Air Defense Anti-Tank System (ADATS)

[GTX]

I couldn't find a dedicated thread for this system, so here goes (please merge if need be though).


I came across this image earlier (see attachment) and was wondering if there was any more information on the variants shown, especially the Air Launched version.

 

[sferrin]

That ADAT LADS 5.5 ton would make a cool automated vehicle.

 

[GTX]

Agreed.

 

[Grey Havoc]

That ADAT LADS 5.5 ton would make a cool automated vehicle.

A relative of this, I wonder?

 

[Voltzz]

ADATS on a modified (lower and slimmer, to allow it to be carried on a c-130) Warrior chassis, presented on the British Army Equipment Exhibition 1988
EDIT: Found a much nicer version of the picture here

 

[NMaude]

Why did this system never go into production?

 

[Scott Kenny]

Why did this system never go into production?

It did, but just the Canadians bought it.

On the US side, it was a casualty of the post Cold War budget cuts.

Which is a shame, because it's a scary-capable missile.

 

[NMaude]

It did, but just the Canadians bought it.

I wasn't aware of that, is it still in service?

On the US side, it was a casualty of the post Cold War budget cuts.

I suppose if the Cold War had lasted even a couple years longer it would've entered service in the US?

 

[Scott Kenny]

I wasn't aware of that, is it still in service?

Retired in 2011, sadly.

I suppose if the Cold War had lasted even a couple years longer it would've entered service in the US?

Maybe. Would have needed to keep going long enough for at least Initial Operational Capability, to make it highly unlikely to cancel.

 

[NMaude]

Retired in 2011, sadly.

I suppose that after 12 years they won't be available for donation to Ukraine?

 

[Scott Kenny]

I suppose that after 12 years they won't be available for donation to Ukraine?

They'd be scary close to aging out, you do NOT want to be close to a solid rocket motor that has cracks in it when it ignites...

 

[Hood]

Yes, the Canadian's cancelled the planned upgrade as part of the Multi-Mission Effects Vehicle programme and retired it. They were never used in active service.

Thailand brought a static version integrated with Oerlikon Contraves Skyguard for airfield defence.

There was also a naval CIWS concept called Sea Sprint too.

 

[NMaude]

I'm wondering how well the mobile ADATS would've performed in Ukraine?

 

[Colonial-Marine]

I'd have to imagine it would work pretty well. It's hard for an aircraft or helicopter to fool that sort of guidance method.

 

[Firefinder]

Retired in 2011, sadly.


Maybe. Would have needed to keep going long enough for at least Initial Operational Capability, to make it highly unlikely to cancel.

As is the US Adats was basically a month away from IOC.

The Army had everything set for it, from the trainers to the first Adats Crew Class Graduated and waiting to ship to the first Unit to get them.

The Cold War lasted even 6 more months would have seen this in the units.

 

[DrRansom]

ADATs would be very helpful for the Ukrainian military, longer range than Starstreak, multi-purpose warhead. It could help keep the Ka-52 more honest.

The US military - with its practical absence of any SHORAD whatsoever - would be wise to look at resurrecting the program.

 

[Scott Kenny]

I'd have to imagine it would work pretty well. It's hard for an aircraft or helicopter to fool that sort of guidance method.

Laser beam-riding requires the launcher to stay revealed, though.

But yes, at the sheer speeds of the ADATS it won't be revealed long.

 

[Colonial-Marine]

As is the US Adats was basically a month away from IOC.

The Army had everything set for it, from the trainers to the first Adats Crew Class Graduated and waiting to ship to the first Unit to get them.

The Cold War lasted even 6 more months would have seen this in the units.

I know they trialed a few different secondary armament options but was one configuration decided upon for production vehicles?

 

[Scott Kenny]

I know they trialed a few different secondary armament options but was one configuration decided upon for production vehicles?

Wasn't it supposed to have the 25mm chain gun?

 

[Colonial-Marine]

Wasn't it supposed to have the 25mm chain gun?

At least one prototype had that and I've seen at a photo with what looked like a .50 caliber machine gun added as well. Maybe other configurations were considered too?

 

[Firefinder]

I've heard of like 3 different versions have 25mm on top, or two under the missiles, and talk of the same with 35mm insteads.

Plus an idea for a 50 cal attachment.

Have some images I have found on the net over the year.

 

[NMaude]

I wonder if the ADATS design could be dusted off, updated with all of the relevant technology advances in the last 35 years, resurrected and put into production? I'm sure that the US Army would happily put a modernised ADATS into service.

 

[Firefinder]

Honestly with the way lasers are advancing...

I wonder if you make a duel mode one.

A low power set for guiding missiles. Or rockets using the Laser guide hydra deals, likely can put a quad rocket pod for every Adats tube.

Anyways the laser designator could also have a high power mode for burning things.

Add in the 30mm M230 Chain gun with Proxy fuse shells.

Be a scary set up.

 

[NMaude]

What was the ADATS DoD Tr-services designation?

 

[Scott Kenny]

What was the ADATS DoD Tr-services designation?

MIM-146

Honestly with the way lasers are advancing...

I wonder if you make a duel mode one.

A low power set for guiding missiles. Or rockets using the Laser guide hydra deals, likely can put a quad rocket pod for every Adats tube.

Anyways the laser designator could also have a high power mode for burning things.

I don't think you can put a laser powerful enough to do that onboard an M113/Bradley sized vehicle. Or even on a HEMTT sized vehicle. Not for another couple decades.

 

[NMaude]

MIM-146

Thanks.

I still think that the US Army should take another look at the design and update it taking into account all of the tech-advances that have occurred in the last 35 years and put it into production (Assuming it passes the relevant tests).

 

[Firefinder]

MIM-146


I don't think you can put a laser powerful enough to do that onboard an M113/Bradley sized vehicle. Or even on a HEMTT sized vehicle. Not for another couple decades.

The US Army just field such a Laser, a 50 kilowatt one, on the smaller Stryker the beginning of this year.

With plans to push it up to 300 kilowatts in the next year.

Its not just possible.

But it happening.

 

[Scott Kenny]

The US Army just field such a Laser, a 50 kilowatt one, on the smaller Stryker the beginning of this year.

With plans to push it up to 300 kilowatts in the next year.

Its not just possible.

But it happening.

It took MIRACL, a low-Megawatt class Deuterium-Fluoride laser (some 1980s books said it was a 5MW beam, everything now just says "Megawatt-class" or "over a megawatt") roughly 5 seconds to inflict destructive damage on either a flying TOW missile or a flight-stressed Titan missile lower stage.

That's 25 megajoules delivered to the missiles to cause destruction.

Which is why I usually insist on a 100MW laser beam for not quite point-click-and-destroy performance (0.25sec per target)

 

[Kat Tsun]

Wasn't it supposed to have the 25mm chain gun?

Yes, this would have covered the dead zone of the ADATS.

I wonder if the ADATS design could be dusted off, updated with all of the relevant technology advances in the last 35 years, resurrected and put into production? I'm sure that the US Army would happily put a modernised ADATS into service.

The problem is ADATS was always somewhat schizophrenic in its design. Combining anti-tank and air defense is a bit like combining a belt-fed machine gun and a howitzer into a single cannon.

It was never really a good missile, being both too large and too expensive for practical use or mass production, due to the addition of a unnecessary and frankly detrimental anti-tank warhead, but it was very fast and the laser beamrider was hard to jam. The laser combined with the missile speed are the main reasons the U.S. Army wanted it.

A VT-1 Liberty with the laser beamriding versus Ku-band beamriding would have been wildly superior and probably seen service. More room for improvements in altitude and range (Crotale is up to something like 20 km ground range and 10 or 15 km altitude I think, which is double the ADATS in both regards) because it lacked the anti-tank capability and a more easily produced missile system.

 

[NMaude]

A VT-1 Liberty

I'm not familiar with this missile.

 

[Kat Tsun]

I'm not familiar with this missile.

It was renamed to Crotale NG after Thomson-CSF lost the FAADS LOS-H contract.

 

[Firefinder]

It took MIRACL, a low-Megawatt class Deuterium-Fluoride laser (some 1980s books said it was a 5MW beam, everything now just says "Megawatt-class" or "over a megawatt") roughly 5 seconds to inflict destructive damage on either a flying TOW missile or a flight-stressed Titan missile lower stage.

That's 25 megajoules delivered to the missiles to cause destruction.

Which is why I usually insist on a 100MW laser beam for not quite point-click-and-destroy performance (0.25sec per target)

The difference is how it works.

The Miracl laser was a continuous beam laser. It basically just fire a fairly large beam that due to thermal dynamics slowly dumps that energy to heat up the entire target til it basically melts. And is one of the more inefficient designs.

The Guardian laser Stryker uses an Ultrashort Pulse beam Laser. This use a smaller size beam which pulse multiple times a second. This cause rapid heating and cooling of the target doing mechanical and thermal damage to the target. Basically it is a far more efficient design allowing

As is it has successfully and rapidly destroyed multiple targets including a 80mm mortar and drones in both tests and training.

 

[Scott Kenny]

As is it has successfully and rapidly destroyed multiple targets including a 80mm mortar and drones in both tests and training.

How quickly?

 

[Scott Kenny]

Yes, this would have covered the dead zone of the ADATS.



The problem is ADATS was always somewhat schizophrenic in its design. Combining anti-tank and air defense is a bit like combining a belt-fed machine gun and a howitzer into a single cannon.

It was never really a good missile, being both too large and too expensive for practical use or mass production, due to the addition of a unnecessary and frankly detrimental anti-tank warhead, but it was very fast and the laser beamrider was hard to jam. The laser combined with the missile speed are the main reasons the U.S. Army wanted it.

I thought ADATs had an HE warhead to do more damage to aircraft, because it was a pure KE missile for tanks?

 

[Firefinder]

How quickly?

Classified, but fast enough to be consider good for CRAM duties for tge mortar, while the few videos of it engaging drones have it dropping them in less then a second from more then 1km out

 

[Scott Kenny]

Classified, but fast enough to be consider good for CRAM duties for tge mortar, while the few videos of it engaging drones have it dropping them in less then a second from more then 1km out

Well, released videos showing popping drones in under a second is pretty decent.

MIRACL had a terrible spot size, I have discovered...

 

[Firefinder]

Well, released videos showing popping drones in under a second is pretty decent.

MIRACL had a terrible spot size, I have discovered...

Yup, the larger then a dinnerplate IRC, compares to the Guardian Pencil.

Basically sectional density in principle.

Big deal be the Cram work.

Cause you only get like 4 second IRC to Detect, Identify, Track, Slew, and Lase the incoming for 80mm mortars.

So being able to disable one of those in the tiny amount of time is a big deal.

Edit: As for the ADATs warhead design?

Not that big of a deal that people made it out to be.

Leaving out how it will murder any aircraft it hits. And how we are using Longbow Hellfires to do the same job these days.

The thing was accurate enough to ensure a 90 percent hit rate with it getting close enough to frag the target to death the next 9 percent. The final 1 is the missile going stupid and fucking off.

The thing had 25 pounds of high explosive in it. Nothing short of an Armor Vehicle shrugging a near hit from that off.

 

[apparition13]

I thought ADATs had an HE warhead to do more damage to aircraft, because it was a pure KE missile for tanks?

No, it was a combined HE and HEAT warhead. As I recall it has some issues in the AA role because the HE part didn't have a good lethal radius. And it had problems guiding in poor weather.

That said, it really needed to be deployed so a mark 2 could be developed. You don't really find out where problems lie and how to fix them until version one is in service. And the base concept was solid.

I also really like the AGDS (air-ground defense system) variant with 12 ADATS in two six tube launchers and a pair of 35mm Bushmasters in an armored turret that was designed for the M1. I like to think of it as a BMPT, but way more capable.

 

[Firefinder]

And it had problems guiding in poor weather.

Needs to also pointed out that the Weather it had issues with?

Was the type of weather that combat pilots stay the hell away from.

They tested this thing a Saudi Sandstorm and the only issues to be had was trying to keep the target drone in the air to be shot down. Which it did get shot down.

The Laser apperantly uses similar laser freqs and set up as the StarStreaks missiles which is consider to have decent bad weather usage so...


The bigger issue was that it was a maintenance nightmare with less then 500 hours between mission failing break downs.

 

[Scott Kenny]

Needs to also pointed out that the Weather it had issues with?

Was the type of weather that combat pilots stay the hell away from.

They tested this thing a Saudi Sandstorm and the only issues to be had was trying to keep the target drone in the air to be shot down. Which it did get shot down.

Which is surprising as hell, because no laser likes air full of particulates...

The Laser apperantly uses similar laser freqs and set up as the StarStreaks missiles which is consider to have decent bad weather usage so...

Should be fine enough, then.

The bigger issue was that it was a maintenance nightmare with less then 500 hours between mission failing break downs.

Okay, that?

That needed to be fixed.