Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Verba MANPAD

    Share

    chaosactor
    Private
    Private

    Posts : 4
    Points : 9
    Join date : 2014-03-03

    Verba MANPAD

    Post  chaosactor on Wed Mar 12, 2014 9:34 pm

    Hi there

    I was reading an article today about air defense weapons and it said there was a new MANPADS called Verba in service with the Russian Army, but I had not heard of it.  I googled it, but came up with very little.  Does anyone know anything about it?


    Many thanks

    Chaosactor

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15458
    Points : 16165
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Verba MANPAD

    Post  GarryB on Wed Mar 12, 2014 11:16 pm

    From a Russian military magazine from 2007:

    2008 is likely to see the service entry of the Bagulnik self-propelled and Verba man portable regiment-level SAMs. The Bagulnik SAM system will replace the Strela-10 SAM system. Its laser-guided missile is believed to be able to kill threats travelling at a speed of 700 m/s at a range of 1–10 km and at an altitude of 0.01-5 km.
    The Verba MANPADS, whose missile carries a 3-waveband optical homer, is to oust all variants of the Strela-2 and Igla MANPADS.
    Unlike its predecessors, the Verba's range, altitude and speed have increased by 20, 30 and 20 per cent respectively to 0.5–5.4km, 0.01–4.5 km and 500 m/s respectively. Its reaction time is within 8 s, and its warhead has gained 1.5 kg more weight – an increase of 20 per cent.
    The existing Army air defence weapons as well as those operated by the Air Force are undergoing an upgrade to enhance their combat capabilities and extend their service
    lives.

    Bagulnik is the SOSNA-R SAM system which is very similar to the Pantsir-S1 missile but is a cheaper simpler laser beam riding missile.
    Verba is the replacement for Igla and both are Army SAMs... ie the future range of SAMS for the Army will be S-500, S-300V4, BUKM3, TOR-M3, Pantsir-S1, Bagulnik, Verba.

    The Air Force and Air Defence line up will be S-500, S-400, S-350, Pantsir-S1, Igla/Verba?

    In other words if it is a tracked chassis it is probably an army system... wheeled it is Air Force/Air Defence. Exceptions will be with air defence vehicles in the new wheeled medium and light brigades.

    Note Bagulnik is lighter and simpler and cheaper than Pantsir-S1 and for 10-15 ton weight vehicles in the light armour brigades it will be much better as it will likely actually fit in one vehicle instead of 3-4.


    _________________
    “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

    Viktor
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5629
    Points : 6282
    Join date : 2009-08-25
    Age : 36
    Location : Croatia

    Verba MANPAD

    Post  Viktor on Fri May 30, 2014 12:39 pm

    Little unexpected considering we havent seen much info about it but who cares .... the most important thing is that it is there  russia 


    Russian Paratroopers Receive Newest Verba Shoulder-Fired Missiles

    xeno
    Junior Sergeant
    Junior Sergeant

    Posts : 143
    Points : 148
    Join date : 2013-02-04

    Re: Verba MANPAD

    Post  xeno on Fri May 30, 2014 2:45 pm

    Willow is coming, after 2 years delay.
    Igla-S won't be the most advanced manpad in Russian armed force ( and in the world) after so many years.
    Great!

    magnumcromagnon
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 4468
    Points : 4659
    Join date : 2013-12-05
    Location : Pindos ave., Pindosville, Pindosylvania, Pindostan

    Re: Verba MANPAD

    Post  magnumcromagnon on Fri May 30, 2014 2:53 pm

    What's the specifications for Verba, and how much more is it advanced or improved over the Igla-S manpad?

    xeno
    Junior Sergeant
    Junior Sergeant

    Posts : 143
    Points : 148
    Join date : 2013-02-04

    Re: Verba MANPAD

    Post  xeno on Fri May 30, 2014 3:05 pm

    Check militaryrussia.ru/blog/
    It has some speculations.

    Morpheus Eberhardt
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1967
    Points : 2092
    Join date : 2013-05-20

    Re: Verba MANPAD

    Post  Morpheus Eberhardt on Sun Jun 08, 2014 6:59 am

    The missile furthest from the camera, in the first picture, and the one to the left, in the second picture, is claimed to be part of Verba (9K333).

    9M336 is claimed to be the designation for one of the missiles used by Verba.




    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15458
    Points : 16165
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Verba MANPAD

    Post  GarryB on Mon Jun 09, 2014 12:22 pm

    If you dig through some of the posts here there is information about Verba posted in one of the threads about the new SAMs.

    There was an article in a Russian magazine from 2007 that had this to say about the new Verba MANPAD:

    The Verba MANPADS, whose missile carries a 3-waveband optical homer, is to oust all variants of the Strela-2 and Igla MANPADS.
    Unlike its predecessors, the Verba's range, altitude and speed have increased by 20, 30 and 20 per cent respectively to 0.5–5.4km, 0.01–4.5 km and 500 m/s respectively. Its reaction time is within 8 s, and its warhead has gained 1.5 kg more weight – an increase of 20 per cent.

    So the main improvement is the 3 wave band optical homer... which sounds to me like it uses a sensor that can see IR light, visible light, and UV light to home in on a target.

    This would make it rather capable against even stealthy aircraft because most jammers wont operate across the entire spectrum. For instance a Flare will give off UV light as well as visible light and light in the IR spectrum, whereas real aircraft don't give off UV light so such decoys can be detected for what they are immediately and ignored.

    Equally DIRCMs tend to operate in IR ranges.

    Operating in three wave bands suggests a visibly clear optical port, unless it uses two IR bands and UV band instead of visible light... The long and medium IR wavebands are used for different purposes in thermal sights because of the different sensitivities offer different benefits and features.


    _________________
    “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

    mutantsushi
    Senior Sergeant
    Senior Sergeant

    Posts : 285
    Points : 307
    Join date : 2013-12-11

    Re: Verba MANPAD

    Post  mutantsushi on Tue Jun 10, 2014 8:44 am

    GarryB wrote:So the main improvement is the 3 wave band optical homer... which sounds to me like it uses a sensor that can see IR light, visible light, and UV light to home in on a target.
    Could be true, although given dual-band IR seekers are already established (both for countermeasure resistance and different range/H20vapor behavior of high/low IR), this could just as well be an extension of that approach, i.e. 3 bands within IR spectrum...  But whether also operating in UV/visible or just within IR, 3 bands will help countermeasure resistance, regardless.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15458
    Points : 16165
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Verba MANPAD

    Post  GarryB on Wed Jun 11, 2014 11:32 am

    I remember reading about thermal sights for Russian tanks that include long and medium IR cameras. It seems that the commanders camera is one wavelength and the gunners is a different wavelength because the different wavelengths offer different performances in terms of range and image quality.

    Another issue however is that one needs to be heavily cooled before use so it take about 30 seconds or more to cool down to operating temperature before it can be used, while the other is usable much faster. Modern IWS use the latter sensors which makes them smaller and lighter and quieter.

    I tend to think this new missile will be using a new QWIP sensor chip like the new model Catherine XP third generation thermal imager now produced in Russia.

    Very simply a modern CCD chip as used in a digital camera on a phone or video recorder or still camera uses light sensitive elements in a square grid array on the surface of a chip. When light falls on the elements it can record the intensity and hue and colour so combining the signal of all the elements you get a picture and displaying that picture refreshed 25 times every second gives a video recording.

    The thing is that standard CCD chips are sensitive to IR frequencies... but generally only very short IR frequencies like those used in IR remote controls. If you point your TV remote at your digital camera and press a button on the remote you will see a flashing light coming from the remote. Of course that is active IR as used in WWII. Modern thermal imagers use a different area of the IR spectrum where objects above absolute zero emit ir light naturally... previously needing serious cooling using liquid hydrogen, but in modern cameras (3rd gen thermal) only minor cooling if any. Modern 3rd gen thermal imagers use CCD chip arrays... so combining a chip with elements sensitive to IR and visible light and UV would be fairly straight forward and offer very good performance for a missile.

    The IR and visible light frequencies can be used to detect and track the target while the UV channel can help distinguish flares and the sun from the target (helicopters don't emit UV light normally).

    A similar seeker could be used on a fire and forget anti tank missile.

    Mass production could lead to such chips being produced for a few dollars each so you could use them for seeker/guidance packages for unguided missiles and bombs.

    Not as all weather as MMW radar guidance... but much better than unguided.


    _________________
    “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

    RTN
    Sergeant
    Sergeant

    Posts : 185
    Points : 170
    Join date : 2014-03-24
    Location : Fairfield , CT

    Re: Verba MANPAD

    Post  RTN on Mon Jun 16, 2014 10:12 am

    GarryB wrote:I tend to think this new missile will be using a new QWIP sensor chip like the new model Catherine XP third generation thermal imager now produced in Russia.

    The USSR reacted to the Apache AH 64A by designing the SA 19 Grison which can increase the effective range of defensive fire & react quickly enough to kill the AH 64A before it can complete it's anti missile engagement cycle. The SA 19 achieved this by combining 30mm SPAAG and missile system using a radar package similar to the SA 15 but armed with very high speed 2 staged tube launched missiles .

    However, with the advent of the Apache AH 64D Longbow this threat from the SA 19 has been neutralized to a large extent. The AH 64D combined a mast mounted millimetric wave band search and engagement radar with the ‘fire-and-forget’ millimetric band active radar seekered equipped Hellfire variant. A passive precision radio-frequency interferometer was added to permit the system to sniff out the emissions of the SA-8, SA-13, SA-15 and SA-19 search radars. The Longbow Apache could remain behind cover, raising only the mast mounted sensor package to search for targets, only popping up for a few seconds to fire a salvo of Hellfires at a detected target


    Werewolf
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5390
    Points : 5639
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    Re: Verba MANPAD

    Post  Werewolf on Mon Jun 16, 2014 10:55 am

    RTN wrote:
    The USSR reacted to the Apache AH 64A by designing the SA 19  Grison which can increase the effective range of defensive fire & react quickly enough to kill the AH 64A before it can complete it's anti missile engagement cycle. The SA 19 achieved this by combining 30mm SPAAG and missile system using a radar package similar to the SA 15 but armed with very high speed 2 staged tube launched missiles .

    However, with the advent of the Apache AH 64D Longbow this threat from the SA 19 has been neutralized to a large extent. The AH 64D combined a mast mounted millimetric wave band search and engagement radar with the ‘fire-and-forget’ millimetric band active radar seekered equipped Hellfire variant. A passive precision radio-frequency interferometer was added to permit the system to sniff out the emissions of the SA-8, SA-13, SA-15 and SA-19 search radars. The Longbow Apache could remain behind cover, raising only the mast mounted sensor package to search for targets, only popping up for a few seconds to fire a salvo of Hellfires at a detected target


    There is already a problem, the active MMW seeker in Hellfire missiles have a very low power supply and small radar anyway, which results in bad performance and are not useful beyond 4km range and that in "clean" environmental with low interference be it artificially or surfaces that are scattering radar waves and raising the sideslops and vehicles can be filtered out. Those tactics the US army tried to fullfill in Iraq to penetrate Iraqis echelon to get to the "SAMs" they already recieved hard beating from units that had no IADS network and no night capabilities like some shilkas without radars.

    The crucial part for Helicopters being able and having even a slight chance and effective results against any SHORAD, they need not only a weapon that has a higher weapon and the important part is having an effective range that is bigger than your enemies SHORAD system maximum range, but you can equip a helicopter with 40-50km range missile that does not solve the problem that you need to determine the position of your target without getting either to close and therefor into weapon range of SHORAD, nor endangering your mission by alerting your enemy by irridating with radar the target. Ground targets have usually higher ECM and ECCM capabilities, which leaves Apache in a worse conditions in that situation.

    RTN
    Sergeant
    Sergeant

    Posts : 185
    Points : 170
    Join date : 2014-03-24
    Location : Fairfield , CT

    Re: Verba MANPAD

    Post  RTN on Mon Jun 16, 2014 11:46 am

    Werewolf wrote:There is already a problem, the active MMW seeker in Hellfire missiles have a very low power supply and small radar anyway

    YES ! There are a number of problems with the Hellfire missile involving it's guidance system and the captive carry health-monitoring system . That's a different issue .

    What I was referring to is the ability of the AH 64D Longbow to avoid threats from missiles like the SA 19

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15458
    Points : 16165
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Verba MANPAD

    Post  GarryB on Mon Jun 16, 2014 11:52 am

    The USSR reacted to the Apache AH 64A by designing the SA 19 Grison which can increase the effective range of defensive fire & react quickly enough to kill the AH 64A before it can complete it's anti missile engagement cycle. The SA 19 achieved this by combining 30mm SPAAG and missile system using a radar package similar to the SA 15 but armed with very high speed 2 staged tube launched missiles .

    The Tunguska system was developed to combine the missiles and gun of previous generations systems to reduce likely future costs of systems.

    Very simply the Shilka had an expensive radar and fairly basic optics, while the SA-9/-13 had fairly basic optics... in the case of the latter a small ranging only radar, and passive sensors to detect radio altimeters and other electronic emissions from manned aircraft and guided missiles.

    The Tunguska increased the number of ready to fire missiles of more than double range, and added longer range harder hitting cannon with a higher rate of fire than the Shilka. It was intended for use against the Apache and the A-10.

    The radar package of Tunguska is far superior to the system on Shilka but it is no where near as good as the system on the SA-15 TOR.

    However, with the advent of the Apache AH 64D Longbow this threat from the SA 19 has been neutralized to a large extent.

    Not really. The Tunguska in the 1980s had a range of 8km with missiles but from the 90s when the D model Apache was in service it had 10km range upgraded missiles that still outrange MMW Hellfire. More critically the TOR SAM can actually engage individual Hellfires in flight.

    The new system will have a range of 20km or more.

    The AH 64D combined a mast mounted millimetric wave band search and engagement radar with the ‘fire-and-forget’ millimetric band active radar seekered equipped Hellfire variant.

    You have to be able to get a proper lock on the target to achieve fire and forget capability and with the widespread use of a Nakidka type camouflage that might become an issue.

    A passive precision radio-frequency interferometer was added to permit the system to sniff out the emissions of the SA-8, SA-13, SA-15 and SA-19 search radars.

    SA-13 had all sorts of sensor boxes mounted on it to detect threats including MMW radars.

    Most ELINT systems will have the same and will pass on detected threats to the IADS.

    The Longbow Apache could remain behind cover, raising only the mast mounted sensor package to search for targets, only popping up for a few seconds to fire a salvo of Hellfires at a detected target

    There is cover and there is concealment. Looking over the lip of a hill could be considered cover but if the IADS detects that MMW radar scan it could pass that data to nearby armoured units... even a T-90 could detect the IR plume of a helicopter sitting behind a hill crest and fire an ANIET HE shell to explode above the hovering helo.

    If it is hovering behind a tree then an APFSDS round will easily travel through the tree and do serious damage to anything behind...

    The Attack Helo was the queen of the battlefield before tanks got auto target trackers, modern ballistic computers and long range thermal sights... and excellent communications and datalink capability. Now it has to be used very carefully... hovering behind a hill top looking for enemy air defences and a light team with a Metis-M1 ATGM could fire at you from behind and really ruin your day.

    What I was referring to is the ability of the AH 64D Longbow to avoid threats from missiles like the SA 19

    How does Apache avoid SA-19?

    Its current in service model has a range of 10km and a flight speed of well over mach 3 which is 3 times faster than Hellfire in any model.

    For the Tunguska sitting still and scanning for targets with its thermal sight with its CM wave and MMW radar passively listening for threats suggests if anything the Tunguska will detect the Apache first, can engage first and is most likely to win.

    For the Apache it might detect the radar emissions of one Tunguska but what about the other 5 vehicles in the battery? In optical guided mode there is nothing for the Apache to jam and no DIRCM target. Just a very fast approaching missile...


    _________________
    “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

    Asf
    Junior Lieutenant
    Junior Lieutenant

    Posts : 488
    Points : 515
    Join date : 2014-03-27

    Re: Verba MANPAD

    Post  Asf on Mon Jun 16, 2014 1:44 pm

    The Longbow Apache could remain behind cover, raising only the mast mounted sensor package to search for targets, only popping up for a few seconds to fire a salvo of Hellfires at a detected target
    Thank God, Tunguska's missiles have proximity detonators

    medo
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 3051
    Points : 3149
    Join date : 2010-10-24
    Location : Slovenia

    Re: Verba MANPAD

    Post  medo on Mon Jun 16, 2014 2:04 pm

    RTN wrote:
    GarryB wrote:I tend to think this new missile will be using a new QWIP sensor chip like the new model Catherine XP third generation thermal imager now produced in Russia.

    The USSR reacted to the Apache AH 64A by designing the SA 19  Grison which can increase the effective range of defensive fire & react quickly enough to kill the AH 64A before it can complete it's anti missile engagement cycle. The SA 19 achieved this by combining 30mm SPAAG and missile system using a radar package similar to the SA 15 but armed with very high speed 2 staged tube launched missiles .

    However, with the advent of the Apache AH 64D Longbow this threat from the SA 19 has been neutralized to a large extent. The AH 64D combined a mast mounted millimetric wave band search and engagement radar with the ‘fire-and-forget’ millimetric band active radar seekered equipped Hellfire variant. A passive precision radio-frequency interferometer was added to permit the system to sniff out the emissions of the SA-8, SA-13, SA-15 and SA-19 search radars. The Longbow Apache could remain behind cover, raising only the mast mounted sensor package to search for targets, only popping up for a few seconds to fire a salvo of Hellfires at a detected target


    Tunguska is now an old complex (30 years old) and sooner or later it will be replaced by tracked Pantsir. But at the end of the story, helicopters are one of the reason to create BMPT. AD complexes as Tor, Tunguska, Pantsir, etc, are usually few kilometers behind the tanks, so usually they very difficultly fire on low hovering helicopters, if they don't want to kill their own troop in front of them. Tanks got ATGMs and HE shells to fire on helicopters. BMPs could also fire on them with guns and ATGMs as well as ATGM complexes as Kornet and Krizanthema. But BMPT is in the same line as tanks and with the same armor. It have 30 mm guns with higher elevation than tanks and if they equip them with Kornet-D missiles, it will have very long hand against helicopters. Connected with IADS and C4I, BMPT could be well aware of AH-64D behind the mask and fire on it with guns through the mask or with ATGM with thermobaric warhead. BMPT will be far closer to Apache than Tunguska and far more dangerous. It doesn't have radar, but have very high placed EO device for commander.

    Sujoy
    Lieutenant Colonel
    Lieutenant Colonel

    Posts : 914
    Points : 1082
    Join date : 2012-04-02
    Location : India

    Re: Verba MANPAD

    Post  Sujoy on Mon Jun 16, 2014 5:56 pm

    medo wrote:BMPT will be far closer to Apache than Tunguska and far more dangerous. It doesn't have radar, but have very high placed EO device for commander.

    Actually the Apache's first line of defense against attack is keeping out of range of enemy missiles , anti aircraft artillery. However, an Apache tasked to perform a deep penetration operation is an attractive target for an S-300PMU or S-300V .

    To avoid this helos like the Apache follow a nap of the earth flight and terrain masking as this denies line of sight tracking and weapon aiming or guidance.

    Radar guided SAMs and Self-propelled anti-aircraft weapon will continue to present a serious threat to the Apache AH64 D Longbow.

    RTN
    Sergeant
    Sergeant

    Posts : 185
    Points : 170
    Join date : 2014-03-24
    Location : Fairfield , CT

    Re: Verba MANPAD

    Post  RTN on Mon Jun 16, 2014 7:20 pm

    Asf wrote:Thank God, Tunguska's missiles have proximity detonators

    Proximity detonation will not destroy the AH 64D . The AH 64 D has high ballistic tolerance. The tailshaft is designed to absorb hits and if cut by fire, not to chop the tail off - however ,a direct RPG hit will cause significant damage.

    That being said ,existing radar based MAWS technology could be adapted to deal with RPGs as well .


    Sujoy wrote:Radar guided SAMs and Self-propelled anti-aircraft weapon will continue to present a serious threat to the Apache AH64 D Longbow.

    This is not a AH64 D specific problem .

    The Mi 28 , Eurocopter Tiger among others also have to face this challenge .

    This is why modern day attack helos have a sophisticated  Electronic Warfare Self Protection (EWSP) .

    The Ah 64D was able to drastically reduce  direct missile hits  in Af-Pak by combining

    (1) the ITT AN/ALQ 211 Suite of RF countermeasures  comprising a lamp or laser directed IR jammer,

    (2) an ALE-47 dispenser and an AAR-57 passive UV Common

    (3) Missile Warning System,

    (4) pulse doppler and continuous wave warning receiver ,

    (5) a pulse and continuous wave jammer & RF expendable jammers

    I am therefore venturing to guess that RPGs will pose a bigger challenge to the Ah 64D than the Verba MANPAD

    magnumcromagnon
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 4468
    Points : 4659
    Join date : 2013-12-05
    Location : Pindos ave., Pindosville, Pindosylvania, Pindostan

    Re: Verba MANPAD

    Post  magnumcromagnon on Mon Jun 16, 2014 7:34 pm

    RTN wrote:
    Asf wrote:Thank God, Tunguska's missiles have proximity detonators

    Proximity detonation will not destroy the AH 64D . The AH 64 D has high ballistic tolerance. The tailshaft is designed to absorb hits and if cut by fire, not to chop the tail off - however ,a direct RPG hit will cause significant damage.

    High ballistic tolerance? There's been at least one documented case of a 7.62x39mm rounds fired from an AK-47 and penetrating Apache window glass and hitting one of the pilots in the throat which occurred in Iraq:

    "...King and Tomblin's Apache was hit by a burst of AK-47 fire which penetrated the cockpit and struck the former in the throat as he was calling out fires..."

    http://tinyurl.com/nr592np

    Werewolf
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5390
    Points : 5639
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    Re: Verba MANPAD

    Post  Werewolf on Mon Jun 16, 2014 7:49 pm

    RTN wrote:

    Proximity detonation will not destroy the AH 64D . The AH 64 D has high ballistic tolerance. The tailshaft is designed to absorb hits and if cut by fire, not to chop the tail off - however ,a direct RPG hit will cause significant damage.

    That being said ,existing radar based MAWS technology could be adapted to deal with RPGs as well .

    What a nonsense.

    Proximity detonation is exactly what the absolute majority of ATAM's,SAMs and MANPADS use and they use proximity fuzes because they use continous rod to penetrate aircrafts, but in comperision with GarryB's example, a usual MANPAD uses 3 times less explosive than 125mm HE-Frag grenade contains.

    Also the tail is not designed to absorb anything, they usually have very skinny GFK which can stop 12.7mm at most and are only structural reinforced at the tail (after section).

    Direct RPG hit would cause in 90% of the time less damage than a MANPAD or a  125mm HE-frag. RPG's are shaped charges that pierce holes through and as long they do not directly hit with the jetstream fuel tanks, engines, rotors, flightcontrol or pilot it will have much lower result than proximity fuzed weapons.

    RTN wrote:This is not a AH64 D specific problem .

    The Mi 28 , Eurocopter Tiger among others also have to face this challenge .

    This is why modern day attack helos have a sophisticated  Electronic Warfare Self Protection (EWSP) .

    The Ah 64D was able to drastically reduce  direct missile hits  in Af-Pak by combining

    (1) the ITT AN/ALQ 211 Suite of RF countermeasures  comprising a lamp or laser directed IR jammer,

    (2) an ALE-47 dispenser and an AAR-57 passive UV Common

    (3) Missile Warning System,

    (4) pulse doppler and continuous wave warning receiver ,

    (5) a pulse and continuous wave jammer & RF expendable jammers

    And only Radar Warning Reciever and Laser Warning Reciever are standard sensoric on Apaches, everything else are only 1 of 4 Apaches  (D) of RF squadrons which are less than 130 in total, while AH-1Z,Tiger,KA-50/52, Mi-28N and WZ-10 have standardized full spectrum sensoric and only Ka-52 has standardized DIRCM and jamming pods while no other helicopter has such an defensive suite.

    RTN wrote:I am therefore venturing to guess that RPGs will pose a bigger challenge to the Ah 64D than the Verba MANPAD

    That is the most ridiculous claim you have made.

    RPG's are easy to counter, they are selfdetonating at about 1km flight, so fly high enough and it will be physically not even be possible to be hit by a RPG's the other part is only during NoE flights are RPG's even considered as a threat.

    It's like saying a sniper rifle is more effective in bird hunt than a shotgun.

    Mindstorm
    Captain
    Captain

    Posts : 734
    Points : 917
    Join date : 2011-07-20

    Re: Verba MANPAD

    Post  Mindstorm on Mon Jun 16, 2014 8:26 pm


    RTN wrote:The USSR reacted to the Apache AH 64A by designing the SA 19 Grison

    Obviously not, 2К22 was conceived to consistentl destroy NATO lw altitude CAS aircraft , in particular A-10- and to provide highly mobile anti PGM defense to first and second echelon Army divisions.

    AH-64A would have had a very very hard time even only against not downgraded 9К33, as proved by the staggering results of Victor Strike 2000 exercise against Polish AD brigade that, with merely few batteries of 9К33 in a density of 1:6 in comparison to what NATO should have confronted against URSS in the....end of '70 years , have literally trashed an entire US Army AH-64 regiment with only two losses.

    About AH-64D and its weapon system i suggest to you to read the points already highlight in that thread :



    http://www.russiadefence.net/t2518p90-rpg-7-spg-9-at-3-sagger-your-views


    This is what i wrote on this oftenly mistyfied subject :



    Mindstorm wrote:Practically all version of AGM-114 -except the AGM-114L- employ this kind of missile guidance -semi active laser guidance- (immensely more fragile , easy to detect and easy to break in respect to domestic coded beam riding ) and this bulk of Hellfire was ,incidentally , not only by very far the most employed in pasted conflict by US Army ,including anti-armor operations, but also the unique with still orders by part of US Army up to 2014 Wink

    Even more also the unique version with limited real "fire and forget" capabilities , the AGM-114-L, would still leave the carrying helicopter equally vulnerable against any relatively well equipped enemy (even only to domestic '80 years !).
    The reason is that the unique AGM-114-L's modality of engagement showing a true "fire and forget" capability is the LOBL/LOBL-I (both representing, by a wide edge, the selection most commonly chosen by AH-64D crew in US Army training against relatively strong OPFOR) which can be realized only at very short range against enemy vehicles because the missile's MMW seeker for unavoidable power aperture reason has only very limited discriminating range of acquisition of target in high clutter such as mobile APCs, IFVs and MBTs -within 2,7-3 km -

    The long range fire and forget mode - LOAL - (up to 7,5-8 km in good environmental scattering conditions) can be realized only against motionless targets (such as bunkers ,buildings, machine gun nests refueling vehicles etc..) and only after that the AN-APG-78 FCS has transferred to the missile enough data to allow independent acquisition by part of the missile seeker at the intended point and anyhow with markedly reduced Phit even against those motionless targets !


    In substance an AH-64D ,even wanting to employ the unique AGM-114's model with some kind of "fire and forget" capabilities ,against an enemy equipped at domestic '80s standard would be very likely destroyed NOT by S-300V, Tunguska-M1, Thor-M1, IGLA etc... but more simply by 30 mm AP auto-cannon, fuse programmed HE-Frag rounds and gun launched missiles (all not matching well with integrity of helicopter's hull, cabin and rotor blades Laughing) by part of the same vehicles it would have intended to attack, all enjoying a substantial range of engagement advantage over AGM-114L's LOBL-I engagement mode.



    medo
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 3051
    Points : 3149
    Join date : 2010-10-24
    Location : Slovenia

    Re: Verba MANPAD

    Post  medo on Mon Jun 16, 2014 9:23 pm

    Apache and all other helicopters are meant for CAS in the battlefield. Helicopters will very difficultly come near the front line unnoticed. There are many different radars, SAMs, UAVs, visual observers, recce teams, AWACS behind the line etc. Success of helicopters will depend on tactics as well as on target delivery, that they could engage them from max. distance. MANPADs are AD weapons of infantry and infantry could be in expected as well as in unexpected places, so it is not wise for helicopters to hover too long behind an object. Bigger SAMs are more connected with armored vehicles and tanks.

    BMPs usually drive behind tanks and carry infantry and with their firepower they support their own infantry in battlefield. BMPT doesn't have infantry, so they don't need to support them and they drive in the same line as tanks. BMPT use laser guided ATGMs (Ataka) and doesn't have radar. Helicopter could be warmed by LWR and MAWS, that laser guided missile fly against it, but it doesn't have any other counter measure than to fly out of its range. Modern ATGMs like Kornet, Vikhr, Ataka and Krizanthema are wireless and very fast and by speed comparable with some older MANPADs (Strela-2, Blowpipe, RBS-70), what make them very effective against helicopters and UAVs.

    RTN
    Sergeant
    Sergeant

    Posts : 185
    Points : 170
    Join date : 2014-03-24
    Location : Fairfield , CT

    Re: Verba MANPAD

    Post  RTN on Mon Jun 16, 2014 9:43 pm

    Mindstorm wrote:Obviously not, 2К22 was conceived to consistentl destroy NATO lw altitude CAS aircraft , in particular A-10- and to provide highly mobile anti PGM defense to first and second echelon Army divisions.

    Yes and that includes helos as well . What you can suggest is that SA 15 could have also intercepted the AH 64 A .


    Mindstorm wrote:Practically all version of AGM-114 -except the AGM-114L- employ this kind of missile guidance -semi active laser guidance- (immensely more fragile , easy to detect and easy to break in respect to domestic coded beam riding  ) and this bulk of Hellfire was ,incidentally , not only by very far the most employed in pasted conflict by US Army ,including anti-armor operations, but also the unique with still orders by part of US Army up to 2014  

    But I never said that the Hellfire was a game changer . That's a different topic & am not digressing from the point .

    I was only referring to the fact that the AH 64D Longbow is better protected against MANPADS than it's predecessors . It can do very little if hit by an RPG but then that can be said about all the current attack helos like Mi 28 or Eurocopter Tiger.

    medo
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 3051
    Points : 3149
    Join date : 2010-10-24
    Location : Slovenia

    Re: Verba MANPAD

    Post  medo on Mon Jun 16, 2014 9:55 pm

    RTN wrote:I was only referring to the fact that the AH 64D Longbow is better protected against MANPADS than it's predecessors . It can do very little if hit by an RPG but then that can be said about all the current attack helos like Mi 28 or Eurocopter Tiger.

    AH-64D protection against MANPADs is nothing more than IR jammer and flares. It have newer and better IR jammer than predecessors, but not something other helicopters doesn't have.

    Werewolf
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5390
    Points : 5639
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    Re: Verba MANPAD

    Post  Werewolf on Tue Jun 17, 2014 6:57 am

    RTN wrote:
    I was only referring to the fact that the AH 64D Longbow is better protected against MANPADS  than it's predecessors . It can do very little if hit by an RPG but then that can be said about all the current attack helos like Mi 28 or Eurocopter Tiger.

    AH-64D is no different than AH-64A when we let it fly in enemy territory filled with MANPADS. Not a single AH-64 regardless of its model, not even AH-64E, has standardized MAWS (Missile Approach Warning Sensors), only RF squadrons which make 1/4th of the total deployed Apaches for RF squadrons that participated in Iraq and Afghanistan.

    The only current Apache user with standardized MAWS and that only because they have low number of Apaches are Neatherland. Not even the Israeli Apaches are standardized with MAWS sensores and Israel is rather prone to install defensive sensorics and protection to all their vehicles.

    Sponsored content

    Re: Verba MANPAD

    Post  Sponsored content Today at 12:53 am


      Current date/time is Sun Dec 04, 2016 12:53 am