Invasion forces are 'life costly' and it makes sense to kill everyone first and then occupy them.
Wouldn't it be wonderful if big business took a back seat for a change. Remember when Isinhower (sp) left office he warned of the military industrial complex.

>>25950 The new 800 seater CheapoAir plane ;D

Drones are certainly the way forward, but I'm we'll see all kinds of designs over the next decade or so.

>>25950 I like that. The invading troops could set loose a whole box full with poison needles on the front and sting the enemy to death.

>>25949 agreed but you'll still need eyes on the ground

(pic shows the 'Black Hornet' nano-drone)

To me, these little suckers are the future warfare.

Maybe we'll see how all this expense does when the U.S. decides to invade Iran. Otherwise I can't think of a place where the vehicles would be useful.

>>25946 I meant USMC, Doh!

Impressive, but it was cancelled:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l94arUeh1XI

>>25942 the US version fits inside a LDS, while the Russian version is a stand-alone. It all has it's pro's and con's

>>25942 US Navy version is slightly less. At 87 feet long, it is as long as the Zubr is wide and carries 1/3 the payload of the Zubr.

>>25941 Now THAT'S an invasion craft. The U.S. Navy should take note. We're always invading somebody; may as well have the means to do it.

And then they went with the Zubr Class (Pomornik) LCAC

By what I read on Wikipedia, flying low for a surprise attack was the whole point of this aircraft. It had the power to maintain a low altitude. It is a monster. I'll give you that.

The A-90 entered military service in 1979. Units S-21, S-25 and S-26 remained in active service at least until 1993.

>>25938 much like the flying boats of WWII, the A-90 was amphibious; it could both take-off from land as well as water. And it could be refueled by a boat/ship. As with most Russian/Soviet design: if you don't try you always fail

I'm just not convinced that this plane is worth any tactical movement. 950 mile range, 150 troops and 6 missiles. If they tried real hard they might be able to overthrow the township of Anchorage, Alaska.

>>25936 Not too many 3000m waves, so that would work ok :)

Wing-In-Ground (WIG) effect craft take advantage the fact that the aerodynamic efficiency of a wing, and particularly its lifting capacity, improves dramatically when is operated within approximately one-half of its span above ground or water, in what is called ground effect. If the wing's natural accelerated flow passing over it is further accelerated by the high-velocity exhaust of a turbojet engine, the lifting capacity of the wing is even more greatly enhanced. In 1966 the Central Hydrofoil Design Bureau under Rostislav Alekseev produced a gargantuan "ekranoplan" ("surface plane") combining the smooth hull form of a ship with stub wings, a large vertical fin and horizontal tail. The craft featured ten engines: eight mounted in two clusters of four directly behind the cockpit to provide augmented lift, and two on the vertical fin to provide cruise power. This machine, which American intelligence organizations dubbed the Caspian Sea Monster, could lift 540 tons and cruise at over 300 mph at an altitude of over 10 feet. Alekseev developed a smaller military WIG, the Lun ("Dove"), armed with six large anti-shipping cruise missiles perched not so aerodynamically on its back. This led to the jet-and-turboprop-powered Orlyonok ("Little Eagle," NATO name Orlan >>0), intended as an amphibious assault craft. The apparent success of these machines hid some very real problems, not least of which were serious stability and control deficiencies, as well as tremendous power requirements to get off the water.

source: fas.org

>>25935 it seems that the max ceiling was 3000m! But I guess control was some-what better at lower altitudes.

Wonderful machines, but sadly not much use on a choppy sea :/

Big plane but only a range of 948 miles with 150 personnel.

Ekranoplan! Google Caspian sea monster.