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


    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2

    miketheterrible
    miketheterrible

    Posts : 4851
    Points : 4829
    Join date : 2016-11-06

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2 - Page 25 Empty Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2

    Post  miketheterrible on Sat Mar 28, 2020 5:10 pm

    ahmedfire wrote:
    Unfortunately many in the west see the Armata as the tank and the Kurganets as the BMP and the Boomerang as the BTR, while the Typhoon is the BRDM... but they are not individual vehicle types... if the Kurganets really is the BMP then what is the T-15 (the T-15 is the IFV version of the Armata chassis if you don't know).

    Yes Yes , that's exactly what happened to me when i read about these projects in many english sites . thanks Garry Smile

    That's why you are here. To get better informed on this stuff Smile
    ahmedfire
    ahmedfire

    Posts : 1373
    Points : 1551
    Join date : 2010-11-11
    Location : The Land Of Pharaohs

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2 - Page 25 Empty Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2

    Post  ahmedfire on Sat Mar 28, 2020 11:26 pm

    That's why you are here. To get better informed on this stuff Smile

    A lot of english sites are misleading data about Russian army , intentionally or just lack of a proper research from the writers . In arabic forums i see these shits repeated by some guys and my mission is to correct it , Russia should give me salary or at least one tank Very Happy russia
    miketheterrible
    miketheterrible

    Posts : 4851
    Points : 4829
    Join date : 2016-11-06

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2 - Page 25 Empty Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2

    Post  miketheterrible on Sun Mar 29, 2020 12:13 am

    ahmedfire wrote:
    That's why you are here. To get better informed on this stuff Smile

    A lot of english sites are misleading data about Russian army , intentionally or just lack of a proper research from the writers . In arabic forums i see these shits repeated by some guys and my mission is to correct it , Russia should give me salary or at least one tank Very Happy russia

    Because most of those English sites are American think tanks which job is to misinform people on other countries stuff.
    avatar
    AJ-47

    Posts : 189
    Points : 192
    Join date : 2011-10-05
    Location : USA

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2 - Page 25 Empty Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2

    Post  AJ-47 on Sun Mar 29, 2020 4:47 am

    George1 wrote:Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2 - Page 25 Kurgan10


    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2 - Page 25 Russia13

    In both pictures we can see the Epoch turret and the Bulat Launcher, but there is one differant between them.
    It seems to me that the launcher on the Kurganets mounted in a way that it can get a bigger elevation than the one on the BMP-3. IMO that's becuease the need to hit top stories in  building, and maybe the warhead for this missile/rocket has just explosive/incendiary warhead.
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 26297
    Points : 26843
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2 - Page 25 Empty Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2

    Post  GarryB on Sun Mar 29, 2020 8:32 am

    Because most of those English sites are American think tanks which job is to misinform people on other countries stuff.

    Part of the problem is they are not interested in the truth and the second part of the problem is they think the US and west are the centre of technology and civilisation... everyone is behind the US and the west and the only way they can progress forward is to adopt systems and equipment more like US and western equipment.

    I remember when it was realised that the T-62 had a smoothbore barrel for its main gun... the west had a good moan about how inaccurate such a gun would be ignoring all the benefits it offers... they also moaned about how the AK was useless at more than 300m so it was a silly weapon to issue to your troops because the enemy will just sit back and pick you off... a bit like the Taliban in Afghanistan tried to do with PK machine guns when fighting 5.56mm calibre armed HATO forces with no full calibre ammo capable weapons within their units... just M4 rifles and FN Minimi LMGs in 5.56mm meaning effective fire beyond about 200m simply wasn't going to happen.

    Western mantra is that the Germans developed assault rifles because they are smart... the reality is that the assault rifle was a combination of what the Soviets and the Finnish had already deployed on the battlefield... bolt action rifles for accuracy to combat ranges and short range SMG fire power over much shorter distances.. the Soviets learned from experience in combat in forests that fire power is important so SMGs were introduced in mass... when the Germans attacked their riflemen came up against Soviet soldiers armed with bolt action rifles with accuracy and fire power beyond the distance they could be effectively used but meant you could not sit back and out shoot them, while the SMG had close range fire power that meant fights in forests and urban areas made them devastating.

    The German solution was a compromise between a rifle and a SMG... they didn't need a full power rifle round because targets were not engaging other targets at more than 300m so it made little sense to make them effective beyond that, but the rounds they developed were more powerful than pistol rounds from SMGs so at close range you had the bullet volume but also some of the rifle bullets penetration to reach behind cover pistol bullets couldn't reach.

    Germany introduced Assault Rifles because the Soviet combination of the Mosin 3 line rifle and the PPSh-41 was too much for them... the Russians introduced an Assault rifle in WWI... called the Federov Avtomat 1916... but the Soviets are the leader of the second world and are not part of the first world like Germany...

    Sorry... bit off topic.... if you get a tank then I want a tank.... hell I couldn't even keep my chinese AK knockoff... and my FN FAL and my chinese knockoff M4 carbine... perhaps they could send me something useful like a nice bolt action 7.62 x 39mm hunting rifle... Smile

    Because most of those English sites are American think tanks which job is to misinform people on other countries stuff.

    It is all sales and marketing... if you actually thought about it properly for a minute you would realise this Kool aide is shit and is killing you and your family (there is no proven connection between Kool aide and cancer, but there are no scientific studies on it either....).

    It seems to me that the launcher on the Kurganets mounted in a way that it can get a bigger elevation than the one on the BMP-3. IMO that's becuease the need to hit top stories in building, and maybe the warhead for this missile/rocket has just explosive/incendiary warhead.

    All of the ATGMs come with HE Frag equipped warhead options. They are not interchangable in the sense that you can swap warheads on missiles, but you can change your load out to include HE equipped missiles and HEAT equipped missiles. The Vikhr has a switchable warhead where a flick of a switch inside the Hokum you can select HEAT or HE Frag warhead... presumably it has multiple fuses that determines whether it is HEAT or HE Frag... the problem is that on a modern HEAT missile those cone liners are often exotic and expensive metals so using it for HE frag is a bit wasteful, but it does mean you can use it for what you need to use it for at the time.

    I would suspect a new missile could use a smart warhead and I suspect this new missile is optimised for use against lighter targets where the front warhead might punch a hole in the target and the rear warhead might act to damage or destroy the contents of what has just been hit.

    The vehicles that have a 57mm grenade launcher probably already have a potent direct fire HE capacity so this Bulat missile might be more useful against moving targets like light vehicles, while vehicles with the 57mm high velocity gun could probably defeat lightly armoured targets much better with an APFSDS round from the main gun, so more HE Frag guided rounds from the Bulat launcher would make sense against aerial targets as the Bulat probably has better hitting power over medium ranges than the 57mm guided shell and is probably cheaper.
    avatar
    Mindstorm

    Posts : 1011
    Points : 1178
    Join date : 2011-07-20

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2 - Page 25 Empty Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2

    Post  Mindstorm on Sun Mar 29, 2020 2:28 pm

    AJ-47 wrote:In both pictures we can see the Epoch turret and the Bulat Launcher, but there is one differant between them.
    It seems to me that the launcher on the Kurganets mounted in a way that it can get a bigger elevation than the one on the BMP-3. IMO that's becuease the need to hit top stories in  building, and maybe the warhead for this missile/rocket has just explosive/incendiary warhead.


    The solution adopted spare a lot of weight because the volume occupied is lower and the armored coverage of the missile launchers is the same of the turrett instead of a separate one as in the  previous design.  

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2 - Page 25 00000010

    patent...

    https://www1.fips.ru/registers-doc-view/fips_servlet?DB=RUPAT&DocNumber=2713753


    The aim of the arragement of this system (retractable as you can see) as for the design of practically all the turrett-mounted sensor system and element of active defense system is to render them protected ,maintaining plain operativity, from wide majority of battlefield fragmentation damages , in particular air burst detonation of middle caliber autocanon ammunitions (up to 50 mm) and artillery rounds within a threshold radius.

    This come from the particular concept of operation entrusted to the new missiles in combination with reduced ballistic 2А94 autocannon.

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2 - Page 25 15772560717101

    The 9М134 Булат's main task is not to be employed against fortifications or infantry in defilade or enemy lightly armored vehicles placed in fixed fire points ,where the radio controled (choice coming from the necessity to expand range of working also in presence of aerosol obscurant and snow reducing the effective of laser induced detonation command) detonation ammunitions 3ОФ91 and increased penetration APFSDS 3БМ76 will be employed at range greater than virtually any enemy counter fire, but to offer possibility to engage enemy high speed moving ground vehicles and low flying vehicles (surveillance UAV in particular) from long range , a task where the realatively slow muzzle speed of the gun will produce poor results with the 57 mm rounds even with induced command detonation.

    The 9М134 Булат will be used also to engage and saturate (always from range greater than enemy's gun direct fire) hard-kill APS on the most advanced foreign MTBs and IFVs equiped with similar defensive systems - with MBTs the Булат, also in in pair, will allow the Корнет to pass unhindered by the APS protection), as well known the 57 mm rounds do not trigger the APS; this will be important in mobile vs mobile engagement against enemy IFV, because in order to achieve an acceptable probability to hit woth a reduced ballistic 57 mm gun you should close at range where the new 35-40 mm opponent's autocannons could return fire.

    Obviously the vehicles equiped with high ballistic 57 mm autocannons 2A91 will not suffer the same problems and for it will be implemented also single round guidance.

    dino00 likes this post

    Hole
    Hole

    Posts : 3266
    Points : 3266
    Join date : 2018-03-24
    Age : 44
    Location : Merkelland

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2 - Page 25 Empty Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2

    Post  Hole on Sun Mar 29, 2020 4:36 pm

    Great info. thumbsup thumbsup thumbsup thumbsup thumbsup
    avatar
    AJ-47

    Posts : 189
    Points : 192
    Join date : 2011-10-05
    Location : USA

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2 - Page 25 Empty Epoch Turret

    Post  AJ-47 on Mon Mar 30, 2020 3:00 am

    Thank you very much Mindstorm for your interesting thoughts and the launcher’s drawing and the intersting pictures

    I still think, seeing the drawing, that this launcher is build to achieve a higher elevation which is very important in urban fighting. You can’t get high elevation with the launcher that we saw on the BMP-3.
    It’s not a matter of weight and I like the idea that it’s kept under armor and get out only when we need it.

    To my understanding if this vehicle wants to fight against another IFV, APC and fortified post, it should have the AU-220M or the Dagger that is like the AU-220M but with ATGM. This turret has 57 mm high velocity gun, which has a grater range, more flexibility and guided rounds.
    We can add 30/40mm AGL to shot over the head of the enemy.  

    BTW, way to work with radio command to activate the warhead? You can tell it to detonate after certain distance.

    To hit flying object we need to have AAA system like Pantsir and 2S38 gun. These vehicles are better equipped to take the fight to any flight objects, than the soldiers in the IFV/APC.

    In the future war, the UAV will give us a lot of info about where the enemy is, and they will see us, to shout from the distance and stay away from enemy fire might not be an option. Tanks might not see each other. A loitering munitions that will fly before the troops will search and destroy many targets before the fight even start..

    Do you know the caliber of this baby Kornet missile? Range and type of warhead? Is it a guided missile or unguided rocket?

    Thanks
    AJ
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 26297
    Points : 26843
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2 - Page 25 Empty Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2

    Post  GarryB on Mon Mar 30, 2020 10:30 am

    but to offer possibility to engage enemy high speed moving ground vehicles and low flying vehicles (surveillance UAV in particular) from long range ,

    So they are not short range missiles... that is interesting.

    I suspected they would primarily be used against moving targets because the vehicle platforms seem to already have 57mm grenade launchers and 57mm high velocity guns which would be a much simpler and cheaper way to deal with stationary targets using HE frag shells.

    BTW while you are here can I ask regarding that photo you posted... it shows the full sized Kornet in the back and then the Bulat in front of it and along the front of the table from left to right is a 57mm grenade launcher grenade round that seems to be a rather heavy HE round... but next to that is an APFSDS penetrator with sabot and then on the far right is an APFSDS round lying down.

    The APFSDS round lying down looks like it has the same shape as the grenade standing up... have they made the 57mm grenade launcher able to take high pressure rounds so it can use large slow heavy grenades but also slim light very high velocity penetrator rounds too?

    The high velocity 57mm gun seems to use the full sized S-60 cannon round which is a big bottle shaped shell with much more potential for high velocity than any grenade launcher...

    To hit flying object we need to have AAA system like Pantsir and 2S38 gun. These vehicles are better equipped to take the fight to any flight objects, than the soldiers in the IFV/APC.

    There are going to be an enormous number of drones flying around in the future, but the new 57mm AA guns will use optics and auto tracking software and likely laser range finding... which is also what most IFVs will already have so it would make sense to also allow IFVs to shoot down aerial targets... they could be just as effective and they will be all over the place.

    Plus airburst rounds you can detonate in specific places would be very valuable in all sorts of roles and situations.

    To my understanding if this vehicle wants to fight against another IFV, APC and fortified post, it should have the AU-220M or the Dagger that is like the AU-220M but with ATGM. This turret has 57 mm high velocity gun, which has a grater range, more flexibility and guided rounds.
    We can add 30/40mm AGL to shot over the head of the enemy.

    There are two BMP turrets it seems... one has a high velocity 57mm gun and the other, which is this one has a 57mm grenade launcher.

    Most of the time a good HE round is more value than penetration... During WWII they could have equipped the T-34 with a high velocity 57mm anti tank gun and they did with some, but most of the time the targets are not heavy German tanks... there were less than 7,000 Panthers and Tiger Is made during the war, so the vast majority of targets were better dealt with a good HE shell and the 76.2mm has a much better HE round than the 57mm gun of the time.

    jhelb
    jhelb

    Posts : 915
    Points : 1024
    Join date : 2015-04-04
    Location : Previously: Belarus Currently: A Small Island No One Cares About

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2 - Page 25 Empty Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2

    Post  jhelb on Mon Mar 30, 2020 2:38 pm

    GarryB wrote:I would suspect a new missile could use a smart warhead and I suspect this new missile is optimised for use against lighter targets where the front warhead might punch a hole in the target and the rear warhead might act to damage or destroy the contents of what has just been hit.

    I would suspect that given the speed that these missiles are travelling at (Mach 2 and above) once it hits both the warheads - front and rear will go off immediately after the missile hits the target.
    Isos
    Isos

    Posts : 6426
    Points : 6418
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2 - Page 25 Empty Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2

    Post  Isos on Mon Mar 30, 2020 2:49 pm



    Some of you may know this game War thunder the youtuber who is pretty famous and makes great videos.

    Here it shows the use of 40mm APFSDS against MBT. The game is more or less accurate with pentration and armor values so it gives a nice idea of what the new turret with 57mm gun and its apfsds can do. There is also anti air rounds that are fired against choppers.
    avatar
    AJ-47

    Posts : 189
    Points : 192
    Join date : 2011-10-05
    Location : USA

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2 - Page 25 Empty Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2

    Post  AJ-47 on Tue Mar 31, 2020 1:28 am

    1. IMO the crew of tanks or IFV/APC in a battle situation will be very busy with searching the area around the vehicle for enemies. With the stress, the dust, the fatigue and bad observation, none of the crew will be able to look for flying objects.  So for the safe of the soldiers it’s better to use the proper equipment and let the professional AA units to deal with flying objects. We can use even the old Shilka gun and the Tunguska to defend the troops.
    You know who we say “Jack of all trade but master of none”. So let’s not put too much on the IFV/APC units and let them do what they do best.

    2. I can’t believe that the Kornet Junior, which we saw in the picture, has the speed and the range to engage IFV and keepthemself far away from the 30-40mm guns, or the 50mm in the future, of the enemy.
    For fighting against everything the Dagger turret with 57mm high velocity gun and Kornet/Ataka missiles will be the best weapon. For APC that fight in urban area, the Epoch turret with the 57mm AGL and the Bulat launcher will be the best fit.
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 26297
    Points : 26843
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2 - Page 25 Empty Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2

    Post  GarryB on Tue Mar 31, 2020 7:23 am

    I would suspect that given the speed that these missiles are travelling at (Mach 2 and above) once it hits both the warheads - front and rear will go off immediately after the missile hits the target.

    The standard Kornet already does that... modern ERA boxes don't deform externally, but do so internally, so the front small warhead on the Kornet sets off the ERA block, while the second warhead detonated at pretty much the same time punches through the now fired ERA box. Against targets without ERA the first front warhead punches a small hole in the target and the second warhead continues to tunnel through that hole in the armour penetrating through to the crew compartment.

    I would suspect this new missile could use a shaped charge front warhead and a rear mounted thermobaric warhead designed to blow through the hole created by the front HEAT warhead and to explode inside the target as it moves in.

    There is an RPO-M model rocket that does that... has a HEAT warhead in the front with a thermobaric warhead behind. The reason for this arrangement is that with just a thermobaric warhead to get best effect you need to hit a window or open door to get the rocket inside the room before the explosion goes off... having a thermobaric warhead explode inside a target instead of outside it makes an enormous difference in its effect.

    By adding a HEAT warhead to the nose you make the main charge slightly less powerful, but by using teh HEAT warhead to blow a hole in the target and pumping the Thermobaric material in through the hole and then detonating it as it expands and mixes with the air inside the target makes it orders of magnitude more effective in destroying the target.

    By doing this with the Bulat missile it becomes much much more effective at destroying moving targets like IFVs and drones... the HEAT warhead often just damages vehicles and would just damage most drones, but a thermobaric warhead then being pumped into or around a small drone and then detonated is likely to make the missile much more lethal and effective against almost all targets including buildings and vehicles and drones...

    Here it shows the use of 40mm APFSDS against MBT. The game is more or less accurate with pentration and armor values so it gives a nice idea of what the new turret with 57mm gun and its apfsds can do. There is also anti air rounds that are fired against choppers.

    In a Russian BMP with a 57mm gun it would have a 20 round autoloader, but I am not sure how it would work... is it just 20 rounds ready to shove straight into the gun to fire which means keep it empty and load the rounds you think you will need and then fire them, or is it 5 separate loading channels with four rounds each where you could have each channel loaded with a different type of ammo and select between them for each shot so you could have 5 different types of rounds loaded that you can instantly choose from and between and you get four shots of each... I would expect that would take up too much space... perhaps four channels of five rounds each so you could load HE Frag, APFSDS, Air burst, and maybe guided HE, with five rounds ready to fire of each type... or if you are on an anti armour mission perhaps APFSDS in two or three of the slots and HE frag...

    Of course the real Russian vehicle will have video processing and auto targeting presumably to the point where you could get it to aim at a specific part of the target, so the gunner would just push the fire button...

    1. IMO the crew of tanks or IFV/APC in a battle situation will be very busy with searching the area around the vehicle for enemies. With the stress, the dust, the fatigue and bad observation, none of the crew will be able to look for flying objects. So for the safe of the soldiers it’s better to use the proper equipment and let the professional AA units to deal with flying objects. We can use even the old Shilka gun and the Tunguska to defend the troops.
    You know who we say “Jack of all trade but master of none”. So let’s not put too much on the IFV/APC units and let them do what they do best.

    There would be computer support where targets that stand out on thermals can be highlighted as potential targets much like modern cameras can detect human faces and puts target boxes around any that appear in view so you can select one for the purposes of focusing.

    Crews of vehicles will be very busy because in addition to aircraft and ground vehicles they will also be looking for snipers and ATGM teams and enemy infantry as well as potential IEDs and also any civilians etc...

    2. I can’t believe that the Kornet Junior, which we saw in the picture, has the speed and the range to engage IFV and keepthemself far away from the 30-40mm guns, or the 50mm in the future, of the enemy.

    The Kornet it is based on has a range of up to 10km with a HE payload, so it would not be impossible for a scaled down model to have a range of 5-6km... these missiles will be mounted on very well protected vehicles that those 30mm guns probably wont penetrate at any range and those 40mm guns might start penetrating at 2-3km...

    For fighting against everything the Dagger turret with 57mm high velocity gun and Kornet/Ataka missiles will be the best weapon. For APC that fight in urban area, the Epoch turret with the 57mm AGL and the Bulat launcher will be the best fit.

    It really depends on who the enemy is of course... I would say a mix of both weapons makes the best sense as few opponents will have enough armour to make a 57mm high velocity gun critical... most of the vehicles we are talking about have guided missiles and 125mm gun armed vehicles with new anti armour missiles perhaps with 10-12km ranges and are supported by artillery and aircraft... there is not going to be a fire power shortage any time soon...

    I would think a special Bulat with two HE Frag warheads one front and one back just designed to explode and shower the target with fragments with supersonic speed would be an ideal weapon for a drone being small and relatively light and likely using laser beam riding guidance as most drones will have laser range finders and target markers already, so making it use a much lower power but still stabilised coloured beam to mark targets should not be a huge problem.

    Those drones spotting terrorists in light trucks can hit them straight away...
    Isos
    Isos

    Posts : 6426
    Points : 6418
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2 - Page 25 Empty Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2

    Post  Isos on Tue Mar 31, 2020 8:55 am

    2. I can’t believe that the Kornet Junior, which we saw in the picture, has the speed and the range to engage IFV and keepthemself far away from the 30-40mm guns, or the 50mm in the future, of the enemy.

    In syria all the atgm fire were in range to be fired back by the enemy. But spoting an atgm fire is in reality impossible even for a leopard 2A4, even the t-90 crew didn't saw it. They are nasty weapon.

    But the bmp 3 or kurganets carrying the atgm will be easier to spot specially with thermals so maybe range could be an issue. But then they will operate with manned atgm teams that have longer range and are hidden better.
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 26297
    Points : 26843
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2 - Page 25 Empty Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2

    Post  GarryB on Wed Apr 01, 2020 6:49 am

    Some of you may know this game War thunder the youtuber who is pretty famous and makes great videos.

    Here it shows the use of 40mm APFSDS against MBT. The game is more or less accurate with pentration and armor values so it gives a nice idea of what the new turret with 57mm gun and its apfsds can do. There is also anti air rounds that are fired against choppers.

    Should also point out that while the game tries to emulate armour protection levels and angles etc etc as accurately as it can... I do watch those videos and have seen him driving around in a PT-76 with the 76.2mm guns getting lucky kill shots on all sorts of vehicles it would never in the real world have any chance against... sometimes groups do work together as a real team but often the game starts and you go off and do your own thing.

    Also things like driving around in a ZSU-57-2 is amusing because infantry could snipe the entire crew rather easily in the real world... equally absurd situations like driving around with a Grad vehicle launching rockets directly at enemy target vehicles and destroying armoured vehicles... not realistic at all.

    It is also unrealistic in terms of engine or track damage and also putting out fires and the like... but of course it never claimed to be a proper war simulation... it is a game.

    In syria all the atgm fire were in range to be fired back by the enemy. But spoting an atgm fire is in reality impossible even for a leopard 2A4, even the t-90 crew didn't saw it. They are nasty weapon.

    This is an important factor... when playing a computer game you normally get an indication of where incoming fire is coming from through the game mechanics, but in the real world you probably wont see or hear the round that hits you.

    RPG fire is almost worse in that once it is launched the attacker can take cover and the short range makes the attackers job dangerous but it also reduces response times too.

    Also I would like to add that I have noticed that neither the Kornet tube launchers nor the Bulat launcher on the BMP turret does not include optics or guidance equipment so it must use the gunners sight to guide the missiles... to give the missiles extra range perhaps imagine a Tigr with optics and guidance on an arm that can be raised up about 2-3 metres above the vehicle roof and rotated in any direction with either standard Kornets or Bulats launched up at a 45 degree angle into the field of view of the optics to allow a much longer range ballistic trajectory to be used for both missiles... maybe?
    magnumcromagnon
    magnumcromagnon

    Posts : 6217
    Points : 6370
    Join date : 2013-12-05
    Location : Pindos ave., Pindosville, Pindosylvania, Pindostan

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2 - Page 25 Empty Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2

    Post  magnumcromagnon on Wed Apr 01, 2020 9:43 am

    GarryB wrote: to give the missiles extra range perhaps imagine a Tigr with optics and guidance on an arm that can be raised up about 2-3 metres above the vehicle roof and rotated in any direction with either standard Kornets or Bulats launched up at a 45 degree angle into the field of view of the optics to allow a much longer range ballistic trajectory to be used for both missiles... maybe?

    I really don't see how raising Kornet's 2-3 meters would increase it's range, when it already has a flight ceiling of 9km (limited by the max range of HE-Frag variant).
    Isos
    Isos

    Posts : 6426
    Points : 6418
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2 - Page 25 Empty Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2

    Post  Isos on Wed Apr 01, 2020 11:36 am

    It's just a game about only tanks. No infantray.
    There is a simulator mode where the game shows nothing, much more realistic.

    to give the missiles extra range perhaps imagine a Tigr with optics and guidance on an arm that can be raised up about 2-3 metres above the vehicle roof and rotated in any direction with either standard Kornets or Bulats launched up at a 45 degree angle into the field of view of the optics to allow a much longer range ballistic trajectory to be used for both missiles... maybe?

    Unlikely that the range would increase. It would allow however to hide the vehicle from enemy thermals begind a small hill or something like that and just pup-up the launcher and the optics above the obstacle so that it cober a big area. The enemy won't spotthe launcher if he is further than hundreds of meters.
    avatar
    Mindstorm

    Posts : 1011
    Points : 1178
    Join date : 2011-07-20

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2 - Page 25 Empty Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2

    Post  Mindstorm on Wed Apr 01, 2020 3:01 pm


    AJ-47 wrote:To my understanding if this vehicle wants to fight against another IFV, APC and fortified post, it should have the AU-220M or the Dagger that is like the AU-220M but with ATGM. This turret has 57 mm high velocity gun, which has a grater range, more flexibility and guided rounds.
    We can add 30/40mm AGL to shot over the head of the enemy.


    The fundamental change ,allowed obviously by the new technical advancement, in the design of the the unified family of vehicles of the three weight categories has been exactly capability by part of the iterations conceived to be employed in the first and second echelon of armoured and mechanized operations to deal (with various degree of effciency) with practically all the main opponent's main ISR and fighting systems to be found in the battlefield of the future; that capability has been computed to provide a crushing superiority (near-exponential degradation rate of its fighting potential) on similar formations of the probable enemy in the future battlefield.

    Enemy, you know, almost never not comply with your force's composition and while highly specialized weaponry with optimized design wil surely remain the centerpiece of particular roles and missions, the capability of all the other standard elements of combined arms formations to contribute to degradation of enemy capabilities will place a burden totally unbearable for enemy formations, above all constructed around western construction's philosophy.

    Just to provide an easy example: battlefield ISR UAVs, with obviously reduced performances in terms of range and altitude, are today in development both in domestic bureau and western ones to be integrated in the missions of infantry, mechanized and Army aviation (helicopters in particualr) formations, often directly on board of the single vehicle, to provide target positional data and third party designation for remotely delivered precison fire.

    While obviously exist in domestic formation a multitude of highly specialized systems that will be able to direcctly destroy the carrying platforms (new generation of AD systems, artillery and long range "almost authonomous missiles) or destroy single links of the kill chain (EW systems of several kinds, specialized multispectral battlefield obscurant, soft kill and hard kill APS, decoys, dynamic protections and within some years direct energy systems) the capability of practically all IFV ,APC, MBT to destroy those third party search and target designator elements literally crumble the same foundation of enemy integrated battlefield structure.

    This is a staple scenario : Several groups of incredibly costly FARA helicopters proceed at very low altitude toward the likely position of a domestic mechanized and infantry formation proceeding as spearhead, a group of them, among others falling instead prey of ambushing Army's AD and counter air helicopters elements, manage to reach the other side of an hill or a low mountain and guide with not LOS links a group of UAV to recieve an electromagnetic and optical picture of the battlefield on the other side in order to attempt to select some important target to be engaged with third party guided munitions.
    In a today formation you must rely on the action of specialized EW capable to distrupt the not-LOS guidance and data sharing link of those UAVs or rely specialized AD elements to actively destroy them, in a future formation practically ALL ground vehicles with robotized turretts in that formation integrated in an unified management systems will be more than capable to destroy those UAVs, moreover not specialized vehicles such as MBTs will be capable to deliver stand-off terminally guided ammunitions potentially also guided or corrected by friendly UAVs to destroy those FARA helicopters from well beyond LOS , and those helicopters will have a very very hard time to destroy those UAVs by its own for unavoidable volume, weight, cost and time of construction limits of those platforms.


    Returning to the Эпоха turrett it is clear that against static targets ,including ATGM infantry squads and enemy LAVs in preconstructed firing positions will be not capable to return fire at the range available to 2А94 autocannon and that include also the "pseudo" 50 mm rounds (in reality based on 35 mm round case and therefore with sensibly reduced perfomances) of Bushmaster III.

    3БМ76 APFSDS and guided 9М134 Булат together with the integrated soft and hard kill APS and new dynamic and passive composition of armor of Курганец-25 will offer to it a crushing advantage in comparison with today design of, at example, OMFV in mobile engagement and that without any need of highly ballistic 57 mm autocannon that will be anyhow integrated in other meneber of the three families.

    dino00 likes this post

    avatar
    AJ-47

    Posts : 189
    Points : 192
    Join date : 2011-10-05
    Location : USA

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2 - Page 25 Empty Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2

    Post  AJ-47 on Thu Apr 02, 2020 3:13 am

    If I understand your idea, and my English is not so good as yours, you think that the distraction of the ISR equipment and the communication between the ISR units and the user is very important, on tha
    I agree with you 100%, but I don’t see how you going to achieve this goal, there is no way that you can put a blanket of EW on the enemy. Some of the ISR will be on satellite that might be launched when the war will start, some of them will be on planes that will fly far away from the warzone, some will be on a mast that pops up from ISR vehicles, and there is no way to take them out. More then that the ISR flying unit can take off from any vehicle and some of them have a size of a bird.

    tKurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2 - Page 25 Usa_dr10[url=%0A%0Ahttps://servimg.com/view/17449660/109]Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2 - Page 25 Usa_dr11[/url]
    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2 - Page 25 Usa_dr12

    We can avoid the use of third party if we use loitering munition that will hit the target without a third party intervention. We can also use missile that will be guided to the target by the picture of the target.

    The only performance that we lose with 50mm gun is the velocity speed, but it come with a bigger warhead so it’s probably a fair trade. BTW what gun is the 2A94?

    I’m not familiar with these rounds, what I know that the gun on the Kurganets is 30mm that is going to replace by the 57mm gun.
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 26297
    Points : 26843
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2 - Page 25 Empty Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2

    Post  GarryB on Thu Apr 02, 2020 5:43 am

    I really don't see how raising Kornet's 2-3 meters would increase it's range, when it already has a flight ceiling of 9km (limited by the max range of HE-Frag variant).

    When I say firing it at a 45 degree angle I mean lofting it up into the air on a ballistic trajectory like an artillery shell... Kornets are powered but have no wings to hold them in the air so with their stabilisers and control surfaces they are kept angled up in flight a few degrees constantly climbing to counter the rate at which they would actually be falling if they were unpowered like a bullet.

    Launching them up at a 45 degree angle should allow them to climb 6-10km in altitude and then they could dive down on the target almost like the trajectory of a mortar shell... a ballistic flight path to maximise flight range... the main problem would be for the guidance system to direct the laser beam that directs the missile to get it to fly such a path... it might require a different shaped sensor at the back of the missile to detect the missiles position in the laser beam at extremely shallow angles...

    It's just a game about only tanks. No infantray.

    It is also a game played by people with no experience in warfare and no interest in tactics or personal survival because even when you die you get to respawn so you can do stupid things and really brave things knowing the consequences is points in a game.

    Unlikely that the range would increase. It would allow however to hide the vehicle from enemy thermals begind a small hill or something like that and just pup-up the launcher and the optics above the obstacle so that it cober a big area. The enemy won't spotthe launcher if he is further than hundreds of meters.

    But that is the thing... laser beam riding missiles are line of sight weapons so the only way you could use it to extend range and also fire from behind cover would be if you coordinate the attack with a drone with line of sight view of the target.

    Very simply when you launch a Kornet it is launched in front of the launchers optics and there might be half a second where the missile cannot see the laser field from the launcher and so it just keeps flying forward and level... it will detect the beam and therefore also its position in the beam and manouver itself to get to the centre of the beam and therefore also the point of aim of the launcher directing the beam...

    Now imagine a case where a vehicle is on the ground in front of a drone that is at... say 4,000m altitude... the vehicle on the ground is looking at the video feed fro the drone and sees in front of it but behind buildings and a low hill and some trees... 6 kms away is an enemy vehicle... say a Chapparal air defence vehicle... which makes it a pretty dangerous vehicle and worth attacking... the vehicle can't see the target but the drone can point a beam at the target... remember unlike a normal laser homing missile where the powerful laser is pointed at the target so when you launch your weapon the laser goes from the marker to the target and reflects in all directions so the missile launched from a vehicle marking the target itself needs to be able to see the laser reflections that have gone from the target marker laser to the target and reflected all the way back to the launch platform... so very powerful laser beam. Replace it with a beam rider... when you launch the missile the missile is looking back at the launch platform directly at the laser source... no reflections off anything and even at the target the laser is only travelling the distance to the target... not there and back so the laser can be much much less powerful.

    At the start of the engagement the drone might point the laser 400m beyond the target so it wont know a laser guided missile is on the way... the vehicle launches its missile upwards at 45 degrees... with the drone at 4km altitude that means for the first 4km of flight the missile will be climbing to get into the centre of the beam... for the next 2km of flight it will be diving at a relatively shallow angle at the target which is 6km away... the launch vehicle is free to do as it pleases of course now as it is not controlling the missile. As the missile approaches the target the laser beam can be aimed precisely at the target and boom.

    The point is that you can do this smarter too... getting the missile to climb means it can fly faster... the missile will move through the thinner air at 4km faster than it will at sea level and if you wanted to hit a target at extended range you could optimise the altitude of the drone... the standard missiles range is 6km so having a drone at 5km altitude with perhaps a steeper climb could then mean a gliding attack engine off at targets 7-8km away perhaps... optimise the flight path to the target to equal the sink rate of the un-powered missile and you can extend the range... and that is what I was suggesting for Bulat missiles because their optics and laser beam they ride are not part of the launcher so they should be able to do it...

    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 26297
    Points : 26843
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2 - Page 25 Empty Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2

    Post  GarryB on Thu Apr 02, 2020 5:47 am

    Regarding drones... even very small drones the best solution is a shotgun blast... the main problem there is that shotgun blasts by definition are very short ranged... but a 57mm gun can be used as a very effective shotgun with airburst ammo... and if most vehicles have one (BMPs) or a smaller equivalent (BTRs with 30mm and new airburst rounds), or bigger equivalent (125mm for tanks and 152mm for artillery), then the airspace starts to become less crowded... also keep in mind that the Russians are already making and using their own drones and when it comes to cost effective cheap swarm drones do you put your money on a western company or a Russian or Chinese company... and that is just the brute force method... EM weapons will also be used with a range of other things too...
    avatar
    Mindstorm

    Posts : 1011
    Points : 1178
    Join date : 2011-07-20

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2 - Page 25 Empty Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2

    Post  Mindstorm on Thu Apr 02, 2020 10:08 pm

    AJ-47 wrote:I agree with you 100%, but I don’t see how you going to achieve this goal, there is no way that you can put a blanket of EW on the enemy.

    Domestic EW products today, not in future, fully cover and is capable to distrupt the functions of practically the entire spectrum of ISR and weapon guidance means - from small tactical level up to space - , but this notion is not what pertain to the point in object , the systems of what we talk here are the numerous and widely used short to medium weight tactical UAVs used to gain a "picture" (electromagnetic and/or optical) of the enemy-occupied battlefield area at operationally-relevant ranges.

    Those small and mid weight tactical UAVs (contrarely to those , with very high unit cost, that proceed at long range and at high altitude that are easy and very "paying" targets for AD elements),loitering in an area attempt to discover the enemy and provide positional correction data for enemy long range fire and often laser irradiation for PGMs delivered from remote against moving targets (in 99% of the video you see with bombs or missiles that hit a moving target you must image that there is a laser pointed ,irradiated from relatively close range from the delivering platform or from friendly elements very close to that target).

    Is the distruption of those kind of tactical UAVs - range of operation of 15 km or more ,of class of RQ-7 Shadow - and obviously also larger UAVs that proceed at low altitude to avoid the destruction by part of enemy Air Defense elements (as happened just in Syria in the Idlib area, only some weeks ago) that will literally collapse the structure of today networked warfare concept and in particular western-type military force structure and system composition.



    AJ-47 wrote:More then that the ISR flying unit can take off from any vehicle and some of them have a size of a bird.

    We talk of different capabilities here AJ-47.
    The very small UAVs you have pointed out ,like the Norwegian Black-Hornet micro helicopter



    https://www.flir.ca/globalassets/imported-assets/document/black-hornet-prs-spec-sheet.pdf

    with range of 2 km at a speed of 6 m/s could be maybe used in some COIN operations by some wasteful western operator or ever find some utility in few special force missions but do not receive even a single sight by domestic Ground Forces planners that search means to find, in major wars against very advanced opponents, enemy presence and possibly nature at enormous distances so to sever satellite and communication links in the area and immediately cue against the area massive fire of artillery ,MLRS, MBT and IFV while letting advancing infantry occupy those positions and finish the survivors.

    An enemy vehicle with several gold-plated micro UAVs on board ,with a very low speed and a range of 2 km, will only be very well accepted by Federation's officials on the battlefield, it will liquidated from wide stand-off range by practically all the domestic ground fighting elements, even new APCs and infantry weapons; the presence of this class of UAVs literally produce zero effects in a conflict against an advanced enemy Wink



    About loitering munitions, such as Switchblade,

    https://www.avinc.com/uas/view/switchblade

    them represent nothing more than another offensive mean (conceived as the long arms of infantry in future battlefield) that fully depend from the data collected and enemy positions discovered previously by area search platforms just like the tactical UAVs ; from that the importance to quickly destroy that fundamental link of the enemy ISR and kill chain.


    Just for knowledge there are domestic equivalents ,with the usual large stand-off edge against foreign counterparts like Ланцет-1 and Ланцет-3

    https://rostec.ru/news/udarnyy-bespilotnik-lantset-kope-xxi-veka/

    dino00 likes this post

    avatar
    AJ-47

    Posts : 189
    Points : 192
    Join date : 2011-10-05
    Location : USA

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2 - Page 25 Empty Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2

    Post  AJ-47 on Fri Apr 03, 2020 2:35 am

    Mindstorm wrote:
    AJ-47 wrote:
    I agree with you 100%, but I don’t see how you going to achieve this goal, there is no way that you can put a blanket of EW on the enemy.

    Thank you for your answer and I appreciate your knowledge.
    Electronic Warfare is not an easy thing to win, you have many different radio systems and they know how to “jump” between different frequency and I’m not sure that you can follow them.
    More then that your enemy will find the entire radiated units and put them out of action.

    More then that, the smart system doesn’t need to talk any more, ”link 16” will do the job without say a word.

    A smart enemy will have missiles that will release from a plan far away from the target, it will have the path to the target in his head and could by-pass the AD systems on the way without using GPS, and when the missiles get close to the target the smart warhead, that has the picture of the target in his head, will find his way to the target hit it and destroy it.

    As for loitering munitions:
    An Israel Company Uvision has a big line of Loitering munitions for every need in the battlefield for infantry or mechanize units.

    The Israeli Hero-30 launch from the ground.
    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2 - Page 25 Israel10


    And for you a nice link:
    https://uvisionuav.com/products/#
    miketheterrible
    miketheterrible

    Posts : 4851
    Points : 4829
    Join date : 2016-11-06

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2 - Page 25 Empty Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2

    Post  miketheterrible on Fri Apr 03, 2020 4:39 am

    As someone who has a family member in the military that deals with radar - that's not how EW works

    Modern EW systems blast the enemy systems and subsystems with high frequency, high wattage power to either fry or blind a system.  Doesn't matter what frequency they operate at.

    Ground based systems can more or less scramble a bombers radar and comm system by hitting it with high wattage of radiation. Ground based systems will always be more powerful as they have huge resources behind them to power it's generator.
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 26297
    Points : 26843
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2 - Page 25 Empty Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2

    Post  GarryB on Fri Apr 03, 2020 11:49 am

    Drones are going to be everywhere... most artillery units are going to have drone rounds they can launch towards enemy positions to monitor targets during attack and determine if a follow up attack will be needed or not... hell infantry units already carry 40mm grenades that consist of a camera and a parachute and can be launched up to 500m into the air above the target and then falls to the ground under a parachute transmitting a 180 degree view of the ground below it as it falls to the small TV screen carried by the squad commander... how long before it is a disposable rocket that launches several kms into the air and out over enemy held territory... a 140mm model could be a powered unit so a rocket launches it rapidly up into the air but a drone deploys with cameras and propellers and it flys around the battlespace for the next four hours... and of course most Russian units these days have drone support units... and likely developing datalinks to aircraft including attack aircraft and helicopters to get a better view of the area and allow the commander of the troops on the ground to pass on target information to the guy doing the target removing above...

    Drones are going to be everywhere... flying, walking, rolling, swimming... bouncing... a lot of it needs to be dealt with but having your soldiers shoot them down reveals their position to any enemy forces monitoring them... better to send in drones to deal with the problem perhaps? ....together with conventional air defence of course.

    Sponsored content

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2 - Page 25 Empty Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Fri Oct 30, 2020 5:28 pm