Russia Defence Forum

Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Russian Army ATGM Thread

    miketheterrible
    miketheterrible

    Posts : 4713
    Points : 4691
    Join date : 2016-11-06

    Russian Army ATGM Thread - Page 21 Empty Re: Russian Army ATGM Thread

    Post  miketheterrible on Mon Aug 24, 2020 11:08 pm

    Let's wait and see. Probably inquiry will be made to figure it out. Could be bad batch but t-72b3 hit their targets and t-90 missed one. Dunno what was up with T-80. But maybe it is bad missile batch.
    LMFS
    LMFS

    Posts : 1930
    Points : 1930
    Join date : 2018-03-03

    Russian Army ATGM Thread - Page 21 Empty Re: Russian Army ATGM Thread

    Post  LMFS on Mon Aug 24, 2020 11:35 pm

    Isn't it possible that it was foreign crews trying as part of some weapon demonstration? If this is Russian crews hired by the manufacturer for PR purposes it was not a great achievement, to say the least...
    Isos
    Isos

    Posts : 6162
    Points : 6154
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Russian Army ATGM Thread - Page 21 Empty Re: Russian Army ATGM Thread

    Post  Isos on Mon Aug 24, 2020 11:44 pm

    Good thing if it pushes them to create a new missile. Their actual gun launched one is limited. With the new guns allowing longer munitions, even the missile can benefit of that improvement. Longer missile so longer range and longer warhead.

    But I doubt it has to do with the missile itself. As stated by Mike it is used for decades. It is probably a failed batch or the crew that suck.
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 25896
    Points : 26442
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Russian Army ATGM Thread - Page 21 Empty Re: Russian Army ATGM Thread

    Post  GarryB on Tue Aug 25, 2020 9:32 am

    T-72B3 and t-90 launched both one atgm and missed.

    T-80 launched 4 atgm and 3 missed.

    Pathetic result. Can either be that they used old missiles or the missile sucks.

    No missiles pretend to have 100% hit performance.

    Firing one missile and not hitting the target says nothing about the missile... most PK rates for ATGMs is 80-90% so one or two in ten will miss in normal conditions.

    The poor performance here however probably needs to be looked in to... perhaps they were not using them properly... a technical fault, or perhaps a bad batch.

    Would be true if it was 1 crew and 1 tank. The issue is in the missile or the sights.

    I am sure they will work out what the problem was and fix it...

    Could also be that it's not army crews inside but factory ones who are not used to fire with the gun.

    The purpose is for army crews to show their stuff, not factory crews... this is an Army event, not a defence exhibition...

    It is entirely in the crew as it is still manually controlled and not fire and forget.

    The crew would be responsible for loading the round and selecting the target, but these missiles are not manually flown like AT-3 missiles.

    The target sight should be locked onto the target before launch and should autotrack the target if it moves or stays still.

    The targets were pretty easy ones in open field and there were at least three different crews doing almost the same mistake. That's almost impossible.

    Not if they were all making the same mistake...

    Good thing if it pushes them to create a new missile. Their actual gun launched one is limited. With the new guns allowing longer munitions, even the missile can benefit of that improvement. Longer missile so longer range and longer warhead.

    The missile is fine... they are already developing new missiles anyway... the Sokol-V is one... but standard missiles seem OK... these are laser beam riding missiles that use the same technology as Kornet and Bulat, so there should be no problem with the technology.

    It is probably a failed batch or the crew that suck.

    Should be too easy to use for the crew to stuff it up... perhaps the missiles were from an old batch or the storage area was damp or their batteries have expired.

    When you say miss... do you mean got no where near a tank sized target, or do you mean missed a rubbish tin lid sized target representing a tank.
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 25896
    Points : 26442
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Russian Army ATGM Thread - Page 21 Empty Re: Russian Army ATGM Thread

    Post  GarryB on Tue Aug 25, 2020 11:34 am

    magnumcromagnon
    magnumcromagnon

    Posts : 6104
    Points : 6255
    Join date : 2013-12-05
    Location : Pindos ave., Pindosville, Pindosylvania, Pindostan

    Russian Army ATGM Thread - Page 21 Empty Re: Russian Army ATGM Thread

    Post  magnumcromagnon on Thu Aug 27, 2020 5:21 pm

    I leaning on a bad batch of GLATGM's delivered, specifically an older batch. This is the first time I've ever heard this happening, it's like the missiles have out lived their shelf life. Almost like food items, missiles have shelf lives and recommended use time-lines, and if I was to guess they were near the tail end of their use.
    Isos
    Isos

    Posts : 6162
    Points : 6154
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Russian Army ATGM Thread - Page 21 Empty Re: Russian Army ATGM Thread

    Post  Isos on Thu Aug 27, 2020 7:10 pm

    https://mobile.twitter.com/RALee85/status/1298695528700686337

    3 out of 4 kornet launched by bmp-2M touched their target. 1 missed its target.
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 25896
    Points : 26442
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Russian Army ATGM Thread - Page 21 Empty Re: Russian Army ATGM Thread

    Post  GarryB on Fri Aug 28, 2020 8:59 am

    I remember in the early 1990s there was a western delegation watching an exercise in Russia that included soldiers launching Konkurs missiles at targets.

    During the exercises the soldiers would launch their missiles at targets 3-4km away, but as the missiles approached their targets they would climb into the air and fly over the target and then dive into the ground beyond. There was lots of speculation at the time... was it faulty missiles or badly trained soldiers... was it disinformation... or were they displaying a new version that climbs upwards before impact and attacks the target in a diving top attack mode...

    The soldiers were from well respected units.... there was lots of speculation but I don't remember reading any followup... or definitive explaination from the Russians.

    Maybe they were using old stock that had faulty batteries... or maybe it was old stock that used old components that have not aged well... over time clear plastic can yellow so an optical port looking back at the launcher looking for a laser beam to follow might have trouble if it is aged... weaker batteries might reduce the performance of the control surfaces so they can't respond properly to keep on target... I would want to see the hits and the misses and even then it might not be obvious... it might just be pressure.
    Isos
    Isos

    Posts : 6162
    Points : 6154
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Russian Army ATGM Thread - Page 21 Empty Re: Russian Army ATGM Thread

    Post  Isos on Fri Aug 28, 2020 9:36 am

    In all the cases the missile changed its course at the last moment.

    It could be also someone with a small laser in the public that confuses the missile on purpose.

    Thry will have to inspect all that because the Pk of their missiles seems to be close the 50% if we ake all the shots and mix the missiles.
    Werewolf
    Werewolf

    Posts : 5291
    Points : 5494
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    Russian Army ATGM Thread - Page 21 Empty Re: Russian Army ATGM Thread

    Post  Werewolf on Sat Aug 29, 2020 1:28 am

    One missile in particular just went straight upwards before the target which is unlikely to be normal procedure from wire nor LBR guidance.

    guidance plattform would be my guess.

    Is that even possible to fool LBR with outside source? I mean they listen to a a specific laser designator that has its "fingerprint" by using a sequence of impulses in which it communicates only with the fired missile, so the missile doesn't pick up any other source.
    avatar
    Mindstorm

    Posts : 992
    Points : 1159
    Join date : 2011-07-20

    Russian Army ATGM Thread - Page 21 Empty Re: Russian Army ATGM Thread

    Post  Mindstorm on Sat Aug 29, 2020 11:50 am

    This is the complete report of shots of КУВ 9К119 Рефлекс by part of the four different tanks from Виктор Мураховский

    https://www.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=4225020990905027&id=100001915026868&refid=52&__tn__=-R

    Shooting Complex Guided Weapon, ranges to targets (tanks) 2400 . -2700 m
    tanks T 90A omsbr 27 minutes (from 23:34) MSA 1A45-T, KUV 9K119 "Reflex".
    1 - undershoot, slip
    2 - "boot" stall pointing
    3 - objective
    4 - misfire refusal of the FCS? As a result, the tank did not fire any KUV or a projectile at all

    T-80U tanks of the 4th Guards TD (from 31:41) FCS 1A45, KUV 9K119 Reflex.
    1 - flight, miss (clearly before firing self-oscillations of the gun barrel are visible, that is, the stabilizer is not adjusted)
    2 - flight, miss
    3 - "boot", disruption of guidance
    4 - target

    Tanks T-80UE1 4th Guards. td (from 42:04). SUO 1A45-1, KUV 9K119 "Reflex".
    1 - overflight, miss
    2 - "boot", failure of guidance
    3 - undershot, miss
    4 - target

    Tanks T-72B3 mod. 2011, without a single tactical sign, it is quite possible - from among those delivered by UVZ for tank biathlon, as indicated by the unpainted railway gauge on one of the cars and the Army forum label on the other (51:34). Sights 1A40-4, "Sosna-U", KUV 9K119 "Reflex".
    1 - Goal
    2 - Goal
    3 - Goal
    4 - Goal

    You can think of a lot of supposedly objective excuses, such as the expired assigned service lives of guided missiles. But after a fight they don't wave their fists.
    https://youtu.be/rIaCGCrNVB4?t=1415 "


    Very likely the fault for this otherwise unexplicable poor PHit performance of gun launched guided missiles that have proved in hundreds of instances Phit at 4000 m near 100% on the same tanks is neither the quality of construiction or storage of missiles (all those employed came fom the same batch) neither the proficiency of the crew (coming from very different area and all of excellent preficiency).

    The fault at 99% is from the repair and maintenance team tasked to prepare three types of those MBTs (Т-90А, Т-80У and Т-80УЕ1) among four for the demonstration causing the FCS and laser irradiator's allignment problems to majority of the tanks they have touched.

    The four Т-72Б3 instead that was taken directly from those of the reserve for the "Tank Biathlon" games ,prepared obviously by a different technical repeai and maintenance team have experienced zero problems related to sight, stabilization and missile guidance.

    flamming_python, magnumcromagnon, PeeD and LMFS like this post

    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 25896
    Points : 26442
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Russian Army ATGM Thread - Page 21 Empty Re: Russian Army ATGM Thread

    Post  GarryB on Sat Aug 29, 2020 1:24 pm

    It could be also someone with a small laser in the public that confuses the missile on purpose.

    Wouldn't work... it is not a normal laser beam, and the missile does not have a wide field of regard so it likely wouldn't even see the crowd.

    Thry will have to inspect all that because the Pk of their missiles seems to be close the 50% if we ake all the shots and mix the missiles.

    They will have serial numbers and can look at whether it was an old batch they wanted to use up because it is near expiry date, or possibly not stored properly.

    For all we know they might have tried to simulate a top attack algorithm that does not work with a two dimensional target...

    Is that even possible to fool LBR with outside source? I mean they listen to a a specific laser designator that has its "fingerprint" by using a sequence of impulses in which it communicates only with the fired missile, so the missile doesn't pick up any other source.

    My understanding is that the laser beam it uses is coded and has four quadrants... the missile looks back into the beam so the beam can be rather weak because it just has to reach the missile and does not need to reach the target and reflect back to the missile off the surface of the target. It also means the surface of the target is not important either...

    The missile looks back in flight and determines its place in the beam. A good way to visualise it would be with colour coding... imagine you have four torches in two rows of two... the top left one is red, the top right one is blue, the bottom left one is green and the bottom right one is orange. When the missile is launched it looks back at the beam... if it sees red then it knows it is high and to the left so it starts to turn down and to the right... if it sees green it knows it is now too low but still to the left of the target so it will stop descending and keep turning right... if it sees orange it knows it has gone right far enough and needs to turn back left a little. When it sees all four colours it knows it is on the path it needs to be.

    Now for the first part of the flight the laser might be raised a few metres above the target to avoid the manouvering missile from hitting trees or bushes or fences or other things on the ground... as the missile gets close to the target the system automatically drops the crosshair onto the target... with the missile then dropping down and impacting the target.

    Most of the time the target is autotracked by the video system with no input from the gunner.

    The missile would ignore any lasers outside its field of view simply because it can't see them anyway, and no amount of pointing a normal laser at it will simulate the necessary "colour" it sees.

    Obviously the missile sensor isn't actually using colour because the laser is not using visible light, but it can determine frequency quite accurately and so the colours would get stronger the further away from the centre they are so a deep red would tell the missile to turn quite sharply for instance as it might be well off target.

    As mentioned because the laser sensor in the missile is looking at the vehicle that launched the missile then smoke or DIRCMS are not much use till the missile gets very close to the target an enters the smoke cloud.

    The laser used for guidance is rather less powerful by an order of magnitude than a laser range finder, so if the target has a laser sensor sensitive enough to detect the beam they likely will already have turned it off because even their own laser rangefinder would probably set it off at that level.

    Thanks for the update Mindstorm.... Smile

    Sponsored content

    Russian Army ATGM Thread - Page 21 Empty Re: Russian Army ATGM Thread

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Thu Sep 24, 2020 9:46 am