Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Μilitary Questions & Answers

    Share
    avatar
    jhelb

    Posts : 433
    Points : 500
    Join date : 2015-04-04
    Location : Previously: Belarus Currently: A Small Island No One Cares About

    How is the design of a seeker for an AA missile different from the design of a AG missile?

    Post  jhelb on Thu May 12, 2016 7:45 pm

    Just one question, how is the design of a seeker for an Air-to-Air missile different from the design of a Air-to-Ground missile?
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16520
    Points : 17128
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Μilitary Questions & Answers

    Post  GarryB on Fri May 13, 2016 10:32 am

    I have already suggested the idea of a corner reflector under a radar transparent nosecone for 14.5mm HMG bullets for use against an APS system on a tank.

    the defensive radar system detects incoming 14.5mm rounds that look rather larger due to the front facing corner reflector and believe they are incoming missiles... the defensive system opens fire to defend itself and eventually after 50 or 100 rounds have been fired you can be sure the system has either been turned off because of all the false alarms or it is out of ammo... then you fire the real ATGMs.

    In the case of anti ship weapons you need much longer range decoys... or indeed an up angled weapon firing from near the rear of a missile some 14.5mm calibre HMG rounds from 4-5km out from the target to confuse the defences as the missile closes in on the target...


    _________________
    “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
    GarryB

    Posts : 16520
    Points : 17128
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Μilitary Questions & Answers

    Post  GarryB on Fri May 13, 2016 11:08 am

    Just one question, how is the design of a seeker for an Air-to-Air missile different from the design of a Air-to-Ground missile?

    The differences were huge, but will actually disappear in the future.

    Do you know what a PIR is?

    Where you work there is probably one in the room.. it is basically an IR sensor that detects heat and movement and would be part of the security system in most offices.

    Old AAM seekers were much like that, they didn't form an image like a thermal imager... they just detected hot spots as blobs, which was used to steer the missile towards a target in the air.

    things like the sun or heated rocks on the ground could easily distract such a simple seeker so to get a lock you slaved the missile seeker directly forward and then flew your plane to behind the enemy aircraft where you were looking directly up his engine tail pipe and then locked your missile and fired it.

    With no sun behind the target you assumed the target it locked was the target aircrafts engine.

    Problem is that a flare is also hot so if he popped a flare your missile might go after that instead.

    Later seekers could see more clearly and your average enemy aircraft became a cluster of hot points so an individual flare did not work so well as it was too hot and the missile seeker might have locked onto a less hot part of the target pattern.

    Solution was to release an enormous number of flares to create a pattern to distract the seeker.

    Point is that these seekers look for IR patterns rather than actual targets so a group of rocks on the ground could look like a vehicle or vice versa.

    To engage targets on the ground you need to have an IR image where targets are actually defined shapes as well as patterns.

    New AAMs like ASRAAM and Morfei will have IIR or imaging infra red seekers that actually form an image of the target.

    Anyway very simply an AAM with an IR seeker has a very simple IR detector sensor, whereas to hit ground targets you need an imaging IR sensor... the latter is also beginning to be used in AAMs as well.

    Note the Pantsir-S combines EO (ie Low light level TV, and Thermal Imaging) as well as MMW and CMW radar to track the target and the outgoing missiles... and cheap simple command guidance to send course corrections to the very cheap missile... makes it capable and cheap to use... and indeed able to be used against almost any target within line of sight... including ground targets.


    _________________
    “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
    Isos

    Posts : 822
    Points : 820
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Re: Μilitary Questions & Answers

    Post  Isos on Fri May 13, 2016 1:20 pm

    GarryB wrote:I have already suggested the idea of a corner reflector under a radar transparent nosecone for 14.5mm HMG bullets for use against an APS system on a tank.

    the defensive radar system detects incoming 14.5mm rounds that look rather larger due to the front facing corner reflector and believe they are incoming missiles... the defensive system opens fire to defend itself and eventually after 50 or 100 rounds have been fired you can be sure the system has either been turned off because of all the false alarms or it is out of ammo... then you fire the real ATGMs.

    In the case of anti ship weapons you need much longer range decoys... or indeed an up angled weapon firing from near the rear of a missile some 14.5mm calibre HMG rounds from 4-5km out from the target to confuse the defences as the missile closes in on the target...


    I meant put a dispenser in the missile and lunch a lot of corner reflectors, maybe we could design it with small propulsor to send it some 200m from the missiles, some at the left some at the right ...
    If your missile is mach 3 when you lunch them, the reflectors will be also mach 3. So it's difficult to know wich target is the missile. Chaffs are so light that when you lunch them they lose instantly their speed, anti air missiles can know they are chaffs.

    The speed of a 14.5mm is too high, something that go away from the missile at low speed is better optimized against the alghorithms used for anti chaffs. If your missiles is flying 2000km/h then there are two targets on radar and one is flying 1000m/s but 45° on the left. With good alghorithms you can know which one is the missile.
    Then if you have a propulsed reflector that goes in parallel with the missiles at 100m from it (even if it's for 10s, but it would be a very little propuslor), it's more complicated to know which one is the good target. So with 100 or 1000 of them it's 100/1000 times harder.
    You just need to eject it 100m away. A bullet would go 4km from it and wouldn't be detected by the missile's radar (out of range).
    avatar
    Werewolf

    Posts : 5357
    Points : 5588
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    Re: Μilitary Questions & Answers

    Post  Werewolf on Fri May 13, 2016 6:09 pm

    I already have suggested an ATGM with one-shot corner reflectored projectile in the probe of the ATGM that is fired from some range to set off the APS system and use the time between reload/reaction to penetrate it. Or use a projectile that explodes with the set off the APS and forms a dust/cload that will block the radars of acquiring the follow up ATGM.
    avatar
    Militarov

    Posts : 5538
    Points : 5579
    Join date : 2015-09-02
    Location : Serbia

    Re: Μilitary Questions & Answers

    Post  Militarov on Fri May 13, 2016 7:11 pm

    Isos wrote:Do you think it's possible to put radar reflectors in a antiship missile and release them while attaking ? Naval radars can detect like 2000 targets, so puting 500 2mm radar cone reflectors could sature radars. I'm not talking about a cloud of chaffs.


    Would need to be bigger than that, radar reflectors are great idea but they still need to be alot bigger than that.
    avatar
    Isos

    Posts : 822
    Points : 820
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Re: Μilitary Questions & Answers

    Post  Isos on Fri May 13, 2016 7:39 pm

    Werewolf wrote:I already have suggested an ATGM with one-shot corner reflectored projectile in the probe of the ATGM that is fired from some range to set off the APS system and use the time between reload/reaction to penetrate it. Or use a projectile that explodes with the set off the APS and forms a dust/cload that will block the radars of acquiring the follow up ATGM.

    RPG-32 !!

    Militarov wrote:

    Would need to be bigger than that, radar reflectors are great idea but they still need to be alot bigger than that.

    I read somewhere that with a good design it could be small. They use the same as in the picture on boat to be seen by radars. So a much smaller could simulate a 0.1m² RCS of a ONIKS.

    Bonus:



    At 55s, It seems to be a Moskit !
    avatar
    jhelb

    Posts : 433
    Points : 500
    Join date : 2015-04-04
    Location : Previously: Belarus Currently: A Small Island No One Cares About

    Re: Μilitary Questions & Answers

    Post  jhelb on Sat May 14, 2016 12:18 pm

    GarryB wrote:
    Just one question, how is the design of a seeker for an Air-to-Air missile different from the design of a Air-to-Ground missile?
    Later seekers could see more clearly and your average enemy aircraft became a cluster of hot points so an individual flare did not work so well as it was too hot and the missile seeker might have locked onto a less hot part of the target pattern.

    So GarryB, is it possible to design an air-to-air or air-to-ground missile that has several types of seekers in just one missile? In other words the missile will have

    1. Radar Guidance
    2. IR Guidance
    3. TV Guidance
    4. Satellite Guidance


    Is it possible to design such a missile? Thanks again.
    avatar
    Regular

    Posts : 2029
    Points : 2033
    Join date : 2013-03-10
    Location : Western Hemisphere.. mostly

    Re: Μilitary Questions & Answers

    Post  Regular on Sat May 14, 2016 1:34 pm

    Garry is da man, but after seeing Your post I wanted to chip in.
    Sounds like You are describing wunderwaffle missle who would cost as much as jet shooting it:) Also there are plenty of multichannel weapons about like good old KH-25 family, why would You want to put all seekers in one missle and see it explode? What would be benefit of added weight and cost. Not to mention You want to tailor missile to Your needs. There are plenty of weapons who have TV guidance in late stage.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16520
    Points : 17128
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Μilitary Questions & Answers

    Post  GarryB on Sun May 15, 2016 11:58 am

    Sounds like You are describing wunderwaffle missle who would cost as much as jet shooting it:

    For older missiles the old PIR type IR emission detector was sophisticated enough for hitting aircraft and it was cheap enough to be widely used.

    For the air to ground use however it was useless against ground targets because you could not tell what you had locked.

    Old thermal imagers were enormously expensive and simply would be overkill for use against aircraft.

    Against ground targets you could look at the image and select a real target... indeed many targets could be selected by computer processing of the image so you could let it find potential targets itself with the operator confirming targets and locking them.

    Also there are plenty of multichannel weapons about like good old KH-25 family, why would You want to put all seekers in one missle and see it explode?

    Kh-25 is not multichannel... it has several seeker options but it can't use more than one guidance option at a time. For instance with a laser spot seeker it is the Kh-25ML or AS-10 Karen laser homing missile... with that seeker fitted it cannot be used against radar installations seeking radar waves like an anti radiation missile.

    What would be benefit of added weight and cost. Not to mention You want to tailor missile to Your needs. There are plenty of weapons who have TV guidance in late stage.

    If you can make it cheap enough the benefit is flexibility in use... a big radar station is radiating so you launch an anti radiation missile... but the launch is detected so the radar station turns off for a few seconds in the hope the missile will miss. Unknown to the radar station your anti radiation missile has an IR sensor and a very large radar generates a large amount of heat so even though the incoming missile can no longer detect a radar wave signal to home in it can still see a hot spot at exactly the same location it previously saw the radar emissions so it hits the IR target instead of the radio wave target... the radar gets destroyed anyway.

    Another combination is ARM and GLONASS... as it flys towards its target it calculates the coordinates of the target so when the radar turns off the missile continues to the location where the radar signal was detected/tracked so the target gets hit anyway.

    We have seen versions of the Kh-58 anti radiation missile with IR sensors.

    New technology like QWIP sensors make things even more interesting.

    [quote]So GarryB, is it possible to design an air-to-air or air-to-ground missile that has several types of seekers in just one missile? In other words the missile will have

    1. Radar Guidance
    2. IR Guidance
    3. TV Guidance
    4. Satellite Guidance


    Is it possible to design such a missile? Thanks again.[/qutoe]

    Very much so.

    In fact you can go a step further... radar guidance can be passive ie anti radiation missile, or active, with active radar homing. Satellite inertial guidance is a common standard backup, and IIR and TV guidance will become common with QWIP technology.

    Very simply if you look at a digital camera that you have... whether it is a digital video camera or the camera on your cell phone, if you look through the viewer to take a photo or video and point a TV remote control at the viewer and push a button on the remote control... you should see a flashing light behind the black panel on the front of the remote.

    Very simply modern CCD chips are sensitive to normal visible light, but they are also sensitive to IR light... not actual heat... they are not thermal cameras, but active IR light.

    A QWIP chip is similar and can be made sensitive to a range of light from UV to visible light through to IR. (note UV just means beyond violet light wave and IR means beyond red... visible light is red, orange, yellow, green, blue, indigo, and violet... so you have beyond red (IR), then red, then orange, yellow, green, blue, indigo, violet and then beyond violet (ie UV).

    A QWIP sensor chip can be made sensitive to all those frequencies and more so like the alien hunter in predator you could switch between frequency ranges to get the best view of the target.

    On a clear crisp morning visible frequencies will give the best view, but at night or in bad weather IR can be used to improve normal light frequencies.

    A radar dish in the nose of a missile able to detect radar emissions and to send a radar signal in active mode with side mounted optical ports able to detect IR and visible light and UV rays and an internal GLONASS navigation system and you have a real multirole seeker.

    Of course it is more realistic to have a radar model with Glonass and an EO model with GLonass... the former can be used against aircraft or moving ground targets and enemy radar, while the latter could be used against pretty much anything... it can see in the dark and it could detect laser spots so you could use it with laser homing systems too.

    The point is that QWIP sensor chips can be printed like CCD chips and AESA modules so eventually they will become very very cheap and you will be seeing them all over the place... modern optics are much much smaller than the 1980s... in the 1980s a thermal imager was a vehicle mounted system and an image intensifier was huge... today a modern thermal scope is tiny and it has a ballistics computer built in and laser range finder and target marker etc etc.

    Regarding combinations of guidance system some combinations make sense... for instance a TV system might be fooled by camouflage... adding IR means paint or foliage no longer hide targets... but with IR camo being able to use a laser to mark the target means even the most heavily camouflaged target can be hit accurately.

    The EO seekers for Ugroza have moving target capability so a tank moving along a road can be locked and targeted by the system. A tank parked and hidden by camo can still be accurately hit by someone pointing a laser at the target... either on the ground or in the air (ie UAV) or the launch aircraft itself.


    _________________
    “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
    RTN

    Posts : 188
    Points : 169
    Join date : 2014-03-24
    Location : Fairfield , CT

    Re: Μilitary Questions & Answers

    Post  RTN on Sun May 15, 2016 7:47 pm

    GarryB wrote:In fact you can go a step further... radar guidance can be passive ie anti radiation missile, or active, with active radar homing. Satellite inertial guidance is a common standard backup, and IIR and TV guidance will become common with QWIP technology.

    A DIRCM  for a fighter that can jam a Aim-9X, IRIS-T, ASRAAM, Python 5 which have IIR seekers does not exist. Missiles with IIR seekers which as of today, are literally impossible to guard against within their NEZ, especially when cued by HOBS capable helmet sights

    http://spie.org/newsroom/5614-ir-imaging-seekers-may-be-very-resistant-to-laser-jamming

    Our AIM 120D already features a multi mode RF seeker. Once fired it is a sure shot killer. It's undoubtedly the best BVRAAM in business.
    avatar
    Militarov

    Posts : 5538
    Points : 5579
    Join date : 2015-09-02
    Location : Serbia

    Re: Μilitary Questions & Answers

    Post  Militarov on Sun May 15, 2016 8:19 pm

    RTN wrote:
    GarryB wrote:In fact you can go a step further... radar guidance can be passive ie anti radiation missile, or active, with active radar homing. Satellite inertial guidance is a common standard backup, and IIR and TV guidance will become common with QWIP technology.

    A DIRCM  for a fighter that can jam a Aim-9X, IRIS-T, ASRAAM, Python 5 which have IIR seekers does not exist. Missiles with IIR seekers which as of today, are literally impossible to guard against within their NEZ, especially when cued by HOBS capable helmet sights

    http://spie.org/newsroom/5614-ir-imaging-seekers-may-be-very-resistant-to-laser-jamming

    Our AIM 120D already features a multi mode RF seeker. Once fired it is a sure shot killer. It's undoubtedly the best BVRAAM in business.

    "Once fired it is a sure shot killer." - Try not using this...funny line.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16520
    Points : 17128
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Μilitary Questions & Answers

    Post  GarryB on Mon May 16, 2016 1:23 pm

    A DIRCM  for a fighter that can jam a Aim-9X, IRIS-T, ASRAAM, Python 5 which have IIR seekers does not exist.

    That is a bold statement... laser dazzlers can be made to damage optical sensor cells in a human eye...what makes you think upping the power wont let them do the same to an IIR seeker sensor?

    Filters can be used to block laser radiation but at the end of the day for an IIR sensor to work it has to let in the IR frequencies it operates at... and there is a limit to specific frequencies that move well through the air... some frequencies are useless because they are absorbed by moisture in the air... the effective channels can easily be targeted by a laser.

    Missiles with IIR seekers which as of today, are literally impossible to guard against within their NEZ, especially when cued by HOBS capable helmet sights

    Again, not sure how you can say that... unless you work for a company that makes such systems.

    Whether an IIR guided missile is cued by a helmet mounted sight or by IRST or radar or simply pointing the whole aircraft at the target and getting a lock and firing (the latter is how F-22 pilots do it BTW... with the first three options open to a MiG-29 pilot from the 1980s) makes no difference as to how effective DIRCMs are...

    Our AIM 120D already features a multi mode RF seeker. Once fired it is a sure shot killer. It's undoubtedly the best BVRAAM in business.

    Wow a multi mode RF seeker... except the Soviets had passive radar homing missiles in the late 1970s... in the 1980s if the cold war had started the western air forces would have been in serious trouble... R-73 was vastly more capable than any model Sidewinder so the only safe way for NATO to fight would be at BVR with the ordinary Sparrow but with passive radar homing R-27s homing in on those Eagles marking Soviet aircraft for their SARH Sparrows would be sitting ducks not eagles.

    It would have been a slaughter.

    Now you are suggesting the AIM-120D is the best BVRAAM in the business... Is it better than the R-37M? What do you know about the R-37M to be able to say the AIM-120D is better?

    I know the AIM-120D does not have better range than the 300km+ range R-37M...

    Note regarding multi sensor missiles:



    Note the nose contains a wide band radar sensor for detecting enemy radar, while the bumps under the chin of the nose contain IIR sensors to detect IR targets on the ground.

    Note I should mention that multi sensor weapons are not new... the old SS-N-2 Styx anti ship missile came in active radar homing and simple IR guided versions for export... the domestic models had both systems. I seem to remember the Indians used the IR guided models to hit Pakistani oil storage tanks that had been heated by the sun during the day. they got hot enough to allow targeting at night with IR guided versions of the Styx... but that relied on the fact that they were very big... like a ship and they stood out in IR because the ground around them cooled down much faster when the sun went down than all that oil did... much the same as a ship will be a visible IR target in the open sea... either hotter or cooler.


    _________________
    “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
    TheArmenian

    Posts : 1714
    Points : 1871
    Join date : 2011-09-14

    Re: Μilitary Questions & Answers

    Post  TheArmenian on Mon May 16, 2016 1:58 pm

    The P-120 Malakhit (NATO Codename: SS-N-9) was the first anti-ship missile to use two sensors:
    -Radar
    -IR

    And it was introduced in 1972 .... almost half a century ago!

    avatar
    sepheronx

    Posts : 7252
    Points : 7546
    Join date : 2009-08-06
    Age : 28
    Location : Canada

    Just one question, how is the design of a seeker for an Air-to-Air missile different from the design of a Air-to-Ground missile?

    Post  sepheronx on Sat Jun 11, 2016 9:05 pm

    A couple of things to take into consideration:
    - Yes, Automation will be a problem in events such as EW environment. But what gives these unmanned systems benefit over others is if they are stationary. Why I mention this is because they will not be connected wireless, so not letting off signals to be intercepted or system being intercepted and controlled wireless, but all controlled via fiber optic lines so it would require having to actually cut into the connection physically in order to gain control. If they are thinking of making them unmanned in the sense where the systems operate freely on their own, then that is a problem for sure.
    - Regarding radar, not really. In any event, I imagine that such systems will be connected to a central unit (as said, via fiber lines), and the central system will have access to data from advanced radar systems so it will be able to detect and track targets far more efficiently and accurately. The radar systems onboard these Tor systems are only so good due to its size and power draw.

    I imagine it will be a module system where they operate somewhat by their own, but all connected to a control unit. Technically, Unmanned drones are controlled via a central console by two people anyway, so not exactly fully unmanned. I imagine this is the same method. So in reality, control units of a Tor, which may require two individuals to control it, can be now left unmanned and all controlled by a couple of guys in a trailer somewhere else, that can monitor and control lets say 5 or more of these systems at same time.
    avatar
    VladimirSahin

    Posts : 414
    Points : 432
    Join date : 2013-11-29
    Age : 26
    Location : Florida

    Re: Μilitary Questions & Answers

    Post  VladimirSahin on Thu Jun 16, 2016 9:07 am

    Quick war scenario and a follow on question for guys who are reliable with warfare capabilities:

    Russia invades Estonia and Latvia due to similar events like Ukraine, NATO declares war on Russia. Now how exposed would a NATO reinforcement deployment be?

    Kaliningrad is right there, and tactical missiles are going to be targeting Polish bases. I'd assume the Polish armed forces would be rendered useless (offensively) in a tactical missile strike operation in about 1-2 days. S-400s in Kaliningrad (2 battalions) would block the air space however, what would NATO need to break this air bubble?

    btw, I'm not trying to start something the Rand article I read about Russian troops being able to be in the capital of the baltics by 30 hours really interested me.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16520
    Points : 17128
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Do you think it's possible to put radar reflectors in a antiship missile and release them while attaking ?

    Post  GarryB on Thu Jun 23, 2016 1:48 pm

    The speed of a 14.5mm is too high, something that go away from the missile at low speed is better optimized against the alghorithms used for anti chaffs.

    Chaff released by a missile in flight will rapidly decellerate and clearly not have a trajectory that will hit the target... it will drop to the ground a few metres past where it is released and would be ignored by the ARENA radar system from the 1990s let alone a modern system.

    If your missiles is flying 2000km/h then there are two targets on radar and one is flying 1000m/s but 45° on the left. With good alghorithms you can know which one is the missile.

    It doesn't matter what speed your target is approaching at a HEAT warhead will work at any speed so any object no matter how fast it is moving will need to be intercepted by the defense system... except if its trajectory wont hit the tank like with chaff.


    The speed of 14.5mm ammo at the gun muzzle is 1km/s which is rather less than most APFSDS rounds... if it is going to hit the target then the APS would need to intercept.

    The point is that you would not be firing the 14.5mm HMG at the target from within 500m... from 3,000m or more the projectile will be travelling at nothing like 1km/s... it will be more like subsonic, but its mass will allow it to travel great distances... 6km or so.

    The point is that the corner reflector in its nose will make it appear to be a much larger object and as long as its trajectory will impact the tank the APS system would have to intercept... a 20 round burst means it will have to intercept 20 targets within the space of 2 seconds due to the cyclic rate of fire of the KPV HMG launching these projectiles.

    It would not be hard to launch a Kornet and then fire a burst of 14.5mm rounds from the same vehicle at the same target so the 20 rounds of 14.5mm ammo arrive on target a fraction of a second before the Kornet arrives... the APS will see 20 large objects arriving and then detect a smaller slower threat arriving next... it will try an engage the first targets first and will not be able to cope.

    An EM pulse projectile could be fired from a BMPT from its 120mm main gun via a 120mm mortar shell that detonates 10m from the tank and disables all the tanks electronics just before the ATGMs arrive...

    There are lots of options.

    Then if you have a propulsed reflector that goes in parallel with the missiles at 100m from it (even if it's for 10s, but it would be a very little propuslor), it's more complicated to know which one is the good target. So with 100 or 1000 of them it's 100/1000 times harder.
    You just need to eject it 100m away. A bullet would go 4km from it and wouldn't be detected by the missile's radar (out of range).

    Decoys release just short of impact would all have to be on a trajectory to hit the target to trigger a system like ARENA which will ignore threats that are not actually going to hit the tank or fly directly over it... an ARENA munition would likely shatter the missile and all the decoys in one interception.

    14.5mm rounds will come one at a time in a string of rounds rather than all together in a cluster like released decoys.


    _________________
    “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
    nemrod

    Posts : 809
    Points : 1305
    Join date : 2012-09-11

    Question about this hardware please

    Post  nemrod on Wed Jun 29, 2016 1:49 pm


    Does Russia have the same hardware ?
    Indian's Weapon Locating Radar.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BEL_Weapon_Locating_Radar
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16520
    Points : 17128
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Μilitary Questions & Answers

    Post  GarryB on Thu Jun 30, 2016 1:18 pm

    Yes... Zoopark, Credo, Fara, Rys, Gamma...


    _________________
    “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
    nemrod

    Posts : 809
    Points : 1305
    Join date : 2012-09-11

    Re: Μilitary Questions & Answers

    Post  nemrod on Thu Jun 30, 2016 1:41 pm

    Thank you Garry.
    avatar
    Walther von Oldenburg

    Posts : 919
    Points : 974
    Join date : 2015-01-23
    Age : 26
    Location : Oldenburg

    Re: Μilitary Questions & Answers

    Post  Walther von Oldenburg on Sat Aug 06, 2016 2:30 pm

    What would be the best sources to learn about conduct of land warfare , from small unit tactics up to operational (brigade and above) level? I have some intuitive understanding of this but it's not comprehensive enough I think.
    avatar
    magnumcromagnon

    Posts : 4488
    Points : 4661
    Join date : 2013-12-05
    Location : Pindos ave., Pindosville, Pindosylvania, Pindostan

    Re: Μilitary Questions & Answers

    Post  magnumcromagnon on Sat Aug 06, 2016 6:39 pm

    Walther von Oldenburg wrote:What would be the best sources to learn about conduct of land warfare , from small unit tactics up to operational (brigade and above) level? I have some intuitive understanding of this but it's not comprehensive enough I think.

    VPK-News which is a site that focuses on both strategic analysis as well as operational combat tactics

    http://vpk-news.ru/

    Use google translate:

    https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=ru&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fvpk-news.ru%2F&edit-text=&act=url
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16520
    Points : 17128
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Μilitary Questions & Answers

    Post  GarryB on Sun Aug 07, 2016 1:57 pm

    If you use Mozila Firefox as a browser there is a Yandex translator add on that adds a tool bar that includes three buttons... one button will open a popup window with a translation for highlighted text, another button will translate highlighted text within a page into a different language and a third button that will open a new page with the full page translated.

    In my experience so far the translations are better than google translate for Russian to English conversions.


    _________________
    “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

    nastle77

    Posts : 195
    Points : 255
    Join date : 2015-07-25

    Re: Μilitary Questions & Answers

    Post  nastle77 on Wed Aug 24, 2016 10:50 pm

    Are anti ship missiles like Harpoon able to hit targets when they are hidden by land or islands e.g in the earlier version of harpoon if launched from the sea on one side of a peninsula can it travEl overland and hit a naval target at sea on the other side of the peninsula? Provided this target is within its max range e.g of 60nm
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16520
    Points : 17128
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Μilitary Questions & Answers

    Post  GarryB on Thu Aug 25, 2016 11:25 am

    Very few have the radar range to detect their target at launch and so the general location is given to the missile and it flys to the target location and turns on its own radar to scan for the target.

    Some can be fed the targets general location, while others have to climb and scan for the target and then drop down to very low altitude for the flight to the target area.

    As long as the island is not between the missile and the target when it turns on its radar to scan for the target it should be able to fly past islands and other items to get to a position to scan for the target.

    Some longer range missiles can have way points so they actually approach their target from an unexpected direction.


    _________________
    “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: Μilitary Questions & Answers

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Fri Oct 20, 2017 12:52 pm