Yeah totally impossible to make outside of Sci-Fi right? I guess they can't be amphibious either.
Oh wait, y'all were being sarcastic.
Last edited:
Tanks and other Armoured Vehicles Image thread.
- Thread starter Duke Nukem
- Start date
Yeah totally impossible to make outside of Sci-Fi right? I guess they can't be amphibious either.
Oh wait, y'all were being sarcastic.
BF110C4
Well-known member
Ok, I knew the vehicles themselves exist, they have done so in one way or another from WWII but to put in large numbers in the field to deal with the current trend of making smaller and cheaper drones would be where a revision of the AA doctrine would be needed and then an increase in the budget to equip both frontline armored units as well as motorized versions for everyone else.
Not a big revision though, just return to previous times, when total air superiority was not taken for granted.
With some caveats some meaningful part of these duties can also be shifted to multi role IFVs.
The Army Wants to Bring the "Linebacker" Bradley Back from the Grave
Key point: The M6 Linebacker was the Army’s best armored anti-air troop carrier. Recent conflicts in Armenia, Iraq, Syria and Ukraine have demonstrated the widespread adoption of drones by state actors—as well as rebel and terrorist groups—for reconnaissance purposes and as improvised attack...
nationalinterest.org
There are also self-contained SHORAD missiles packages like Starstreak, that can be pretty much stuck on the back of a truck and work well enough.
And then there is the more future oriented solution, to kill a mass of cheap drones, make cheap drone hunting drones.
And then there are dedicated anti drone weapons like this.
7 Anti-drone Weapons Used by the Military and Law Enforcement Around the World
Drones can be used for some very nefarious activities. For this reason, armies and law enforcement need some effective means of countering them.
interestingengineering.com
Taking "total air superiority for granted" is mostly a USA thing, and is partly because we've had very bad luck with land based AAA systems. The T249 Vigilante was cancelled for the stillborn MIM-46 Mauler because the Army jumped too soon at the promise of guided missiles, and then the legitimately very capable M247 Sergeant York fell to media hit pieces and political pressure. The Army then dropped out of the joint-with-Canada ADATS for political reasons, and adopted the relatively makeshift Bradley Linebacker and Humvee Avenger. . . then downsized both into oblivion.
Doomsought
Well-known member
It doesn't help that we also have the cult of the missile constantly insisting that guns are obsolete and no longer needed anymore.
The poor missile cult...when we finally get the directed energy and rail weapons done up right.
BF110C4
Well-known member
And ironically the US planes got high altitude threats well under control while low flying aircraft and helicopters, drones and missiles are the most likely to slip the net of air supremacy fighters.
Aaron Fox
Well-known member
That's a 'yes and no' answer, largely because the environment has changed, and more specifically the sensor environment changed. Take the Sgt. York, for example, had the revolutionary ability to pick up any aircraft from ground clutter that is anything less than radar opaque. That sort of radar capability is in the F-35 and in any upgrades to the F-teen fighters' radar sets (please note that the Sgt York's designers managed this feat with an F-16 radar set, they had some bugs to work out on the sensitivity and fire control). So, unless you're skimping out on upgrades and maintenance (like *cough* Russia *cough*), modern aircraft are going to pick helicopters, missiles, and drones out of the ground clutter.
Add the 'fun' that is AAA rounds like AHEAD and... well... it isn't going to be a good time to be in the air.
I would point out that AHEAD was designed as an anti-missile round rather than an AAA round, and actually less effective against aircraft than a "plain" proximity fused AA shell. What AHEAD is designed for and shines at is laying controlled scatter patterns of heavy slugs along the projected trajectory of a very fast incoming round.
Aaron Fox
Well-known member
That's a bit of a 'yes and no' answer, largely because aircraft don't react well to, well, much of anything hitting them at high velocity. Tends to do things like rip into components and control surfaces and whatnot. Also, missiles don't generally fly that fast anyway, generally less than a kilometer per second (outside of the Russian 'lolhuge' supersonic ASMs) from my understanding.
Those are what AHEAD was made to counter, as an alternative concept to "regular" CIWS systems. Extend the engagement range with heavier caliber autocannon, compensate for lower RoF and also for the inability to fit proximity fuses by using smart canister shells.
paulobrito
Well-known member
Well, while at the beginning of the 'Special Operation' the Pantsir/Thor/Tugunska systems showed a clear difficulty in dealing with drones, they have apparently fixed most of that. Now, if that is via software upgrades or better training/use is not known (yet).
Considering the similar issues in Karabach, i think the issue is "it's doable but requires the crew to fiddle with sensor/fire control settings that they are normally told not to touch as they are not trained to touch them and/or degrade performance against other air threats".
Considering the regular stories of Ukraine using drones as a distraction for AA, a lot of fiddling may be required.
Last edited:
Aaron Fox
Well-known member
Largely because the forces deployed are... Iraqi conscript-level competent at best, with equipment that hasn't been properly maintained (from my understanding). It's telling that even China -which is in the same ballpark as Russia in the corruption department- still forces its military to at least be competent in maintaining their equipment... but then again even China has shyed away from conscription.
And yet a Russian refinery got blyat'd by a drone the Ruskie's apparently either didn't see coming, or thought was their own.
China at least has good conditions for maintaining their hardware. They are modernizing and expanding their army, so they get rid of old crap that may need restoration. Something like at least half of their armored vehicles were built in this century, and they are building more all the time.
As such, their machine park is nothing like Russia's reserve, built around a core of vehicles built in the Soviet Union, some even discontinued. They also don't have as much manpower shortages in their military for maintaining vehicles, and i'm pretty sure their new equipment is less reliant on foreign made components too.
paulobrito
Well-known member
I said fixed most, not fixed all. Also, no system is 100% perfect. Only in very bad novels.
Sure, but you've presented no actual evidence that Russian anti-aircraft performance has improved in the first place.
paulobrito
Well-known member
Because Ukrainian drones including the Turkish-made ones started to be shot down, left, center, and right?