Forest Green
ACCESS: Above Top Secret
- Joined
- 11 June 2019
- Messages
- 7,724
- Reaction score
- 12,957
Yes.
Well then, by the same token, neither do reports of Ka-52s 'proving deadly' if we don't hear the counter points about the ones that get shot down. Agreed?
Needs significantly better MANPADS defenses, as well as more competent planners. Many of the Russian losses are ambushes set up on routes the Russian aircraft fly every day.The Ka-52 has I think proved an effective weapon in this conflict, despite the losses.
No camera likes getting a laser in its detectable frequencies to the face. Just like your eye doesn't like getting a laser to the face, you can only see whatever color that is.From what I am gathering with the updated dircm defenses of the ka-52m they will have abilities to degrade even iir seeker heads as well as others. Indeed with the enhanced speed and range of legacy weapons and the lmur and new sensor and communication systems the ka-52m is one of the best attack helicopters on the planet.
Like what? Name the defense system that faced the combat environment so intensevily siturated with AA assets, especially MANPAD.Needs significantly better MANPADS defenses,
You can plan the route safe against large AD-systems, but not MANPAD, which can be placed literally under every tree.as well as more competent planners.
The Ka-52 defense system removes up to 18 missiles of a portable anti-aircraft system in one flightNeeds significantly better MANPADS defenses
Majority of warnings comes from the false sources like flashes of shots, RPG launches etc. So that story about 18 MANPAD suppressed in one combat sortie is just another piece of propaganda or journalistic lamerism.The Ka-52 defense system removes up to 18 missiles of a portable anti-aircraft system in one flight
Probably layered defenses. DIRCM; chaff; flares; Laser warning system for Starstreak, Hellfires, and tanks playing skeet, with some flavor of antilaser aerosols in the chaff/flare launchers; radar warning receivers and jammers; etc.Like what? Name the defense system that faced the combat environment so intensevily siturated with AA assets, especially MANPAD.
It's a lot easier to ambush attack helicopters when you know exactly where they're going to be.You can plan the route safe against large AD-systems, but not MANPAD, which can be placed literally under every tree.
Helicopter losses is not a problem of themselves, but the problem of our combat jet aircrafts lacking the ability to recon and precisely strike in real time small, mobile targets like infantry or armoured vehicles. Thus, helicopters crew forced to risk themselves to exclusively do the job that otherwise could be performed en masse by the strike aircraft and multirole fighters, be those equipped with the modern sensors and PGMs.
But...but Ka-52 defense system has it all. It just don't give a 100% guarantee of safety.Probably layered defenses. DIRCM; chaff; flares; Laser warning system.
Strange logic. Helicopters operating in the areas where the opposing force is presented. And the opfor is using drones...in the places where it is presented. Predictibale? Yes. Avoidable with some magic planning? Impossible.We wouldn't have drone footage of shootdowns if the attack helos were not flying predictably.
So Russian have 133 Ka-52 and 102 Mi-28, but they lost 41 Ka-52 and only 12 Mi-28 though. That is nearly 4 times higher in loss rate.Cause it's the most numerous attack helo in use, it's going to bear the brunt of losses as a result.
Cause it's the most numerous attack helo in use, it's going to bear the brunt of losses as a result.
I highlighted the keyword. Ka-52 is using much wider than Mi-28N due to the lack of DIRCM in the latter's defensive complex, which is essential in the combat environment full of MANPAD.So Russian have 133 Ka-52 and 102 Mi-28, but they lost 41 Ka-52 and only 12 Mi-28 though. That is nearly 4 times higher in loss rate.
I think it's safe to say given the unprecedented amount of SAM's/MANPAD's/AAA supplied by U.S./NATO, any helicopter, regardless of it's type or nationality would find it hard to survive the Russian-Ukraine battlefield.Needs significantly better MANPADS defenses, as well as more competent planners. Many of the Russian losses are ambushes set up on routes the Russian aircraft fly every day.
Probably layered defenses. DIRCM; chaff; flares; Laser warning system for Starstreak, Hellfires, and tanks playing skeet, with some flavor of antilaser aerosols in the chaff/flare launchers; radar warning receivers and jammers; etc.
It shines laser at very last moment to target. Feels like more into operator training as these systems are laser beamrider which needs the laser to shine to guide the missile.
Such technique has been observed in use of Stugna ATGM against helicopter.
You have to have NLOS to achieve full utility of superior Western secure networking and remote targeting capability with good FPA imagers. The Russians can match our precision gunlay and ERA absorb longrange SLRP shots. In urban environments where you can actually hide tanks with overhead cover against airpower and RT, the fighting distances get so close that you cannot stay outside of overmatch distance against a 6,000fps round arriving with 15-20MJ. There is no 'rub some dirt on it and walk it off' at that level of KE.The anti-efp stuff is good.
Not sure arty entered this discussion
Moar Dakka is a War Hammer 40K reference in which the Orcs are the dumbest of the combatants but come at you in enormous numbers and have a fascination with massed firepower as overwhelming force as 'Dakka' (dakka dakka dakka, Battle Of Britain film covert reference).What is Moar Dakka?
..have been arguing that there is need to get back NLOS for tank guns introduced under FCS which started at 105mm
Drone cued NLOS defines the new maneuver supports fire replacing the fire supports maneuver concept being bantered about these days and defines hitting first.
Are u suggesting a proactive APS msle out to 15km?..would agree.
tanks and IFVs shouldnt carry full swarms that is for another vehicle and coyote is more toy garbage.
The current ocean of defenses do to small units what they are doing to them now and both sides will have synoptic awareness..Minus full spectrum "blast thru" capability no units have any capability. APS and counter-obstacle/mine is needed at the lowest level
MAPS
must be a base integrator for a small family of capabilities and deeper magazine APS (s) than trophy IMHO.
I generally agree, though if I can I want both a sensor mast and Iron Vision.But mostly, you just want to stay away from the cans. Cheap, CLGP, NLOS does this. NLOS lets you be a fish in the ocean.
I thought we'd decided that shootdowns don't really count as newsworthy in themselves? Unless they bring some specific technical or other knowledge?
STAFF, ERM/TERM, X-Rod, those are just the easy ones and most of them predated XM1111 by decades. There was a lot of overreach in the 1970s-80s, considering we were using 6800 series (Motorolla equivalent from to Intel 8088) and had just begun doing VLSI/VHSIC through the Pave Pillar program. We didn't even have eyes on the precursors to MMIC (One of the reasons AIM-120A was a decade late was that it was a hybrid RF electronics nightmare...).I generally agree, though if I can I want both a sensor mast and Iron Vision.
My mind boggles at just how long the US army has been trying to field some variety of NLOS tank gun round. STAFF, MRM, and I'm sure I'm missing a couple more off the top of my head. But IIRC only the South Koreans have fielded some variety of NLOS munition for tanks, the KSTAM.
I'm not sure I agree with that. Not survivable? correct. So make them drones so you don't care about losing the helo as much.Helicopters are on their way out since 2003 and Najaf as simply not survivable. Ukraine has proven this.
Except for the issue of magazine size, I can see wanting both.Which brings us to KSTAM. To my understanding, this is a single bomblet equivalent to BONUS (2-3). The round goes out, the bomblet dispenses and comes down on a parachute (like a Skeet), hitting threats at large elevational differentiation, endemic to ROKs mountainous east and limited (urbanized) coastal plain western target sets.
That's fine if they want to do it that way, their operational needs etc. But for fast moving MTTs in an open field Ukrainian Steppe or Saudi Empty Quarter condition, you really want a system that is coming in faster and can direct guide on the threat. As soon as the round, not the enemy, clears that 10km horizon.
You can still use a (silhouette pixel size fusing indicator) EFP to beat a Trophy style MEFPS, firing directly through the seeker.
I'd argue that good situational awareness is an integral part of fundamental protection.This is why we need to seriously consider what our top end caliber needs are as a function of how many and how fast (ROF) a total threat count needs engaging. I prefer 105 because _everyone_ is going to mount APS, after the debacle of Ukraine. And also because I don't expect every target to need a seekered round. But when they do pop up, they are almost certainly going to have DIRCM and Hard Kill.
Iron Vision is a cool system, if only because it is the fundamental baseline for Combat UGVs and protected vision in a dazzler environment. But it cannot be allowed to beat fundamental protection (APS), firepower (ranged NLOS) and mobility/persistence (lighter tank) improvements to the Iron Triangle.
If your intervention model is requiring a 20+:1 kill ratio, I think we need to talk about not being in that location in the first damn place unless you're going to send enough troops to have a realistic chance of winning it.Everything else (spaced ballistic/HEAT protection, NBC, manned/unmanned teaming) inherent to 'nobody hangs out of the tank' is just a convenience compared to NOT EXPOSING THE TANK to enemy direct fires. When you only brought ten MPF (in the back of five Barneys) to theater and there are 200+ threat T-90M and perhaps a 1,000 UAS organic to the threat, you cannot afford the LOS fight.
heavy fog, so controlled flight into terrain?
...notice how they kept the laser off target until the last minute..clever.
It shines laser at very last moment to target. Feels like more into operator training as these systems are laser beamrider which needs the laser to shine to guide the missile.
Such technique has been observed in use of Stugna ATGM against helicopter.
Ah no, it’s real easy to use (there’s reports of operators reading the manual, then successfully using it, first try), the laser is on throughout missile flight and the complete engagement could occur without the beam touching/grazing the target. It’s very clever, doesn’t home on light backscatter and believe unique but I don’t know how Stugna works so can’t compare/be sure.