Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    General Questions Thread:

    d_taddei2
    d_taddei2

    Posts : 1548
    Points : 1728
    Join date : 2013-05-11
    Location : Scotland UK

    General Questions Thread: - Page 13 Empty Re: General Questions Thread:

    Post  d_taddei2 on Wed Jan 31, 2018 7:08 pm

    Isos wrote:Most of the time it will carry manpads for self defence. Air cover will be made by fighters.

    Russia rely more on air defence systems to protect its forces from those threats with tunguskas and shilkas.

    Helicopters are very good to attack ground vehicle so they should be used for that.

    Shilka and Tunguska are not designed for scouting or hunting UAV or helicopters and obviously lack mobility compared to a helicopter and and not suggesting that all helicopters are configured to this and I am not disputing helicopters effectiveness as ground attack role.

    I actually think it wouldn't hurt to have 2-3 ka-52 armed in this manner as a QRF for base defence against UAV once detected helicopters deploy destroying UAV before they even reach base air defence systems it just adds another layer. Of if troops on the ground keep reporting drones in the area send helicopters out to hunt them down and destroy or the same roles could be applied to the Yak -130 2-3 stationed at base waiting for the call the Yak of course has the added advantage of speed and agility arm it with handful of missiles and guns and your sorted the guns themselves would do most of the destroying and an unarmed UAV could easily be flipped by yak -130 wings if it really needed to.
    Isos
    Isos

    Posts : 3673
    Points : 3665
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    General Questions Thread: - Page 13 Empty Re: General Questions Thread:

    Post  Isos on Wed Jan 31, 2018 7:40 pm

    d_taddei2 wrote:
    Isos wrote:Most of the time it will carry manpads for self defence. Air cover will be made by fighters.

    Russia rely more on air defence systems to protect its forces from those threats with tunguskas and shilkas.

    Helicopters are very good to attack ground vehicle so they should be used for that.

    Shilka and Tunguska are not designed for scouting or hunting UAV or helicopters and obviously lack mobility compared to a helicopter and and not suggesting that all helicopters are configured to this and I am not disputing helicopters effectiveness as ground attack role.

    I actually think it wouldn't hurt to have 2-3 ka-52 armed in this manner as a QRF for base defence against UAV once detected helicopters deploy destroying UAV before they even reach base air defence systems it just adds another layer. Of if troops on the ground keep reporting drones in the area send helicopters out to hunt them down and destroy or the same roles could be applied to the Yak -130 2-3 stationed at base waiting for the call the Yak of course has the added advantage of speed and agility arm it with handful of missiles and guns and your sorted the guns themselves would do most of the destroying and an unarmed UAV could easily be flipped by yak -130 wings if it really needed to.  

    It depends what drones. Shilka and tunguska are good for protecting troops, they are not meant to hunt.

    If you are talking about military drones, most of them will fly higher than the helicopter, and will be destroyed by modern fighters.

    Small drones will be more easily detected from the ground and destroyed by passive EW or enegry weapons. Yak-130 can do the job but they already have lot of interceptors (mig, sukhoi ...) for that. The war in syria proved that most of the time infantry detect those small drones first and they are deal with with small arms or cheap missiles. It isalready discussed on other threads.

    Firing with a 30 mm gun from a helicopter or a fighter is not the best way to destroy them. They will be practicaly invisible and their small size will force you to fire lot of rounds before you hit it. If you hit it with your plane it can destroy your engines and destroy the plane, can be even equiped with explosives specially to destroy your plane.
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 21517
    Points : 22067
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    General Questions Thread: - Page 13 Empty Re: General Questions Thread:

    Post  GarryB on Thu Feb 01, 2018 12:10 am

    Actually the Soviets used Hinds for interception in the past... Rust ring a bell?

    The PVO detected Rust and MiG-23s went to intercept the unknown target... when they discovered it was a civilian cessna they reported this fact and the interception task was handed to the local authorities because a MiG-23 could either shoot it down or do nothing because of the speed difference...

    Rust never even knew the MiGs intercepted him... but by the time the Hinds were launched and found him he had already landed.

    Hinds were sent because they matched the airspeed of a cessna and would have been able to force him to land with warning shots and hand signals etc.

    The problem was that without a radar they had to be talked to where the cessna was.

    Modern attack helos don't have intercept radar either.

    For the cost and low speed of a helo used in the air intercept role it would be much easier and cheaper to have a MiG-29M2 flying at 10,000m altitude with 8 x R-77 missiles that can hit hovering helos from quite a distance... the MiG could see targets great distances away and rapidly engage them with little risk to itself.

    Attack helos have AAMs purely as self defence and most of the time operationally they would not even use them.

    The only real factor that even makes such aircraft interesting would be a swarm UAV attack, because R-77s are not cheap and there could be more than 8 targets.

    In such a case a helo is still to slow and would not cover ground very quickly.

    I would be looking at Su-25SM aircraft, preferably with an Ugroza upgrade with laser beam homing 80mm rockets, or perhaps two stage laser beam riding rockets.

    Four pods per wing means each aircraft could carry 160 UAV killers, plus gun.

    In fact I would go for three pods under each wing and one EW jammer pod so you could fly to within 2km or so of the target and blast their electronics with a high energy beam and melt them.

    The Su-25 is fast enough but also very manouverable.
    d_taddei2
    d_taddei2

    Posts : 1548
    Points : 1728
    Join date : 2013-05-11
    Location : Scotland UK

    General Questions Thread: - Page 13 Empty Russian COIN aircraft potential

    Post  d_taddei2 on Sat Aug 25, 2018 1:17 pm

    Hi all. With COIN aircraft having more focus in the last number of years and more companies putting forward there own aircraft is this a market Russia should compete in?

    Russia itself doesn't have a massive need for such aircraft apart from possibly of the caucuses region. But I am thinking of export sales and possibly as a cheaper alternative as military aid to neighbouring countries such as Tajikistan Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan with the threats that these countries face. As it stands Russia could really only offer helicopters such as mi-24 to fulfil this role.

    The great thing about COIN aircraft is they are not complicated aircraft and Russia already has the
    yak 152. It wouldn't take much to turn it into COIN type aircraft. You add this to a portfolio with an armed yak-130 (Light attack) Russia would cover every type of aircraft for every type of customer.


    So should Russian companies design such aircraft or is the market already saturated or has the super tucano dominated the market now?
    Hole
    Hole

    Posts : 2195
    Points : 2193
    Join date : 2018-03-24
    Age : 43
    Location : Merkelland

    General Questions Thread: - Page 13 Empty Re: General Questions Thread:

    Post  Hole on Sat Aug 25, 2018 6:59 pm

    General Questions Thread: - Page 13 000114
    General Questions Thread: - Page 13 000215
    General Questions Thread: - Page 13 000311

    This is the SM-92P. Was intended for the Border Guards. Back in the middle of the 90´s. Saddly the company took the money and declared bankrupcy a little later = some guys stole the money. But the project could be resurrected.
    avatar
    KeMac

    Posts : 3
    Points : 7
    Join date : 2014-04-12

    General Questions Thread: - Page 13 Empty Pombey Training Area

    Post  KeMac on Sun Mar 03, 2019 11:33 am

    Can anyone tell me exactly where the Pombey bombing range is please? I think it is somewhere near Vorkuta above and to the East of the Polar Urals. I have read elsewhere that it has been used by Tu 160s for exercises. Also if possible does anyone know how long it has been in existence as I think it is fairly new, but I may be wrong.
    Many Thanks
    KeMac
    George1
    George1

    Posts : 13447
    Points : 13936
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    General Questions Thread: - Page 13 Empty Re: General Questions Thread:

    Post  George1 on Sun Mar 03, 2019 12:49 pm

    KeMac wrote:Can anyone tell me exactly where the Pombey bombing range is please? I think it is somewhere near Vorkuta above and to the East of the Polar Urals. I have read elsewhere that it has been used by Tu 160s for exercises. Also if possible does anyone know how long it has been in existence as I think it is fairly new, but I may be wrong.
    Many Thanks
    KeMac

    Introduce yourself first pls

    http://www.russiadefence.net/f6-member-introductions-and-rules
    franco
    franco

    Posts : 3201
    Points : 3233
    Join date : 2010-08-18

    General Questions Thread: - Page 13 Empty Re: General Questions Thread:

    Post  franco on Sun Mar 03, 2019 5:55 pm

    KeMac wrote:Can anyone tell me exactly where the Pombey bombing range is please? I think it is somewhere near Vorkuta above and to the East of the Polar Urals. I have read elsewhere that it has been used by Tu 160s for exercises. Also if possible does anyone know how long it has been in existence as I think it is fairly new, but I may be wrong.
    Many Thanks
    KeMac

    Have not been able to pinpoint this location exactly myself however... northeast of Vorkuta about 100 km's around Chalmer-Yu there are some old abandoned Soviet Gulag camps. On some Russian language maps, this area is showing as a Proving Grounds, which is the literal translation for Training Range.
    avatar
    KeMac

    Posts : 3
    Points : 7
    Join date : 2014-04-12

    General Questions Thread: - Page 13 Empty Re: General Questions Thread:

    Post  KeMac on Sun Mar 24, 2019 8:02 pm

    franco wrote:
    KeMac wrote:Can anyone tell me exactly where the Pombey bombing range is please? I think it is somewhere near Vorkuta above and to the East of the Polar Urals. I have read elsewhere that it has been used by Tu 160s for exercises. Also if possible does anyone know how long it has been in existence as I think it is fairly new, but I may be wrong.
    Many Thanks
    KeMac

    Have not been able to pinpoint this location exactly myself however... northeast of Vorkuta about 100 km's around Chalmer-Yu there are some old abandoned Soviet Gulag camps. On some Russian language maps, this area is showing as a Proving Grounds, which is the literal translation for Training Range.

    Thank you Franco. That sounds about right. I think there was a big exercise last year and it was used then.
    Isos
    Isos

    Posts : 3673
    Points : 3665
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    General Questions Thread: - Page 13 Empty Re: General Questions Thread:

    Post  Isos on Sat Jun 15, 2019 10:02 pm

    Just saw that kh-59 has an inertial guidance and last 10 km it switches to TV and is controled by the plane that launched it. The guy in the plane sees what the missile sees and controls it to the target.

    Some question about that :

    Isn't it easy to jam the data link ? Especially if an ELINT station recorded the first use of the missile, then they will know at what frequency they "talk".

    Do the bomber needs to wait the first missile to hit before firing another one ?

    The range should be limited so once the bomber launched the missile, he needs to stay high and in range to communicate. Isn't it dangerous ?

    Is it widely bought ? Open sources say china ordered only 200 which is pretty low. Countries like France, GB and germany ordered like 300-400 each of the SCALP/ storm shadow/Taurus. Mk2 should be expensive but first generation kh-59m should be really affordable and a detterent weapon because of its precision.
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 21517
    Points : 22067
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    General Questions Thread: - Page 13 Empty Re: General Questions Thread:

    Post  GarryB on Sun Jun 16, 2019 2:50 am

    Datalinks are not so easy to jam.

    Especially directional ones as used by the Kazoo.

    The datalink pod has two antenna so the missile is launched and then the carrier aircraft can turn 180 degrees and still control the missile using the rear facing datalink antenna.

    Do the bomber needs to wait the first missile to hit before firing another one ?

    AFAIK the datalink works with one missile so a missile can be launched and controlled by the launch aircraft, but another aircraft can launch and control their own missile too.

    The range should be limited so once the bomber launched the missile, he needs to stay high and in range to communicate. Isn't it dangerous ?

    I am not aware of any altitude restrictions for the launch aircraft, and as I mentioned once fired the aircraft can turn 180 degrees and head away from the target and still control the missile... the tracking and targeting range of most systems is dramatically reduced with receding targets.

    Is it widely bought ? Open sources say china ordered only 200 which is pretty low. Countries like France, GB and germany ordered like 300-400 each of the SCALP/ storm shadow/Taurus. Mk2 should be expensive but first generation kh-59m should be really affordable and a detterent weapon because of its precision.

    AFAIK not many aircraft can use it successfully, and generally only Su-24 units were fully equipped with guided weapons for air to ground use.

    They revised the design in the 2000s to eliminate the Ukrainian parts and they are still in production AFAIK.

    They are supposed to have three warhead options... He penetration type at 320kg, a 283kg sub-munition type and a nuke...

    The latest models have active radar homing seekers for use against fixed known coordinate targets.

    Sponsored content

    General Questions Thread: - Page 13 Empty Re: General Questions Thread:

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Sun Aug 25, 2019 8:19 am