Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues

    M270 vs Smerch | ATCAMS vs Iskander



    Posts : 787
    Points : 954
    Join date : 2011-07-20

    Re: M270 vs Smerch | ATCAMS vs Iskander

    Post  Mindstorm on Sat May 27, 2017 5:44 pm

    The debate here IMHO is totally out of target....

    Искандер-М/K is a substrategic weapon - at today, by a very long margin, the most advanced and lethal theatre ballistic missile at world-.

    Its main role would be to destroy (mostly in virtue of its immuty to interception by part of today operative and in development anti missile defense systems) both fixed targets such as C4 centers, soft/hardened main air-bases, larger hardened military ammo depots , early warnig radar stations, GPS satellite relay nodes and time-sensitive targets (being the faster offensive weapon on this planet capable to destroy a target within its range after its detection by ground/air/space based sensors) such as large enemy ground force concentrations ,mobile radar and air defense systems etc...  

    The Искандер-М,for the destruction of those critical enemy targets, can mount or a thermo-nuclear warheads or a  very high-cost specialized conventional warhead with level of performances several times greater than those mounted on weapon with similar warhead mass.

    Therefore if, from a side, is perfectly true that a single specialized conventional warheads of Искандер-М ,incorporating the most cutting edge achievements in nano-engineered molecular structure for explosive mixtures, detonation time's control, submunition composition and dispersion etc...achieve in a very reduced time window and in a virtually undefendeable way the destructive effect produced by several precision conventional munitions with the same warhead's mass , from the other side would be demented (or for better say impossible even only for mere economical and time/complexity of construction reasons ) to equip similar very costly warheads on high production weapons ,like gravity/glide bombs or MLRS tasked to destroy less sensitive targets and much more numerous.

    Established this fundamental difference is possible to talk of the two corresponding systems : AR-3 and Торнадо-С.

    AR-3 has two caliber options for rockets : 300 mm and 370 mm.

    The 300 mm pallets have 5 rockets (10 in total) with a maximum range of 130 km. The 370 mm pallets have 4 rockets (8 in total) with a range of 220 km and 280 km for the version with additional booster. The latter caliber -370 mm- is the only with guidance option.

    Торнадо-С have 2 pallets with 6 300 mm rockets (12 in total), with a maximum range greater than 200 km and guidance option.

    Anyone can easily notice that propulsion efficiency of the chinese product, taking into account the same caliber, is significantly inferior in comparison with the up-to date Federation's one; increased rocket range of the AR-3 is simply the product of increased caliber at the expense of 50% reduction in rocket number.

    Posts : 11481
    Points : 11954
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: M270 vs Smerch | ATCAMS vs Iskander

    Post  George1 on Fri Jun 16, 2017 7:55 am

    The American answer to the Iskander

    The American Army is very worried that the opponents riveted (and continue to rivet) many, many cruise and ballistic missiles, primarily operational-tactical assignments (well, of course, for SSC-8 too).

    They say that they can shoot down everything, only the anti-missiles are more expensive and will end sooner than the ground-ground from the enemy.
    Moreover, they say that one must seriously puzzle who will answer for both the interception and the retaliatory strikes (including the FBD) -the land-keepers or the air force.

    In the meantime, the production of long-range high-precision missiles for its MLRS is being pumped (by 2020 it is promised to increase from current 6,000 to 10,000 per year), and most importantly, they loaded Raytheron with $ 116.4 million to develop Long-Range High-Precision Fire Means (Long Range Precision Fires, LRPF).

    The DeepStrike project assumes a system with two missiles (although, judging by the infographics, there may be an option with four), earth-land with a range of up to 499 km (just so, we all believe Smile) capable of hitting targets with the utmost precision.

    Fire tests are planned by the end of 2019.

    Many people ask about ATACMS, I will say why this system is not enough:
    A) range up to 300 km;
    B) number, incl. Directly on the starting;
    C) cost - there was even an episode with the termination of production for financial reasons.

      Current date/time is Sun Jun 24, 2018 3:10 am