Why don't African (or other broke) countries buy a shit ton of trainers or turboprop aircraft? They're cheaper than jetfighters, sure they don't go as fast or have the same maneuverability... but your enemies literally have ak-47s and can't do shit against them anyways.
Like you could just drop bombs from these frickers and wreck havoc against the goat frickers always causing trouble in your country.
Their would be no competition.
probably because another thats also cheap is decent anti air which can also frick up jets, now imagine those planes having to deal with your average soldier weilding that shit, it would make any investment into those on the grounds of them being cheap pointless since the cost to constantly replace them would outweight just getting jets
which country did you have in mind, idiot?
>probably because another thats also cheap is decent anti air
yeah, ZU-23s are like the mainstay of Toyota armies and they absolutely will frick up cheapass turboprops
How effective a light AA-gun is depends entirely on fire control and early warning systems. Illiterate durkas usually don't have early warning radars or communication network to be aware air threat.
Ding, ding, ding. Gotta think of all the starving politicians and staff officers.
when your gross domestic product is Giraffe poop you dont have much money to buy foreign goods!
I looked up Nigerian air force, and by the looks of it I'm assuming that they order planes and helicopters entirely on a whim. It must be a logistical nightmare to operate their entire fleet.
>on a whim
oh my sweet summer child
>2 aircraft types, 2 parts suppliers, 2 sources of kickbacks
>5 aircraft types, 5 parts suppliers, 5 sources of kickbacks
which would you prefer?
Trainers are good.
>your enemies literally have AK's
And stingers/cheap manpads.
Get enough trainers so that you have a steady lead of skilled pilots.
Then go for three tiers.
>Austere
Drones. TB-2 up to things like Predators/Akincki's
>Lo
F/A-50, JF-17. Cheap and cheerful jets to make up numbers, enforce CAP, do things that require human input and survivability.
>Hi
Rafales, J-10C's, F-16's, F-35's Eurofighters etc. These will be your bread and butter for actual "fighting".
Hi-Lo should share armaments (Both JF-17 and F/A-50 can mount BVR missiles that can be shared with J-10C's and Rafales) and have common logistics and easy cross-training with eachother.
>Picrel, J-10CP and JF-17. Both can fire PL-10/PL-15's and both have the same wienerpit setup re: huds/BVR/Helmet Cueing as well as aerial refuel.
JF-17 is 1/2 the price of the J-10CP, has a lower logistical overhead and can take off from improvised airfields/roads. Meanwhile the J-
10CP can super cruise, can use longer range PL-15's and flies further/faster whilst carrying more munitions
This is the future.
Nigeria is an interesting one. They've got JF-17's that can handle CAP/PGM's. But then instead of going for the JF-17B which can do LIFT they weren't for M-364.
A lot of smaller countries will buy jets based on which have better kickbacks/politics and to avoid embargo's.
For example India brought MiG-29's (which are bad) specifically because they just brought M2K's (which are very good) and didn't want to lose Russian kickbacks and support.
Nigeria is the only country in africa with oil money. It's one of the most corrupt state of the continent (which is saying something).
>Nigeria is the only country in africa with oil money.
Not even remotely close.
Angola, Libya, Algeria, Gabon, Equatorial Guinea, Republic of Congo and South Sudan are all major oil exporters.
Fricking Angola? and who the frick cares about Gabon?! holy shit why do these shitholes get oil?!
Angola is only behind Nigeria in terms of oil, but Nigeria exports a lot of gas as well. Angola has 1/6 of the population of Nigeria.
Gabon and Equatorial Guinea export the most oil and gas relative to their small populations (2.4M and 1.6M people, respectively). If they weren't corrupt they could be very, very rich.
Oh look, the blown out moron made a new thread.
It's because aircraft are hideously expensive to operate.
>Because aircraft are hideously expensive to operate (safely)
Ftfy. Fly it until it dies. Its not like maintenance would have been a thing over there money or lack thereof anyway.
because making it an effective fighting unit with trained pilots and keeping that system maintained costs enough you might as well be doing it conventionally and at that point maybe you're not a dirtfricker whose only enemies are spearchuckers and dudes with AKs
It doesn't even come to that. You need intelligence to strike targets. These frickers are huge, and have massive populations dispersed at random, and their main threat are guerillas. Planes never worked well against randoms.
They do though?
Africans are moronic, anon.
>A FRICKING RAMP
to be fair though, playing around with your mates making aeroplanes looks pretty cosy
>tfw China and Russia are on the same tier as a backyard African
The one at 1:30 looks like the best attempt
Some of those looked passable. The common theme I see with all of them is lack of power. That first heli would've been fine if the tail rotor had some ass behind it.
goddamn I love all of those guys in the video
passionate people with minimal formal education and no access to the know-how and actual aviation-grade materials fail again and again, yet they always cheerfully come back for another try unless they die during testing, just like euro and NA aviation pioneers 120 years ago
I am now tempted to start my own project like that, if only to fly for 50 yards before crashing
Wakanda forevah https://youtu.be/0h_cqTCT5g0
>That video
The word you're searching for is based
Cause they aren't cheap. They are cheaper than a jet fighter but not cheap for a broken ass country. An A-29 cost millions for example.
Probably because they do better and buy jet trainers instead.
They already do what you're "proposing" moron. There are even thirdie countries out there whose entire combat aircraft fleet are ALL armed trainers.
>but your enemies literally have ak-47s and can't do shit against them anyways.
which means it is ideal for straffing them
>Why don't African (or other broke) countries buy a shit ton of trainers or turboprop aircraft?
You mean countries that can't afford basic human-waste management systems?
>They're cheaper than jetfighters
>jetfighters
anyways...they aren't cheap, they are actually very expensive.
>sure they don't go as fast or have the same maneuverability
Neither speed nor maneuverability matter in 2023 for military aircraft.
>but your enemies literally have ak-47s and can't do shit against them anyways.
A Croatian .50cal gun shot down 2 Mig-s in several minutes 30 years ago, A-10s got shot down by small-arms fire constantly.
>Like you could just drop bombs from these frickers and wreck havoc against the goat frickers always causing trouble in your country.
You can't bomb religious extremists.
tard, /misc/ is more up to your speed, go there
Anyone who can afford that can afford a few of those Turkish drones.
Because such an air farce is like buying a toupee.
No way your spirit can endure crossing that Rubicon. You'd sooner have none of it than ... this.
>but your enemies literally have ak-47s
well occasionally their enemies have a few migs or phantoms lying around and then your whole prop air force is destroyed within a week
anti air has ruined all the fun and is cheap
they would still have to maintain them
>Why don't African (or other broke) countries buy a shit ton of trainers or turboprop aircraft? They're cheaper than jetfighters, sure they don't go as fast or have the same maneuverability... but your enemies literally have ak-47s and can't do shit against them anyways.
>Like you could just drop bombs from these frickers and wreck havoc against the goat frickers always causing trouble in your country.
>Their would be no competition.
Because prop planes with unguided munitions are incredibly inaccurate. If you are going to use unguided munitions you are better off buying a cheap helicopter like Jetranger, Huey, Gazelle or something and attaching rocket pods / bombs which won't cost much more than your little plane and will be much more likely to hit things. Also in favor of helicopters, they are a stable platform to fire ATGM's from. If you add PMG's that are suitable for airplane use to the plane then they are no longer all that cheap and you certainly can't buy a shit ton of them.
Also in terms of vulnerability you won't just be dealing with AK's, 23mm AA guns and shoulder fired missiles are pretty abundant so you'll have an inaccurate weapon that isn't that hard to shoot down. The practical dime store airstrike meta is quadcopters with bombs / suicide drones on the low end, cheapish drones with PGM's like the TB-2 like drones on the higher end.
>Gazelle
French learned the hard way that you don't attack Toyota technicals with machine-gun-armed helicopters
>with machine-gun-armed helicopters
Your pic is from a gazelle lisse (unarmed) crash.
But your point is still valid.
weren't they strafing the Toyotas when they got shot down?
mad balls on the Tiger crew btw
Mexico is using those against the cartels. There is a video of it out there.
Even better, go full WWI. Even if the enemy somehow manage to get their hands on MANPADS they're going to struggle to lock onto a balsawood and canvas airframe powered by a 40 horsepower engine.