Military Review

A helicopter against the tank. Standoff more than half a century long

195

The history of the formation of confrontation


The experience of the Second World War clearly showed the power of mobile armored units. In the considered variants of military confrontation between the USSR and the NATO countries, armored formations were assigned the leading role in the implementation of deep breakthroughs in the territory of the countries of Western Europe, with access to the English Channel as soon as possible.



Manufacture tanks in USSR


Overclocked during the period of the Great Patriotic War, the production of tanks in the USSR and after the end of the war did not slow down much. By the time of the collapse of the Soviet Union, the number of tanks in service and in storage was, according to various estimates, about 63 — 69 thousand units, the number of infantry fighting vehicles (BMP) and armored personnel carriers exceeded 75 thousand units.

Of course, such a threat demanded that the armed forces of Western countries search for solutions to neutralize it. One of the most effective ways to counter the Soviet tank threat was the creation of combat helicopters with anti-tank guided missiles (ATGM).

The first X-7 Rotkäppchen ATGM (“Little Red Riding Hood”) appeared in Nazi Germany during the Second World War, but their use was not systematic. At about the same time, the first serial helicopter appeared - the American Sikorsky R-4 Hoverfly. It was as a result of the "crossing" of the helicopter and the ATGM that the most effective anti-tank weaponfrom all existing.


German X-7 Rotkäppchen ATGM and Sikorsky R-4 Hoverfly Helicopter


Conventionally, combat helicopters can be divided into two types. The first includes combat helicopters, created on the basis of multi-purpose vehicles, which, during the revision, hung ATGM and elements of the guidance / control system. The lack of machines of this type is often a lack of security, a limited set of weapons and over-weight due to the cargo-passenger cabin (if the basis was a transport helicopter). Examples of such helicopters include the German multipurpose and attack helicopter Bo 105 or the British Westland Lynx.


Anti-tank modifications of helicopters Bo 105 and Westland Lynx


The second type includes later specialized combat helicopters, originally developed as anti-tank helicopters or fire support helicopters.

The first such helicopter was the American Bell AH-1 Cobra, adopted in 1967. The design of the helicopter was so successful that its modified versions are still used by the US Marine Corps, the armed forces of Israel and other countries of the world. The Bell AH-1 Cobra helicopter was primarily intended for aviation support, but its anti-tank modifications could carry up to four TOW ATGMs, and in the latest versions of the AH-1W and AH-1Z helicopter can carry up to eight completely modern AGM-114 Hellfire ATGMs.


Bell AH-Cobra combat helicopter and its modern modification Bell AH-1W Super Cobra


The imperfection of the guidance systems and the ATGM of that time ensured the likelihood of armored vehicles being hit by a helicopter from a helicopter with a probability of about 0,5 — 0,6, but this was only the beginning.

The main threat to Soviet armored vehicles was the latest AH-64 Apache attack helicopter, adopted in the 1984 year. This helicopter was originally intended to fight enemy tanks at any time of the day and is capable of carrying up to 16 the latest AGM-114 Hellfire ATGMs with a firing range of 7 km in earlier versions and 11 km in the latest versions. The AGM-114 Hellfire provides several homing heads - with semi-active laser or active radar homing. At the moment, AH-64 Apache in versions “D” “E” remains the main combat helicopter of the US Army and no direct replacement is expected. In the AH-64D modification, the helicopter received a sub-submarine radar, which allows for reconnaissance and use of weapons from behind the jump, and in the AH-64E modification, the ability to control the UAV’s slave.


Attack helicopter AH-64E Apache Guardian


Attack helicopters of varying degrees of success have also produced other countries, of which we can mention the Franco-German helicopter Tiger (Tiger) of the company Eurocopter, the Italian A129 Mangusta of the company Agusta and the South African AH-2 Rooivalk (Kestrel).


Franco-German attack tiger helicopter in Tiger UHT variants - fire support helicopter for the Bundeswehr (left) and Tiger HAP - fire support helicopter for the French army (right)



A129 Mangusta and AH-2 Rooivalk attack helicopters


Anti-aircraft defense (air defense) armored vehicles


In principle, the title of the article “A helicopter against a tank” is not entirely correct, since in fact the tank cannot oppose anything to the helicopter, not considering an anti-aircraft gun of 12,7 mm caliber as an effective means of defense. Even setting remotely controlled weapon modules (DUMV) with 30-mm gun will not allow the tank to effectively confront modern military helicopters.

Exercises conducted in 80-ies of the XX century, showed the ratio of the losses of combat helicopters to armored vehicles as 1 to 20. In addition, Assault Breaker-type reconnaissance-strike complexes (ARMs), capable of striking armored vehicles with high-precision submunitions, loomed on the horizon. As a result of the emergence of the above-mentioned threats, the view was increasingly heard about the decline of tanks as a class of combat vehicles.

The response to increase the survival of armored vehicles on the battlefield, was the development of military air defense.

Anti-aircraft self-propelled units (ZSU) of the Shilka type could not effectively deal with helicopters due to the small firing range. The Strela-60 and Strela-70 anti-aircraft missile systems (ZRK) developed at the end of the 1-X-beginning of the 10-s as the main guidance mode used the selection of a contrast target against the sky (photocontrast mode). This did not allow attacking targets against the background of the earth, which is relevant when repelling the threat posed by combat helicopters. In the Strela-10, the infrared guidance mode was used as a backup, but its operation required the cooling of the infrared homing head (ICGSN) with liquid nitrogen located in the body of the missile container. If IKGSN was activated, but subsequently the launch was canceled, for example, if the target left the zone of visibility, then it was no longer possible to reuse the infrared targeting mode due to the absence of nitrogen. Thus, the above air defense systems cannot be considered a full-fledged protection against helicopter gunships with anti-tank missiles.


ZSU “Shilka”, ZRK “Strela-1”, ZRK “Strela-10”


The Tunguska anti-aircraft missile and cannon system (ZRPK) and the Tor-M1 air defense system became the first effective military air defense systems capable of fighting helicopter gunships. A special feature of the Tunguska air defense missile system was the possibility of hitting targets with anti-aircraft guided missiles (SAM) in the amount of 8 units, at a distance of up to eight kilometers, and two twin 30-mm automatic cannons, at a range of up to four kilometers. Guidance is carried out both by data from a radar station (radar), and by data from an optical-location station (OLS). Supersonic flight speed Zur provides defeat carrier (combat helicopter) earlier than the ATGM, which our opponents are mostly subsonic, will be able to hit the target. In case the anti-tank guided missiles are not equipped with an autonomous homing head and require carrier tracking of the target during the entire rocket flight, this makes defeat of the armored vehicles they protect unlikely.

The Tor-M1 complex can hit targets vertically with launching missiles at a distance of up to twelve kilometers.

A helicopter against the tank. Standoff more than half a century long

ZRPK "Tunguska" and ZRK "Tor-M1"


In general, the Tunguska air defense missile system and the Tor-M1 air defense system allowed for some time to significantly increase the combat stability of armored formations, protecting them from air threats in general, and from combat helicopters with an anti-tank missile system, in particular.

Current trends in the confrontation "a helicopter against a tank"


However, time does not stand still. In the confrontation of armored vehicles and combat helicopters, the latter have new advantages.

First of all, the range of use of anti-tank guided missiles increased significantly. For new US JAGM ATGMs (Joint Air-to-Ground Missile), designed to replace AGM-114L Hellfire Longbow ATGM, the launch range of 16 kilometers when launching from helicopters and up to 28 kilometers when launching from airplanes is declared, which allows it to be used outside the military range Air defense. The JAGM ATGM includes a three-mode homing head with infrared, active radar and laser guidance channels, which makes it possible to hit targets with a high probability in a difficult jamming environment in the “started and forgotten” mode. The purchase of JAGM ATGM for the US Army is planned from 2020 onwards.


ATGM JAGM


Since the advent of the AGM-114L Hellfire Longbow ATGM equipped with an active radar homing head, AH-64D Apache helicopters have been able to hit targets using the “jump” mode. In this mode, the combat helicopter gains altitude for a short time to search for and capture a target, after which it launches an ATGM from ARLGSN and immediately decreases, hiding in the folds of the terrain. In the homing mode ATGM does not require continuous tracking of the target carrier, which significantly increases the survival rate of the latter.

Thus, the use of long-range ATGMs with multi-mode homing heads, which allow combat helicopters to operate from the “hop”, largely eliminates the capabilities of troop-based air defense based on the Tungusk and Tor-M1 systems. The appearance in the troops of the Sosna air defense missile system will not change the situation, since the tactical and technical characteristics of this complex do not exceed the performance characteristics of the Tunguska air defense missile system and the Tor-M1 air defense system. Part of the situation can be corrected by the development of a military air defense missile system / air defense missile system based on the advanced Pantsir-SM air defense system, which has long range missiles and potentially hypersonic air defense systems. Also developed for the Pantsir-SM SAM and ZRPK small-sized missiles deployed four units in one container can effectively be used to destroy already launched ATGMs such as Hellfire Longbow or JAGM, since the latter have a subsonic flight speed.


ZRK "Pine" and ZRPK "Pantsir-SM"


A radical solution could be the use of missiles with ARLGSN, capable of hitting helicopters hiding in the folds of the terrain. Only the development and use of such missiles as part of the Tor family or the Pantsir-SM air defense system (or any other short-range air defense system) can effectively deal with helicopters capable of attacking targets. The absence of missiles with ARLGSN as part of short-range complexes will require the involvement of at least medium-range air defense systems for solving problems of protecting armored vehicles from attack helicopters, which can hardly be considered an effective solution.

An alternative is the radar on the air defense system to a height sufficient to detect hidden targetsIn this case, the task of controlling the missile defense outside the ground radar should be solved (the transfer of the task tracking and missile guidance from the ground radar to the radar stationed on a quadrocopter or helicopter type UAV). The advantage of this solution is the lower cost of hitting the target, since the cost of a missile defense missile system with ARLGSN is higher than the cost of a missile with radio command guidance. The downside is the limited number of channels simultaneously accompanied by goals.

Partly to protect the tank from air strikes can active defense systems (KAZ), gradually gaining their place on the tank armor. Given that the majority of the ATGM of the likely enemy is subsonic, they may well be intercepted by the KAZ. The most difficult target for the KAZ is the ATGM attacking in the upper hemisphere, and of course the problem of oversaturation of the active defense complex capabilities to repel simultaneous attacks with several ammunition will not disappear anywhere.

Do not forget that in the United States are actively developing projects of promising combat helicopters capable of moving at a speed of about 500 km / h. At the moment, these machines are at the testing stage, but their appearance in service with a potential enemy can be considered only a matter of time. This means that after the launch of the ATGM, they will be able to quickly change their position, which will allow them to leave the capture zone of the ARLGSN before the missile defense system moves closer to a confident target.


Prototype of a high-speed helicopter Sikorsky S-97 Raider



AVX high-speed helicopter concepts from Aircraft Company and AH-64E Block II Apache


The prospect of the emergence of high-speed combat helicopters emphasizes the importance of creating a missile defense system with hypersonic flight speed on most of the trajectory. At the site of work ARLGNS, the speed can be reduced to prevent the formation of a plasma layer that prevents the passage of radio waves (if the problem of permeability of such a layer has not been solved yet).


Presumably, hypersonic ZURK / ZRPK Pantsir-SM (right) with a firing range of up to 40 km, on the left, an anti-tank missile system at the Pantsir-S, in the center - the Hermes-S ATGM


At the moment, for armored vehicles, the main threat is not enemy tanks, but masked manpower and aviation. This situation has persisted for a long time, and it is unlikely that it will change in the near future. In the end, this can significantly affect the composition of weapons, the structure of active protection complexes and the reservation scheme of main battle tanks, which we will discuss in future materials.
Author:
Photos used:
bmpd.livejournal.com, ru-aviation.livejournal.com, vko.ru, topwar.ru, otvaga2004.mybb.ru
Articles from this series:
Fire support tanks, BMPT "Terminator" and the cycle of OODA John Boyd
Armored vehicles against infantry. Who is faster: a tank or infantry?
Increased situational awareness of armored combat vehicle crews
Ergonomics of workplaces and combat algorithms for promising armored vehicles
Unmanned systems for advanced armored vehicles
195 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. rocket757
    rocket757 25 July 2019 06: 50
    0
    The confrontation is endless, until such a technique ceases to be in demand.
    Of course, the topic is not about different barmel men, this is a confrontation of serious guys armed to the teeth !!! Well, it’s better not to check in practice who and how will be ahead.
    And so on a choice, at whom on what .... a look is turned!
    1. okko077
      okko077 25 July 2019 09: 42
      +5
      A very stupid and outdated article that does not fully take into account the realities of modern war ... In modern war, tanks go in the third echelon, and are not the main striking force ... UAVs and modern reconnaissance equipment turn tanks into light targets, and do not allow their use as the main striking force, like all ground forces ... Why ponder what should not be? Do not confuse operations against partisans with military operations against the enemy with high-tech weapons, primarily aviation and air defense ... In the context of modern reconnaissance equipment and with network-centric approaches to warfare, discussion of this topic is not relevant ...
      1. rocket757
        rocket757 25 July 2019 10: 27
        +5
        Quote: okko077
        obsolete article that does not fully take into account the realities of modern war ..

        Often, plans, tactics, and other things that were planned, were thought to fly to tarara in advance due to unforeseen factors, or even mistakes in planning .... a battle, this is not a computer game, it can really creep out for all thoughtful plans.
        Not defined yet, not verified by anyone! that's why they develop everything and different, just for every unscheduled, "fire" case.
        1. okko077
          okko077 25 July 2019 13: 04
          -6
          Yes, you can and agree, but we have a defensive doctrine, and do not pour water on their mill .... Let them dream further and develop an anti-tank component ..... Our tanks have huge modernization potential, and fit into the latest concepts of military operations but pi_ndoskie and Israeli it is yesterday, again no luck ADVANCED ....
          1. rocket757
            rocket757 25 July 2019 13: 20
            +2
            I’m not a great tactician on everything terrestrial ... not that taught. So I read sho I came across along the way ... and since there were no real battles for ground battles, there were no concrete, very armed guys for a long time, and the technology over the years stepped forward and nothing could be said objectively .... in computer shooting I’m finally playing, so there’s not much such experience ...
            only from books, from chronicles of past battles. And there you will not find such a thing, there’s nothing to build an experience from! Some assumptions .... not confirmed by battle, then doubtful!
            1. okko077
              okko077 25 July 2019 14: 37
              +5
              Yes, I am also from aviation, but there is a battle, albeit a simplified one, but in Syria, and there are almost no achievements .... In terms of new methods of warfare, modern warfare .... Everything is the old fashioned way: scouts, spotters, wise generals and clocks for making decisions ... on stationary goals, and cartoons for the blind .... The technique is modern, and the methods for its use are old, or rather old, and medals on tunics out of habit ....., and victories due to valor Russian soldier with the stupidity of the Russian general ...
              1. rocket757
                rocket757 25 July 2019 14: 44
                +1
                I, as it were, from the minus of aviation, I have devoted many years to this ... my contacts are from the same "opera".
                We learn the most valuable from them .... Syria would be a real training ground, but it would be shortened.
                Although, okay, let it be better than a big fire in all directions !!!
      2. yehat
        yehat 26 July 2019 11: 31
        +2
        Have you ever seen at least one tank exercise?
        reconnaissance equipment, drones ... what will you do with armor that uses relief?
        the armor remains a striking force, but now its main function is not destruction, but ensuring a high offensive rate without unnecessary losses.
        the victory of the tank is not a destroyed tank or infantryman, but a crushed convoy of trucks or an infantry captured without shelter or capture an important point.
  2. Professor
    Professor 25 July 2019 07: 07
    +6
    The first such helicopter was the American Bell AH-1 Cobra adopted in the 1967 year. The design of the helicopter was so successful that its modified versions are still used by the US Marine Corps, the armed forces of Israel and other countries of the world.

    In the arsenal of Israel there is not a single Cobra. All of them were transferred to Jordan.

    The imperfection of guidance systems and ATGMs of that time provided the probability of armored vehicles being hit by a missile from a helicopter with a probability of the order of 0,5 — 0,6, but this was only the beginning. The main threat to Soviet armored vehicles was the latest AH-64 Apache attack helicopter, adopted in the 1984 year.

    Somehow, the author immediately jumped on Apache. But what about the experience of fighting in the Golan (or whatever it is in Arabic)? In the USSR, this revolutionized front-line aviation.

    An alternative option is to carry the radar on the air defense system to a height sufficient to detect hidden targets,

    On the march in tank columns?
    1. Lopatov
      Lopatov 25 July 2019 07: 42
      +3
      Quote: Professor
      On the march in tank columns?

      Is that a problem?
      1. Professor
        Professor 25 July 2019 08: 10
        0
        Quote: Spade
        Quote: Professor
        On the march in tank columns?

        Is that a problem?

        Yeah. Problem.

        Quote: Nikolaevich I
        Quote: Professor
        On the march in tank columns?

        Why not ? what Current without "Did you order the tower?" ! Copters! Here is our answer to Chamber ... the foe! Drones ... both "self-contained" and "tethered"! Moreover, copters, like the "aerial platform", do not need to be ordered ... there may be specialized anti-helicopter air defense systems, prescribed in tank units .. The design can be twofold: 1. radar and armament on the copter ...; 2. on the copter - radar (ECO) ... weapons on the ground "part" of the complex. Outwardly, such an air defense complex may look like a tank (BMP) with a "turret" -unmanned aircraft ...

        With the mast, I think no need to explain why not?

        Non-tethered copters are already aviation and this is a completely different matter. Tied copters is an interesting solution. I watched them when I ran, they watched me as I ran.



        Nevertheless, all these decisions are from the "why not" series, and not from "this is what has been adopted."
        1. Lopatov
          Lopatov 25 July 2019 08: 33
          +3
          Quote: Professor
          Yeah. Problem.

          Well, yes ... For this, you must have a brain.
          And when there are no brains .... then the problem

          I remember that we managed to occupy the dominant heights along the route during the march. The column passed, the platoon was removed.

          Quote: Professor
          With the mast, I think no need to explain why not?

          Required.
          So why can’t the car go into the gap between the convoy of main forces and the gas processing plant, expand the mast and stand until the convoy passes by. and the second (third. fourth) car will not reach the next position and will not turn around?

          The column speed is only three minutes a kilometer. Even artillery can carry out fire combining without stopping the column.
          1. Professor
            Professor 25 July 2019 08: 45
            +1
            Quote: Spade
            Well, yes ... For this, you must have a brain.
            And when there are no brains .... then the problem

            It's true. However, physics is in the way. Any stability there. But the main thing is brains. lol


            Quote: Spade
            I remember that we managed to occupy the dominant heights along the route during the march. The column passed, the platoon was removed.

            1. Heights in the steppes of the Kherson region or the sands of Sinai?
            2. Did you manage to deploy the radar, and then collapse?

            Quote: Spade
            Required.
            So why can’t the car go into the gap between the convoy of main forces and the gas processing plant, expand the mast and stand until the convoy passes by. and the second (third. fourth) car will not reach the next position and will not turn around?

            The column speed is only three minutes a kilometer. Even artillery can carry out fire combining without stopping the column.

            Paatamushto will not have time. fellow
            For example Mobile radar station 39N6 "Casta-2" Deployment time - 20 min.
            https://vpk.name/library/f/kasta-2.html


            48Я6-К1 Approach-К1 Deployment (coagulation) time for complex facilities - 20 min. Radar turn-on time - 3 min
            http://militaryrussia.ru/blog/topic-519.html/topic-872.html
            1. Lopatov
              Lopatov 25 July 2019 09: 00
              +4
              [quote = professor] This is true. However, physics is in the way. Any stability there. But the main thing is brains. [/ quote]
              Yeah ... What kind of brains do you need to have to pick up the "instability" of a traveling car with a folded mast and standing with an installed one?


              [quote = professor] Mobile radar station 39N6 "Casta-2"
              [quote = professor] 48Y6-K1 Podlet-K1 [/ quote]
              You have gigantomania ... Oh well.
              The "approach" has a range of up to 200 km. Take a hundred for a guarantee. 100 km. a tank column will travel for 300 minutes. 5:30. Even if you unfold in half an hour and roll up for 4 minutes too, XNUMX hours will be enough for the eyes. to overtake the column and take a new position. And if there are three of them?

              However, to protect the convoy from helicopters, it is enough to lift some "Harmony" to the tower

              And a couple of minutes will be enough to raise the mast.
              1. Professor
                Professor 25 July 2019 09: 42
                -4
                Quote: Spade
                Yeah ... What kind of brains do you need to have to pick up the "instability" of a traveling car with a folded mast and standing with an installed one?

                Yeah. So the mast is already folded up and it means that we won’t succeed in movement. the ice has broken.

                Quote: Spade
                You have gigantomania ... Oh well.
                The "approach" has a range of up to 200 km. Take a hundred for a guarantee. 100 km. a tank column will travel for 300 minutes. 5:30. Even if you unfold in half an hour and roll up for 4 minutes too, XNUMX hours will be enough for the eyes. to overtake the column and take a new position. And if there are three of them?

                Gigantomania at your designers. It is they who create the largest in the world microcircuits mobile radar.

                With mathematics, as with probability theory, you are not all right. What can not be said about your imagination. Of course, I understand that you (by the way, is it according to the charter?), In front of the tank column one more column rushes in the composition of three transport units:
                - antenna post on the KAMAZ chassis
                - kung control on the KAMAZ chassis
                - an electric generator on the KAMAZ chassis.
                They are like Rambo. Over rough terrain, they overtake the tank convoy at the front line, deploy the station within 20 minutes (after all, everything is like at the training camps and everything works the first time), launch the radar within 3 minutes and begin to scan airspace. I will not even ask why they themselves will not be the easy target of these helicopters hunting tanks. Question in the field of arithmetic. The average speed of movement of a tank column is 20-25 km / h, (http://encyclopedia.mil.ru/encyclopedia/dictionary/[email protected]). Attention is the question: for how long does a convoy consisting of three transport units with a radar have to detach from the tank convoy if the speed of movement of this convoy from the radar is 25-30 km / h? For some time, sappers should advance before them? Pure arithmetic.

                Quote: Spade
                However, to protect the convoy from helicopters, it is enough to lift some "Harmony" to the tower
                And a couple of minutes will be enough to raise the mast.

                I am embarrassed to ask about the height of the mast, and why the whole concert with Harmony if Tunguska can do more and better in motion?
                1. Lopatov
                  Lopatov 25 July 2019 09: 57
                  +5
                  Quote: Professor
                  Yeah. So the mast is already folded up and it means that we won’t succeed in movement. the ice has broken.

                  It is folded.
                  And in motion, we will succeed. because when one or more people are traveling, one station is standing with the radar raised on the tower.

                  Quote: Professor
                  Of course, I understand that you (by the way, is it according to the charter?) Another column in the composition rushing ahead of the tank column

                  Ahead ??? At you from ignorance.
                  I kind of pointed out in Russian that I was not "in front of the column." And between the GPZ or the vanguard and the main forces.

                  Quote: Professor
                  Cross-country overtake tank column

                  And which columns pull over rough terrain? There are roads and column roads for this.

                  Quote: Professor
                  I’m embarrassed to ask about the height of the mast and why the whole concert with Harmony

                  1. Professor
                    Professor 25 July 2019 10: 05
                    -5
                    Quote: Spade
                    It is folded.
                    And in motion, we will succeed. because when one or more people are traveling, one station is standing with the radar raised on the tower.

                    I get it. Short dashes. No more questions. laughing

                    Quote: Spade
                    Ahead ??? At you from ignorance.
                    I kind of pointed out in Russian that I was not "in front of the column." And between the GPZ or the vanguard and the main forces.

                    oh what I'm not attentive. That is, the radar station stops, deploys its own personal belongings, and the convoy at this time advances to the front line. So at an average speed of movement of the tank column 20-25 km / h, in 20 minutes the column will leave for 5-6 km. Clear. That is, it will just go into the dead zone and the radar will look for targets against the background of hills (one or the other) behind which insidious enemy helicopters are hiding.

                    Quote: Spade
                    And which columns pull over rough terrain? There are roads and column roads for this.

                    Yes Yes. I understood. That is why the travel speed is so "high".

                    Quote: Spade
                    I’m embarrassed to ask about the height of the mast and why the whole concert with Harmony

                    And where is the portable radar in the picture?
                    1. Lopatov
                      Lopatov 25 July 2019 10: 17
                      +7
                      Quote: Professor
                      I get it. Short dashes.

                      Exactly. Moreover, many divisions operate in this way. From artillery to chemists

                      Quote: Professor
                      So at an average speed of movement of a tank column of 20-25 km / h, in 20 minutes the column will leave for 5-6 km. Clear. That is, it will just go into the dead zone and the radar will look for targets against the background of hills (one or the other) behind which insidious enemy helicopters are hiding.

                      some kind of completely naive went. Even the "Harmony" in the 2E version operates at 80 km. Nothing prevents to put the radar on a hill

                      Quote: Professor
                      Yes Yes. I understood. That is why the travel speed is so "high".

                      In fact, most of the column is delayed by marching guards. And not the quality of the roadway.

                      Quote: Professor
                      And where is the portable radar in the picture?

                      From above. And you can remove and put on a tripod.
                      1. Professor
                        Professor 25 July 2019 10: 29
                        -4
                        Quote: Spade
                        Exactly. Moreover, many divisions operate in this way. From artillery to chemists

                        I already understood. Now this is how the Pvoshniki will act on the march. Cover the column at the back.

                        Quote: Spade
                        some kind of completely naive went. Even the "Harmony" in the 2E version operates at 80 km. Nothing prevents to put the radar on a hill

                        "on a hill that the tank column has already passed, and not on a hill that the tank column is approaching." Be precise pliz.

                        Quote: Spade
                        In fact, most of the column is delayed by marching guards. And not the quality of the roadway.

                        Security in the form of air defense personnel that will now unfold and collapse for another half an hour? By the way, will you now have a radar calculation based on 3 for the tank battalion?

                        Quote: Spade
                        From above. And you can remove and put on a tripod.

                        ... and forward a mound with her. I already understood. I have no questions. wassat
                      2. Lopatov
                        Lopatov 25 July 2019 10: 39
                        +6
                        Quote: Professor
                        Cover the column at the back.

                        Including.


                        Quote: Professor
                        on the hill that the tank column has already passed, and not on the hill to which the tank column is approaching. "Be precise pliz.

                        One car is the one where it has already passed. the second is "approaching", the third rides.
                        It’s easy.

                        Quote: Professor
                        Air defense

                        Not. In the form of reinforced motorized rifle units and sappers. but air defense workers there will also be required.

                        Quote: Professor
                        and forward a hill with her.

                        "Turn on the fool"? The motorbike runs well on the hills.
                      3. Professor
                        Professor 25 July 2019 10: 50
                        -3
                        Quote: Spade
                        Including.

                        Left behind the column, they will cover it behind.

                        Quote: Spade
                        One car is the one where it has already passed. the second is "approaching", the third rides.
                        It’s easy.

                        You are not accurate again. All cars will be deployed in those places where the column is already Passed.

                        Quote: Spade
                        Not. In the form of reinforced motorized rifle units and sappers. but air defense workers there will also be required.

                        That is, air defense workers who, incidentally, need to be protected themselves, since they lagged behind the convoy. At least 2 of 3's calculations.

                        Quote: Spade
                        "Turn on the fool"? The motorbike runs well on the hills.

                        Moe, were we dismounted?
                      4. Lopatov
                        Lopatov 25 July 2019 10: 57
                        +6
                        Quote: Professor
                        Left behind the column, they will cover it from behind.

                        Exactly. And just at that time another radar station will start working. in front. I already wrote about this several times. Difficult to understand?

                        Quote: Professor
                        You are not accurate again. All cars will unfold in those places where the column has already passed.

                        no. They will unfold in front of the column. And I already wrote about this several times. Also hard to understand?

                        Quote: Professor
                        That is, the air defense workers of which, by the way, must be protected themselves

                        Naturally. This is done by the curfew.

                        Quote: Professor
                        Moe, were we dismounted?

                        No, you turned on the fool.
                        And in order to raise the radar on the mast there is no need to dismount. Rather the opposite
                      5. Professor
                        Professor 28 July 2019 08: 47
                        +2
                        Quote: Spade
                        Exactly. And just at that time another radar station will start working. in front. I already wrote about this several times. Difficult to understand?

                        How was she ahead of the column? Teleported? Outstripped by the oncoming lane?

                        Quote: Spade
                        no. They will unfold in front of the column. And I already wrote about this several times. Also hard to understand?

                        How, CEP? Ahead of security?

                        Quote: Spade
                        No, you turned on the fool.
                        And in order to raise the radar on the mast there is no need to dismount. Rather the opposite

                        Again materiel. Three Kamaz. Deployment time 20 minutes. It’s not just that dismounting is necessary; Cables to flick. Ahead of the column. wink

                        You didn’t answer, according to the charter, is this supposed to be, or is it your fantasies about the three calculations by the dashes guarding the column on the march?
                2. Alex_59
                  Alex_59 25 July 2019 12: 43
                  +1
                  Quote: Professor
                  By the way, do you now have an 3 radar calculation for a tank battalion?
                  Why not have them in the regiment and attach to the battalion during the march?
        2. PSih2097
          PSih2097 25 July 2019 12: 02
          0
          Quote: Professor
          For some time, sappers should advance before them?

          advancement of engineer intelligence at least a day.
          Quote: Professor
          if Tunguska can do more and better in motion?

          Yes, and Tor (detection up to 32km), also not bad to cope ...
        3. Alexey RA
          Alexey RA 25 July 2019 13: 32
          +6
          Quote: Professor
          Yeah. So the mast is already folded up and it means that we won’t succeed in movement. the ice has broken.

          You see what's the matter ... the problem of covering a moving column has many more solutions than the simplest "air defense systems move in the same column with concealed"Moreover, the simplest solution often turns out to be the worst - because our roads do not go along an infinite plane, and the folds of the terrain perfectly shade the view. And worst of all, the enemy knows these folds very well, and he can calculate in advance the sectors they shade in the event of a direct convoy escort by air defense means.

          This problem was solved even before the invention of the radar and the advent of anti-aircraft self-propelled systems - in those days when the columns on the march should have been covered by towed vehicles that could not fire at all from the move. There were two main ways to cover the columns on the march:
          - advance deployment of air defense systems along the convoy’s route at tactically advantageous positions and in places of the greatest probability of a raid (crossing, intersection, narrowing),
          - the division of the air defense systems of the convoy into groups and the movement of the groups as the convoy moves from one position to another (withdrew - overtook - turned around - waited for the column to pass through the radius of fire - removed).

          These methods have remained to this day - and now it is even easier to apply them: air defense systems have become self-propelled and their radius of destruction has increased.
          So firing on the move to cover the column is required only for means of direct cover (small radius - MANPADS, ZSU, ZRAK). The rest can cover the column in motion, moving along the route from one advantageous position to another.
          1. Professor
            Professor 25 July 2019 15: 34
            -3
            Quote: Alexey RA
            These methods have remained to this day -

            What did your "advisers" not teach the Arabs these not cunning methods?


            1. Alexey RA
              Alexey RA 25 July 2019 16: 00
              +6
              Quote: Professor
              What did your "advisers" not teach the Arabs these not cunning methods?

              You know, when calculating the EEC at the sight of goals on the VIKO breaks through the door and runs up through the cracks - what kind of preparation can we talk about?
              There, Iraqis were taught and supplied first by ours, and then by the Americans. There is no difference.
              1. Professor
                Professor 25 July 2019 16: 27
                -3
                Quote: Alexey RA
                You know, when calculating the EEC at the sight of goals on the VIKO breaks through the door and runs up through the cracks - what kind of preparation can we talk about?

                In truth, he was once in a convoy that simulated a strike. On assignment, we had to move off the road who left to right. Nobody drove off the road. Everyone pressed their heads to their shoulders. If it were a real blow everyone would be in another world.

                Do not be angry with the Arabs. It’s not easy for them. on the other hand, the British taught the Arab Legion and those alone fought with dignity. Maybe you teachers and Americans are not thin. wink
              2. Alex_59
                Alex_59 26 July 2019 07: 27
                +7
                Quote: Professor
                Maybe you and the Americans are not lousy.

                Israel’s happiness is that it is surrounded by Arabs, not Vietnamese.
              3. okko077
                okko077 26 July 2019 09: 13
                0
                The happiness of Israel, that 80% of US banking funds belong to Jews .... This is their guarantee of wisdom and development. And you think why they are arrogant and have not been spread for a long time on the holy stones in their reservation. .....
              4. Alex_59
                Alex_59 26 July 2019 09: 50
                +1
                Quote: okko077
                The happiness of Israel that 80% of US bank funds belong to the Jews ....
                Well, in this too laughing In general, there are many equivalent factors.
                This is also the help of the USSR, which tried not to sell military equipment in performance No. 1 to the Arabs (as for the SA). This is also help from the United States, which supplied the Jews with military equipment, on the contrary, in a full-fledged configuration "like yourself." These are the "genius warriors" Arabs, who do not give any technique, and how do not teach - everything is decay. This is both the talent and determination of the Israeli military (which is, that is).
              5. yehat
                yehat 26 July 2019 13: 12
                +1
                the main reason is the frivolous attitude of the Arabs towards the conduct of hostilities.
                even the elementary execution of orders was in question - what army is this?
              6. goose
                goose 30 July 2019 11: 38
                +1
                Quote: Alex_59
                These are the "genius warriors" Arabs, who do not give any technique, and how do not teach - everything is decay.

                She had a long experience in communicating with a military adviser who was in Vietnam, Syria, Egypt, and Afghanistan. He was engaged in training personnel. Passed several local wars.
                At the mention of the military qualities of the Egyptians one obscene language was heard. Especially negative for officers.
                Syrians, Vietnamese respected.
          2. sivuch
            sivuch 26 July 2019 10: 52
            0
            Czechs with Dederons would be better
          3. Professor
            Professor 28 July 2019 08: 49
            0
            Quote: Alex_59
            Quote: Professor
            Maybe you and the Americans are not lousy.

            Israel’s happiness is that it is surrounded by Arabs, not Vietnamese.

            That's how I watch you win these Arabs for several years, win, win, win, but still don’t win.
    2. Grits
      Grits 26 July 2019 08: 34
      0
      Quote: Professor
      What did your "advisers" not teach the Arabs these not cunning methods?

      Arabs are generally hard to teach. And does not matter, who will be these advisers
      1. Professor
        Professor 28 July 2019 08: 55
        +1
        Quote: Gritsa
        Quote: Professor
        What did your "advisers" not teach the Arabs these not cunning methods?

        Arabs are generally hard to teach. And does not matter, who will be these advisers

        Not true. The Arab Legion is an example to you. The same Arabs, but the teachers are British.
    3. okko077
      okko077 26 July 2019 09: 08
      0
      Yes, your ISIS Zionists also taught poorly, do not tell me why?
  • Bad thing
    Bad thing 26 July 2019 01: 20
    0
    Quote: Spade
    So why can’t the car go into the gap between the convoy of main forces and the gas processing plant, expand the mast and stand until the convoy passes by. and the second (third. fourth) car will not reach the next position and will not turn around?

    Where to include air defense? in the commandant service or OOD?
    1. Lopatov
      Lopatov 26 July 2019 07: 26
      0
      Quote: Bad
      Where to include air defense?

      In the air defense system. it is a completely separate organization.
      1. Bad thing
        Bad thing 26 July 2019 11: 21
        0
        I agree,
        Quote: Spade
        In the air defense system. it is a completely separate organization.
        but there is a question where, in what conditions, you and the Professor are dragging the combined-arms unit (compound) in the column, that it independently organizes and fights helicopters on the march without the support of the senior air defense chief. Judging by the flight of basins thrown at each other, your convoy is fighting alone with the whole world.
        1. Lopatov
          Lopatov 26 July 2019 12: 47
          0
          Quote: Bad
          drag in the column the combined arms unit (compound) that it is independent, without the support of the senior air defense commander

          And if there is "the support of the senior chief of the air defense", the chief of the air defense of the regiment / brigade can, together with his subordinates, boldly score on the service and go in the convoy without twitching?
          I hasten to assure you, the rescue of drowning people is the work of the drowning people themselves. And the responsibility for their own protection, including from enemy aircraft, the combined arms and unit are fully.
  • Nikolaevich I
    Nikolaevich I 25 July 2019 10: 36
    0
    Quote: Professor
    Nevertheless, all these decisions are from the "why not" series, and not from "this is what has been adopted."

    So problems have to be solved as they come! The situation has changed ... the concept ... the problem (the new problem ...), "measures" must be taken immediately! A new situation (problem) is imminent and new countermeasures (measures) need to be discussed urgently ... in order to have time to react when the problem becomes real!
    Quote: Professor
    With the mast, I think no need to explain why not?

    Duc, I don’t even think about the masts!
    Quote: Professor
    Non-tethered copters are already aviation and this is a completely different matter.

    Aviation is a term, and the meaning can be invested in different ways, as needed! And then the conversation will turn out "to the topic"!
    1. Professor
      Professor 25 July 2019 10: 54
      +1
      Quote: Nikolaevich I
      So problems have to be solved as they come! The situation has changed ... the concept ... the problem (the new problem ...), "measures" must be taken immediately! A new situation (problem) is imminent and new countermeasures (measures) need to be discussed urgently ... in order to have time to react when the problem becomes real!

      Not. Helicopters knocked out tanks back in 1967. A solution should have been found for a long time. Invented all sorts of Tunguzka. They didn’t come up with radars flying over tanks and looking over the folds of the terrain.

      Quote: Nikolaevich I
      Duc, I don’t even think about the masts!

      To you and no complaints. hi

      Quote: Nikolaevich I
      Aviation is a term, and the meaning can be invested in different ways, as needed! And then the conversation will turn out "to the topic"!

      All that flies without a leash is aviation and a conversation on a different topic. here the column would survive on its own.
      1. Nikolaevich I
        Nikolaevich I 25 July 2019 11: 14
        0
        Quote: Professor
        All that flies without a leash is aviation ...

        So ... ekranoplanes, "air platforms", amphibious hovercraft, balloons, airships ... knapsack engines, finally? what
        1. Professor
          Professor 25 July 2019 11: 41
          +2
          Quote: Nikolaevich I
          Quote: Professor
          All that flies without a leash is aviation ...

          So ... ekranoplanes, "air platforms", amphibious hovercraft, balloons, airships ... knapsack engines, finally? what

          More or less like this. They are controlled by PILOTS. wink

          Quote: Nikolaevich I
          If you put together 9 pregnant women, then the child will still not be born in a month! "

          Buffett said that.
          1. Nikolaevich I
            Nikolaevich I 25 July 2019 11: 58
            +1
            Quote: Professor
            Like that. They are controlled by PILOTS

            Duc ... PILOTS are in Formula 1! wink
            1. Professor
              Professor 25 July 2019 15: 36
              +3
              Quote: Nikolaevich I
              Quote: Professor
              Like that. They are controlled by PILOTS

              Duc ... PILOTS are in Formula 1! wink

              Well, they definitely fly. You can’t even argue. wink
      2. Nikolaevich I
        Nikolaevich I 25 July 2019 11: 21
        0
        Quote: Professor
        Helicopters knocked out tanks back in 1967. A solution should have been found for a long time. Invented all sorts of Tunguzka. They didn’t come up with radars flying over tanks and looking over folds of terrain.

        As a certain movie villain said in the famous "spy" film: "The idea must mature! If you bring together 9 pregnant women, the child will still not be born in a month!" hi
  • Nikolaevich I
    Nikolaevich I 25 July 2019 07: 57
    +1
    Quote: Professor
    On the march in tank columns?

    Why not ? what Current without "Did you order the tower?" ! Copters! Here is our answer to Chamber ... the foe! Drones ... both "self-contained" and "tethered"! Moreover, copters, like the "aerial platform", do not need to be ordered ... there may be specialized anti-helicopter air defense systems, prescribed in tank units .. The design can be twofold: 1. radar and armament on the copter ...; 2. on the copter - radar (ECO) ... weapons on the ground "part" of the complex. Outwardly, such an air defense complex may look like a tank (BMP) with a "turret" -unmanned aircraft ...
    1. Lopatov
      Lopatov 25 July 2019 09: 18
      +1
      Quote: Nikolaevich I
      Current without "Did you order the tower?"

      Why?
      1. Nikolaevich I
        Nikolaevich I 25 July 2019 10: 16
        +1
        Quote: Spade
        Why?

        Yes, because the Professor objects! That is, the radar station stops, deploys its own personal belongings, and the convoy at this time advances to the front line. So at an average speed of movement of the tank column 20-25 km / h, in 20 minutes the column will leave for 5-6 km. Clear. That is, it will just go into the dead zone and the radar will look for targets against the background of hills (one or the other) behind which insidious enemy helicopters are hiding.
        1. Lopatov
          Lopatov 25 July 2019 10: 20
          +3
          He has arithmetic problems.
          60 km minus "5-6 km" is 54 km.
  • Shopping Mall
    25 July 2019 09: 00
    +3
    Quote: Professor
    An alternative option is to carry the radar on the air defense system to a height sufficient to detect hidden targets,

    On the march in tank columns?


    Why not? If the UAV is of a quadrocopter or helicopter type, with the power supplied from the carrier vehicle, move synchronously. If you make an electric UAV with sufficiently capacious batteries and fast charging, then there may be several of them, with alternating duty in the air, while the second UAV is charging.
    1. Professor
      Professor 25 July 2019 09: 46
      +2
      Quote: AVM
      Quote: Professor
      An alternative option is to carry the radar on the air defense system to a height sufficient to detect hidden targets,

      On the march in tank columns?


      Why not? If the UAV is of a quadrocopter or helicopter type, with the power supplied from the carrier vehicle, move synchronously. If you make an electric UAV with sufficiently capacious batteries and fast charging, then there may be several of them, with alternating duty in the air, while the second UAV is charging.

      Theoretically, it is possible that it exists only among the evil Zionists.
      1. Nikolaevich I
        Nikolaevich I 25 July 2019 10: 50
        0
        Quote: Professor
        Theoretically, it is possible that it exists only among the evil Zionists.

        Questions of the practical functioning of ,, ligaments ,, "ground armored vehicles in motion, ,, tethered ,, copter" have been considered for a long time! In my opinion, this topic was encountered in military-technical journals already at the end of the last century. That is, everything depends not on the practical implementation of the solution, but on the possibility of financing the solution by the appropriate "authorities" and the desire to acquire it by the "authorities" ...
  • okko077
    okko077 25 July 2019 09: 58
    +1
    On the march in tank columns?

    Only in Israel ... You can’t even dream ... This does not mean that tanks are not needed, their role is completely different, they completely fit into the concept of modern war ... But this only applies to Russian tanks, American and yours do not fit .... Pi_ndoisky Abrams and your Merkava have no modernization potential in the light of the realities of modern war ... T-90 in this regard is an order of magnitude higher ...
  • yehat
    yehat 26 July 2019 13: 10
    0
    blimp tied to the first car, let go over the column and all things
    here's a permanent point above the column where you can hang both the radar and
    banner "here we are"
  • abc_alex
    abc_alex 25 July 2019 07: 54
    +7
    Dear author, and you did not confuse?

    Exercises conducted in 80-ies of the XX century, showed the ratio of the losses of combat helicopters to armored vehicles as 1 to 20.


    This, I'm sorry, how? Provided that the attack helicopter ammunition, maximum, 16 missiles? That is, according to these data, the helicopter turns out to be invulnerable in principle? It turns out that he can shoot off all the ammunition with impunity, fly back to recharge, return, shoot another 4 tank, and only the bottom of the tank ... What kind of exercises have they shown? Is it in the USA?

    . “Strela-1” and “Strela-10” used the selection of a contrast target against the sky as the main guidance mode (photo-contrast mode). This did not allow attacking targets against the background of the earth, which is relevant when repelling the threat posed by combat helicopters.

    Moreover, such a regime did not allow attacking targets under water or in space. :)
    Excuse me, but where did you get the idea about "against the background of the earth"? Was the air defense system raised to a height of several kilometers? Did the helicopters start rolling on the ground? Always and everywhere the helicopter is above the air defense system, I personally cannot even think of options when the air defense system is forced to consider the helicopter against the background of the earth. The main problem of the military air defense of the 60s was the short range of destruction, and not the mythical inability to land a helicopter from a height of a couple of kilometers.

    . In the Strela-10, the infrared guidance mode was used as a backup, but its operation required the cooling of the infrared homing head (ICGSN) with liquid nitrogen located in the body of the missile container. If IKGSN was activated, but subsequently the launch was canceled, for example, if the target left the zone of visibility, then it was no longer possible to reuse the infrared targeting mode due to the absence of nitrogen.


    So what? Firstly, the infrared mode was exactly the spare, for shooting in the conditions of interference on certain courses of the target, aiming and shooting was carried out as before by the television channel. Secondly, the supply of nitrogen in the GOS was carried out at the very last moment, when the decision on the shot has already been made and its cancellation is extremely unlikely, if at all possible. Invented a problem?

    . The Tunguska anti-aircraft missile and cannon system (ZRPK) and the Tor-M1 air defense system became the first effective military air defense systems capable of fighting helicopter gunships.


    Actually, no. The most effective military means of dealing with attack helicopters (according to the developers of attack helicopters) is MANPADS. Since the crew is simply not physically able to see a fighter-anti-aircraft gunner, if the latter is not a complete idiot.

    . AH-64D Apache helicopters were able to hit targets using the “jump” mode. In this mode, the combat helicopter gains altitude for a short time to search for and capture a target, after which it launches an ATGM from ARLGSN and immediately decreases, hiding in the folds of the terrain.

    Yeah, and crawls back gardens. :) Hollywood.
    1. Professor
      Professor 25 July 2019 08: 23
      0
      Quote: abc_alex
      Actually, no. The most effective military means of dealing with attack helicopters (according to the developers of attack helicopters) is MANPADS. Since the crew is simply not physically able to see a fighter-anti-aircraft gunner, if the latter is not a complete idiot.

      Here you are right. MANPADS today are a threat only to brainless Syrian pilots. In other conflicts, the effectiveness of MANPADS was very low, especially since the helicopter does not need to "shine long and high" to fight tanks.

      Quote: abc_alex
      . AH-64D Apache helicopters were able to hit targets using the “jump” mode. In this mode, the combat helicopter gains altitude for a short time to search for and capture a target, after which it launches an ATGM from ARLGSN and immediately decreases, hiding in the folds of the terrain.

      Yeah, and crawls back gardens. :) Hollywood.

      In approximately this way, the Syrian tanks in the Golan were destroyed (or whatever they are in Arabic). Today, a helicopter does not need to go to the line of fire. He can launch a rocket from behind cover. And then gardens, gardens.
      1. Lopatov
        Lopatov 25 July 2019 08: 44
        +2
        Quote: Professor
        MANPADS today are a threat only to brainless Syrian pilots.

        For any pilots who have not been infected with hats. Anti-aircraft gunners can be, for example, in the patrol squad. This, given the Verba, will provide the main forces with 12 km of a safe zone.
        1. Professor
          Professor 25 July 2019 08: 49
          -1
          Quote: Spade
          Quote: Professor
          MANPADS today are a threat only to brainless Syrian pilots.

          For any pilots who have not been infected with hats. Anti-aircraft gunners can be, for example, in the patrol squad. This, given the Verba, will provide the main forces with 12 km of a safe zone.

          By the law of normal distribution? What do you think is the effectiveness of MANPADS in real conflicts? request
          1. Lopatov
            Lopatov 25 July 2019 09: 05
            +3
            Quote: Professor
            By the law of normal distribution?

            According to the law of the presence of brains and the absence of hypertrophied self-reliance

            Quote: Professor
            What do you think is the effectiveness of MANPADS in real conflicts?

            Enormous. Ask the Ukrainians.
            And we had the largest one-time losses due to MANPADS. Khankala, Mi-26, August 2002

            Ps The Americans consider MANPADS so "ineffective" that they invested in the creation, production and supply of their simulators to the troops to train crews to protect against them
            1. Professor
              Professor 25 July 2019 09: 15
              +1
              Quote: Spade
              Enormous. Ask the Ukrainians.
              And we had the largest one-time losses due to MANPADS. Khankala, Mi-26, August 2002

              Are there any numbers? Statistics? Like so many MANPADS were fired and so many targets hit? I have them. wink
              1. Lopatov
                Lopatov 25 July 2019 09: 32
                0
                Quote: Professor
                Are there any numbers?

                Just one rocket. 127 dead, 20 wounded. At Khankala.
                Lugansk 2014 One rocket 49 dead.

                It's enough? Or do you need more numbers?
                1. Professor
                  Professor 25 July 2019 10: 08
                  +3
                  Quote: Spade
                  Quote: Professor
                  Are there any numbers?

                  Just one rocket. 127 dead, 20 wounded. At Khankala.
                  Lugansk 2014 One rocket 49 dead.

                  It's enough? Or do you need more numbers?

                  No, not enough. Need performance. And then some win the lottery.

                  Type were x MANPADS and hit y targets?
                  1. Lopatov
                    Lopatov 25 July 2019 10: 23
                    -3
                    Quote: Professor
                    No, not enough. Need performance

                    Well again bestial Russophobia. 127 killed Russian bullshit. And 7 dead Israeli soldiers a disaster.
                    1. Professor
                      Professor 25 July 2019 10: 24
                      +1
                      Quote: Spade
                      Quote: Professor
                      No, not enough. Need performance

                      Well again bestial Russophobia. 127 killed Russian bullshit. And 7 dead Israeli soldiers a disaster.

                      Demagogy. Performance figures in the studio.
                      1. Lopatov
                        Lopatov 25 July 2019 10: 28
                        0
                        Quote: Professor
                        Demagogy.

                        And what is the effectiveness of landmines? On the strength of one of hundreds can give minimal damage to the enemy? And why then are yours protecting themselves from them?

                        Quote: Professor
                        Performance figures in the studio.

                        I have already written. 127 Khankala, 49 Lugansk.
                      2. Professor
                        Professor 25 July 2019 10: 56
                        +2
                        Quote: Spade
                        And what is the effectiveness of landmines? On the strength of one of hundreds can give minimal damage to the enemy? And why then are yours protecting themselves from them?

                        There are specific figures for the results of the use of MANPADS. There are specific figures of the probability of defeating MANPADS of different targets. Figures in the studio.

                        Quote: Spade
                        I have already written. 127 Khankala, 49 Lugansk.

                        100% performance? 2 of 2's? wassat
                      3. Lopatov
                        Lopatov 25 July 2019 11: 02
                        0
                        Quote: Professor
                        There are specific figures for the results of the use of MANPADS.

                        Should I write these numbers for the third time?

                        Quote: Professor
                        There are specific figures of the probability of defeating MANPADS of different targets. Figures in the studio.

                        wassat
                        In Vietnam, Americans spent 200.000 cartridges on one killed Vietnamese soldier. Does this indicate the inefficiency of small arms and the need to abandon all these pistols / automatic rifles?
                      4. Professor
                        Professor 25 July 2019 11: 44
                        +2
                        Quote: Spade
                        Should I write these numbers for the third time?

                        Not just once:
                        The probability of hitting a single target?
                        The effectiveness of combat use?

                        Maybe you do not know such numbers? lol

                        Quote: Spade
                        In Vietnam, Americans spent 200.000 cartridges on one killed Vietnamese soldier. Does this indicate the inefficiency of small arms and the need to abandon all these pistols / automatic rifles?

                        The probability of hitting a single target?
                        The effectiveness of combat use?
                      5. Lopatov
                        Lopatov 25 July 2019 14: 48
                        -1
                        Quote: Professor
                        Not just once:

                        This will be the third time.
                        Something is especially difficult for you today.
                        127 Khankala, 49 Lugansk.
                      6. Professor
                        Professor 25 July 2019 15: 30
                        0
                        Quote: Spade
                        Quote: Professor
                        Not just once:

                        This will be the third time.
                        Something is especially difficult for you today.
                        127 Khankala, 49 Lugansk.

                        Remove from the parking brake. In your opinion, the effectiveness of MANPADS 2 from 2's? That is, 100%? Yes or no?
                        That is, if one Israeli shell during the Cluster of Retribution operation sent 102 Arabs to Allah, does this mean that 1020 shells are needed to destroy 10 Arabs or was it just lucky (or unlucky)? Or in other words, the effectiveness of one shell is 102 of the Arab?
                      7. Lopatov
                        Lopatov 25 July 2019 17: 30
                        0
                        Quote: Professor
                        Remove from the parking brake. In your opinion, the effectiveness of MANPADS 2 from 2's? That is, 100%? Yes or no?

                        That you will be removed from the parking brake. If such losses are possible from one MANPADS, then this at least requires respect for such weapons. And not hatred in your style.
                        The Americans in Iraq lost at least seven helicopters from MANPADS fire, while 36 people died. They were all "brainless Syrian pilots?"
                      8. Professor
                        Professor 25 July 2019 17: 51
                        +1
                        Quote: Spade
                        That you will be removed from the parking brake. If such losses are possible from one MANPADS, then this at least requires respect for such weapons. And not hatred in your style.

                        I asked you simple questions, and you swam. In total, it was necessary to answer everything:

                        Chance to hit a single target- "the average probability of hitting the target of one 9M39 missile defense system per flight of the affected area was 0,31 when shooting towards and 0,24 when shooting in pursuit" (Normal distribution law). http://rbase.new-factoria.ru/missile/wobb/igla/igla.shtml Later 0,45..0,63.
                        Combat effectiveness-0.15-0.2 (not according to the Normal Distribution Law wink )

                        Teach materiel. hi
                        Quote: Spade
                        The Americans in Iraq lost at least seven helicopters from MANPADS fire, while 36 people died. They were all "brainless Syrian pilots?"

                        Americans from clerical knives lost 4 aircraft and 3000 man. How many people have lost from MANPADS? How many MANPADS were used? According to your stationery knives, a more effective means of defense than MANPADS. 4 knife, 4 aircraft, 3000 people.
                      9. Lopatov
                        Lopatov 25 July 2019 18: 51
                        0
                        Quote: Professor
                        Americans from clerical knives lost 4 aircraft and 3000 people.

                        And now try to bring such knives on a plane flying to the United States.

                        Quote: Professor
                        According to your stationery knives, a more effective means of defense than MANPADS

                        No, that's exactly your way. It is you who are interested in "how many MANPADS were used and how many were shot down. How many knives were used and how many were killed."

                        My initial message is the opposite in principle. There is a danger - it must be taken into account. And do not stupidly hatred.

                        By the way, about the birds. The shelling of the territory of Israel by RS has a near-zero efficiency. Following your logic, the Palestinians should be allowed to indulge in this cute entertainment. and all these "Iron Cumpols" should simply be written off. so as not to spend money on maintenance
                      10. Professor
                        Professor 25 July 2019 20: 56
                        +1
                        Quote: Spade
                        And now try to bring such knives on a plane flying to the United States.

                        Easy. The Americans put armored doors. We have had such a long time.

                        Quote: Spade

                        No, that's exactly your way. It is you who are interested in "how many MANPADS were used and how many were shot down. How many knives were used and how many were killed."

                        This is what is measured EFFICIENCY, CEP. fellow

                        Quote: Spade
                        My initial message is the opposite in principle. There is a danger - it must be taken into account. And do not stupidly hatred.

                        Well yes. "We will not stand the price." Only it doesn't even work in theory. There is not enough blanket for everyone and everyone pulls it on themselves. There are far more serious threats to aircraft than MANPADS.

                        Quote: Spade
                        By the way, about the birds. The shelling of the territory of Israel by RS has a near-zero efficiency. Following your logic, the Palestinians should be allowed to indulge in this cute entertainment. and all these "Iron Cumpols" should simply be written off. so as not to spend money on maintenance

                        You mixed up cause and effect. However, as usual. recourse The near-zero effectiveness of shelling is achieved by active (LC), passive (bomb shelters) and preventive (air strikes) protection. And yes. We periodically allow them to engage in shelling. We allow to let off steam in no way reacting to attacks. So for example, it was a last resort.
                      11. Lopatov
                        Lopatov 26 July 2019 07: 24
                        -3
                        Quote: Professor
                        Easily.

                        Lies. Do not carry despite armored doors and agent with weapons in the cabin

                        Quote: Professor
                        This is what measures EFFICIENCY, CEP.

                        Nonsense.
                        This does not measure effectiveness. For MANPADS is not a means of destroying aircraft, but a means of protecting units from air attacks.
                        That is, ideally, MANPADS should not shoot down aircraft at all. By its very presence, preventing attacks.
                        However, according to your strange criteria, such an ideal means of defense should be recognized as absolutely ineffective.

                        Quote: Professor
                        The near-zero effectiveness of shelling is achieved by active (LC), passive (bomb shelters) and preventive (airstrikes) protection.

                        Nonsense. It is "achieved" by the accuracy of these weapons. Near-zero. The LCD statistics itself testifies to this. Most MSs do not fire. because they even do not fall within the boundaries of the bombarded settlements

                        Quote: Professor
                        You mixed up cause and effect. However, as usual

                        Rather, it is your usual method of reversing principles depending on the context. The excavator is bad because it digs the ground. the shovel is good because it digs the ground. Here is the gist of your "dispute methods"
                      12. Professor
                        Professor 28 July 2019 08: 37
                        +3
                        Quote: Spade
                        Lies. Do not carry despite armored doors and agent with weapons in the cabin

                        Yeah. Carried by mistake. Moreover, not one-time knives and forks are given out in the cabin, but real stainless steel ones. Why carry your knife?

                        Quote: Spade
                        Nonsense.
                        This does not measure effectiveness. For MANPADS is not a means of destroying aircraft, but a means of protecting units from air attacks.
                        That is, ideally, MANPADS should not shoot down aircraft at all. By its very presence, preventing attacks.
                        However, according to your strange criteria, such an ideal means of defense should be recognized as absolutely ineffective.

                        In your Galaxy, it may be so, but in our country, when a buyer looks at the performance characteristics, he is interested in the probability of hitting a particular target, and the manufacturers even in your Galaxy indicate these numbers. Why, because "MANPADS shouldn't shoot down planes at all ". wink

                        Quote: Spade
                        Nonsense. It is "achieved" by the accuracy of these weapons. Near-zero. The LCD statistics itself testifies to this. Most MSs do not fire. because they even do not fall within the boundaries of the bombarded settlements

                        You really have problems with the materiel. The ZhK is launched only on those missiles that do not fly into the wasteland, but on the target and effectiveness it is calculated only on intercepted missiles. Passive protection also exists not in a clean field, but in those where there is someone and what to protect. Like you.

                        Quote: Spade
                        Rather, it is your usual method of reversing principles depending on the context. The excavator is bad because it digs the ground. the shovel is good because it digs the ground. Here is the gist of your "dispute methods"

                        All visitors to the thread can judge the methods. Correspondence is public. These are your pearls you need to take for quotes "For MANPADS is not a means of destroying aircraft, but a means of protecting units from an air attack.
                        That is, ideally, MANPADS should not shoot down aircraft at all.
                        " wassat
                2. sivuch
                  sivuch 26 July 2019 10: 56
                  0
                  You perfectly understand that the effectiveness of air defense is not determined only by the ratio of launched and missiles
  • Bongo
    Bongo 25 July 2019 10: 26
    +2
    Quote: Spade
    The Americans consider MANPADS so "ineffective" that they invested in the creation, production and supply of their simulators to the troops to train crews to protect against them.

    Not really, exaggerate is not necessary. No. Americans take threats into account and learn to minimize them. Just at the moment I am writing an article on this topic. wink

    MANPADS simulator in the USCM
    1. Lopatov
      Lopatov 25 July 2019 10: 30
      +2
      Quote: Bongo
      Americans consider threats and learn to minimize them.

      That's it!
      Threats.
      And the main threat to MANPADS is that they can be anywhere.

      There are camp guards, and anti-aircraft gunners can be there. There are military intelligence agencies. Reconnaissance patrols, reconnaissance squads, reconnaissance groups. They can be there too. Well and so on.
      1. Bongo
        Bongo 25 July 2019 10: 37
        +1
        Quote: Spade
        And the main threat to MANPADS is that they can be anywhere.

        But the effectiveness of MANPADS should not be overestimated either. I myself have had a chance to study Strela-2M quite closely and teach others. I have an idea of ​​the subject of the conversation.

        In the USA, imitators reproducing the work of CHP-75 are also operated. But nobody claims that the C-75 air defense system is still capable of presenting a particular threat to the Air Force and the US Navy.
        1. Lopatov
          Lopatov 25 July 2019 10: 46
          0
          Quote: Bongo
          But the effectiveness of MANPADS should not be overestimated.

          And what is considered "efficiency"?
          Here's an example. the need to change the tactics of the combat employment of aviation, huge money invested in increasing the range of use of aviation weapons, big money. invested in the protection of aircraft from MANPADS - is this all included in the concept of "efficiency"?
          1. Bongo
            Bongo 25 July 2019 10: 52
            +3
            Quote: Spade
            And what is considered "efficiency"?

            The ability to shield troops from air attack and the ratio between launched missiles and targets hit by them. It is not possible to cover the troops with MANPADS alone, and the likelihood of defeat, even in a simple jamming environment, is not too high. In any case, less than in "large" complexes. In my unsophisticated opinion, this is primarily due to the stress experienced by the shooter of the portable complex in a combat situation and the mistakes he makes.
            1. Lopatov
              Lopatov 25 July 2019 11: 13
              -1
              Quote: Bongo
              and the relationship between missiles launched and targets hit by them.

              It does not matter.
              Mining greatly limits the enemy in maneuverability. But the ratio of the number of targets hit to the number of mines is microscopic.
              Similarly about the same KAZ. The number of stopped attacking ammunition to the number of tanks equipped with this system is also a microscopic number.


              Quote: Bongo
              In my inexperienced opinion, this is primarily due to the stress experienced by the shooter of the portable complex in a combat situation and the mistakes made by him.

              I read that the main choice was the wrong range. but modern control systems are able to remove this drawback. And by the way. synchronize the launch of several missiles on one target. Flyers count. that it’s very difficult to get away from this.
            2. Bongo
              Bongo 25 July 2019 11: 19
              +1
              Quote: Spade
              It does not matter.

              The probability of hitting the target Zur does not matter Did not know. But you can see as an artilleryman.
              Quote: Spade
              Mining greatly limits the enemy in maneuverability. But the ratio of the number of targets hit to the number of mines is microscopic.

              Not correct example No.
              Quote: Spade
              I read that the main choice was the wrong range. but modern management systems are able to remove this shortcoming.

              What domestic MANPADS has a range finder?
              Quote: Spade
              And by the way. synchronize the launch of several missiles on one target.

              In practice, this is not easy to implement.
            3. Lopatov
              Lopatov 25 July 2019 15: 08
              0
              Quote: Bongo
              The probability of hitting a missile target does not matter?

              Absolutely not.
              Just try to answer the question: "What is MANPADS intended for?"
              Is it a means of air defense units or a means to destroy aircraft?

              Quote: Bongo
              Not a valid example no

              Absolutely correct. Mines are not a means of destroying equipment. Therefore, drummed, what is their effectiveness.

              Quote: Bongo
              What domestic MANPADS has a range finder?

              ?
              How interesting. And how does this relate to the above?
              Or is that so. thinking out loud?

              I’ll ask you too. Are there systems in domestic MANPADS that provide launching of a rocket only in conditions. when guaranteed, for example. fifty percent chance of hitting a target?

              Quote: Bongo
              In practice, this is not easy to implement.

              Not just, but very simple. It is enough to have a normal control system. There are much more complicated things that can be synchronized. For example, battery pseudo-volley MRSI
        2. sivuch
          sivuch 25 July 2019 11: 36
          +1
          Sergey, as a percentage, it was precisely MANPADS that hurt more aircraft than adults.
          Believe word smile
        3. Bongo
          Bongo 25 July 2019 11: 44
          +2
          Quote: sivuch
          Sergey, as a percentage, it was precisely MANPADS that hurt more aircraft than adults.
          Believe word

          Igor, the fact of the matter is that I am familiar with statistics. Even more than the MANPADS of aircraft and helicopters in conflicts shot down anti-aircraft artillery. But we are talking about the relationship between the launched missiles and the targets hit, isn't it?
        4. sivuch
          sivuch 25 July 2019 11: 51
          0
          FOR - not everywhere. There was no such thing in Karabakh or South Africa. But the effectiveness is not only determined by running and caught. It is also the CC of the zrk, which I already wrote about and the limitation of flights on criminally small (after all, MANPADS can be anywhere)
        5. Bongo
          Bongo 25 July 2019 11: 54
          +2
          Quote: sivuch
          FOR - not everywhere. There was no such thing in Karabakh or South Africa. But the effectiveness is not only determined by running and caught. It is also the CC of the zrk, which I already wrote about and the limitation of flights on criminally small (after all, MANPADS can be anywhere)

          Igor, this is not a typical example. Tell me, how many MANPADS in Iraq and how many they shot down?
        6. sivuch
          sivuch 25 July 2019 12: 38
          +1
          Sergey, you understand that it is impossible to answer this question exactly. According to various sources, about 3000 MANPADS were delivered (plus or minus one thousand fellow ), and mainly Strela and their Chinese clones. There were also Needles-1 (Needles without units, of course, weren’t, like tablets) You understand that for the correct statistics, these little things must be taken into account. How many launches - only Allah knows.
          January 17, 1991 "Tornado" GR.1
          January 17, 1991 Jaguar A - Returned to France and deposited at Chateaudin AFB. Apparently, the A91 has not flown since then.
          January 18, 1991 OV-10A Bronco
          It was shot down at an altitude of 2500 meters by a MANPADS missile approximately 25 km northeast of Ras al-Mishab
          January 28, 1991 AV-8B Harrier II Berryman's plane was hit by a MANPADS missile
          January 31, 1991 AC-130H "Spectrum" Then a MANPADS missile hit one of the aircraft engines
          February 9, 1991 AV-8B "Harrier" II Captain Sanborn's plane was struck by a MANPADS missile at the exit from the attack
          19 February 1991 OA-10A Thunderbolt II Several sources say that OA-10 was shot down by a MANPADS missile. -questionable
          On February 22, 1991, an A-10A Thunderbolt II Thunderbolt was hit by a missile (apparently MANPADS).
          February 25, 1991 AV-8B "Harrier" II aircraft of Captain Walsh was damaged by a MANPADS missile After the failure of the hydraulic system, he ejected
          25 February 1991 OV-10A "Bronco was shot down over Iraqi positions in southern Kuwait by a MANPADS missile.
          On February 27, 1991 OA-10A "Thunderbolt" II aircraft of 1st Lieutenant Olson was heavily damaged by a MANPADS missile, but lost control during the landing approach and was killed
          February 27, 1991 F-16C "Fighting Falcon" Captain Andrews' plane was hit by a MANPADS missile
          Ponamarchuk Eugene
          Wings broken by a storm. Losses of aircraft of the Multinational Force and Iraq during the 1991 war
          I have no data on damaged aircraft
  • Lopatov
    Lopatov 25 July 2019 10: 48
    0
    Quote: Bongo
    In the USA, imitators reproducing the work of CHP-75 are also operated.

    And how many of these complexes over the past 10 years developed and built?
  • sivuch
    sivuch 25 July 2019 11: 25
    +1
    Sergey, efficiency is a too vague concept. Remember, in an article about Osa, I wrote that from the experience of the teachings, it was Eagle arrows who were usually the first to find Vintokruta and give TsU Osam? But, it would seem, db. vice versa
    1. Bongo
      Bongo 25 July 2019 11: 29
      +2
      Quote: sivuch
      Sergey, efficiency is a too vague concept. Remember, in an article about Osa, I wrote that from the experience of the teachings, it was Eagle arrows who were usually the first to find Vintokruta and give TsU Osam? But, it would seem, db. vice versa

      Igor, you are in many respects right. But I would not overestimate the role of MANPADS in confrontation with a strong opponent.
      1. Professor
        Professor 25 July 2019 11: 46
        +3
        Quote: Bongo
        Igor, you are in many respects right. But I would not overestimate the role of MANPADS in confrontation with a strong opponent.

        Everything is much simpler. There are specific performance figures in the public domain. Everything is clear on them.
      2. Corn
        Corn 25 July 2019 13: 50
        +2
        There are no specific figures for performance on this topic and there cannot be (the most active MANPADS operators are all kinds of paramilitary formations of varying degrees of legality, and they do not send statistics on the use of their products to the arms manufacturer), there are only estimates, but they cannot fully reflect the usefulness whatever
        At the same time, we can observe the influence on modern conflicts quite clearly: helicopter raids have gone down in history, winged aviation has been driven up to heights of 5 km +, I think this is the best characteristic of the real effectiveness of MANPADS.
  • sivuch
    sivuch 25 July 2019 11: 19
    0
    What do you think is the effectiveness of MANPADS in real conflicts? request
    Good one.
  • Nikolaevich I
    Nikolaevich I 25 July 2019 10: 57
    0
    Quote: Professor
    MANPADS today are a threat only to brainless Syrian pilots. In other conflicts, the effectiveness of MANPADS was very low ...

    Interesting girls are dancing! 4 pieces in a row! And the use of MANPADS in Afghanistan? And what about Donbass? The basis of the air defense of the militia was (and it is ...) - MANPADS! However, they are weaning're coming out-aviation "to carry out combat missions"!
    1. sivuch
      sivuch 25 July 2019 11: 26
      0
      The Artsakh conflict has been forgotten. And there MANPADS came off to the full
      1. Nikolaevich I
        Nikolaevich I 25 July 2019 11: 53
        +3
        Quote: sivuch
        Artsakh conflict forgotten

        Well then, it’s better ... the Georgian-Abkhaz conflict! You can recall the Chadian-Libyan conflict, where MANPADS were the basis of the air defense of the Chadian forces. (then, as you know, the Chadian troops; having no aviation, heavy artillery, armored vehicles, defeated the Libyan army with aircraft, in particular ...)
    2. Professor
      Professor 25 July 2019 14: 37
      0
      Quote: Nikolaevich I
      Quote: Professor
      MANPADS today are a threat only to brainless Syrian pilots. In other conflicts, the effectiveness of MANPADS was very low ...

      Interesting girls are dancing! 4 pieces in a row! And the use of MANPADS in Afghanistan? And what about Donbass? The basis of the air defense of the militia was (and it is ...) - MANPADS! However, they are weaning're coming out-aviation "to carry out combat missions"!

      The probability of hitting a single target?
      Effectiveness of combat use? '

      And it turns out that the clerical knife was the most effective weapon with which Nain Eleven were committed.
      1. Nikolaevich I
        Nikolaevich I 25 July 2019 15: 30
        0
        Quote: Professor
        The probability of hitting a single target?

        Professor, I'm surprised at your ... hmm, "simple" questions! And here ... (what does it matter ...) "the probability of hitting a single target" if the final result turned out to be important? request The task is assigned to the air defense system (organization) (!), And MANPADS (or other means!) Is an element ... "tool" of the system! The LDNR air defense fulfilled its task by means of mainly MANPADS! As a result, the desired result was obtained: removed the sword "hanging" over the militia combat units and the civilian population of the LPR; The ground forces of the Armed Forces of Ukraine lost air support, which to a certain extent limited their actions! This is the main thing! The rest is from the "evil one"!
        1. Professor
          Professor 25 July 2019 15: 47
          +1
          Quote: Nikolaevich I
          This is the main thing! The rest is from the "evil one"!

          Not. Now, according to your plan, you will have enough single case, or will you be based on the probability of an attack on the target (according to the Normal Distribution for Lopatov) compiled on the effectiveness of the systems in previous conflicts? The effectiveness of MANPADS Strela amounted to 0.15-0.2 in Yom Kippur. How many complexes do you need to defend yourself against 10 LA (LNPATX will have enough 10. He has 100% effectiveness)?
          1. Nikolaevich I
            Nikolaevich I 25 July 2019 16: 50
            +1
            And I did not claim (and do not claim) that, based on the experience of Donbass, the Georgian-Abkhaz conflict, one should neglect "other" air defense systems and other air defense components, and rely on MANPADS! I only object to the "postulate" of the worthlessness of MANPADS!
            1. Professor
              Professor 25 July 2019 17: 57
              0
              Quote: Nikolaevich I
              And I did not claim (and do not claim) that, based on the experience of Donbass, the Georgian-Abkhaz conflict, one should neglect "other" air defense systems and other air defense components, and rely on MANPADS! I only object to the "postulate" of the worthlessness of MANPADS!

              You can kill with a brick on the head. Nevertheless, the effectiveness of MANPADS leaves much to be desired.
              1. Mooh
                Mooh 27 July 2019 02: 25
                0
                You can kill with a brick on the head.

                Really carry nonsense. Even if you need 10 needles per aircraft, it is still cheaper than one C-300 rocket. In general, measuring the effectiveness of MANPADS on the basis of statistical data makes no sense due to the inability to establish the qualifications of operators and, in many cases, the MANPADS model. Lopatov’s analogies with minefields and rifle cartridges are very correct. Give each Arab a MANPADS and your vaunted aircraft below 5000 will not be able to fly.
                1. Professor
                  Professor 28 July 2019 08: 41
                  +2
                  Quote: MooH
                  You can kill with a brick on the head.

                  Really carry nonsense. Even if you need 10 needles per aircraft, it is still cheaper than one C-300 rocket. In general, measuring the effectiveness of MANPADS on the basis of statistical data makes no sense due to the inability to establish the qualifications of operators and, in many cases, the MANPADS model. Lopatov’s analogies with minefields and rifle cartridges are very correct. Give each Arab a MANPADS and your vaunted aircraft below 5000 will not be able to fly.

                  Your vaunted aviation has long been flying below 5000. Nevertheless, in real conflicts, losses from MANPADS are minimal, and in recent conflicts they are scanty. There are more losses due to errors in the margins.
        2. sivuch
          sivuch 25 July 2019 16: 43
          +2
          Come on you. The opponent understands perfectly well that the matter is not only about the Clogged-missed.
  • abc_alex
    abc_alex 25 July 2019 14: 09
    +2
    Quote: Professor
    Here you are right. MANPADS today are a threat only to brainless Syrian pilots. In other conflicts, the effectiveness of MANPADS was very low, especially since the helicopter does not need to "shine long and high" to fight tanks.


    In Russia, there is a design bureau that simultaneously deals with the subject of helicopter weapons and MANPADS. I have the opportunity to communicate with the specialists of this design bureau. They usually don’t lie to themselves. My data is from them. They claim that in 7 cases out of 10, the MANPADS operator emerges victorious from a confrontation with a helicopter. And as a rule, helicopter pilots do not even have time to understand where the shot came from, because the MANPADS guidance system is passive.
    In theory, the helicopter doesn't even need to take off to hit a tank. :) He can launch a rocket even while standing on the ground. You just need to "see" the tank. But to develop target designation, it is just the helicopter that needs to take off to a height of hundreds of meters. How much it "shines" there depends on the performance of the sighting and navigation complex. But this time is usually enough for the MANPADS operator by the eyes.

    Quote: Professor
    In approximately this way, the Syrian tanks in the Golan were destroyed (or whatever they are in Arabic). Today, a helicopter does not need to go to the line of fire. He can launch a rocket from behind cover. And then gardens, gardens.


    About how? Putting the antenna out of the ravine in the area of ​​the enemy radar?
    I have already answered about the line of fire. If there is a third-party target designation, the helicopter does not need to fly. If we assume the helicopter as a platform for launching long-range missiles "in the blind", according to intelligence advanced beyond the horizon, then the helicopter may not even fly close to the contact line, but move between protected airfields, transporting a pack of missiles from place to place.
    But if the helicopter is considered as an independent combat unit, capable of fully servicing itself, all this Hollywood shooting "from around the corner", "from a ravine" or "over the roof of the house" becomes a fantasy. Or there were "wars with monkeys" when the enemy has no idea about the system of camouflage and concealment of equipment.
    1. Professor
      Professor 25 July 2019 15: 20
      0
      Quote: abc_alex
      They usually don’t lie to themselves. My data is from them. They claim that in 7 cases from 10 the MANPADS operator emerges victorious from a confrontation with a helicopter.

      The probability of hitting a single target?
      Effectiveness of combat use? '

      Quote: abc_alex
      But to develop target designation, it is just the helicopter that needs to take off to a height of hundreds of meters. How much it "shines" there depends on the performance of the sighting and navigation complex. But this time is usually enough for the MANPADS operator by the eyes.

      Not at all like that. Over-the-shoulder radar above the hill is enough to detect a target. In this position, the helicopter is invulnerable to MANPADS.

      Quote: abc_alex
      But if the helicopter is considered as an independent combat unit, capable of fully servicing itself, all this Hollywood shooting "from around the corner", "from a ravine" or "over the roof of the house" becomes a fantasy. Or there were "wars with monkeys" when the enemy has no idea about the system of camouflage and concealment of equipment.

      That’s how helicopters knocked out Syrian tanks from behind a hill, firing rockets and diving behind the hill again.

      PS
      In reality, the effectiveness of MANPADS was 0,15-0,2.
      1. abc_alex
        abc_alex 26 July 2019 12: 39
        0
        Quote: Professor
        The probability of hitting a single target?
        Effectiveness of combat use? '


        The probability of defeating what and what purpose? MANPADS helicopter? For new Needles declare 0,8-0,9. They don't talk about Verba at all. But as a rule, in a normal army, MANPADS operators do not go one at a time.

        The results of the combat use in the form of an Excel plate or in the form of a diagram to provide you? You are not asked to provide an analysis of the combat effectiveness of the Iron Dome or Merkava with detailed reports. Here, it seems, not military analytical centers are discussing, but ordinary people.

        Quote: Professor
        That’s how helicopters knocked out Syrian tanks from behind a hill, firing rockets and diving behind the hill again.


        I think you are either making it up yourself, or you are being led by others. By itself, the process of detecting a tank by a helicopter does not imply any "jumping out". Although, if the helicopters "jumped out" for 15-20 minutes, then I am ready to believe.
        In general, looking at how the Syrian army was changed by just a couple of years of "education" by our officers, I am ready to believe that at one time yours managed to destroy their tanks simply by throwing grenades through the helicopter door ...
        1. Professor
          Professor 28 July 2019 08: 54
          +2
          Quote: abc_alex
          The probability of defeating what and what purpose? MANPADS helicopter? For new Needles declare 0,8-0,9. They don't talk about Verba at all. But as a rule, in a normal army, MANPADS operators do not go one at a time.

          The manufacturer clearly indicates the probability of hitting targets, explaining which and how.

          Quote: abc_alex
          The results of the combat use in the form of an Excel plate or in the form of a diagram to provide you? You are not asked to provide an analysis of the combat effectiveness of the Iron Dome or Merkava with detailed reports. Here, it seems, not military analytical centers are discussing, but ordinary people.

          It is possible in the tablet. I don’t know about Merkava, but the effectiveness of the LCD in open access.

          Quote: abc_alex
          I think you are either making it up yourself, or you are being led by others. By itself, the process of detecting a tank by a helicopter does not imply any "jumping out". Although, if the helicopters "jumped out" for 15-20 minutes, then I am ready to believe.
          In general, looking at how the Syrian army was changed by just a couple of years of "education" by our officers, I am ready to believe that at one time yours managed to destroy their tanks simply by throwing grenades through the helicopter door ...

          I wonder who cooked the Syrians in those days? Who developed operational plans for them? In whose military schools did their officers study? Who finally commanded them at battalion level and above?
      2. vatov
        vatov 26 July 2019 12: 41
        +1
        In truth, he was once in a convoy that simulated a strike. On assignment, we had to move off the road who left to right. Nobody drove off the road. Everyone pressed their heads to their shoulders. If it were a real blow everyone would be in another world.
        After the use of MANPADS, the pilot will try to save himself and his equipment, which means that the main task has not been completed or is threatened with a breakdown, and it doesn’t matter if they shot him down or not ....
  • Shopping Mall
    25 July 2019 09: 11
    0
    Quote: abc_alex
    Dear author, and you did not confuse?

    Exercises conducted in 80-ies of the XX century, showed the ratio of the losses of combat helicopters to armored vehicles as 1 to 20.


    This, I'm sorry, how? Provided that the attack helicopter ammunition, maximum, 16 missiles? That is, according to these data, the helicopter turns out to be invulnerable in principle? It turns out that he can shoot off all the ammunition with impunity, fly back to recharge, return, shoot another 4 tank, and only the bottom of the tank ... What kind of exercises have they shown? Is it in the USA?


    Yes, with probabilities you are bad. The calculation can be done in different ways. For example, the task is to defeat a tank covered by air defense. Runs 20 times. In one case, the helicopter was struck by the air defense of the cover, so you and 1 to 20. There are plenty of other options.

    Quote: abc_alex
    . “Strela-1” and “Strela-10” used the selection of a contrast target against the sky as the main guidance mode (photo-contrast mode). This did not allow attacking targets against the background of the earth, which is relevant when repelling the threat posed by combat helicopters.

    Moreover, such a regime did not allow attacking targets under water or in space. :)
    Excuse me, but where did you get the idea about "against the background of the earth"? Was the air defense system raised to a height of several kilometers? Did the helicopters start rolling on the ground? Always and everywhere the helicopter is above the air defense system, I personally cannot even think of options when the air defense system is forced to consider the helicopter against the background of the earth. The main problem of the military air defense of the 60s was the short range of destruction, and not the mythical inability to land a helicopter from a height of a couple of kilometers.


    The terrain relief is uneven, especially in the mountains, a situation where a helicopter can be on the background of mountains / hills or forests is more than likely, respectively, knock it out of the Arrows will not work.

    Quote: abc_alex
    . In the Strela-10, the infrared guidance mode was used as a backup, but its operation required the cooling of the infrared homing head (ICGSN) with liquid nitrogen located in the body of the missile container. If IKGSN was activated, but subsequently the launch was canceled, for example, if the target left the zone of visibility, then it was no longer possible to reuse the infrared targeting mode due to the absence of nitrogen.


    So what? Firstly, the infrared mode was exactly the spare, for shooting in the conditions of interference on certain courses of the target, aiming and shooting was carried out as before by the television channel. Secondly, the supply of nitrogen in the GOS was carried out at the very last moment, when the decision on the shot has already been made and its cancellation is extremely unlikely, if at all possible. Invented a problem?


    And the fact that this is not a fictional problem, but a reality, I just stated a fact.

    Quote: abc_alex
    . The Tunguska anti-aircraft missile and cannon system (ZRPK) and the Tor-M1 air defense system became the first effective military air defense systems capable of fighting helicopter gunships.


    Actually, no. The most effective military means of dealing with attack helicopters (according to the developers of attack helicopters) is MANPADS. Since the crew is simply not physically able to see a fighter-anti-aircraft gunner, if the latter is not a complete idiot.


    Yes, the imager will not see. A MANPADS easily hit the helicopter for 10-15 km ...
    All destruction of MANPADS helicopters is possible only with the direct fire support of ground forces, when helicopters operate with unguided weapons close to the target. When hunting for tanks tactics will be completely different.

    And in general, even now, self-defense complexes have drastically reduced the effectiveness of MANPADS. The emergence of more powerful lasers will not leave chances of thermally guided MANPADS. Stupidly will burn head, something else is required.

    Quote: abc_alex
    . AH-64D Apache helicopters were able to hit targets using the “jump” mode. In this mode, the combat helicopter gains altitude for a short time to search for and capture a target, after which it launches an ATGM from ARLGSN and immediately decreases, hiding in the folds of the terrain.

    Yeah, and crawls back gardens. :) Hollywood.


    That's right, it is necessary on the Mi-24 on the low-level flight to the trunks, on MANPADS, to the focus ...
    1. Bongo
      Bongo 25 July 2019 09: 51
      +3
      Quote: AVM
      A MANPADS easily hit the helicopter for 10-15 km

      Sorry, I may be behind the times. What is this MANPADS with such a range of launch?
      1. Shopping Mall
        25 July 2019 11: 01
        0
        Quote: Bongo
        Quote: AVM
        A MANPADS easily hit the helicopter for 10-15 km

        Sorry, I may be behind the times. What is this MANPADS with such a range of launch?


        It's sarcasm.
        1. Bongo
          Bongo 25 July 2019 11: 06
          0
          Quote: AVM
          It's sarcasm.

          This is a question. I'm interested in what exactly MANPADS has a hit range of 10-15 km?
          1. Alexey RA
            Alexey RA 25 July 2019 13: 45
            0
            Quote: Bongo
            This is a question. I’m interested in which specific MANPADS has a range of 10-15 km?

            This was the author’s sarcasm: they say, for some reason everyone believes that the MANPADS are omnipotent and can shoot down a helicopter in 10-15 km. But in fact, MANPADS is dangerous for a helicopter only at a close distance - at a time when it is engaged in the RPE.
          2. Shopping Mall
            25 July 2019 14: 43
            0
            Quote: Bongo
            Quote: AVM
            It's sarcasm.

            This is a question. I'm interested in what exactly MANPADS has a hit range of 10-15 km?


            No, this is my sarcasm about the fact that for a modern anti-tank helicopter, capable of using an ATGM from a distance of about 10 km, and soon already 15 km, MANPADS is the main threat.

            MANPADS, as for me, this is a threat to the helicopter in the first place during its work with unguided weapons, well, or an ambush tactic on the route of movement, if known.
            1. Professor
              Professor 25 July 2019 15: 51
              +3
              Quote: AVM
              No, this is my sarcasm about the fact that for a modern anti-tank helicopter, capable of using an ATGM from a distance of about 10 km, and soon already 15 km, MANPADS is the main threat.

              Spike UFO 30 KM.

              Quote: AVM
              MANPADS, as for me, this is a threat to the helicopter in the first place during its work with unguided weapons, well, or an ambush tactic on the route of movement, if known.

              I have never seen a video of Apache working NURSami.
              1. Alexey RA
                Alexey RA 25 July 2019 16: 06
                +3
                Quote: Professor
                I have never seen a video of Apache working NURSami.

                But NAR units are suspended on combat missions. Here is Iraq:
                1. Professor
                  Professor 25 July 2019 16: 22
                  +2
                  Quote: Alexey RA
                  But NAR units are suspended on combat missions. Here is Iraq:

                  Are you sure this is not a controlled Hydra?
                  Is there a combat video?
    2. sivuch
      sivuch 25 July 2019 11: 34
      +2
      Actually, scary statistics like 11 to 1 or 20 to 1 are exactly the dueling situevina tanks vs helicopters. When there is air defense, it is already necessary to look specifically - which helicopters, which air defense, which terrain.
      By the way, the shooting of defenseless tanks for 10-20 km is also possible only if the enemy is ram or simply technologically retarded.
    3. abc_alex
      abc_alex 25 July 2019 14: 37
      +1
      Quote: AVM
      Yes, with probabilities you are bad. The calculation can be done in different ways. For example, the task is to defeat a tank covered by air defense. Runs 20 times. In one case, the helicopter was struck by the air defense of the cover, so you and 1 to 20. There are plenty of other options.

      So your example of probability is not a loss ratio, as you wrote. This is the probability of a helicopter hitting an air defense system. 1 to 20 i.e. 0,05. By the way, what kind of air defense is such that a helicopter knocks down 20 attempts? And what does the tank have to do with it?
      The ratio of losses is the defeat of 200 tanks spent 10 helicopters. This is not calculated, this is statistics. But because it is situational, I ask, what kind of teaching do you mean?



      Quote: AVM
      The terrain relief is uneven, especially in the mountains, a situation where a helicopter can be on the background of mountains / hills or forests is more than likely, respectively, knock it out of the Arrows will not work.

      So for that, they then introduced the IR channel into "Strela". He can do such a task.

      Quote: AVM
      Yes, the imager will not see. A MANPADS easily hit the helicopter for 10-15 km ...
      All destruction of MANPADS helicopters is possible only with the direct fire support of ground forces, when helicopters operate with unguided weapons close to the target. When hunting for tanks tactics will be completely different.

      I made a reservation, "if the latter is not a complete idiot." Of course, it is not difficult to see an eccentric sitting in an open field with MANPADS on his shoulder. It is somewhat more difficult to see him, hiding in a building, trench, behind a wall or even a fence. Infrared rays are not X-rays after all, their energy is not such as to shine through obstacles.
      And you suppose that the confrontation between tanks and helicopters takes place in the style of "I will go out into the open field to look for a combatant!" Generally, as a rule, the helicopter has to SEARCH its targets, and this does not happen quickly.
      What is a "hunt for tanks"? Is it like a helicopter is prowling in the frontline zone without access and catching tanks in an open field?

      Quote: AVM
      And in general, even now, self-defense complexes have drastically reduced the effectiveness of MANPADS. The emergence of more powerful lasers will not leave chances of thermally guided MANPADS. Stupidly will burn head, something else is required.


      Perhaps that is required. Or maybe it will be enough to complicate the trajectory of approach to the target.
      But this is not about that. You misrepresented the confrontation between a helicopter and military air defense.
      I think so.
  • Alexey RA
    Alexey RA 25 July 2019 13: 42
    +2
    Quote: abc_alex
    This, I'm sorry, how? Provided that the attack helicopter ammunition, maximum, 16 missiles? That is, according to these data, the helicopter turns out to be invulnerable in principle? It turns out that he can shoot off all the ammunition with impunity, fly back to recharge, return, shoot another 4 tank, and only the bottom of the tank ... What kind of exercises have they shown? Is it in the USA?

    This is data from an old article in the Western Military District, which examined the effectiveness of all anti-tank weapons. In practice, this means that for every 20 tanks lost, one turntable will be shot down. That is, a couple of crews are lucky to hit 6-8 targets and return, and the third will be knocked down on the 8th or even 4th.
    EMNIP, these results were obtained by calculation and, most likely, taking into account the military air defense model of the early 80s ("Shilki", "Wasps", "Strela-10").
    By the way, "Shilka" was considered ineffective against helicopters with ATGMs back in the late 70s - even against vehicles with "TOU".
    1. abc_alex
      abc_alex 26 July 2019 13: 19
      0
      Is there more detail? For example, who counted?
  • Mik13
    Mik13 25 July 2019 07: 57
    +2
    In the Strela-10, the infrared guidance mode was used as a backup, but its operation required the cooling of the infrared homing head (ICGSN) with liquid nitrogen located in the body of the missile container. If IKGSN was activated, but subsequently the launch was canceled, for example, if the target left the zone of visibility, then it was no longer possible to reuse the infrared targeting mode due to the absence of nitrogen. Thus, the above air defense systems cannot be considered a full-fledged protection against helicopter gunships with anti-tank missiles.

    Dear Author, it may not be up to date, but at the present time all TGSN are cooled. This in no way reduces their effectiveness. And not only MANPADS, but also some ATGM with TGSN.

    For example, the newest Russian MANPADS 9K333 "Verba":

    front is a cylinder with liquefied nitrogen and a disposable electric battery, combined in one node.


    I draw the author's attention to the fact that the battery is also disposable. It is designed for the promotion of gyro rocket and can produce very large currents.
    1. Shopping Mall
      25 July 2019 09: 13
      0
      Quote: Mik13
      In the Strela-10, the infrared guidance mode was used as a backup, but its operation required the cooling of the infrared homing head (ICGSN) with liquid nitrogen located in the body of the missile container. If IKGSN was activated, but subsequently the launch was canceled, for example, if the target left the zone of visibility, then it was no longer possible to reuse the infrared targeting mode due to the absence of nitrogen. Thus, the above air defense systems cannot be considered a full-fledged protection against helicopter gunships with anti-tank missiles.

      Dear Author, it may not be up to date, but at the present time all TGSN are cooled. This in no way reduces their effectiveness. And not only MANPADS, but also some ATGM with TGSN.

      For example, the newest Russian MANPADS 9K333 "Verba":

      front is a cylinder with liquefied nitrogen and a disposable electric battery, combined in one node.


      I draw the author's attention to the fact that the battery is also disposable. It is designed for the promotion of gyro rocket and can produce very large currents.


      The author is in the know. Some kind of cooled, some not. In any case, it is a reality, it is a necessary measure and a disadvantage.
  • Bongo
    Bongo 25 July 2019 08: 04
    +6
    The topic is interesting, but the article turned out to be weak. negative Too many blunders, and the author has mixed too much into a bunch.
    1. Professor
      Professor 25 July 2019 08: 32
      +3
      Quote: Bongo
      The topic is interesting, but the article turned out to be weak. negative Too many blunders, and the author has mixed too much into a bunch.

      Write an article. I had a Soviet book DSP "Experience of using helicopters in the Arab-Israeli wars." I'll look for you.
      1. Bongo
        Bongo 25 July 2019 09: 49
        +2
        Quote: Professor
        Write an article. I had a Soviet book DSP "Experience of using helicopters in the Arab-Israeli wars." I will look for you

        For the book I will be grateful! But on this topic I already had a loop from 10 parts. I do not want to repeat.
        1. Professor
          Professor 25 July 2019 09: 57
          +3
          Quote: Bongo
          Quote: Professor
          Write an article. I had a Soviet book DSP "Experience of using helicopters in the Arab-Israeli wars." I will look for you

          For the book I will be grateful! But on this topic I already had a loop from 10 parts. I do not want to repeat.

          I’ll look for a book. I had it in print.

          And you write shorter, but the people of 10 articles do not pull (limited to pictures) and then tells you how effective the MANPADS were.
          wink
          1. Bongo
            Bongo 25 July 2019 10: 12
            +1
            Quote: Professor
            And you write shorter, but the people of 10 articles do not pull (limited to pictures) and then tells you how effective the MANPADS were.

            Perhaps this is my flaw. But I am not interested in "knocking off the tops" and making articles quickly. No.
            1. Professor
              Professor 25 July 2019 10: 17
              +5
              Quote: Bongo
              Quote: Professor
              And you write shorter, but the people of 10 articles do not pull (limited to pictures) and then tells you how effective the MANPADS were.

              Perhaps this is my flaw. But I am not interested in "knocking off the tops" and making articles quickly. No.

              Learn from Damantsev. laughing
              1. Bongo
                Bongo 25 July 2019 10: 18
                +2
                Quote: Professor
                Learn from Damantsev.

                You are very kind! wassat But in insanity, I have not yet fallen.
              2. Alex_59
                Alex_59 25 July 2019 12: 57
                +3
                Quote: Professor
                Learn from Damantsev

                It's impossible. Damanis out of reach.
                1. Alexey RA
                  Alexey RA 25 July 2019 13: 46
                  +3
                  Quote: Alex_59
                  It's impossible. Damanis out of reach.

                  There are also Kaptsov ... wink
          2. abc_alex
            abc_alex 26 July 2019 13: 21
            0
            So, to tell someone about the effectiveness of MANPADS, to someone about helicopters jumping out of ravines. Everyone has their own joke. lol
    2. Shopping Mall
      25 July 2019 14: 33
      0
      Quote: Bongo
      The topic is interesting, but the article turned out to be weak. negative Too many blunders, and the author has mixed too much into a bunch.


      I didn’t have a goal to paint this topic into several dozen articles, especially since individually these topics were repeatedly disclosed. The main message is to show the stage-by-turn helicopters with the 1 ATGM generation and Strela-10 / ZSU Shilka anti-tank systems, helicopters with the 2 generation ATGM and ZRK / ZRPK TOR / Tunguska helicopters, helicopters with the 3 X-ray generation helicopter / high-speed helicopters and I-Tunguska, helicopters with the XNUMX X-ray generation helicopter / high-speed helicopters, and I and I and my alarms. short range from this threat.
      All this is considered in the context of a series of articles about the prospects for the development of armored vehicles.
      1. abc_alex
        abc_alex 26 July 2019 13: 29
        0
        Quote: AVM
        The main message is to gradually show the confrontation - helicopters with ATGMs of the 1st generation and SAM type


        Then you have a weird selection of material. You are considering exclusively the confrontation between NATO helicopters and Soviet military air defense. But after all, the Phalanx and Baby were put on the Mi-2 since 1969. Will you consider the situation with the use of Soviet ATGMs from helicopters on NATO troops?
  • Whowhy
    Whowhy 25 July 2019 08: 13
    0
    Interestingly, what prevents the use of anti-radar missiles on new helicopters (with radar)?
    1. Mooh
      Mooh 27 July 2019 02: 33
      0
      Price first.
  • Nikolaevich I
    Nikolaevich I 25 July 2019 08: 28
    +1
    The prospect of the emergence of high-speed combat helicopters emphasizes the importance of creating a missile defense system with hypersonic flight speed on most of the trajectory. At the site of work ARLGNS, the speed can be reduced to prevent the formation of a plasma layer that prevents the passage of radio waves (if the problem of permeability of such a layer has not been solved yet).
    Duc, not the current "appearance of high-speed helicopters", but also the appearance of supersonic and hypersonic anti-tank missiles! The idea of ​​reducing the speed of the warhead near the target is not bad (!), Although comments with "objections" may appear ... But the problem of "obstructing the passage of radio waves" can be tried to solve by a sharp (short-term) cooling of the seeker near the target. Of course, the rocket should be equipped with an INS and, if possible, telecontrol (radio correction ...). Supposed solutions for radio correction are available.
    A radical solution could be the use of SAM with ARLGSN, capable of hitting helicopters hiding in the folds of the terrain. SAMs with ARL.GSN are not required ... there can be missiles with IK.GSN ... "specialized".
    Air defense missile systems with vertical launch of missiles are optional! But "oblique launch" zoos with homing missiles and warheads capable of detecting and hitting helicopters in the "folds of the terrain" will also be "suitable" ...
  • K-50
    K-50 25 July 2019 09: 58
    +2
    The launch range is, of course, an important value, but you must somehow find the target at such a distance or even more, identify it, and unambiguously. How does attack helicopters deal with this, especially in the "jump" mode?
    It’s not necessary to jump a lot of mind, history has already shown it, but to jump on the case ... request
    In the meantime, attack helicopters are trying to "discern" their targets, which are more long-range than the military air defense means, they have this "eye" stretched to another place.
    So, not so simple, not so. request
    1. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA 25 July 2019 14: 53
      +1
      Quote: K-50
      In the meantime, attack helicopters are trying to "discern" their targets, which are more long-range than the military air defense means, they have this "eye" stretched to another place.

      Ideally, an attack helicopter should not search for targets on its own. He must work in the system and receive information about targets from external sources, using his on-board means for a short time, only for further exploration - to clarify the current position of the target, to clarify its type and to capture it for the use of URO.
  • voyaka uh
    voyaka uh 25 July 2019 10: 53
    +2
    The best tool against a helicopter is a fighter. Knocks down quickly, guaranteedly, and without losses.
    1. sivuch
      sivuch 25 July 2019 11: 41
      +2
      And the best remedy for dandruff is the guillotine. While the fighter arrives, it finds a target that at criminal low altitudes, the rotorcut will have time to work out.
      1. voyaka uh
        voyaka uh 25 July 2019 12: 27
        +3
        "While the fighter arrives, it will find the target" ////
        -----
        1) Fighters fly fast (unlike helicopters) smile
        2) A helicopter is a major target. Modern aircraft radars calculate such a goal without difficulty.
        3) Do not have time to work out. If air supremacy is over enemy aircraft, it is better to immediately mask the helicopters at the bases (they usually do this).
        1. sivuch
          sivuch 25 July 2019 12: 40
          +1
          So we are talking about a serious war. The fighter will spin at the front line?
          1. voyaka uh
            voyaka uh 25 July 2019 12: 44
            +3
            Mandatory. Moreover, several, patrolling and replacing each other. 24 hours a day. And it is in a serious war.
            To do this, they are now making a special economical mode in the new engines.
            1. sivuch
              sivuch 25 July 2019 14: 02
              +1
              And if the adversary has his own fighters? Not to mention medium / long range air defense missiles
              1. voyaka uh
                voyaka uh 25 July 2019 14: 23
                +2
                ABOUT! You got to the main good :
                "Air supremacy".
                At first they stubbornly fight for supremacy in the air. First with fighters (which is more difficult), then with air defense systems (which is easier)
                And when it is reached, the helicopters turn into ... recourse important goals.
                1. sivuch
                  sivuch 25 July 2019 14: 53
                  +2
                  While you will establish dominance in the air, the enemy will reach the Roki tunnel, after which the UN will offer to establish a humanitarian truce. So we are discussing the option -In the air balance, but we must fight now and here
                  1. voyaka uh
                    voyaka uh 25 July 2019 15: 13
                    +1
                    So you, like, talked about a serious war? And cite as an example a transient local conflict. In any case, as long as there is a likelihood of enemy fighters breaking through to attack helicopters, it is better not to lift them into the air. They will die instantly.
                    1. Shopping Mall
                      25 July 2019 15: 23
                      +2
                      Quote: voyaka uh
                      So you, like, talked about a serious war? And cite as an example a transient local conflict. In any case, as long as there is a likelihood of enemy fighters breaking through to attack helicopters, it is better not to lift them into the air. They will die instantly.


                      You are right in many ways. If someone establishes air supremacy, then helicopters will be just a target for him. the problem of modern armies is that the equipment has become scarce - it is expensive. A situation may well arise when both opponents will knock out the air force from each other so much that crows will dominate the air. And modern fighters are too expensive to risk against armored vehicles. In other words, fighters will save money, "air" will keep the air defense system, creating A2AD.

                      But ground forces in these conditions may well work, as well as helicopters capable of working from the airfields of the jump, deployed following the movements of ground forces. From the air defense system of the helicopter can use the terrain and obstacles, if it is not a desert. This is where he becomes a threat.

                      Well, of course, the removal of ground troops is obviously a weaker enemy.
                      1. voyaka uh
                        voyaka uh 25 July 2019 15: 44
                        +1
                        You touched on the cost theme correctly. High-tech equipment is becoming more expensive and, accordingly, the numbers are sharply reduced. But this trend applies to helicopters and air defense systems. How much does Apache cost? How much does C-400 or Patriot cost?
                        For example, Israel has Apache. But their maintenance is very expensive. It is cheaper for us to throw an attack on F-16 tanks than Apaches. A cheaper helicopter with NURs is ineffective.
                        The "front-line" air defense systems (Pantsiri, Torah, Buki) are also very dubious in terms of effectiveness (here, I foresee, Russian opponents will not agree with me).
                        According to Israeli calculations, the most (in the aggregate of qualities) effective, cheap and universal weapons that against helicopters, against tanks, and against air defense missile systems are F-16.
                      2. Shopping Mall
                        26 July 2019 13: 11
                        0
                        Quote: voyaka uh
                        You touched on the cost theme correctly. High-tech equipment is becoming more expensive and, accordingly, the numbers are sharply reduced. But this trend applies to helicopters and air defense systems. How much does Apache cost? How much does C-400 or Patriot cost?
                        For example, Israel has Apache. But their maintenance is very expensive. It is cheaper for us to throw an attack on F-16 tanks than Apaches. A cheaper helicopter with NURs is ineffective.
                        The "front-line" air defense systems (Pantsiri, Torah, Buki) are also very dubious in terms of effectiveness (here, I foresee, Russian opponents will not agree with me).
                        According to Israeli calculations, the most (in the aggregate of qualities) effective, cheap and universal weapons that against helicopters, against tanks, and against air defense missile systems are F-16.


                        Modern Apache is worth over 60 million.

                        Without guided weapons, modern aircraft below 5000 meters are targets. Throwing pilots to certain death with NARs, in my opinion, is unreasonable at any cost of the helicopter. At the very least, it should be something like "Hydra" - NAR equipped with laser guidance.

                        Regarding the F-16 - about the work on ground-based equipment, in the face of opposition from a serious opponent, I have doubts. Carapaces, tori and beeches are largely on the F-16, as a basic goal and oriented. They may have problems with the defeat of the modern low-profile WTO, but the F-16 is a typical target.
                      3. voyaka uh
                        voyaka uh 26 July 2019 21: 19
                        0
                        I'm not saying that the F-16s are capable of suppressing front-line air defense without loss.
                        But the combination of EW containers, anti-locational missiles, bait missiles
                        etc. with shock missiles will first discharge and destroy air defense, and then
                        suppresses. But at the cost of shot down fighters - war, there are no miracles.
                        The difference between F-16 and Apache is that even in the shock version
                        on F-16 leave
                        a couple of VV rockets - just in case.
                        And in the case of enemy fighters
                        he can somehow stand up for himself. Again,
                        with losses, but "brush it off".
                        And Apache is doomed.
                2. sivuch
                  sivuch 25 July 2019 16: 53
                  +2
                  In any case, these are no longer the Papuans, who had nothing more serious than MANPADS. Yes, in this conflict it took days to make an air defense (and the ground forces needed support from the air at that time), but with a more serious enemy the process could drag on .
                  And the fighter will not graze in an area where there is a chance to run into an air defense system.
                  And there is always danger in a war, otherwise it is no longer a war.
            2. Alexey RA
              Alexey RA 25 July 2019 14: 56
              +5
              Quote: voyaka uh
              First with fighters (which is more difficult), then with air defense systems (which is easier)

              First, they take out the OVC radar. And with great luck - control centers and communications of the air defense system.

              By the way, if you first fight with fighters. and then with an air defense system, this means that the air defense system is no longer there. For in the current air defense system, both active components work together (more precisely, the three components are also electronic warfare).
        2. bk0010
          bk0010 27 July 2019 19: 49
          0
          Such an air defense organization is one of the reasons why we were left without aviation in 1941 (the surviving fighters quickly exhausted their resources, trying to cover the troops with patrols).
          1. voyaka uh
            voyaka uh 27 July 2019 20: 15
            0
            Because the spacecraft had light fighters with a small engine life.
            The Americans launched a massive production of heavy high-altitude fighters,
            who could spend hours circling over the front line, covering their troops.
            In Normandy - France, they completely controlled the sky.
            In the Arden operation, the Germans had to choose the most non-flying weather
            for his tank offensive. As soon as the weather improved, it stopped
            and offensive. Aviation crushed him.
            1. bk0010
              bk0010 28 July 2019 01: 11
              0
              Here, ours, too, circled, circled and twisted ... Amers had anti-aircraft guns, moreover mobile, so as not to let themselves storm with impunity. So no resources would be enough to spin around: remember the announcement of constant air duty in the USA (after the launch of the first satellite) and the USSR (after the Pershing was deployed in Europe) - they flew and spat, even for strategists the resource is not endless.
  • Bongo
    Bongo 25 July 2019 10: 54
    +2
    Quote: Spade
    Quote: Bongo
    In the USA, imitators reproducing the work of CHP-75 are also operated.

    And how many of these complexes over the past 10 years developed and built?

    Not a little. An article on this topic will be soon.
  • Operator
    Operator 25 July 2019 12: 25
    -3
    An anti-tank helicopter at the European theater of operations is a paper tiger: NATO has determined that in a local nuclear conflict in Europe, all planes and helicopters that fly into the air will be disabled by the damaging factors of nuclear explosions before they reach the attack line.
  • Operator
    Operator 25 July 2019 16: 01
    -2
    Quote: AVM
    Quadcopter or helicopter type UAV, with power supply from the carrier vehicle

    It is much easier to install KAZ on armored vehicles with the ability to intercept anti-tank missiles at speeds up to 900 m / s - like the Soviet experimental tank, Object 477 "Hammer / Boxer", which intercepted caliber artillery shells at a specified speed. At the same time, helicopter ATGMs over 600 m / s never accelerated.

    The helicopters themselves are elementarily detected by AWACS at a distance of + 400 km due to the large and characteristic EPR due to the huge rotor throwing area. After that, according to external target designation, helicopters can easily and easily be shot down by mobile air defense systems (accompanying convoys of armored vehicles) using missiles with ARGS homing at low-speed aerial targets behind vertical obstacles and the limits of the radio horizon.

    Attack helicopters of the "Apache" type are only suitable for driving slippers without MANPADS, which we can see on the example of the IDF.
    1. Shopping Mall
      25 July 2019 16: 09
      0
      Quote: Operator
      Quote: AVM
      Quadcopter or helicopter type UAV, with power supply from the carrier vehicle

      It is much easier to install KAZ on armored vehicles with the ability to intercept anti-tank missiles at speeds up to 900 m / s - like the Soviet experimental tank, Object 477 "Hammer / Boxer", which intercepted caliber artillery shells at a specified speed.


      any KAZ has a limit on the number of simultaneously intercepted targets; they will launch a 2-4 ATGM tank simultaneously, and over the means of countering the KAZ, I am sure that work is underway. When DZ appeared, they also said that the cumulative warheads had exhausted themselves. But tandem warheads appeared, then double DZ, etc.

      Quote: Operator
      At the same time, helicopter ATGMs over 600 m / s were never accelerated.


      More accelerated.

      Quote: Operator
      The helicopters themselves are elementarily detected by DRLO airplanes at a distance of + 400 km due to the large and characteristic EPR, due to the huge area of ​​the rotor's launching.


      If the AWACS is not "overwhelmed" with a long-range missile.

      Quote: Operator
      After that, helicopters, according to external target designation, are easily and uncontrollably brought down by mobile air defense missile systems (accompanying armored vehicles columns) with the help of ARGSN missiles homing on low-speed aerial targets behind vertical obstacles and radio horizon limits.


      Which we do not yet have, about what and the conclusions in the article.

      Quote: Operator
      Attack helicopters of the "Apache" type are only suitable for driving slippers without MANPADS, which we can see on the example of the IDF.


      This is just one of the tools in the war, not an absolute weapon, but not useless.
      1. Operator
        Operator 25 July 2019 16: 47
        0
        Quote: AVM
        will launch a tank 2-4 ATGM simultaneously

        It makes no sense to fire ATGMs in salvo at one tank equipped with a KAZ - fragments of the first downed missile will shoot down all the other ATGMs in a salvo. And so that the fragments of the first missile do not catch the rest, the flight distance between them must be at least 100 meters or 1/3 of a second of the time interval, which fits well during the reloading of the Trophy SAZ and three times exceeds the minimum time between shots of the Arena KAZ ...

        If the AWACS is not "inundated" with a long-range missile

        In fact, the participation of DRLO planes in knocking out attack helicopters is optional - a mobile air defense missile system will launch missiles with ARGSN along a hinged trajectory in the direction from which a helicopter shot was fired, or simply due to the characteristic radiation of a helicopter hiding behind a vertical barrier.
        1. Shopping Mall
          25 July 2019 17: 08
          0
          Quote: Operator
          Quote: AVM
          will launch a tank 2-4 ATGM simultaneously

          It makes no sense to fire ATGMs in salvo at one tank equipped with a KAZ - fragments of the first downed missile will shoot down all the other ATGMs in a salvo. And so that the fragments of the first missile do not catch the rest, the flight distance between them must be at least 100 meters or 1/3 of a second of the time interval, which fits well during the reloading of the Trophy SAZ and three times exceeds the minimum time between shots of the Arena KAZ ...


          KAZ are different, like ATGM. ATGM may well make a "slide" and attack from above, or from different sides. Or the first missile will interfere with the KAZ radar. Or it will generally be with a directed field of fragments, just for the destruction of the radar and other elements of the KAZ. Well, do not forget that the appearance of hypersonic ATGMs is most likely inevitable.

          Quote: Operator
          If the AWACS is not "inundated" with a long-range missile

          In fact, the participation of DRLO planes in knocking out attack helicopters is optional - a mobile air defense missile system will launch missiles with ARGSN along a hinged trajectory in the direction from which a helicopter shot was fired, or simply due to the characteristic radiation of a helicopter hiding behind a vertical barrier.


          At ARLGSN, the limited viewing angles, even with the use of revolving (additional search), the sector will be limited, just will not be able to get there. Moreover, if the helicopter uses the radar is not constant, but a short review, then changing position and specifying the coordinates of the targets with passive sensors.
          1. Operator
            Operator 25 July 2019 18: 59
            0
            What's with a slide / interference / GGE, what's without them - one final: fragments of the first ATGM will shoot down all the other missiles in a salvo. And the slide is good only against the Trophy, which has a dead zone funnel of 100 degrees. By the way, the latter's radar is covered with ceramic armor that can withstand a 12,7 mm bullet hit, and not that GGE. And the antenna at the AFAR-type radar, therefore, the barrage of interference does not work on it, and the source of the aiming interference will be knocked down by the KAZ for clarity, so the matter will end.

            Hypersonic ATGMs with a kinetic warhead will require reducing the fire contact distance of the helicopter with the tank to 2-3 km to break through armor without using a cumulative charge, which means that a lightly armored expensive helicopter will be in equal position with a heavily armored cheap tank.

            The ARGSN review sector is quite sufficient to search for a helicopter at the height of the hinged flight path of an anti-aircraft missile. The duration of the radiation of the helicopter’s supra-barrel radar in the viewing mode is also quite sufficient to detect its position in the ambush, and this position is optically detected by the flash of infrared and ultraviolet radiation when launching the ATGM from the carrier helicopter.
        2. bk0010
          bk0010 27 July 2019 19: 55
          0
          A rocket? I would "call" the gunners and ask them to make a couple of volleys of shrapnel with a pipe behind that hill, let them try to hide.
  • Operator
    Operator 25 July 2019 16: 19
    -1
    Quote: Alexey RA
    This is data from an old article in the ZVO, which examined the effectiveness of all anti-tank weapons

    This was a misinformation article based on open Western press materials - NATO secret documents announced the almost complete disruption of attack helicopters at the initial stage of the nuclear conflict in Europe due to the massive use of tactical nuclear weapons.

    In other words, Warsaw-contracted tanks would not have met NATO helicopters because of the massive helicopter fall in the conditions of square-nested use of nuclear weapons, both attacking and defending.
  • yehat
    yehat 26 July 2019 11: 08
    0
    I’m wondering, does it make sense, by analogy with replaceable munition tapes, to make replaceable booster stages for air defense missiles in order to vary the launch range and missile speed?
    1. Shopping Mall
      28 July 2019 10: 41
      0
      Quote: yehat
      I’m wondering, does it make sense, by analogy with replaceable munition tapes, to make replaceable booster stages for air defense missiles in order to vary the launch range and missile speed?


      I think yes. I had similar thoughts when different ammunition is packed in a given container size - more range / speed - less warheads or vice versa. A sort of rocket LEGO.
  • yehat
    yehat 26 July 2019 11: 18
    0
    Quote: voyaka uh
    For example, Israel has an Apache. But their maintenance is very expensive

    how so? Apache is a rather minimalistic machine and much lighter than mi28 or mi-35 or ka-52.
    interesting comparison of the operating costs of the a10 attack aircraft and Apache
    another interesting thing is that the United States is going to reduce a10, is there any interest in Israel in their purchase?
  • yehat
    yehat 26 July 2019 11: 37
    0
    Quote: Spade
    Americans in Iraq from MANPADS fire no less

    Americans in Iraq have managed to lose several aircraft and helicopters after firing small arms. 1 a10 was shot down after firing from a tank anti-aircraft machine gun at close range.
    but the fact is that air defense missiles have become more effective than Iraq’s object defense.
    1. Shopping Mall
      26 July 2019 12: 58
      0
      Quote: yehat
      Quote: Spade
      Americans in Iraq from MANPADS fire no less

      Americans in Iraq have managed to lose several aircraft and helicopters after firing small arms. 1 a10 was shot down after firing from a tank anti-aircraft machine gun at close range.
      but the fact is that air defense missiles have become more effective than Iraq’s object defense.


      There may be several factors:
      First of all, the fact that, in addition to MANPADS, some people do not have enough intelligence for complex complexes. They just "fire and forget."
      Secondly, there can be a relaxation of pilots as a result of weak resistance.
      And finally, the theory of probability - with a relatively large conflict, anything can happen.
      1. yehat
        yehat 26 July 2019 13: 07
        0
        It seems to me that the secrecy and invisibility of MANPADS and other means that could do something became the most important condition.
        1. Shopping Mall
          26 July 2019 17: 51
          0
          Quote: yehat
          It seems to me that the secrecy and invisibility of MANPADS and other means that could do something became the most important condition.


          Yes, the problem is that they are capable of causing some damage, but their use will not ensure victory in the war. And the further, the less will be the influence of RPGs, MANPADS and similar weapons. Including wearable anti-tank systems of the Javelin type. The armor of equipment is being improved, KAZ appears, which are also quickly modernized, and the possibilities of manual complexes are practically exhausted. Explosives do not become more powerful, hypersound is difficult to provide for small complexes. And MANPADS will initially be blinded and retracted by President-S systems, and later stupidly be shot down by lasers, tk. they (MANPADS) are also compact, you cannot put normal protection. No, they will also be improving, but they will no longer show such efficiency as in Afghanistan or Chechnya.
  • Artunis
    Artunis 26 July 2019 12: 09
    0
    All this is of course interesting and probably fairly true, but it makes no sense to get involved in land battles with a potential adversary in the form of NATO Russia, because of the apparent inequality of forces. Unfortunately, we are no longer the USSR who could afford it economically. We can not afford until (hope so far) is. In real life, with a massive global attack on us by the very same NATO, we can counterpose only conventional weapons with nuclear weapons with all the resulting fatality for the whole world. And this I need to think loudly and bluntly speak openly from all the stands. And to develop all these tricky screws on theirs nuts, of course, you need them for the future without spending a lot of money on mass production. So it seems to me.
    1. Shopping Mall
      26 July 2019 12: 59
      0
      Quote: Artunis
      All this is of course interesting and probably fairly true, but it makes no sense to get involved in land battles with a potential adversary in the form of NATO Russia, because of the apparent inequality of forces. Unfortunately, we are no longer the USSR who could afford it economically. We can not afford until (hope so far) is. In real life, with a massive global attack on us by the very same NATO, we can counterpose only conventional weapons with nuclear weapons with all the resulting fatality for the whole world. And this I need to think loudly and bluntly speak openly from all the stands. And to develop all these tricky screws on theirs nuts, of course, you need them for the future without spending a lot of money on mass production. So it seems to me.


      NATO is half the trouble, and if with some sort of Turkey or Poland we grapple? It’s not a fact that NATO will go for them, but if we apply nuclear weapons, then the consequences for us will be serious.
  • pogis
    pogis 26 July 2019 13: 14
    0
    And from what altitude can a helicopter see at a distance of 20 km, without external target designation?
    1. Shopping Mall
      26 July 2019 17: 45
      0
      Quote: pogis
      And from what altitude can a helicopter see at a distance of 20 km, without external target designation?


      With regard to the air defense system, I examined this issue here - https://topwar.ru/157292-obespechenie-raboty-zrk-po-nizkoletjaschim-celjam-bez-privlechenija-aviacii-vvs.html

      And so you can calculate the options here: https://planetcalc.ru/1198/
  • Usher
    Usher 27 July 2019 11: 03
    0
    Quote: Professor
    Quote: Alexey RA
    You know, when calculating the EEC at the sight of goals on the VIKO breaks through the door and runs up through the cracks - what kind of preparation can we talk about?

    In truth, he was once in a convoy that simulated a strike. On assignment, we had to move off the road who left to right. Nobody drove off the road. Everyone pressed their heads to their shoulders. If it were a real blow everyone would be in another world.

    Do not be angry with the Arabs. It’s not easy for them. on the other hand, the British taught the Arab Legion and those alone fought with dignity. Maybe you teachers and Americans are not thin. wink

    And lying is ugly, what kind of task are we? you did not serve in the army.
  • pogis
    pogis 27 July 2019 12: 55
    0
    Quote: AVM
    Quote: pogis
    And from what altitude can a helicopter see at a distance of 20 km, without external target designation?


    With regard to the air defense system, I examined this issue here - https://topwar.ru/157292-obespechenie-raboty-zrk-po-nizkoletjaschim-celjam-bez-privlechenija-aviacii-vvs.html

    And so you can calculate the options here: https://planetcalc.ru/1198/

    If you believe the calculator, then the visibility range from my 4 floor is almost 20 km, and in fact, on the one hand, 50 m (to the edge), and on the other 0,7-0,8 km.
    1. Shopping Mall
      28 July 2019 10: 39
      +1
      Quote: pogis
      Quote: AVM
      Quote: pogis
      And from what altitude can a helicopter see at a distance of 20 km, without external target designation?


      With regard to the air defense system, I examined this issue here - https://topwar.ru/157292-obespechenie-raboty-zrk-po-nizkoletjaschim-celjam-bez-privlechenija-aviacii-vvs.html

      And so you can calculate the options here: https://planetcalc.ru/1198/

      If you believe the calculator, then the visibility range from my 4 floor is almost 20 km, and in fact, on the one hand, 50 m (to the edge), and on the other 0,7-0,8 km.


      In fact, the terrain is always uneven. In the article to which I gave the link, there is a profile of elevation differences on the line, and these are only large differences, there are also trees, buildings. To obtain the maximum range, the helicopter most likely has to "jump" at heights from 5 to 200 meters and quickly change positions, hovering only being sure that it will not receive an RPG-7 or a large-caliber machine gun.
  • Denis Medveezhikoff
    Denis Medveezhikoff 27 July 2019 13: 42
    0
    Only NATO helicopters and USSR anti-aircraft guns saw. But what about the other way around? Or do we have no helicopters or do NATO tankers have? And the whole world is sitting without tanks and without helicopters?
    1. Shopping Mall
      28 July 2019 10: 37
      0
      Quote: Denis Medveikikoff
      Only NATO helicopters and USSR anti-aircraft guns saw. But what about the other way around? Or do we have no helicopters or do NATO tankers have? And the whole world is sitting without tanks and without helicopters?


      In work, I’ll add it next week.
  • Lieutenant Colonel of the USSR Air Force in stock
    0
    Quote: sivuch
    Actually, scary statistics like 11 to 1 or 20 to 1 are exactly the dueling situevina tanks vs helicopters. When there is air defense, it is already necessary to look specifically - which helicopters, which air defense, which terrain.
    By the way, the shooting of defenseless tanks for 10-20 km is also possible only if the enemy is ram or simply technologically retarded.

    ***
    Strange, but I even remember from a military school that the loss ratio of 1:24 during military-scientific exercises was the basis for the development of tactical helicopter aviation in the Warsaw Pact countries ...
    Losses of helicopters at that time were formed from the affected helicopters from air defense of ground forces and anti-aircraft machine guns of tanks, but at that time the possibilities of helicopters and air defense were different ....
    For specific situations, weapons need fresh data, computer simulations, practical research ...
  • Basarev
    Basarev 25 September 2019 20: 26
    0
    It would be perfectly ideal to create a missile launcher launched through the barrel of a tank gun.
  • Chaldon48
    Chaldon48 5 October 2019 08: 17
    0
    What to do in a war as in a war, and tanks and helicopters are just expendable material of the war and as long as they are controlled by people, a lot will depend on their ability and dedication in the performance of a combat mission.