MarcellogoSurprise, Assad makes a visit to Moscow.
What a slap in the face to the “Assad must go!” crowd.
MarcellogoJobar siege is going to beat the duration of the WWII Leningrad one.
So it is only to be expected such a distruction.
MarcellogoQuite Interesting article in the link that had been placed in your post above about the view in Russia over the satellite guided weapons.
As well with the article in the link provided by Austin about the new KAB 250 bellow:
http://sputniknews.com/russia/20151018/1028696831/russia-supersonic-bomb.html
This new version of the KAB 250 has been described in the article that would be equipped with INS ( Inertial navigation system) until the head seeker wit IIR could be able to make the lock over the target, without any mention about the GPS / Glonass channel.
The description in article would put this new KAB 250 very close to the concept from KAB 500Kr that had been proposed in the past with head seeker with IIR but without GPS/Glonass receivers . However it was not described in the article about this new version of the KAB 250 would have besides the inertial navigation also a GPS / Glonass channel, maybe it were just omitted in the article.
About the image from new KAB 250 in the link I would guess that in rear fins there are four antennas from GPS / Glosnass. Maybe it would be more a backup of the inertial navigation system, since the latter would be the main navigation system until the head seeker with IIR will be able to lock on the programmed target.
As I don’t have much knowledge about the Russians, so I would guess they has not been relying at the same degree as the US about the concept from GPS / Glonass as primary system to designate targets , such as the US has shown so far in the case of JDAM series with GPS.
Although both KAB 1500S and KAB 500S had been testing since 2005 with GPS / Glonass receivers and INS, which would matches for the large series of JDAM from US, but so far it appeared that only KAB 500S were adopted by Russia in last year.
However I suppose the Russians has seen the KAB 500S more like guided bomb with inertial navigation as back up by GPS / Glonass receivers, once the GPS/ Glonass signal could be blocked or jammed in the event of confrontation with powerful nations able to accomplish this.
In case of the confrontations like in Syria today the KAB 500S has been certainly used at full mode with GPS/Glonass receivers as well INS, once the insurgents has not been capable for jamming the signal from GPS/Glonass.
By the time I know that heavy KAB 1500S with Glonass / INS has been tested in the Russian Air Force for years, yet I do not know if these were adopted for Russia or even used in Syria, just as the light KAB 250L/S.
About the new KAB 250 with IIR could have been only forgotten in the article the mention about the capability from GPS/Glonass receivers, otherwise it new KAB 250 maybe has been designed for confrontations more complex that has been tragically happening in Syria today, once this new version will more expensive than the legacy KAB 250L/S.
Yes, you right: there is a discordance between the part referring to confrontation with an image previously set in memory that joined to the satellite guided mention would suggest a TERCOM guide system and the illustration referring instead to an IIR weapon set to engage moving target.
In the second case the image in memory doesn’t fit anymore and the GLONASS midcourse guidance would be redundant as the engagement would be anyway at within sight distance.
In my opinion Sputnik has made its usual mess, anyone know the producer site for a cross reference? And know Russian?
It is a typical problem, Russian nomenclature is different from NATO one so misunderstanding is frequent, even without the use of translator.
Marcellogointeresting footage
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Q60yBQG8XI
COLOR ME IMPRESSED.
AND SHAMEFUL, IT IS PURE WAR PORNOGRAFY.
MarcellogoThread officially revived!
Just to note how in passing between the vanilla Jdams to the hybrid ones the GPS guidance changed function and became a means of mid-course guidance while terminal homing is usually done trough
other guidance systems.
This is because they are intended to be used as glide bombs in order to increase stand off distance.
So we have here two different Developmental path between the West and the East when it came to air launched weapons.
In one they envisage to perform CAS mission using SDB launched from 20000 feet and an hundred km distance, the other they use SU-24 or/and -25 with OFAB bomb, rocket pods and 30 mm gun.
Something in the middle, not?
Not a surprise USAF want so badly to retire A-10: it is not about the plane, it is just in the wrong aviation!:rolleyes:
Now according to what they showed in the latest MAKS also Russians have developed several types of stand off weapons , comprised a Kab-250 TERCOM/GLONASS bomb, so they maybe have finally found a place for them in their own arsenal,surely a smaller one than in the west but who know, maybe just the right one for such type of weapons.
MarcellogoThread officially revived!
Just to note how in passing between the vanilla Jdams to the hybrid ones the GPS guidance changed function and became a means of mid-course guidance while terminal homing is usually done trough
other guidance systems.
This is because they are intended to be used as glide bombs in order to increase stand off distance.
So we have here two different Developmental path between the West and the East when it came to air launched weapons.
In one they envisage to perform CAS mission using SDB launched from 20000 feet and an hundred km distance, the other they use SU-24 or/and -25 with OFAB bomb, rocket pods and 30 mm gun.
Not a surprise USAF want so badly to retire A-10: it is not about the plane, it is just in the wrong aviation!
MarcellogoHmm how long you think Russia would be able to sustain this campaign ?
is 1 year too optimistic ?
Look, being allowed to open a real military base in a foreign country is not a cost for Russia , is a reward and a strategical win.
Actually Russia is employing less than a plane regiment and a helicopter regiment in Syria and between this less of a squadron of modern planes overall, not a great expense at all.
MarcellogoWhile they do have massive swathes of territory, keep in mind like 75% of that is underpopulated desert.
Also that map is….very political. If Russia needs to bomb an area that is contested it might very well suddenly be ISIS held 😉 . Or Al-Nusra.
Seems me right the contrary.
It is indicating a small part of the opposition controlled territory as held by different forces than them, that allow them to say:here you see, we are telling the truth, we are bombing terrorist ONLY!
(The rest they leave to the Syaaf).
MarcellogoI would be much more interested about tthe significance of the other sign, above all the RED and BLUE arrow pointing downward: airstrikes?
So why two different colours?
P.S: I have noted that the sign meaning oil well was changed.
P.P.S: My guess about the arrow colors is that red means CAS/BAI while the blue means “separate” bombings.
MarcellogoI guess that is a little strange this KAB 250 designation for this new weapon, once previously KAB 250L / ES has been used for Russian LGB equivalents to North American GBU 10 Paveway or JDAM GBU 38 since 2005 . The previously KAB 250 would have been kits with head seekers from laser or GPS / INS that were attached to a GP( General Purpose) 250 kg bombs.
This new KAB 250 has been keeping the same concept of guidance system from North American JDAM / EO because this combination of GPS / INS and IIR(Imaging Infra Red), or even the Israeli Spice without datalink.Then it new KAB 250 could be described as high improvements from Eletro-Optical Guided bomb KAB 500Kr but with less weight from this last ones.
However this new KAB 250 would not a kit that has been attached to a GP bomb, but its look like that has been built on a single part or airframe as the SDB and SDB II from US. But this new KAB 250 has not been equipped with folding wings to increase the capability for more weapons could be installed inside the compartment bays from T 50 just ASFAIK at this point.
Perhaps most interesting should be the mention the capability that new weapon could be released in speed from ‘several Mach numbers’, that may also suggest beyond the T 50 that new weapon could be launched by MiG 31BM in high-altitude and high Mach speed in order to increase the range of these weapons.
Anyway the legacy KAB 250L / ES has been described that could be released at max speed from Mach 1.5, which would be more than adequate from: Su 27M2, Su 30M, MiG 29 SMT, Su 34, Su 35, Tu 22M3M, Tu 160M and even the T 50, in that last T 50 those KAB 250L/ES should have been equipped with folding wings.
Anyway the legacy KAB 250L/ES has not apparently been adopted by Russia or another nation until this present time.
Thanks for the nice technological recap. Very useful (also to defuse some obvious trolling).
For your last quote: think this article would be useful to explain how the sat bombs hold a much more niche role in the Russian military doctrine when compared to the ( quasi obsessive) one they got in the US one.
http://www.defensenews.com/story/defense/policy-budget/warfare/2015/10/18/russia-shows-early-success-new-capabilities-syria/74041722/
MarcellogoCould be supersonic-speed-capable when I think of it.
Yes, it can be so, thanks.
MarcellogoYeah, yeah I know , it`s ages old thread etc and so on
But, it was my understanding that the russian kab-500 and kh-29 with video cameras needed to be manually steered until the boom moment, can someone confirm ?
Not- it was Kh-23 (AS-7 Kerry) needing such a control, kh-25 and kh-29 with TV guidance has auto tracking.
Real advantage of a satellite guided bomb is that its precision is not influenced by the quote of launch so the plane can operate at maximum altitude.
Extensive use of UAV was the mean western forces used to match up the advantages of the two sistem (plus eventually glide or RAP fittings) into one weapon.
Given the about 15 years hiatus between the posts actually would be more correct to say Jdam+ Paweway (or anything other in alternative.)
There is actually an interesting article on the thread about russian intervention in Syria explaining how, apart from the economic collapse of the nineties, doctrinal and organizational differences left to satellite guided weapon just a niche role.
Let me find it…
Here we go.
http://www.defensenews.com/story/defense/policy-budget/warfare/2015/10/18/russia-shows-early-success-new-capabilities-syria/74041722/
To sum it up, the so-called frontal aviation deal almost exclusively with direct tactical support to troops on field ie CAS/BAI mission, in this role vanilla sat-guided bomb have simply no role: they are less precise than other guidance systems and offer not any real advantage even when compared with unguided ones when they are coupled with updated FLIR/ targeting systems.
They are instead useful; according to their own word, just to destroy separate targets or also to simply bomb separate cities, territories and infrastructure into oblivion, with separate meaning here “well distant from front lines”: something that in their doctrine is made by the long distance aviation i.e. in this case the Su-34 only.
Marcellogo‘Drop-and-Forget’: Russia Develops Supersonic Smart Bomb
http://sputniknews.com/russia/20151018/1028696831/russia-supersonic-bomb.html
Where is supersonic there?
In such a case “satellite guidance” means TERCOM more than just GPS/GloNAss right?
MarcellogoSo basically no meaningful quantities until sometime well after 2020.
Think these refers to developmental planes only, serial production of baseline variant would start as soon state trial of it would be over.
P.s. It means that the T-50-8 would be off before years end?
MarcellogoLet’s put it in that way:
F-16 entered service in 1978, F-35 first flight is from 2006.
About 28 years difference, superior to the one between F-100 and F-16 itself.
It would mean a lot of things are changed along the way, not only in electronics and materials but also in military doctrine.
I see some comparations have been made between Mig-29 and Mig-35, not taking in consideration the most obvious difference between the two: fuel carried, passed by a measly 3500 to 6500 kgs.
It means it have changed its own role: from a frontal aviation fighter with an exclusively A2A role to a long range fighterbomber .
Same is happening with almost all planes around, also the Flankers that5 were born as long range fighters have continuously incremented their own range at every follow up version.
Now we have to consider how those changes have affected the planes performances: putting conformal tanks on a F-15 change radically its own performance and characters, same happen with f-16 with added tanks.
It is not just about added weight to be counteracted by higher engine outputlike someone have stated, also drag change but above all the wing loading: more weight and same wings area will radically change the way your plane perform .
Lifting body like the one of F-35 would certainly help but the high instable configuration , light wing loading of the earlier F-16 is just another thing.
Sign In
