FBWIts good to see the US/Nato finally lose all credibility and standing on these matters. One only needs to go to western newspaper sites , Twitter or any social medium and look at the comments.
well, nice to see that the state information warfare blitz is convincing it’s target audience. Those “average joe” comments, and tweets could be generated right down the street from you. I have to say, the Russian disinformation apparatus is truly and effective weapon in the social media age. The western nations have really been losing this war they didn’t know they were fighting. Will be a interesting footnote in history someday. It is frightening, there is no way that western governments can counter the a state controlled media/disinformation/propaganda machine. Kudos.
FBW[
NO, your initial assumption is completely wrong, most of the fighting in Syria like in Iraq happen in not heavily populated areas like arould Palmyra , Latakia province mountain range, East Ghouta horchards, Desert road to Aleppo and so on.
Think again, ISIS learned very quickly that it was suicidal to be out in the open. The groups fighting the SAA in western Syria, again are fighting in the more built up areas of Syria.
Vanilla bombs offer you just a marginal better CEP than the even worst one of the several ones I have seen referred to the SVP-24 (but they said after that was maximum CE not average one), so to achieve a real better performance 20K is absolutely not enough, you would need to add another guidance system to do better i.e. EXACTLY WHAT RUSSIAN DO.
Only point I agree with you is the eventual need of a small caliber bomb to be used in very close proximity to your own troops in such an environment.
What is a vanilla bomb? do they come in chocolate? This whole paragraph is jibberish. The SVP-24 may be the best digital bombing system in the world, but at weapon release, that bomb is at the mercy of countless environmental/meteorological factors. And no, even with the claimed CEP of such bombing systems, they don’t approach GPS/Laser guidance whatever the manufacturer claims. This is literally a non-sense arguement. A GPS tail unit is 22,000 USD! There is zero, zero, justification for your claims that using dumb bombs is more efficient. Just consider cost per flying hour, one missed target that requires an additional targeting order blows the cost efficiency out the window.
I’ll explain this better: the usual tactic SAA use to face insurgent offensives (from the beginning of the russian intervention onward) is instead to hold just a little, retreat orderly from the position they occupy and let their combined air forces to bomb them to hell and after it retake what they lost.
The majority of fighting between the SAA and the various groups aligned against are in urban/suburban areas. Your claims are simply false. Have you watched any of the videos from the fighting? Leveling a city block may be an effective method to eliminate resistance points, but it is hardly an eloquent argument in favor of unguided weapons as a more efficient tool.
FBWUmmm… can’t speak for the ASQ-239 but mid-course guidance generally relies on a much more accurate track than that provide by simple RWR.
.
UMMM, none of the aircraft I listed have just a simple RWR. Both U.S. systems have this capability. I would be surprised if the Gripen E didn’t, and one of the upgrades planned for the Typhoon in P4E is passive geolocation.
The open source material is very limited on all these systems, and I don’t expect that to change. Considering the F-22’s IDAS suite was designed in the early 90’s, geolocation and passive targeting techniques have most likely improved. The drawback is that the target has to be emitting (another reason the Link-16 needs to be replaced eventually).
Not to mention that the Meteor and Aim-120D can be handed off- shooter does not have to stay pointed toward target.
FBWSurely any array is an excellent radar reflector from the right angle, so why single out one on a swashplate?
True, most AESA are set upwards with a 15-30* angle. The APG-63 (v3) and APG-81 aren’t angled in the F-15. Obviously, RCS reduction was not a design goal as it really wouldn’t matter on an F-15.
Even those with a swashplate are angled upward when not in use to reduce reflection.
FBWNow, after having clarified my intent with the previous post allow me to give a technical response to the question you asked me.
I So,i’ll use tons over tons of unguided ordnance against enemies in a military campaign environment, something like OFAB against insurgents in the open, BETAB if in tunnels and pillboxes, FDAB when in trenches and FZAB if in a non populated urban environment.
I’ll instead use the guided one when it come to high value targets and/or surrounded by civilian populace.
Last i’ll use an airborne ATGM missile against tanks and other exceptionally and yet punctual targets for what BETAB would not fit.t is not enough precise to mark a real difference with a digital bombing sistem dropping an UNGUIDED bomb and is not even comparable with the accuracy of almost all other type of guidance actually used.
I’ll instead use it as a very useful midcourse correction system for stand -off weapons so i’ll envisage a great use of it anyway.
.
Now, allow me to clarify: There are very few area targets in Syria that don’t require precision. Mostly, the targets are embedded in with the population centers, or areas where you want to avoid collateral damage. Second, those engaged on the ground (Russian FAC’s we can assume, are attached to Syrian units, U.S. special forces with the Kurds). They are calling in coordinates very close to their own positions.
Those itty bitty guided bombs your constantly railing against are far more effective, far safer to use in an environment like Syria where the risk collateral damage and casualties to civilians are constant considering the target set. The risk estimate distance for a 500lb JDAM is 185m. Think about that. The CEP for a GPS guided bomb is roughly 5 m. There is no such thing as a accurate unguided bomb (or bombing system), when you are talking about a difference of 10-20 CEP. That could be the difference between destroyed technical, or dead shoppers in a market.
I think the 22,000 dollars for a guidance system is very much worth not killing civilians or allied troops (not that it isn’t going to happen anyway. As I’ve said, smart bombs don’t fix dumb targeting orders, wrong coordinates).
FBWI’ve heard otherwise from some.
Very poorly reasoned answer. A swash-plate allows you to go evasive whilst still guiding a missile.
And pray tell, what AAM are any Typhoon or Gripen users employing that require CW guidance? Mid-course guidance can be provided by AN/ALR-94 in the F-22 and the AN/ASQ-239 in the F-35. I’d be surprised if both the Gripen and Typhoon lack this capability in thier IDAS suites.
Second, as others have stated, adding a swashplate takes up room that would better used for additional T/R modules, not to mention added complexity and cost, and make an excellent radar reflector when the array is pointed forward.
FBWSo, what does that say about Lavrov’s claim that SAA forces don’t fly at night?
FBWThese weren’t the “moderate rebels” saying that they saw the helicopters and heard the jets coming in. These were the Syrian Red Crescent workers. But hey, spin away.
http://time.com/4503600/syria-un-relief-convoy-attack/ there are other reports, but this is comprehensive and new. Of course, I’m sure you will dismiss it as “Time magazine western propaganda”- too bad the eyewitnesses are so numerous.
FBWBellingcat????
Lol….it’s amazing anybody still quotes or takes them seriously. Some basic research about them, and the very first word in the thread title is in order.
Ok then let’s focus on the Aleppo news channel video:
https://www.facebook.com/aleppo24new…type=2&theater
Then, let’s look at the initial claims that Russia was not tracking the convoy, then backtrack that the drone stopped tracking the convoy, to the three different explanations offered for the convoys destruction. Then, the dozens of people on the ground that saw the helicopters and heard the jets. The “Big Lie” is alive and well-“Make the lie big, make it simple, keep saying it, and eventually they will believe it.”
FBWDon’t worry, seems that posters coming from allied countries ALWAYS forgot about it when it come to discuss unguided bomb accuracy…
So, I ask again. You are embedded as a JTAC in allied forces, or a FAC in VKS striking positions 200 m from your location with fires, updrafts, and wind gusts ripping through the desert. Which would you prefer: A) digital bombing system dropping a dumb bomb B) JDAM guided by GPS or dual mode laser guidance? (or Russian KAB-500S-E equivalent)
Btw, do you know how much the guidance kit costs for the GPS/INS JDAM? Not enough not to use them.
FBWAlleged video footage of attack. Very dark, but the sound of aircraft overhead is clear:
https://www.facebook.com/aleppo24news/videos/vb.1093585364013565/1174130202625747/?type=2&theater
FBW“The object was in the area around the town of Urm Al-Kubra, where the convoy was a few minutes before it caught fire,” Konashenkov added. “It left after about 30 minutes.”
“This type of drone can not only monitor the situation, but also guide ground weapons to their targets and inflict surgical airstrikes at objects located on the ground by itself,” the Russian spokesman explained.
“Our western colleages are putting their best efforts to hype up the situation and ‘blur’ the tragedy in Deir ez-Zor and to distract the international community from Al-Nusra’s advance on Aleppo and thus cover the US incompetence in distinguishing between the ‘moderate’ opposition and terrorists in Syria.”
Now we are starting to see the picture..
Yes, clear picture. The first web of lies did not stick. Recast a new web, this one centering on the U.S. (a popular bogyman in Russian media). Mistakes happen, the U.S. hit Syrian troops. After initial denial, once it became clear and footage was analyzed, the U.S. came clean and admitted the error.
Russia? Why spend all that money on information warfare (creating fake news agencies, Twitter fronts, blogs, flooding comments sections of Western Media), if you can’t use it.
FBWI suppose this is as good a place as any to post this:
Journal of Electronic Defense- good write up and overview of RWR/ESM systems on the F-35, -22, -15, -18, Rafale, Gripen, Typhoon. No revelations, but still an informative article from 2015.
http://www.raytheon.com/news/rtnwcm/groups/public/documents/content/yuse_jed_2015_interview.pdf
FBWI don’t know if I’d rate if ahead of a APG-77 or APG-81 just because they have no swash plate, not the GaAs version anyway. The Gripen NG radar is GaN but it is also very small compared to Captor-E. The Radar 2 variant will likely be superior, since they’re both GaN and coming from UK branch of the same company at roughly the same time and Radar 2 is bigger and has some QinetiQ EW goodies incorporated.
http://www.leonardocompany.com/documents/63265270/65495828/mm07819_Raven_ES05_LQ_.pdf?download_file
http://www.leonardocompany.com/-/captor-e-radar
The Gripen’s Raven ES-05 is not GaN, it is a Gallium arsenide AESA like all others currently in service.
The swashplate controversy is a non-starter. AESA have max FoV of 120 degree (some have less, the APG-77 claims 120* as does the APG-81) , and considering the number of T/R modules and power, have no issues within that FoV (“sidelobes” at the edges may impact max detection ranges, but there are tradeoffs to both configurations). There are good reasons not to have a swashplate, hence why so few do.
FBWBogdan pushing for block buy for lot 12- claims 2 billion in savings:
http://breakingdefense.com/2016/09/bogdan-predicts-2b-block-buy-savings-for-450-f-35s/
Sign In
