Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Has Russia ever tested an ADATS equivalent?

    Share

    KomissarBojanchev
    Lieutenant Colonel
    Lieutenant Colonel

    Posts : 991
    Points : 1144
    Join date : 2012-08-05
    Age : 19
    Location : Varna, Bulgaria

    Has Russia ever tested an ADATS equivalent?

    Post  KomissarBojanchev on Tue Mar 26, 2013 9:59 pm

    IMO  one of the best missile  systems ever built is the   Canadian ADATS that can penetrate as much armor as the TOW2A and has  a lot higher speed while being able to engage all kinds  of  aircraft with ease plus  its  very high speed  make it more difficult  for  vehicle mounted  hard kill systems to intercept it. the question is  why hasn't  Russia  ever been interested to my knowledge  of  building a  missile  like the ADATS. I'm  sure that  with more  modern  technology and superior missile and  HEAT ammo  tech the  Russians  could make a sytem far deadlier than the ADATS. Do you know  any   Russian prototypes  of that kind  of a weapon and if  yes  why hasn't it ever entered service?

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15470
    Points : 16177
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Has Russia ever tested an ADATS equivalent?

    Post  GarryB on Tue Mar 26, 2013 11:32 pm

    ADATs is a pretty stupid idea when it comes down to it.

    It is a bit like mounting SAMs on your self propelled artillery vehicles.

    What is the use of an air defence vehicle that can operate with tanks that can also destroy enemy tanks?

    How does the vehicle commander decide whether to engage enemy vehicles or enemy aircraft?

    What happens if he gets it wrong?

    At the end of the day some vehicles can be combined... a case in point the Shilka and the SA-9/13 were two vehicles that performed basically the same role but their features did not overlap, yet to improve their performance expensive sensors would need to be duplicated for each vehicle. By combining the gun and the missile armament onto one vehicle you get a vehicle more expensive than either of the two it was replacing, but also much more capable and also cheaper than upgraded versions of both previous vehicles, to buy and to operate.

    Guns compliment missiles in air defence because they are cheaper and not stopped by jamming and allow ground targets to be engaged and also warning shots. Missiles are much more expensive per shot but have a higher kill probability and much greater range.

    There is nothing wrong per say with having dual use missiles, but it needs to make economic sense... any missile with the performance to hit high speed aircraft will likely be too expensive and large to be comparable to a decent ATGM.

    I would suggest going the other way like with Kornet-EM would be much cheaper... and that is critical... expensive means you wont have that many deployed, which makes them less effective.

    Kornet-EM will most likely be fitted to every IFV in the Russian Army... and will most likely be standard UCAV armament too.

    Personally I thought Starstreak was a better idea than ADATS.

    HERMES is related to the SA-19/-22 SAM (the missiles from Tunguska and Pantsir-S1 respectively). HERMES will be a cross service missile... used by the air force, navy, and army as an air, naval, and land based missile for use against a range of ground target types including armour. The solid rocket booster will accelerate the missile to approximately 1.3km/s and the missile will follow a ballistic path to the target area where the terminal phase guidance will take over... likely including IIR, MMW radar, Glonass, SALH and likely optical 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

    TR1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5840
    Points : 5892
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Re: Has Russia ever tested an ADATS equivalent?

    Post  TR1 on Wed Mar 27, 2013 1:22 am

    Yeah there is a reason Russia isn't going to be attempting an ADATS counterpart anytime soon (or ever).
    It can afford to operate specialized vehicles that are better at their job than this Frankenstein.

    medo
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 3052
    Points : 3150
    Join date : 2010-10-24
    Location : Slovenia

    Re: Has Russia ever tested an ADATS equivalent?

    Post  medo on Wed Mar 27, 2013 8:51 am

    Russian didn't build a SAM complex, that will also fight tanks, they are too value and expensive for that. They also build BMPT that air defense guns will not be used in ground battles. But they build antitank missiles, which could also engage flying targets as Vikhr for Kamov helicopters or Krizanthema, which could engage low flying helicopters and planes. Problem is, that ATGMs don't have such elevation as SAMs, because they don't need it. Maybe BMPT is the most close to ADATS, because it have higher elevation for its Ataka ATGMs and FCS, so it could do AD role in self defense or when needed.

    Zivo
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1504
    Points : 1540
    Join date : 2012-04-13
    Location : U.S.A.

    Re: Has Russia ever tested an ADATS equivalent?

    Post  Zivo on Wed Mar 27, 2013 9:03 am

    It's far too large to be used in an anti-tank roll. How are you supposed to sneak up on anyone with that?

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15470
    Points : 16177
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Has Russia ever tested an ADATS equivalent?

    Post  GarryB on Wed Mar 27, 2013 9:31 am

    The performance required of ADATS to engage fast low flying aircraft makes the missiles relatively big and expensive... and relatively fast.

    The problem is that such big expensive missiles are not needed for the anti tank role and smaller cheaper missiles can do that job much better.

    The Soviets and Russians certainly have a range of multirole missiles... the air launched Vikhr for example has a special warhead that either explodes on impact and blows a small hole through very thick armour (for AT use) or it operates with a proximity fuse for use against thin skinned aircraft.

    For the mission of tank hunter they already have the Shturm-S and Krisantema-S missile vehicles, which may soon be replaced by a more modern chassis with Kornet-EM missiles. For an anti aircraft defence vehicle they already have Tunguska and are introducing the Pantsir-S1.

    I would suggest the ADATS is radically inferior to both systems in terms of costs and 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

    medo
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 3052
    Points : 3150
    Join date : 2010-10-24
    Location : Slovenia

    Re: Has Russia ever tested an ADATS equivalent?

    Post  medo on Wed Mar 27, 2013 9:50 pm

    The performance required of ADATS to engage fast low flying aircraft makes the missiles relatively big and expensive... and relatively fast.

    To be honest, russian ATGM missiles are actually fast enough. For example, Roland 2 missile have max. speed 500m/s. Kornet is in the same class, Vikhr is even faster with 610 m/s. Ataka have speed 550 m/s and Krizanthema 400 m/s. They are able to engage low flying aircraft, which fly subsonic, and CAS planes fly subsonic. Problem is, that ATGMs are not designed for high g turns to engage fast turning planes, but slower ones and helicopters could.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15470
    Points : 16177
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Has Russia ever tested an ADATS equivalent?

    Post  GarryB on Wed Mar 27, 2013 11:41 pm

    Very good points, though anyone who watches US movies and sees US aircraft fly in front of missiles or dodge incoming missiles probably has totally the wrong impression of reality.

    Even a slow missile like Kornet-EM travelling at mach 1 is moving much faster than any helo... when shown in movies the missiles seem to be flying at a very similar speed to the aircraft they are trying to hit, it becomes like a mini dogfight with the missile trying to ram the target. In reality the missile would be a blur, the pilot would use information from his ESM suite and assume the missile it headed straight for him so a timed turn at the last seconds before impact a sudden turn means that the missile has to detect the change in direction of the target, recalculate a new interception point and then turn to reach that new interception point in time to meet the target there. The faster the missile is travelling the harder it is for it to turn, so a lower speed missile should in theory be able to turn with the target much more easily, though most ATGMs can turn hard because they normally don't need to. Their small control surfaces wont allow super high g turns.

    Missiles like Vikhr and Kornet-EM do have the enormous advantage in the anti air role that they are equipped with proximity fuses which makes kills much more likely.

    As an example the tests of the original Igla MANPAD against Falanga ATGMs (AT-3) used for testing their performance against very small low flying targets to see how effective they would be against cruise missiles resulted in 5 hits from 9 engagements. The main reason for the 4 misses was the very small targets and impact fuses that required contact with the target to set off the warhead.

    Igla-S was fitted with a proximity fuse because of the results of that testing and has become a much more effective weapon because of it.


    _________________
    “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

    Werewolf
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5391
    Points : 5640
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    Re: Has Russia ever tested an ADATS equivalent?

    Post  Werewolf on Thu Mar 28, 2013 11:56 pm

    GarryB wrote:Very good points, though anyone who watches US movies and sees US aircraft fly in front of missiles or dodge incoming missiles probably has totally the wrong impression of reality.

    Even a slow missile like Kornet-EM travelling at mach 1 is moving much faster than any helo... when shown in movies the missiles seem to be flying at a very similar speed to the aircraft they are trying to hit, it becomes like a mini dogfight with the missile trying to ram the target. In reality the missile would be a blur, the pilot would use information from his ESM suite and assume the missile it headed straight for him so a timed turn at the last seconds before impact a sudden turn means that the missile has to detect the change in direction of the target, recalculate a new interception point and then turn to reach that new interception point in time to meet the target there. The faster the missile is travelling the harder it is for it to turn, so a lower speed missile should in theory be able to turn with the target much more easily, though most ATGMs can turn hard because they normally don't need to. Their small control surfaces wont allow super high g turns.

    Missiles like Vikhr and Kornet-EM do have the enormous advantage in the anti air role that they are equipped with proximity fuses which makes kills much more likely.


    From diffrent situations like Ambush they would probably have less than 2 seconds to do anything flaring or trying to dodge which is the most unlikely thing. MANPADs for example are for the most helicopters absolutley killer since majority of Attack Helicopters don't have MAWS only AH-1Z,Mi-28N,Ka50/52,WZ-10,EC665 the rest stays unaware. MANPADs launched by infantry is closer to 1-1.5km from the Helicopter, because the human eye wouldn't and couldn't spot anything at higher distance, not to mention that MANPADs would have trouble to give a Lock On. So we have 1.5km range from MANPAD to Helicopter with let's say a Stinger FIM-92C with Mach 2.03, even when we take into account the time which is under one second to gain the maximum or at least near maximum speed while the Pilot is flying with Maximum speed of about 300km/h away from Launcher and an immidiate recognition of the incoming SAM, (and in this scenario we totally ignore that the MAWS first had to measure the vector if the missile is even flying towards his helicopter or not) of MAWS it would give him a time window between 2.4-2.8 seconds to react.

    Even 3 seconds for someone who is unaware at such speed wouldn't be enough to do any maneuvers which would give him the ability to avoid it, the only hope is the automated Counter-Measure system for self-flaring or someone who has fast reactions to flare, but an automated counter-measure system is by far better since it uses a flare-sequence when it can classify the incoming SAM.

    As an example the tests of the original Igla MANPAD against Falanga ATGMs (AT-3) used for testing their performance against very small low flying targets to see how effective they would be against cruise missiles resulted in 5 hits from 9 engagements. The main reason for the 4 misses was the very small targets and impact fuses that required contact with the target to set off the warhead.

    Igla-S was fitted with a proximity fuse because of the results of that testing and has become a much more effective weapon because of it.

    Do you have a source for this?
    Sounds interesting.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15470
    Points : 16177
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Has Russia ever tested an ADATS equivalent?

    Post  GarryB on Fri Mar 29, 2013 1:08 am

    MANPADs for example are for the most helicopters absolutley killer since majority of Attack Helicopters don't have MAWS only AH-1Z,Mi-28N,Ka50/52,WZ-10,EC665 the rest stays unaware

    Mi-24s had nagging nadia... missile approach sensors... note the sensor in the photo below just level with the pilots canopy but behind the pilots position below the engines... the sensor on the end is an IR incoming missile warning sensor... on older model Hinds it was lower and further forward.



    The information about the Igla testing was from an issue of a German military journal called Miltech (short for military technology) by monch publishing. A very interesting journal BTW.


    _________________
    “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

    Werewolf
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5391
    Points : 5640
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    Re: Has Russia ever tested an ADATS equivalent?

    Post  Werewolf on Fri Mar 29, 2013 2:21 am

    GarryB wrote:
    MANPADs for example are for the most helicopters absolutley killer since majority of Attack Helicopters don't have MAWS only AH-1Z,Mi-28N,Ka50/52,WZ-10,EC665 the rest stays unaware

    Mi-24s had nagging nadia... missile approach sensors... note the sensor in the photo below just level with the pilots canopy but behind the pilots position below the engines... the sensor on the end is an IR incoming missile warning sensor... on older model Hinds it was lower and further forward.

    The information about the Igla testing was from an issue of a German military journal called Miltech (short for military technology) by monch publishing. A very interesting journal BTW.

    If i'm not totally nuts, this is the LIP Radar warning reciever.
    All Missile Approach Warning reciever i know operating in UV-wavelentgh therefore they need Optical access to surrunding Area and this things on Mi-24 don't have any lenses but a hard cover.

    http://aerospace.boopidoo.com/philez/Su-15TM%20PICTURES%20&%20DOCS/Overscan%27s%20guide%20to%20Russian%20Military%20Avionics.htm
    This must be the LIP RWR sensors, stated by this sources, which you've provided a few times before.

    When you look on all MAW sensors at EC665 Tiger,Mi-28,AH-1Z,WZ-10 or any helicopter with MAWS you see all are optical.


    Click on Picture to get bigger view

    Tiger MAWS

    Mi-28, Ka50 and Ka-52 have the exact same MAK-UFM (L-150) MAWS

    AH-1Z Viper

    WZ-10


    If i am not wrong A-50 AWACs have also MAWS like here


    And here is the MAWs additional ESM pod
    [

    And this is the close up of the sensors you meant of Mi-24's.



    PS: The nagging nadia is the System of "Ekran M03" (not really sure if it is the exact version in Hinds) it is like the american "bitching betty" Just the voice system that warns the pilot from Lock On or low altitude and so on.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15470
    Points : 16177
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Has Russia ever tested an ADATS equivalent?

    Post  GarryB on Fri Mar 29, 2013 6:31 am

    All Missile Approach Warning reciever i know operating in UV-wavelentgh therefore they need Optical access to surrunding Area and this things on Mi-24 don't have any lenses but a hard cover.

    Most operate in UV and IR light range so don't need clear lenses... look at the IR sensor on your TV remote or home alarm system... most look like frosted plastic or glass in the visible light range we see in, but are transparent in UV and IR frequencies.

    If i'm not totally nuts, this is the LIP Radar warning reciever.
    All Missile Approach Warning reciever i know operating in UV-wavelentgh therefore they need Optical access to surrunding Area and this things on Mi-24 don't have any lenses but a hard cover.

    http://aerospace.boopidoo.com/philez/Su-15TM%20PICTURES%20&%20DOCS/Overscan%27s%20guide%20to%20Russian%20Military%20Avionics.htm
    This must be the LIP RWR sensors, stated by this sources, which you've provided a few times before.

    The link you posted... did you read it?

    LIP

    Airborne active radar missile approach warner fitted to platforms such as the Mi-24 Hind, Ka-29 Helix and Su-25 Frogfoot. Mi-24 installation only covered 180° , which lead to several losses, and the Ka-29 used two sensors to give 360° coverage.

    So it is an active radar sensor that detects incoming threats... not optical at all, my mistake... I assumed the bumps on the end were frosted plastic covers for a UV/IR sensor, when in actual fact they are pulse doppler radar sensors to detect incoming missiles. And no, you are not nuts. Smile

    PS: The nagging nadia is the System of "Ekran M03" (not really sure if it is the exact version in Hinds) it is like the american "bitching betty" Just the voice system that warns the pilot from Lock On or low altitude and so on.

    Nagging Nadia is the "flashing light" in the cockpit to tell the crew that the aircraft is under attack and is just as an important part of the MAWS as any other component.


    _________________
    “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

    Werewolf
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5391
    Points : 5640
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    Re: Has Russia ever tested an ADATS equivalent?

    Post  Werewolf on Fri Mar 29, 2013 12:55 pm

    LIP

    Airborne active radar missile approach warner fitted to platforms such as the Mi-24 Hind, Ka-29 Helix and Su-25 Frogfoot. Mi-24 installation only covered 180° , which lead to several losses, and the Ka-29 used two sensors to give 360° coverage.

    Details....the constant emerging enemy Embarassed

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15470
    Points : 16177
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Has Russia ever tested an ADATS equivalent?

    Post  GarryB on Sat Mar 30, 2013 8:18 am

    Werewolf wrote:
    LIP

    Airborne active radar missile approach warner fitted to platforms such as the Mi-24 Hind, Ka-29 Helix and Su-25 Frogfoot. Mi-24 installation only covered 180° , which lead to several losses, and the Ka-29 used two sensors to give 360° coverage.

    Details....the constant emerging enemy Embarassed

    It is a now obsolete active missile dectection system that used dopplar radar to detect incoming threats. When it detected incoming missiles it would automatically launch timed flares and chaff and a calculated time to offer the best possible defence and would also warn the pilot... in this case verbally.

    As mentioned it only operated sideways on the Mi-24 so it didn't cover all angles.


    _________________
    “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

    Sponsored content

    Re: Has Russia ever tested an ADATS equivalent?

    Post  Sponsored content Today at 9:08 pm


      Current date/time is Thu Dec 08, 2016 9:08 pm