Russian Jet Fighters in Afghanistan
These are photos from private archives of Russian SU-25 jet fighters in Afghanistan War at 1980s.
via leprosorium.ru
| Tags: afghanistan, russian army, russian jet fighters, russian pilots, russian planes, russian soldiers, russian war, su-25, vintage, war |
Tip: To get daily entertaiment news like this one, bookmark englishrussia.com or get 
if it's more convinient for you.
if it's more convinient for you.
Our friends publish:Bloggers, send your links! |
|
Back to English Russia Main Page for more articles like this
4:16 am
Loading ...
Funny how i just watched Charlie Wilson’s War and saw the freaks using american stingers to shoot these down oh and ur not first
PHOTOSHOP FIRST IGOR IS A FAT BALDY FAG SOME SHIT ABOUT HOW BAD RUSSIA IS, OTHER STUFF, SOME OTHER SHIT, SOMETHING FUNNY ONCE IN A WHILE, THAT GUY WHOS ACTING LIKE MAHMOUD THAT ONE SARA PROSTITUTE THING THOSE AMERICAN MIDDLEAGED GUYS
Дайте инвайт на лепру! =)
Su-25 is not fighter, but more an attack plane like US A-10, A-4 and other A series. Su-25 is almost useless against flying targets, but very useful to attack tank formations or nomads on horses.
Гмм, а когда СУ-25 успел стать истребителем?
Please send these pictures to George Bush. In twenty years those will be American planes.
Keep dreaming hater. The taliban are on the verge of defeat….just like al qaeda in Iraq.
being hit by russian stingers, lol
I read that attack/fighter aircrafts were not very successful in Afghanistan due to rugged terrain, small and fast-moving targets and their relatively high speeds.
Surprisingly, even Mi-24s, the symbols of the war, were supposedly not as efficient as transport Mi-17 equipped with bolt-on weaponry.
“Surprisingly, even Mi-24s, the symbols of the war, were supposedly not as efficient as transport Mi-17 equipped with bolt-on weaponry.”
Are you serious? I don’t disagree, because I don’t know. It’s just that I’ve never heard or read that before.
Why would an Mi-17 be better? That is very interesting. Maybe I’ve watched too many war films with that awesome Mi-24.
Thanks.
I was surprised, too.
The information comes from the book written by Czech non-fiction writer who based it on the works of ex-Soviet veterans of the war (these books are listed, but unavailable to me). It says that “Many veterans insist that Mi-17 was better than Mi-24 when deployed in close combat missions as it was possible to remove the cargo door and mount two twin machine guns into the openings for the protection of the chopper´s rear and sides…” etc.
I must admit that although bookshops are overflowing with the books about WWII, there is very little literature available about the Afghanistan war in CZ - I guess the topic is on the very fringe of reader´s interest.
At least one book of those used for the research is available in English and online for those who like reading books while sitting in front of their computer (I don´t):
http://books.google.com/books?id=MWgR8zSaK4oC&printsec=frontcover&dq=borovik&hl=cs&sig=c5mXNNWhfXM4SqWcaZ7ka0E3hJA
That makes sense, and it’s another excellent example of how soldiers adapt equipment in the field, and how sometimes the thing everyone assumed would be the most effective is not . . . at least not in every case.
I guess the additional small-arms coverage–or “flank security”–of the door gunners makes the difference. The guns mounted on the door not only would cover the left and right flanks, but probably had a broad arc of fire (depending on how far into the door they were mounted, width of doorway, etc.), whereas the guns in the nose of a Mi-24 have a limited arc, and even that is pointing forward.
The timing of this post is great because I just found a copy of “Afghan Tales–Stories from Russia’s Vietnam” by Oleg Yermakov, published in 1991. (I was lucky enough, and surprised, to come upon it in a stack of used books for sale). The author info says Yermakov spent two years (1980-1981) in Afghanistan. It should be interesting.
Thanks again for the info, and thanks for the link to the book. It should be a good one. I’ll check it out soon.
The second image looks like a takeoff error? He still has those FAB250 bombs on his wings. I think any pilot would have gotten rid of those things if he had time.
What is with the ears on the guy in the first photo? He looks like an elf.
better get it done before Bush leaves office
once black Barack Osama gets into office the troops are coming home
That’s right. Every night Islamic terrorists, on the run from an administration that has the political will to authorize hit teams to kill the bastards in their tracks, gather around their campfires all over the world and listen to their group leader read a chapter from “The Audacity of Hope.”
Very interesting photos of Su-25 aircraft and crew. Thanks for the post.
De toes are on the edge of defeat.
Wow. I’m still digesting the deep meaning of that profound statement, but somehow I already know that someone of your intellect is right at home here at ER. Welcome, brother!
[...] read more…. Related PostsThe Korean BoeingThe Russian Tank and The Russian MissileBarracks for Charlie CO 2/508 82n Airborne Posted in Funny Pictures | Leave a Comment [...]
The Su-25 was a close support battle plane, like the A10 wartog, not a fighter.
Thus, they fly really low in range of handguns and Stingers.
It s amazing, how the pilot landen with the plane fully loaded with weaponry.
They can carry a lot of it, it was a good plane. Just ask the pilots.
Not really “handguns”
picture 1, “Spokski”
=Star Treck “Spock” joke
wtf ? Su-25 Frogfoot is Attack Plane. NOT fighter.
like A6 or A10, for example.
yes, designed for CAS.
[...] w Afganistanie Tutaj troch ciekawych jak mi si wydaje zdj z czasw wojny w Afganistanie: English Russia Russian Jet Fighters in Afghanistan English Russia Russian Pilot in Afghanistan [...]
yep, its great plane.
especially latest mod SU-25CM Frogfoot II.
or designated tank killer SU-39[two-seats, armed with precision striking munitions).
Funny post! Liked the pics you shared. Enjoyed it!:)