lukosThe endurance of a reaper is 14 hours fully loaded and with a huge radar sticking out probably less. Range is only 1,000nmi, less with radar probably. When we don’t have any MPA, destroyer-launched cruise missile capability, anti-ship missiles, ARMs, or proper BMD that’s a lot of money to spend on something where a person would have to think very hard to come up with a realistic requirement scenario. What’s the enemy and the theatre and why is it not a NATO operation? Couldn’t E-3s from a nearby land base be used?
It’s a nice to have but not before all those other things.
lukosMaybe but there has been a [sic] anti F35 hate storm raging across the internet for at least 15 years.
That’s delusional. Completely false.
It’s delusional to think there wasn’t.
lukosWhat ship is that?
lukosSomething oft heard in the context of aircraft carriers in general.
Much depends on your definition of ‘right now’. If you mean today extending to the impending SDSR I would agree with you on the AEW front. As stated though one of the ‘other things’ you cite is the ISTAR platform discussed. If we are smart about this we leverage one programme to help develop the other.
Realistically what AEW can you put on them? A V-22 based system would only be ~100mph faster than a helicopter and still way slower than a cruising jet. It would be a lot to pay for not much. Ditto for a Reaper-based AEW, which probably has a far smaller radar than an ASAC unit. Unless they intend to put a catapult on-board, there simply isn’t a system that’s actually worth buying and according to BAE, the cost of implementing a catapult is basically the same as a cost of a 3rd carrier, which ain’t never gonna fly politically.
lukosSo you basically say that Russian separatist uprising in Ukraine, too, is legit and that the outside element (Russia) seized the opportunity and became involved is quite normal?
Well this just goes to show how it’s a matter of perspective. At least Ukraine was previously a free democracy that didn’t marginalise certain cultures, like Greek, Russian and Hungarian, by banning languages and positive media circulation. The film Red Heat is now effectively banned in Ukraine, as is Eastern Promise and any other film that portrays the Russian military or police force in a positive light. Meanwhile a criminal on the run from his original country (facing charges of embezzlement, abuse of power and politically motivated attacks) gets appointed governor of Oddesa and interviewed as a saint on the Channel 4 News.
lukosObviously modern IR threats are very dangerous, as dangerous as any modern threat, whatever the tracking and guidance mode is. Countermeasures are evolving as well, and IRCM are not left apart : kinematic, dual waveband flares, etc.
Currently no fighter has DIRCM and it is limited to a single threat missile and even then they have to be multi-waveband and track a high-speed target, shining on its seeker accurately. Flares are absolutely useless against IIR, you may as well pee out the window. Laser comm guidance – very difficult to jam
Flying around a SAM at very high altitude is certainly not the smartest thing to do, since in case of a launch, you won’t be able to perform hard evasive maneuvers (which would bleed your energy much, much faster than defensive maneuvers at low or medium altitude), and you won’t be able to rely on relief to break the radar horizon..
The missile’s energy will also have dissipated by the time it gets there, reducing speed and performance, it also provides time to act and you can jam a radar SAM pre-launch and attack it with ARMs, forcing it to shutdown either temporarily or permanently depending on success. You can also employ radar decoys ranging from MALD to TRDs. PE can also be rapidly converted to KE.
lukosIn Ukraine hundreds of tanks have been blown to pieces by ATGMs as well.
Are tanks obsolete now as well?
Yes flying low is dangerous without modern defensive aids.
Flying within S-300’s reach is dangerous as well.Russia itself has had decades of experience with attack helos and manpads being used against them, from insurgencies to outright wars, as recently as losses in Georgia. Have they decided to dump low altitude assets ? No the attack helo fleet is being renewed on a massive scale, Su-25s are being modernized with (finally) modern defense suits…
Well it depends how you use them. Nobody said helos were useless, they just shouldn’t be flown over enemy territory where SAMs exist. They should be used in conjunction with an advancing front line, preferably from just behind it.
Tanks are a damned if you do, damned if you don’t situation. Tanks can be destroyed but other ground vehicles can be destroyed even easier and infantry only requires bullets to kill. So tanks are the best option.
lukosThe point is obvious.. To use every chance to say the words “separatists” and “Buk” in a single sentence as a reference to MH17 flight.
Older version of Buk missile was used with a different warhead to that currently used by Russia. So if it was the separatists, they used a stolen Ukrainian Buk.
lukosEngineer Lukos found out that SAM are dangerous.
The question should be : does anyone still want to fly low level missions without the proper assets ?
There are no proper assets against dual waveband or amplitude filtering IIR SAMs.
Laser warning systems, missile warning systems, adapted countermeasures (the Hind in question was probably fitted with none of those), intelligence, good observation.. Lukos (nor any of us) do not have all the elements (we don’t even know what type of weapon was fired at the Hind..) to draw a conclusion and just saw in this video a poor pretext to troll.
A MAWS would give you a 2s warning – how very useful.
Countermeasures against against dual waveband or amplitude filtering IIR SAMs? No such thing unless you have some kind of multi-waveband DIRCM. Jamming the laser comms to a Starstreak would also be extremely hard.
No amount of intelligence and good observation will spot every MANPADS and SAM.
Well, if it was a Buk, I don’t think they could even get the video tape back..
Also, I don’t really see your point ? You mean that Ukrainian do not have the proper material to counter Buk batteries ?
At least a Buk system would have a radar to jam and can be targeted by ARMs. I’d fancy my chances doing that from 40,000ft rather than rolling in at 200ft into a 2s surprise death. Obviously wasn’t a Buk though, that would have blown the helicopter to pieces mid-air.
lukosI think another pertinent question is: Where are the GCC states in all of this?
Oh yes I remember! Bombing Shia Houthi rebels in Yemen who want such evil dastardly things as: government accountability, the end to corruption, regular utilities, fair fuel prices, job opportunities for ordinary Yemenis and the end of Western influence!
OK the Houthi rebels are widely supported amongst the Yemeni population and desire to set up a representative democratic Republic and have stated they don’t want to set up a cleric led Iranian style government and are already running peoples councils in Sana’a. Of course we can’t have that kind of thing breaking out can we so of course the GCC need to prioritise bombing Yemen over taking on ISIS…
If Yemen was Syria and Saudi Arabia was Russia, the US would complain, even though it’d be the exact same scenario.
lukosDoes anyone still want to fly low level missions?
lukosJust because they were given little media spotlight before, doesn’t mean they suddenly appeared out of nowhere. ISIS started as an Al-Qaeda local subsidiary (Al-Qaeda in Iraq) after the US invasion which in time became taken over by locals linked with ex-Baathists who had a somewhat different agenda from the main organization (e.g. fighting non-Sunni population, proclaiming an Islamic Caliphate in 2006., etc.).
A simple google search can provide you various articles such as these:
https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2015/06/03/isis-forces-exbaathist-saddam-loyalists/
But, of course, the story is rather complicated as is the history of the countries involved which is why it’s much easier to assume a conspiracy theory which can explain everything in a few simple sentences. It saves you from a lot of reading and exercising some mental effort.
Or one could look at the fact that nobody knew about them until recently and ask how they suddenly became so big and who is funding them.
at the end of the day ISIS is completing the US’s goals, namely overthrowing Assad (or at least taking his country out of the global equation) and fighting Iran and its Iraqi allies
even if US isn’t controlling ISIS, strategically speaking it has no interest in stopping it
It’s very much the old, “an enemy of an enemy is a friend,” philosophy… until they aren’t and start taking out buildings in the West. Al-Quaeda itself was created as an opposition to Soviet communist expansion.
lukosI think anyone who refuses to acknowledge that IS is a creation and is supported by the west (big scandal in Turkey with found out heavy supplies to IS, Turkey being the west’s hand in the middle east) are only fooling themselves.
They will be used to take out governments like Asad and when the time comes that they will have outlived their usefulness they will be “taken care of”
The only problem with this logic is that the west never put Al Qaeda under control, why will they manage to put IS?
The west created IS, the west is funding and supplying IS and is directly responsible for the thousands that are dying horrifically at their hands.
Hate to agree with that but it seems likely. Between Iran, Iraq and Syria there was growing Shia power in the region following the ousting of Saddam and neither Saudi Arabia nor Israel was happy and so suddenly IS appears and begins destabilising Shia regimes funded from out of nowhere and extremely sophisticated. Al-Quaeda then realises this and denounces IS.
lukosThe main problem with ITAR is that certain imbeciles across the pond mark anything they’re not sure about as ITAR, like brackets and fire extinguishers.
lukosMach 1.2 supercruise is possible with tanks.
About Typhoon acceleration and supercruising capabilities…
http://hushkit.net/2014/06/15/eads-test-pilot-chris-worning-gives-us-the-low-down-on-typhoons-super-cruising-abilities/
From link:
…and the other side of this is where we normally settle down.
The speed given is that used for optimal supercruise wrt drag and range, it also doesn’t give the payload. A Swiss article on air policing stated Mach 1.5 with just missiles. Another article written in response to a claim the F-35 was kinematically superior stated it could supercruise at Mach 1.2 with a ‘considerable load’.
What do you know the wonder of the internet:
http://web.archive.org/web/20090815004539/http://www.eurofighter.at/austria/td_lu.asp
Also managed Mach 1.21 even on a hot day with a combat loading in a Singaporean trial:
http://ukarmedforcescommentary.blogspot.co.uk/p/eurofighter-typhoon.html
“AFM understands, however, that the evaluation, which was the first time Typhoon had flown outside Europe (redeploying together with a VC10 air tanker), was a resounding success. Though BAE and Eurofighter will not confirm any details, it is believed that the two aircraft (they were RAF T1 fighters) flew 28 missions, totalling 35 flying hours, during the course of which the aircraft convincingly demonstrated its air-to-air capabilities, first against a pair of F-16s and then against a package of six F-5S and F-16C/D aircraft. It also demonstrated its ability to ‘supercruise’ (fly supersonically without reheat), achieving Mach 1.21 on a normal, hot Singapore day. This impressed the Singaporeans – and Typhoon’s rival bidders, whose aircraft require reheat for supersonic flight.
“They didn’t wait for the cool evening, they didn’t wait for a cooler day – they just went out and did it in a hot, daytime, tropical environment,” one Rafale programme insider told AFM, with grudging admiration.
Sign In
