Mining missiles for the Smerch MLRS

93
For the MLRS 9K58 "Smerch" developed a large number of 300-mm missiles for various purposes with a different payload. With the help of such products, the system is capable of solving a wide range of combat missions, including performing remote mining of the area. Due to the ammunition of the two types of MLRS can create mine-explosive barriers in the way of infantry and armored vehicles.


Fighting vehicle 9K58 "Tornado". Photo by Vitalykuzmin.net




Universal remedies


The launcher of the 9K58 combat vehicle is compatible with all existing 9X55 family of rockets, and conducting mining with the help of appropriate ammunition does not require any special preparation. The calculation of the MLRS is enough to go to the position and shoot at a given piece of terrain.

Missiles mining the area as much as possible unified with other 300-mm products for the "Tornado". The same housing with stabilizers, correction systems and a solid fuel engine are used. The differences are in the equipment and filling the head part. All this allows us to simplify the release of ammunition, but at the same time to provide the necessary expansion of the nomenclature.

Anti-personnel Mine Projectile


A missile 9М55К3 has been developed for the remote production of covering anti-personnel minefields. In terms of size and weight, such a product does not differ from other serial missiles. The length is 7,6 m, weight - 800 kg. In the design used unified elements.

The head of the projectile 9М55К3 has a length of 2,05 m and a mass of 243 kg. It houses the 64 anti-personnel mines POM-2 Edema. These munitions are stacked in eight rows of eight each and are oriented along the axis of the projectile. At the end of the flight, the head of the rocket is dropped. With the help of the squib, a miner is ejected from its hull.


The layout of the projectile 9М55К3. Figure Rbase.new-factoria.ru


The 9М55K3 missile can be used for firing from 20 to 70 km. Depending on the characteristics of the trajectory, mines are scattered in an area of ​​about 2x2 km. 12 volley with shells provides a release of 768 mines with a territory covering tens of hectares.

Mine POM-2 is a product of height 180 mm and weight 1600 g with a cylindrical body and side legs for orientation in space. The target sensor is four strands of length 10 m. Their tension leads to the undermining of the 140-g warhead. The fuse becomes on a platoon during 50 since after falling to the ground. Self-destructive effect occurs in the interval from 4 to 100 h after mining.

With a massive remote mining with the use of "Tornado" and 9М55К3 projectile in the path of enemy troops, a high density barrier is created. A large number of mines in a salvo and a considerable length of target sensors increase the probability of successful destruction of manpower or unprotected equipment.

Anti-tank mining shell


For the organization of obstacles in the way of armored vehicles was developed missile 9М55К4. In terms of its architecture, it is similar to 9M55K3 and other ammunition for Smerch. The differences relate only to the layout and equipment of the head part. The anti-tank mines PTM-3 are transported in a unified body of such a rocket.


Anti-personnel mine POM-2 in a combat position. Photo of Wikimedia Commons


The PTM-3 product differs in significant dimensions, which is why only 300 of such mines were able to fit into the 25-mm missile. They are placed in five tiers of five pieces each with orientation along the longitudinal axis of the projectile. For discharge of mines from the detachable head part, a squib is used. From the point of view of the main features of combat use, the 9М55К4 projectile with PTM-3 mines hardly differs from the 9М55К3 missile with POM-2 ammunition.

A full volley of 9М55КХNUMX missiles provides for the installation of 4 mines at ranges from 300 to 20 km. Such a launch provides mining of a site of the order of size 70х2 km. The average mining density reaches 2 min per hectare, which is enough to destroy the advancing armored vehicles. Several volleys at one site, respectively, increase the density of the installation of mines and the fighting qualities of the barrier.

Mina PTM-3 has a rectangular body, most of which is given under the warhead. Product length - 330 mm, weight - 4,9 kg with 1800-g charge. The mine is completed with a BT-06 non-contact magnetic fuse, which reacts to changing fields or moving ammunition. Transfer to the combat position after falling to the ground takes about a minute. Combat work continues from 16 to 24 h, after which the self-killer is triggered. The defeat of the goal is a cumulative stream in the chassis or bottom. To form the jet, the side planes of mines are designed in the form of cumulative funnels.

Positive traits


MLRS "Smerch" has a number of well-known advantages. The presence of two mining missiles gives it its characteristic capabilities and provides new advantages, including over existing engineering means of setting barriers.


Rocket 9M55K4 in the cut. Figure Rbase.new-factoria.ru


First of all, the advantage is the fact of the presence of mines for 9М55 missiles. Such a rocket projectile is able to send a load over a distance of 70 km, which is useful both when striking and preparing obstacles. One 9K58 launcher with one volley can send anti-tank mines or 300 anti-personnel mines to a given 768 point and sow a large area with them. The fighting qualities of a battery with such ammunition are obvious.

In projects 9М55К3 and 9М55К4 all the advantages of remote installation of mines in the survey are realized. Mine explosive barrier can be created at any time in the path of a moving enemy. The long range of available missiles, in turn, simplifies the conduct of such activities.

The presence of mining projectiles for the MLRS to some extent simplifies and accelerates the creation of barriers. Thanks to them, the army is able to solve such tasks not only by the forces of engineering troops, but also with the involvement of rocket artillery. Thus, in the ranks there are two structures at once capable of using mines - besides, one of them can strike direct blows at the enemy.

It is noteworthy that the 9М55К3 and 9М55К4 rockets are one of a kind. Foreign countries have repeatedly attempted to combine the MLRS and mines for various purposes, but the characteristics of "Tornado" as a mining system could not be repeated. Moreover, in the armies of some developed countries, such as the United States, there are no mining missiles at all.

On the sidelines


However, with all its advantages, mining missiles for multiple launch rocket systems are not the main means of remote installation of barriers. For installation of mines in the float on the surface, other types of equipment are widely used, which are in service with engineering units.


Mock anti-tank mines PTM-3. Photo Russianarms.ru


In our country, there are mining complexes with the shooting of ammunition from cassettes with the help of special launchers. The latter can be placed on wheeled and tracked chassis or helicopters. Passing through the terrain, such a layer protects the desired type of ammunition and leaves behind a strip of mining.

MLRS with mining shells and barriers have different characteristics and features of work. However, those and others can be used to solve their problems in different conditions and thus complement each other. Thus, the main work on the installation of mines can be carried out by sappers with land-layer barriers who shoot mines. For mining at a distance, you can use helicopter systems or rockets.

In practice, a more convenient means of mining, suitable for use in most cases, are just “traditional” minelayers. However, MLRS with special ammunition are of great importance. Remaining on the sidelines, such specialized weapons give the troops certain advantages over the enemy. Proper use of it allows you to decide the outcome of the battle.
Our news channels

Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest news and the most important events of the day.

93 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +9
    18 July 2019 05: 38
    In practice, a more convenient means of mining, suitable for use in most cases, are just “traditional” minelayers. However, MLRS with special ammunition are of great importance. Remaining on the sidelines, such specialized weapons give the troops certain advantages over the enemy. Proper use of it allows you to decide the outcome of the battle.
    On the one hand, you can mine remotely, if you don't have time. And also in case of luring into a trap, when the terrain is not specially mined for the enemy, and then "op". Or to work on the retreating enemy, when it is not possible to mine the escape routes.
    There are many options, such a technique will always come in handy!
    1. +3
      18 July 2019 08: 24
      Quote: Ⅴ - vendetta
      There are many options, such a technique will always come in handy!

      laughing

      "The missiles available in the armament are capable of performing the following tasks:
      - to mine the terrain in areas of concentration (location) of enemy troops, extension routes, maneuver (retreat) routes, deployment lines in pre-combat (combat) formations;
      - establish minefields to cover open flanks and joints, gaps in battle formations, areas of landing of airborne assault forces of their troops, close passages in minefields established by engineering means, increase the effectiveness of other obstacles and natural obstacles;
      - to mine the areas of landing of air (naval) assault forces of the enemy; to mine the positions of weapons and routes of movement.

      Typical objects are: PU elements; artillery battalions (batteries) on the march; batteries (platoons) of field artillery at firing (starting) positions; tank (motorized infantry, infantry) companies in the areas of concentration; battalions (companies) on the march, the lines of deployment and transition to the attack; helicopters at landing sites; field mobile storage points for nuclear weapons (supply points for conventional ammunition, fuel) and other facilities. In addition, sections of the terrain are being mined, where the actions of enemy troops and the placement of his objects are expected. "
      (c) Textbook of S&M from Kolomna.
  2. +1
    18 July 2019 06: 32
    There is no limit to perfection.
  3. -16
    18 July 2019 06: 41
    The launcher of the 9K58 combat vehicle is compatible with all existing 9X55 family of rockets, and conducting mining with the help of appropriate ammunition does not require any special preparation. The calculation of the MLRS is enough to go to the position and shoot at a given piece of terrain.

    This is one of the main drawbacks of such systems. Mines are known to be installed wisely, and it is not known where to disperse where at a distance of 70 km. This is a whole science. And the Tatar-Mongolian cavalry does not come as locusts. Moreover, it is necessary to make maps of minefields; otherwise, these mines will be more harmful to their own than to the enemy.

    Useless ammunition. negative
    1. +14
      18 July 2019 07: 10
      Quote: professor
      otherwise, from these mines there will be more harm to their own than to the enemy.

      for such things in mines there is a self-liquidator ...
      1. +2
        18 July 2019 07: 58
        Well, why did you talk about this? laughing
      2. +9
        18 July 2019 15: 33
        This has been written about this several times in the article, but who reads these letters.
    2. +2
      18 July 2019 07: 15
      So after all the likely offensive will be foiled. While demined ... And do no harm to their own. They self-destruct upon expiration of time. request
      Well, I understand from the article
    3. +12
      18 July 2019 08: 14
      Quote: professor
      Useless ammunition.

      Are you trying to stupidly troll again?

      Guess how quickly the Israeli Air Force will be able to lift their planes into the air if the Tornado Battalion floods the aircraft parking lots with a cocktail of antipersonnel and anti-vehicle mines?

      How will the Israeli artillerymen be able to conduct a "counter-fire maneuver" if their area of ​​firing positions is "seeded"?

      How fast can Israeli tank columns travel to prevent the enemy from using the WTO if their route is densely strewn with anti-tank and anti-personnel mines? So "quickly" that they can be destroyed by not at all "smart" high-explosive RS?
      1. -3
        18 July 2019 09: 27
        Quote: Spade
        Guess how quickly the Israeli Air Force will be able to lift their planes into the air if the Tornado Battalion floods the aircraft parking lots with a cocktail of antipersonnel and anti-vehicle mines?

        Are you talking about a spherical horse in a vacuum?
        1. Nobody will allow the Tornado division to approach the distance of a shot at the airfield.
        2. If you have the opportunity to launch a salvo attack on the aircraft parking areas (what kind of places are these?), Then you should destroy these aircraft directly, and not mine the concrete. Use cluster munitions. 20% of them become mines according to the Normal distribution law.
        3. Aircraft are located in closed concrete shelters.

        4. The "siluk pzatsot" unit copes with the task of demining with a bang. This is evidenced by combat experience.
        5. "Tornado" is so "highly accurate" that it is unlikely that you will be able to mine "aircraft parking spaces". You should get to the airfield.

        Quote: Spade
        How will the Israeli artillerymen be able to conduct a "counter-fire maneuver" if their area of ​​firing positions is "seeded"?

        Anti-personnel mines? Sappers will be called and they will complete their task. Why don't you immediately hit the artillerymen with a "tornado" that has no analogues in the world so that there is no one else to make the maneuver?

        Quote: Spade
        How fast can Israeli tank columns travel to prevent the enemy from using the WTO if their route is densely strewn with anti-tank and anti-personnel mines? So "quickly" that they can be destroyed by not at all "smart" high-explosive RS?

        Overcoming minefields is a routine for tank units. This does not affect the "speed" of progress. And here why don't you hit the units themselves? Accuracy does not allow? So buy shells from the Chinese. They are more accurate.


        Quote: igorbrsv
        So after all the likely offensive will be foiled. While demined ... And do no harm to their own. They self-destruct upon expiration of time. request
        Well, I understand from the article

        About self-liquidators do not remember better.
        1. +2
          18 July 2019 10: 05
          Quote: professor
          Useless ammunition.

          It is for this reason that someone is trying to repeat this. winked
          Foreign countries have repeatedly made attempts to combine MLRS and mines for various purposes, but they failed to repeat the characteristics of Smerch as a mining system.
          1. -1
            18 July 2019 10: 19
            Quote: Nyrobsky
            It is for this reason that someone is trying to repeat this.

            Our world is full of useless things that are trying to sniff us by talking about their "usefulness".



            PS
            The hit of the season.
          2. +2
            18 July 2019 10: 30
            It is noteworthy that the 9X553 and 9X55X4 shells are one of a kind. Foreign countries have repeatedly made attempts to combine MLRS and mines for various purposes, but they failed to repeat the characteristics of Smerch as a mining system ... After reading this fragment, one might get the impression that NATO "vobche" lacks NURS remote mining for MLRS. But this is not so ... at the end of the last century, such NURSs in NATO were developed. For example, for MLRS "LARS-1/2" (Germany) there are DM70, DM711 with AT-1 (8), AT-2 (5) anti-tank mines ... MLRS "Teruel" (140 mm ... Italy )
        2. +1
          18 July 2019 13: 17
          Quote: professor
          About self-liquidators do not remember better.
          This is not a mine
          1. +2
            18 July 2019 13: 42
            Who cares? It's not about being a mine, not a mine, but about the reliability of self-destructors. And in SPBE self-liquidator is also there.
            1. 0
              18 July 2019 13: 56
              Quote: Nefarious skeptic
              And in SPBE self-liquidator is also there.


              If during the descent the combat element could not find the target, then it simply falls to the ground, after which the infrared system continues to monitor the terrain and searches for targets with a characteristic thermal signature. In this mode, the self-aiming combat element appears to be a kind of ground anti-tank mine. Work in this mode continues until the battery runs out. After that, the product is turned off.
              1. 0
                18 July 2019 15: 20
                For some reason you decided not to insert the words "according to some data", which are present in all copy-paste of this text fragment on the Internet. I would like the source of these data, otherwise the standard version is the self-destruction time of 1 minute after the start of the infrared sensors. The effectiveness of SPBE as a mine is near-zero.
        3. +1
          18 July 2019 14: 32
          . why don't you hit the units themselves

          So everyone can. And here are the captured weapons, and the captive labor force. Someone then needs to be restored. The captured fascists then won how many houses were built for us. So far, many have survived. Qualitatively and inexpensively wassat
        4. +4
          18 July 2019 17: 16
          Quote: professor
          Are you talking about a spherical horse in a vacuum?
          1. Nobody will allow the Tornado division to approach the distance of a shot at the airfield.
          2. If you have the opportunity to launch a salvo attack on the aircraft parking areas (what kind of places are these?), Then you should destroy these aircraft directly, and not mine the concrete. Use cluster munitions. 20% of them become mines according to the Normal distribution law.
          3. Aircraft are located in closed concrete shelters.
          4. The "siluk pzatsot" unit copes with the task of demining with a bang. This is evidenced by combat experience.
          5. "Tornado" is so "highly accurate" that it is unlikely that you will be able to mine "aircraft parking spaces". You should get to the airfield.

          1.And who will ask?

          2,3 In fact, the points contradict each other. It is necessary to "destroy directly" but at the same time it is ineffective due to the fact that the planes are in cover. What to do? That's right, a constraining minefield, to prevent the planes from taking off. With the subsequent destruction.

          4. Any unit "will cope with a bang." Even kids from school, if you teach them. But ... it takes time. And other people's planes have already crossed the border.

          5. He is so high-precision. Do not write bullshit.
          1. -3
            18 July 2019 19: 45
            Quote: Spade
            1.And who will ask?

            No one will ask, will destroy for a long time before the arrival at the distance of the shot. Video example show?

            Quote: Spade
            2,3 In fact, the points contradict each other. It is necessary to "destroy directly" but at the same time it is ineffective due to the fact that the planes are in cover. What to do? That's right, a constraining minefield, to prevent the planes from taking off. With the subsequent destruction.

            No, not right. Correctly destroy the aircraft with high-precision ammunition as the Americans did in Syria and no one has already flown anywhere. Do you have a MLRS with high-precision ammunition? wink


            Quote: Spade
            4. Any unit "will cope with a bang." Even kids from school, if you teach them. But ... it takes time. And other people's planes have already crossed the border.

            ... they are waiting for the valiant PVOshniki. Ask Assad, he experienced it the hard way. Or ask her. On her account 2 enemy LA.


            Quote: Spade
            5. He is so high-precision. Do not write bullshit.

            Yep According to the normal distribution law. Did you confuse him with Chinese missiles? wink

            Quote: Spade
            Well, yes, until they get there, until they start cleaning ... Artillery units, devoid of mobility, will be destroyed. This time is enough for additional exploration, followed by complete cutting out.
            And the complete "mixing" of the entire area of ​​fire, with a flow rate that guarantees the destruction of targets will require too many installations, time and missiles.

            We have sappers in battle formations. You are wrong?

            Quote: Spade
            Routine ... Well, he "trawl" one mine, well, two, well, three. Then it, this trawl, must be thrown into the trash, and put a new one. And there are many mines ... hundreds ...

            Why not just millions of mines? Our sappers ALWAYS go in front of the tanks. Minefields are not a problem. With land mines harder.

            Quote: Spade
            And about the Chinese, a good joke. That's just the PC with the correction according to the global positioning data can only be used for fixed targets. And that's just how remote mining turns tanks into fixed targets.

            No, not funny. They have a MLRS much more accurate than yours and they are able to quickly cover a column of tanks if there is target designation. And nothing will have to be mined.

            Remote mining is a typical example of money down the drain. They even thought of scattering anti-tank mines from helicopters. fool Why in real combat no one remembered this brilliant thought? request
            1. +5
              18 July 2019 20: 05
              Quote: professor
              destroyed long before arriving at a distance shot

              Caps cast?

              Quote: professor
              No, not right. Correctly destroy planes with high-precision ammunition

              Now in Syria, much more complex targets are regularly shot down than precision-guided munitions.
              In addition, it is quite difficult to destroy "high-precision" aircraft that have taken off.

              Quote: professor
              Do you have a MLRS with high-precision ammunition?

              What for? We have Iskander.
              We are not Americans, do not do stupid things.

              Quote: professor
              Yep According to the normal distribution law. Did you confuse him with Chinese missiles?

              Likbez:
              "Smerchovskie" missiles initially have a system of impulse correction in the active part of the trajectory, plus a system for correcting the separation time of the warhead
              There will be no more similar "profound" proofs of the insufficient accuracy of "tornadoes"?
              1. -2
                19 July 2019 19: 02
                Quote: Spade
                Quote: professor
                destroyed long before arriving at a distance shot

                Caps cast?

                You, yes. We are different.

                Quote: Spade
                Now in Syria, much more complex targets are regularly shot down than precision-guided munitions.
                In addition, it is quite difficult to destroy "high-precision" aircraft that have taken off.

                Is the body of the launcher knocked going to the ram?

                And remote mining is easy - to destroy "high-precision" aircraft that took off?

                Quote: Spade
                Quote: professor
                Do you have MLRS with high-precision ammunition?

                What for? We have Iskander.
                We are not Americans, do not do stupid things.

                Uh-huh, a sparrow cannon. Iskander is our everything. Better immediately Poplars. Shoot so shoot. by the way, is there enough Iskander for each "sparrow"? A rhetorical question.

                Quote: Spade
                Likbez:
                "Smerchovskie" missiles initially have a system of impulse correction in the active part of the trajectory, plus a system for correcting the separation time of the warhead
                There will be no more similar "profound" proofs of the insufficient accuracy of "tornadoes"?

                I look for comments Lopatova about how much Chinese MLRS more accurate Russian or not disgrace Lopatova? wink

                Quote: Spade
                In the artillery battle formations? No, we are not.
                And from what or from whom your sappers hiding in the rear?

                We have such a doctrine. We have no rear.

                Quote: Spade
                Because the number of mines planted by the Tornado Division is not in the millions.
                Are you having trouble with arithmetic? 12x25 = 300. 300 PT min min can install one MRLS.

                And all these hundreds of mines en route one tank? How is the normal distribution law? After all, do mines take their place on the earth’s surface?

                Quote: Spade
                Once again, educational program. First, most of the Chinese "long-range" RSs are similar to the Smerchevs. Guided variants are used in missiles with a range exceeding 70 km.
                Secondly, such missiles cannot hit moving targets. It is very expensive to try to use them at "meeting points" as conventional ammunition.

                What, what, what? "managed options"? Aren't we talking about them when we talk about high-precision, and not statistical? Do you have such?

                Quote: Spade
                Write a letter to the Pentagon. They have the same advanced system of remote mining, as we have. True, somewhat more expensive due to the large use of aviation.

                And who said that only you are allowed money?

                Quote: Spade
                They write that they used it in Iraq.

                ... however, they are silent on how successful. True?
                1. +4
                  19 July 2019 19: 27
                  Quote: professor
                  You, yes. We are different.

                  Well, yes, you never twitch on those who have a normal echelon air defense. Like Iran. Choosing the right opponent is important. More importantly, choose the moment when he can not answer. Here you immediately become heroes.

                  Quote: professor
                  And remote mining is easy - to destroy "high-precision" aircraft that took off?

                  And how do they soar? Once again, the mines are serious. And even mine clearance will cause unacceptable damage to the runway and taxiways. Modern aviation is so gentle ...

                  Quote: professor
                  Uh-huh, a sparrow cannon. Iskander is our everything. Better immediately Poplars. Shoot so shoot. by the way, is there enough Iskander for each "sparrow"? A rhetorical question.

                  Do you think the Israeli fighter jet is so useless that you feel sorry for the Iskander to spend on it?
                  Maybe you are right....

                  Quote: professor
                  I look for comments Lopatova about how much Chinese MLRS more accurate Russian or not disgrace Lopatova?

                  Look for 8)))))
                  1. -2
                    20 July 2019 07: 26
                    Quote: Spade
                    Well, yes, you never twitch on those who have a normal echelon air defense. Like Iran. Choosing the right opponent is important. More importantly, choose the moment when he can not answer. Here you immediately become heroes.

                    That's for sure. For example, Operation Medvedka-19. To conduct an educational program? wink

                    Quote: Spade
                    And how do they soar? Once again, the mines are serious. And even mine clearance will cause unacceptable damage to the runway and taxiways. Modern aviation is so gentle ...

                    Again. In 2006, the Hizbalon rockets fell on the airfield and on the runway. Has it delayed the take-off and landing of aircraft? This time. Just now you have been telling you about the places of aircraft parking. Now this is no longer a problem?

                    Quote: Spade
                    Do you think the Israeli fighter jet is so useless that you feel sorry for the Iskander to spend on it?
                    Maybe you are right....

                    You did not answer my question.

                    Quote: Spade
                    Look for 8)))))

                    Still looking for? wink
                    https://topwar.ru/158017-v-tehmashe-rasskazali-o-rabotah-po-novoj-rakete-monolit.html#comment-id-9372346

                    https://topwar.ru/92353-belarus-primet-na-vooruzhenie-novye-sistemy-zalpovogo-ognya.html#comment-id-5682253

                    Quote: Spade
                    There is. And firing positions of artillery are located exactly there.

                    You know better. We will not even discuss the fact that our artillery from places of permanent deployment to the capitals of enemy states will be discussed. How many batteries in the 2006-m crossed the Lebanese border? And in the 2014-m border with gas?

                    Quote: Spade
                    Tin. Have you ever seen a tank column moving along the road?

                    Really hard. 300 mines scattered over a large area according to the Normal distribution law will all be in the path of the tank. Snobel Prize in the studio.

                    Quote: Spade

                    What kind of verbal pardon?
                    Did you not know that the "Smerch" rocket is not unguided?
                    Nevertheless, it is. For such ranges of correction to OUT plus correction of the time of separation of the warhead is enough. There will be more long-range, will receive control of the INS + GLONASS
                    But at the same time, even with GLONASS they will not become "high-precision"
                    Likbez I will not conduct, you will find what precision weapons are.

                    When they "get" and "become" then we'll talk, and while I repeat my question: "Do you have high-precision MLRS shells?" Are there any managed? Are there any corrected ones?

                    Quote: Spade
                    So far, there are no serious arguments in favor of this statement. One cheek swelling "we know how to beat a lying person in a crowd in a driveway, and therefore we can lay a boxer one on one"

                    The best argument in favor of the uselessness of this system is the lack of positive combat experience.

                    Quote: Spade
                    Another educational program. Mines for modern armies are needed primarily to limit the mobility of enemy units. And not in order to derive from the structure of his equipment and people. You do not know this, and therefore do not understand the meaning of remote mining

                    Americans, apparently, were able to restrict the mobility of the Iraqi army units, therefore, remote mining systems are developing, training is being actively conducted.

                    See, and here I was right. Started highly Likely. laughing
                    1. +4
                      20 July 2019 07: 58
                      Quote: professor
                      That's for sure. For example, Operation Medvedka-19. To conduct an educational program?

                      Would you still remember Golda's time ... Since then, the Israelis have changed a lot ....
                      And even then the situation of the confrontation of the newest aircraft and twenty-year-old air defense systems in the neutered export version was clearly advantageous for Israel.


                      Quote: professor
                      Again. In 2006, the Hizbalon rockets fell on the airfield and on the runway. Has it delayed the take-off and landing of aircraft? This time. Just now you have been telling you about the places of aircraft parking. Now this is no longer a problem?

                      You don't need to turn on the fool ... A mine fell, for example, on the runway. She got up on the "fighting", threw out the "antennae" of the stretch marks. And that's all. Airplanes cannot take off. Demining begins. It can only be accomplished by undermining. Any attempt to move will trigger a trigger. They blew it up. On the strip there are fragments, rubble, and other debris. Clean up. Otherwise, Khan's engines.
                      Questions?
                      On parking and taxiways similarly. Airplanes cannot be serviced; they must be approached only with great care; demining is complicated by the need to ensure the safety of airplanes and equipment.

                      And also, do not forget that it will not be a couple of Hezbalon missiles, it will be hundreds of mines. Many hundreds. The smallest division with two installations in a battery is about 18 hundred mines.

                      Quote: professor
                      Still looking for?

                      More search.
                      The accuracy of the 107-mm turbojet RS has the same relation to the accuracy of long-range large-caliber MLRS, as the accuracy of the 7.62 rifle to the accuracy of 155-mm guns

                      Did you hope that I would be lazy to follow the links?
                      1. -2
                        21 July 2019 07: 20
                        Quote: Spade
                        Would you still remember Golda's time ... Since then, the Israelis have changed a lot ....
                        And even then the situation of the confrontation of the newest aircraft and twenty-year-old air defense systems in the neutered export version was clearly advantageous for Israel.

                        Did you learn the materiel? About the air defense density in the Bekaa Valley revered? Who ruled the system figured out? Any more questions?

                        Quote: Spade
                        You don't need to turn on the fool ... A mine fell, for example, on the runway. She got up on the "fighting", threw out the "antennae" of the stretch marks. And that's all. Airplanes cannot take off.

                        Stop telling us stories. Show how this mine will be buried in concrete.

                        Quote: Spade
                        On parking and taxiways similarly. Airplanes cannot be serviced; they must be approached only with great care; demining is complicated by the need to ensure the safety of airplanes and equipment.

                        Show by arrow the parking places and taxiways. Where is the aircraft serviced?


                        Quote: Spade
                        And also, do not forget that it will not be a couple of Hezbalon missiles, it will be hundreds of mines. Many hundreds. The smallest division with two installations in a battery is about 18 hundred mines.

                        1. You do not go the distance of the shot not only by the division, but also by a single vehicle. Video of how this happens in reality show?
                        2. You with your accuracy try to get on the airfield not to mention the runway.
                        3. Hezbalons launched thousands of missiles. Some of them with a warhead in a hundred kilograms fell on the airfield. How did this affect the functioning of the airfield?

                        Quote: Spade
                        Quote: professor
                        Still looking for?

                        More search.
                        The accuracy of the 107-mm turbojet RS has the same relation to the accuracy of long-range large-caliber MLRS, as the accuracy of the 7.62 rifle to the accuracy of 155-mm guns

                        Did you hope that I would be lazy to follow the links?

                        Can I also search for the accuracy of your Tornadoes and Chinese analogues? Won't you mind? I have a good memory. I remember your pearls.

                        Quote: Spade
                        Well, what am I talking about? Your artillery, as you say, is in the rear. Not just in the rear, but "in places of permanent deployment."
                        Your sappers, according to your words, are together with the artillery. That is, in the rear, not with advanced units. Hiding. It is understandable why your tanks and M113s are blown up by "large land mines", which are relatively easy to spot.

                        Yep They hit the enemy without starting the engine. Do you want to see the video again how does this work?

                        What approaches are you going to mine, CEP?

                        About land mines, good luck with your search for them in urban areas. It is on your pictures they are on the sidelines. In practice, they are located in the tunnels or masked under the stone. Sometimes they can be found, sometimes not. You are different. Your sappers in 100% find all land mines and therefore your men do not ride armor.

                        Quote: Spade
                        10 snobel 8))))) to you. What prevents to choose an aiming point like that. so that the direction of the major semi-axis of the ellipse of dispersion coincides with the direction of the road? Only ignorance and unwillingness to think
                        And after the divisional salvo we will get such good, thick mining. And even turn around and go around it does not work, there are also mines.

                        Physics interferes, CEP. Random processes not amenable to calculation. For example, the direction and speed of the wind on ALL the flight path, inaccuracy of manufacturing ammunition and other nonsense forcing to buy expensive high-precision ammunition.

                        Quote: Spade
                        The question is: why don't the Merkavs have guided anti-tank shells?

                        There is. Photo show? wink

                        Quote: Spade
                        No one in the world has "high-precision shells" for MLRS, that is, hitting a point target with a probability of more than 50%.

                        Do not confuse to hit and hit. Azerbaijan has a MLRS allowing guaranteed one salvo to hit any target within the range of the MLRS. Israel has MLRS shells equipped with an electro-optical homing system with pint-point accuracy.
                        https://news.walla.co.il/item/2752584
                        Will the object be hit after hitting? This is as lucky.

                        My question is valid. Do you have high-precision MLRS shells or not? Why is Israel, China has, and you do not? Why do yours with 2012 year develop such projectiles if according to yours they are useless? request

                        Quote: Spade
                        Does your head hurt? Temperature? Have Ukrainian patriots bite you lately? They also often have this "logic"

                        We turn to the individual? Bravo. good
                      2. +3
                        21 July 2019 07: 39
                        Quote: professor
                        Show how this mine will be buried in concrete.

                        "Professor", why does she need it? It is not necessary, it is enough that it lies on the concrete and at the slightest attempt to move it, it explodes.
                        Here are a few moments. This mine will be able to destroy the aircraft or some airfield equipment - great. These she will pay for itself 1000 times. And it can not, because the same is not a special problem. It is enough that for some time it blocks the work of this airfield, and this is the same good result.
                      3. -2
                        21 July 2019 08: 58
                        Quote: svp67
                        Quote: professor
                        Show how this mine will be buried in concrete.

                        "Professor", why does she need it? It is not necessary, it is enough that it lies on the concrete and at the slightest attempt to move it, it explodes.
                        Here are a few moments. This mine will be able to destroy the aircraft or some airfield equipment - great. These she will pay for itself 1000 times. And it can not, because the same is not a special problem. It is enough that for some time it blocks the work of this airfield, and this is the same good result.

                        Does not block. How much can this be explained? There are two ways to block:
                        1. Destroy the aircraft as the Americans did in Syria.
                        2. Zaminirovat runway bombs with delayed action that burrow into betonka and meanly waiting in the wings to explode. So it was with Jordanian airfields.
                      4. +2
                        21 July 2019 09: 02
                        Quote: professor
                        How much can this be explained?

                        You are simply wrong.
                        Quote: professor
                        There are two ways to block:

                        And in the same way that the Germans invented by the way during the WWII. It is not necessary that something and somewhere to destroy, it is enough to NOT let this airfield function normally for some time.
                      5. -2
                        21 July 2019 09: 30
                        Quote: svp67
                        And in the same way that the Germans invented by the way during the WWII. It is not necessary that something and somewhere to destroy, it is enough to NOT let this airfield function normally for some time.

                        Many years have passed since the Second World War. Look at the satellite images of the airfield. Where are the planes? Where are the fuel warehouses? Where ammunition depots? Do you restore concrete pouring in concrete?
                      6. +3
                        21 July 2019 09: 34
                        Quote: professor
                        Do you restore concrete pouring in concrete?

                        In my opinion, in order to remove these mines from the runway and allow the aircraft to take off and land, special equipment and equipment, and above all TIME, is required. For which, on this particular front, without air support, a lot of things can happen.
                      7. -2
                        21 July 2019 09: 49
                        Quote: svp67
                        Quote: professor
                        Do you restore concrete pouring in concrete?

                        In my opinion, in order to remove these mines from the runway and allow the aircraft to take off and land, special equipment and equipment, and above all TIME, is required. For which, on this particular front, without air support, a lot of things can happen.

                        I remembered the anecdote told by a sunflower about a Jew who allegedly fights in the whole Jewish army.
                        At each airbase there is a special unit whose task is to demine and eliminate the consequences of the bombing. The runway will be restored very quickly if it is not about delayed action bombs.
                      8. +2
                        21 July 2019 09: 52
                        Quote: professor
                        Runway will be restored very quickly

                        Well, well ... they will have an impressive "front of work", from several dozen, or even hundreds of mines set to "non-handling", and then also to remove the fragments from the strip ... in short, they will not remain idle
                      9. 0
                        21 July 2019 10: 55
                        Quote: svp67
                        Well, well ... they will have an impressive "front of work", from several dozen, or even hundreds of mines set to "non-handling", and then also to remove the fragments from the strip ... in short, they will not remain idle

                        Not. Mines are not buried in betonka, but at best they will roll on it. They will be washed away in a ditch in a ditch.

                        Do not stop this mining action of the airfield.
                      10. +1
                        21 July 2019 10: 58
                        Quote: professor
                        They will be washed away in a ditch in a ditch.

                        Any attempt to touch them, let alone wash them off, will lead to an explosion. Again, they are immediately set to non-handling. And firefighting equipment can itself receive a "shock core" in response ... Not everything is so simple
                      11. 0
                        21 July 2019 11: 42
                        Quote: svp67
                        Quote: professor
                        They will be washed away in a ditch in a ditch.

                        Any attempt to touch them, let alone wash them off, will lead to an explosion. Again, they are immediately set to non-handling. And firefighting equipment can itself receive a "shock core" in response ... Not everything is so simple

                        Detonated on betonke? And thank God. Fill the holes with foam and take off.
                      12. +3
                        21 July 2019 11: 45
                        Quote: professor
                        Fill the holes with foam and take off.

                        Yes, please, it remains to add all these spent seconds into minutes, and minutes into hours ... and fly, and during this time some "gift" can still arrive
                      13. 0
                        21 July 2019 11: 57
                        Quote: svp67
                        Quote: professor
                        Fill the holes with foam and take off.

                        Yes, please, it remains to add all these spent seconds into minutes, and minutes into hours ... and fly, and during this time some "gift" can still arrive

                        It does not take hours.
                        If you have only one airfield for the whole theater of combat, on which there is only one single runway, then it would be better for you not to fight at all.
                      14. +1
                        21 July 2019 11: 58
                        Quote: professor
                        If you have only one airfield for the whole theater of combat, on which there is only one single runway, then it would be better for you not to fight at all.

                        Yes you are right. But do not forget that such MLRSs are not one and not ten ...
                      15. 0
                        21 July 2019 13: 42
                        Quote: svp67
                        Quote: professor
                        If you have only one airfield for the whole theater of combat, on which there is only one single runway, then it would be better for you not to fight at all.

                        Yes you are right. But do not forget that such MLRSs are not one and not ten ...

                        Do not forget that they will destroy even on the march and no one will let them approach the range of the shot to the airfield. You are not going to drop behind the enemy?
                      16. 0
                        21 July 2019 14: 36
                        Quote: professor
                        Do not forget that they will destroy it on the march and no one will let them approach the range of the shot to the airfield.

                      17. +1
                        21 July 2019 08: 42
                        Quote: professor
                        Have you learned the materiel?

                        I looked at the date and did not read. Once again, it was almost 40 years ago. Since then, everything has changed a lot. Including the Israelis.
                        Therefore, the thesis that Israel is able to kick only the fallen, and preferably your bound one, is not refuted.



                        Quote: professor
                        Stop telling us stories. Show how this mine will be buried in concrete.

                        Eh .... Why would she "bury herself" ????????
                        Well, turn on the brain, finally. Dropped mine.
                        If this anti-tank mine, then she embarked on a combat platoon. Attempt to move - undermining. An attempt to approach a mine with a metal with a total weight of more than 100 grams is undermining.
                        If it is anti-POM-2. Self-articulated, threw out the antennae, stood up in combat. Attempt to move - undermining. Hooked for scaffolding, undermining. If it is POM-3, then the detonation will occur simply from the steps, there is a seismic sensor sensor.

                        That is, there are only three ways to deactivate such mines. Or to pull off each "cat", or to undermine with an overhead charge, or wait until the self-liquidator is triggered. Up to a day, as far as I remember.
                        All methods are long, all methods lead to the destruction of the coating, all methods require a huge amount of work to prevent fragmentation of aircraft and airfield equipment - anti-personnel mines "jumping out"


                        Quote: professor
                        1. You do not go the distance of the shot not only by the division, but also by a single vehicle. Video of how this happens in reality show?

                        In the reality? Your companions can't see anything. UAVs jam REP and shoot down, radars suppress REP, communications system suppress REP, fire at control points, fire weapons, infrastructure elements Hundreds of special forces groups roam your rear areas and blow up, blow up, blow up ... The area is covered by air defense from S-300 up to the harsh guys with "Verb", all these funds are brought together into a single system through "Barnaul". Aircraft covered. And at this time, a division of tornadoes leaves for the position. How can you destroy it? In reality, just throw hats.

                        Quote: professor
                        2. You with your accuracy try to get on the airfield not to mention the runway.

                        Let me remind you that you have not yet been able to prove the low accuracy of the "Tornado". So either the facts are in the studio, or you end up with this outright slander. Even a thousandth repetition of an unfounded statement does not turn it into a fact.

                        Quote: professor
                        Hezbalons launched thousands of rockets. Some of them with a warhead of a hundred kg hit the airfield. How did this affect the functioning of the airfield?

                        Two missiles flew into the airfield without damaging the airport infrastructure, and this indicates that hundreds of mines caught on the runway, taxiways and parking areas and aircraft maintenance will not complicate the actions of aviation?
                        And that is very "logical". I will repeat the question about "bitten" 8))))))))))))))))))))

                        Quote: professor
                        Can I also search for the accuracy of your Tornadoes and Chinese analogues? Won't you mind? I have a good memory. I remember your pearls.

                        Well, I already wrote to you. SEARCH.
                        Hope I ask you not to? Of course not. After all, I know that similar Chinese missiles are designed in exactly the same way, moreover, the "splavovtsy" participated in their development

                        So be sure to search. And then too often you started to vote too ....
                      18. 0
                        21 July 2019 09: 20
                        Quote: Spade
                        I looked at the date and did not read. Once again, it was almost 40 years ago. Since then, everything has changed a lot. Including the Israelis.
                        Therefore, the thesis that Israel is able to kick only the fallen, and preferably your bound one, is not refuted.

                        Uh-huh. Operation Opera and Operation Orchard. Who was "fallen and preferably bound" there? wink

                        Quote: Spade
                        Eh .... Why would she "bury herself" ????????
                        Well, turn on the brain, finally. Dropped mine.
                        If this anti-tank mine, then she embarked on a combat platoon. Attempt to move - undermining. An attempt to approach a mine with a metal with a total weight of more than 100 grams is undermining.
                        If it is anti-POM-2. Self-articulated, threw out the antennae, stood up in combat. Attempt to move - undermining. Hooked for scaffolding, undermining. If it is POM-3, then the detonation will occur simply from the steps, there is a seismic sensor sensor.

                        That is, there are only three ways to deactivate such mines. Or to pull off each "cat", or to undermine with an overhead charge, or wait until the self-liquidator is triggered. Up to a day, as far as I remember.
                        All methods are long, all methods lead to the destruction of the coating, all methods require a huge amount of work to prevent fragmentation of aircraft and airfield equipment - anti-personnel mines "jumping out"

                        I would recommend that you turn on the brain. All the lyrics mentioned by you are not interesting as all the objects scattered on the runway are washed into the ditch at once, and the damaged coating is restored within minutes and no matter from mines or from firing with an aircraft cannon. Bomb craters are harder. Recovery takes tens of minutes. There is no aircraft or critical equipment in the open. I have twice posted a photo that you do not see at all.

                        Quote: Spade
                        In the reality?

                        Video to show what is happening with PU MLRS in reality or will we continue to discuss the spherical horse in a vacuum? How many volleys did the Hezbalon PUs make in reality, despite the fact that most of them were hidden on the ground and did not move along the roads?

                        Quote: Spade
                        Let me remind you that you have not yet been able to prove the low accuracy of the "Tornado". So either the facts are in the studio, or you end up with this outright slander. Even a thousandth repetition of an unfounded statement does not turn it into a fact.

                        Exactly the opposite. You could not prove the high accuracy of the current Tornadoes and your military-industrial complex from the 2012 year leads to the development of adjustable ammunition for Smerch. Are they fools of you?

                        Quote: Spade
                        Two missiles flew into the airfield without damaging the airport infrastructure, and this indicates that hundreds of mines caught on the runway, taxiways and parking areas and aircraft maintenance will not complicate the actions of aviation?
                        And that is very "logical". I will repeat the question about "bitten" 8))))))))))))))))))))

                        Two rockets? Where is the firewood from? And once again I ask the cross in the picture to show the service places of the aircraft.

                        Quote: Spade
                        Well, I already wrote to you. SEARCH.
                        Hope I ask you not to? Of course not. After all, I know that similar Chinese missiles are designed in exactly the same way, moreover, the "splavovtsy" participated in their development

                        The keyword is "similar" that is, not controlled. Only we are about the fact that they have and are managed, and you only lead their development. Didn't you write about this? wink

                        Quote: Spade
                        So look in the obligatory order. And then too often you started to voice ....

                        I will definitely find it. wassat
                      19. +1
                        21 July 2019 10: 54
                        Quote: professor
                        Who was "fallen and preferably bound" there?

                        Iraq leading a long-term war. But the funniest thing is that when he started to work with you a little later, you were afraid to answer him ...
                        But that's all true, the lyrics.
                        Once again, over the years 40 everything has changed a lot.

                        Quote: professor
                        Video show what is happening with the MLRS launcher in reality

                        Show. With you video destruction by the Israeli Air Force Russian installation of the MLRS. Covered by Russian air defense systems.


                        Quote: professor
                        You could not prove the high accuracy of the current Tornadoes

                        You are already lying.
                        There is official data from the manufacturer, dispersion "up to 0.3%" of the firing range. (http://mz.perm.ru) These data are not refuted by anyone.
                        So take the trouble to prove your unfounded statements about the "inaccurate" Tornado "

                        Quote: professor
                        Two rockets? Where did the firewood come from?

                        Did they have even less? I just did not read about the destruction. So they were not. So there are few missiles, and there was no effect of their use.

                        Quote: professor
                        Keyword "similar" that is, not controlled

                        It is "similar".
                        That is, for large-caliber MLRS with a range of flight up to 90 km.
                        Because we no longer have an analogue of the Chinese long-range MLRS in service. At least for now. We do not have a "Taiwan problem", we can not rush to the range

                        Quote: professor
                        I will definitely find it.

                        Clear. It seems that to ensure that you answer for your words will not work.
                      20. 0
                        21 July 2019 11: 12
                        Quote: Spade
                        Iraq leading a long-term war. But the funniest thing is that when he started to work with you a little later, you were afraid to answer him ...
                        But that's all true, the lyrics.
                        Once again, over the years 40 everything has changed a lot.

                        You teach mate and do not disgrace. Iraq was at the peak of its combat readiness. Who did Syria fight with when we bombed its reactor?
                        We succumbed to the provocation of Saddam.

                        not 2007 years have passed since 40.

                        Quote: Spade
                        Show. With you video destruction by the Israeli Air Force Russian installation of the MLRS. Covered by Russian air defense systems.

                        Now the condition that the installation should be Russian? What other conditions will be?

                        Quote: Spade
                        You are already lying.
                        There is official data from the manufacturer, dispersion "up to 0.3%" of the firing range. (http://mz.perm.ru) These data are not refuted by anyone.
                        So take the trouble to prove your unfounded statements about the "inaccurate" Tornado "

                        Prove that advertising claims are true. This time.
                        0.3% at a distance of 90 km is 270 meters. QUO high-precision projectile MLRS 10 m. Hmm ...
                        0.3% at a distance of 120 km is 360 meters. QUO high-precision projectile MLRS 10 m. Hmm ... Hmm .. These are two.

                        Quote: Spade
                        Did they have even less? I just did not read about the destruction. So they were not. So there are few missiles, and there was no effect of their use.

                        Well, according to your logic, planes in the open air are standing and waiting for them to be hit. And according to your logic, the MLRS division without problems will approach the distance of the shot at the airfield. Also, according to your logic, all errors in the world are subject to the normal law of distribution. wassat

                        Quote: Spade
                        It is "similar".
                        That is, for large-caliber MLRS with a range of flight up to 90 km.
                        Because we no longer have an analogue of the Chinese long-range MLRS in service. At least for now. We do not have a "Taiwan problem", we can not rush to the range

                        Stop, stop, stop. What do you mean by now? You just asserted that your systems are accurate enough and you need expensive, high-precision systems. What will change?

                        Quote: Spade
                        Clear. It seems that to ensure that you answer for your words will not work.

                        Found. Laid out. Looking for more?
                      21. +3
                        21 July 2019 13: 05
                        Quote: professor
                        We succumbed to the provocation of Saddam.

                        How interesting ... So when Saddam launches 38 ballistic missiles with possibly chemical warheads at Israel, you "do not succumb to provocations," and sit quietly in the cracks, squeezing gas bags with trembling hands.
                        When a pair of improvised rockets flies out of the water pipes from the Sector, you get a violent tantrum and you instantly strike back.

                        Question: why such a difference in the reaction?


                        Quote: professor
                        not 2007 years have passed since 40.

                        A single blow from the corner, with the realization that Syria will not be indignant about this and will let things go.
                        And instantly hide behind the "big gopnik, the main one among the punks in the area"
                        Heroes What else to say. But this has nothing to do with the subject under discussion. Neither counteraction from the Syrian air defense, nor counteraction from the Syrian aviation, nor counteraction from the Syrian REP, nor special forces on Israeli territory, nor air-raid attacks on Israeli territory ... there was none of this. therefore, the example under discussion has nothing to do.
                        And the thesis "you have enough courage to beat only the lying and tied one" is again confirmed. And even with an excess - from retaliation, as WikiLeaks testifies, Israel was saved by a loud shout to Damascus from Washington. The Americans were confident in a retaliatory strike, and possibly with chemical ammunition.


                        Quote: professor
                        Now the condition that the installation should be Russian? What other conditions will be?

                        Why Russian? Chinese

                        Quote: professor
                        0.3% at a distance of 90 km is 270 meters

                        So in a square kilometer per kilometer with a divisional salvo, 48 missiles will arrive. That is, or 3072 anti-personnel mines.

                        There will also be slander about "not so high-precision to get into the airfield?"

                        Quote: professor
                        Well, according to your logic, planes in the open air stand and wait until they are hit

                        It is possible and in shelters. But if at the exit of them there are mines, there are mines on the taxiways, and also mines on the runway, then there will be no special effect from this. Planes will not be able to fly at once.

                        Quote: professor
                        You have just stated that your systems are accurate enough and you need expensive high-precision systems.

                        Again, brazen lies. And you are definitely not ashamed.

                        Quote: professor
                        Found. Laid out. Looking for more?

                        And again lies. On the contrary, you found confirmation of the fact that I had previously stated the same thing as now.
                      22. 0
                        21 July 2019 14: 15
                        Quote: Spade
                        How interesting ... So when Saddam launches 38 ballistic missiles with possibly chemical warheads at Israel, you "do not succumb to provocations," and sit quietly in the cracks, squeezing gas bags with trembling hands.
                        When a pair of improvised rockets flies out of the water pipes from the Sector, you get a violent tantrum and you instantly strike back.

                        Question: why such a difference in the reaction?

                        Because the shelling from Gaza is not a provocation, unlike the shelling from Iraq. The weapons of mass destruction were not applied to us and Saddam was justly hanged. Nevertheless, we bombed the reactor to him despite his air defense super-duper and ballistic missiles.

                        Quote: Spade
                        A single blow from the corner, with the realization that Syria will not be indignant about this and will let things go.

                        You cannot please. Either they are "lying and tied" (who put them down and tied them?), Then this is "a single blow from around the corner." Next time we will warn them in advance about the upcoming strike. Well, the fact that the blow is single, you forgive. We do not have everything in Normal Distribution and we are capable of destroying a target with one hit.

                        Quote: Spade
                        Why Russian? Chinese

                        Iranian fit or only Russian-Chinese? wink

                        Quote: Spade
                        So in a square kilometer per kilometer with a divisional salvo, 48 missiles will arrive. That is, or 3072 anti-personnel mines.

                        According to the brochure will arrive. In reality, you have not brought any evidence even of such accuracy.

                        Quote: Spade
                        There will also be slander about "not so high-precision to get into the airfield?"

                        Already got? Where when?

                        Quote: Spade
                        It is possible and in shelters. But if at the exit of them there are mines, there are mines on the taxiways, and also mines on the runway, then there will be no special effect from this. Planes will not be able to fly at once.

                        Well yes. if the Smerchii division is allowed to penetrate the enemy’s rear and carry out a volley of mines, then the planes will not be able to take off immediately. At least half an hour a couple of three planes can not fly. The rest will take off and destroy your division.
                        Together calculate the number of rilezhek, lanes and shelters?


                        Quote: Spade
                        Quote: professor
                        You have just stated that your systems are accurate enough and you need expensive high-precision systems.

                        Again, brazen lies. And you are definitely not ashamed.

                        I'm not ashamed, and you?

                        Quote: Spade
                        And again lies. On the contrary, you found confirmation of the fact that I had previously stated the same thing as now.

                        Get out well with you well. Then you TASS is not the authority, then the deputy minister of defense is not a deputy minister.
                      23. -1
                        21 July 2019 09: 45
                        Quote: Spade
                        So look in the obligatory order. And then too often you started to voice ....

                        Spade (Spade) 13 February 2018 23: 43
                        +2
                        Quote: Abel
                        In the container one rocket. And have a tornado?

                        Tornado-S has no containers at all.

                        Quote: Abel
                        and in general, how do the MLRS and the individual tip?

                        It fits perfectly. Especially when you consider that the RS to the "Smerch" / "Tornado-S" is very, very expensive and come very close in cost to simple guided munitions with an inertial guidance system with correction according to global positioning data, like the Polonaise
                        Here, of course, it is necessary to count, but with a high probability the firing of a group of URS “Polonaise” at an area target will be even cheaper than a volley of “Tornado-S” due to greater accuracy and the possibility of individual guidance of missiles in a volley.


                        https://topwar.ru/92353-belarus-primet-na-vooruzhenie-novye-sistemy-zalpovogo-ognya.html
                        Spade (Spade) 16 March 2016 10: 57
                        +2
                        Apparently, never. The Chinese in this area specifically overtake us. That against the background of the fact that the United States practically came out of this topic, it is very unpleasant.


                        Once again, the longer the range, the greater the dispersion. And there comes a time when it is more economically feasible to use guided missiles with an ANN with correction according to global positioning data on an area target.


                        https://topwar.ru/122771-belorusskiy-polonez-voshel-v-troyku-luchshih-sistem-v-mire.html
                        Spade (Spade) 17 August 2017 12: 59
                        +5
                        Quote: Shurik70
                        In general, how objective is his assessment?

                        Judging by the fact that the first places are Chinese, it is very objective. If "Tornado" were in the first place, it would be worth considering the adequacy ...
                        Although, of course, throwing everything in one pile is not entirely correct.
                      24. 0
                        21 July 2019 10: 59
                        Quote: professor
                        Once again, the longer the range, the greater the dispersion. And there comes a time when it is more economically feasible to use guided missiles with an ANN with correction according to global positioning data on an area target.

                        You see ... Thank you so much for finding my quote proving your wrong.
                        I originally wrote exactly what I repeated several times on this thread.
                        It's all about the maximum range.
                        And you turned out to .... keep silent.

                        And for the future. Sometimes it is worthwhile to think with your head before throwing out arguments in favor of one’s own wrong.
                      25. -1
                        21 July 2019 11: 40
                        Quote: Spade
                        Quote: professor
                        Once again, the longer the range, the greater the dispersion. And there comes a time when it is more economically feasible to use guided missiles with an ANN with correction according to global positioning data on an area target.

                        You see ... Thank you so much for finding my quote proving your wrong.
                        I originally wrote exactly what I repeated several times on this thread.
                        It's all about the maximum range.
                        And you turned out to .... keep silent.

                        And for the future. Sometimes it is worthwhile to think with your head before throwing out arguments in favor of one’s own wrong.

                        Have you turned everything over again? Then you say that "stupid" shells are equally accurate with high-precision ones, until suddenly it all depends on the range. You yourself will figure it out, otherwise it will turn out like hybrid cars and Normal Distribution Law.

                        PS
                        Good luck to your military-industrial complex in creating "unnecessary" high-precision MLRS systems. hi
                      26. 0
                        21 July 2019 12: 07
                        Quote: professor
                        Have you turned everything over again? Then you claim that "stupid" projectiles are equally accurate with high-precision

                        Question: Are you not ashamed to lie?
                        I pointed out from the very beginning that the "Tornado" projectile was never "stupid". It initially had an inertial navigation system, according to the information from which the trajectory is corrected on the OUT and the time of separation of the RS head part is corrected.
                        I wrote from the very beginning that for the existing maximum firing ranges of the Smerch RS, such a scheme for reducing the dispersion of shells in a salvo is sufficient.

                        And you are absolutely impudently trying to attribute what I never wrote. And it’s not clear what you hope for, because it’s very easy to just go up the branch and see ....
                      27. 0
                        21 July 2019 09: 30
                        Quote: professor
                        Yep They hit the enemy without starting the engine. Do you want to see the video again how does this work?

                        E .....
                        And, I understand, your artillerymen are the same "heroes" as your sappers, who, as you say, are sitting deep in the rear
                        Knowing that with the first shot they clearly indicate their location, instead of an anti-fire maneuver, they leave the self-propelled guns and hide in a safe place? Then yes, remote mining will not hurt them in any way.

                        Accepted. I have no more questions. And this is an innovation ... there is no need to suffer with an anti-fire maneuver, no need to cover the area of ​​fire, no need. Three or four shots, and the gun is thrown by the crew. Congenial.

                        Quote: professor
                        As for the land mines, good luck finding them in a city building.

                        With the sappers, who, along with the artillerymen in the RPM, stick out, this is really daunting. I agree with you.

                        Quote: professor
                        For example, the direction and speed of the wind along the entire flight path, the inaccuracy of the manufacture of ammunition and other nonsense

                        ... is compensated by the creation or adjustment of the rapper.
                        Again, don't put an equal sign between "I don't know about this" and "it's impossible"

                        Quote: professor
                        Do not confuse to hit and hit.

                        Do not confuse MLRS and tactical missile systems. Different tasks, different composition of ACS and other equipment, different place in the battle formation, different tactics of combat use. An attempt to create "two in one" leads to overcomplication and to an excessive rise in the cost of such a "combine". At the same time, its efficiency will be lower than that of two machines - PU MLRS and PU TRK. Since the execution of one function greatly complicates the execution of another.

                        Quote: professor
                        My question is valid. Do you have high-precision MLRS shells or not?

                        Of course not! And I already wrote about this several times. Our MLRS are not designed to hit point targets AT ALL. The minimum target size, for example, for the Hurricane division, is 500x500 meters. For "Tornadoes", given their greater accuracy, most likely in the region of 400x400.
                        Accordingly, if there is no need to hit point targets, there is no need for high-precision ammunition.
                        And for systems to reduce the dispersion of RS in a salvo at the moment, with the existing maximum firing ranges, a correction of a projectile in the active part of the trajectory plus systems for adjusting the separation time of the warhead


                        Quote: professor
                        Why are your 2012 year developing such projectiles

                        This statement is not true
                        Ours, like the Chinese, are developing a system for reducing the dispersion of the RS in a salvo when firing at a distance of more than 90 km. No more. Because the correction system for OUT is no longer effective.



                        Quote: professor
                        We pass on to the person?

                        Not on your nelly. Just thinking out loud about your paradoxical logic. Like "you always carry the key in your pocket, so you don't need it." Ukrainian patriots are usually inclined to this "logic".
                      28. 0
                        21 July 2019 10: 01
                        Quote: Spade
                        E .....

                        It means you don’t need to show real combat video. We confine ourselves to sofa reasoning.

                        Quote: Spade
                        With the sappers, who, along with the artillerymen in the RPM, stick out, this is really daunting. I agree with you.

                        Quote: professor
                        Our sappers ALWAYS go in front of the tanks.


                        Quote: Spade
                        ... is compensated by the creation or adjustment of the rapper.
                        Again, don't put an equal sign between "I don't know about this" and "it's impossible"

                        It is not compensated, and therefore expensive high-precision ammunition is created that does not need zeroing, saying: "Hey, I'm going to shoot at you from here now."

                        Quote: Spade
                        Quote: professor
                        My question is valid. Do you have high-precision MLRS shells or not?

                        Of course not! And I have already written about this several times. Our MRLSs are not intended to hit point targets AT ALL.

                        Finally, the answers went. So we write: no.

                        Quote: Spade
                        Quote: professor
                        Why are your 2012 year developing such projectiles

                        This statement is not true
                        Ours, like the Chinese, are developing a system for reducing the dispersion of the RS in a salvo when firing at a distance of more than 90 km. No more. Because the correction system for OUT is no longer effective.

                        Lying tass?
                        https://tass.ru/armiya-i-opk/3627028
                        "This year, the state tests of the Tornado-S system, which will replace the Smerch MLRS, are being completed. Its production is scheduled for 2017, we are looking forward to it," he said.

                        According to Borisov, the new complex will have an increased firing range compared to its predecessor. In addition, "Tornado-S" will be equipped high precision shells.
                      29. +1
                        21 July 2019 10: 33
                        Quote: professor
                        So a real combat video

                        And when did you last drive them? Limited to First Lebanese 40 years ago?
                        Since then, only the enemy, with orders of magnitude fewer opportunities ... It is desirable very much weakened, as leading the fight against terrorists Syria. Even Saddam was afraid to answer the rocket attacks on his territory. Considered that the risk is too great?

                        Quote: professor
                        With the sappers, who, along with the artillerymen in the RPM, stick out, this is really daunting. I agree with you.
                        Quote: professor
                        Our sappers ALWAYS go in front of the tanks.

                        You will finally decide where your sappers are. Otherwise, they are at the same time in the rear with the artillery, they help and "walk in front of the tanks" on the front end.

                        Quote: professor
                        Not compensated

                        Deny reality? Or rather do not know what a "benchmark" is 8))))))))))))))))))))

                        Quote: professor
                        who do not need a sighting message saying: "Hey, I'm going to shoot at you from here now."

                        Complete training. Or, again, the rapper and the transfer of fire. Or the transfer of fire from the previously shot target.
                        Again, educational program: shooting is not the main way. The main one is complete preparation, and the adjustment is applied when the requirements of the control program are not met, as well as to transfer fire from a bench mark or other target. That is force majeure.

                        Well, gentleman ... how can you be so amateur and climb to argue ??????


                        Quote: professor
                        Lying tass?

                        Ага.
                        It often happens to them. No control of news reports by experts. As a result, even stand, at least fall.
                        In almost any message on a military topic there are jambs.
                      30. -1
                        21 July 2019 10: 53
                        Quote: Spade
                        And when did you last drive them? Limited to First Lebanese 40 years ago?

                        They never stopped. This is called sluggish conflict with exacerbations.

                        Quote: Spade
                        Since then, only the enemy, with orders of magnitude fewer opportunities ... It is desirable very much weakened, as leading the fight against terrorists Syria. Even Saddam was afraid to answer the rocket attacks on his territory. Considered that the risk is too great?

                        Air defense capabilities in Syria and the number of vehicles not including aircraft exceeded the Israeli one. This did not prevent us from bombing their reactor. We acted correctly with Saddam, did not go on about it and did not let us drag us into the conflict, thereby destroying the anti-Saddam coalition.

                        Quote: Spade
                        You will finally decide where your sappers are. Otherwise, they are at the same time in the rear with the artillery, they help and "walk in front of the tanks" on the front end.

                        Sappers are everywhere. Such a theater of war.

                        Quote: Spade
                        Deny reality? Or rather do not know what a "benchmark" is 8))))))))))))))))))))

                        Rather, you are trying to deny the reality where precision-guided munitions are more precise than precision ones.

                        Quote: Spade
                        Complete training. Or, again, the rapper and the transfer of fire. Or the transfer of fire from the previously shot target.
                        Again, educational program: shooting is not the main way. The main one is complete preparation, and the adjustment is applied when the requirements of the control program are not met, as well as to transfer fire from a bench mark or other target. That is force majeure.

                        You explain to an amateur why your military-industrial complex is developing a high-precision projectile for MLRS if everything is so good without it, "Full preparation. Or again, a benchmark and transfer of fire. Or transfer of fire from a previously targeted target." Waste pensioners money down the drain?

                        Quote: Spade
                        Quote: professor
                        Lying tass?

                        Ага.
                        It often happens to them. No control of news reports by experts. As a result, even stand, at least fall.
                        In almost any message on a military topic there are jambs.

                        Deputy Minister of Defense, you also lie? lol
                      31. +2
                        21 July 2019 11: 31
                        Quote: professor
                        They never stopped.

                        Once again, the last experience of this kind almost 40 lnt ago. Since then, exclusively beating lying. Moreover, it is connected and often by a crowd together with terrorists, as in Syria.

                        Quote: professor
                        Air defense capabilities in Syria

                        Ancient, not really served, sitting on a financial "starvation ration" ... Honestly, I would be ashamed of such "victories".

                        Quote: professor
                        Sappers are everywhere. Such a theater of war.

                        If a sapper is lying belly up in the rear, in the area of ​​firing positions, then he is absolutely exactly there. Not "everywhere". That is, where it is really needed, it is not. That's all. And let's go without this balancing act. One sapper at a given moment can be located only at one point in space. And not in a few, let alone "everywhere"

                        Quote: professor
                        Rather, you are trying to deny the reality where precision-guided munitions are more precise than precision ones.

                        Again, lied .... Well, here it’s easier, there is only one branch. Where did I say that?

                        Everything is much simpler here. High-precision ammunition is effective only in the defeat of single point targets. Which on the modern NORMAL battlefield between the two normal armies is almost there.
                        Most goals are group arenas. Which is faster, cheaper, and more effective than hitting conventional ammunition.



                        Quote: professor
                        You explain to the amateur why your defense industry is developing a high-precision projectile for MLRS

                        Do you have dyslexia? For the third time, I need to indicate why for RS working at a range of 120 km. do you need a trajectory correction system for ANN + GLONASS? I write for the third time, why such PCs are not high-precision?

                        Quote: professor
                        Deputy Minister of Defense, you also lie?

                        Did he say that the PC is high-precision? Or did the journalist retell it in his own words, and the word "high-precision" refers to the journalist's fantasies?

                        I don’t think you missed it. So you are lying, not "our deputy defense minister"?
                    2. +2
                      20 July 2019 08: 32
                      Quote: professor
                      You know better. We will not even discuss the fact that our artillery from places of permanent deployment to the capitals of enemy states will be discussed. How many batteries in the 2006-m crossed the Lebanese border? And in the 2014-m border with gas?

                      Well, what am I talking about? Your artillery, as you say, is in the rear. Not just in the rear, but "in places of permanent deployment."
                      Your sappers, according to your words, are together with the artillery. That is, in the rear, not with advanced units. Hiding. It is understandable why your tanks and M113s are blown up by "large land mines", which are relatively easy to spot.

                      Quote: professor
                      Really hard. 300 mines scattered over a large area according to the Normal distribution law will all be in the path of the tank. Snobel Prize in the studio.

                      10 snobel 8))))) to you. What prevents to choose an aiming point like that. so that the direction of the major semi-axis of the ellipse of dispersion coincides with the direction of the road? Only ignorance and unwillingness to think
                      And after the divisional salvo we will get such good, thick mining. And even turn around and go around it does not work, there are also mines.


                      Quote: professor
                      When they "get" and "become" then we'll talk, and while I repeat my question: "Do you have high-precision MLRS shells?" Are there any managed? Are there any corrected ones?

                      The question is: why don't the Merkavs have guided anti-tank shells? That's right, because at their ranges of application, the accuracy of the uncontrollable is quite enough. And if there is a need to hit other people's tanks at ranges of 5 km, such TUS will be created.
                      So does it reach you?
                      No one in the world has "high-precision shells" for MLRS, that is, hitting a point target with a probability of more than 50%.
                      Educational program: RS for MLRS is one thing. Tactical missiles are different. There are, let's say, not very smart ones who think that they should start a clock. missiles with MLRS installation is a good solution. But this is exactly the same "down the drain".

                      Quote: professor
                      The best argument in favor of the uselessness of this system is the lack of positive combat experience.

                      I'm tired of repeating to you. You overestimate yourself very much, putting an "equal" sign between "I don't know about this" and "this is not present"
                      Positive combat experience? Komsomolskoe, remote mining of a decay through which it was possible to secretly leave the village south to the mountains. The result is a bunch of corpses, no one left.

                      Quote: professor
                      See, and here I was right.

                      Yeah 8)))))))))))
                      After combat use, the system is not written off, they continue to actively train the calculations. This clearly indicates its inefficiency. laughing laughing laughing
                      Does your head hurt? Temperature? Have Ukrainian patriots bite you lately? They also often have this "logic" laughing
                2. +2
                  19 July 2019 19: 47
                  Quote: professor
                  We have such a doctrine. We have no rear.

                  There is. And firing positions of artillery are located exactly there.

                  Quote: professor
                  And all these hundreds of mines along the route of one tank? What is the normal distribution law? After all, do mines occupy their place on the earth’s surface?

                  Tin. Have you ever seen a tank column moving along the road?

                  Quote: professor
                  What, what, what? "managed options"? Are we not talking about them when we talk about high-precision, and not statistical? Do you have such?

                  What kind of verbal pardon?
                  Did you not know that the "Smerch" rocket is not unguided? laughing laughing laughing
                  Nevertheless, it is. For such ranges of correction to OUT plus correction of the time of separation of the warhead is enough. There will be more long-range, will receive control of the INS + GLONASS
                  But at the same time, even with GLONASS they will not become "high-precision" laughing
                  Likbez I will not conduct, you will find what precision weapons are.


                  Quote: professor
                  And who said that only you are allowed money?

                  So far, there are no serious arguments in favor of this statement. One cheek swelling "we know how to beat a lying person in a crowd in a driveway, and therefore we can lay a boxer one on one"

                  Quote: professor
                  ... however, they are silent on how successful. True?

                  Another educational program. Mines for modern armies are needed primarily to limit the mobility of enemy units. And not in order to derive from the structure of his equipment and people. You do not know this, and therefore do not understand the meaning of remote mining

                  The Americans, apparently, were able to limit the mobility of the Iraqi army, therefore, remote mining systems are developing, training is being actively conducted.
            2. +2
              18 July 2019 20: 31
              Quote: professor
              We have sappers in battle formations. You are wrong?

              In the artillery battle formations? No, we are not.
              And from what or from whom your sappers hiding in the rear?

              Quote: professor
              Why not millions of mines right away?

              Because the number of mines planted by the Tornado Division is not in the millions.
              Are you having trouble with arithmetic? 12x25 = 300. 300 PT min min can install one MRLS.

              Quote: professor
              No, not funny. They have a MLRS much more accurate than yours and they are able to quickly cover a column of tanks if there is target designation. And nothing will have to be mined.

              They can. After they are stopped. And there are few options. Unless politely ask if you do not like remote mining laughing laughing laughing

              Once again, educational program. First, most of the Chinese "long-range" RSs are similar to the Smerchevs. Guided variants are used in missiles with a range exceeding 70 km.
              Secondly, such missiles cannot hit moving targets. It is very expensive to try to use them at "meeting points" as conventional ammunition.

              Quote: professor
              Remote mining is a typical example of money down the drain.

              Write a letter to the Pentagon. They have the same advanced system of remote mining, as we have. True, somewhat more expensive due to the large use of aviation.


              Quote: professor
              They even thought of scattering anti-tank mines from helicopters. Why, in real combat, no one remembered this ingenious thought?


              They write that they used it in Iraq.
            3. +2
              18 July 2019 20: 38
              Quote: professor
              Ask Assad, he experienced it in his own skin. Or ask her. On her account 2 enemy aircraft.

              Do you consider your habit of kicking lying mega-cool?
              I'm afraid this habit of choosing an opponent weaker played a cruel joke with you.
        5. +2
          18 July 2019 17: 28
          Quote: professor
          Anti-personnel mines? Sappers will be called and they will complete their task. Why don't you immediately hit the artillerymen with a "tornado" that has no analogues in the world so that there is no one else to make the maneuver?

          Well, yes, until they get there, until they start cleaning ... Artillery units, devoid of mobility, will be destroyed. This time is enough for additional exploration, followed by complete cutting out.
          And the complete "mixing" of the entire area of ​​fire, with a flow rate that guarantees the destruction of targets will require too many installations, time and missiles.


          Quote: professor
          Overcoming minefields is a routine for tank units. This does not affect the "speed" of progress. And here why don't you hit the units themselves? Accuracy does not allow? So buy shells from the Chinese. They are more accurate.

          Routine ... Well, he "trawl" one mine, well, two, well, three. Then it, this trawl, must be thrown into the trash, and put a new one. And there are many mines ... hundreds ...
          And again, taki- the machine column will be hit. Just later, when they will be busy with mine clearance manually. When after a few minutes the trawls lose
          And about the Chinese, a good joke. That's just the PC with the correction according to the global positioning data can only be used for fixed targets. And that's just how remote mining turns tanks into fixed targets.
        6. 0
          19 July 2019 09: 46
          1.
          Quote: professor
          . Aircraft are in closed concrete shelters.

          Concrete shelters are not designed for direct hits, only from fragments.
          In such a case there are Calibers and Iskanders.
          Yes, and a full volley of Tornado survives no shelter)
          2.
          Mines, as you know, need to be installed wisely, and it’s not possible to disperse mines at a distance of 70 km.

          Remote mining on aims to compete in the smart installation of mines))
          The purpose is to delay the offensive in a certain area, to slow down or simply complicate the life of a certain unit for a certain time, in a certain direction. If we talk about the same airfield, the 768 mines scattered over it are not intended to kill everyone there with the help of a sophisticated installation)), but simply to paralyze the work for a certain time.
          1. -1
            19 July 2019 19: 06
            Quote: Ramzaj99
            Concrete shelters are not designed for direct hits, only from fragments.
            In such a case there are Calibers and Iskanders.
            Yes, and a full volley of Tornado survives no shelter)

            Calculated. They take only concrete ammunition. Smerchevsky mines are not among those.

            Quote: Ramzaj99
            Remote mining on aims to compete in the smart installation of mines))

            That's it for sure. This is one of the reasons why it is useless and even harmful for the installers themselves.

            Quote: Ramzaj99
            The purpose is to delay the offensive in a certain area, to slow down or simply complicate the life of a certain unit for a certain time, in a certain direction. If we talk about the same airfield, the 768 mines scattered over it are not intended to kill everyone there with the help of a sophisticated installation)), but simply to paralyze the work for a certain time.

            In theory, this is all true. In practice, the functioning of the airfield is blocked differently.
  4. +3
    18 July 2019 07: 05
    Since the mines installed in the attack are easily detected visually, losses from such minefields will be minimal, but they will be able to delay the enemy for the duration of clearance.
    1. +7
      18 July 2019 07: 58
      The task of any engineering obstacle is to delay the advance of the enemy!
      1. +4
        18 July 2019 08: 33
        Quote: mark1969
        The task of any engineering obstacle is to delay the advance of the enemy!

        Limit its mobility.
    2. +2
      18 July 2019 08: 02
      About POM, probably yes, if on asphalt or a cleaned field there, but from the PTM technique you will not particularly consider it. It seems to me.
  5. -1
    18 July 2019 08: 03
    I do not know how reasonable it is to land mines using MLRS. Mines are no longer cheap, and even more so with a limited duration. Although this way of setting may come in handy, but this is a matter of chance. For me, it is better to use drones for targeted production.
    1. +1
      18 July 2019 14: 10
      War in itself is not an cheap event. Shackling minefields are a very convenient thing. The enemy is either forced to meet fire resistance and maneuver unexpectedly into minefields, or is delayed by the device of passages, or forced to look for bypass routes, which either reduces the rate of attack or delays the approach of enemy reserves. Well, it inflicts some defeat on technology and l / s.
  6. +5
    18 July 2019 08: 04
    On the sidelines
    However, with all its advantages, mining missiles for multiple launch rocket systems are not the main means of remote installation of barriers. For installation of mines in the float on the surface, other types of equipment are widely used, which are in service with engineering units.

    The author was very hasty with such statements.
    First, about the "supporting roles". The role is actually the first, the second, or rather even the first and a half, aviation. And that's all. Because promptly expose in the territory occupied by the enemy minefields, these same "engineering units" cannot
    These are different things, a minefield on its own territory, often in its rear, and a minefield 70 km from the contact line on the territory completely controlled by the enemy are completely different things.

    Secondly, about the "engineering units". In fact, remote mining equipment can be had from the level of a motorized rifle platoon. The same "portable mining kit" PKM-1, which is "Wind".
    Moreover, even the infantry squad can expose minefields from a moving vehicle, for example, from the armor of an infantry fighting vehicle. There are manual mining kits for this. KPM-P for anti-personnel, KPM-T for anti-tank and KPM-S for signal mines. And it will not be much slower than that of mine loaders laying mines on the ground.
  7. 0
    18 July 2019 08: 09
    Author, thanks! But there is such a video:
  8. -4
    18 July 2019 08: 17
    So, it seems, anti-personnel mines are prohibited by convention ....
    Shells developed before the convention and should not be used
    1. +10
      18 July 2019 08: 49
      Quote: U-58
      So, it seems, anti-personnel mines are prohibited by convention ....

      Bullshit this convention.
      Therefore, we did not sign it.
      Bullshit, deceit and hypocrisy, common in the West. Read somehow Veremeev


      This is what a Swedish "defensive charge" looks like:


      But this is just an enchanting photo, Finnish sappers are training Estonian soldiers to use Swedish "defensive charges". Let me remind you that all three countries are signatories to the "Ottawa Treaty on the Prohibition of the Use, Stockpiling, Production and Transfer of Antipersonnel Mines and on Their Destruction"

      https://ivagkin.livejournal.com/62453.html

      Nice, right? Never sit down to play with cheaters.
    2. +2
      18 July 2019 09: 04
      Russia, the USA, China, India and several other countries have not signed this agreement. Therefore, for us it is not prohibited.
  9. 0
    18 July 2019 08: 19
    What only people did not invent for their destruction, and the blame for all greed and pride.
    1. 0
      18 July 2019 09: 07
      And sometimes stupidity to regret.
  10. +1
    18 July 2019 09: 24
    I will note, to the opinion of the author and colleagues in the comments, that the mines used are distinguished by the ability to set the time of self-destruction in a fairly wide range and at the same time are non-neutralized and pose an increased threat during mine clearance. That is, it is easier to go around and bypass minefields set up in a similar way, if possible, otherwise it will take a long time and dreary to burn the area with napalm, level it with artillery and clean the passages with demining charges, and then be ready for possible detonations. Well, or "smoke bamboo" while waiting for self-liquidation, however, no one guarantees that another packet will not arrive, etc.
  11. +1
    18 July 2019 09: 32
    It beautifully mines the enemy’s withdrawal paths, although accuracy was a bit crippled, but the effect was on the face, the witness himself. Experienced crew (crew) must also be considered.
  12. 0
    18 July 2019 12: 06
    A question for specialists. Wouldn't a combination of POM 1 AND POM 2 be more effective? Well, I mean large anti-personnel POM 2 and small mines to complicate manual clearance. Yes, even the same "Petal"? Or will such fields be unambiguously not cleared manually?
    1. +2
      18 July 2019 17: 40
      Quote: garri-lin
      and small mines to complicate manual clearance. Yes, even the same "Petal"?

      What's the point with him? It does not have any anti-movement devices. That is, you can stupidly pushed aside A with POM-2, everything is very sour. Only trash, only throwing a "cat"
      1. 0
        18 July 2019 18: 59
        Well, I meant the mixed field. Small inconspicuous mines complicating the work of manual clearance. Plus, in the same Petal, you can put a fuse similar to that installed in POM 1 disk. His then figs tornesh. I wonder why such a mixed mining is not used.
        1. +2
          18 July 2019 19: 25
          Quote: garri-lin
          Well, I meant the mixed field. Small inconspicuous mines complicating the work of manual clearance.

          So do I. "Petal" does not make mine clearance particularly difficult.

          Quote: garri-lin
          Plus, in the same Petal, you can put a fuse similar to that installed in POM 1 disk. His then figs tornesh.

          And if you yourself have to clear mines? "The cat" won't help anymore.
          1. 0
            18 July 2019 20: 02
            Petal had a self-liquidator. For two days if I'm not mistaken. In the army I read manuals of sappers from nothing to do. It described how to manually set mixed minefields. For one anti-tank several anti-personnel large and many small. The schemes were very clear and there were a lot of options. So this type of mining was considered effective. But with remote mining, they don’t use it.
            1. +2
              18 July 2019 20: 39
              Quote: garri-lin
              Petal had a self-liquidator.

              Not at all.
              And if you need it before?
              1. 0
                18 July 2019 20: 58
                Well, maybe you're right. I agree with the opinion of an experienced person.
      2. +1
        19 July 2019 21: 09
        Not everywhere, the desert and the petal are visible to the naked eye.

        Remote mining systems were made for the war in Europe. Grass in summer, you know ... snow in winter ...

        Can not see.

        And if you step it will hurt.
        1. +2
          19 July 2019 21: 49
          Quote: Horse, lyudovѣd and soulѣlyub
          And if you step it will hurt.

          Russian boots from the "Dublon" keep 200g. in TNT equivalent. About 5 times more.
          There are all sorts of "spiderboots"


          or reduce the likelihood of damage to the legs, or reduce the pressure on the ground
          1. 0
            19 July 2019 22: 42
            I have never seen such a thing.

            hi
            1. +2
              20 July 2019 07: 29
              There is no active mining by mines intended for traumatic amputation, and there is no need to wear one. But this does not mean that they are not available in the troops.
  13. 0
    18 July 2019 12: 10
    Well done !!! It is possible to quickly cut off attempts of the enemy’s counter-attacks, as well as block his units in a limited area, transferring them to their liability.
  14. 0
    21 July 2019 03: 45
    I can propose to adapt a similar mining system for the City. I understand there are land mining systems, but where are they? And Grad is always at hand ... Grad shoots much closer than Tornado, but Grad is EVERYWHERE, and Tornado - there are not so many of them. hi
  15. 0
    19 August 2019 21: 34
    And with a smoke screen there is smoke, poor visibility is panic !!!
  16. -1
    24 August 2019 13: 17
    Quote: professor
    The launcher of the 9K58 combat vehicle is compatible with all existing 9X55 family of rockets, and conducting mining with the help of appropriate ammunition does not require any special preparation. The calculation of the MLRS is enough to go to the position and shoot at a given piece of terrain.

    This is one of the main drawbacks of such systems. Mines are known to be installed wisely, and it is not known where to disperse where at a distance of 70 km. This is a whole science. And the Tatar-Mongolian cavalry does not come as locusts. Moreover, it is necessary to make maps of minefields; otherwise, these mines will be more harmful to their own than to the enemy.

    Useless ammunition. negative


    Okay, I’ll reveal a terrible secret to a thoughtful person:
    In fact, there is such a secret thing because of which the mines
    fall not just where, but where it is necessary, called "sight".
    The second terrible secret is that the mines there are not eternal canned, they go out in a maximum of three or four days and disappear with the sound "boom!", So you don't have to bother with maps

"Right Sector" (banned in Russia), "Ukrainian Insurgent Army" (UPA) (banned in Russia), ISIS (banned in Russia), "Jabhat Fatah al-Sham" formerly "Jabhat al-Nusra" (banned in Russia) , Taliban (banned in Russia), Al-Qaeda (banned in Russia), Anti-Corruption Foundation (banned in Russia), Navalny Headquarters (banned in Russia), Facebook (banned in Russia), Instagram (banned in Russia), Meta (banned in Russia), Misanthropic Division (banned in Russia), Azov (banned in Russia), Muslim Brotherhood (banned in Russia), Aum Shinrikyo (banned in Russia), AUE (banned in Russia), UNA-UNSO (banned in Russia), Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People (banned in Russia), Legion “Freedom of Russia” (armed formation, recognized as terrorist in the Russian Federation and banned)

“Non-profit organizations, unregistered public associations or individuals performing the functions of a foreign agent,” as well as media outlets performing the functions of a foreign agent: “Medusa”; "Voice of America"; "Realities"; "Present time"; "Radio Freedom"; Ponomarev; Savitskaya; Markelov; Kamalyagin; Apakhonchich; Makarevich; Dud; Gordon; Zhdanov; Medvedev; Fedorov; "Owl"; "Alliance of Doctors"; "RKK" "Levada Center"; "Memorial"; "Voice"; "Person and law"; "Rain"; "Mediazone"; "Deutsche Welle"; QMS "Caucasian Knot"; "Insider"; "New Newspaper"