Military Review

Pumped "Hellfire" changes the rules of the game with the Russian Armed Forces in the European theater of operations. How will military air defense respond?

96

Multipurpose tactical / anti-tank missile JAGM



Behind media coverage of unpredictable and explosive events taking place in the northwestern part of Aleppo province, where Ankara plays the “Kurdish card” at a quick pace, intending to push through the FSA’s anti-terrorist formations and other “moderate” currents into the cleared territory of the canton of Afrin, sometimes not just pay attention to seemingly "dull" and rare news materials on the development and adoption of promising foreign military equipment, representing a certain degree of threat to our military units.

At the same time, some of these products can significantly influence the course of combat operations in a tactical situation. So, for example, if we talk about the FGM-148 “Javelin” ATGM, they are ways to seriously change the operational-tactical picture in favor of the operators (USA, Canada, etc.) only in the urban confrontation at a distance of 1,5-2 km, While in the field countryside, dominated by flat terrain and steppe terrain (without the standard urban infrastructure), the Javelins are becoming completely useless weapons, as their operators will be easily detected by the enemy's small-size optical-electronic reconnaissance.

We will now consider a more serious type of air-based tactical missile weapons (with the option of optional expansion for ground launch), which can create serious problems for the units of the ground forces of numerous countries of the world, including the Russian Armed Forces. This is a promising multipurpose tactical missile JAGM ("Joint Air-to-Ground Missile"), designed to deliver point attacks on numerous types of stationary and mobile targets (from armored units and surface ships of small displacement to well-protected ground strong points).

The last successful tests of the Lockheed Martin and Raytheon offspring on the suspension of the carrier were carried out on 5 on January 2018 of the year, based on the AH-1Z Viper helicopter of the US Marine Corps, which had risen from the US Navy's Patuxent River. The pilot and the operator of the Viper systems have fully tested the operability of the digital data exchange bus (apparently, MIL-STD-1760) between the helicopter armament control complex and all three modules of the 3-x range homing head, which will provide the developer with the necessary data for the missile development under its flexible application in various meteorological conditions. Next, fire field tests of JAGM should follow from the side of the rotor wing machine, which will allow the finalization of the radio channel for the correction of the JAGM flight path on the flight section, intended for the implementation of the “let me forget” concept. At the same time, JAGM will be able to receive target designation from several ground-based or airborne third-party sources — means of optoelectronic, radio engineering, or radar reconnaissance, which will also make it possible to instantly redirect the tactical missile already on the trajectory.

The previous test of a prototype JAGM, conducted by 25 in May of 2016, was in flight, where the MQ-1C “Gray Eagle” unmanned attack and reconnaissance aircraft was used as a launch vehicle platform. Then the rocket was able to destroy the moving target, which was made by a truck moving at a speed of 35 km / h. Recall that the development program for the advanced tactical missile Joint Air-to-Ground Missile was initially launched in accordance with the 125-million contract concluded between the US Land Forces and the consortium Boeing-Raytheon as early as 2008, and after 2, The White Sands test range (White Sands, New Mexico) conducted the first in-field tests from a specialized ground-based oblique launcher. The information received became the basis for the continuation of the development of the project already in the framework of the contract that was signed 8 on September 2015, as part of the Lockheed Martin-Raytheon consortium. From this information we conclude that, despite the three-year "slip" of the program, JAGM is still ready to acquire operational combat readiness by the year of 2020. The burning question for servicemen and experts automatically arises: what “critical” combat parameters that pose a threat to our ground forces, the new tactical missile of the 3 generation possesses.

For this it is necessary to consider the peculiarities of the guidance system, as well as the power plant of the perspective product. In particular, designed to replace heavy anti-tank / tactical missiles of the AGM-114 “Hellvaer”, AGM-65 “Maverick” and BGM-71F “TOW-2B” advanced JAGM is a rather complex conceptual and constructive hybrid of the AGM-114R PTG hybrid “AGM-114R” PTM “Anti-tank missile” “ "(Option for use with surface, ground and air carriers), AGM-114K" Hellfire II "(modification with PALGSN increased noise immunity), AGM-53L" Longbow Hellfire "(version with ARGSN), as well as small-size" narrow bomb "GBU -94 / B. The Raytheon and Lockheed Martin specialists selected all the best elements from the above WTO tools and then integrated them into the JAGM project. The output was a multi-purpose rocket, equipped with a three-band homing head, represented by an infrared module, an active millimeter Ka-band radar sensor with a frequency of 1 GHz and a resolution of about 2 m, and a semi-active laser-guided channel. Thus, the JAGM rocket is even ahead of the well-known “Brimstone-XNUMX” from the West-European concern MBDA in terms of flexibility in a complex jamming environment. Thus, the latter is only equipped with active radar and semi-active laser homing channels, which makes the rocket ineffective if the ground units of the enemy use powerful EW and a smoke screen, while the JAGM can switch to the infrared homing channel in such a situation.

The effectiveness of the IR channel can also be significantly reduced by equipping armored vehicles with complexes such as the “Cape” (reduces heat radiation from the engine and transmission compartment by 2–3 times), or the so-called “heat cap” recently developed by the Moscow Higher Combined Arms School (MosVOKU) leading fields with the largest infrared signature tanks, BMP or APCs beyond their physical silhouettes. Nevertheless, in a combat situation, 3 JAGM guidance channels do their job, significantly complicating the lives of the crews of armored units. To a large extent, this applies to the majority of vehicles that are not equipped with active defense systems, or operate as part of brigades covered by the standard anti-aircraft missile systems Tor-M1, Tor-M2U, Tor-M2KM, Tunguska- M1 "and" Shell-C1 ". What is the primary problem here?

Despite the fact that the JAGM multipurpose rocket has similar geometrical parameters with AGM-114L “L ongbow Hellfire” anti-tank guided missile (apart from the difference in length, which is larger by the first 170 mm and reaches 1800 mm), its single-chamber solid rocket engine from Aerojet »With reduced smoke generation (due to the absence of aluminum oxide) has a low burning rate, so that for a large segment of the JAGM trajectory it is not subject to such a phenomenon as ballistic braking. As a result, the range of the promising missile reaches 16 km when launched from the suspension of a low-flying attack helicopter and 28 km from the suspension of a medium-height UAV or carrier-based fighter F / A-18E / F Super Hornet. We will focus on the tactics of using JAGM from aboard a helicopter attack, enveloping the terrain.

Using natural terrain objects (folds, hills and lowlands), as well as some provincial and urban infrastructure, the Apache Longbow AH-64D attack helicopter can easily attack the strongholds, positions of enemy artillery batteries and armored units, while remaining inaccessible to the above modifications. Thors and Armor. For example, the range of Tor-M1 / M2KM using XUR-interceptors 9М331 / D is 12 and 15 km, respectively, while JAGM can be launched from 16 km. With the "Shell-C1" no guarantee for the destruction of such "Apache" is also not. Despite the fact that the complex is equipped with high-speed 57E6E SAM with an initial speed of 4700 km / h and a range of 20 km (due to low ballistic braking due to the small mid-section of the combat stage), the radio command of targeting the target provides for finding the object being intercepted only in the radar field of view target tracking and homing 1PC2-1E “Helmet” module or auxiliary optical-electronic complex 10EC1-Е throughout the entire ZUR flight trajectory. The slightest "jerk" of "Apache" for the "screen" of the elevated terrain or any structure will lead to the disruption of tracking and loss of the 57-61 interceptor missile.

As for the Tor-M2E / KM anti-aircraft missile systems, equipped with the latest 9М338 (RZV-MD) compact anti-aircraft missiles that have a range of 16-17 km and an initial speed of 3600 km / h, it’s not necessary to feed large illusions because the Vympel design bureau of the Tactical Missile Corporation supplied the new product with the same radio command control system that needs direct line of sight, which is extremely rare in the case of attack helicopters. What, then, can the units of the Army of Russia or our friendly armies rely on transferred to the theater plots that are within the range of the AH-64D Apache Longbow equipped with JAGM missiles?

Firstly, the presence on the helicopter direction of long-range radar detection and control airplanes (AWACS), or the Su-30CM / Su-35С fighters capable of patrolling, capable of detecting the Apache airplanes at a distance of 100 - 250 km. The presence of these machines will be a serious obstacle for the army aviation US forces in planning such missions using attack and attack reconnaissance helicopters.

Secondly, the development and adoption by the units of the military air defense of self-propelled anti-aircraft missile systems, the ammunition of which will be represented by anti-aircraft guided missiles with infrared and active radar homing heads. Such ZRSK will be able to work without difficulty on attack helicopters operating from extremely low altitudes and folds in the terrain. Targeting for the complex will be able to come from its own radar facilities, if the approaching enemy helicopter will leave for at least a couple of seconds due to the radio horizon / “terrain screen”, or from airborne radar observation and guidance equipment (HFMD); There is no urgent need for a direct view of the target. The most promising development in this direction may be an upgraded version of the 9М100 SAM, which is part of the ammunition sets of the shipboard Redut systems and the Vityaz ground C-350. "Highlights" of this missile are the ability to work on targets outside the sector of the review of the battery multifunctional RLC, as well as the ability to act on target designation of additional funds due to the presence of the receiving module of radio correction. The problem is that the range of this missile defense reaches only 15 km, which is not enough to defeat the carrier of a multi-purpose JAGM missile at a distance of 16 km. And there is no information regarding the unification of 9М100 with the existing Torahs. All the projects on the use of modified air-to-air missiles RVV-AE / SD as part of anti-aircraft missile systems, unfortunately, are also folded.

It unintelligible remains situation with active "radio broadcast" interceptor missiles medium and long range 9M96D / DM, which, judging from the complete absence of information on the receipt in videoconferencing and lack of pictures PU 5P85TE2 with corresponding "small" Structures TPK present in Ammo "Chetyrohsotok »Only as prototypes at some exercises at the Kapustin Yar training ground. In the West, in terms of large-scale production of missiles with ARGSN, more and more “chocolate”: the arrival of ERINT and Aster-30 interceptor missiles to the troops is quite stable; also within the walls of MBDA, work is actively progressing on improved modifications of the Aster-30 family of SAMs - Block 1NT / 2. Do not forget about two small small-scale missiles, integrated into the composition of anti-aircraft missile systems "Land Ceptor" and IRIS-T SLS. We are talking about a SAAM rocket with an active RGSN and a range of 25 km and an IRIS-T with an EKGSN range of about 15 - 17 km. The only drawback of these complexes is the impossibility of working on the march (without stopping), while our self-propelled air defense missile systems possess such qualities.

Thirdly, on the “Pantsira” and “Thors” abilities to intercept several small-sized air attacks simultaneously. For example, the 96K6 “Pantsir-С1” air defense system, which is unlikely to be able to destroy the Apache hiding behind the relief in 16 km, will be able to destroy several tactical JAGM missiles launched from its M299 launchers. Interception of JAGM is a fairly simple task, because these missiles do not make anti-aircraft maneuvers on the trajectory, have a maximum flight speed of no more than 1400 - 1600 km / h and an effective reflective surface around 0,08 m2 due to the radar signature of an active X-ray radar sensor. Remarkably, the extended burnout period of the solid-fuel charge will play a cruel joke with JAGM: the rocket can be easily detected not only with the 1PC1-1 X-ray detection radar and the 1PC2-1E X-ray Node-ZnumX-10-1 optical imaging channel and the X-Yn-XNumx-3E optical imaging channel and the ZNUMX-5 thermal imaging channel of the X-YN-122-9 optical imaging channel and the ZNUMX-22 X-ray imaging channel of the X-Yn-Xnumx-Xnumx thermal imaging channel of the X-YN-2017-XNUMX optical imaging channel and the X-YN-XNUMX-ZNXX-XNUMX-XNUMX-XNUMX Optical Radiometer and the Zn-XNUMX-XNUMX X-ray NUMX-XNUMX X-ray Radar . The result: the destruction of XNUMX - XNUMX JAGM will be for one BM "Shell" quite an everyday task, despite the electronic opposition from the enemy. The high potential of the Pantyreys to intercept small, high-speed objects was confirmed at the time of the destruction of two XNUMX-mm NURSs of the XNUMXМXNUMX Grad type, launched by militants at Hmeimim airbase in December XNUMX. These objects were much more difficult to detect, maintain, and “capture” than the slow and “glowing” JAGM.

However, there is also an unpleasant moment. In the case of even a temporary lack of air support from aviation to achieve superiority in air (“Drying” and “Meinstei”), the enemy can seize the moment by sending an attack “bundle” as part of a link from several Apache Longbow armed with the maximum number of JAGM (16 units on each), as well as one or a pair of Bell OH-58D Kiowa Warrior multi-purpose attack and reconnaissance helicopters. The latter are equipped with nadpultochnye MMS-optical complexes (“Mast Mounted Sted”), as well as more advanced AN / AAS-53 operating in television and infrared sight channels with the possibility of laser targeting. The use of passive TV / IR channels will allow the Kayam to secretly calculate the positions of artillery, armored vehicles, as well as mobile self-propelled air defense missile systems through the use of the subtle MMS sub-module MMS module slightly elevated above the terrain, after which, by tactical information exchange, target designation will be sent to AH-64D “flying arsenals” that can launch 16, 32, 48 and more JAGM on our units. With such a number of goals even 4 "Shell" is unlikely to cope. Consequently, an impeccable "umbrella" of military air defense from attacks by promising JAGM missiles can be installed solely by introducing anti-aircraft interceptors with infrared or active RGSN, as well as support from fighter aircraft and air defense missile complexes.


Early modification of the optical-electronic complex MMS ("Mast Mounted Sight")


At the end of our work, I would like to find out whether there are multi-purpose tactical missiles in service with the army aviation of the Russian Armed Forces, reaching or even surpassing the radically improved modification of the Hellfire. Naturally, yes. Two types of missiles can be safely attributed to them - a heavy X-38 multi-purpose missile in four versions with a range of 40 km, as well as a long-range 2 missile antitank guided missile with a radius of 15 - 18 km.

The first type (X-38) can be immediately removed from the list weapons asymmetrical response, since the rockets have a starting mass of 520 kg and a length of 4200 mm. In order to maintain proper flight performance in a difficult tactical environment, the helical rotary-winged carrier vehicle can take no more than 2-like products on board, given that the R-73RDM-2 melee combat system must also be present on the suspension for self-defense. The missiles have an impressive radar signature, flight speed in 2300 km / h, the absence of intensive anti-aircraft maneuvering modes, as well as single-channel homing heads (active RGSN, IKGSN, semi-active laser GOS or satellite radio-navigation GLONASS module), which makes the protection against interference, GHGSN, doesn’t make the jam protection, which, in the same way, it’s jamming protection, didn’t suppress fire protection, didn’t suppress fire protection, didn’t suppress protection, GLS and module, didn’t suppress protection of GLNASS module, didn’t suppress protection, but didn’t suppress protection. three-channel JAGM parameters.

Hermes-A / 1 / 2 fits much better into the category of high-precision weapons for an asymmetric response to the appearance of the JAGM in the American army. In particular, all missiles of this class have a maximum flight speed in 3600 km / h, which is 2,5 times faster than JAGM. Due to the lower aerodynamic resistance of the 130-mm combat stage, the flying speed is not 1100 - 1200 km / h, but near 2000 - 2300 km / h, which, with a small physical silhouette and an EPR comparable to the 120-mm mortar mine, makes it extremely difficult to intercept . The low weight of the missiles in the TPK (110 kg) causes the placement of the 16 “Hermes” at the same time on the four quadruple launchers of the Ka-52 or Ka-52K attack helicopter.


Long-range ATGM "Hermes-A" in the quadruple transport and launch module


Four modifications of the ATGM are provided, differing in the type of guidance system, in particular: Hermes-1 (ANN with a semi-active laser homing demanding laser targeting), Hermes-2 (ANN from ARGSN, the principle of “let-forget”), “ Hermes-A "(version with PALGSN and the possibility of radio correction), as well as the version with inertial guidance + IKGSN. The disadvantage of this architecture of the Hermes complex is the unrealizability of changing the mode (channel) of the GOS during the flight of the missile to the target, which may be necessary if the enemy suddenly uses certain countermeasures (REB or optical-electronic interference). However, the ammunition of one Ka-52 can be represented by each type of 4 ATGM, and pilots can make a choice in favor of a particular type of missile in accordance with countermeasures expected from the enemy, and this is a huge plus.

In October 2016 of the year, during the long hike of the Admiral Kuznetsov TAKR to the eastern Mediterranean, numerous Russian media quoted a source in the defense industry complex to spread information about the upcoming trials of the Hermes-A complex, which was present in the Ka-52 helicopter armament located in the wing of a heavy aircraft-carrying cruiser; but further information, as often happens here, has not followed. We will expect that the 48 of May full-scale fire tests of JAGM from AH-64D will still force our defense department to continue fine-tuning the Hermes-A project to the state of initial combat readiness.

Information sources:
http://forum.militaryparitet.com/viewtopic.php?id=19216
http://rbase.new-factoria.ru/missile/wobb/hermes/hermes.shtml
http://rbase.new-factoria.ru/missile/wobb/jagm/jagm.shtml
Author:
96 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. srelock
    srelock 18 January 2018 06: 38
    21
    I got to the middle ... I couldn’t go further - the wheels fell off ..
    1. Now we are free
      Now we are free 18 January 2018 09: 03
      +5
      But I’ve read everything ... Thank God we already have Hermes 2 for an asymmetric answer to such a system, the main thing is to bring it to mass production and saturate the troops with it. +It is time to and on our advertised "Ansat" or "Killer Whale" install a detection / guidance complex similar to "Kiowa Warwior" ...
      1. Lexus
        Lexus 18 January 2018 11: 11
        +3
        Thank God we already have Hermes 2

        Rather, he would be "brought to mind." There are difficulties with the GOS.
      2. Igor Golov
        Igor Golov 18 January 2018 13: 00
        0
        )))))))))) Optics do not always work. For a second.
      3. Foxmara
        Foxmara 18 January 2018 16: 31
        +2
        I would argue. In the sense that Hermes is needed not to answer the helfayer, but to defeat ground targets. And for Helfaer, Apache’s means of destruction are needed .. more, as the author proved, there is an opportunity to locally oversaturated the air defense system.
      4. iouris
        iouris 25 February 2018 14: 41
        +1
        Quote: “We will expect that the 48 May JAGM full-scale fire tests from the AH-64D will still force our defense department to continue the development of the Hermes-A project.” End quote.
        Vasil Ivanovich, what are you in underpants - dancing begins in five minutes.
        So there will be no women.
        Why are you wearing a tie?
        Or maybe ....
    2. free_flier
      free_flier 18 January 2018 21: 17
      +7
      article of the type "and then Ostap suffered" ...
      In such cases, you need to read the beginning and end.
      1. dauria
        dauria 18 January 2018 23: 54
        +1
        article of the type "and then Ostap suffered" ...


        In fact, they tried to return the helicopter to the battlefield. MANPADS and air defense motorized rifle threw attack helicopters from the deck. Without ATGMs with a range of less than 11 km, the helicopter will not last long. Yes, the Americans have solved the problem, and we need to make such a missile for our Mi-28. The only question is target designation - UAVs would be useful here, but they won’t live for a long time over the field. A whole intelligence network is needed, and a unified and automated one ..
        One annoying - the real mess of equal land opponents since the storming of Berlin and was not. How it will be in practice is a question. And if you take into account the nuclear tactical - a question.
  2. infantryman2020
    infantryman2020 18 January 2018 07: 40
    +3
    Excellent informational and analytical article!
    But, aren't the Kiowa Vorrior withdrawn from weapons?
  3. Monar
    Monar 18 January 2018 07: 48
    +3
    And what about “armored units”?
    1. Redfox3k
      Redfox3k 18 January 2018 11: 15
      +3
      I agree, it would be possible simply and clearly: armored vehicles
    2. Boris Chernikov
      Boris Chernikov 18 January 2018 20: 35
      +4
      there are suspicions that the author plays too much in strategy)
      1. IImonolitII
        IImonolitII 19 January 2018 23: 32
        0
        it’s just obvious that part of the information is taken from foreign sources. In this case, the unit is a separate combat unit, or an indivisible unit. There is no direct analogue in Russian, it was completely legitimate to leave just a transcription
  4. Herman 4223
    Herman 4223 18 January 2018 08: 29
    +3
    The topic is interesting, but what are the disadvantages of such a system? Three guidance channels on one medium reduce the efficiency of each one individually. How critical is it, at what distance does the target capture? Three channels work simultaneously or one channel works, and if it doesn’t work, then switch? just wondering, who knows?
    1. karelia-molot
      karelia-molot 18 January 2018 09: 14
      +3
      The main minus is three guidance channels, 3 heads in fact, will be destroyed in one launch. That is, a rocket is 2 times more effective, but also 3 times more expensive.
      At the same time, the main potential threat to the ATGMs was not yet eliminated by the Meracos (and, as you can see, they are not even planning to do this) - the possibility of physical destruction on the march.
      But it is precisely this threat (with the development of the computing power of the BCM) that is growing ever stronger every year.
      1. voyaka uh
        voyaka uh 18 January 2018 11: 39
        +1
        The article actually talks about new
        guided missiles (SD) air-to-ground. smile
        1. sivuch
          sivuch 18 January 2018 11: 49
          +4
          But in my opinion, on the contrary, about the means of dealing with them. Another thing is to disassemble all the mistakes - we need another article, several times more
    2. voyaka uh
      voyaka uh 18 January 2018 09: 23
      +5
      "three guidance channels on the same media reduce the effectiveness of each separately" ////

      In no way. But this electronics increases the price of rockets at times - yes.
      Three channels are good in that the rocket cannot be drowned out by electronic warfare and impossible
      disguise it from heat by turning off the engine.
      It can only be knocked down.
      1. Herman 4223
        Herman 4223 18 January 2018 19: 09
        +1
        Capture the target with the missile guidance head at the maximum launch range? If so, then the efficiency does not decrease, but if not, then the target capture range decreases. This is the point, that’s interesting. If the target capture is from 28km, then this is one thing and if from 2x or 3, then this is not at all super, because the rocket will have to be fired up to this distance.
    3. Redfox3k
      Redfox3k 18 January 2018 11: 16
      0
      Yes, and how the rocket will understand that "well, it didn’t work out"
  5. sd68
    sd68 18 January 2018 08: 45
    +2
    funny to read however
    they are ways to seriously change the operational-tactical picture in favor of the operators (USA, Canada, etc.) only in the urban confrontation at a distance of 1,5-2 km, while in the field suburban area, where the flat terrain and steppe dominate (without a standard city infrastructure), the "Javelins" are turning into completely useless weapons, as their operators will be easily detected through small-sized UAV optoelectronic reconnaissance of the enemy.

    to find Javelin’s pipe lying in the bushes and disguised, it turns out, just spit.
    There’s no way to detect a tank; it’s green wassat
    As for Hermes, the author is not aware that the new American missile has a matrix infrared seeker, which is not close on Hermes (and does it have an IR head on Hermes?),
    1. karelia-molot
      karelia-molot 18 January 2018 09: 15
      +2
      Say, the mention in this article of portable ATGMs is generally out of place.
    2. AlexKP
      AlexKP 18 January 2018 17: 42
      +3
      In order for the pipe to lie in the bushes it is necessary to bring it in disguise, but in the open area this is not so easy, and after use it remains only to shoot itself, about which the author wrote.
      The Hermes IR complex has a thermal imaging head and it is naturally matrix, and there is nothing supernatural.
      1. sd68
        sd68 18 January 2018 18: 01
        0
        a reference can be with a description of the head such?
        never seen such a description anywhere
        1. gringo
          gringo 18 January 2018 20: 08
          +1
          And what description did you come across? So, in my opinion, the needle already has a matrix, why can't this Hermes have a matrix ?.
          1. sd68
            sd68 19 January 2018 00: 18
            0
            The needle is MANPADS, and Hermes is ATGM
            And the Needle does not have a matrix seeker.
            1. gringo
              gringo 19 January 2018 07: 22
              0
              Well, yes, the MANPADS needle and what?
              And what kind of gos on the needle?
              1. sd68
                sd68 19 January 2018 11: 00
                0
                conventional IR, not matrix, like most older MANPADS.
      2. sd68
        sd68 19 January 2018 00: 21
        0
        well, yes, it’s not possible in advance, and the fighters will go in the open field and they won’t even put on their overcoat on the pipe, so that it wouldn’t be visible what they were carrying.
        the banner will expose that they have Javelin, and the picture from the drone directly on the sight of the tank gunner is displayed in real time during the battle.
        everything is just like that.
        1. gringo
          gringo 19 January 2018 07: 50
          0
          I’ll tell you more because the Americans want to make deliveries for their pennies, they must be scattered with an even layer over all the ATGM fields, well, covered with pellets, it’s not necessary to consider all the others as near, I think I wouldn’t be surprised if I saw bodies before the positions with an overcoat under my arm and I would definitely go see what they have there.
          1. sd68
            sd68 19 January 2018 11: 01
            0
            go, they’ll only shoot after all.
            you actually read what it is about?
            1. gringo
              gringo 19 January 2018 18: 59
              0
              Read. About long-range anti-tank missile systems and what were you thinking?
            2. gringo
              gringo 19 January 2018 19: 02
              0
              Well, they’ll shoot or not, someone will be lucky, but I don’t need to give some brow to walk around the positions.
  6. tchoni
    tchoni 18 January 2018 09: 04
    +1
    Pumped "Hellfire" changes the rules of the game with the Russian Armed Forces in the European theater of operations. How will military air defense respond?
    The silence of the lambs hi
    1. sivuch
      sivuch 18 January 2018 10: 22
      +2
      Other options you basically do not consider?
      1. tchoni
        tchoni 18 January 2018 13: 33
        0
        Quote: sivuch
        Other options you basically do not consider?

        ))) I believe that this is no longer an air defense mission, but rather an electronic warfare system and active protection of "armored units." If the "bird flew out", then air defense will not help. It didn't work anymore hi
        1. sivuch
          sivuch 18 January 2018 16: 00
          +3
          I believe that this is precisely the task of air defense, although not only it. Naturally, we need aerosol curtains and anti-helicopter mines (and, accordingly, methods for quickly installing such mines) and KAZ-s and electronic warfare, in short the whole vinaigrette. But you have to shoot down the ASP, you can’t get anywhere. Hopes that it will be possible to beat all the carriers, in my opinion, are illusory. You can always make the range of the TSA more than air defense. And the restriction will not be on the launch passport range, but only if possible detect and take on the target in real combat conditions. For example, the same Javelin with its speed of 200-250 m / s, flight height of 150 meters, diameter of 127 mm and without anti-aircraft maneuvering is a completely confusing target for Thor, for example. It's another matter that there may be too many such goals.
          1. tchoni
            tchoni 18 January 2018 17: 00
            0
            Quote: sivuch
            For example, the same Javelin with its speed of 200-250 m / s, flight height of 150 meters, diameter of 127 mm and without anti-aircraft maneuvering is a completely confusing target for Thor, for example. It's another matter that there may be too many such goals.

            Here I am about the same. A poor TOP or a shell simply won’t know who to shoot down. Work on the ground will require a known multichannel and solid ammunition from the air defense system. And this will complicate the system. And not one of our front-zone air defense systems has the required multichannel and ammunition. But, the target that is being attacked is quite capable of such a simple target as the same javelin to track and shoot counter-ammunition. Rebowski or with striking elements is another question. An attempt to do something similar was made on the T14 armature. Only time will show how much this justifies itself.
  7. shuravi
    shuravi 18 January 2018 10: 00
    +5
    Delusional article. Sorry, now there is no time, in more detail in the evening.
  8. Tektor
    Tektor 18 January 2018 10: 45
    0
    KMK, the best means of intercepting a multi-purpose tactical missile JAGM ("Joint Air-to-Ground Missile"), designed for delivering targeted attacks against numerous types of stationary and moving targets (from armored units and surface ships of small displacement to well-protected ground reference points) can be a guided artillery shell of 57 mm caliber, the guns of which our art must be saturated. And the Willow should counteract the helicopter of all variants of basing, including the helicopter.
    1. Redfox3k
      Redfox3k 18 January 2018 11: 21
      0
      Willow? At a distance of 16 km? Are you joking?
      1. Tektor
        Tektor 18 January 2018 11: 26
        +2
        Do you know the performance characteristics of the "Willow" MANPADS? I read that the range reaches 10 km.
        The most interesting option for basing Willow on a high-speed UAV ...
  9. Alexey-74
    Alexey-74 18 January 2018 12: 42
    0
    The disadvantages of the Americans are too much sophisticated electronics, which is very well suppressed by electronic warfare ... but where to get so much electronic warfare, you can’t install equipment for each unit ..... well, Hermes-2 is better than the American design, the main thing is much faster and more inconspicuous ..... and I still have a question why Hermes is installed only on Ka-52 helicopters ??? Is it impossible on the Mi-28 if we assume at the moment these missiles in the Russian Federation are the most advanced?
    1. voyaka uh
      voyaka uh 18 January 2018 13: 22
      +2
      "too many complex electronics, which are very well suppressed by electronic warfare ..." ////

      If you had the patience to read the article, you would know that this is a new rocket
      EW is NOT suppressed, as channels of various types of its GOS automatically replace each other
      in case of jamming or loss of purpose.
      1. hydrox
        hydrox 18 January 2018 20: 12
        +3
        Quote: voyaka uh
        channels of various types of its GOS automatically replace each other
        in case of jamming or loss of purpose.


        Do you really think that electronic warfare is just jamming?
        You are mistaken :: there are a lot of ways and methods, and even more algorithms for achieving the goal ....
      2. Vlad.by
        Vlad.by 4 February 2018 23: 12
        0
        Any electronics is suppressed by electronic warfare. The issue is interference power. Or with a narrow focus interference.
        Or with the duration of the radiation pulse. The properties of EMP have not been canceled yet.
    2. Viktor.12.71
      Viktor.12.71 18 January 2018 13: 36
      0
      Quote: Alexey-74
      Well, Hermes-2 is better than the American development

      While hermes-2 will be developed, the Americans will already be replacing JAGM with something new. The same story as with the asymmetric answer to Hellfayer.
      Quote: Alexey-74
      EW

      She will not be able to make a rocket absolutely nothing. There is a tri-band homing head. Read the article to the end.
      1. AlexKP
        AlexKP 18 January 2018 17: 50
        +1
        Semi-active laser, millimeter radar and infrared guidance. Semi-active laser - for use, it is necessary to get out of the folds of the terrain and substitute for ZR, a millimeter radar will crush electronic warfare, infrared guidance is a "cape". She can’t make anything too loud a statement.
        1. sivuch
          sivuch 18 January 2018 18: 15
          +1
          First you need to create a jammer for the mm range. It is still unknown about such.
          1. gringo
            gringo 18 January 2018 20: 04
            +2
            On ali, the Chinese will give you a hundred rubles a bag of jammers in the mm range. But seriously, do you know the characteristics of the new EW stations? Well, no one canceled passive interference.
            1. sivuch
              sivuch 19 January 2018 15: 34
              +1
              try to find at least one description of the EW station, where it would be said that it works in the range of 8 mm. I am sure it will find only in development. But passive interference is, in principle, possible. For example, resurrect such a well-known method as a cloud of dipoles. + there are natural dipoles in the form of snow, rain, fog
              1. AlexKP
                AlexKP 19 January 2018 17: 53
                0
                BM mercury offhand. Perhaps LEER 3.Smalta Lever. Purely aviation, but I think the technology will become a mascot without any problems.
              2. Vlad.by
                Vlad.by 4 February 2018 23: 18
                0
                A curtain to you such a cloud of "dipoles" creates that ... This is so offhand.
                Since there is radar in the mm range, then anyone can interfere, I emphasize any transmitter at this frequency. What problems? Or do we not have mm radar?
            2. AlexKP
              AlexKP 19 January 2018 18: 01
              0
              Not exactly the range, VI-FI -2400 MHz and the power is small, although the specimen already has 600 m
  10. Forest
    Forest 18 January 2018 13: 12
    +7
    We don’t have Hermes, no, we’ve abandoned it 10 years ago. We are already behind the 40 years of missile weapons.
    1. Mairos
      Mairos 18 January 2018 13: 38
      +1
      Ek you, my dear, sausages! Is it right on 40?
      1. Forest
        Forest 18 January 2018 17: 23
        0
        Quote: Mairos
        Ek you, my dear, sausages! Is it right on 40?

        They began to develop 3 ATGMs of NATO in the 70's, and the latest generation of air-to-air missiles, too. And we have ATGM 3 of the Hermes generation at the end of the 00's abandoned to do, the first Russian-made air-to-air missiles will be produced only in the 21 year, and then the copies are not the newest even at the time of release in the 80's P-73 and P -77.
    2. AlexKP
      AlexKP 18 January 2018 17: 51
      0
      But the Egyptians have. Sadness
      1. Forest
        Forest 19 January 2018 02: 28
        0
        Quote: AlexKP
        But the Egyptians have. Sadness

        Egypt while the 3-th generation does not produce.
        1. gringo
          gringo 19 January 2018 10: 56
          0
          Complete with ka52k which are purchased for the Mistral.
          1. Forest
            Forest 19 January 2018 13: 09
            0
            Quote: gringo
            Complete with ka52k which are purchased for the Mistral.

            What are purchased? The working Hermes in nature does not exist now, there were a couple of starts in 2000-2002 and work in 2003 is still covered.
  11. Mairos
    Mairos 18 January 2018 13: 20
    +2
    Quote: voyaka uh
    "three guidance channels on the same media reduce the effectiveness of each separately" ////

    In no way. But this electronics increases the price of rockets at times - yes.
    Three channels are good in that the rocket cannot be drowned out by electronic warfare and impossible
    disguise it from heat by turning off the engine.
    It can only be knocked down.

    And what prevents to put combined interference? And there is an army PVO and active defense .. Eternal combat. And to shoot from such a “device” at a truck or an armored personnel carrier .. hmm .. another question - what is more expensive. Also an eternal struggle - price-effectiveness. )) In general, an interesting trend is underway - no matter what medium, what matters is what launches. )))
  12. Old26
    Old26 18 January 2018 13: 56
    +4
    Quote: infantryman2020
    Excellent informational and analytical article!

    You know, I, for the first time, probably also rated the article by Evgeny Damantsev positively. Not lulling or disappearing, namely a balanced review, taking into account the pros and cons. Of course, paws can be found, but as an information review - quite ...
    1. Mairos
      Mairos 18 January 2018 14: 04
      0
      To the topic .. Looking at how much high-precision and effective things are being created, the idea arises that soon the most effective means of fighting for the ground forces at the forefront will be groups of 2-3 pro fighters armed with the latest sniper (or anti-tank or anti-aircraft) weapons. Nobody will drop (launch) a sniper bomb (missile) from a “three-channel” GOS. Expensive))
    2. Cherry Nine
      Cherry Nine 19 January 2018 00: 17
      +3
      Quote: Old26
      namely, a balanced review, taking into account the pros and cons

      The article is in the spirit of the author: on serious cabbage soup, with terms and numbers, the game and the spheroconin are chased. The ground operation of the Americans without a clear sky, what a beauty.
  13. sleeve
    sleeve 18 January 2018 18: 28
    +1
    It seems not long before the next change in the methods of struggle for something non-trivial ... simpler, cheaper, more efficient. Perhaps not at all from the technotrash opera.
  14. shuravi
    shuravi 18 January 2018 19: 55
    +5
    So:

    Despite the fact that the JAGM multi-purpose rocket has similar geometrical parameters with the AGM-114L L ongbow Hellfire ATGM (in addition to the difference in length, which in the first is 170 mm longer and reaches 1800 mm), its single-chamber solid-fuel rocket engine from Aerojet »With low smoke generation rates (due to the absence of alumina) has a low burning rate, which is why over a long section of the trajectory the JAGM is not subject to such a phenomenon as ballistic braking. As a result of this, the range of the promising missile reaches 16 km when starting from the suspension of a low-flying attack helicopter and 28 km from the suspension of a medium-high UAV or the deck fighter F / A-18E / F “Super Hornet”. We will focus on the tactics of using JAGM from an attack helicopter enveloping the terrain.


    And why the author -> author -> the author mentioned this ballistic braking? Indeed, PRUR (UR) is not a shell, it is an aircraft. I wanted to show off a smart word? How out of place happened.
    As for the rocket itself, it’s clear that to increase the range, the developers went to reduce the flight speed.
    But how long will this url stomp to the target? More than a minute? Does someone seriously believe that this way you can hit a moving target?
    Of course, I understand that s have an enduring desire to fight remotely. But alas. For such purposes as tanks for ATGMs, the destruction range in 10 km is maximum. And then, if they are controlled by the operator until the meeting with the goal.

    Using the natural objects of the terrain (folds, hills and lowlands), as well as some provincial and urban infrastructure,


    How tired of this baby talk. laughing Kids. I have to disappoint you, the real terrain is very different from the one drawn on the computer. In the first place. that these same folds of terrain, even in hilly terrain, are far from being located as required for the implementation of the "ingenious" tactical plans of couch strategists.
    In addition, ground forces need to destroy active targets immediately. They have no time to wait until the helicopter crews find suitable shelter, take up positions, and examine the battlefield.
    Only a suicide can get into a city building by helicopter.


    AH-64D Apache Longbow attack helicopter can freely attack strongholds, positions of artillery batteries and armored units of the enemy, remaining unattainable for the above modifications of Torov and Armor.


    The conclusion is based on ignorance of the realities and narrow thinking of the author of the article.
    There is nothing easier than hitting helicopters in hover mode. And no SAMs are needed here.
    To defeat a ground target such as a hovering helicopter, the most banal MLRS is enough. Enough to spot the helicopter. And this is also a simple task, because nothing is so unmasking as a working radar. Moreover, the helicopter is detected earlier than he finds something.
    Besides. potentially dangerous places of helicopter ambushes. can be mined remotely.
    1. sd68
      sd68 19 January 2018 00: 24
      +1
      Why are you a pester.
      and how from a MLRS helicopter shoot?
      and about a helicopter, so it will rise only during the launch of a rocket
      1. shuravi
        shuravi 19 January 2018 01: 00
        +1
        Quote: sd68
        Why are you a pester.
        and how from a MLRS helicopter shoot?


        In the same way as for other ground targets. In addition, they can conduct remote mining.

        and about a helicopter, so it will rise only during the launch of a rocket


        And how do you think then to use the radar? She needs direct visibility.
        1. sd68
          sd68 19 January 2018 11: 03
          +1
          helicopter is another ground target?
          you were deceived, it flies ....
          1. shuravi
            shuravi 19 January 2018 12: 39
            +1
            Quote: sd68
            helicopter is another ground target?
            you were deceived, it flies ....



            Kid, the helicopter in hover mode is considered just like a ground target. bully
            1. sd68
              sd68 19 January 2018 12: 57
              +1
              not serious. it will hang minimum start time
  15. MKPU-115
    MKPU-115 18 January 2018 20: 22
    +1
    Too many bukffs and everything in a bunch.
  16. Boris Chernikov
    Boris Chernikov 18 January 2018 20: 56
    +1
    modest questions:
    1) Following the logic of the author, the helicopter should hover in the air not flying 15 + km and being at a distance of 15-16 km attack our armored vehicles .. Moreover, you will have to work in hovering at a height of at least 20-30 meters .. Following the commonplace logic, it turns out that the enemy helicopter with with a probability close to 1 it will detect equipment on the ground closer than 16 km, which automatically makes it a target for the above air defense systems.
    2) it seems that the troops will cover either the TORs or the Armor .. And where did the rest of the air defense ensemble go? Where did the Buki and s-300v systems go? Generally speaking, the air defense system in the Russian army implies multilevel. So the U.S. attack helicopter is within the range of most types of air defense systems, given that at exactly a distance of 16 km the helicopter can only work in purely polygon conditions, the real range will be in the region of those 10-12 km.
    1. sd68
      sd68 19 January 2018 11: 07
      +1
      it, of course, if the helicopter alone will be rummaged out of boredom, then it will be shot down, of course.
      but if according to information from the fighters from the front line, and even if they preliminarily strike a blow at someone else’s air defense, it will be otherwise
      On the other hand, at one time the Hussein fleet was knocked out by kaolitsii helicopters, although no sea folds were observed at sea
      1. shuravi
        shuravi 19 January 2018 12: 43
        +2
        Quote: sd68
        it, of course, if the helicopter alone will be rummaged out of boredom, then it will be shot down, of course.
        but if according to information from the fighters from the front line, and even if they preliminarily strike a blow at someone else’s air defense, it will be otherwise
        On the other hand, at one time the Hussein fleet was knocked out by kaolitsii helicopters, although no sea folds were observed at sea


        Sorry, but this is your baby talk. Air defense also builds its defense lines and mutually hides. So it’s still necessary to get close to him.
        As for Iraq, the example is incorrect. Firstly, due to the overwhelming superiority of the coalition's jackal. Secondly, Iraq no longer had the technical ability and resources to build air defense.
        1. sd68
          sd68 19 January 2018 13: 00
          +1
          I’m saying that it was precisely helicopters that drove Saddam’s fleet, not aviation.
          As for the air defense, the Americans will certainly not send a helicopter against the unsuppressed well-layered air defense
          1. shuravi
            shuravi 19 January 2018 13: 35
            +2
            Quote: sd68
            I’m saying that it was precisely helicopters that drove Saddam’s fleet, not aviation.


            So what? What fleet was already there? So, the boats.

            As for the air defense, the Americans will certainly not send a helicopter against the unsuppressed well-layered air defense


            Just do not confuse the war with an equal opponent and the beating of the weak.
            1. sd68
              sd68 19 January 2018 15: 35
              0
              and Americans have no equal for a long time, especially if they are in company with other NATO members.
        2. sd68
          sd68 19 January 2018 13: 26
          +1
          I misunderstood your post.
          if you are of the fact that the use of a helicopter as an anti-tank weapon does not make sense, then you, of course, have the right to your opinion, only in the world you will clearly disagree.
          And if the fact that the new missile does not expand the capabilities of helicopters, then it is obvious that it reduces the time that the helicopter should hang in front of the enemy.
          if the fact that air defense in principle also happens at the forefront, so I don’t argue with you, it happens.
          only the main anti-helicopter tool at the front line is still MANPADS.
          1. shuravi
            shuravi 19 January 2018 13: 43
            +2
            Quote: sd68
            I misunderstood your post.
            if you are of the fact that the use of a helicopter as an anti-tank weapon does not make sense, then you, of course, have the right to your opinion, only in the world you will clearly disagree.


            The helicopter is one of the best VET. First of all, due to mobility. But to fight sitting far and safely will not work.


            And if the fact that the new missile does not expand the capabilities of helicopters, then it is obvious that it reduces the time that the helicopter should hang in front of the enemy.


            Will not expand. The helicopter has its own niche and tasks where ATGMs are required capable of hitting real armored vehicles, rather than mock-ups and dead cars.

            if the fact that air defense in principle also happens at the forefront, so I don’t argue with you, it happens.
            only the main anti-helicopter tool at the front line is still MANPADS.


            In the trenches of MANPADS. But the rear-mounted air defense systems reach far further. That is why the only chance of a combat helicopter is to work on the move, at speed and without any hangs, huddling to the ground. Have a reservation from the shooting cabin crew and vital units.
            The West simply cannot still create helicopters with decent protection. Therefore, it is refined with super-long-range launch.
            1. sd68
              sd68 19 January 2018 15: 43
              +2
              16 km is not an extra long launch.
              another thing is that a helicopter with the missile described above due to the matrix GSN
              work on the go, at speed and without any hangs, huddle to the ground.

              fired and forgot, left behind the terrain folds again, so that the MANPADS did not have time to release, and work out the air defense.
              What are we talking about ....
              1. shuravi
                shuravi 19 January 2018 16: 15
                +3
                Quote: sd68
                16 km is not an extra long launch.
                another thing is that a helicopter with the missile described above due to the matrix GSN
                work on the go, at speed and without any hangs, huddle to the ground.

                fired and forgot, left behind the terrain folds again, so that the MANPADS did not have time to release, and work out the air defense.
                What are we talking about ....


                First of all, these matrix GOS cannot. The situation on the battlefield is dynamic, the problem of identifying the target is acute, to look for the most vulnerable spots on the target itself, to redirect the already launched ATGMs. Moreover, this is all in the conditions of any interference.
                Secondly, before shooting and forgetting, a helicopter with a radar needs to light up itself and find a target.
                And stop stupid about the folds of the terrain. They will not appear wherever you want.
                1. sd68
                  sd68 19 January 2018 17: 25
                  +1
                  you don’t seem to understand what you are writing about.
                  On this rocket, it is assumed that, for two other things, a matrix infrared seeker similar to those that stand on Spikes and Javelins.
                  She does not retarget in principle, the picture was fixed, the rocket was launched, and then she herself, the helicopter should not be illuminated until it hits.
                  That is, compared to other ATGMs, a helicopter needs much less to hang around in sight, all other things being equal.
                  Booking from a rifleman is an important matter, only a helicopter nearby can calmly not only MANPADS, but also anti-tank systems, and no armor will help him in this case.
                  And about the folds of the terrain, somewhere there is, somewhere not.
                  Fighting is generally a probable thing and no one can give guarantees.
                  1. shuravi
                    shuravi 19 January 2018 18: 08
                    +1
                    Quote: sd68
                    you don’t seem to understand what you are writing about.


                    Or maybe you? Today I am a specialist in this field from you, unlike you.

                    On this rocket, it is assumed that, for two other things, a matrix infrared seeker similar to those that stand on Spikes and Javelins.
                    She does not retarget in principle, the picture was fixed, the rocket was launched, and then she herself, the helicopter should not be illuminated until it hits.


                    That’s what it’s all about, not only can a similar ATGM capture anything, it’s impossible to correct the mistake.


                    That is, compared to other ATGMs, a helicopter needs much less to hang around in sight, all other things being equal.


                    It seems to explain to you about the air situation, how to undock an African blind man about snow.
                    What makes you think that it will not stick out? Where will he go, especially when working as part of a group. Just don’t tell me the helicopter pilot about the folds of the relief. bully



                    Booking from a rifleman is an important matter, only a helicopter nearby can calmly not only MANPADS, but also anti-tank systems, and no armor will help him in this case.


                    To begin with, not just what to get, try to find a helicopter at a distance of 3-6 km when it is on the WWII. If he will not shine radar.


                    And about the folds of the terrain, somewhere there is, somewhere not.


                    And as a rule, they will not help you, but the enemy.


                    Fighting is generally a probable thing and no one can give guarantees.


                    Do you have any combat experience?
                    1. sd68
                      sd68 19 January 2018 21: 37
                      +1
                      I understand, but I doubt that you used the matrix infrared seeker in the ATGM, especially Javelin, on the basis of which you made this missile.
                      however, if you have such an experience, write. And calmer, please, you are too nervous and write so confused that it’s difficult to understand you. Above you easily shot down helicopters 16 km, and now no one will find it even 3 km away.
                      Take a breath and try to forget about all kinds of folds and everything, since you are confused in them, and read what I’m writing now, all other things being equal
                      1. the use of missiles with 3 heterogeneous guidance systems, including a purely passive matrix IR, sharply increases noise immunity.
                      2. the ability for a helicopter to immediately after a shot to perform a maneuver of evading return fire reduces the likelihood of its destruction by the enemy. he does not need, for example, to ensure that the target is illuminated before being hit, as in second-generation systems.
                      3. The mere use of such or another missile does not fundamentally change the need to search for and identify a target using optical or radar methods, advanced observers, other methods, or a combination of these — that for this helicopter, that for any other.
                      4. Booking a helicopter does not protect the ATGM (and it is limited from MANPADS), and even less so with any modern SAM, and finding a helicopter is still easier than a tank at the same distance.

                      So you understand what I'm writing about?
                      1. shuravi
                        shuravi 20 January 2018 01: 15
                        +1
                        Quote: sd68
                        I understand, but I doubt that you used the matrix infrared seeker in the ATGM, especially Javelin, on the basis of which you made this missile.


                        That is, you are an ordinary couch strategist. It happens.)

                        however, if you have such an experience, write. And calmer, please, you are too nervous and


                        Are you talking about yourself? Well, yes, couch strategists tend to be nervous. :)

                        write confused so that it’s hard to understand you; above you easily shot down helicopters at 16 km, and now no one will even find it on 3 km.


                        This is you just a complete lamer, not able to understand what the defeat of a helicopter depends on.

                        Take a breath and try to forget about all kinds of folds and everything, since you are confused in them, and read what I’m writing now, all other things being equal


                        Are you persuading yourself? In vain, you can’t understand from the sofa how a real flight looks like.


                        1. the use of missiles with 3 heterogeneous guidance systems, including a purely passive matrix IR, sharply increases noise immunity.


                        Did you read it on the Internet? How much did the ATGMs actually launch themselves? ;)

                        2. the ability for a helicopter to immediately after a shot to perform a maneuver of evading return fire reduces the likelihood of its destruction by the enemy. he does not need, for example, to ensure that the target is illuminated before being hit, as in second-generation systems.


                        Kid, a helicopter can be shot down before a shot.


                        3. The mere use of such or another missile does not fundamentally change the need to search for and identify a target using optical or radar methods, advanced observers, other methods, or a combination of these — that for this helicopter, that for any other.


                        Did you do it However, it is clear that no.


                        4. Booking a helicopter does not protect the ATGM (and it is limited from MANPADS), and even less so with any modern SAM, and finding a helicopter is still easier than a tank at the same distance.


                        What are you talking about? ;)

                        So you understand what I'm writing about?


                        Of course it is clear, you rave like any ordinary ordinary sofa strategist. ;)
      2. Boris Chernikov
        Boris Chernikov 19 January 2018 15: 03
        0
        "but if information", then it’s easier to strike with artillery .. it’s cheaper and safer. Remember which missiles drowned the fleet?
  17. TOR2
    TOR2 19 January 2018 22: 56
    0
    If the “Hellfires” are also added to the “Javelins”, then money for creating countermeasures systems will most likely be allocated.
    From time to time, stories about the IR matrix and IR portrait pop up in different topics. Let's try to figure out how the IR portrait is formed. The operator points the marker at the radiation source. The rocket program forms a capture zone up to the line of radiation reduction.

    This is how the IR portrait is formed. During the flight, the rocket compares the template with the current information coming from the IR matrix. This system eliminates the re-targeting of missiles to other infrared emitting objects. Everything is fine for the time being, until artificial intelligence on the other hand entered the confrontation. The control unit on the BMP removes engine emission characteristics from the sensors and, in a random sequence, turns on radiation blocks at the same wavelength that distort the IR portrait. But that's not all. Using lenses, the floor lamp will project IR rays around the BMP (naturally at the same wavelength) that will begin to rock the tracking missile system.
    Our industry is able to produce such systems, and in a short time.
    1. sd68
      sd68 20 January 2018 00: 30
      +1
      not so simple.
      and how do you think that a GOS of this type does not lose a target if it turns sideways, for example?
      the matrix has high sensitivity and sophisticated signal processing algorithms.
      Due to software processing by applying multiple images to each other, it is possible to make the GOS sensitive to a temperature difference of up to 1 ° F, she sees not only the engine, but the entire tank.
      PS if you believe the English Wikipedia, the defeat range was raised from 2500 m from the original version to almost 5000 m - I don’t know how true ...
      There is a manual on the original Javelin- https://ru.scribd.com/document/36176716/FM-3-22-3
      7-JAVELIN-Close-Combat-Missile-System-Medium
    2. Angelo Provolone
      Angelo Provolone 24 May 2018 05: 06
      0
      Well, what will prevent the system from tracking the change in the appearance of the BMP that it is pointing at? She captured him more than once, she can carry out dynamic "interception" of the target.
  18. Conserp
    Conserp 20 January 2018 20: 33
    +2
    Another extravaganza of advertising fairy tales and children's fantasies.

    The author does not understand the issue and gives judgments at about the level of old two-dimensional computer toys - "The range digit is larger in this brochure, which means it's cooler."

    And what is especially ridiculous, the author carries a blizzard, which even in advertising brochures is not.

    First of all, Hellfire / JAGM are strictly subsonic missiles. No "1400 - 1600 km / h" there is not and cannot be.

    Secondly, the declared JAGM range is 8 km (i.e. the same as that of Hellfire). Which is not surprising in view of the fact that JAGM is a modification of Hellfire with a new GOS, but with the same weight, dimensions, warhead and engine. From which finger 16-25 km are sucked out - it is incomprehensible to the mind.

    As for the three-component GOS, the story reeks of the cuts and kickbacks traditional for Lockheed Martin with Northrop, because of the three options, only the PAL channel works reliably.

    Finally, countermeasures - first of all, multispectral grenades for the "Cloud" system (developed more than a dozen years ago), not only completely covering the IR range (both laser and passive infrared seeker - here again the author has written rubbish), but packed with dipoles, for a long time turning the entire surrounding area into completely unsuitable for use by radar seekers.

    Naturally, the most important thing here is the detection of threats and the timely use of protective equipment.
  19. Victor_B
    Victor_B 21 January 2018 01: 39
    +1
    How long is one such waffle-wunder?
    48 pieces in a salvo you say?
    Oh well!
  20. Vladimir Kazakov
    Vladimir Kazakov 21 January 2018 22: 24
    +1
    The information in the article is generally informative. BUT!
    It is not entirely correct to consider the confrontation between Apache and JAGM against the brigades of CBs covered with tori, beeches, shells. Apache radar is not able to detect targets for the JAGM beyond 8 km. This means that Apache is protected from MANPADS, and short-range air defense systems, but not from a small air defense missile type torus / beech / armor. In other words, to launch the JAGM from 16 km (I also could not find confirmation of this figure, only 11 km) Apache is included in the range of short-range air defense systems. It can be said that Apache with JAGM does not have an overwhelming advantage - with a probability of 50-70% it will be detected and attacked by small-range air defense systems, and the JAGM rocket itself will be struck by the theme of small-scale air defense systems with a 100% probability, the rocket itself has a subsonic flight speed. In general, if the tori / beeches / armor work - they are afraid of nothing.
    But if you simulate the situation that JAGM is permissible and can be launched from 16 km and Apache was not within the radius of the small-scale air defense system, then other means of early warning and reconnaissance helped to find targets. For complete equality in modeling in this case, the RF NE should be “armed" with such means. And this is a completely different story.

    It is alarming in this article that the Americans well understand the importance of intelligence in breaking through air defense. No one in the world has such a rich experience of breaking through air defense systems. If now from a rocket and do not have the ability to overcome air defense, then in the future they may appear.
  21. asr55
    asr55 25 January 2018 16: 01
    +1
    Damantsev is an amazing expert, as always the pea jester drew up. And about Hermes, he has no idea at all. At what everything is in the public domain (if guided only by this). Why write such detailed opuses if you yourself don’t understand anything.
  22. rkpu97
    rkpu97 28 January 2018 01: 57
    +2
    I would like to bring some clarity on ur jagm to cool some hotheads. Yes, and it will be useful for the author to read and think about what he writes.
    1. The author is clearly not burdened with knowledge in the field of military affairs (uses terminology at the level of a student of the faculty of marketing), as well as a foreign language, especially with regard to such a specific section as military translation. One pearl "armored units" at the beginning of the article is worth what. So guess what this is about? Apparently, the author replayed computer games or simply transliterated the English term “unit”, which, in fact, means a military unit and translates as “unit; unit; unit; unit” depending on the unit of subordination in context. In the plural “units”, unless a specific unit is indicated, the meaning is “units and subunits”. From the point of view of firing at the moment of shelling the target, the military targets are only “motionless and moving”. Yes, and I would like, at the same time, to take a look at least with one eye, how an ATGM with a tandem warhead weighing 8-9 kg will destroy a stronghold of at least a platoon, which can occupy up to 400 m along the front and up to 300 m in depth. If you disassemble in detail all the pearls and bloopers, then you need to write a separate large article.
    2. On the discovery of calculations ATGM "Jeweline". This is a portable, lightweight, small-sized complex. It is easily masked. It will be possible to detect the calculation with a high degree of probability only after the launch of the SD. But it’s a competent calculation, and one must proceed from the fact that it is competent - after launch it will not remain in place and wait for the “return”. He will immediately change position. In addition, the rocket has already “gone”, and its autonomous homing system will find the target itself. those. at least once the calculation will do its job.
    3. About UR JAGM. Everything is very bad here. As the classic wrote, “judgments are drawn from forgotten newspapers, from the time of Ochakov and the conquest of Crimea.” Moreover, the author sometimes writes something that has never happened. For example, there was no joint "brainchild" Lockheed Martin "and" Raytheon ". Each of these firms led separate, competing groups that independently worked on the JAGM SD program. At the same time, Raytheon officially left this program in 2012. Therefore, on January 5, 2018, she could not participate in the tests of this SD.
    4. I will not bore with the details, but I would like to note that the JAGM program is the successor to the JCM (Joint Common Missile) program, which began in 1999 with the goal of developing an interspecific universal and unified SD for use in helicopter and aircraft aviation systems , as well as ground-based anti-tank systems (man-portable and self-propelled) SV, Navy and US MP. According to the TTZ (tactical and technical specifications) issued, the firing range of the SD was to be 28 km and 16 km from a helicopter from a maximum launch height when launched from an airplane. The homing system is three-channel through various information channels: mm active radar (8 mm, 35 GHz), mid-wave IR (3-5 microns) and semi-active laser (1,06 microns). The JCM program was discontinued in 2007.
    5. It was resumed under the current name with the same requirements and composition of participants in 2008. However, in 2012 it was again discontinued after the US Navy and the US Ministry of Defense left the list of customers of a promising weapon. NE USA succeeded in continuing the program, acting as the sole customer, but simplified TTZ. This was the reason for leaving the Raytheon program. From then until now, the main performance characteristics of the UR JAGM modification 1 (according to the latest TTZ) are: firing range of UR - 0,5-8 km; homing system - two-channel (8-mm range radar seeker and semi-active laser seeker); carriers - combat helicopters AH-64D / E and AH-1Z (in 2015, the command of the US MP changed his mind and returned to the program). The universal tandem cumulative high-explosive warhead allows the use of SD for small tonnage surface and armored targets (tanks, armored personnel carriers, etc.), as well as light fortifications and buildings. The missile is being developed on the basis of the UR AGM-114R ("Hellfire Romeo"). Only the front compartment with the seeker and the control unit changes. The current and long-term plans for the development of the JAGM SD do not provide for the installation of a radio communication channel on a rocket for transmitting target designation to the SD at the pace of summer. Serial production of SD should begin in 2020. For this, appropriate funding is provided. According to estimates for June 2017, the cost of one SD should be approx. 177 thousand US dollars. It is planned to replace all modifications of the Hellfire SD with a new SD. Replacement of UR AGM-65 "Maverick" and BGM-71F "TOW-2B" with a new missile is not provided.
    6. There are plans for the development of modifications 2 and 3 of the SD JAGM. At modification 2, the firing range should be increased (specific data are not reported) and the accuracy of guidance should be improved. In modification 3, the number of media types will increase to 15, incl. airplanes and UAVs, the firing range will increase and a three-channel GOS should be developed, similar to the one that was originally planned. The development of SD for ground anti-tank systems current plans are not provided. However, in the short-term plans of the American command, financing for the development of modifications 2 and 3 is not provided for (in any case, until 2020 inclusive).
    Sources of knowledge: presentation of Lockheed Martin at the AUSA-2014 conference and exhibition of arms and military equipment and a report by the Inspector General of the US Department of Defense on the status and progress of the JAGM SD program dated 07.12.2017/XNUMX/XNUMX.