Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Russian Helicopter ATGMs

    Share
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16865
    Points : 17473
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Helicopter ATGMs

    Post  GarryB on Sat Sep 28, 2013 10:06 am

    The information have seen says Arena-E engage target at with a max speed of 700m/s ,thats Mach 2.0. which is
    not bad at all.. can engage almost all anti tank weapons but not Hermes k that travels at mach 4.0. APFSDS rounds also travel at very fast super sonic speeds.
    The new ARENA-E can engage targets from 70m/s to 1,000 m/s as shown in the current brochure:



    Which is Mach 3.

    As I said above Standard and Afghanistan will be able to engage APFSDS rounds... which means they can engage very small targets at 1,500m/s or so, which means Hermes is not fast enough to evade them.

    Also Hermes uses a solid rocket booster after which it coasts to the target area so while it might be moving at 1.3km/s at about 2km range by about 15km range it will likely be going at about 600-700m/s.

    In Urban warfare tanks takes a lot of gun fire , lots of rpgs and IED too. So tank any hardware outside the tank
    and sensors will be destroyed if too big and weak.
    Audio sensors can hear around corners so can sit behind steel plate armour with multiple sensors used to locate sound sources. All sources of gunfire could be located and engaged in real time so I suspect the number of enemy forces shooting at your tank will rapidly diminish as the targets are eliminated. Needless to say firing an M16 at a T-90AM would do very little, but the act of firing locates you for the crew of that tank. After 10 of your buddies are killed because they fired upon enemy tanks how often are you going to try it on the off chance you might hit something important... remember in the near future in an armata brigade every vehicle will have tank level armour and sensors to detect your location when you open fire...

    on top active protection detonation mechanism is a problem not only for troops near but equipment in the tank.
    Looking at the ad above it still just protects from the sides rather than diving top attack threats... friendly troops can't operate close to their tanks anyway... that 125mm gun swinging around and firing a shot above your head would ruin your day pretty damn fast.

    Equally the gunners sight is above the line of the coaxial MG so he could open fire into the back of a friendly soldiers head not realising he is in the line of sight of the gun but not the optical sight.

    ARENA is designed to launch its intercept munitions up into the air and direct the fragments down at the incoming threat to minimise the threat to nearby soldiers. Conversely munitions can be fired manually to engage enemy troops that are nearby...


    So i don't see in the near future ,how could you have outside a tank very big expensive radars and expensive sensor to counter super fast missiles coming to a tank.
    What makes you think they need to be big? They just need to detect the incoming threat to 50m or so and be fast acting.

    Here are the radar elements of the ARENA-E system:



    Those boxes in the sides.



    Here you can see the open tops with the munitions visible...

    One hermes with 1300 mm penetration should be more than enough to disable a tank ,or at least wound its operators inside even in a frontal attack.
    They need a breakthrough... 152mm guns are just too big and heavy and cumbersome... I suspect much higher velocity EM guns will start being used... most likely in long range artillery on land and at sea and then EM MBT guns of smaller lighter calibres but much higher velocities so they are still effective.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    Vann7

    Posts : 3471
    Points : 3583
    Join date : 2012-05-16

    Re: Russian Helicopter ATGMs

    Post  Vann7 on Sat Sep 28, 2013 10:56 am

    GarryB wrote:

    Which is Mach 3.

    As I said above Standard and Afghanistan will be able to engage APFSDS rounds... which means they can engage very small targets at 1,500m/s or so, which means Hermes is not fast enough to evade them.

    Also Hermes uses a solid rocket booster after which it coasts to the target area so while it might be moving at 1.3km/s at about 2km range by about 15km range it will likely be going at about 600-700m/s.
    I do not understand what you mean by Standar and afganistan? is that another hardware? care to elaborate?

    Max speed is achieved at the end before impact not at the start. Makes no sense why would anyone design a missile that decelerate at it most important moment when it is being tracked and before impact..  if Arena- E specs says can engage targets up to 1,000 m/s (~mach 3.0)..  i cannot see why you insist, to say that it can engage much faster targets like hermes mach 1,300 m/s (~mach 4.0)  or APFSDS kinetic hypersonic rounds that travels at near twice the speed of arena-E projectiles. that  is up to 1,900 m/s  (mach 5.6). When it comes to interceptions even half a second later will totally miss to intercept a projectile. Unless you talk about a future Arena EM++ that can intercept hypersonic targets.? confused


    Last edited by Vann7 on Sat Sep 28, 2013 11:14 am; edited 1 time in total
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16865
    Points : 17473
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Helicopter ATGMs

    Post  GarryB on Sat Sep 28, 2013 11:09 am


    I do not understand what you mean by Standar and afganistan? care to elaborate?
    Afghanistan is the name of the APS system for armata and has been described as being able to defeat APFSDS rounds.

    Standard is the name of the APS systems for medium and light vehicles... ie Kurganets, Boomerang, and Typhoon.

    And if Arena- E specs says can engage targets up to 1,000 m/s (~mach 3.0).. and i do not understand why you insist, to say it can engage much faster targets like hermes mach 1,300 m/s (~mach 4.0) or APFSDS kinetic rounds that travels at near twice the speed of arena-E projectiles. that is up to 1,900 m/s (mach 5.6)? Unless you talk about a future Arena EM++ that can intercept hypersonic targets.?
    Hermes only travels at 1,300m/s at main booster rocket burn out... ie about 2-3km beyond the launch tube... after that it will slow down due to drag and when engaging targets at standoff distances (which is what it is designed for)... say 10-16km range, the speed of the missile will actually be closer to 600-700m/s.

    If they could design it so that it flew at 1.3km per second all the way to a target 20km away instead of a 30kg HEAT warhead they could simply line the core of the missile with a rod of depleted uranium that was 3m long and weighed 15kgs... that would penetrate any known tank easily.

    The fastest known APFSDS round is Soviet and travels at 1.8km/s, but that is from the muzzle of the gun that fires it... by the time it reaches a target at 2km or so it will not be travelling that fast.

    BTW I was talking about the period when armata is in service so near future.. when Hermes is also in service.

    Also, don't get me wrong, Hermes is cool, but nothing is perfect... right now the most powerful anti tank weapon would be the Kh-29L with its 317kg HEAT warhead even premature detonation 20m short of the tank target it would still generate a plasma torch powerful enough to melt pretty much any tank ever made... past or future. It is designed to undermine the heavy concrete foundations of large bridges and other large structures like bunkers etc so a little tank would be no problem.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    Vann7

    Posts : 3471
    Points : 3583
    Join date : 2012-05-16

    Re: Russian Helicopter ATGMs

    Post  Vann7 on Sat Sep 28, 2013 11:26 am

    GarryB wrote:
    Hermes only travels at 1,300m/s at main booster rocket burn out... ie about 2-3km beyond the launch tube... after that it will slow down due to drag and when engaging targets at standoff distances (which is what it is designed for)... say 10-16km range, the speed of the missile will actually be closer to 600-700m/s.

    If they could design it so that it flew at 1.3km per second all the way to a target 20km away instead of a 30kg HEAT warhead they could simply line the core of the missile with a rod of depleted uranium that was 3m long and weighed 15kgs... that would penetrate any known tank easily.
    But thats a supposition of yours .. it will be not very  logical, to design the missile in such a way that waste its maximum speed at the start and not when it need it more.. before the missile impact ,to penetrate any system defenses. and they don't need it to be mach 4 all the time.. just only before impact. CLub missiles . even though is another company..for example some of them do exactly this. they achieve max speed before impact. This is more logical to pass more quickly any system defenses.  

    Im curious how armata will do against hellfire missiles..

    Anyway both systems .. Arena-E and Hermes ,looks very promising.. Can't wait to see the APS of armata and
    hermes system in service. Thanks for the updates.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16865
    Points : 17473
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Helicopter ATGMs

    Post  GarryB on Sun Sep 29, 2013 10:17 am

    But thats a supposition of yours .. it will be not very logical, to design the missile in such a way that waste its maximum speed at the start and not when it need it more.. before the missile impact ,to penetrate any system defenses. and they don't need it to be mach 4 all the time.. just only before impact.
    Go to this page:

    http://www.kbptula.ru/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=146&Itemid=414&lang=en

    On the right side of the main window there is a text block titled system composition, and the top link says containerised hermes guided missile... click that link and the box that opens has details about the air launched Hermes-A missile... top speed 1,000m/s, and notice below... it has a two stage missile with a booster stage and a coasting stage.

    Obviously the booster stage is where its main propellent is stored and it accelerates the missile to speed in the first few seconds of flight to 1km/s.

    The coasting stage is long and slim and low drag... in practise the missile will likely be fired on a ballistic trajectory to maximise range except for relatively close range targets Which it will likely just fly directly towards.

    APS systems are not widely deployed and there is no real benefit to flying at mach 4 on impact for a HEAT/HE warhead.

    The advantage of flying at mach 3+ just after launch is that the booster can be dropped leaving a lighter smaller lower drag missile which increases its average flight speed across its entire envelope without needing a cruise rocket motor.

    CLub missiles . even though is another company..for example some of them do exactly this. they achieve max speed before impact. This is more logical to pass more quickly any system defenses.
    It is logical for anti ship missiles because modern ships are well defended. Very few modern tanks actually have APS systems however so it doesn't really make sense for ATGMs yet.

    And Club is the only missile that does what it does so can hardly be taken as normal.

    Im curious how armata will do against hellfire missiles..
    Early model ARENA could deal with Hellfires, so I don't see Armata having a problem if it is fitted with an APS as standard... which it will.



    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order
    avatar
    Flyboy77

    Posts : 61
    Points : 64
    Join date : 2013-06-01

    Re: Russian Helicopter ATGMs

    Post  Flyboy77 on Sun Dec 29, 2013 6:50 am

    I was reading the Russian Air Force 2025 article in Combat Aircraft mag and they made mention that the Mi-28NM and Ka-52M will be armed with a new multi-function missile called the LMUR.

    Does anyone have any information of this missile?
    avatar
    Werewolf

    Posts : 5358
    Points : 5587
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    Re: Russian Helicopter ATGMs

    Post  Werewolf on Sun Dec 29, 2013 2:24 pm

    Flyboy77 wrote:I was reading the Russian Air Force 2025 article in Combat Aircraft mag and they made mention that the Mi-28NM and Ka-52M will be armed with a new multi-function missile called the LMUR.

    Does anyone have any information of this missile?

    I've never heared of LMUR and couldn't find anything that is called LMUR Missile.

    Do you have any information about it that you could link?
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16865
    Points : 17473
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Helicopter ATGMs

    Post  GarryB on Mon Dec 30, 2013 9:07 am

    I was reading the Russian Air Force 2025 article in Combat Aircraft mag and they made mention that the Mi-28NM and Ka-52M will be armed with a new multi-function missile called the LMUR.

    Does anyone have any information of this missile?

    The new multifunction missile for Mi-28NM and Ka-52M is Hermes.

    Other weapons they might be talking about are air launched Krisantema, or possibly the Ugroza guidance kits for unguided rocket pod weapons like 80mm and 122mm rockets (S-8 and S-130)


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order
    avatar
    Flyboy77

    Posts : 61
    Points : 64
    Join date : 2013-06-01

    Re: Russian Helicopter ATGMs

    Post  Flyboy77 on Mon Dec 30, 2013 2:21 pm

    Werewolf wrote:
    Flyboy77 wrote:I was reading the Russian Air Force 2025 article in Combat Aircraft mag and they made mention that the Mi-28NM and Ka-52M will be armed with a new multi-function missile called the LMUR.

    Does anyone have any information of this missile?

    I've never heared of LMUR and couldn't find anything that is called LMUR Missile.

    Do you have any information about it  that you could link?

    Russian Airforce 2025

    RuAF-1 http://i58.servimg.com/u/f58/15/54/62/79/00110.jpg
    RuAF-2 http://i58.servimg.com/u/f58/15/54/62/79/00210.jpg
    RuAF-3 http://i58.servimg.com/u/f58/15/54/62/79/00310.jpg
    RuAF-4 http://i58.servimg.com/u/f58/15/54/62/79/00410.jpg
    RuAF-5 http://i58.servimg.com/u/f58/15/54/62/79/00510.jpg
    RuAF-6 http://i58.servimg.com/u/f58/15/54/62/79/00610.jpg

    It's in part 6 at the top of the page.

    avatar
    Werewolf

    Posts : 5358
    Points : 5587
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    Re: Russian Helicopter ATGMs

    Post  Werewolf on Mon Dec 30, 2013 5:06 pm

    Lightweight Multi-Purpose Guided Missile, meaning it has a warhead like Vikhr meaning Tandem shaped charge and followed by HE-Frag charge with proxy fuze and contact fuze but the "lightweight" does that mean lighter than ATAKA,Shturm and Vikhr with 33.5kg - 49kg without and with container, means leighter than 35kg with container?

    I don't think they mean Ugroza program or any unguided rocket with corrective guidance suite.
    Is there any known lightweight ATGM that is possibly already known or used on other plattforms and will become a costeffecient lighter version of Ataka/Vikhr missile like a heliborne Kornet ?
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16865
    Points : 17473
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    new multi-function missile called the LMUR

    Post  GarryB on Tue Dec 31, 2013 11:19 am

    Kornet-EM is 33.5kgs.

    It is only a beam rider AFAIK however.

    Plus there are two models... one with a shaped charge warhead and one with a HE warhead with proximity fuse...

    I would have thought the Krisantema would be a better missile to base such a missile on as it can use laser beam riding or SARH guidance...


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order
    avatar
    TR1

    Posts : 5679
    Points : 5707
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Re: Russian Helicopter ATGMs

    Post  TR1 on Fri Jan 10, 2014 9:45 pm

    http://sdelanounas.ru/blogs/45848/

    Ataka-VN and Strelets complexes accepted for service.

    Well, slowly getting there!

    BTW I saw a Shturm missile in the Central Armed Forces museum- damn thing was much bigger than I expected.
    avatar
    Werewolf

    Posts : 5358
    Points : 5587
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    Re: Russian Helicopter ATGMs

    Post  Werewolf on Fri Jan 10, 2014 11:29 pm

    TR1 wrote:http://sdelanounas.ru/blogs/45848/

    Ataka-VN and Strelets complexes accepted for service.

    Well, slowly getting there!

    BTW I saw a Shturm missile in the Central Armed Forces museum- damn thing was much bigger than I expected.

    Wait, why is Ataka-VN only 6km while every other Ataka-M have 8-10km?

    And it has a mutlipurpose warhead no new guidance did i get that right?
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16865
    Points : 17473
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Ataka-VN and Strelets complexes accepted for service.

    Post  GarryB on Sat Jan 11, 2014 9:33 am

    I suspect they are using export missile figures to disguise the domestic models performance...


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order
    avatar
    Werewolf

    Posts : 5358
    Points : 5587
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    I guess so because that wouldn't make much sense to have a missile with the performance of an average Shturm missile.

    Post  Werewolf on Sat Jan 11, 2014 6:29 pm

    I guess so because that wouldn't make much sense to have a missile with the performance of an average Shturm missile.

    Cyrus the great

    Posts : 280
    Points : 290
    Join date : 2015-06-12

    Re: Russian Helicopter ATGMs

    Post  Cyrus the great on Sat Jun 20, 2015 6:08 pm

    Werewolf wrote:
    Cyrus the great wrote:

    The British Brimstone missile seems to be a further development of the American Hellfire missile... so how in the world does it achieve its purported 60 km range when the hellfire is only capable of 8 km? The two missiles have the same weight and so it's not as though the Brimstone achieves its incredible range by being larger. As usual, I'm stumped.

    The negative point with the Hellfire is that it has a fixed algorythm that after launch it will gain 400-600m altitude, even if it is launched from 4km altitude already, this burns extra fuel and with the combination that the rocket engine is a high burning engine it burns its fuel far faster then most missiles. In theory the Hellfire could reach easily 10km + maybe even 15km when launched at certain speeds and altitude of higher than 5km, but the problem is the flight trajectory (always trying to gain altitude) and high burning engine. The brimstone is based on Hellfire with two major things changed, the engine is a slow burning engine it burns the fuel much slower rate, because it is always launched from drones 10km+ altitude, meaning they cut out the algorythm and trajectory of the missile to gain extra altitude because it wouldn't make any sense at such hights. The other thing is the trajectory which is a direct trajectory which cuts the range from launch to target further giving it potential more range and of course that it is launched from fixed wing airplanes giving it the extra velocity, while most launches from Apaches are made with 0 velocity from hovering or at lower speeds than 180 km/h. It also has a multispectral sensor which gives it better target descrimination and lays down the basis at which ranges it can effectivley engage targets, bad SALH seeker on Hellfire 1 missile were the problem in Iraq war with relative short range of less than 4km, despite Iraq being mostly flat desert with good range of sight.

    God, I love this forum... I am learning so much. I'm surprised that the Hellfire isn't nearly as capable as I was led to believe. I know that the Russians have an arguably superior missile [Hermes] with far greater speeds and a whopping 100 km max range, but it weighs 110 kg. Couldn't the Russians either create a lighter variant of the Hermes [around 50 kg] or extend the range of the khrizantema to 15-20 km for its attack helicopters?

    Cyrus the great

    Posts : 280
    Points : 290
    Join date : 2015-06-12

    Re: Russian Helicopter ATGMs

    Post  Cyrus the great on Sat Jun 20, 2015 6:19 pm

    Werewolf wrote:
    Cyrus the great wrote:
    GarryB wrote:Probably a lower thrust much longer burning engine and the fact that it is released from fixed wing high speed aircraft instead of low flying helos.

    That occurred to me but I didn't think that it would increase the range to that extent. Even when launched from a helicopter, the Brimstone can reach an astonishing 40 km. As always, thank you for explaining it to me.

    Brimstone can't reach 40km launched from a helicopter. It would reach 16 maybe 20km launched from 4-5km altitude from an Apache with speeds of 150-200 km/h.

    It seems that I made the mistake of trusting information from Wikipedia. I tried to find other sources for the 40 km figure, but I couldn't, and so you're right. I suppose I should have corroborated the claims, instead of trusting Wikipedia like a mindless sap. Thanks for the correction.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16865
    Points : 17473
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Helicopter ATGMs

    Post  GarryB on Sun Jun 21, 2015 11:58 am

    I know that the Russians have an arguably superior missile [Hermes] with far greater speeds and a whopping 100 km max range, but it weighs 110 kg.

    AFAIK only the ground launched model of Hermes will reach 100km range with a ballistic flight path.

    Couldn't the Russians either create a lighter variant of the Hermes [around 50 kg] or extend the range of the khrizantema to 15-20 km for its attack helicopters?

    the standard model Hermes for helicopter launch will have a range of about 20km, and I suspect later model helicopter launched variations of Khrisantema and Vikhr will likely persist as the cheaper lighter options.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order
    avatar
    Werewolf

    Posts : 5358
    Points : 5587
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    Re: Russian Helicopter ATGMs

    Post  Werewolf on Sun Jun 21, 2015 4:19 pm

    Cyrus the great wrote:
    God, I love this forum... I am learning so much. I'm surprised that the Hellfire isn't nearly as capable as I was led to believe. I know that the Russians have an arguably superior missile [Hermes] with far greater speeds and a whopping 100 km max range, but it weighs 110 kg. Couldn't the Russians either create a lighter variant of the Hermes [around 50 kg] or extend the range of the khrizantema to 15-20 km for its attack helicopters?

    The comparision between Hellfire and Hermes isn't fair, they were designed in completley different times and are different kind of technology generation. If you want to compare it to a counterpart so you have to compare it with one off the US designs as next gen. heliborne ATGM. The US had several proposals, some died off, were closed some emerged into existing projects like raytheons project PAASM (Precision Attack Air-to Surface Missile) AFAIK which was canceled years ago, then there was JCM (Join Common Missile) that was a replacement for Mavericks with up to 28km range (fixed wing) that was also tested in 2005 for Apaches, the budget for that project was terminated and relocated to the JAGM project. That would be the current project be JGAM (Joint Air-to Ground Missile) which is to great deal based on Hellfire and has a range of around 15-18km,(which mainly comes as a deal between new rocket engine and non dogmatic "top attack" trajectory which burned the fuel before it even reached 2km mark) however not much information on it but is suppossed to be the introduced into active service in 2019 roughly the same timeline of Hermes, but that will take some years untill those missiles will be in sufficient numbers and take even longer to be called "main armament" far post 2025.

    http://www.lockheedmartin.com/us/products/JAGM.html


    Cyrus the great

    Posts : 280
    Points : 290
    Join date : 2015-06-12

    Re: Russian Helicopter ATGMs

    Post  Cyrus the great on Sun Jun 21, 2015 4:32 pm

    GarryB wrote:
    I know that the Russians have an arguably superior missile [Hermes] with far greater speeds and a whopping 100 km max range, but it weighs 110 kg.

    AFAIK only the ground launched model of Hermes will reach 100km range with a ballistic flight path.

    Couldn't the Russians either create a lighter variant of the Hermes [around 50 kg] or extend the range of the khrizantema to 15-20 km for its attack helicopters?

    the standard model Hermes for helicopter launch will have a range of about 20km, and I suspect later model helicopter launched variations of Khrisantema and Vikhr will likely persist as the cheaper lighter options.


    The 20 km range is extraordinary but the Hermes-A still weighs 110 kg. A 20 km version of the Khrizantema would be ideal for attack helicopters. I know that it would probably be needlessly expensive to develop such a variant, but hey, one can dream.

    Cyrus the great

    Posts : 280
    Points : 290
    Join date : 2015-06-12

    Re: Russian Helicopter ATGMs

    Post  Cyrus the great on Sun Jun 21, 2015 4:55 pm

    Werewolf wrote:
    Cyrus the great wrote:
    God, I love this forum... I am learning so much. I'm surprised that the Hellfire isn't nearly as capable as I was led to believe. I know that the Russians have an arguably superior missile [Hermes] with far greater speeds and a whopping 100 km max range, but it weighs 110 kg. Couldn't the Russians either create a lighter variant of the Hermes [around 50 kg] or extend the range of the khrizantema to 15-20 km for its attack helicopters?

    The comparision between Hellfire and Hermes isn't fair, they were designed in completley different times and are different kind of technology generation. If you want to compare it to a counterpart so you have to compare it with one off the US designs as next gen. heliborne ATGM. The US had several proposals, some died off, were closed some emerged into existing projects like raytheons project PAASM (Precision Attack Air-to Surface Missile) AFAIK which was canceled years ago, then there was JCM (Join Common Missile) that was a replacement for Mavericks with up to 28km range (fixed wing) that was also tested in 2005 for Apaches, the budget for that project was terminated and relocated to the JAGM project. That would be the current project be JGAM (Joint Air-to Ground Missile) which is to great deal based on Hellfire and has a range of around 15-18km,(which mainly comes as a deal between new rocket engine and non dogmatic "top attack" trajectory which burned the fuel before it even reached 2km mark) however not much information on it but is suppossed to be the introduced into active service in 2019 roughly the same timeline of Hermes, but that will take some years untill those missiles will be in sufficient numbers and take even longer to be called "main armament" far post 2025.

    http://www.lockheedmartin.com/us/products/JAGM.html


    I guess I was terribly unfair comparing recently developed missiles to those that have been in service for decades. If a top-attack trajectory is so difficult to deploy beyond reasonable range, why doesn't the US just scrap that particular requirement and get on with it? That's probably a stupid question seeing as how the top-attack trajectory is in vogue now. A 20 km variant of the Khrizantema for rotary aircraft would be a game changer. Thanks for your extensive reply.
    avatar
    Werewolf

    Posts : 5358
    Points : 5587
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    Re: Russian Helicopter ATGMs

    Post  Werewolf on Sun Jun 21, 2015 5:09 pm

    Cyrus the great wrote:
    I guess I was terribly unfair comparing recently developed missiles to those that have been in service for decades. If a top-attack trajectory is so difficult to deploy beyond reasonable range, why doesn't the US just scrap that particular requirement and get on with it? That's probably a stupid question seeing as how the top-attack trajectory is in vogue now. A 20 km variant of the Khrizantema for rotary aircraft would be a game changer. Thanks for your extensive reply.

    Well the top-attack requirement isn't the issue here, the issue with the Hellfire is does not have a direct-launch profile mode. It has three missile launch profiles, low trajectory, the missile still tries to gain altitude considered Top attack even tho the missile does not hit tanks roof armor, not even close. The other profiles are mid and high, they both gain again altitude the difference with mid and low trajectory is the missile launch profile and trajectory of gaining altitude and going down on target is still rather flat, but the high trajectory was initially designed to be used behind cover so the missile will not hit trees, obstacles or nearby buildings which is the actual top attack, all other profiles do not even hit the weak roof armor, it gives them still some advantage due better angle to armor but that is essentially the case for any heliborne launched missile/rocket.

    They did not see it as a big problem because it is not a big problem, most engagements of Apaches vs tanks are done between 30-700m at such altitudes the operators can't even see nor designate targets further away than 3-4km and that is the case for all Helicopters, they all have a similiar requirement to deploy to battlefield with high valued targets like MBT's with NoE (Nap over Earth) flights, because it is crucial for helicopters to stay undetected with very good intel of enemy forces for succesful and effective use of helicopters. Russians, Chinese, US and any other country try to reduce the chances of being spotted or targeted by MANPADS by flying low to their targets and they usually remain lower than 1km altitude for many reasons, not being spotted, it is far more effecient with combat load to fly at lower altitudes due better and denser air which gives better flight performance and fuel effecient flight. They usually tend to gain altitude 2-3km away from tanks and then launch their ATGM's, but that is not always the case and will not be always the case due the increasing capability of defense suites and when non isolated targets appear, where a full strike against a variety of targets is necessary, the US has adopted the same thing the Soviets/Russians did and still do with Hinds, which provides the highest and most effecient way of dealing with quite often occuring targets of different value in formation or fortification.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16865
    Points : 17473
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Helicopter ATGMs

    Post  GarryB on Tue Jun 23, 2015 1:00 am

    The main feature of the Hermes is speed.

    Getting to the target area quickly is critical especially against a moving target that, if it is a tank, will be accelerating from cover to cover looking for targets.

    Having a range of 20km is great, but smoke and dust and the general difficulty of detecting and properly identifying targets at that range mean most actual shots will be taken at rather shorter range.

    Krisantema will not likely ever get a range of 20km... 8-10km is rather more sensible, as there are plenty of battlefield targets that don't require a Hermes sized weapon to kill them... a smaller, lighter, shorter range weapon that is also cheaper makes a lot of sense... and in this situation I would be in favour of the Ka-52 keeping its Vikhr missiles as well, though Hermes will be the primary long range weapon for helos and light aircraft...


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    Cyrus the great

    Posts : 280
    Points : 290
    Join date : 2015-06-12

    Re: Russian Helicopter ATGMs

    Post  Cyrus the great on Wed Jun 24, 2015 1:16 pm

    Werewolf wrote:
    Cyrus the great wrote:
    I guess I was terribly unfair comparing recently developed missiles to those that have been in service for decades. If a top-attack trajectory is so difficult to deploy beyond reasonable range, why doesn't the US just scrap that particular requirement and get on with it? That's probably a stupid question seeing as how the top-attack trajectory is in vogue now. A 20 km variant of the Khrizantema for rotary aircraft would be a game changer. Thanks for your extensive reply.

    Well the top-attack requirement isn't the issue here, the issue with the Hellfire is does not have a direct-launch profile mode. It has three missile launch profiles, low trajectory, the missile still tries to gain altitude considered Top attack even tho the missile does not hit tanks roof armor, not even close. The other profiles are mid and high, they both gain again altitude the difference with mid and low trajectory is the missile launch profile and trajectory of gaining altitude and going down on target is still rather flat, but the high trajectory was initially designed to be used behind cover so the missile will not hit trees, obstacles or nearby buildings which is the actual top attack, all other profiles do not even hit the weak roof armor, it gives them still some advantage due better angle to armor but that is essentially the case for any heliborne launched missile/rocket.

    They did not see it as a big problem because it is not a big problem, most engagements of Apaches vs tanks are done between 30-700m at such altitudes the operators can't even see nor designate targets further away than 3-4km and that is the case for all Helicopters, they all have a similiar requirement to deploy to battlefield with high valued targets like MBT's with NoE (Nap over Earth) flights, because it is crucial for helicopters to stay undetected with very good intel of enemy forces for succesful and effective use of helicopters. Russians, Chinese, US and any other country try to reduce the chances of being spotted or targeted by MANPADS by flying low to their targets and they usually remain lower than 1km altitude for many reasons, not being spotted, it is far more effecient with combat load to fly at lower altitudes due better and denser air which gives better flight performance and fuel effecient flight. They usually tend to gain altitude 2-3km away from tanks and then launch their ATGM's, but that is not always the case and will not be always the case due the increasing capability of defense suites and when non isolated targets appear, where a full strike against a variety of targets is necessary, the US has adopted the same thing the Soviets/Russians did and still do with Hinds, which provides the highest and most effecient way of dealing with quite often occuring targets of different value in formation or fortification.

    I really cannot add much to this, other than to say thank you. When you lay it out like that [with facts] it makes it untenable for me to continue arguing for a 20 km missile in a theatre replete with sophisticated air defence systems like the Russian Pantsir. I will have to read up on deployment doctrines and the constraints that the environment impose on them instead of being fixated on weapon (s) performance stats.

    Cyrus the great

    Posts : 280
    Points : 290
    Join date : 2015-06-12

    Re: Russian Helicopter ATGMs

    Post  Cyrus the great on Wed Jun 24, 2015 1:47 pm

    GarryB wrote:The main feature of the Hermes is speed.

    Getting to the target area quickly is critical especially against a moving target that, if it is a tank, will be accelerating from cover to cover looking for targets.

    Having a range of 20km is great, but smoke and dust and the general difficulty of detecting and properly identifying targets at that range mean most actual shots will be taken at rather shorter range.

    Krisantema will not likely ever get a range of 20km... 8-10km is rather more sensible, as there are plenty of battlefield targets that don't require a Hermes sized weapon to kill them... a smaller, lighter, shorter range weapon that is also cheaper makes a lot of sense... and in this situation I would be in favour of the Ka-52 keeping its Vikhr missiles as well, though Hermes will be the primary long range weapon for helos and light aircraft...


    Yeah, I couldn't believe my eyes when I first saw the speed of the Hermes missile. You're right, a 20 km missile would be difficult to deploy, and even then, it could only be conceivably deployable against third world insurgents with last generation MANPADS. I like the fact that you and Werewolf have been really patient with me. Thanks, Garry

    Sponsored content

    Re: Russian Helicopter ATGMs

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Thu Dec 14, 2017 10:02 pm