@wdolson that was a long post so I won't quote it but in response to your statement "I think cheap commercial drones are getting a brief moment in the sun" . I believe AI and drones haven't even seen the light of day yet and that they will render the need for control moot and make drones truly terrifying. I could see some country launching thousands and thousands of drones with instructions to kill x, y, or z and have a AI fine tuned to flying and identification. Already Google engineers are raising the alarm because startup opensource AI teams are developing and using AI more nimble and just as powerful as anything google or openai have on tap. It's a brave new world but I think the rise in AI combined with reaching the magic 500 on battery energy density means that we'll have heavily armed drones swarming the sky and they should not be very expensive.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Russia/Ukraine conflict
- Thread starter amolina
- Start date
SwedishAdvocate
Active Member
"Zelenskyy blitzes Europe with fighter jet diplomacy
Ukrainian president pushes for ‘coalition of jets’ ahead of G7 summit in Japan.BY CRISTINA GALLARDO AND CLEA CAULCUTT
MAY 15, 2023 | 11:19 PM CET
...] Ukraine wants between 40 to 50 F-16s in total, [Yuriy Sak, an adviser to the Ukrainian Minister of Defense Oleksii Reznikov (My edit.)] added, forming three or four squadrons to defend its skies from Russian bombardments. Kyiv is telling Western leaders the need for modern jets has become more acute since the Russian Air Force began widespread use of guided glide bombs in March, reaching targets at greater distances. Ukraine currently has 'nothing to stop' the Russian aircraft carrying them, Sak said. [My underline.] [..."
Zelenskyy blitzes Europe with fighter jet diplomacy
Ukrainian president pushes for ‘coalition of jets’ ahead of G7 summit in Japan.
www.politico.eu
Artful Dodger
"Neko no me"
Excellent book on 22 SAS in Burma in 1942-45:
I read this book as a young Officer-in-training in 1982, and had the interesting experience of meeting a few of the Troopers from 22 SAS as they were returning home from operations in the Falkland Islands, via way of the Canadian Airborne Centre (wanted to added Cdn Jump Wings to their collection of badges). Those were some hard and hardy men, easily capable of entering our Gunners Canteen (Mess) through any wall of their choosing, and holding it for as long at it suited them.
To rephrase P.M. Maggie, 'the trouble with the Falklands, is eventually you run out of Argies...'
Cheers!
Artful Dodger
"Neko no me"
UA already has 'Harpoonski', which was more than a match for the Moskva. They use them again, together with a massive drone swarm, when the time is right... now in ground-launched flavours, too:
bkp_duke
Well-Known Member
UA already has 'Harpoonski', which was more than a match for the Moskva. They use them again, together with a massive drone swarm, when the time is right... now in ground-launched flavours, too:
Pretty sure Harpoons don't have the range to get from Odesa to Sevastapol to hit the fleet there. Unless something has changed, IIRC they are not capable to be air-launched either (but that can change with the proper mounting equipment developments).
EDIT - Harpoon:
278 km on the land-launched version (rocket booster), shorter range on the air-launched version, but the plane can do most of the work.
Google says Odesa - Sevestapol is 301 km, just outside of the range of Harpoon.
Storm Shadow air-launched version has a 250km range for the export version (560km for the version GB keeps for themselves).
Last edited:
Artful Dodger
"Neko no me"
Guess how they sank the Moskva.
The ground-based launcher was mounted on a barge, then towed into range of the ship.
Guess how they sank the Moskva.
The ground-based launcher was mounted on a barge, then towed into range of the ship.
The Moskva was well west of Sevastapol.
I never saw anything saying they used a barge. The Moskva was well within the range of shore launched Harpoons.
petit_bateau
Active Member
The Anglo/French Stormshadow is really only designed for use against fixed targets, though that can include ships in harbour or at very fixed moring locations. Given the ranges involved that would allow Ukraine to threaten the Crimean ports such as Sevastpol, and the Ukraine Azov ports (Berdyansk etc). However it would not allow Ukraine threaten the Russian naval harbour at Novorrisk as apparently there is a committment from Ukraine to only use within Ukraine's sovereign territory. The static nature of the target is because the weapon is flying a preloaded course and only at the very final moment does it use an IR camera to do final precision line-up on a target (e.g. to strike a ventilator shaft in a bunker, etc), i.e. the sensor does not have a large enough field of view to really do much more than focus very precisely. The warhead would likely sink any naval target in theatre, it is very capable indeed - the Kerch bridge is also definitely at risk but that would require a significant effort as it has a lot of SAM sites covering it. There is a Stormshadow upgrade going through at the moment to allow for in-course target coordinate/route update but that is still not really intended for use against mobile naval targets, more against relocatable large land targets (SAM sites, HQs, etc), or to switch targert if a first strike has already succeeded on the primary; and in any case I don't know if that facility is either ready yet, or indeed operable by Ukraine. To attack ships in port Ukraine would need timely and precise sensor data to make a viable attack. The replacement Anglo/French missile (already in development) will have an ability to attack mobile naval targrts at long range, i.e. carry a radar/etc for target location but that is probably a decade away from becoming available.
All sources are silent on this. My personal suspicion is that this will be the UK supplying the US-made longer range Aerovironment drones.
After leaving Finland I spent some time in the jungles of Myanmar as a young man, in the Tennaserim river area, we were the first white people since WWII ended. Karen were at war with the Burmese army, then they had a brief decade of peace..now back at war I guess. I will have to look up that book.Excellent book on 22 SAS in Burma in 1942-45:
I read this book as a young Officer-in-training in 1982, and had the interesting experience of meeting a few of the Troopers from 22 SAS as they were returning home from operations in the Falkland Islands, via way of the Canadian Airborne Centre (wanted to added Cdn Jump Wings to their collection of badges). Those were some hard and hardy men, easily capable of entering our Gunners Canteen (Mess) through any wall of their choosing, and holding it for as long at it suited them.
To rephrase P.M. Maggie, 'the trouble with the Falklands, is eventually you run out of Argies...'
Cheers!
@petit_bateau I don't see the ranges on the switchblade products that would indicate anything like 200km being possible. That's the interesting range...also the warhead package. Seems high. So 200km and say 20lbs or more warhead? @Artful Dodger asking an old gunnery chap what is the weight of an effective explosive that could be carried by a drone. So strip out the propellents and other things...how much weight ? A 155mm shell has over 20lbs of explosive but they are also encased in steel/lead right? So that the shrapnel damages things. Do kamikaze drones dispense with the shrapnel as the targeting is more direct?
petit_bateau
Active Member
Most modern kamikaze drones seem to have a shaped charge up front and a shrapnel payload surronding another charge behind that. You can see that in the Iranian ones very clearly.
I'm basing my suspicion on some stuff I've read in various internet sites and joining the dots. It is just a suspicion. It might not be a product that is specifically in the Aerovironment catalogue yet, perhaps an extension of one of the products. Of course I might be wrong.
lolachampcar
Well-Known Member
Seems a normal tactic to use something to cause the other side's defense radars to light up then send in air defense targeting (that radar) weapons. The interesting thing about the above is that the "stuff that followed" the "blinding" of the air defense did not make it either. Hmmm. Someone is not telling the whole story.
Though Russia never invested in SEAD like NATO did. They don't have much in the way of SEAD assets. Because NATO is centered around air power and not ground based air defense, Russia didn't put much priority on the SEAD mission. The newest SEAD missile in the Russian inventory entered service in 1982.
If Russia really had crippled Ukraine air defenses around Kyiv why haven't they followed up with more attacks? Even if they don't want to use up missiles there are glide bombs and drones that could do a lot of damage to Kyiv with no air defense or badly weakened air defense.
Until I see evidence I call BS on any Russian claims.
SageBrush
REJECT Fascism
One thing is pretty sure: if they could, they would
Indeed.
3 U.S. officials report damage is minimal, that the system remains operational, and that there appears no need to remove the Patriot for repairs.
This sounds like falling debris.
Live updates: Russia's war in Ukraine
Similar threads
