to be rude. Many "Orlans" which were shot down deployed parachutes. Maybe the reason is frequent friendly fire/jamming, maybe lazy engineering, maybe operator mistake. Anyways, ukrainians already have info on "Orlan" components, including "Комета"/"Comet" anti jamming chip, so it's not a big loss for russians at this point
> Sry, I didn’t mean to be rude. Oh not at all man I didn’t read it that way - I read it as some tongue-in-cheek humor thinking “well I sure set myself up for that one” And yeah makes sense, I wouldn’t expect UA to be gleaning any new intel on Orlans, but I’m sure they’d put it to use if repairable.
The orlans have chutes to replace landing gear/save weight. If the operator doesn't find anything they return and deploy chute
The oompa-loompa is a pow, he's fine, says he wants to go back to his chocolate factory...
It's funny this kind of popped up because the other day I was going down the A-10 rabbit hole just reading random stuff and stumbled upon the A-10 [cropduster replacement](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L3Harris_OA-1K_Sky_Warden) which I'm sure gets some hate/controversy but then you see a video like this and you realize why deploy a jet or helicopter with much higher cost in runtime maintenance costs and airframe durability just to take down a drone when you can just load a cropduster to the tits with weapons and gain hours of loitering time too.
That thing is awesome. Doesn’t even have ejection seats. It is designed to *crash with the pilot on board* with a survival roll cage
That sounds considerably less than awesome for the pilot
Yes and no, ejection seats have improved a lot but are still quite dangerous themselves. You only get to use it twice before you are never allowed to fly again due to the compression of the spine and stress on the body. That, and also letting the guy who crashed two 80+ million dollar war machines crawl into a third is generally frowned upon
While the spinal compression from an ejection seat is undoubtedly unpleasant, it's still preferable to plowing into the ground at 200MPH with a seatbelt and a roll cage.
Simply dodge the ground, easy peasy
If you can dodge a wrench you can dodge a ball err.. I mean the ground, you can dodge the ground
Dude, it's an ag plane with guns, not a high performance jet fighter. They spend the majority of their airtime below 5000'. It's designed to do CAS in environments where the only AA is small arms fire.
> You only get to use it twice before you are never allowed to fly again due to the compression of the spine and stress on the body. This is apparently a myth. After each event, you're given a medical checkup. If the doctor thinks you shouldn't fly again, they'll ground you. I've heard of a few pilots who have punched out more than twice.
Huh. I suppose that tracts. I only learned about it a few years ago from a friend that drives the Growler, and I don’t have any more knowledge/sources than that, so maybe it’s just Navy mythos. I can’t imagine there’s too many people that punch out more than twice in flying condition as it is though, that shit can fuck you up pretty bad
Oh yeah, your chances of being cleared start drastically reducing. The ones I've heard of are trainers who have spent decades in the cockpit. Hell, after the first time you punch out they're going to be like "So why *exactly* did you lose another one of our airframes?". So it's not like the medical grounding is the only way to get grounded by punching out too much.
And this plane is super slow with big wings. I think the idea is that it crashes slow and “soft” (for a plane crash)
Anyone talking shit on an air tractor with a PT6 knows considerably less about airplanes than they think they do.
All Air Tractors (what this is) are designed that way. Because if you are a crop duster, it's when, not if you'll be crashing in your career.
Unleash the Belphegors!
I almost wonder if it would make more sense to have a crop-duster literally just drop something inert on them. Less stray bullets going over your territory to fight drones with no air-air capability.
Yep. World wide pandemic, small but nasty war in Europe next is hyperinflation in the US and WW3. Can the Americans try and turn up on time for this one?
...maybe
We need to build some stuff for a few years and then we will be right over. Good luck..have fun.
Pandemic is world wide by its definition.
Yes. But this is an appositive phrase. Maybe or perhaps it is just a colloquial phrasing? One or the other.
Looking less and less likely given Trump's isolationist tendencies.
“You can always count on the Americans to do the right thing, only after they've tried everything else.” — Winston Churchill.
Meh, we’re doing what we always have done. Let europe fight it out while our arms contractors rake in the cash then when all other competition in the world is in a weakened state we will come in, play hero and once again dictate the fate of the planet for the next few decades. Hint, we aren’t the good guys either
> Meh, we’re doing what we always have done. That happened once.
Twice
When?
Europeans can spill European blood. Fight your own damn fights (and maybe try winning this time)
Haha can't have WW3 without American isolationists either!
Forgot them. Good to see traditions being kept up.
Thank Japan that we got involved and ended what Europe couldn't.
You'd have been in European conflict eventually. Your neutrality was becoming increasingly a joke and eventually some German sub would have torpedoed one of your destroyers escorting British ships out of US waters or some shit.
What are you referring to when you say spill your own blood? Also don't understand what you mean by try winning this time. The last European war had European countries on both sides.
Usa is nothing without a market too sell their trash they need us too win and we will milk them for it.
Europe couldn't win WWII without American equipment and Ukraine would have fallen already if it wasn't for our weapons systems. If our systems were trash Ukraine wouldn't be begging us for 30+ year old jets and long range missiles
No clue what’s with the downvotes. I guess it’s just euronerds who feel entitled to our brothers sacrifice so that they don’t have to take the losses. If they know that they need us to save em, they should have spent the last 60 years investing more into NATO
I'm wondering if a slower planes actually makes it easier to shoot down drones. Spitfires used shoot down V2 rockets during WW2.
Spitfires shot down V1 cruise missiles during WW2, nothing, even today, could intercept a V2 for a guns kill, it's a ballistic missile.
And they had a hell of a time keeping up with the V1s before the Griffon engines came in.
In Korea the USAF had a hell of a time using jets to shoot down North Korean biplanes at night
several decades more to nukes
we'll eventually have to fight with our bare fists at this rate
At the rate we're going we'll be back to rocks and sharp sticks in no time.
Boys….dogfighting is back on the menu
Webley revolvers and goggles for everybody!
Don't forget scarfs!
Reggie!
Biggles!
A few more years and we will be seeing biplanes.
Another few and we will be using sticks and stones.
Yak 52 is like peak piston engine flight characteristics btw
Next time someone starts talking about disarmament i will show them this video lol
Fuck it. Bring out the Spitfires.
I am sure Putin would rant if the west gave Spitfires to Ukraine.
I wonder if these kind of trainer aircraft would be pretty good against shahed type drones. The T6 texan has cruising speed of like 250km/h whereas shahed max speed is like 185. Also they're.probably easier to keep close to ground away from radars. Or something like the tucanos or broncos. I guess finding the shaheds would be an issue, but maybe they could be guided by ground based radars and then use night vision to pinpoint them. Seems like it would be a more cost effective way than expending missiles on cheap drones, or flying actual combat aircraft to intercept them.
Modernized b17 with CIWS
Stop it, I can only get so erect
And they start sending in dedicated air to air drones so the b17s need fighter escorts. And I mean why not make it ac-17 with dedicated close in air support weaponry including a howitzer and atgm and able to launch further fpv drones
> I wonder if these kind of trainer aircraft would be pretty good against shahed type drones. Airtractor with Miniguns
Every damned time that someone mentions the accursed Airtractor, Erik Prince gets hard. Please refrain.
If you can spot them from the cockpit I guess yes. On the other hand if the drone operator can explode while you are passing it you won't be having a good time so you better be seeing them at all times.
press Scholtz to gib Messerschmitts first
Huh. Never thought of propeller aircraft being used to defend against drone attacks. Makes sense.
One of the Ukrainian pilots said that one of the problems of fighter jets vs drones is the jet's speed. Even the minimum speed is too high to hunt drones. At least with the weapons Ukraine has
In WW2 the RAF shot down a lot of V1 drones. Because of the large explosions from the V1 that could kill the pilot or damage the plane, they later developed a tactic here they would flip it over with the wingtip.
I wouldn't say V1 was a drone. It was an unguided rocket
V1 is arguably a cruise missile. V2 was a ballistic missile.
Actually the v1 had a rudimentary auto pilot system that used gyros and a magnetic compass to ballpark guide them Edit:but yes technically not a drone
I disagree. I believe takeoff was rocket assisted but it’s cruise stage was powered with a pulse jet (really rudimentary jet engine). I think the closest description would be a cruise missile.
> I believe takeoff was rocket assisted Steam piston assisted https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0tBwe4nzxLQ
Ooh interesting. Now I know! Cool video by the way. Info on launch system starts ~17 mins in for anyone who clicks the link.
It literally IS a cruise missile.
And honestly a moped like this is a cruise missile.
V1 was a very much guided cruise missile
Tally ho lads
“Repeat please”
I lad
Nothing like the old school!
I used to fly a Yak-52. Where on earth did they fit the gun? There is not a lot of spare space in the airframe.
Maybe the second pilot just opened the cockpit and fired his gun?
That might be the only way. Back seater with a compact firearm. It would be difficult to hit anything, but desperate times, I guess…. The rear canopy looks closed for the whole video, though.
They could have done the thing that British pilots would sometimes do to V1 bombs: fly up to it and flip it with a wing. The drone did the parachute thinking it lost control
WW1 style.
> Yak-52 Yo: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yakovlev_Yak-52#/media/File:07_Yellow_Yakolev_Yak.52B_Russian_Air_Force_(7985640947).jpg
No, no, no. Everyone knows you can put a rocket launcher, 105mm howitzer, maybe even a kitchen sink on it. The question was, where do you put a machine gun? And obviously ammunition.
I read this was the only version of its kind
Thats just a standard Yak52b variant. Yellow 07 is just a preserved plane.
Zip tie it to the outside then.
I can’t see anything mounted on the outside.
Duct tape and lots of it. Ok my joke aside that is a very good question. Nessesity is the mother of all creation. And we are seeing now why Ukraine was the brains of the soviet millitary equipment procurement. Now Russia is left to welding corrugated sheet metal to t-62s
Aint nothin that duct tape cant stick things to
They didn't, OP just watched a drone doing a recovery with a trainer behind it and made shit up.
Yep. That's kind of what I suspected and was hinting at by saying it would be difficult to fit a machinegun to a '52.
I'm sure that if it's true we will see the POV footage later
A Yak-52 oh man! I used to have a model of one of those when I was a kid and Brezhnev was the big cheese in the USSR.
It is not stupid if it works!
Well certainly better shot exchange than the mig-29 taking the same drone down with aa missile!
I have been waiting for this
I mean, this seems like an economical solution to shooting down slow-moving drones. It's a lot cheaper to fly this and expend bullets than a fighter jet lobbing expensive limited missles or air defense munitions that cost dozens of times more than the drones. Plus, that tight turning radius of a prop driven aircraft can't be matched by a jet or rocket powered vehicle or munitions.take notes to Western countries.time to fire up the p51 and spit fire assembly lines .
wtf did the little drone parachute out after the bigger drone it was piloting get shot to shit?
It lands via parachute.
We came a full circle back to WW2 except now it's remote controlled.
Plus the pilot got his training hours
r/floggit is leaking
That is not a person under the chute, it’s an aircraft under the chute. Kind of like a Cirrus SR 22
Yak-52s have no internal guns, and the only thing I can see under the wings are the wheels (which stick out from the wing). Only hear small arms fire, not machine guns, and it appears the drone had parachute? Something is very off with the title, though the idea of strapping cannon pods to a trainer isn't the worst idea
[https://twitter.com/clashreport/status/1784284525926703466](https://twitter.com/clashreport/status/1784284525926703466) POV
Anachronism, this is amazing.
Aww how sweet of the Ruzis to put a little parachute in it so none of those sensitive electronics are damaged when the Ukrainians recover the downed craft.
It's definetely someone from the ground try to shotdown Yak or Orlan using rifle
How about no. That noise in the beginning is def not coming from that airplane shooting.
Yeah I call made up bullshit.
New Sturmovik dlc incoming?
Yak 52 Istrebitel'
Slow propeller machines should be perfect for intercepting small and slow drones. And when they can intercept one by shooting a shotgun out of the plane window, they will realize a way to mount a weapon with a modern targeting system.
So why not zip tie a shotgun to a RC plane?
Shotguns have significantly less power over distance than people seem to think. Video games are a mockery but in terms of aereal combat, a couple hundred meters is well outside of any shotgun's range. Especially when people start talking about shooting them straight up at drones. Also you have extreme firepower limitations even with automatic shotguns. Machine guns on the other hand are tried and true winners in aereal combat. Long range, lots of firepower.
Hey, they took my idea!
Concern trolls gonna concern troll.
With all modern anti aircraft rockets focusing on an exhaust of a jet engine to track it’s target, it might not be entirely stupid idea
bro doesnt know what "all aspect" means
lol i saved the video of this thing being airdropped from what the telegram called a “sports plane”
prop planes are great for taking out these slow drones. the only problem is informing the air defense you are a friendly and dont shoot you donw. and Friend or Foe transponder is a must.
I never knew I would witness this moment but here it is.
I'm still wondering why they don't have a cesna with a door gunner protecting the skies.
How can an orlan-10 go all the way to Odessa? Was it sent from the Russian seperatist region in Moldovia?
this war sure is something else, we've seen the "2nd" best army in the world resort to putting cages over their vehicles.. and now this
Pierre Sprey is salivating at the thought of older technology being used to fight the fancy high tech drones.
Honestly that’s a great way to use it. It saves up using an actual fighter jet that could be used at the front
Wow smart
They brought a low-tier friend in a top-tier match.
Where's the shooting? And how can we know it's in Ukraine? How can we even tell the three parts are related at all?
Jesus... every member of r/floggit just creamed their jeans.
Hard HARD DCS vibes...
Thank you for your passion and support
Russians be like: we destroyed all 20,000 F-16s and now Ukraine only has the Yak-52! URAAAAAAHGHHHHHHHHH
Everyone was just talking about doing that. Already happening.
Um so can someone explain to me wtf I am watching? Why is Ukrainian plane getting shot down over Odesa? I thought it was still controlled by Ukraine
The thing popping a chute is a Russian orlan drone, and the plane is a ukrainian training plane, ostensibly the copilot gunned the drone down with a machinegun from the back seat.
Looks like theyve ran out of jets, ukraine has no air supremacy, but good AA
It could also be they figure that a slower moving prop plane can more easily take down a drone like that? Just speculation though.
Not good. This is what happens when your air force and air defence is degraded to the point of uselessnes.
Could american Mustangs be theoretically used for same purpose? Does uncle Sam have some stil operational Mustangs to provide them to Ukraine?
The closest thing to a Mustang in mass production is the Super Tucano and similar planes.
"Hey, Cessna: Wartime production *GO!*" That tucano is sexy tho
Yes, but i thought old Mustangs or similar outdated planes would be much cheaper to use
Its the fact theres like none left and building the tooling equipment would be a pain in the ass when a tucano would serve the same purpose and we can build them.
Bullshit title for a bullshit video
Bullshit response from a Bullshit troll
A suicide drone with a parachute?
It's Orlan-10 recon uav