Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Russian military intervention and aid to Syria #13

    nomadski
    nomadski

    Posts : 576
    Points : 578
    Join date : 2017-01-02

    Russian military intervention and aid to Syria #13 - Page 30 Empty Re: Russian military intervention and aid to Syria #13

    Post  nomadski on Thu Apr 18, 2019 2:26 pm

    The planes are by far superior to drones . Heavy payloads .In this operations . If the problem is , as Vann  says , yank radar giving warning , or sound of jet , then solution is to fly one or two planes  continuously  over rat holes . Then noise exist all the time . As does radar warning . Also use glide munitions , Iranians have some .  km range . Less jet noise at this range . TV feed . This means planes on stand by all the time . Over target 24 / 7 . Loud speakers  over battlefield with engine jet noise , effective . Fly fast model aircraft over battlefield to simulate radar return of big plane . Cheaper.........
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 22048
    Points : 22592
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Russian military intervention and aid to Syria #13 - Page 30 Empty Re: Russian military intervention and aid to Syria #13

    Post  GarryB on Fri Apr 19, 2019 6:18 am

    Actually for every flight over enemy territory (which has shrunk down to a fraction of the size it used to be) 90% of the time it will just be monitoring... ie cameras looking at movement on the ground and antenna detecting communications traffic to try to locate enemy forces and comms centres and HQs... so most of the time they don't hear aircraft flying over because they are at 10km altitude they wont be getting bombed anyway.
    avatar
    Vann7

    Posts : 4163
    Points : 4267
    Join date : 2012-05-16

    Russian military intervention and aid to Syria #13 - Page 30 Empty Re: Russian military intervention and aid to Syria #13

    Post  Vann7 on Sat Apr 20, 2019 3:07 pm

    GarryB wrote:

    Why do they need them now for?

    Su-24s are quite effectively dropping cheap dumb bombs on targets without problem.


    Because those planes are INCREDIBLY ABYSMALLY NOISY... so much that is impossible for the
    terrorist to not know when one plane is about to fly near them... im more informed than you
    over the Syrian Conflict and have seen Plenty of videos , from the Terrorist Side.. where they
    capture the Russian planes , before they reach their positions..

    and as i said NATO radars in Syria and in Cyprus warns Alqaeda and ISIS all the time
    whenever Russian airforce take off from their latakia base.. Terrorist are well informed
    when Russia airforce will do another attack..  This was one of the reason why Russia wanted a base in IRAN  ,to take by surprise terrorist..in their bunkers..  

    Drones are not fortified bunkers destroyers ,but their missiles ,like Predator drones hellfire missiles, can be very useful to take down terrorist in then they moving in the open..  Drones are very silent
    at 5,000km altitude.. Planes are very noisy have seen plenty of videos of terrorist being aware
    of  Russian airforce flights.. before they do bombing..   Cruise missiles can do the job , but they too expensive.. Russia needs attack drones..period.. to increase their performance/cost ratio and to take
    by surprise terrorist ,when moving in the open for an operation. Terrorist spread over large areas
    and is not practical to use a million dollar $ missile to kill 2-5 terrorist in the open..
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 22048
    Points : 22592
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Russian military intervention and aid to Syria #13 - Page 30 Empty Re: Russian military intervention and aid to Syria #13

    Post  GarryB on Sun Apr 21, 2019 10:10 am

    So hang on, you are making a lot of claims here... first you are claiming Russian planes are noisy and are therefore easy for the terrorists to detect and watch... of course without any evidence to prove that... just opinion.

    Then you claim NATO is passing on information about Russian flights to the terrorists... well if that is the case then WTF does it matter whether they are noisy or not?

    Then you say the Russians want to use Iranian bases to be stealthy in their attacks... but surely the bases in Syria itself are much closer to the targets you are engaging and give even less warning...

    If you are trying to say drones are good for taking out toyota utes then so is Krasnopol 152mm artillery shells directed by UAVs with lasers...

    Drones operating at 5,000km altitude would be very silent... there is no sound in space...

    by surprise terrorist ,when moving in the open for an operation. Terrorist spread over large areas
    and is not practical to use a million dollar $ missile to kill 2-5 terrorist in the open..

    What do you think they do... fly aircraft over Syria and look for people on the ground wearing "I am a Terrorist" T shirts and then pass that info on to the cruise missile planners who then look up a phone book and find his address and launch a missile at the place where he lives in the hope he gets a kill?

    Most of the time it will be A-50U and Tu-214R aircraft flying around collecting electronic intel... cell phone calls, satellite link calls, locations with a lot of power cables going in to it in a country where there are not many powered devices actually working.

    Didn't you notice money was found for the A-100?

    When they find a building that has a lot of communications coming in and out they will watch it and see who goes in and out... for a period of time... and when there are quite a few people in there you bomb them... not with a hellfire... with a couple of 500kg dumb bombs.

    And aircraft armed with bombs might fly several times across enemy territory... satellites can observe locations too as well as currently used uavs used for observation... seeing which locations get emptied first gives you an indication about who is important enough to get warning and who isn't... so you can watch them leave and see where they go to and bomb that instead... NATO can help the enemy but Russia can apply intelligence and tactics to nullify or even take advantage of their cowardly support for terrorists.
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 22048
    Points : 22592
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Russian military intervention and aid to Syria #13 - Page 30 Empty Re: Russian military intervention and aid to Syria #13

    Post  GarryB on Sun Apr 21, 2019 10:12 am

    It is not an accident that they want their attack helos to be able to carry 500kg bombs too...
    medo
    medo

    Posts : 3638
    Points : 3722
    Join date : 2010-10-24
    Location : Slovenia

    Russian military intervention and aid to Syria #13 - Page 30 Empty Re: Russian military intervention and aid to Syria #13

    Post  medo on Sun Apr 21, 2019 11:31 am

    This year we already see Russian Orion UCAV in action in Syria, dropping new 25 or 50 kg bombs.



    RuAF will this year receive first Orion serial UCAVs and for sure they will receive their armament as well. Gliding bombs and missiles have range up to 100 km.

    https://bmpd.livejournal.com/2802967.html

    Russian military intervention and aid to Syria #13 - Page 30 Drone_10

    Russian military intervention and aid to Syria #13 - Page 30 57105010

    Russian military intervention and aid to Syria #13 - Page 30 Wp_20110

    Those bombs will not be useful to be placed only on UCAVs, but also on combat planes and helicopters, specially those gliding bombs with stand off capabilities. Any Flanker could place on any pylon, which carry a payload of 1500 kg, 30 gliding bombs with mass of 50 kg. Of course, they will not carry 30 of them on 1 pylon, but they could carry many of them. This is very important, when striking similar air defense batteries like Pantsir or Tor-M2. There you launch as many small bombs as possible from safe distance, that they could not shot down all of them and this swarm could destroy the battery. NATO doesn't have such complexes as Pantsir or Tor-M2, so those bombs will be even more effective in destroying NATO IADS. Also they are small and very hard to detect, but as they are small with small warhead, they could be used only against soft targets. For harder targets RuAF have bigger bombs, gliding as well, like Grom-1/2.

    MALE and HALE UCAVs are very useful against enemies with weak air defense as they could fly very long time (Orion for 24 hours, Altius for 48 hours) and couldt strike targets any time. Against any serius opponent, they are very vulnerable as we see in Yemen, where Houtis shot down many Saudi UAVs, including big armed Wing Loong UCAV. Using of them will well depend on strategy and tactics, when, where and how to use them.
    nomadski
    nomadski

    Posts : 576
    Points : 578
    Join date : 2017-01-02

    Russian military intervention and aid to Syria #13 - Page 30 Empty Re: Russian military intervention and aid to Syria #13

    Post  nomadski on Sun Apr 21, 2019 11:50 am


    Yes the question is where to use UCAV . Cost and practicality. Against the rats , caught in the open , then a small payload , anti - personnel , will suffice . If we are concerned about noise and radar , and rats running into holes , then we can use new short range battery powered , low altitude kamikaze drone . Launched from ground . Also low RCS . Kalashnikov made some . And also Iran made some recently .
    Vladimir79
    Vladimir79

    Posts : 2925
    Points : 3801
    Join date : 2009-07-10

    Russian military intervention and aid to Syria #13 - Page 30 Empty Re: Russian military intervention and aid to Syria #13

    Post  Vladimir79 on Sun Apr 21, 2019 6:53 pm

    nomadski wrote:
    Yes the question is where to use UCAV .  Cost and practicality.   Against the rats , caught  in the open , then a small payload , anti - personnel , will suffice . If we are concerned  about noise  and radar , and rats running into holes , then we can use new short range battery powered , low altitude kamikaze drone . Launched from ground . Also low RCS . Kalashnikov made some . And also Iran made some recently .

    Chinese make some cheap ones but the problem is after a few uses they are unserviceable and the entire fleet is grounded.
    nomadski
    nomadski

    Posts : 576
    Points : 578
    Join date : 2017-01-02

    Russian military intervention and aid to Syria #13 - Page 30 Empty Re: Russian military intervention and aid to Syria #13

    Post  nomadski on Sun Apr 21, 2019 8:50 pm

    We should not give up too easy . Why useless after a few operations ? If controlled  by TV ,  then frequency  can change  for narrow beam directional signal . Laser designators from ground can identify range of target and UAV deploys at exact distance . .  Or GPS  of target obtained from real time battlefield  range finders and target hit . All seem cheap to me ....and reliable . The best method is live real time laser designation . Can not be jammed easy , if sensor in back of UAV . Also can send live picture of ground by nose camera ......

    Should not be any different to many anti -tank ATGW  controls . Difference with prop driven battery power UAV , is probably larger payload and range . More than rockets . And total stealth . No heat no noise .


    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=gRb07kY_gzY
    Vladimir79
    Vladimir79

    Posts : 2925
    Points : 3801
    Join date : 2009-07-10

    Russian military intervention and aid to Syria #13 - Page 30 Empty Re: Russian military intervention and aid to Syria #13

    Post  Vladimir79 on Mon Apr 22, 2019 7:57 am

    Chinese drones might as well be kamikaze they crash so much and useless after a few missions. We need resusable UCAVs that last 10000s of hours.
    nomadski
    nomadski

    Posts : 576
    Points : 578
    Join date : 2017-01-02

    Russian military intervention and aid to Syria #13 - Page 30 Empty Re: Russian military intervention and aid to Syria #13

    Post  nomadski on Mon Apr 22, 2019 1:24 pm

    Ok , we want to precisely  drop small  anti - personnel  frag round , on a couple of rats , from say a few hundred meters up , from platform traveling  at 100 miles per hour . So either the payload has to be GPS smart and be maneuverable,  or the platform has to be manouverable with GPS .  In either case we need expensive electrics that are destroyed .  But the payload can not be dumb . Payload not large and travelling fast . Also the move to drop payload in vertical dive , and recover from dive , difficult . Also internal housing of payload and  means of reliably detaching from UAV , difficult . So everything considered , kamikaze is best . Make the body out of injection mouldings . GPS , watches are cheap . ....
    avatar
    nero

    Posts : 49
    Points : 49
    Join date : 2019-03-26

    Russian military intervention and aid to Syria #13 - Page 30 Empty Re: Russian military intervention and aid to Syria #13

    Post  nero on Mon Apr 22, 2019 2:46 pm

    nomadski wrote:Ok , we want to precisely  drop small  anti - personnel  frag round , on a couple of rats , from say a few hundred meters up , from platform traveling  at 100 miles per hour.
    That would release the payload at 100 miles per hour. Or 44 m/s. It would simply not have enough time to correlate it's location using GPS because it would hit the target in a matter of a few seconds.
    nomadski
    nomadski

    Posts : 576
    Points : 578
    Join date : 2017-01-02

    Russian military intervention and aid to Syria #13 - Page 30 Empty Re: Russian military intervention and aid to Syria #13

    Post  nomadski on Mon Apr 22, 2019 6:57 pm


    That is not a problem . The release can be done higher up , and payload glide more gently . But this payload needs flight control and wings . Almost same size as UAV . And this is not much different in cost than kamikaze UAV . You may save battery and motor and prop , by bringing back . But discharging payload is one problem , the other is that you may reveal your launch position . If enemy tracks UAV . And range is half to 20 km .
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 22048
    Points : 22592
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Russian military intervention and aid to Syria #13 - Page 30 Empty Re: Russian military intervention and aid to Syria #13

    Post  GarryB on Tue Apr 23, 2019 5:21 am

    Personally I think Shturm and Ataka and Krisantema type supersonic anti tank missiles would be ideal... they don't trail any wires so fired from an altitude of 4-5km means a much higher flight speed than a ground launch, but the cheap and relatively simple command guidance makes them accurate and easy to mass produce... they are not heavy and you could probably give them small wings to improve their ability to manouver at extended range.

    No complex or expensive terminal guidance and dircms wont work to stop them.

    I would suspect with a command guidance control method you could lase the target to find the precise range and then command the missile to seriously overshoot the target until the last few seconds and make it dive near vertically on the target too...

    The launch tubes are small and compact and as the Mi-28 shows it is easy to carry large numbers on a conventional weapon pylon.

    From a good altitude we are talking Hellfire or better performance at a fraction of the cost... the 6kg payload should easily deal with vehicles and bunkers or rooms of a building... with a standard weapon already in production.

    You could make a wire bundle with say 8-10 launch tubes fused together as one sort of munition to hang from one weapon pylon and when all the missiles are launched the bundle can be dropped... the point is that you can spend more money on the avionics... very good optics and processing power can be used to make the missiles more accurate especially if a laser can track the missile and another laser can accurately track the target to provide precise tracking information for both... the payoff will be cheap and simple missiles that are effective.

    The optics and brain of the UCAV can be modular so after a dozen flights or so the expensive stuff can be kept and anything getting worn out or damaged can be replaced. Redundancy to allow damaged or failed parts to not stop the UCAV from making it back to base means twin engines that are good quality but allow for them to be recycled into a new platform if the platform is damaged during use.

    Modular design allowing damaged of faulty parts to be easily replaced so it can keep working in the field...
    AlfaT8
    AlfaT8

    Posts : 1806
    Points : 1801
    Join date : 2013-02-02

    Russian military intervention and aid to Syria #13 - Page 30 Empty Re: Russian military intervention and aid to Syria #13

    Post  AlfaT8 on Tue Apr 23, 2019 4:20 pm

    Well, it looks like the Shilka already had a very capable upgrade package.
    I would definitly send some of these to Syria, to cover the pantsirs and other site and systems.
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 22048
    Points : 22592
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Russian military intervention and aid to Syria #13 - Page 30 Empty Re: Russian military intervention and aid to Syria #13

    Post  GarryB on Wed Apr 24, 2019 3:12 am

    Interesting but I would have shifted the missiles to be mounted on the side of the turret instead of the back rear of the turret in the way of the radar and the optics...

    Having two boxes of four missiles... one on each side of the turret means more ready to fire missiles but also moves them out of the way of the radar and the optics... keep the missile tubes horizontal until they are ready to be fired by turning the turret towards the target... raise the missile boxes and fire.

    They could have Kornet-EM on one side and Igla-S/Verba on the other for a better selection of targets... or perhaps they could use SOSNA-R missiles which are small and compact...

    I would probably increase the height of the turret to give more room for more ready to use cannon rounds and more room for the crew...
    starman
    starman

    Posts : 333
    Points : 331
    Join date : 2016-08-10

    Russian military intervention and aid to Syria #13 - Page 30 Empty Re: Russian military intervention and aid to Syria #13

    Post  starman on Wed Apr 24, 2019 12:04 pm

    Why hasn't the recent Israeli raid with Rampage missiles been discussed here? Or is there a separate thread for it somewhere?
    I understand the Rampage compensates for longer range with a reduced warhead. So the solution is hardening?
    AlfaT8
    AlfaT8

    Posts : 1806
    Points : 1801
    Join date : 2013-02-02

    Russian military intervention and aid to Syria #13 - Page 30 Empty Re: Russian military intervention and aid to Syria #13

    Post  AlfaT8 on Fri Apr 26, 2019 6:21 pm

    Here's one of the prototypes, i wonder if this package has be ordered by the MoD yet?

    magnumcromagnon
    magnumcromagnon

    Posts : 5263
    Points : 5416
    Join date : 2013-12-05
    Location : Pindos ave., Pindosville, Pindosylvania, Pindostan

    Russian military intervention and aid to Syria #13 - Page 30 Empty Re: Russian military intervention and aid to Syria #13

    Post  magnumcromagnon on Fri Apr 26, 2019 6:40 pm

    AlfaT8 wrote:Here's one of the prototypes, i wonder if this package has be ordered by the MoD yet?


    Uhhh...I think this is a Ukrainian modernization (by looking at the user who posted it, and the typical videos they post), not a Russian modernization. Besides, Shilkas would have better modernization potential as BMPT conversions. Instead of having 4 23mm cannons, they should have 2 Gsh-23L cannons as the lower lower two guns, and one upper gun being AGS-30 grenade launcher, and the other upper gun being a 57mm S-5 rocket launcher, with a automated belt feed, with rockets being thermobaric with the new laser guidance kits to increase accuracy.
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 22048
    Points : 22592
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Russian military intervention and aid to Syria #13 - Page 30 Empty Re: Russian military intervention and aid to Syria #13

    Post  GarryB on Sat Apr 27, 2019 3:09 am

    I think this upgrade is a waste of time simply because keeping this vehicle in service means keeping 23mm cannon shells in use at a time when most other platforms that use that calibre are getting fewer and fewer.

    It would make sense to perform minor changes and upgrades that improve performance... like ripping out most of the old technology electronics the Shilka came with and replacing most of it with what is practically a few small electronic boxes and a couple of lap top computers which would be vastly more powerful and effective than the old systems... mainly because the old model stuff would no longer be in production and would therefore be hard and expensive to maintain, yet performance would not be great.

    The GSh-23 uses a totally different round with nothing like the performance of the original weapons and would shorten effective range rather than improve it.

    What you could do is simply fit a single 2A38M 30mm cannon, which would extend its effective range from about 2km to about 3km against air and ground targets and would eliminate the 23x152mm calibre ammo from the inventory, which saves money in lots of ways... because you don't need to keep those weapons or that ammo ready in storage. Anything that currently uses the 23x152mm calibre weapon can be replaced with a 2A38M cannon including towed mounts...

    Instead of turret mounted missiles, you could simply attach a platoon of Igla operators for each vehicle who could travel in an APC like a BTR-82A, who can deploy around the Shilkas with their missiles to find targets and engage them. The BTRs will use the same 30x165mm ammo as the upgraded shilkas too...

    There is no point spending good money upgrading a Shilka when it is about to be replaced again... Tuguska started replacing it in the mid 1980s and then the M1 model Tunguska entered service in the early 2000s, and soon either a Pantsir model or perhaps a 57mm gun armed vehicle will be supplementing it in service.

    Even a fully upgraded Shilka with new radar and new electronics and new missiles doesn't out perform a 1980s level Tunguska so what would be the point?

    If those missiles on the upgraded shilka are manpads then the SA-19 of the 1980s tunguska already outrange them by 2km and the new models reach 20km range targets so have pretty much 4 times the range, while the 30mm guns have twice the effective range and much more hitting power than the 23mm guns.
    avatar
    Vann7

    Posts : 4163
    Points : 4267
    Join date : 2012-05-16

    Russian military intervention and aid to Syria #13 - Page 30 Empty Re: Russian military intervention and aid to Syria #13

    Post  Vann7 on Mon Apr 29, 2019 10:03 am



    there are claims that Idlib terrorist tried to attack Russian base again ,recently with a major drones
    attack and some video images on Elint in twitter released..
    AlfaT8
    AlfaT8

    Posts : 1806
    Points : 1801
    Join date : 2013-02-02

    Russian military intervention and aid to Syria #13 - Page 30 Empty Re: Russian military intervention and aid to Syria #13

    Post  AlfaT8 on Tue Apr 30, 2019 11:44 pm

    Well if the Shilka is too much of a headache, because of it's 23mm guns.
    Then perhaps an alternative like the Strela-10M4, it would be a more attractive option there are plenty of these systems around and Russia itself has only recently started upgrading their own Strelas to M4 standard, so an export M4 package could easily be done for Syria.

    Properly networked they could become a very potent defense.
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 22048
    Points : 22592
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Russian military intervention and aid to Syria #13 - Page 30 Empty Re: Russian military intervention and aid to Syria #13

    Post  GarryB on Wed May 01, 2019 6:14 am

    The problem there is that the Strela-10 system is about to be replaced with the SOSNA-R system, which is a much better performing system by the look of it, and it has much cheaper missiles with much better performance...

    In terms of aide to syria the 23mm calibre weapons would be fine, and for export upgrades of Strela-10 is fine too... foreign countries will be using Shilkas and Zu-23-2s and SA-13s for quite some time... I remember in the 1990s South Africa offered an upgrade that mixed the SA-9 and SA-13 so it could launch either missile, so for easier targets you used the simpler cheaper lower performing SA-9 missile and for harder targets the SA-13 was there ready to go...

    In terms of value for money the Strela-10 relies on a missile nose mounted seeker for its terminal performance, which is destroyed every time the system is used... with SOSNA-R the optics are in the launch platform and the missiles are laser beam riding, which is much simpler and cheaper than IR homing.

    In addition to cheaper missiles, the system has much longer range with much faster missiles... hitting a target 10km away in about 12-14 seconds is a potent SAM system...
    AlfaT8
    AlfaT8

    Posts : 1806
    Points : 1801
    Join date : 2013-02-02

    Russian military intervention and aid to Syria #13 - Page 30 Empty Re: Russian military intervention and aid to Syria #13

    Post  AlfaT8 on Wed May 01, 2019 11:53 pm

    GarryB wrote:The problem there is that the Strela-10 system is about to be replaced with the SOSNA-R system, which is a much better performing system by the look of it, and it has much cheaper missiles with much better performance...

    Well, the Sosna still hasn't been deployed as far as i am aware of, and Russia is also in the process of upgrading the Strela-10s anyway.

    In terms of aide to syria the 23mm calibre weapons would be fine, and for export upgrades of Strela-10 is fine too...

    So the upgrades are fine then.

    In terms of value for money the Strela-10 relies on a missile nose mounted seeker for its terminal performance, which is destroyed every time the system is used... with SOSNA-R the optics are in the launch platform and the missiles are laser beam riding, which is much simpler and cheaper than IR homing.

    Either way the Sosna isn't ready yet, haven't heard about any unit orders yet.

    In addition to cheaper missiles, the system has much longer range with much faster missiles... hitting a target 10km away in about 12-14 seconds is a potent SAM system...

    True, although then there's the question of how many targets it can engage at once, after all it only has one Laser beam channel.
    Probly the only advantage the Strela has, i guess.
    Although there is mention of a small acquisition Radar to engage more targets, not much info on this component though?
    medo
    medo

    Posts : 3638
    Points : 3722
    Join date : 2010-10-24
    Location : Slovenia

    Russian military intervention and aid to Syria #13 - Page 30 Empty Re: Russian military intervention and aid to Syria #13

    Post  medo on Thu May 02, 2019 11:13 am

    AlfaT8 wrote:Well, the Sosna still hasn't been deployed as far as i am aware of, and Russia is also in the process of upgrading the Strela-10s anyway.

    https://weaponews.com/news/65349093-the-defense-ministry-is-preparing-to-adopt-a-short-range-sam-sosna.html

    True. Russia finnished state tests with Sosna-R in March this year and now they went in production. We could expect first deliveries late this year or in the beginning of next year. Russia upgrade only 70 Strela-10 to Strela-10MN, mostly for VDV units, which will use them untill new air defense complexes based on BTR-MDM will come in armament.

    Russian military intervention and aid to Syria #13 - Page 30 Master10

    To be honest, better actual replacement for Strela-10 is Gibka-S VSHORAD system, same as Strela-10, which is now in process of state tests. It uses Igla-S or Verba MANPADs and is more comparable with Strela-10 or as it is based on Tigr-M vehicle, with Strela-1. Strela-10MN is still usefull, as it is integrated in IADS with data link and have FLIR camera for night operations. Problem is, that it is from seventies and missile's IR homing head is not that good against modern small targets as drones, bombs, missiles, etc, although in Syria, they shot down cruise missiles.

    AlfaT8 wrote:True, although then there's the question of how many targets it can engage at once, after all it only has one Laser beam channel.

    Correct, Sosna-R could engage only 1 target with 1 missile simultaneously, similar as Tunguska. In Russian army, Sosna-R will take its place in the level between Tor-m2 and MANPADs with their self propelled variants like Gibka-S. Sosna-R coulod still give good protection to Tor-M2, specially in time of reloading. Baterry of 6 Sosna-R have 72 missiles on launchers and 6 channels to guide 6 missiles against 6 targets and their missiles are also simple and cheap and could be produced in large numbers. Ideally a baterry of 4 Tor-M2 will have protection of battery of 6 Sosna-R. that would mean 136 missiles in launchers ready to fire and 22 channels to guide 22 missiles against 22 targets simultaneously. This is quite important, when you have to deal with attacks with larger number of bombs, drones, missiles. Not many states could send such a large number of expensive guided missiles, bombs or drones against 1 target as noone want to fly too close to such defense to drop unguided bombs. In IADS you have to look on the SAM system layered in defense with other systems in higher and lower level.

    Sponsored content

    Russian military intervention and aid to Syria #13 - Page 30 Empty Re: Russian military intervention and aid to Syria #13

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Fri Oct 18, 2019 7:04 am