MarcellogoI am not referring to the sort of prop driven UAVs that lead Amiga to humiliate himself… UTAP-22 and MALD are both jet powered and are capable of flying fairly high and fast. (or low and fast) The point is that while they remain cheap, in many cases cheaper than the weapons that would be used to engage them, they would still be pretty challenging targets.
Of course it is possible to build low-cost SAM systems that could help balance things out, but you have certainly complicated things for your adversary. (especially given the challenges associated with telling one type of target from another)
Yes but paradoxically flying faster could end up making them an easier target when compared with the small prop that uses its own nimble velocity as a protection to certain types of treaths.
A MiG-29 and a F-16 are specifically designed to confront one with the other so engaging a 0,91 mach “high performance Ucav” is not a problem at all for them, taking instead something flying at less than 100km /h just over treetops definitively is, same for heavy SAM systems that can instead intercept an IRBM
Obviously, it can be also the same prop drone meet a Mi-24P or a Super Tucano on its way and it is dead…
MarcellogoThere is actually some merit to a variant of this idea. With missile costs as high as they are, and inventories correspondingly lower, there could be a place for swarms of very low cost drones/cruise missiles. You could see them coming, but could you, would you, shoot million dollar missiles at them? That is obviously the thinking behind something like the UTAP-22. The trick would be to create a drone with sufficient performance to be challenging to shoot down, but remain cheap enough to keep the cost advantage.
Something like the ADM-160 MALD with it’s unit cost of roughly 300,000 USD. Cheap enough to launch in large numbers. Don’t know if the MALD-V went anywhere, but certainly it is an option.
http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2010targets/Rutt.pdfTactical recon UAV’s, even a relatively simple one like the Searcher-2 (unit cost around 6 million) alleged to be perpetrator in this latest incident, are pretty expensive. Then again, when you fire roughly 5 million dollars of missiles at one and miss…..
UAV is not an easy target at all: small, low RCS, low IR, able to fly very close to terrain…
Above all they are not the type of targets actual AD systems are designed to engage.
This same aximetrical character of their use, leave me however quite dubios that they would a real substitute of conventional planes: as soon as they would became a major part of an aerial fleet, adversaries would structurate themselves to specifically counteract them.
Advanced version of systems like Tunguska,Tor, Pantsir but above all something like our Otomatic/Strales, able to engage also in ground combat, would be an obvious solution.
MarcellogoI think that Flight’s Uncle Roger once made that suggestion in his much-missed ‘Straight and Level’ column. (As the Book of Genesis says, there were giants in the earth in those days.)
Well, Cessna Caravan with Hellfires has made great services to IqAF.
And Piaggio P-180/P.1 HammerHead is just half a ton more.
MarcellogoCongratulations!
MarcellogoI’m not sure where you are going with this..?
Did you see the Mig-29 9.12 do any supermanuvere(post stall) prior to launching its missile at the UAV..
The nose pointing capabilities of Vanila Mig-29 is more than enough for shooting down UAV.I would pick a Mig-35 with its newer Fire and Control radar, newer IRIST, AESA or not, anyday over old Mig-29 9.12
I think we are on the same page here.
You said, sarcastically I think, that a vanilla Mig-29 is a old crappy plane with a old crappy radar with an old crappy R-73.
I make present is still a noise pointer, high AoA, low stall speed fighter with helmet cueing system and an off boresight missile, all ideal characteristic for a SMI mission.
And not, the comparison was not with a more advanced version of the same plane (captain obvious) but about the idea that just putting a 5 generation AESA radar on a 4.0 madeit automatically a 4,5 gen plane.
Flight pattern of a F-15 or F-16 (as they are the ones IsrAF uses) would remain the same: no high AoA, no noise pointing, no low speed handling and I’m not sure they have AIM-9X either…
So for this particular mission only, i’ll take vanilla MiG (and obviously any other true 4,5 gen plane).
MarcellogoThink it would depend by the type of scenario and by the tactics used. Mi-28/Apache and Ka-52/Cobra/Tiger /Mangusta would operate together to cover different roles.
Just look at what Russians are actually doing in Syria: not just the Mi-28 and Ka-52 but also the Mi-24P have found their specific use in with they respectively excel.
MarcellogoThere were several claimed (but unconfirmed) Georgian UAV shoot downs by an L-39 and a Buk. Previously, Israel has downed two UAV with Patriot missiles, one in similar location to the recent incident.
http://www.jta.org/2014/08/31/news-opinion/israel-middle-east/idf-shoots-down-syrian-drone-with-patriot-missileWhatever the reason for the recent failure, I disagree with the OP that this incident reflects overall performance of either SAM or AAM missiles. The reports are still vague as to what type of UAV it was, what it was doing, engagement parameters. And contrary to some people’s apparent beliefs; tactical recon UAV are not easy to track, target, and hit.
Add this to the comments from Tal Inbar in post #7, and the point is clear.
Yes, Slow Moving Interception is a mission of its own, some planes perform it better than others that are reportedly way more performant.
Low speed Handling is the most important paramether there, so jet trainers were widely employed until some years ago.
As an example, we used MB-339 with a underwing gun pod, not certainly the optimum, until the arrival of Eurofighters.
It doesn’t however means that you can’t give it a try with a more conventional fighter or a heavy SAM, just that is way more difficult and that in such a mission those that are usually are good qualities became defects.
MarcellogoFair enough.
But from my memories, i once saw an old 9.12 Mig-29 operated out from a Southern Russian Airbase, shot down a UAV. It was not cruising over the tree tops as some are suggesting with the one in Syria here..?
Nevertheless, the Russian mig launched what i believe was one Short range missile.Old crappy mig with old crappy radar and control unit launching old crappy R-73’ish..
I think there was some simple explenation back then why the mig managed to shoot down the UAV.. have to find it 🙂
But it went like; shooting down UAV is easy.. anyone can do it.
Old and crappy nose pointing, high AoA, low stall speed fighter with old crappy helmet mounted display system paired with old crappy high° off boresight IR missile to be precise.
In other world exactly what you need for a SMI mission.
Or someone there really think that just putting a brand 5 gen AESA radar and some RAM on a teen fighter would get you a real 4,5 gen flight pattern? Or that supermaneouvreability is just for airshows?
Same for Patriot: excellent system, able to engage targets at all altitudes, just not with the same efficiency against all types of targets regardless of their altitude.
Same can be said for all existing AD missiles but it is for this reason because the more different systems overlapping one the other you have the better.
MarcellogoUh?
Su-24
Length: 22.53 m (73 ft 11 in)
Wingspan: 17.64 m extended, 10.37 m maximum sweep (57 ft 10 in / 34 ft 0 in)
Height: 6.19 m (20 ft 4 in)
Wing area: 55.2 m² (594 sq ft)
Empty weight: 22,300 kg (49,165 lb)
Loaded weight: 38,040 kg (83,865 lb)
Mig-29
Length: 17.37 m (57 ft)
Wingspan: 11.4 m (37 ft 3 in)
Height: 4.73 m (15 ft 6 in)
Wing area: 38 m² (409 ft²)
Empty weight: 11,000 kg (24,250 lb)
Loaded weight: 15,300 kg (33,730 lb)
Su-34
Length: 23.34 m (72 ft 2 in)
Wingspan: 14.7 m (48 ft 3 in)
Height: 6.09 m (19 ft 5 in)
Wing area: 62.04 m² (667.8 ft²)
Unless te Su-24 could enter just with folded wings there would no problem at all IMHO
MarcellogoAirstrikes coming from T-4 airbase.
https://www.almasdarnews.com/article/russian-airstrikes-crush-isils-hopes-southwest-deir-ezzor/
MarcellogoLong overdue if you ask me. I doubt the ‘security considerations’ are any more serious than those applicable to Turkey. And the opportunity for a sale has been there all along (Finally Parrikar Admits Rafale Deal Nowhere Near Closure).
Well, with the actual political situation I would not be surprised if even long time NATO members would completely change their own international political position.
My country at first.
Marcellogoso what advantage does this jet have over an Su-25?
1) Cheaper to operate, probably. And still relatively affordable to buy, thanks to Cessna’s economies of scale (and the 20,000 hour airframe life)
2) Far superior Western avionics that can be shared among planes (FLIR sensors in the ISR payload bay, podded countermeasures etc)
3) Excellent endurance (5hrs at 150nm)
Downsides: no armor.
So, basically our Ghibli but 26 years later…
…and is a praise, AMX was at its own beginning the “ugly duckling” of our air force, now it will be much more missed than Tornado itself.
MarcellogoOnboard diagnostics are fine, but there is a lot more about aircraft maintenance than this. ALIS allows for limited autonomous operations before a connection is needed, in general you need a lot of computers these days to keep such aircraft in a serviceable condition, to plan and debrief missions, to generate mission data files and to manage the fleet in the first place which includes configuration management, scheduled maintenance task tracking and execution, managing unscheduled maintenance and ensuring a proper spare parts flow etc. There are typically dozens of support equipment needed to support an aircraft in the field, some of them are frequently required, others might be special purpose equipment that is rarely required.
Btw Israel’s experience is of limited relevance here anyway as the aircraft was designed to match US requirements in the first place. As said “let’s hope”. I don’t know the details and how it works out for the F-35.
I agree, I wouldn’t like that as usual any consideration made about F-35 would be considered just as a senseless bashing.
Just let’s wait and see how it would turn out to be operatively.
MarcellogoCheapest way? BETAB bombs.
Marcellogo*Sorry, can’t , it wouldn’t pass custom control
AND NOT in southern europe we don’t drink Grappa, Rakia or even the same Brandy in the dry season, now is the time of diluited or fruity beverages: Pernod, Sangria, Radler, Panache, Gemist, Bevanda,Bicicletta :p bleaahh better turn to fruit squezees that actually are having a great comeback there.
On the more serious thing, your argumentation seems to hint that the A-10 is just a notable exception to a well consolidated standard, pourposely kept simple thank to its peculiar mission.
Maybe on your part of Atlantic is so, there absolutely not: in Scandinavia and Russia is right at the contrary a basic prerequisite but also in the western europe there is a lot of quite sophisticated warplanes able to operate from small airfields and with just a minimum of logistical support.
So the fact that the USMC want the Bee to be able to operate from FOB is just to be expected as it was something they actually do with the Harrier, assuming instead that they will get it from a plane that has actually not yet completed its own development is exactly the false reasoning I mentioned in my own post.
Sign In
