# FMA IA-58 Pucara COIN aircraft.



## CharlesBronson (Jun 19, 2005)

The Command-in-Chief of the Argentine Air Force officially presented at the beginning of 1968 the requirements to the Cordoba Material Area for the project and construction of the FMA IA-58 Pucará. The construction of the first prototype began in September of the same year, and made its first flight the 16 of August of 1969. The first prototype was equipped with two turboprops Garret TPE 331 of 904 HP, but soon for the series airplanes the Turbomeca Astazou XVI-G was selected, of 1.021 HP, that drive variables three-blade propellers. The Pucará is the only plane produced by the Military Factory of Airplanes that entered into combat, since it was used by the Argentine Air Force in the conflict of the Malvinas Islands. It is a two-seater ground-attack and tactical support airplane of entirely metallic construction, and their general characteristics are: 

Width 14.50 ms; Length 14.25 ms; Height 5.36 ms; wing area 30.30 m2; Empty weight 3,985 kg; Maximum weight in take-off 6,625 kg; Maximum weight in landing 5,800 kg; Payload 2,640 kg; Speed at 3,000 ms of altitude, 520 km/h; Speed in deep 750 km/h; Cruise speed 485 km/h; Rate of climb at sea level 18 m/s; Take-off distance 420 ms; Landing distance 230 ms; Normal range 1,400 km; Ferry flying range, 3,400 km. 

It count with two Martin-Baker Mk.6 zero-zero ejection seats. The fixed armament consisted of four FN Browning 7.62 mm machine guns located in both sides of the fuselage, and two HS 804 20 mm cannons in the inferior part of the nose. Has in addition three pylons to transport external loads by a gross weight of 1,500 kg, being able to take bombs, rockets or napalm tanks. In the time of the Malvinas conflict tests for the launch of torpedoes were made, but did not prosper. Were made sales to Uruguay, Venezuela and Indonesia, without counting the units captured by the British in the South Atlantic conflict. 

*Pucará with the more common camouflage scheme used in the Malvinas-Falkland conflict*






*An example present in the South Atlantic armed with a ventral container of an additional cannon*


----------



## CharlesBronson (Jun 19, 2005)

*In Tucuman: *
Toward the year 1975, Argentina was wrapped in a typical low intensity war, against guerillas fighters that belonged to different groupings. Mainly established in the Tucuman mount, it is there where the Pucara was deployed for the first time. The scarce number of available airplanes - there were only 4 airplanes in service - made that their participation was only limited to exploration tasks and support. In this respect some action it is not known in the one that has participated. The used paint scheme was the standard with which left factory, it is natural metal, just as sample the profile of the A-501.







*The bordering conflict with Chile: *

Toward ends of 1978, dictatorship by means of, the different bordering conflicts with the Republic of Chile were increased. For that reason, all the available Pucara, included those of the Center of Tests in Flight (C.E.V.), with all their personnel, were deployed to the south of Argentina. Concretely, the Pucara was divided in two squadrons: In the BAM Santa Cruz, in the province of the same name, and in the BAM Fuerte General Roca, in the province of Rio Negro. This spread carried out to principle of December of that same year. The Pope's John Paul II opportune intervention avoided the conflict, reason for which the Pucara of the G3A was refolded to Reconquista, in the province of Santa Fe, in gradual form. The last section (2 airplanes) returned coming from Santa Cruz by the middle of January of 1979. For this date the readiness of machines was bigger (around 20 airplanes), being the cadence of deliveries on part of the FMA of one per month. Although scarce information exists about the used scheme of painting, the very few black and white pictures allow us to deduce that the last left airplanes of factory were colored entirely of medium gray, as it shows the figure of the A-557, while the first ones still conserved the natural metal.






*The Malvinas- Falkland war: *

The Argentinian Armed forces recapture the Malvinas Islands in april 2 1982, that territory so care to the national feeling. The Pucara of the G3A arrived the same day at the airport of Puerto Argentino (Port Stanley) in squadron (4 airplanes), and their numerals were: A-523, 529, 552 and 556. Starting from that moment this airport was constituted in the BAM Malvinas. In the following days the Pucara Malvinas Squadron was devoted to familiarize with the land and the operations type that would carry out. The offensive recognition would be its main operation way. The Pucara Squadron, to being this the only combat airplane that it prepared the Argentinian Air Force to operate in Malvinas, was reinforced with 8 more airplanes, that which took at 12 the total of machines. Also began to look for alternative runways to be able to deploy the noted Pucara Squadron, due to the congestion of air traffic in the runway of Puerto Argentino, besides the scarce available place to park the airplanes. The only capable considered place for these airships was a land located in the proximities of Port Darwin. In fact, to say capable it doesn't mean ideal, since in fact the runway was far from being considered in that way. The “runway” not measured more than 500 meters. With a prominent wave that if somebody observed the take off career from some of the runway heads, you grieve it could sight the superior part of the line of the airplane. This way, due to the rough and irregular of the land, each take off and landing they constituted an enormous effort. To this place it denominated BAM Condor, being like an alternative the use of the BAN Calderon that was in hands of the Navy, located in the Pebble Island. Starting from April 24 the Pucara Malvinas Squadron, such its official name, began to operate in the “runway” of the BAM Condor, task that was intensified toward ends of the same month.


----------



## CharlesBronson (Jun 19, 2005)

*The 1st. of May:*

Although the boss of the BAM Condor was noticed of the attacks suffered by the BAM Malvinas at the tomorrow's 4:44 and 8:00 local time, the defenders of the base were taken by surprise, when at the 8:24 three Harriers of the 800 Sqn of the aircarrier Hermes fliying at great speed and low height, throwing cluster bombs. This happened while the A-527 of the Lt. Juckic started the engines, being reached by a bomb, perishing the pilot and six mechanics. As consequence of the attack three airplanes they were damaged and one destroyed. That same day they were carried out patrol flights without results. The BAM Condor was useless, and the Pucara they were reestablished in the BAN Calderon. It was there where May 15 a blow command of the 22° SAS destroyed 11 airplanes, including 6 Pucara. The scarce Pucara in service was finally established in the BAM Malvinas. Other airplanes arrived of the continent, in fact from Commodore Rivadavia, where they were colored before the crossing to the islands. When the British troops began the blockade to Darwin, the Pucara was used in an intense way during the whole place; destroying places of advanced of the British, observation positions, carrying out attacks to troops, etc. In May 28 a section of Pucara detected, in Darwin's proximities, two British Scout helicopters. The A-537 of the Lt. Gimenez was able to shot down one of them with a combined cannon-rockets burst, while the other Scout suffered smaller mishaps. 

. With Darwin's fall, the Pucara settled down definitively in the BAM Malvinas. With the blockade to Puerto Argentino the Pucara was again active, using 68 mm. rockets shot to targets pointed out by the Argentinian artillery, with having not been so uncertain, because the British answer was not made wait every time that the Argentinian airplanes operated. Finally, a last attack intent to the positions of the English artillery with later return to the continent drifted for June 14, but it was canceled due to the rendition of the Argentinian troops.

Camouflage and insignia:
Although little its known, because no officially revellation never existed in this respect of the used colors; but, for the available pictures, it is supposed that these been:

Medium green: Similar to the israeli (FS 34227).

Brown (Toasted) : Similar to Tan (FS 30219).

Light blue (Aviation): Lower part of the airplane.

But well, we should clarify that 4 camouflages existed, whose base is the colors up exposed.
Dark Camo: Just as it was exposed up, and perhaps until a little darker. An example of this camo was the A-537, 536 and 555, only with national insignia in wings and fuselage, conserving the medium gray in the inferior part, likewise the national insignia and the numeral one.


*Standard Camo: We will denominate this way it to be the one that possessed most of the Pucara. More lighter than the previous one. Example: A-517, 513 and 515; most conserved their national insignia and numeral, it leaves bottom of the fuselage in natural metal.*






*Light Camo: More lighter than the standard, these airplanes were seemingly the first ones in being colored to be correspondents to Malvinas. Examples: A-522, 532 and 528; they conserved national insignia and numeral, it leaves bottom part of the fuselage in light blue. The A-536 it was something attractive, since having been colored with the light camo, it was repainted in the dark camo, being able to appreciate this in the tail of the airplane, where the dissimilar paintings were superimposed.*


----------



## plan_D (Jun 19, 2005)

Interesting. I enjoyed reading about the Falklands war from the Argentinian point of view. What a foolish nation to try and take the Falkland Isles.


----------



## Nonskimmer (Jun 19, 2005)

Let's keep it clean and above the belt boys, 'coz I can see where this could end up.

Interesting posts by the way, CB.


----------



## CharlesBronson (Jun 19, 2005)

> ...What a foolish nation...



Is not a very fortunate statement.......  

Aniway:

*The Torpedo Armed Pucará*


The South Atlantic conflict caused the Argentinean Armed Forces to face not only a world power when it comes to military might, but also their own internal limitations and failures in warfare. 

Not only the maritime might, but the certain threat posed by the British submarines was evidenced with the sinking of the cruiser ARA "General Belgrano" on 02-May-82, and for this reason, the Argentinean Navy and Air Force sought to implement solutions to counteract this troublesome situation. 

Despite the controversial decision to withdraw the ships from the fleet to safer waters, the Naval Aviation developed, besides their attack operations to naval targets, many options to protect the fleet from attack coming from enemy ships and submarines, and part of the success of these options was due to the withdrawal of the fleet to shallow waters.

On the other hand, the Air Force, despite having had little experience in attack operations against naval formations, began to evaluate the possibility of adapting aircraft and to develop tactics specifically aimed to 
that end, in an attempt to increase its attack capabilities. 

By the middle of May, 1982 the Strategic Air Comand of the Air Force decided to undertake a series of test flights, with the purpose of make operational the IA-58 Pucará, armed with torpedoes. 

The weapon chosen in this case, would be the U.S. built Mk.13 torpedo, which by then had almost been withdrawn from use by the Argentinean Navy. Built between the years 1944 - 1952, it was a sturdy weapon, having been designed to be launched from boats and aircraft. The Argentinean Navy employed it for many years, launching it from Consolidated PBY-5A Catalinas, with the launching speed being 100 knots. 







While not being the most modern weapon, the large number of examples remaining in the inventory caused its selection for the evaluation being conducted. The then Comodoro Jorge S. Raimondi was placed in charge of the project, conducted at the Naval Base of Puerto Belgrano, in order to obtain cooperation from the Navy. The Navy quickly supplied enough torpedoes, which were equipped then with the brackets necessary to mount them to the airplanes, and after a long time of inactivity, the torpedoes' mechanisms and systems were back in service. 

On 21 May, lands at the Comandante Espora air base, Pucará registered as AX-04, which had been assigned to the Centro de Ensayos en Vuelo (Flight Testing Center) at the Area Material Córdoba, flown by Capitán Rogelio R. Marzialetti and the Supervisor Mario A. Loiacono (both belonging to the CEV). 

This specific aircraft was a standard series unit (A-509) having been modified after leaving the assembly line, to be employed as prototype for the evaluation of weapons and aircraft systems, and having as part of its equipment, a film camera to be employed to document the moment when the torpedo was launched. The torpedo was carried on the aircraft's Aero 20A-1 central weapons station. 

The first launch of a Mk.13, takes place on 22 May, the torpedo having been a practice round, not equipped an explosive head. The launch zone established by the Navy, was located 40 miles from Puerto Belgrano, and would be the same location where later the same day, the second test launch would take place. 


Launch involved having the aircraft establish a 20 degree dive, at a speed of 300 knots and at approximately at a height of 100 mts., resulting on the destruction of the torpedo when it impacted the sea. The same happens the next day when the parameters were a 45deg. dive, speed of 250 knots, and approximate height of 200 mts. 

It became evident that there was something missing for the torpedo to be effectively deployed from an airplane with the performance of the Pucará.

Lacking the torpedo's operational manuals for air deployment, the only information available was that it should enter the water at an angle of approximately 20 degrees. With a less acute angle, the torpedo would bounce when hitting the water, thus damaging the internal and propulsion mechanisms, and if the angle was greater, then there existed the risk that it would "spike" itself on the bottom of the sea. 

After consultations conducted with retired sub-officers who had been assigned to the Army's torpedo shops, a nose-mounted aero-dynamic brake was installed on the Mk.13, and a biplane stabilizer was installed in the tail end, additions that would be destroyed when the torpedo hit the water.

After these modifications were undertaken, the first successful launches take place on 24 May, off Trelew, in the waters of the San Jose Gulf. These took place while the airplane was on a straight and level flight attitude and at a height of 15 meters, and it was then determined that the optimal speed was 200 knots, since higher speeds caused the torpedo to impact the bottom of the sea.

A total of 7 practice runs were conducted, and another 10 launch, this time with an explosive head, was conducted on 10 June, on a zone with deeper waters and near cliffs, North of the Port of Santa Cruz, but the depth here was not enough to compensate for the speed of 250 knots developed by Pucará A-566 which hade replaced AX-04 on the testing.

A last attempt is conducted on 14 June, in the neighborhood of Pingüino Island (near Puerto Deseado) chosen because of its maximum depth and ruggedness of the shoreline, and establishing a definite launch speed of 200 knots, but while the preparations for launching were taking place, this operation is completelly cancelled, due to the surrender of the Argentinean troops which were fighting in the Malvinas. 

It is worth mentioning that at the same time that this project was being undertaken, studies were also conducted regarding the launching from the Pucará, of anti-ship mines Mk.12, in an attempt to mine the San Carlos Straits (in the Malvinas Islands), but this did not go beyond the loading up testing of the mines to the airplane. 

While these testing operations were taking place, the Air Force deployed a section of IA-58A Pucara from the Grupo 3 de Ataque, to the airport of La Plata (Buenos Aires) to conduct patrolling missions on the approaches to the Río de La Plata, due to the possibility of British submarines operating in the area. 

The end of the South Atlantic conflict, marked the end of the evaluation of the employment of the Pucará for the delivery of torpedoes and other specific weapons, for use against naval targets, and the aircraft involved in the testing, were returned to their parent units.


----------



## plan_D (Jun 19, 2005)

You took the quote out of context. You do not believe Argentina was foolish to try and claim the Falkland Isles from Britain? Even with the benefit of hindsight?


----------



## CharlesBronson (Jun 20, 2005)

Do you really are waiting that I am to agree with you... ?  

If we look back the Anglo-Argentine relations where very good in the 20 century, maybe with a short intermezzo de 1940-1946, when took the power a serie of very pro-german military goverments.

The 1982 conflict poisoned for ever the frienship between this 2 countries.

Back on topic.

*THE "FOREIGN" PUCARAS*

*Uruguay*

Towards year ends 1980, the Uruguayan Air Force (FAU) decides the purchase of 6 Pucara, to locate them in the Air group Nº 1 with base in Durazno. The machines were given of the serial numbers corresponding to the Argentinian Air Force as they left factory. For example, the matriculations that corresponded to the A-542, 543, 544,
546, 547 and 548, were dropped from rolls for their sale to the FAU. Until the present the quick Pucara services in the FAU not anticipating their replacement in immediate time. The numbers of identification go from the 220 to the 225, without no area code or letter that accompanies them. As it notices peculiar we will say that the FAU has the first IA-58 woman pilot. The color scheme used at a first moment by the Uruguayan airplanes was the three colors used by the US in Vietnam, that is: Tan FS 30219, Green FS 34079 and Green FS 34102. We must brief that the badge of the unit was placed in the empennage (tail) of the airplane. Later the FAU adopts for all their airplanes a scheme of camouflage in the Europe I style. We say is similar because all the colors of the same one are not
contemplated. For the Pucara the Green FS 34092 and Dark Grey FS 36081 were adopted, for the superior surface, and Light Grey FS 36622 for the inferior one. 

















*Colombia:*

The late 1980s was a very violent and bloody time for Colombia.
the increase in strenght of the Narco-guerrilas and urban cartels devastated the country with a serie of terrorist attacks and selvatics affensives.

With the strong conviction something have to be done, the President of Argentina Dr Carlos Saul Menem donates 3 IA-58 Pucara and a pack of spares.
The planes where delivered by with Argentine crew in december 1989.

The IA-58 was *"THE"* aircraft for the combat against the drug traffic and the guerrilla. Such they were assigned to the Base of Apiay, but indeed to the Swarm of Special Operations Nº 314. The serial numbers in FAC are the 2201, 2202 and 2203. 
On the COIN task it replaced the FAC T-33 and complemented the AC-47 gunship.
The favorite weapons layout was 6 low drag 125 kg argentine frag bombs in the central pilon and four 19x70mm rockets launchers in the wings pods.
Pucara indeed has participated for the aim by which they were donated. Of all ways the life utility of the Pucara in Colombia was short. 
Despite the roughness of this craft.... the lack of adecuate maintenance left them out of service. The paint scheme was equal to the one of the FAA, in natural metal, with exception, obviously of the national insignias.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Jun 20, 2005)

I've always been facinated by this aircraft, it looks like it has a "German" blood line!


----------



## Glider (Jun 20, 2005)

I always thought that it looked a good little plane ideal for use in drug wars and similar low intensity situations.
Reading about the Falklands they were robust planes capable of taking a lot of damage, and giving it to the british troops they were attacking. In many ways similar to the American Bronco


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Jun 20, 2005)

I think it would be a blast to fly one!


----------



## plan_D (Jun 21, 2005)

It would have been fly to blast one too.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Jun 21, 2005)

It's funny, according to this site only one IA-58 was lost in air-to-air combat!

http://www.acig.org/artman/publish/article_158.shtml


----------



## CharlesBronson (Jun 21, 2005)

Yes, most of them was destroyed in ground attacks made by Harriers ans Sea Harriers.

*THE "FOREIGN" PUCARAs: Part II*

*Sri Lanka:*

Surprisingly in 1993 the Air Force of this ignoto country acquired 5 aircraft. The instruction as much of mechanics and pilots was carried out in Cordoba. Later the airplanes were disarmed and sent on board of a C-130 of the FAA. This country was suffering a bloody civil war against the denominated guerrilla Tamil Tigers, that in addition dominated a part of the island. 






The use of the machines was intense, as soon as they were in operative conditions were put in support missions. The conditions of the climate of this country, with intense heats and high humidity, added to the intense beaten use went degrading to the Pucara Thus towards 1998 were retired from duty when only they were 2 left of the 5 original ones. Test this once again that its name was not put in vain. The
scheme of paint and insignia is represented in a profile. In the superior part was used a Light Gray, while in the inferior 












*Mauritania:*

Although it was an operation that was frustrated at last moment, the fact that existed one of the three airplanes acquired by this African nation and in addition a photography, feeds our modelistic curiosity. Beyond of the details that happened to the frustrated sale, the interesting thing is the description of the standards and painting colors. The matriculation that initially it had was pasavante (provisory civil matriculation) 5T-MAB, located in the
fuselage and wings, whereas the national insignia of the country in the empennage and the wings. The colors were for desert climate were: Desert Yellow and Brown Chocolate, for the upper part, and Pale Blue even the inferior one. The profile gives an idea us how it had left factory originally. 











*England*

Let me say that I included the Pucara captured by the English like a tribute to its task in the Malvinas conflict. Then the airplanes captured in Port Stanley (Puerto Argentino), those that were in flight condition or almost, were taken to England for their evaluation. The matriculations of those airplanes were: A-515, 533, 522, 528 and 549. After evaluating all the cells it was decided that the 515 would be the chosen one to return it to flight condition an to evaluate, serving the others like source as spare parts. Thus in April of 1983 ZD 485 (former A-515), flew for the first
time. The tests concluded in September of the same year. Therefore the A-515 returned to Cosford with a different pain scheme from which it had when it flew for the FAA. The profile represented in this note corresponds to ZD 485.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Jun 21, 2005)

Great post CB!


----------



## plan_D (Jun 21, 2005)

The British liked them. Yes, most of them were blown up on the ground by SeaHarriers and ground forces. My dad saw quite a few blown to pieces. The British forces captured an Argentine Huey too and were using it before the reinforcement Chinooks went down. 

My dad tried to take the Peto head off one of the wrecked Hueys but didn't have the tools to take it off, and didn't want to break it, so he left it there. That would have been a great souvenier.


----------



## CharlesBronson (Jun 21, 2005)

FLYBOYJ said:


> Great post CB!



As usual....  

The only Pucara downed in air-to-air operation was in the 21 may 1982 1045 hours, when it was catched by No.801 Squadron CAP ( Lt. N. Ward, Lt. S. Thomas and Lt. A. Craig ). It was hit several times by 30mm cannon fire from Ward's Harrier and the pilot, Major Carlos Tomba, ejected and walked back to Goose Green. Ward later complemented Major Tomba on how he continued to fly his aircraft after Ward had filled it with so many holes. 


*Improved versions.*


*IA-58B:*

This aircraft used two Defa 553 30 mm gun instead the 20 mm HS-804.
As result the lower fuselage presented a very prominent bulge to allow the chamber of this revolver-cannon.
3 aircraft completed.

*IA-58C*

Very improved version, single place ( the front cockpit was eliminated).
Increased pilot and fuel armor. The nose added a single 30 mm Defa 553 gun 






The fixed weaponry now is : 4 x 7,62 mm with 900 rpg, 2x 20 mm with 270 prg and 1 x 30mm with 170 rpg. The total rate of fire is around 7000 rpm.






Equipped with ECM, more modern HUD and marginal pilons for Matra Magic AAM and Martin Pescador air to ground missiles.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Jun 21, 2005)

Now the Charlie version - THAT IS SLICK! I still say there's some "Kurt Tank" influance there?!?


----------



## CharlesBronson (Jun 21, 2005)

Hard to tell....check this view, not a good quality photo but it shows the cockpit layout.






The only very germanic thing is the landing gear and shock damper, very similar to .....Ju-88


----------



## evangilder (Jun 22, 2005)

Interesting aircraft.


----------



## CharlesBronson (Jun 22, 2005)

A funny situation was presented in the early 1990s when the Ejercito Argentino ( Argentine Army) was in the search for a multirole fixed wing plane, wich could operate over the battlefield.

The FMA IA-58A, obviously being and domestic product seemed the first choice.
However the Ejercito specifications was most targeted for the recon and FAC ( Forward Advanced Control) than COIN or attack.

As result of this the Army bought 24 OV-1D Mohawk in 1993-4, this aircraft is less capable in the Coin and attack role , but the Mohawk with more advanced sensor as SLAR, FLIR, and TV operated more efective in the recon and night special-ops.











Despite being equipedd with pods for light rocket-launcher and bombs, it was never used in the support role.


----------



## CharlesBronson (Jun 23, 2005)

*Improved Versions, Part II:*


*IA-58D:*

Basically a IA-58A but completely refurbished.

Amongst the most salient characteristics of this airplane, it is worth mentioning the widespread use of composite materials in the fuselage, that contributing to increase the load carrying capabilities of the machine, and they have contributed to increasing the machine's useful life span. 

Some pics of the work done in *LMAASA *( Lockheed Martin Argentina Sociedad Anonima, Formerly *FMA*), in July 2004.











The new elements includes a new electric wiring and fuel/hidraulic pipes.
Also the proppeller blades and some engine components are replaced for more modern ones.

The more noticeable differences took place inside the cabin, at the controls, mainly in the instrument panel, where instruments were replaced to indicate measures in feet, instead of in meters. For this purpose, Collins VHF 22B, CTL 22 and 32, VIR 32 and RMI 30, as well as a Garmin GPS 150 XL and a Litton HSI. 

A factory fresh *IA-58 Delta*, note the low visibility grey, more suitable for air superiority than the low level attack arena , usual in the Pucara. 






This photo was took in he LMAASA "Flugplatz", just at 15 km where I am writing this.  



*IA-66:*

This version made his maiden flight in 1986.
It was equipped with 2 four blade, 1100shp, Garret turboprops, that boosted the performace to more than 600 km/h and increase the payload to 2000 kg.






Also carry 4 x 12,7 mm M3, instead the 30 caliber MGs.
Despite the good caracteristics of this plane, the weapons ( and engines) embargo aplied to Argentina in the post Falkland-Malvinas conflict crippled the logistic for the Garret TP.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Jun 23, 2005)

GREAT SHOTS! Did Lockheed Martin buy the former FMA?


----------



## CharlesBronson (Jun 23, 2005)

Yes, the original state property FMA ( Fabrica Militar de Aviones = military aircraft factory) was privatizated and leased to Lockheed-Martin Aircraft for a 25 year period in the late 1995.






In this facility is also manufactured the trainer AT-63 Pampa.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Jun 23, 2005)

OK - That makes sense, I always see literature from LMC promoting the Pampa.


----------



## evangilder (Jun 24, 2005)

Cool stuff!


----------



## plan_D (Jul 10, 2005)

There's a Pucara at Duxford - it's in great shape! I took these just for you, CB...

It was captured in the Falklands.


----------



## CharlesBronson (Jul 11, 2005)

> it's in great shape!



Funny boy...  

Thanks for your pics, this one the A-549 was used as spare part for this ZD 485 (former A-515).






A remark on the IA-58... despite the use of A-4s, Mirage IIIs, Mirage Vs for the AAF and A-4s, MB-326s, MB-339 and Super Etendars by the Armada, this propeller aircraft achieved to shot down the only enemy aircraft confirmed by the Argentine Air Forces.


----------



## CharlesBronson (Aug 8, 2005)

A little more info about the AT-63.

With a fully upgraded cockpit and modern avionics suite, the new AT-63 under production in Argentina is setting a new standard for low-cost basic through advanced trainer and light attack aircraft. On June 19, 2001, Lockheed Martin presented this new aircraft during the Paris Air Show and is now offering it to customers worldwide. 

The Argentine Air Force signed an agreement with Military Planes Manufacturer of Cordoba for the purchase of 12 Pampa AT-63 pilot trainers- The production is scheduled to begin in 2003. The first jet prototype conducted the inaugural flight in early 2002. The aircraft worth 6 million dollars is being offered to Colombia, Greece and Venezuela


The new AT-63 features:

-A Honeywell TFE-731-2C turbofan engine with 3,500 pounds of thrust. 

-A state-of-the-art avionics suite with a Digital 1553B MIL STD data bus, full systems redundancy, a glass cockpit, laser ring INS/GPS NAV, a mission computer and an integrated weapons system. 

-Fully pressurized dual control cabin with a one-piece canopy that can be electrically fragilized in the event of ground emergency. 

-The ejection sequence for the two zero-zero seats can be pre-selected. 
-Four underwing plus one under fuselage weapons stations enabling air-to-air and air-to-ground light attack capability. 

Some internal shots still in factory.






AT-63 Characteristics

Weight: 
Empty
6,217 lb
2,820 kg


Internal Fuel
2,380 lb
1,080 kg


Max TOGW
11,038 lb
5,000 kg

Wing Area
168.3 sq.ft.
(15.63 m2)

Horizontal Tail Area
46.8 sq.ft.
(4.35 m2)

Aspect Ratio
6.0

Leading-Edge Sweep
5.4 deg

Service Life
8,000 hours

Engine Thrust
3,500 lb class
1,560 daN

Performance

Max Level Speed @ 26,200 ft
440 KTAS
815 km/hr

Cruise Speed @ 30,000 ft (Clean)
350 KTAS 
650 km/hr

Stall Speed- Flap-Down
82 KCAS
152 km/hr

Maximum Operational Mach
0.8


Design Load Factor
+6g -3g


Take-Off Run (ISA-S/L-Normal Fuel-8,300 lb)
1,410 ft
430 m

Maximum War load
1510 Kg.

Landing Run (ISA-S/L-7,710 lb)
1,510 ft
460 m

Ceiling
42,300 ft
12,900 m

Maximum Climb Rate (8,300 lb)
5,120 ft/min
1,560 m/min

Range
1,140 n miles
2,100 km

Roll rate
200° /sec


Work in the Factory. 
















Perversely, the new "all glass"avionics installed in the AT-63 trainer is far much better that some combat aircraft still used by the AAF like the prehistorics Mirage III/V/IAI Nesher, only machted by the LMASAA A-4AR Fightigh Hawks.

Nice shot of an old series IA-63.


----------



## plan_D (Aug 8, 2005)

A Pucara shot down an aircraft during the Falklands? Which one? When? Where? How? I've only read three losses, all to Argentine ground fire. Feel free to prove otherwise.


----------



## Glider (Aug 8, 2005)

A Pucara from Groupo 3 shot down a Scout on the 28th May killing the pilot Lt Nunn. 
Just an observation on some comments made earlier. If the Argentine forces had organised themselves properly, there is no reason why they should have lost the air battle over the Falklands. It was to our benefit that they didn't.


----------



## plan_D (Aug 8, 2005)

Okay, I was thinking about the Sea Harriers. The Argentine Air Force certainly could have won with the extreme favourable odds in air power but they just didn't! Plus the fact, our ground forces were far, far, far superior to the Argentine conscripts. 

A lot of their aircraft were ended on the ground. Plus, our Royal Navy pilots were just better.


----------



## CharlesBronson (Aug 8, 2005)

> Just an observation on some comments made earlier. If the Argentine forces had organised themselves properly, there is no reason why they should have lost the air battle over the Falklands. It was to our benefit that they didn't.



How my post about the AT-63 degenerated in this...?  

Aniway I think that organizated or not the Argentine Air Force gave too much advantage in terms of technology and that was the cause of the lack of sucess in achieve the air superiority.

The more modern plane of the AAF in 1982 was the IAI Nesher, a Israeli made Mirage V with no air-to-air radar. The MIIIEA had radar but fron the 60s.






The avionics in the A-4Ps was awful, the long range operation that it had to carry out, mauled his warload and performances.

In the Armada the thing was little better with the Dassault Super Etendar, but the very limited amount of Exocet missiles the only modern weapon in the argentine inventory, also limited his effect on war.






And off course the formidable AIM-9L was a very nasty surprize for every argentine aviators.


----------



## Nonskimmer (Aug 8, 2005)

Pardon me, for my knowledge of the Argentine military is extremely spotty, but it was my understanding that the Argentine pilots were skilled enough, and that it was really an organizational problem that hampered them more than anything. Their equipment wasn't exactly garbage either.
Believe me, I'm following this thread with interest and hoping to learn a bit. 

Beautiful pictures by the way! Good info too.


----------



## plan_D (Aug 8, 2005)

Their equipment was superior to what the Royal Navy could produce; 20 Sea Harriers. The pilots were good but not superior to Royal Navy pilots, who are some of the best in the world. 

A complete lack of tactical ability let the entire Argentine attempt down. I don't think they were prepared for a British counter-attack and especially not one organised that quickly. 

The AAF also lost a lot of it's aircraft on the ground to British SF. The aircraft that were operational often had to be at the extent of their range against the Royal Navy, as they were operating from Argentina. 

The AAF also had the goliath task of stopping the British landing anything ashore. Which, I must say, was almost impossible especially since MI6 had bought up all the Exorcet missiles from the French. Once the British forces were ashore it was only a matter of time before defeat came upon the Argentines, the AAF could not save them.


----------



## Glider (Aug 9, 2005)

Their is no doubt that the AAF pilots were brave but not as well trained as the Harrier Pilots or that the Harrier was the better fighter. Obviously the British were not allowed to strike at the bases in Argentina but we did destroy a lot if not most of the planes based in the Falklands. These tended to be the Pucara and light strike/trainer jets.

The keys mistakes the AAF made were
a) not extending the runway on the Falklands to take faster jets to use as forward bases or refueling points
b) Not building protective bunkers with overhead protection for the planes on the island
c) Not launching large raids to target the Harriers. Their was never a concerted attempt to target the Harriers.
d) The Skyhawks never made any attempt to cover each other when under attack, their only tactic was to run which doesn't work if your in the slower plane. This is part of the training observation.
e) They didn't fuse their bombs properly, a simple mistake that saved the task force from a lot more damage.

It should be remembered that we only had 20 Harriers, their were no spares or replacements even in the UK. The AAF would have lost more Mirages than we Harriers but the loss of three or four Harriers would have had a major effect on ability of the RN to defend itself.


----------



## CharlesBronson (Aug 9, 2005)

> Their equipment was superior to what the Royal Navy could produce



Superior in cuantity not quality. The AIM-9L for example.



> Their is no doubt that the AAF pilots were brave but not as well trained as the Harrier Pilots or that the Harrier was the better fighter.



And again the problem wasnt training but equipment, just put an argentine pilot in a Mirage 2000 or a F-15 and you see what I am talking about.



> It should be remembered that we only had 20 Harriers



Wich had the support of the powerful SAM sistems carried by the U.K navy near the islands. The sea-to-air misiles killed more argentine planes than the FRS-1s.


----------



## plan_D (Aug 9, 2005)

That is why I did mention that we only had twenty Sea Harriers, quantity can have it's own quality. 

The problem of the AAF was strategy. Plus the fact, Royal Navy pilots were better than AAF pilots. On the first day alone 23 AAF aircraft were lost against Royal Navy Sea Harriers, while another 17 were lost to ground fire.


----------



## Glider (Aug 9, 2005)

CB I don't know if you can stil get it but I stongly recommend Air War South Atlantic by Jeffry Ethell and Alfred Price. It caused a stir when it came out in the UK as it debunked a lot of the claims made by some of the armed forces (mainly Rapier Claims) and is recognised as being well reasearched and neutral.
I will need some time to collate the claims but more were shot down by the Harriers than SAMs. 
The breakdown with details should be ready tomorrow evening if that OK.

The heaviest losses occurred on the 21st May when 15 Argentine planes and helicopters were destroyed from all causes including some helicopters destroyed on the ground.

Till tomorrow


----------



## CharlesBronson (Aug 9, 2005)

It was no my intention start a discussion about the 1982 conflict,...but It seems that is for someones interest  

Argentine losses:

Saturday 3rd April 

[a1] - Puma SA.330L of CAB 601 shot down at Grytviken, South Georgia by Royal Marine small arms fire.

Saturday 1st May 

[a2, a3, a4] - One Pucara of FAA Grupo 3 destroyed and two more damaged and not repaired at Goose Green by CBU's dropped in attack by No.800 Sea Harriers flown by Lt Cmdr Frederiksen, Lt Hale and Lt McHarg RN (8.25 am). Lt Jukic killed in the destroyed aircraft.

[a5] - Mirage IIIEA of FAA Grupo 8 shot down north of West Falkland by Flt Lt Barton RAF in No.801 Sea Harrier using Sidewinder (4.10 pm). Lt Perona ejects safely.

[a6] - Mirage IIIEA of FAA Grupo 8 damaged in same incident north of West Falkland by Lt Thomas RN in No.801 Sea Harrier using Sidewinder. Then shot down over Stanley by own AA defences (4.15 pm). and Capt Cuerva killed 

[a7] - Dagger A of FAA Grupo 6 shot down over East Falkland by Flt Lt Penfold RAF in No.800 Sea Harrier using Sidewinder (4.40 pm). Lt Ardiles killed. 

[a8] - Canberra B.62 of FAA Grupo 2 shot down north of Falklands by Lt Curtiss RN in No.801 Sea Harrier using Sidewinder (5.45 pm). Lt Ibanez and Gonzalez eject but are not rescued.

Sunday 2nd May 

[a9] - Lynx HAS.23 of CANA 1 Esc embarked on ARA Santisima Trinidad lost in flying accident probably to north of Falklands.

[a10] - Alouette III of CANA 1 Esc lost on board ARA General Belgrano when she is torpedoed and sunk to south west of Falklands.

Monday 3rd May 

[a11] - Aermacchi MB-339A of CANA 1 Esc crashes into ground near Stanley approaching airfield in bad weather (4.00 pm). Lt Benitez killed.

[a12] - Skyvan of PNA damaged by naval gunfire at Stanley on the night of 3rd/4th and not repaired.






Sunday 9th May 

[a13, a14] - Two A-4C Skyhawks of FAA Grupo 4 lost. Possibly damaged by Sea Darts from HMS Coventry or crashed in bad weather, with one aircraft found on South Jason Island. Lt Casco and Lt Farias killed.

[a15] - Puma SA.330L of CAB 601 shot down over Choiseul Sound by Sea Dart fired by HMS Coventry (4.10 pm). Crew of three lost.

Wednesday 12th May 

[a16, a17, a18] - Two A-4B Skyhawks of FAA Grupo 5 shot down off Stanley by Sea Wolf fired by HMS Brilliant and third aircraft hits sea trying to evade missile (1.45 pm). All three pilots, Lt Bustos, Lt Ibarlucea and Lt Nivoli killed.

[a19] - A-4B Skyhawk of FAA Grupo 5 shot down over Goose Green by own AA fire (2.25 pm). Lt Gavazzi killed.

Saturday 15th May 

[a20-a25] - Six Pucaras of FAA Grupo 3; [a26-a29] - Four T-34C Mentors of CANA 4 Esc; [a30] - Skyvan of PNA, all destroyed or put out of action at Pebble Island in raid by D Sqdn SAS (early morning) 

Friday 21st May 

[a31] - Chinook CH-47C of CAB 601 destroyed on ground near Mount Kent by Flt Lt Hare RAF in 1(F) Sqdn Harrier GR.3 using 30mm cannon (8.00 am).

[a32] - Puma SA.330L of CAB 601 badly damaged on ground near Mount Kent in same attack by Sqdn Ldr Pook and Flt Lt Hare RAF in 1(F) Sqdn Harrier GR.3's using 30mm cannon (8.00 am). Destroyed on 26th in same position by Sqdn Ldr Pook using CBU's.

[a33] - Pucara of FAA Grupo 3 shot down over Sussex Mountains by Stinger SAM fired by D Sqdn SAS (10.00 am). Capt Benitz ejects safely.

[a34] - Dagger A of FAA Grupo 6 shot down near Fanning Head by Sea Cat fired by HMS Argonaut or Plymouth, or more likely Sea Wolf from HMS Broadsword (10.30 am). Lt Bean killed.

[a35] - Pucara of FAA Grupo 3 shot down near Darwin by Cmdr Ward RN in one of three Sea Harriers of No.801 NAS using 30mm cannon (12.10 pm). Major Tomba ejects.

[a36, a37] - Two A-4C Skyhawks of FAA Grupo 4 shot down near Chartres, West Falkland by Lt Cmdr Blissett and Lt Cmdr Thomas RN in No.800 Sea Harriers using Sidewinders (1.05 pm). Lt Lopez and Lt Manzotti killed.

[a38] - Dagger A of FAA Grupo 6 shot down near Teal River Inlet, West Falkland by Lt Cmdr Frederiksen RN in No.800 Sea Harrier using Sidewinder (2.35 pm). Lt Luna ejects.

[a39, a40, a41] - Two Dagger A's of FAA Grupo 6 shot down north of Port Howard, West Falkland by Lt Thomas and a third by Cmdr Ward RN in No.801 Sea Harriers using Sidewinders (2.50 pm). Maj Piuma, Capt Donaldille and Lt Senn all eject.

[a42] - A-4Q Skyhawk of CANA 3 Esc shot down near Swan Island in Falkland Sound by Lt Morell RN in No.800 Sea Harrier using Sidewinder (3.12 pm). Lt Cmdr Philippi ejects.

[a43] - A-4Q Skyhawk of CANA 3 Esc also shot down near Swan Island in Falkland Sound in same incident by Flt Lt Leeming RAF in No.800 Sea Harrier using 30mm cannon (3.12 pm). Lt Marquez is killed.

[a44] - A-4Q Skyhawk of CANA 3 Esc damaged over Falkland Sound by small arms fire from HMS Ardent and again in same incident as above by Lt Morrell using 30mm cannon. Unable to land at Stanley with undercarriage problems and Lt Arca ejects (3.30 pm).

Sunday 23rd May 

[a45] - Puma SA.330L of CAB 601 flies into ground near Shag Cove House, West Falkland attempting to evade Flt Lt Morgan RAF in No.800 NAS Sea Harrier (10.30 am). All crew escape.

[a46] - Agusta A-109A of CAB 601 in same incident near Shag Cove House, West Falkland destroyed on ground by Flt Lt Morgan and Flt Lt Leeming RAF in No.800 NAS Sea Harriers using 30mm cannon (10.30 am).

[a47] - Puma SA.330L of CAB 601 also in same incident near Shag Cove House, West Falkland damaged on ground by Flt Lt Morgan with 30mm cannon (10.30 am). Then believed shortly destroyed by Lt Cmdr Gedge and Lt Cmdr Braithwaite RN in No.801 Sea Harriers with more cannon fire.

[a48] - A-4B Skyhawk of FAA Grupo 5 shot down over San Carlos Water by unknown SAM (1.50 pm). Claims that day include "Broadsword" Sea Wolf, "Antelope" Sea Cat, and land-based Rapiers and Blowpipe. Lt Guadagnini killed. 

[a49] - Dagger A of FAA Grupo 6 shot down over Pebble Island by Lt Hale RN in No.800 Sea Harrier using Sidewinder (4.00 pm). Lt Volponi killed.

Monday 24th May 

[a50, a51, a52] - Two Dagger A's of FAA Grupo 6 shot down north of Pebble Island by Lt Cmdr Auld and a third by Lt D Smith in No.800 Sea Harriers using Sidewinder (11.15 am). Maj Puga and Capt Diaz eject, but Lt Castillo killed.

*[a53] - A-4C Skyhawk of FAA Grupo 4 damaged over San Carlos Water by ship and ground-based air defences and crashes into King George Bay, West Falkland on flight home (1.30 pm). Claims that day include "Argonaut" and "Fearless" Sea Cat, and Rapier and Blowpipe SAM's. Lt Bono lost.*

Tuesday 25th May 

[a54] - A-4B Skyhawk of FAA Grupo 5 shot down north of Pebble Island by Sea Dart fired by HMS Coventry (9.30 am). Lt Palaver killed.

[a55] - A-4C Skyhawk of FAA Grupo 4 destroyed over San Carlos Water by a variety of weapons, claims including small arms fire, "Yarmouth" Sea Cat, and Rapier and Blowpipe SAM's (12.30 pm). Lt Lucero ejects.

[a56] - A-4C Skyhawk of FAA Grupo 4 damaged over San Carlos Water in same attack, and then brought down north east of Pebble Island by Sea Dart fired by HMS Coventry (12.45 am). Lt Garcia killed.

Thursday 27th May 

[a57] - A-4B Skyhawk of FAA Grupo 5 damaged over San Carlos Water by 40mm Bofors from HMS Fearless or Intrepid, and crashes near Port Howard (5.00 pm). Lt Velasco ejects

Friday 28th May

[a59] - Aermacchi MB-339A of CANA 1 Esc shot down at Goose Green by Blowpipe SAM fired by Royal Marine Air Defence Troop (5.00 pm). Lt Miguel killed.

[a60] - Pucara of FAA Grupo 3 shot down at Goose Green by fire from 2 Para (5.10 pm). Lt Cruzado ejects and becomes POW.

Saturday 29th May 

[a61] - Dagger A of FAA Grupo 6 shot down over San Carlos Water by Rapier SAM (12.00 pm]. Lt Bernhardt killed.

Sunday 30th May 

[a62] - Puma SA.330L of CAB 601 lost in the morning in uncertain circumstances near Mount Kent, possibly to own forces fire.

[a63, a64] - In the attack against the carrier HMS Invincible, two A-4C Skyhawks of FAA Grupo 4 shot down east of Falklands by Sea Darts fired by HMS Exeter, although 4.5 inch gunfire from HMS Avenger may have hit one (2.35 pm). Lt Vazquez and Lt Castillo killed.






Tuesday 1st June 

[a65] - Hercules C.130E of FAA Transport Grupo 1 shot down 50 miles North of Pebble Island by Cmdr Ward RN in No.801 Sea Harrier using Sidewinder and 30mm cannon (10.45 am). Crew of seven killed.

Monday 7th June 

[a66] - Learjet 35A of FAA Photo-Reconnaissance Grupo 1 shot down over Pebble Island by Sea Dart fired by HMS Exeter (9.05 am). Wing Cmdr de la Colina and crew of four killed.

Tuesday 8th June 

[a67, a68, a69] - Two A-4B Skyhawks of FAA Grupo 5 shot down over Choiseul Sound by Flt Lt Morgan RAF and a third by Lt D Smith in No.800 NAS Sea Harriers using Sidewinders (4.45 pm). Lt Arraras, Lt Bolzan and Ensign Vazquez killed.

Sunday 13th June 

[a70] - Canberra B.62 of FAA Grupo 2 shot down west of Stanley by Sea Dart fired by HMS Exeter (10.55 pm). Pilot, Capt Pastran ejects safely but Capt Casado is killed.

Postwar - Captured at Stanley 

[a71-a81] - Eleven Pucaras of FAA Grupo 3

[a82-a83] - Two Bell 212's of FAA Grupo 7

[a84-a86] - Three Aermacchi MB-339A's of CANA 1 Esc

[a87] - Puma SA.330L of PNA

[a88] - Chinook CH-47C of CAB 601

[a89-a90] - Two Agusta A-109A Hirundos of CAB 601

[a91-a99] - Nine Iroquois UH-1H's of CAB 601


----------



## Nonskimmer (Aug 9, 2005)

Hey man, don't feel obligated. I was just interested that's all. All good stuff though.


----------



## plan_D (Aug 10, 2005)

My dad told me about the Rapiers, Glider. They would hit the enemy aircraft, explode and not do a single thing or they would just bounce off. The warhead was too small on the missile.


----------



## Glider (Aug 10, 2005)

Plan D.
I don't want to upset anyone but the Rapier used in the Falklands didn't have a warhead, it relied on hitting the plane directly. A missile of that size (45kg), going at the speed it does (Mach 2.5) will not, I promise you, bounce off anything. 
In the armed forces they prefer to nickname it a hittile not a missile as it has to hit the target.
A fragmentation warhead with a laser proximity fuse was developed and is in use in the Mark 2 which is compatible with earlier launchers. Most countries have now upgraded their systems to cater for this.


----------



## plan_D (Aug 10, 2005)

Do you want to tell my dad that the Rapiers didn't bounce off the aircraft? Being that he and a lot of lads there either saw it or spoke to the Rocks and Grunts firin' 'em and seeing them hit the aircraft and not do ANYTHING.


----------



## Glider (Aug 11, 2005)

Simple maths and Physics. Put it another way, a car roof is probably as thick as a planes skin. So if a 100lb rock falling from a cliff with a terminal velocity of around 120mph, wouldn't bounce off your car roof. Why would a streamlined missile going roughly 18 times faster bounce off the same roof?


----------



## plan_D (Aug 11, 2005)

It's not though, is it? Because if the Rapier operators witnessed their own missiles bouncing off the target and not even bringing it down, there's obviously something that's happening with the missiles that the piece of paper isn't telling you.

I'm sorry but I'm going to believe the people who saw it more than a piece of paper.


----------



## Glider (Aug 11, 2005)

Your call. My guess is that the people involved saw near misses. With the smoke of the missile, fog of war, tension and understandable confusion, plus a missile that only has to miss by an inch not to do any damage it is understandable.

There is one fact that cannot be argued about and that was that the AA defences were very effective. The AA defences around the shipping are point defence weapons and the most important aspect is that not one ship in the defended area was hit by an attacking plane. The navy took a bashing outside protecting the harbour area but nothing inside was damaged. 
The survival of the Canberra is the proof of that point.


----------



## plan_D (Aug 11, 2005)

Well, I won't disagree that the AA defences were excellent on the Royal Navy.


----------



## CharlesBronson (Aug 11, 2005)

> Well, I won't disagree that the AA defences were excellent on the Royal Navy



Hmmm...are you sure about that sure about that..? The Royal navy was desperately needed for some point defence sistem, like the 20 mm Gatling or the 30mm Goalkeeper.


----------



## plan_D (Aug 12, 2005)

I'm pretty sure about that, since the AAF was getting dropped by the Royal Navy's AA defences just as much as they were by the Sea Harriers.


----------



## Glider (Aug 12, 2005)

The Sea Dart was probably the best naval medium range AA missile at the time anywhere and those ships with the Seawolf had the best point defence weapon. 
I think nearly all the others had the Seacat which was as good as most navies had but was a bit long in the tooth by the early 80's. 
A point defence gun such as the Phoenix would have been invaluble but at the time the RN was selecting one. The Phoenix wasn't the favourite as the 20mm was seen as being lacking the range and a larger 30mm was preferred. It was just a matter of timing that we didn't have one.

Plan D is correct in that what we had was effective and I seriously doubt if any other navy in the world with similar forces would have done any better. 

I suspect that the USN wouldn't have gone near the area without at least three carrier groups.


----------



## plan_D (Aug 12, 2005)

And the fact that Britain organised it's task-force to re-take the islands in three days just adds praise to the skill and organisation of the British forces.


----------



## CharlesBronson (Aug 13, 2005)

All right... is seem that the topic "anti-aircraft defences of the Royal Navy in the 1982 war" is out right now, so let me continue with my beloved little aircraft.

*From the COIN to the CAS, the proyected Pucara A-58: Part 1:*

The Close air support are defined as:

*Air action by fixed- and rotary-wing aircraft against hostile targets that are in close proximity to friendly forces and that require detailed integration of each air mission with the fire and movement of those forces.*
A study of the USAF of years 60 determined the following characteristics of an airplane for operations CAS ( close air support):

1-Aptitud to operate from short and primitive aerodromes

2-Confiable and easy to maintain in land.

3-Capable to transport a great amount of armament and specifically to destroy infantry and armored vehicles.

4-Sufficient autonomy to find the objective to identify it like enemy and to destroy it.

5-Max speed at least 600 Km/h, but must be the sufficiently maneuverable in order to turn on the place battle of way of not breaking away from the visual enemy with the target.

6-Aptitud for the survival, with capacity of absorber the fire from earth and that allows returns out of danger to the base with the pilot.

7-Un low price relative to the modern supersonic reactors.

From these armored concepts and the threat of in Europe, the A-10 and Ah-64 were developed, and before, the Ah-1 during the war of Vietnam.

I allow myself to add:

8-Capable to fight attack helicopters (type Ah-1, Ah-64, Mi-24, etc).

9-High capacity for self-defense AA against airplanes of attack of inferior rank, originated basically in trainers to reacción(A-36, Hawk100/200, Alpha Jet, etc).

10-Equipment to operate in bad weather and at night.

11-Integrated sistem of communications AA and AS to coordinate the operations. (Action of forward air controllers in earth and airplanes type Ov/rc-1, Rc-12, AEW, etc in the air).

12-Suit integrated of sensors of alert radar (RWR), laser and TO GO Countermeasures TO GO, integrated dipoles and disturbers. (dramatic Increase of portable and movable threat AAA and SAMs from aims of 70s).
Friend or foe (IFF), due to the variety of threats and targets AA y SA


In order to adapt the IA-58 to this operation and taking as starting point the IA-58C , is in development the A-58 version.

*IA-58C*





*Proyected attack version Pucara A-58:*





This version deleted completely the rifle calibre and medium calibre machineguns and introduced an all cannon armament.

The fixed armament:

The 20 mm guns in study to replace the already old HS-804 are:

Vektor GA1 ( 20x83mm) 






Pontiac M-39 ( 20x102) 






GIAT M621 ( 20x102) 






In also in consideration to increase the calibre to 30 mm, in this case the only razonable gun is the Giat-Defa 554:







Bombs and missiles:

The A-58 should use some of the especial purpose bombs alredy in service with the AAF.

*FAS-280*






High explosive 34 Kg fragmentation bomb, the blast effect is increased with the adittion of 3500 9 mm diameter steel balls with are capable to penetrate 10 to 20 mm of armour in a 100 meters radius.

*FAS-800*






250 kg anti Anti personal bomb, it use a proximity fuze with detonate the bomb about 20 -30 meters over the ground delivering 38.000 steel balls at supersonic speed, also caused a very nasty effect againt parked aircrafts and unarmoured vehicles. There is a 125 kg model called FAS-800B.

*FAS-250*





Parachute drag retarded bomb, it can be dropped safely even to altitudes of 30 meters to 0,95 Mach.

*FAS-300*






This is a very adaptable cluster bomb, it can be filled with 220 bomlets, or 88 mines. The mines can cover 58.500 square metes and his delayed time fuse could be set from 0,5 seconds to 54 hours.

*FAS-850*






Stand-Off bomb. It is rocket assisted and it can reach about 20 km range dropped from a 35000 feet altitude.

CITEFA Martin Pescador:






Air-to-ground subsonic missile, it carry a shaped charge warhead and could be equipped with a IR or laser guidance.


----------



## dinos7 (Aug 14, 2005)

thats a neat twin engine plane.


----------



## CharlesBronson (Nov 6, 2005)

A little more pics of the "new-old" IA-58 Delta, good against guerrilla, and Anti-war, anti-globalization, and anti-everything protesters 8):











In flight:












Pictures extracted from: http://www.saorbats.com.ar/GaleriaSaorbats/Reynolds05/index.htm


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Nov 6, 2005)

Very Cool!


----------



## Gnomey (Nov 6, 2005)

Nice pics Charles!


----------



## Archangel (Nov 6, 2005)

reminds me of the alpha jet 





( the 2 seat verion ofcourse )


but i really like the look of that aircraft. and..looks like it performed really well too.


----------



## CharlesBronson (Nov 6, 2005)

> reminds me of the alpha jet



You mean that the *AT-63 * remind you the Alpha Jet.  

The only german thing that carry this aircraft is the Dornier supercritical profile wing, wich gave to it a very good handling and aerobatic capabilities at low speed, but is nor designed for high Mach numbers.

Off course it share the general fuselage layout but those and different in shape and measures ( remember that the Alpha is twin engined and swept wing, the Pampa single engine and have standar wing)


----------



## MacArther (Aug 19, 2006)

> I suspect that the USN wouldn't have gone near the area without at least three carrier groups



Eh, that I doubt. In the past, the US has deployed one carrier and its support ships and done pretty well. I'm not positive, but from all the records I remember seeing, there was only one carrier of the USN involved in GW:1. Also, if what you're saying is that Royal Navy carriers carry 20 Sea Harriers, I can assure you that USN carriers have quite a few more planes to throw around. Added to the normal task force of missle cruisers, destroyers, and assault ships (which have their own aircraft, usually Harriers as well), and there is a pretty significant force contending the take over of anything. Would it win a war battle with, say, Soviet Russia? Questionable, but the USN tries to limit the amount major forces in one single combat zone (like the old saying, don't put all your ranking officers in one boat). Still, I have to admire those pilots, especially if they were aware that they had no replacements readily available. I also admire the Argentinians, although not for what they were going to do, but rather for keeping up the fight, even with some out-dated units.


----------



## plan_D (Aug 19, 2006)

There's a big difference between the Falklands War and the Gulf War. The United States had ground forces and air forces operational in the Middle-East, whereas the Royal Navy were the only operators of aircraft during the Falklands War until they got ashore. 

The United States would have used more ships and planes to re-take the Falklands than Great Britain did. The U.S used more ships in Operation _El Dorado Canyon_ than the British did in the entire Falklands conflict.


----------



## MacArther (Aug 19, 2006)

> The United States would have used more ships and planes to re-take the Falklands than Great Britain did


If you read a little more carefully, you would have seen that I did not deny that the US would have used more ships. What I did say was that we would *not* bring every carrier we had in for the conflict, which is not to say the British would have either. I'm saying that there would be a taskforce centered around a Carrier consisting of assault ships, destroyers, missile cruisers, and any other support ships that might be deemed neccessary for the operation. As per the quip about our units already stationed in the Gulf before the start of GW:1, what relevance is that? If the US went to the Falklands Conflict in lieu of Britain, then we would have relied just as much on our sea borne troops.


----------



## plan_D (Aug 19, 2006)

Glider implied, even stated, that the U.S would use three carriers. You denied this and brought the Gulf War into the equation. I never said the U.S would bring every carrier into the conflict (nor did Glider, for that matter). 

There's every relevence to my statement about U.S forces already being in the Middle-East. The Royal Navy didn't have any ground based aircraft or units to support it's operations during Falklands, the U.S had this luxury. This is the reason they only used one carrier group during the initial phases. Instead of the U.S carrier being the main strike force (like the Royal Navy one was in Falklands), the U.S carrier was the supporting arm. If the U.S didn't have ground based operators, or air forces in the Middle-East, they would have used more carriers. Just like the U.S would have used more carriers during the Falklands. 

End of the story is, Glider stated that the U.S would have used more ships and carriers than Great Britain did during the Gulf War. And his statement is true - the Gulf War was a completely different situation, and you're foolish to bring it into the equation - proof is easily found in Operation _El Dorado Canyon_. The U.S used more ships in one single strike than Great Britain did in an entire war.


----------



## CharlesBronson (Aug 21, 2006)

> I also admire the Argentinians, although not for what they were going to do, but rather for keeping up the fight, even with some out-dated units.




The argentine military was more crippled for his poor planing and logistic than for the relatively old war equipment.


----------



## Twitch (Aug 23, 2006)

The Pucara ia a slick plane!!


----------



## Matt308 (Aug 24, 2006)

[ The U.S used more ships in one single strike than Great Britain did in an entire war.[/QUOTE]

Isn't this a simple matter of "overwhelming your enemies"?. C'mon. If the Brits had been able to bear 10 Invincibles, they would have. Hell they had to buddy tank Canberra's for this conflict. I think you guys are comparing apples to oranges here. Be nice.


----------



## Matt308 (Aug 24, 2006)

And I too have always thought the Pucara was one hot attack plane.


----------



## plan_D (Aug 30, 2006)

_"Isn't this a simple matter of "overwhelming your enemies"?. C'mon. If the Brits had been able to bear 10 Invincibles, they would have. Hell they had to buddy tank Canberra's for this conflict. I think you guys are comparing apples to oranges here. Be nice."_

The Royal Navy had more than one carrier in 1982, but we didn't send them all to the Falklands. So, I have to say, no. If Britain had ten aircraft carriers we wouldn't have sent ten. The task force to reclaim the Falklands was set up in three days, the British forces needed to be down there as quickly as possible. Setting up several carriers for the job would have taken too long.


----------



## plan_D (Aug 30, 2006)

My dad saw me scanning this thread, and being a veteran of the Falklands starting chatting away about his experiences there. And he got on to the Rapiers we were using there, I remember a discussion I had with Glider a couple of pages back.

*Glider*

_"Simple maths and Physics. Put it another way, a car roof is probably as thick as a planes skin. So if a 100lb rock falling from a cliff with a terminal velocity of around 120mph, wouldn't bounce off your car roof. Why would a streamlined missile going roughly 18 times faster bounce off the same roof?"_ 

My dad on the subject:

_"What kind of idiot thought of creating a missile without a warhead, I will never know. Only in Britain! They just bounced off the Argie planes, pilots probably felt the bump and thought "What the f*ck was that?" and carried on. It was all well and good when the plane was flying at you, you'd get the combined speeds of the Rapier and the plane ... do some damage. But when they were flying away , you got to remember the collision speed is lower and the angle is never nought degrees. They used to hit the plane a skim right off them. You got a projectile going Mach 2 , hitting a plane goin' Mach 1, they only collide at Mach 1... "_


----------



## Lokolope (Nov 23, 2006)

AT-63 SUPER PAMPA MODEL 2006.































FIDAE 2006

AT-63 Pampa

DESCRIPTION:


With a fully upgraded cockpit and modern avionics suite, the new AT-63 under production in Argentina is setting a new standard for low-cost basic through advanced trainer and light attack aircraft. The Argentine Air Force has contracted to build 12 AT-63s. On June 19, 2001, Lockheed Martin presented this new aircraft during the Paris Air Show and is now offering it to customers worldwide.

The new generation AT-63 maintains the ease of maintenance and airframe stability of the original version, produced in the late 1980s as the IA-63, while adding advanced upgrades and additional combat capabilities.

The new AT-63 features:

A Honeywell TFE-731-2C turbofan engine with 3,500 pounds of thrust. 
A state-of-the-art avionics suite with a Digital 1553B MIL STD data bus, full systems redundancy, a glass cockpit, laser ring INS/GPS NAV, a mission computer and an integrated weapons system. 
Fully pressurized dual control cabin with a one-piece canopy that can be electrically fragilized in the event of ground emergency. The ejection sequence for the two zero-zero seats can be pre-selected. 
Four underwing plus one under fuselage weapons stations enabling air-to-air and air-to-ground light attack capability. 
The first upgraded prototype is scheduled to fly in mid-2005.

While the Argentine Air Force is the first customer for the new AT-63, other countries have expressed an interest, and the Argentine government is supportive of international sales of the aircraft. In addition to Latin America, export potential for the AT-63 exists in Europe, Africa and the Middle East.

Down-time for the in-service AT-63 fleet has consistently remained below design expectations. The AT-63 requires only 2.27 DMMH/FH while the total workload between major scheduled inspections is 3.80 DMMH/FH.
Characteristics
AT-63 Characteristics

Weight: 
Empty
6,217 lb
2,820 kg

Internal Fuel
2,380 lb
1,080 kg

Max TOGW
11,038 lb
5,000 kg

Wing Area
168.3 sq.ft.
(15.63 m2)

Horizontal Tail Area
46.8 sq.ft.
(4.35 m2)

Aspect Ratio
6.0

Leading-Edge Sweep
5.4 deg

Service Life
8,000 hours

Engine Thrust
3,500 lb class
1,560 daN

Performance

Max Level Speed @ 26,200 ft
440 KTAS
815 km/hr

Cruise Speed @ 30,000 ft (Clean) 350 KTAS 650 km/hr 
Stall Speed- Flap-Down 82 KCAS 152 km/hr 
Maximum Operational Mach 0.8 
Design Load Factor +6g -3g 
Take-Off Run (ISA-S/L-Normal Fuel-8,300 lb)
1,410 ft
430 m

Landing Run (ISA-S/L-7,710 lb) 1,510 ft 460 m 
Ceiling 42,300 ft 12,900 m 
Maximum Climb Rate (8,300 lb) 5,120 ft/min 1,560 m/min 
Range 1,140 n miles 2,100 km 
Roll rate 200? /sec


----------



## Matt308 (Nov 24, 2006)

Bet FlyboyJ would love to get ahold of that for a few hours!

And the comments above about the Rapier I have to only chuckle at. Missiles bouncing off aircraft at Mach 1 closing speeds. Phhhhhhttt. I don't give a sh!t what angle of incidence.


----------



## rochie (Nov 26, 2006)

my dad's words whilst sat in hole in the ground near san carlos bay 
"f**k me these guy's look quite good" as he watched skyhawks and mirages scream over at what seemed like head hight


----------



## twoeagles (Nov 28, 2006)

In 1979 during a short stint with Garrett AiResearch in Phoenix, we were
working to sell the TPE-331 turboprops for use on the Pucara. I got to
fly with the chief test pilot (I wish I could remember his name) who was
an amazing stick and had a very thick German accent. Turns out he was
WW2 ex-Luftwaffe. A very friendly guy, too. Oddly enough, when in Spain
also helping CASA with the TPE-331, their chief pilot was an old German...
You just couldn't keep those old Luftwaffe eagles outta the cockpit for long.


----------



## CharlesBronson (Nov 28, 2006)

Huhum..."lokolope" la informacion del AT-63 ya esta puesta aqui:

http://www.ww2aircraft.net/forum/modern/fma-ia-58-pucara-coin-aircraft-1599-2.html




> In 1979 during a short stint with Garrett AiResearch in Phoenix, we were
> working to sell the TPE-331 turboprops for use on the Pucara. I got to
> fly with the chief test pilot (I wish I could remember his name) who was
> an amazing stick and had a very thick German accent



Probably that engines were for the *IA-66* an upgraded version of the IA-58 wich never entered in production.








http://www.ww2aircraft.net/forum/modern/fma-ia-58-pucara-coin-aircraft-1599-2.html


----------



## Smokey (Dec 6, 2006)

Have you guys heard about this



> In order to avoid the high concentration of British air defences, Argentine pilots were forced to swoop in and launch their bombs from a low altitude at the very last moment. The Argentines lost nearly twenty aircraft in these attacks, including several Pucarás on the ground.
> 
> While undoubtedly a brave effort of the air force, the late releasing of bombs meant that many never exploded, as there was insufficient time in the air for them to arm themselves. The problem was that—like many other items never used before by the Argentine Armed Forces in such ways—there was a problem in the way the bombs were armed. Days before the war ended, the problem was solved and the iron bombs exploded regardless of the altitude from which they were dropped, as seen on the 8 June attack.





> Political pressure from above to not risk the LPD forced Mike Clapp (Commander Amphibious Forces) to alter this plan. Two lower-value LSLs would be sent, but without suitable beaches to land, Intrepid's landing craft would need to accompany them to unload. A complicated operation across several nights with Intrepid and Fearless (her sister ship) sailing half-way to dispatch their craft was devised. The attempted overland march by half the Welsh Guards had failed, possibly as they refused to march light and attempted to carry their equipment. They returned to San Carlos and were landed direct to Bluff Cove when Fearless dispatched her landing craft. Sir Tristram sailed on the night of 6 June and was joined by Sir Galahad at dawn on 7 June.
> 
> Anchored 1200 feet apart in Port Pleasant, the landing ships were near Fitzroy, the ordered landing point. The landing craft should have been able to unload the ships to here relatively quickly, but confusion over the ordered disembarkation point (the first half of the Guards going direct to Bluff Cove) resulted in the senior Welsh Guards infantry officer aboard insisting his troops be ferried the far longer distance direct to Port Fitzroy/Bluff Cove. The intention was for the infantrymen to march via the recently repaired Bluff Cove bridge (destroyed by retreating Argentinian combat engineers) to their destination, a journey of around seven miles.
> 
> ...





> The Sea Harriers were outnumbered by the available Argentinian aircraft and were on occasion decoyed away by the activities of the Escuadrón Fénix or civilian jet aircraft used by the Argentine Air Force. They had to operate without a fleet early warning systems such as AWACS that would have been available to a full NATO fleet in which the Royal Navy had expected to operate.
> 
> The result was that the Sea Harriers could not establish complete air superiority and prevent Argentine attacks during day or night, nor could they stop the daily flights of C-130 Hercules transports to the islands.





> The 1982 Falklands War almost ended badly for the British had not the Argentine bomb fitters failed to properly fuse bombs for A-4 SkyHawks and Mirage III jets. Our days of being lucky at sea are about to end.



Imagine if the fuses had been fixed earlier. Is it true that several ships were hit by bombs that failed to explode? 

Falklands War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Gadgetry trumps all to the Tofflerians

http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hangar/2848/dagger.jpg

BAE Sea Harrier - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## Matt308 (Dec 7, 2006)

What is the top picture? Super Etentards on attack run?


----------



## Smokey (Dec 7, 2006)

Skyhawks


----------



## CharlesBronson (Jan 23, 2007)

Uhum.....The Falklands/Malvinas war have his own topic so.... 


Low flying Pucaras (video)


_View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qXLM3BUD-TY_


----------



## Matt308 (Jan 25, 2007)

Nice!


----------



## CharlesBronson (Jan 27, 2007)

And here you got others. ( wacht out the second, a lot of ugly faces in this  )


_View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SOOGUiABaNg_



_View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=acGwAOsXUug_


----------



## Matt308 (Jan 27, 2007)

Very nice looking plane, but it looks borderline underpowered. Is it?


----------



## CharlesBronson (Jan 28, 2007)

Yes, 2 x 1000hp is not enough.


----------



## Matt308 (Jan 28, 2007)

Only 2 1000shp in each? wow that is underpowered. But she's beautiful.


----------



## CharlesBronson (Jan 29, 2007)

This desing would be better. 8)


----------



## Matt308 (Jan 30, 2007)

perhaps some c-of-g problems


----------



## CharlesBronson (Jan 30, 2007)

Is a crazy design, not a practical one.


----------



## Matt308 (Jan 30, 2007)

yep


----------



## ChoirBoy (Mar 6, 2007)

I'm currently working on a 3D model of the Pucara. To me it's a beautiful, streamlined aircraft.


----------



## CharlesBronson (Mar 6, 2007)

Really nice.

in here you got some images that might help you.

Pucaras del Grupo 3 de Ataque


----------



## ChoirBoy (Mar 6, 2007)

Thanks CB.


----------



## MacArther (Mar 7, 2007)

Choir Boy: YOUR AVATAR ROCKS!! ITS LIKE ME DURING A LECTURE!!


----------



## Lokolope (Apr 14, 2007)

Otras fotos, actualmente se los esta probando en Córdoba con biocombustibles, son los primeros en Sudamérica capaces de volar con biocombustibles. Mi ingles es muy bruto así que lo dejo en manos de cualquier colega para que lo traduzca.


----------



## Matt308 (Apr 24, 2007)

Love the loadout display.

But did the Puma have both 20mm and .50BMGs? Or were the .50s in wing pods? The pic shows both and with the Brownings in the raw (ie not in a pod).


----------



## Glider (Apr 24, 2007)

I thought that the built in guns were 4 x 7.62 and 2 x 20 so the .50 would be in carried in pods.


----------



## CharlesBronson (Apr 24, 2007)

Yeap, those are Browning M3 12,7mm use in pods mostly in the belly emplacement, the CITEFA ( Defense technical office) had manufacture some gunpods very similar in shape like the FN HMP .50.








> Otras fotos, actualmente se los esta probando en Córdoba con biocombustibles, son los primeros en Sudamérica capaces de volar con biocombustibles. Mi ingles es muy bruto así que lo dejo en manos de cualquier colega para que lo traduzca.



Another photos, today this aircraft underwent test in Cordoba with bio-fuel, those are the first in South America capable to fly with biofuel. My english is rough so I let this in hands of any colleague to translate. 


--------

My note: the Biofuel mentioned by LKL is a derivated from the standar sunflower oil use mostly to cook in Argentina.


P.S: This picture must have been taken several years ago, the FMA IA-50 (Left) liason aircraft and the B-Mk 62 canberra bomber were deleted from service in the late 1990s.


----------



## Air Ordnance (May 13, 2007)

Flyboyj,
Your comment: I've always been facinated by this aircraft, it looks like it has a "German" blood line!
The fuselage designed is based on the A-4 Skyhawk.


----------



## Air Ordnance (May 13, 2007)

Plan D,
Taking on England was not the problem. The problem was that the U.S. was giving satellite intel to the Brits and had a U.S. Navy carrier servicing British aircraft in the south Atlantic. So much for Alex Haigs "honest broker" approach.


----------



## CharlesBronson (May 16, 2007)

> The fuselage designed is based on the A-4 Skyhawk.



Are you sure about that ? where you get that information ?


----------



## Glider (May 17, 2007)

Air Ordnance said:


> Plan D,
> Taking on England was not the problem. The problem was that the U.S. was giving satellite intel to the Brits and had a U.S. Navy carrier servicing British aircraft in the south Atlantic. So much for Alex Haigs "honest broker" approach.



Re the satellite photo's I would be suprised if they were not supplied. Re the US Carrier servicing British Aircraft in mid atlantic, that is total bull. 
I take it you can supply details as to who or where you got such crass information.


----------



## Matt308 (May 17, 2007)

I have to agree Glider, that would be news to me.


----------



## Glider (May 17, 2007)

Maybe there the same carriers the Vulcans were reported to have operated from (according to one conspiracy theory I heard about)?


----------



## CharlesBronson (May 19, 2007)

No response by "air ordenance" ....hmmm.....that begins to smell fishy.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (May 19, 2007)

Air Ordnance said:


> Flyboyj,
> Your comment: I've always been facinated by this aircraft, it looks like it has a "German" blood line!
> The fuselage designed is based on the A-4 Skyhawk.


And how do you support that claim?


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (May 19, 2007)

I was waiting for FBJ to chime in on this one....


----------



## CharlesBronson (May 20, 2007)

I think that "air ordence" just want to play with us a little.  

The IA-58 was not based in the A-4.


----------



## CRASHGATE3 (May 20, 2007)

Excellent thread......
The Pucara....not one of my favourite aircraft,but it is a flying machine and must be photographed !
A515 taken at Cosford Feb 2007
A549 taken at Duxford April 2007


----------



## CharlesBronson (Jun 6, 2007)

Linda pagina che  , bienvenido al foro.


----------



## Graeme (Jun 6, 2007)

CB..In an old issue of AIR International (October 1977..and yes, I too am old) there is a photo on page 166 of a IA-58 mock-up *GLIDER* in flight. Complete with nacelles but engine-less?!. Apparently towed into the air for the first time on 26 December 1967. Struck me as an odd way to develop a 'modern aircraft'. Do you have any further information or photos on this unusual glider?


----------



## Glider (Jun 7, 2007)

Graeme said:


> CB..In an old issue of AIR International (October 1977..and yes, I too am old) there is a photo on page 166 of a IA-58 mock-up *GLIDER* in flight. Complete with nacelles but engine-less?!. Apparently towed into the air for the first time on 26 December 1967. Struck me as an odd way to develop a 'modern aircraft'. Do you have any further information or photos on this unusual glider?



Don't worry I have that edition and all the ones before it so we can form an oldies section


----------



## CharlesBronson (Jun 7, 2007)

> CB..In an old issue of AIR International (October 1977..and yes, I too am old) there is a photo on page 166 of a IA-58 mock-up GLIDER in flight. Complete with nacelles but engine-less?!. Apparently towed into the air for the first time on 26 December 1967. Struck me as an odd way to develop a 'modern aircraft'. Do you have any further information or photos on this unusual glider



Yes, the first prototipe was a glider, I think that is a legacy left by the german designers who works for the FMA between 1946-55. they used to make an aerodinamical test wooodedn 1:1 mock-up for the Ia-27. 33, and 38.


----------



## CharlesBronson (Jun 7, 2007)

Here you go, the first prototipe for the IA 58, a wooden mock up 1:1 scale, the *AX-2*.


----------



## Graeme (Jun 8, 2007)

Glider said:


> Don't worry I have that edition and all the ones before it so we can form an oldies section



Sounds Good. Do you go back as far as 'Royal Air Force FLYING REVIEW'.. William Green prior to Air International.?!


----------



## Graeme (Jun 8, 2007)

CharlesBronson said:


> Yes, the first prototipe was a glider, I think that is a legacy left by the german designers who works for the FMA between 1946-55. they used to make an aerodinamical test wooodedn 1:1 mock-up for the Ia-27. 33, and 38.



In 'Jane's All The World's Aircraft 1959-60', the Argentine Republic section mentions the I.A 37, a "high-speed delta-wing aircraft". Again, a full-sized engineless version is shown in photographs with a 'Heinkel' like nose. The 3-view shows a proposed production version with a different nose section. Performance is estimated and text mentions that the prototype was "Nearing completion". Did it fly?. Was it intended to be a fighter or high speed research?. Do you have any information/photos/details?.Thanks.


----------



## CharlesBronson (Jun 8, 2007)

The IA-37 was a Reimar Horten Karl Nickel desing, it flies but only as a glider since the promised 2 Rolls Royce avon never were delivered by political reasons.






There was two types of nose , one all glazed with the pilot in prone position and other with a normal cockpit.











The final aircraft should look as a Mirage III but with two engines in the wing roots.

more pictures here:

C. M. A. .."Club de Modelistas Argentina"..


----------



## Graeme (Jun 9, 2007)

I've just polished off my third glass of red wine and continue to look at your last posting photographs in intoxicated awe. Wonderful photographs. The last one depicting the proposed finished product looks like something from the TV series 'THUNDERBIRDS'!. Certainly smaller than the Mirage 550. What an amazing collection of aircraft in a South American country influenced by fugitive? German designers. You're doing your countries aviation history a valuable service.
Which brings me to the Horten brothers. One last request. As a junior member I don't know if the I.A 38 has been covered in this forum but I would appreciate any input you have on this aircraft. The only reference I have illustrating this peculiar and fascinating transport aircraft is a copy of 'Jane's Pocket Book 12-Research and Experimental Aircraft' (1976). It mentions that the project "was suspended in late 1960". Reasons?.apart from looking like a design straight out of Nazi Germany circa 1943-45. It would have fitted easily into Spielberg's 'Raiders of the Lost Ark'. Cheers, and thanks for the photos.


----------



## CharlesBronson (Jun 9, 2007)

> I've just polished off my third glass of red wine and continue to look at your last posting photographs in intoxicated awe. Wonderful photographs.



Thanks. Red wine ?, I see that you are man that enjoy the good things on life. 

I going to create a topic devoted exclusively to the foreing desings in Argentina in orden to do not derail this, I will aswer you there. (post war section).


----------



## CharlesBronson (Jun 15, 2007)

IA-58As flying over the Cordoba s pampa, this ones are from the first production series with natural metal finish.








IA-58A painted for a weird customer, the tiny african country of Mauritania, since were a lot of troubles in payment the small batch of 6 airplanes were handed over to the 4th Air Brigade of the AAF. This aircraft carry a tipical loadout, 4 CITEFA launchers with a total of 76x70mm rockets and 6 x100 kg frag bombs.













IA-58A captured intact by british Forces in Malvinas, this carry and aditional belgian made FN container with 2 x 7,62mm mgs in the centreline pod. ( is the a-549 depicted by CRASHGATE above)


----------



## Graeme (Jun 23, 2007)

Charles, found this 3-view of the IA-55 in Jane's 1964-1965. Described as-
.."a two-seat turboprop-powered aircraft specifically for Co-In (counter insurgency) operations. Design work began in July 1963 and a prototype is* under construction*".

Precursor to IA-58? What happened to the prototype under construction?


----------



## CharlesBronson (Jun 23, 2007)

That design was dropped in favor of the twin engine development, obviously the IA-58, a good desission given the qualities of the twin engined aircraft in the COIN and CAS role.

*IA-58C and IA-58A.*







Others countries have choosen the single engine alternative. The brazilian manufactures Embraer have in production a single turboprop COIN aircraft. The only advantages I guess must be is cheaper to mantain. Colombia purchased some. I hope that those guys could use the ALX better than the Pucaras than Argentine gave them in the early 90s.


----------



## CharlesBronson (Jul 2, 2007)

And talking about the Emb-ALX check this video of an colombian ALX shooting down a drug aircraft. The action is filmed from a UH-60 I think.

LiveLeak.com - Airplane shot down in Colombia


----------



## Riever (Jul 17, 2007)

Does anyone know what would be the export price tag on a Pucara these days in U.S. dollars?


----------



## CharlesBronson (Jul 20, 2007)

Between 800,000 and a million no more than that.

Pucara with Asp-1000 missile.


----------



## Riever (Aug 7, 2007)

That is a pretty good deal for such a great aircraft. A Cessna Caravan goes for about $2M these days. Is the Pucara still in production?


----------



## CharlesBronson (Aug 7, 2007)

Is available for sell but is no more in production, the last aircraft were delivered in 1990 and modernizated in 1995 and 2005.


----------



## Riever (Aug 8, 2007)

Too bad it that it is no longer being built. It is a very interesting aircraft and, based on the pricing you suggest, is relatively cheap given its capabilities. I know it had limited export sales to Ceylon and a couple of other countries as a COIN platform and I understand it has performed pretty well against the Tamil Tigers in Ceyon. I would have thought that this aircraft would have had some buyers as an anti-drug aircraft as well. Did Argentina try to aggressively market the plane or was it really for internal deliveries with the export market as a sideline? I would love to see this at an airshow. I was in Argentina in January 2004 but didn't get a chance to see any shows. I haven't seen any north american shows where it is featured.


----------



## CharlesBronson (Aug 8, 2007)

> Too bad it that it is no longer being built. It is a very interesting aircraft and, based on the pricing you suggest, is relatively cheap given its capabilities


Yeap, there is no Aircraft like that, the more close is the brazilian A-29 Super Tucano, but is single engine.


The FMA did some advertising but never was really important.

The biggest sale of the Pucara was cancelled by the same Argentine gov. for political reasons.

Irak was willing to bought 80 IA-58s in 1987-88 but the president gave a thumbs down to that sale.

Also was cancelled a program to develop a jet engine UAV/cruise missile called "Bigua" to be used in the ventral pod of the Pucara in colaboration with Saddam....but I guess Argentina pick the wrong partner.


----------



## Riever (Aug 8, 2007)

Well, not to worry, a lot of people sold weapons systems to Mr. Hussein over the years, including the U.S., France, China, North Korea, and the UK. He had money to spend, and international aeronautic companies liked his business. I could see how the Pucara would have been very useful against Kurdish Insurgents.


----------



## Graeme (Aug 8, 2007)

CharlesBronson said:


> Yeap, there is no Aircraft like that, the more close is the brazilian A-29 Super Tucano, but is single engine.



Good point. I can't think of any other twin *turboprop* COIN aircraft. I know that the French proposed a twin version of the Epervier, but it was never built.


----------



## CharlesBronson (Aug 8, 2007)

A guy who make a lot ( and I mean a lot ) of money dealing with Saddam not far away of Argentina was Carlos Cardoen.

The chilean manufacturer sells a a high number of armored vehicle and even higher number of self designed cluster bombs.



> Industrias Cardoen SA of Chile makes the "CB-130" (60 kilograms or 132 pounds) and the "CB-500" (245 kilograms or 540 pounds) cluster-bomb unit, with bomblets similar to those used in the US Rockeye CBU. The CB-130 can carry 50 bomblets, while the CB-150 can carry 240 bomblets.




THE CHILEAN CONNECTION / Carlos Cardoen -- arms dealer to Iraq, former friend of the U.S. government, and now fugitive - still lines his pockets with profits from our appetite for wine








> I could see how the Pucara would have been very useful against Kurdish Insurgents.



Not to mention hunting down iranian helicopters.


----------



## CharlesBronson (Aug 8, 2007)

> Good point. I can't think of any other twin turboprop COIN aircraft



There was one, the OV-10, but also no in production any more.

Two engines mean safety, if you get one turboprop blasted by ground fire, you still can go back home.


----------



## Graeme (Aug 8, 2007)

CharlesBronson said:


> There was one, the OV-10



I was thinking in terms of general layout, but yes, I forgot about the Bronco. And I suppose the 'loser' of that competition, the Convair Charger would be another that fits the description. We must be 'scraping the barrel' now?


----------



## CharlesBronson (Aug 8, 2007)

Nice picture.



> We must be 'scraping the barrel' now?



We did.  

The Pucara is better than the basic OV-10 but I think that the OV-10 NOG is one the best COINs ever, the triple barrel 20 mm gatling gun in the ventral pod is fantastic antipersonel and antivehicles weapon. A little slow plataform but sure shot with his sighting devices. Some like the "poorsman" AC-130.






I want one of that in the IA-58.


----------



## Graeme (Aug 8, 2007)

Amazing photo Charles! Did it 'retract' prior to landing, or was there enough clearance?


----------



## CharlesBronson (Aug 8, 2007)

It was a non retractable turret.







Close up to the M197 gun, 1800 rpm. 20x102mm cartrigdes.






For comparison the HS 804 20x110mm guns in the IA-58 shoot at 800-850 rpm.
The 7,62mm FNs ciclic rate is 1100 rpm.


----------



## Riever (Aug 9, 2007)

Great Pics. For my money I still like the look of the Pucara.


----------



## CharlesBronson (Aug 10, 2007)

> Great Pics. For my money I still like the look of the Pucara.



You are welcome.

The "meaner" looking pucara was definately the IA-58C variant. 
In this film still the Charlie is taking off with a laser guided missile, no idea what was the name of that.













Close up to the nose, the protruding barrel belongs to a 30 mm DEFA 553 revolver gun, this shoot about 1800rpm. One of the starbord 7,62mm MG was deleted in order to acomodate the French weapon.


----------



## 0311Matt (Sep 10, 2007)

In Regard to the IA-58 and particularly the IA-66, was there ever any consideration given to using the Pratt Whitney Canada PT6A-68C engines?


----------



## CharlesBronson (Sep 10, 2007)

You mean that model in particular ? 
No really, at list there is no official account of that.
I agree that the astazous are the main drawback of this aircraft.


----------



## Matt308 (Sep 11, 2007)

Love the cockpit of that bird, CB. The canopy looks familiar. Looks very... WWII. Anyone?


----------



## CharlesBronson (Sep 12, 2007)

It looks like second War warbird because it have a flat, armored glass windshield like the fighters in the good old days of the ww2.


----------



## Matt308 (Sep 13, 2007)

Yeah, but so did the A-4. No, I think it looks familiar for other reasons. Perhaps it is the straight stiles of the armoured wind screen.

Oh. And 1800rds/min? For a 30mm?? Is it a chain gun? I can't fathom a firing rate that high for a single barrel cannon.


----------



## CharlesBronson (Sep 13, 2007)

> Oh. And 1800rds/min? For a 30mm?? Is it a chain gun? I can't fathom a firing rate that high for a single barrel cannon.



It is a revolver gun actually, the chain guns are not the fastest one.







I was checking other sources and they said 1100-1300 rpm for the Defa 552, 1300-1500 for the Defa 553 and 1800 for the Defa 554.

I dont remember if the IA-58C used a 553 or a 554 model.

Actually GIAT manufactured today canon named M7981 and it is also single barrel, 7 chamber revolver gun and it fires at...2500 rpm.  

It is used in the Dassault Rafale.


----------



## Matt308 (Sep 13, 2007)

That makes for a hot barrel. I guess the tradeoff is lighter weight.


----------



## CharlesBronson (Sep 13, 2007)

If you mean lighter than a Gatling gun...well must be about 20% of the weight of a GAU-8. 8) 

*IA-58 flying over the Beagle Channel, a hot zone of the 1970s-80s.* This A model carry a 1300 lts fuel tank.


----------



## 0311Matt (Sep 14, 2007)

Hypothetical Canadianized Super Pucara, dubbed 'CA-58' with the PT6A-68C engines and a air-to-air refueling node (to make the aircraft somewhat self-deployable over long distances).


----------



## comiso90 (Sep 14, 2007)

Matt308 said:


> Love the cockpit of that bird, CB. The canopy looks familiar. Looks very... WWII. Anyone?



Reminds me of an Apache helicopter or maybe an ME 410


----------



## Glider (Sep 14, 2007)

How about the Huey Cobra


----------



## Matt308 (Sep 14, 2007)

No. Can't place it.


----------



## comiso90 (Sep 14, 2007)

Glider said:


> How about the Huey Cobra



yeah... i meant cobra......


----------



## CharlesBronson (Sep 14, 2007)

0311Matt said:


> Hypothetical Canadianized Super Pucara, dubbed 'CA-58' with the PT6A-68C engines and a air-to-air refueling node (to make the aircraft somewhat self-deployable over long distances).



Hehe, very good one. I never tough a Puca with flight in refueling.





And what is the armament ?? 8) 






Actually the maximum range of the IA-58 is not bad, about 3000 km, but of course just with maximum fuel and not external bombs/rocket/missiles.


----------



## Graeme (Sep 15, 2007)

After looking around, for far too long, I feel that the 'nose' of the IA-58C is unique.

A family shot.


----------



## CharlesBronson (Sep 15, 2007)

Nice profiles, some sources said "1100 shp Garret" for the IA-66.


*AX-2* (glider)







*AX-2*(powered)







*IA-58B*







*IA-66*


----------



## CharlesBronson (Sep 26, 2007)

IA-58D hit by a vulture, september 3th 2007. 













The airplane was practicing some evasive maneouvers when hit it . The pilots emerged with some cuts in the face, blood visible belongs to the ( very dead) big bird.


http://img169.imageshack.us/img169/3848/77463637ry0.jpg


And the nasty one.

http://img169.imageshack.us/img169/6816/96323449bt7.jpg


----------



## CharlesBronson (Sep 18, 2009)

Just found another inflight photo of one of the few IA-58Cs made.


----------



## vikingBerserker (Sep 18, 2009)

I always thought it was a great looking aircraft.


----------



## CharlesBronson (Feb 4, 2010)

Soome more pictures on this Coin bird.

*- IA-58A weapons display.

- IA-58B 30mm variant. Note the "pregnant" belly of this variant caused by the 30mm 553 DEFAs

-IA-58B in Le Bourget 1980.*


----------



## riacrato (Feb 7, 2010)

Great thread, great pics and great plane!

I wonder how maintenance costs of the IA-58 compare to single engine COIN aircraft like the Tucano.


----------



## CharlesBronson (Feb 7, 2010)

Definately is a 60 or 70% higher, that is the price to pay for a heavier payload, longer range and heavier fixed armament. The ARg Air Force planned a COIN single engine in early 1960s but discarded it quickly. The aircraft is really strong, and the 2 engines allowed you to operated from bad and really short airstrips.
Worth to mention thet the Tucano is in service here but only as a trainer.


----------



## riacrato (Feb 9, 2010)

Nice. Those four MGs and the bent down nose make it look a bit like the Hs 129 

Saw the video of the Tucano shooting down that drug trafficker plane you posted btw. That has to be as close to classic WW2 aircombat as it gets nowadays.


----------



## CharlesBronson (Feb 9, 2010)

True, the Pucara had sometimes been used as drug planes interceptor also, since is not really fast his usual prey are slow singles engine Cessnas coming from Bolivia and Paraguay. Unfortunately the today argentine legislation does not allow the deliberate destruction of a drug carrier, only damage it/ and or force it down.


----------



## CharlesBronson (Jul 18, 2010)

Rare pictures of aerial torpedo test made with the fouth IA-58 prototype. Year 1982


----------



## Matt308 (Jul 18, 2010)

Interesting. I can't imagine that in recently modern warfare (1975-1990) that the Pucara would survive for a torpedo run. While beautiful she most certainly is, the Pucara is vastly under powered and vulnerable.


----------



## CharlesBronson (Jul 19, 2010)

Well, you can see the date of the project, it was intended to be used as an auxiliary anti-submarine patrol helped by the navy S-2Es. The S-2e has the range to reach the Malvinas as loiter for about 3 hours. In the other hand the 24 Pucaras based in the Islands had not such range but since they did not need to cover the 1200 km from mainland argentina with 2 x300 l standar wingtanks they would be ok for a patrol. I an projected combined mission the Ia-58s would fly next to the S-2e and when the Tracker detect something they could attack with torpedos both or just one aircraft.

In the early days of the war the Trackers paired with helos for such mission but after the HMS Coventry blew up one Super Puma with a Seadart ( it was a long shot) and the Harriers damaged several more the Trackers operated alone.
I cant say for sure but I dont think thet ever crossed the Air Force High Command to operate the torpedo Pucara against the british frigates or destroyers, the aircraft simply wouldnt survive the antiaircraft screen.

Is underpowered yes but I dont think it such vulnerable if you provide with some ECM of chaff dispenser, after all is to fight guerrila wich might, might be armed with an old Sa-7, Stinger or SA-16, evidently in not an penetration interdictor, cant ask for more of the design.
The pilot has back, floor and frontal armor, despite all the 24 were loss in the 1982 wars ( mostly by MANPADS and infantry attacks against its airbase) just one pilot was killed, that was Antonio Jukic the aircraft was about to taxi and received a BL-755 cluster bomb launched by Harriers the 1th May 1982.


----------



## CharlesBronson (Oct 28, 2010)

*New Life for the Pucara:*

Believe it or not the Air Force has decided to put money for a second IA-58 modernization. Mainly because the French firm Turbomeca annouced it will quit to manufature spare parts for the Astazou in 2011.

The improvement will include ( at last) a small glass screen with flight data and a HUD displaying cannons, bombs, rocket firing solutions, the armor will be increased below the engine naccelles and the new engine will be Honeywell TPE-331 or Pratt Whitney PT-6. Still this is not fully confirmed but is know some 30 Ia-58As and Ds will be adquiring this new turboprop, the work is already underway in the FMA.

Here some pictures taken the 16 october.


----------



## Matt308 (Oct 28, 2010)

Wow... the phoenix rises from the ashes!


----------



## vikingBerserker (Oct 28, 2010)

Very cool, still a very usefull aircraft IMO.


----------



## CharlesBronson (Oct 29, 2010)

Yea, unfortunately It wont be like this, my project for a turboprop A-58 "Warthog"  with 2 x 30mm and the .30 Mgs replaced with the high rate of fire M3M cal 50...






Aniway the new engines would give them a considerable boost to intercept the pesky drug carring planes coming from the northern borders. I just wish somebody replace those old HS 804 with Rheinmetalls RH 202.


----------



## Matt308 (Oct 29, 2010)

What is the shp difference between what is on the Pucara now and the PT-6A? If it's not hugely significant, she's still gonna be a dog. The Pucara is very underpowered in its current guise.


----------



## CharlesBronson (Oct 29, 2010)

The Astazous had 978 shp and the PT6 from 1200 to 1500shp depending in wich variant is finally choosed, in my opinion the change would be noticeable.


----------



## Matt308 (Oct 29, 2010)

Yeah I would say that might address some shortcomings!


----------



## Aaron Brooks Wolters (Oct 29, 2010)

I just read this thread Charles (I know, I'm a little late) EXCELLENT WORK SIR!!!!!!!! And a beautiful aircraft! I have enjoyed this thread a lot. Thanks you for the time to put it together.


----------



## CharlesBronson (Oct 31, 2010)

> just read this thread Charles (I know, I'm a little late) EXCELLENT WORK SIR!!!!!!!! And a beautiful aircraft! I have enjoyed this thread a lot. Thanks you for the time to put it together



Beter latter than never, my pleasure.



> Yeah I would say that might address some shortcomings!



It would, the Pucara is not designed for speed but probably will hit 590-620 kmph with the new engines. The new aircraft will be a bit heavier due the electronics and extra armor.

A example of 1200 hp PT6 powered turboprop is the Pilatus *PC-12 Ng* wich is service with the Gendarmeria (a sort of argentine border patrol/military police) 
The 1500 shp variant is used in the succesful brazilian Super Tucano the most widespread modern COIN aircraft. Many people ask why the Argie didnt bought SupTuc so far, the answer is simple: the AAF, the argentine Goverment, even the argentine public opinion prefers a domestic product.


----------



## Matt308 (Oct 31, 2010)

Yeah I wasn't thinking for speed so much as climb and turn performance. Watching some videos on the Pucara, it is really underpowered. The upgrade would certainly fix that. Wonder what it would do to the range though.


----------



## tomo pauk (Nov 1, 2010)

CharlesBronson said:


> ...
> The pilot has back, floor and frontal armor, despite all the 24 were loss in the 1982 wars ( mostly by MANPADS and infantry attacks against its airbase) just one pilot was killed, that was *Antonio Jukic* the aircraft was about to taxi and received a BL-755 cluster bomb launched by Harriers the 1th May 1982.



Well, I'm amazed 

Late pilot's prenome suggests he had Croatian background. Not surprisigly though, since many Croats have immigrated in Argentina Chile (and in other S. American countries) in large numbers.

Great thread, and lovely plane, the Pucara.


----------



## CharlesBronson (Nov 2, 2010)

There are more croats in Chile than in Argentina but still here thre is a good number of them. My dad has a friend named Pavel Balog so you can see where he come from. Unlike me he is a landowner, with the productivity of the land in Argentina that means you live live the great life almost without working. 

But lets back to the Pucara.

My earlier information was not complete, Yes, there was a single Pucara pilot killed* by enemy action *but another one ( Lt Gimenez)* was killed in flying accident *due the awful weather.
I dont think the range would be affected due the more powerful engines, after all they are a newer, better technology.


----------



## Rawhide40 (Jan 4, 2011)

CharlesBronson said:


> Beter latter than never, my pleasure.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



The Honeywell TPE331-14 is rated @ 
Power output: shp 1,650
shp (thermo) 1,759
eshp 1,833
emergency APR 2,022


----------



## CharlesBronson (Jan 8, 2011)

Thanks for the input, that 1500 shp is the figure I ve seen in some super Tucano brochures.


----------



## Air Ordnance (Oct 16, 2013)

The shape of the Pucara was taken from the A4 Skyhawk, the other plane which is still flown by the FAA.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Oct 18, 2013)

Air Ordnance said:


> The shape of the Pucara was taken from the A4 Skyhawk, the other plane which is still flown by the FAA.


Do you have documented proof of that?


----------



## Matt308 (Oct 18, 2013)

Yeah... the Pucara and Skyhawk have one letter in common.


----------



## CharlesBronson (Oct 27, 2013)

My god, not again with that myth please.

Designer of the A-4 = Ed Heinemann
Designers of IA58 = A. Ruiz, R. Olmedo.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------

