Military Review

Manage uncontrollable. New modernization of sighting systems for bombers

121

In the recent past, Russian attack aircraft of various types began to receive sighting and navigation systems of new types, which increase the accuracy of using unguided aviation ammunition. The development of this direction continues and should soon give new results. As reported by Russia Today, the necessary work is underway to improve the accuracy.


Collaboration work


According to RT, the modernization of sighting and navigation systems is carried out by the joint efforts of several enterprises and organizations. The key role in the project is played by the military technopolis Era (Anapa). Part of the practical work and research is carried out on the basis of the 925 State Flight Test Center. Chkalova (city of Akhtubinsk). Finished results are transferred to PJSC Sukhoi for implementation of equipment in real projects.

In such cooperation, the tasks of the Era are to conduct research and perform modeling of various processes. 925-th GLITS is involved in the work to verify the compiled models. Sukhoi is directly responsible for the modernization of aviation equipment with the help of new developments.

Mathematical models


The main task of Era specialists is to create the most accurate mathematical models of existing aircraft weapons. Ballistic and aerodynamic characteristics of products are digitized.


Verification of the accuracy and realism of the obtained models is carried out using software that simulates the work of wind tunnels. Era has at its disposal productive computing systems that ensure maximum research efficiency. Research is also carried out in kind - on the basis of the 925 GLITZ.

Ready-made models are handed over to Sukhoi for use in improving sighting and navigation systems. Having the most plausible model of ammunition, the aircraft computing complex will be able to more accurately calculate the data for its use. This should increase the accuracy of hits in comparison with current control systems.

It is reported that through collaboration, experts have already optimized the algorithms for using OFAB-250-270 bombs on Su-34 bombers. Due to the introduction of new models, it was possible to increase accuracy by 2-3 times. The minimum KVO was brought to 30 m. In the near future, work on other models of unguided aircraft weapons should be completed.

Refinement and development


Recent ones news clarify the known information. So, in May of this year, TASS reported on the involvement of the Era technopolis in the further improvement of the specialized computing subsystem SVP-24 Hephaestus, used on domestic front-line and long-range bombers.


SVP-24 is a set of special equipment that collects and processes the necessary data. Based on information about flight speed and altitude, weather conditions, ammunition parameters, etc. data is being generated for effective bombing. Also, devices from the system simplify the search for targets and allow you to work on external target designation.

Recent posts mention the revision of the avionics of the Su-34 bomber for the more effective use of the OFAB-250-720 free-falling bomb. Su-34 is not equipped with Hephaestus - this suggests that new developments can be used in the development of other aiming and navigation systems. In this way, the improvement of all major VKS strike aircraft is ensured.

The main method for improving the combat characteristics of bombers is to improve the mathematical models of ballistics and aerodynamics of unguided munitions used by control systems weapons. "Era" creates more accurate models, which are then entered into the memory of on-board equipment. According to RT, the result will be an increase in accuracy by 2-3 times. Perhaps the comparison is carried out with the SVP-24 parameters in the initial configuration.

Drive uncontrollable


Ongoing work to improve the aiming and navigation systems of strike aircraft involves the use of already mastered principles and methods. This ensures the growth of the main parameters due to the refinement of certain elements of the system.

Manage uncontrollable. New modernization of sighting systems for bombers

Apparently, the ongoing modernization of the existing Hephaestus and other complexes does not provide for a major restructuring of the equipment, mass replacement of components, etc. The changes affect only the software part, which now has to handle more complex, but accurate models of weapons. Improved models should provide a significant increase in accuracy compared to the base complex, not to mention less sophisticated sighting tools.

Otherwise, the operation of the aiming and navigation complex remains the same. He must collect data from many sources, take into account the characteristics of a particular weapon and calculate data for automatic reset.

An interesting fact is that after modernization, the Hephaestus subsystem and other developments retain their pros and cons in the context of the use of unguided weapons. So, the basic version of SVP-24 brings the accuracy of free-falling bombs closer to the characteristics of guided weapons. After modernization, obviously, the parameters of the two classes of weapons will become comparable.

However, changing models will not allow you to get rid of some restrictions. SVP-24 or similar systems cannot influence the flight of a bomb after a reset. As a result of this, high accuracy can be obtained only when working on stationary objects. However, for such purposes there is another weapon with the required characteristics.

Practice and expectations


Several types of bombers equipped with modern weapon control systems have repeatedly shown their capabilities during various exercises. Since 2015, this technique has been actively used in Syria. The specific nature of the theater of operations and the special capabilities of modernized aircraft allowed the mass use of unguided weapons, obtaining the desired results.


Sufficient perfection and confirmed successes of existing systems do not exclude their further development. According to recent reports, now the company "Sukhoi" and the Ministry of Defense in the person of the technopolis "Era" are improving sighting equipment for bombers.

Already reported on the implementation of all necessary work on one of the available free-falling bombs. In the near future, similar studies will be carried out on other domestic weapons. Their result will be new mathematical models for Hephaestus and other complexes of a similar purpose.

Thus, the process of improving strike aircraft continues. Newly built cars immediately receive modern sighting and navigation systems, while older equipment is being modernized and equipped with other types of equipment. Both those and others also receive up-to-date software with improved features. As a result, the accuracy of airstrikes will increase - and for this it is not necessary to use guided weapons.
Author:
Photos used:
RF Ministry of Defense / mil.ru
121 comment
Ad

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, regularly additional information about the special operation in Ukraine, a large amount of information, videos, something that does not fall on the site: https://t.me/topwar_official

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. dgonni
    dgonni 13 November 2019 18: 13
    -14
    I don’t even want to comment.
    1. Professor
      Professor 14 November 2019 08: 45
      -4
      Quote: dgonni
      Ballistic and aerodynamic characteristics of products are digitized.

      And I will comment.

      The main task of Era specialists is to create the most accurate mathematical models of existing aircraft weapons. Ballistic and aerodynamic characteristics of products are digitized.

      It is impossible to mathematically simulate the shaking hands of a welder Petrovich making a cast iron. It is impossible to mathematically simulate the convex sea eye of Semenovna pouring explosives into this cast iron. The runaway in geometry, weight, alignment and further down the list is so great that mathematicians urgently learn non-normative vocabulary. Digital form of face value? Those. rudely drove the blueprints of the design bureau from the blue to AutoCAD or SolidWorks?

      It is reported that through collaboration, experts have already optimized the algorithms for using OFAB-250-270 bombs on Su-34 bombers. Due to the introduction of new models, it was possible to increase accuracy by 2-3 times. The minimum KVO has been brought to 30 m. In the near future, work on other samples of uncontrolled aircraft weapons should be completed.

      1. Oppa. 30 meters? Earlier, we were told tales that Hephaestus, who has no tax in the world, makes high-precision weapons out of cast-iron.
      2. Is the minimum KVO? What is it like? KVO is a "MEDIUM" value so there is no minimum or maximum KVO.

      Su-34 not It is completed with “Hephaestus” - this suggests that new developments can also be used in the development of other sighting and navigation systems. In this way, the improvement of all major VKS strike aircraft is ensured.

      This suggests that flyers know the true price of Hephaestus.

      Otherwise, the operation of the aiming and navigation complex remains the same. He must collect data from many sources, take into account the characteristics of a particular weapon and calculate data for automatic reset.

      For example, wind shear data. The aircraft carries out bombing at an altitude of 5000m and having no taxes in the world, Hephaestus knows the speed and direction of the wind along the entire path of the bomb to the target. Nobody in the world knows, but Hephaestus knows. Hephaestus doesn’t blow a bomb. wassat

      So, the basic version of SVP-24 brings the accuracy of free-falling bombs closer to the characteristics of guided weapons.

      The key word is "zoom in". That is, Hephaestus made the KVO from 40 m to 30 m, thereby "bringing" the accuracy of the Paveway II 2000lb sample of 1976 to the accuracy of which then the accuracy was measured in KVO 8 meters.

      After modernization, obviously, the parameters of the two classes of weapons will become comparable.

      The day before yesterday in Gaza bombing out the bedroom window the terrorist of the "Islamic Jihad" Baha Al-Ata was eliminated. Those in the next room were not injured. Say "comparable"? Ha...
      1. Serg4545
        Serg4545 14 November 2019 09: 47
        +2
        // It is impossible to mathematically model the shaking hands of a welder Petrovich making a cast iron. It is impossible to mathematically simulate the convex sea eye of Semenovna pouring explosives into this cast iron. The runaway in geometry, weight, alignment and further down the list is so great that mathematicians urgently learn non-normative vocabulary. //

        If we could also take these parameters into account, then the accuracy would naturally increase even more.

        //. Minimum KVO? What is it like? KVO is "AVERAGE" value so there is no minimum or maximum KVO. //

        What if several different ammunition are used? And for each ammunition its own QUO?
        For example, for 250-KVO 30 m. And for 500-KVO 40 m.
        And then it turns out that with the use of this system the minimum QUO of 30 m.

        // This suggests that flyers know the true price of Hephaestus .//

        Yes. And they praise her very much.

        // For example, data on wind shear. Aircraft conducts bombing at an altitude of 5000m and having no taxes in the world, Hephaestus knows the speed and direction of the wind along the entire trajectory of the bomb to the target. Nobody in the world knows, but Hephaestus knows. Hephaestus doesn’t blow a bomb. //

        Here, to determine the wind speed at different heights, there is a lidar.

        // The keyword "zoom in". That is, Hephaestus made the KVO from 40 m to 30 m, thereby "bringing" the accuracy of the Paveway II 2000lb sample of 1976 to the accuracy of which then the accuracy was measured in KVO 8 meters. //

        Everything is correct. Draws closer. And for the fulfillment of 95 percent of the combined-arms tasks of the KVO 30 meters per eye.
        1. Professor
          Professor 14 November 2019 10: 29
          -5
          Quote: Serg4545
          What if several different ammunition are used? And for each ammunition its own QUO?
          For example, for 250-KVO 30 m. And for 500-KVO 40 m.
          And then it turns out that with the use of this system the minimum QUO of 30 m.

          Average room temperature? wassat

          Quote: Serg4545
          Yes. And they praise her very much.

          ... and therefore the Su-34 is not equipped with Hephaestus

          Quote: Serg4545
          Here, to determine the wind speed at different heights, there is a lidar.

          To determine the wind shear during bombing, no lidar is used in view of its futility.

          Quote: Serg4545
          Everything is correct. Draws closer. And for the fulfillment of 95 percent of the combined-arms tasks of the KVO 30 meters per eye.

          Announce pliz list of these 95% combined arms tasks. And then we will calculate what the QUO 30m is.
          1. Serg4545
            Serg4545 14 November 2019 12: 01
            0
            // Average room temperature? //

            Yes.
            But the very definition of KVO is also "the average temperature in the ward." Average indicator for different parameters.
            So what?

            //... and therefore the Su-34 is not equipped with Hephaestus //

            I will say more: Kamaz is also not equipped with Hephaestus!
            Probably because Hephaestus sucks? Or is there another reason?
            In general, of course it is cool written: "Hephaestus" is not installed on SU-34, because it is bad. But it is actively installed on the SU-24, because it is .. bad? (Jewish logic?).
            I can immediately three reasons for not installing "Hephaestus" can lead:
            1) SU-34 and SU-24, different planes, with different equipment. And "Hephaestus" just does not get up there in hardware.
            2) SU-34 has its own advanced system and the installation of "Hephaestus" does not give a significant increase in performance.
            3) Some kind of undercover games in the Moscow Region and the defense industry.
            1. Professor
              Professor 14 November 2019 12: 12
              -4
              Quote: Serg4545
              Yes.
              But the very definition of KVO is also "the average temperature in the ward." Average indicator for different parameters.
              So what?

              Nothing smart. "Minimum KVO" is ensigns.

              Quote: Serg4545
              I will say more: Kamaz is also not equipped with Hephaestus!
              Probably because Hephaestus sucks? Or is there another reason?
              In general, of course it is cool written: "Hephaestus" is not installed on SU-34, because it is bad. But it is actively installed on the SU-24, because it is .. bad? (Jewish logic?).
              I can immediately three reasons for not installing "Hephaestus" can lead:
              1) SU-34 and SU-24, different planes, with different equipment. And "Hephaestus" just does not get up there in hardware.
              2) SU-34 has its own advanced system and the installation of "Hephaestus" does not give a significant increase in performance.
              3) Some kind of undercover games in the Moscow Region and the defense industry.

              Convinced. What then is equipped with Su-34?

              Quote: Raven-D
              Have you looked at the commentary about the eyes and shaking hands in the chronicles of the Great Patriotic War? ... It is worth adding to the hungry children at the milling machines and the wife working on 150g of bread per day, with files. And even if something, somewhere, is done like this. In the world . Any mass production works at least on patterns and shapes .. using automatic machines, or "master patterns" for turning / milling / grinding and tp machines .. Visit any factory. Even a furniture factory .. you will learn a lot .. about the production of hands and eyes ..


              You tell tales about machines and robots in your furniture factories to pioneers.
              Opened in Dzerzhinsk first in Russia Dec 8 high explosive bombs automated production line, 2017
              1. Bad_gr
                Bad_gr 14 November 2019 14: 25
                +1
                Do you think there is a difference between the quotes:
                Quote: Professor
                The first automated high-explosive bomb production line Dec 8, 2017 opened in Dzerzhinsk

                And the words said by the announcer:
                "... the first fully automated line for loading high-explosive bombs of 500kg caliber was launched in Russia .."
                ?
                1. Professor
                  Professor 14 November 2019 14: 50
                  -2
                  Quote: Bad_gr
                  Do you think there is a difference between the quotes:
                  Quote: Professor
                  The first automated high-explosive bomb production line Dec 8, 2017 opened in Dzerzhinsk

                  And the words said by the announcer:
                  "... the first fully automated line for loading high-explosive bombs of 500kg caliber was launched in Russia .."
                  ?

                  You watch the video how robots sharpen, cook and milling cast irons.
                  1. Bad_gr
                    Bad_gr 14 November 2019 15: 06
                    0
                    Quote: Professor
                    You watch the video how robots sharpen, cook and milling cast irons.

                    I looked. But my conclusion is completely opposite from yours:
                    robots sharpen, cook and mill cast irons - not news. The news is that automation was used to charge 500kg bombs. Seeing this before was a problem, or did not consider it necessary to automate.
                    1. Professor
                      Professor 14 November 2019 15: 35
                      -1
                      Quote: Bad_gr
                      Quote: Professor
                      You watch the video how robots sharpen, cook and milling cast irons.

                      I looked. But my conclusion is completely opposite from yours:
                      robots sharpen, cook and mill cast irons - not news. The news is that automation was used to charge 500kg bombs. Seeing this before was a problem, or did not consider it necessary to automate.

                      Show us a video where "robots sharpen, cook and mill cast iron".
                      1. Bad_gr
                        Bad_gr 14 November 2019 15: 41
                        +1
                        Quote: Professor
                        Show us a video where "robots sharpen, cook and mill cast iron".

                        I don’t have such videos (due to inconvenience).
                        In our war, the armored tanks of tanks were welded together by a robot, and what are the difficulties of automating the production of bombs?
                      2. Professor
                        Professor 14 November 2019 15: 48
                        -2
                        Quote: Bad_gr
                        Quote: Professor
                        Show us a video where "robots sharpen, cook and mill cast iron".

                        I don’t have such videos (due to inconvenience).
                        In our war, the armored tanks of tanks were welded together by a robot, and what are the difficulties of automating the production of bombs?

                        The main difficulty is the meager wages of workers. They are cheaper than robots.
      2. Raven-d
        Raven-d 14 November 2019 11: 35
        +1
        Have you looked at the commentary about the eyes and shaking hands in the chronicles of the Great Patriotic War? ... It is worth adding to the hungry children at the milling machines and the wife working on 150g of bread per day, with files. And even if something, somewhere, is done like this. In the world . Any mass production works at least on patterns and shapes .. using automatic machines, or "master patterns" for turning / milling / grinding and tp machines .. Visit any factory. Even a furniture factory .. you will learn a lot .. about the production of hands and eyes ..
        1. bairat
          bairat 14 November 2019 12: 34
          +6
          Let me explain why the Israeli "comrades" are so nervous about our successes in Syria, and SVP-24 in particular. It’s no secret that before our intervention in 2015, the Assad government was already sitting on suitcases and looking for a country to evacuate. Thereafter, Israel, in the name of world peace, would expand the occupation zone of the Gollan Heights as much as it wishes. And what falls into their hands is not returned to the owner.
      3. neri73-r
        neri73-r 14 November 2019 13: 38
        0
        Professor, you are just jealous! You do not have this in Israel and that's it! fellow And we have cheap and cheerful, 20 century bombs right on top, all to the nines and barmaley too!
        1. Professor
          Professor 14 November 2019 14: 04
          +1
          Quote: neri73-r
          Professor, you are just jealous! You do not have this in Israel and that's it! fellow And we have cheap and cheerful, 20 century bombs right on top, all to the nines and barmaley too!

          There is nothing to envy. Your compatriots write about this here.

          Even if you believe the article, the KVO of 30 meters (by the way, from what height and at what speed?) Does not allow "just to the tail, to smithereens." This is the materiel. fellow
          1. neri73-r
            neri73-r 14 November 2019 14: 12
            -1
            Quote: Professor
            This is the materiel.

            The materiel is as follows - you and we have a limited number of controlled weapons, it’s very, I emphasize, very expensive, it takes a long time to produce and replenish !!! And now, in the case of a more or less serious mess (you’ll be reminded of Yugoslavia, how many missiles are there after the attacks in the bins), when the racquets end (and end quickly and not the fact that they work out effectively), we will have primitive bombs (which from that war .....), which will roll out and roll into the Stone Age with excellent accuracy your (West) factories for the production of these very high-precision missiles and other objects.
            1. Professor
              Professor 14 November 2019 14: 21
              -2
              Quote: neri73-r
              Quote: Professor
              This is the materiel.

              The materiel is as follows - you and we have a limited number of controlled weapons, it’s very, I emphasize, very expensive, it takes a long time to produce and replenish !!! And now, in the case of a more or less serious mess (you’ll be reminded of Yugoslavia, how many missiles are there after the attacks in the bins), when the racquets end (and end quickly and not the fact that they work out effectively), we will have primitive bombs (which from that war .....), which will roll out and roll into the Stone Age with excellent accuracy your (West) factories for the production of these very high-precision missiles and other objects.

              All you mentioned is carpet bombing. However, why drag them to the precision of smart weapons? Yes, it is more expensive to manufacture, but not sure if it is more expensive to use. Can you calculate how many bombs on average it takes to destroy the 10x10 target with the mentioned KVO in 30 m? I can. The price of inaccuracy is incomparably higher than the price of the most expensive smart bomb.

              Quote: Bad_gr
              Airfield runway, fortified area with trenches, a parking lot with a convoy of cars - are you bombing with the same bombs?

              Exactly. Only such. Beirut 2006.
              1. neri73-r
                neri73-r 14 November 2019 14: 26
                0
                Quote: Professor
                Exactly. Only such. Beirut 2006.

                Whenever possible, it is a local conflict and the rich can afford it. If the war is with an equal enemy, this is the maximum first strike, then "like everyone else" (c).
                1. Professor
                  Professor 14 November 2019 15: 25
                  +1
                  Quote: neri73-r
                  Quote: Professor
                  Exactly. Only such. Beirut 2006.

                  Whenever possible, it is a local conflict and the rich can afford it. If the war is with an equal enemy, this is the maximum first strike, then "like everyone else" (c).

                  Quite the opposite. One hit and no airfield. With cast irons, you have to bomb for a long time and tediously exposing your sides under the fire of air defense systems.

                  Count together?
                  1. Assume that the hits are distributed according to the Normal Law and the CVO is calculated specifically for him.
                  2. Declared KVO 30 meters.
                  3. We translate the area of ​​the square 10x10 into the area of ​​the equivalent circle and calculate its radius. R = 5.6 m.
                  4. The probability of hitting a circle with a radius of 5.6 m with one bomb is p = 1 - exp (-0.41 · R² / KVO²) = 1- exp (-0.41 · 5.6² / 30²) = 1.4%. This value is called SSKR - "Probability to Hit with One Shot".
                  5. 1.4% is not at all thick. This means that the probability of missing is 1-0.014 = 98.6%. Continue to bomb? Take not skill so number? OK. Let's drop xnumx bombs. The probability of spreading 10 bombs with 10%. That is, the probability of getting at least one bomb from 86.7 is 10%. Two less. Three and less. And so on. Bomb further? OK.
                  6. I remind you that the probability of missing one bomb is 98.6%. How many bombs are needed to ensure the probability of getting at least 90%? We solve the equation 0.1 = 0.986 to the power of n, where n is the desired number of bombs, and 0.1 100 is the probability to miss. We recall algebra, logarithms (who of course knew them) n = ln (0.1) / ln (0.986) = 161. One hundred sixty-one bombs is needed to hit a circle with a radius of 5.6 m with a probability of 90%.
                  7. And now for not the faint of heart. How many bombs do you need to hit this circle with probability in 99% (100% happens only to the ignoramus)? Substitute in the equation 99% and get Xnumx bombs. Well, straight Hephaestus is a precision weapon. Not convinced?

                  PS
                  Count for yourself how many GBU-15 bombs are needed to hit the same target. Cry together. crying
                  1. neri73-r
                    neri73-r 14 November 2019 16: 08
                    0
                    Professor, do not translate the topic, I tell you something else! love We are not counters, we are writers! I’m telling you that yes, in the first strike there will be high-precision ammunition, expensive, poorly replenished, existing (stocks) in a limited amount (in comparison with ordinary cast irons, which we, for example, have in the open wassat , oh, how much), and then "like everyone else"! fellow And here it’s better for us than for others, and only here I’m talking about KVO and Hephaestus! hi
                    1. Professor
                      Professor 14 November 2019 17: 15
                      0
                      Quote: neri73-r
                      Professor, do not translate the topic, I tell you something else! love We are not counters, we are writers! I’m telling you that yes, in the first strike there will be high-precision ammunition, expensive, poorly replenished, existing (stocks) in a limited amount (in comparison with ordinary cast irons, which we, for example, have in the open wassat , oh, how much), and then "like everyone else"! fellow And here it’s better for us than for others, and only here I’m talking about KVO and Hephaestus! hi

                      When we run out of smart bombs and goals are not achieved, then no cast irons will help. There will be no one to fly on.
                      1. neri73-r
                        neri73-r 14 November 2019 17: 32
                        0
                        Quote: Professor
                        When we run out of smart bombs and goals are not achieved, then no cast irons will help. There will be no one to fly on.

                        Of course! So you will never start and will not fight with an equal opponent, which is gratifying! good
                      2. Professor
                        Professor 14 November 2019 18: 04
                        -2
                        Quote: neri73-r
                        Quote: Professor
                        When we run out of smart bombs and goals are not achieved, then no cast irons will help. There will be no one to fly on.

                        Of course! So you will never start and will not fight with an equal opponent, which is gratifying! good

                        You look at the composition of aviation IDF. Or on your own composition or American. The planes will end before the turn reaches the cast iron.
                      3. neri73-r
                        neri73-r 14 November 2019 18: 14
                        0
                        Quote: Professor
                        The planes will end before the turn reaches the cast iron.

                        If you do not disperse them.
                      4. Professor
                        Professor 14 November 2019 18: 17
                        -1
                        Quote: neri73-r
                        Quote: Professor
                        The planes will end before the turn reaches the cast iron.

                        If you do not disperse them.

                        End anyway. Both on earth and in heaven. And the pots will sunbathe under the sun.
                      5. neri73-r
                        neri73-r 14 November 2019 18: 19
                        0
                        Quote: Professor
                        And the pots will sunbathe under the sun.

                        Dream, professor, dream! It will not work out for you. laughing
                      6. Professor
                        Professor 14 November 2019 18: 25
                        0
                        Quote: neri73-r
                        Quote: Professor
                        And the pots will sunbathe under the sun.

                        Dream, professor, dream! It will not work out for you. laughing

                        What does it have to do with it? You need to drop one and a half hundred bombs in order to bomb the bridge with a probability of 90%. How many planes will be shot down during this time?
                  2. Serg4545
                    Serg4545 14 November 2019 18: 22
                    +1
                    // Count together?
                    1. Assume that the hits are distributed according to the Normal Law and the CVO is calculated specifically for him.
                    2. Declared KVO 30 meters.
                    3. We translate the area of ​​a 10x10 square into the area of ​​an equivalent circle and calculate its radius. R = 5.6 m.
                    4. The probability of hitting a circle with a radius of 5.6 m with one bomb is p = 1 - exp (-0.41 · R² / KVO²) = 1- exp (-0.41 · 5.6² / 30²) = 1.4%. This value is called SSKR - "Probability to Hit with One Shot".
                    5. 1.4% is not at all thick. This means that the probability of missing is 1-0.014 = 98.6%. Continue to bomb? Take not skill so number? OK. Let's drop 10 bombs. The probability of missing with 10 bombs is 86.7%. That is, the probability of getting hit with at least one bomb out of 10 is 13.3%. Two less. Three and less. Etc. Bomb further? OK.
                    6. I remind you that the probability of missing one bomb is 98.6%. How many bombs do you need to ensure a probability of hitting at least 90%? We solve the equation 0.1 = 0.986 to the power of n, where n is the desired number of bombs, and 0.1 is the 100th chance to miss. We recall the algebra, the logarithms (who of course knew them) n = ln (0.1) / ln (0.986) = 161. One hundred and sixty-one bombs is needed in order to hit a circle with a radius of 5.6 m with a 90% probability.
                    7. And now for not the faint of heart. How many bombs do you need to hit this circle with a probability of 99% (100% only happens with the ignoramus)? Substituting 99% into the equation, we get 322 bombs. Well, straight Hephaestus is a precision weapon. Not convinced? //

                    How is it in Hebrew))
                    Bring a bunch of calculations. Digits. For solidity.
                    Exclusively in order to mask the substitution of concepts.
                    Our goal is NOT to hit an object measuring 10 × 10 meters with a bomb with a QUO of 30 meters.
                    Our goal is to DESTROY this goal.
                    And for this, a direct hit is optional.
                    It is known that 500 kilogram jigsaw leaves a funnel with a radius of 7-8 meters.
                    Within a radius of 18-20 meters, a shock wave and fragments will leave little chance even for a heavy tank.
                    Within a radius of 30-35 meters, with high probability all living things will be destroyed, plus unarmored vehicles, artillery systems, buildings, etc.

                    So what is your verbiage professor worth?
                    1. Professor
                      Professor 14 November 2019 18: 35
                      -2
                      Quote: Serg4545
                      How is it in Hebrew))

                      I did not know that mathematics is Jewish.

                      Quote: Serg4545
                      Bring a bunch of calculations. Digits. For solidity.
                      Exclusively in order to mask the substitution of concepts.
                      It is known that 500 kilogram jigsaw leaves a funnel with a radius of 7-8 meters.
                      Within a radius of 18-20 meters, a shock wave and fragments will leave little chance even for a heavy tank.
                      Within a radius of 30-35 meters, with high probability all living things will be destroyed, plus unarmored vehicles, artillery systems, buildings, etc.

                      We saw these bombings.

                      And if the bridge were bombed then only the fish would be muffled. And about the air support of their troops with such accuracy, there can be no question. Kill everyone. And what will you do if you need to get into the betonka? explosions nearby will not damage her. Is it known that an 500 kilogram jigsaw leaves a funnel with a radius of 7-8 meters? And in 30 meters from the strip, what will happen? Do not answer. We know.

                      Quote: Serg4545
                      Our goal is NOT to hit an object measuring 10 × 10 meters with a bomb with a QUO of 30 meters.
                      Our goal is to DESTROY this goal.

                      And we have just such a task. Destroy a point target, and not all living things within a radius of tens of meters. Such is our Jewish tactic.
                      1. The comment was deleted.
                      2. LastPS
                        LastPS 10 December 2019 13: 03
                        +1
                        These electronic systems are designed solely to make more efficient use of old unguided projectiles. Well, Syria does not have high-precision weapons, and Russia doesn’t want to spend even more on the conflict, so outdated 24s with hephaestos imprisoned under unguided bombs appear on the scene. There are a lot of such bombs, planes will be decommissioned anyway soon, but they still have a resource. It will be bombed by a lonely building, or any long-term position of any organizations banned in Russia is quite enough. This is not a substitute for precision weapons, just a way to use traditional weapons more efficiently, which is very suitable. The fact that this system is positioned as an analogue to high-precision is, of course, wrong, but here are the questions for the media, although what are the questions, everything is clear with them, they are the same everywhere.
                      3. Professor
                        Professor 10 December 2019 19: 55
                        0
                        Quote: LastPS
                        These electronic systems are designed solely to make more efficient use of old unguided projectiles. Well, Syria does not have high-precision weapons, and Russia doesn’t want to spend even more on the conflict, so outdated 24s with hephaestos imprisoned under unguided bombs appear on the scene. There are a lot of such bombs, planes will be decommissioned anyway soon, but they still have a resource. It will be bombed by a lonely building, or any long-term position of any organizations banned in Russia is quite enough. This is not a substitute for precision weapons, just a way to use traditional weapons more efficiently, which is very suitable. The fact that this system is positioned as an analogue to high-precision is, of course, wrong, but here are the questions for the media, although what are the questions, everything is clear with them, they are the same everywhere.

                        good
              2. Lopatov
                Lopatov 14 November 2019 14: 33
                -1
                Quote: Professor
                Can you calculate how many bombs on average it takes to destroy a 10x10 target with the mentioned KVO of 30 meters? I can.

                Well, let's count.
                And then, as usual, a solid allegation.
                So, how many abstract "aerial bombs" are needed to hit some abstract "10x10 target" with a CEP = 30 meters?
      4. Bad_gr
        Bad_gr 14 November 2019 14: 14
        0
        Quote: Professor
        This suggests that flyers know the true price of Hephaestus.

        About "Hephaestus" I read only laudatory reviews.
        Quote: Professor
        The day before yesterday in Gaza, a bomb hit the bedroom window and killed the Islamic Jihad terrorist Baha Al-Ata. Those in the next room were not injured. Say "comparable"? Ha...

        Airfield runway, fortified area with trenches, a parking lot with a convoy of cars - are you bombing with the same bombs?
        1. Alexey RA
          Alexey RA 15 November 2019 12: 23
          +2
          Quote: Bad_gr
          Airfield runway, fortified area with trenches, a parking lot with a convoy of cars - are you bombing with the same bombs?

          You won’t believe it, but runways and shelters have long bombed the UAB. Ammunition consumption is reduced at times, and most importantly - the target is guaranteed to be struck.
          On March 19, 2011, three B-2 Spirit bombers of the 509th bomber wing dropped 45 2000-pound GBU-31 guided bombs at the Ghardabiya airfield near Sirte. Simultaneously with the bombardment on the airfield, a sea-launched cruise missile attack was launched against the Tactical Tomahawk.
          In Gardabia, there were 80 reinforced concrete shelters for aircraft, 5 groups of 16 RCBs each. Three groups were attacked by three B-2s, the rest by cruise missiles.
          Out of 80, I counted five shelters with no visible damage. Three of their targets did not hit the B-2 (however, for some reason, they dropped 45 bombs, not 48), two more - Tomahawks.

          © pfc_joker

          Outwardly, the whole shelter in the photo is actually amazed - this is evidenced by the fragments of the former armored doors scattered in front of them (gray-green lattice sectors).

          For comparison, upstream there are the results of the Tu-22M3 raid on the Georgian air base. Four lines of funnels, no hits in the shelter, hits in the runway allowed to continue takeoff and landing operations. The airbase and equipment on it had to be decommissioned by forces of the Airborne Forces.
      5. Alexey RA
        Alexey RA 15 November 2019 12: 08
        0
        Quote: Professor
        It is impossible to mathematically simulate the shaking hands of a welder Petrovich making a cast iron. It is impossible to mathematically model the convex sea eye of Semenovna pouring explosives into this cast iron.

        I see an epic picture: The staff of OBATO with hammers and files brings ammunition in line with the digital model.
        smile
      6. Farpost
        Farpost 3 December 2019 03: 37
        0
        About 15 years ago, there was a conversation with the navigator of the bomb, so he told me that the bombs were most accurately placed from a great height (he bombed landfills in the 70s, then Hephaestus did not smell), the hardest thing is to get from medium and low heights (medium for from 3000 m to 1000, small respectively 1000 and below), since the bomb picks up speed and all the wind shifts get to the bulb, it flies through these layers almost without deviating, so your attacks on Hephaestus are in this and it seems to me in others paragraphs are completely groundless.
        1. Professor
          Professor 3 December 2019 08: 04
          +1
          Quote: Farpost
          as the bomb picks up speed and all the wind shears become a light bulb, it flies through these layers almost without deviating,

          Nonsense. Caught on a plane in a dummy? How so? After all, he flies at high speed and weighs a hundred tons, throws it from side to side like a maple leaf.
      7. Chaldon48
        Chaldon48 12 December 2019 17: 38
        0
        Everything here is in the ratio of price and efficiency, unguided ammunition is much cheaper, so you can allow the "luxury" to throw 2 instead of one bomb and still it will be cheaper than one heaped up with electronics
        1. Professor
          Professor 13 December 2019 20: 16
          +3
          Quote: Chaldon48
          Everything here is in the ratio of price and efficiency, unguided ammunition is much cheaper, so you can allow the "luxury" to throw 2 instead of one bomb and still it will be cheaper than one heaped up with electronics

          Not two, but a hundred and a half. And it turns out not cheaper if you take into account the media.
      8. serg v stock
        serg v stock 5 January 2020 13: 14
        0
        Why is it impossible to create a model with shaking hands? The model reflects something probabilistic there, for a hit with a probability of 0.5 there will be one, with a higher probability, another model with an increased number of parameters.
      9. IL-64
        IL-64 6 January 2020 01: 39
        0
        You can find out in which place the circular probable deviation has become the AVERAGE parameter? Maybe learn a materiel?
  2. Ros 56
    Ros 56 13 November 2019 18: 36
    +4
    We need different weapons, you never know how the combat situation will develop. Barmalei will appreciate, then complain.
  3. bars1
    bars1 13 November 2019 18: 37
    -4
    Accuracy growth by 2-3 times ... Minimum KVO of 30 meters ... Only against barmaley it suits.
    1. Spambox
      Spambox 13 November 2019 18: 55
      +10
      For a free-falling bomb dropped in a horizontal flight from an altitude above 3000 m, this is very accurate, you will not find it accurate for sure, and below our bombers try not to fall for obvious reasons.
    2. iouris
      iouris 13 November 2019 22: 42
      +5
      Quote: bars1
      Accuracy growth by 2-3 times ... Minimum KVO 30 meters ...

      It's hard to believe that such a specialist could have written or said. 1) With respect to what is the "increase in accuracy" provided "by a factor of 2..3"? 2) How to measure the error, in principle, is understandable, but in what units is the "accuracy" measured? 3) KVO is a circular probable deviation (ie IT, not IT), this indicator is calculated based on ALL statistical units of the considered sample population, so it simply cannot be "minimum" or "maximum".
      1. Ilya_Nsk
        Ilya_Nsk 14 November 2019 05: 39
        +2
        Accuracy can be measured in meters .. The article is probably written for a wide range of readers: you say to them: "KVO 30 meters" - about nothing, but the accuracy is three times better - Wow, that's it! From what has been written, we can conclude that before the KVO was 100 m.?
      2. Serg4545
        Serg4545 14 November 2019 09: 51
        0
        // KVO is the circular probable deviation (ie IT, not IT), this indicator is calculated based on ALL statistical units of the considered sample population, so it simply cannot be "minimum" or "maximum". //

        What if several different ammunition are used? And for each ammunition its own QUO?
        For example, for 250-KVO 30 m. And for 500-KVO 40 m.
        And then it turns out that with the use of this system the minimum QUO of 30 m.
  4. Zaurbek
    Zaurbek 13 November 2019 18: 51
    +2
    All the same, we need "cheap" bombs with Glrnnas guidance .... small diameter .. with wings .... to deal with protected objects.
    1. VO3A
      VO3A 13 November 2019 23: 43
      +5
      The author is engaged in verbiage and abstractions. An example of scientific aimless casting of water for his apparent greatness .... The opposite result ...
      Now in order. In warehouses, a huge number of unguided bombs. Some want to quit them for sure, while others make money on this desire for money and it does not matter with what end result ...
      We are talking about 2 planes, or rather about one .... The decommissioned Su-24M with Hephaestus throws bombs better than the "new" Su-34 ... Otherwise, why drag the old expensive plane with low reliability to Syria .. This kerosene fighter from the past with Hephaestus throws simple bombs better than anyone else ... And how did the Suhovtsy and Poghosyan crush this Hephaestus ... This rabble of traders from the aviation dragged their useless revision "Hussar" just to cut the dough ... And then normal people are normal the system is offered, and at its own expense. We managed to earn money on the sale of our systems from Algeria ... Their aviation officials trampled their feet for about 10 years for wanting to improve the accuracy of bombing ... But the truth broke the road ... And Poghosyan scrambled, sawing dough on his "stinking" Superjet, which almost ditched our civil aviation ... Now he teaches to steal others ... And it turns out ... Now again Hephaestus has been pushed aside and the chair is reinvented ... We need to cut the money to revise not new systems on the Su-34 ... conclude a contract with Hephaestus and get a good result for reasonable money. No, you are compasted by mediocrity about modeling, the main thing for them is to steal money, they can't do anything else ...
      Modulators modulate and program on the Su-34M, on the Su-30SM-1, and we will see the result ....
      1. okko077
        okko077 14 November 2019 00: 10
        +3
        To the topic, who are interested:
        http://bastion-karpenko.ru/svp-24-gefest/
        You can use the experience of Americans, they put a module with wings on a simple bomb and turn it into a precise, adjustable bomb controlled by JPS, but here you need miniature modules and good algorithms, and most importantly more smart people ...
        1. Nikolaevich I
          Nikolaevich I 14 November 2019 00: 51
          +4
          Quote: okko077
          You can use the experience of Americans, they put a module with wings on a simple bomb and turn it into a precise, adjustable bomb controlled by JPS

          In Russia, an "analogue" has long been created ... The IPC is called! "Basalt" in the "zero" ,, skumekal ,, ...
          1. okko077
            okko077 14 November 2019 00: 58
            +1
            Storyteller, wanting is not harmful:
            https://raigap.livejournal.com/570890.html
            Dream only so far: it will be, it will be soon ...
            And with pi_ndos, everything is fine with this:
            The kit costs $ 35 for the GBU-000 bomb and $ 38 for the GBU-70. As of September 000, the Boeing had produced more than 31 JDAM guidance kits.

            https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/JDAM
      2. Nikolaevich I
        Nikolaevich I 14 November 2019 00: 43
        +3
        Quote: VO3A
        But the truth broke the road ... And Poghosyan crumbled, sawing the dough on his "smelly" Superjet, which almost killed our civil aviation ...

        Well, well ... there are a lot of letters ... probably there is something to read ... if only, to translate into Russian ... what
        1. okko077
          okko077 14 November 2019 01: 16
          -3
          Only for you!
          Soft version:
          https://zen.yandex.ru/media/neblog/kak-perspektivnyi-samolet-tu334-proigral-konkurenciiu-suhomu-superdjet-5cd6e7ff54572b00b3bc6076
          And the gross truth:
          https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=3064&v=L9fV1TdCV44
    2. Ilya_Nsk
      Ilya_Nsk 14 November 2019 06: 08
      +1
      Who told you they were "cheap"? It is also a big non-fact that GLONASS will work during large disassembly. Work in this direction, most likely, needs to be continued, since the carrier becomes independent and calculates for itself a more correct position of NVTU (continuously calculated point of impact)
      1. Zaurbek
        Zaurbek 14 November 2019 07: 23
        -1
        And when not a big showdown? There are additionally optional systems ....
  5. Narak-zempo
    Narak-zempo 13 November 2019 18: 58
    +16
    Fresh tradition ...
    Even the Americans, after creating the synchronized Norden sight, boasted that they would hit the barrel with a bomb from a height of 9 km. But you can’t deceive physics. How to scan the state of the air masses, and most importantly, the flow rates along the entire path of the bomb (i.e., tens of kilometers forward and down the plane)? And without this, you can’t calculate her movement.
    1. Eug
      Eug 13 November 2019 19: 34
      0
      The density equations of the distribution of atmospheric parameters for height for a given area for the current period of the year are introduced into the modeling equations. Of course, there will be an error, but the defeat of the goal is considered to be falling into a circle with a radius depending on the power of the power supply. Yes, and usually not one bomb is used, but several. As for me, the task of the course (diploma) design for students of relevant specialties.
      1. Avior
        Avior 14 November 2019 02: 40
        +1
        Purely theoretically.
        A practically large scatter of data.
    2. Aviator_
      Aviator_ 13 November 2019 20: 06
      0
      How to scan the state of the air masses, and most importantly, the flow rates along the entire path of the bomb (i.e., tens of kilometers forward and down the plane)?

      With the help of LIDAR just before the dump, the obvious solution.
      1. Good_Anonymous
        Good_Anonymous 13 November 2019 22: 54
        0
        Quote: Aviator_
        With LIDAR immediately before discharge


        With the help of LIDAR you can find out the state of the atmosphere before dropping, but not during the flight of the bomb.
        1. Aviator_
          Aviator_ 14 November 2019 08: 08
          0
          It is before the discharge and it is necessary. Do you think that during the flight of the bomb from the height of combat use (a few seconds) the state of the atmosphere will change?
          1. Good_Anonymous
            Good_Anonymous 14 November 2019 11: 48
            -1
            Quote: Aviator_
            you think that during the flight of the bomb from the height of combat use (a few seconds)


            If school physics doesn’t fail me, when bombing from a horizontal flight at an altitude of 4 km (the aircraft do not seem to fly lower in Syria), the bomb will fly for 28.6 s.

            Quote: Aviator_
            Will the atmosphere change?


            Of course. In general, it is constantly changing - that is why the UAB is constantly adjusting its trajectory.
            1. Aviator_
              Aviator_ 14 November 2019 19: 46
              0
              25 ago, there simply was no way to read the atmospheric profile at the time of discharge. The UAB needs correction because the discharge is carried out without taking into account the atmospheric profile at the moment. The only thing taken into account is the wind at the height of the discharge, everything else is compensated by the management of the munition. Regarding your numbers - do you seriously think that the direction and speed of the wind changes in half a minute? In my opinion, this is a fallacy.
    3. iouris
      iouris 13 November 2019 22: 44
      +2
      Quote: Narak-zempo
      you will not calculate

      ... but you’ll cut it.
    4. okko077
      okko077 14 November 2019 00: 29
      -4
      And why calculate, this is yesterday. Correctable bombs simply or by JPS ... No need to deceive anyone, you need to keep up with the times ...
    5. Lopatov
      Lopatov 14 November 2019 14: 41
      +1
      Quote: Narak-zempo
      How to scan the state of air masses, and most importantly, the flow rates along the entire trajectory of the bomb

      Radar determination of wind parameters. Even ground appeared, for artillery
    6. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA 15 November 2019 12: 48
      0
      EMNIP, there was a rather funny story with Norden: in 1944, during the training of crews of NW carrier aircraft, a problem was revealed - with an absolutely accurate sight setting, the training bomb regularly missed the target circle. They fought over the problem of accuracy for a couple of months until they found a reason - for accurate guidance and use of weapons, it was necessary to fix the position of the eye of the scorer relative to the eyepiece of the sight. I had to attach a head lock to the sight.
  6. Potato
    Potato 13 November 2019 19: 33
    +1
    Ah, well, increasing the accuracy of old fabs is good.

    But it’s interesting, why it’s impossible to develop a cheap set of additional equipment for equipping a bomb with a satellite guidance system? Like jdam?

    And how did you solve the problem of accurately pointing the aircraft at the target in roll, pitch, yaw and speed? If the plane does not fly accurately enough, then what, it will not be reset at all by a smart sight?
    1. Puzoter
      Puzoter 13 November 2019 20: 57
      +2
      GLONASS can be drowned out once, it makes no sense to hit the bull's eye if it is enough to get into a circle of 50 meters to destroy most of the two targets. The issue price is three. Disposal of four old bombs. Five does not interfere with one another.
      1. Potato
        Potato 13 November 2019 21: 02
        +5
        Barmalei are unlikely to drown out glonass. This time. For the rest of the enemies, unguided bombs are not good - these are two. It depends on what goal - three. The price of the issue is ambiguous - the inaccuracy of bombing is compensated by the number of dropped bombs and sorties - four. Old bombs are disposed of even cheaper if desired - five.

        One does not interfere with the other - golden words)
        1. Bad_gr
          Bad_gr 14 November 2019 14: 42
          0
          Quote: Potato
          .... Barmalei are unlikely to be able to drown out glonass ... This time.

          And they themselves are always only in one place, where do you need to drop just one bomb?
          Quote: Potato
          For the rest of the enemies, unguided bombs are not good - these are two.

          Where did these conclusions come from?
          Quote: Potato
          It depends on what goal - three.

          And from this we need to start: there are goals for precision weapons, and there are goals for ordinary bombs, the accuracy of which they are trying to increase.
    2. Puzoter
      Puzoter 13 November 2019 20: 58
      +3
      The plane is controlled by an autopilot according to Hephaestus.
      1. Potato
        Potato 13 November 2019 21: 05
        -1
        And does he withstand roll, pitch and bearing to the target until angular minutes? And the speed is up to meters per second? And the reset time to milliseconds?

        What a cool Hephaestus! The plane is flying like a glove over it)))
        1. Puzoter
          Puzoter 13 November 2019 22: 51
          +2
          There is no need to keep the parameters accurate to within a meter, because the reset moment is calculated instantly, taking into account the heading errors. Roll-pitch on such a huge and therefore inert aircraft in a calm atmosphere is not so difficult to keep even with your hands. The main thing is to keep the trajectory, but taking into account the speed of calculations, you can swing your tail at the right moment to compensate.
          1. iouris
            iouris 14 November 2019 00: 07
            +2
            Quote: puzoter
            you can at the right time and tail "wave" to compensate.

            And how to measure and how to "wave" to compensate for the parameters of the movement of air masses at different heights?
            1. Puzoter
              Puzoter 14 November 2019 09: 49
              0
              Theoretically, with the Doppler radar this is quite possible, but most likely not necessary - the weather data may well be enough.
              1. iouris
                iouris 14 November 2019 12: 08
                0
                Quote: puzoter
                In theory,

                Probably. Those. Do you propose not only to nest the "Doppler radar" on the "stupid bomb" and make it manageable?
                1. Puzoter
                  Puzoter 14 November 2019 15: 02
                  0
                  Why on the bomb? Wind shear data is needed by the sight, i.e. radar on an airplane.
            2. Bad_gr
              Bad_gr 14 November 2019 14: 46
              0
              Quote: iouris
              to compensate for the movement of air masses at different heights?

              That is, for example, a half-ton bomb, which descends very smoothly in these layers, will simply blow off the desired route?
        2. Narak-zempo
          Narak-zempo 13 November 2019 22: 59
          +1
          Quote: Potato
          And does he withstand roll, pitch and bearing to the target until angular minutes? And the speed is up to meters per second? And the reset time to milliseconds?

          What a cool Hephaestus! The plane is flying like a glove over it)))

          All this is still the same Norden was able to in the Second World War, because has been integrated with autopilot.
          1. Potato
            Potato 14 November 2019 08: 56
            0
            I didn’t know how. To get into the bridge dozens of aircraft and hundreds of bombs were needed, or a bomber and a bomber. And so it was until the appearance of guided bombs and missiles. Learn the story.
            1. Narak-zempo
              Narak-zempo 14 November 2019 09: 21
              0
              Quote: Potato
              Did not know

              He could. I mean, level the plane, keep speed and automatically drop bombs.
              1. Potato
                Potato 16 November 2019 16: 45
                0
                He knew how much he accurately dropped bombs at the same time. At the same time, he hit the factory or port - already a success. That's how much he could. No high precision was out of the question.
                1. Narak-zempo
                  Narak-zempo 16 November 2019 21: 18
                  0
                  Quote: Potato
                  He knew how much he accurately dropped bombs at the same time.

                  He knew more precisely, because the condition of the entire thickness of the air beneath the aircraft with different speeds and multidirectional flows at different heights contributes to the CVO of the bomb, as well as the deviation of the bomb itself from its ideal model embedded in the computational algorithms of the sight, which is especially critical for wartime production with an inevitable decrease in quality standards.
                  True, with regard to advertising, the Americans were bolder. There literally stated the possibility of hitting a cucumber barrel from a height of 30000 ft. The real KVO for combat crews in combat conditions was 120 m from half the height.
            2. Potato
              Potato 21 November 2019 01: 33
              +1
              Sorry - DICKING.
  7. Eug
    Eug 13 November 2019 19: 45
    0
    Elementary modeling - free fall of an object with known characteristics under known initial conditions (acceleration along the axes of the selected coordinate system). The "landing" area obtained taking into account the errors and the radius of destruction should be projected onto the terrain map on the navigator's (operator's) monitor, when aligned with the target marked on the same map, a reset occurs. It is possible to solve the inverse problem - the withdrawal of the carrier with the calculated parameters of movement into the drop area with a high probability of defeat (by the type of director interception).
    1. Potato
      Potato 13 November 2019 20: 03
      +4
      How simple it is for you. In words, then.

      Better tell me how you solve this problem if the spatial position and speed of the carrier is determined and set with a very small error. And please tell me, if two fab250 bombs simultaneously drop out of an airplane bomb from an altitude of 8 km, then at what distance will they fall from each other? It would seem that the reset conditions are the same, but you go ...)))
      1. Eug
        Eug 13 November 2019 20: 12
        0
        Samol has a navigation system that measures the acceleration and speed along the axes of the selected coordinate system, even taking into account errors for the initial modeling conditions, this is enough. If it is not, then calculate on the basis of the data that is. And I can’t answer your question - I need to model it. But, as I understand it, defeating point targets with a single uncontrolled ammunition is not set as a task.
        1. Potato
          Potato 13 November 2019 20: 42
          0
          And I can answer my question. In a hundred meters, or even more. Without calculations, purely in the literature.

          Therefore, all other calculations and calculations can be ignored only by the example of the scatter of these two bombs.

          Experience in the development of such sights and showed that there is no sense in them.

          And you can put all your calculations in an unwritten book: "Chronicles of a dive drone"

          Hope for understanding)
          1. Eug
            Eug 13 November 2019 21: 58
            +1
            Only a real reset can confirm or refute the simulation results - here I agree 100%. If it refutes, it’s impossible to confirm parameters until it is confirmed, it means that the idea is wrong, at least at the current level. And for calculations, you need to know the real characteristics of the products - they are under the stamp ...
          2. Good_Anonymous
            Good_Anonymous 13 November 2019 22: 59
            -2
            Quote: Potato
            In a hundred meters, or even more. Without calculations, purely in the literature.


            But this is 8km (and horizontal flight?). It is unlikely that the results of Hephaestus measured in such conditions.
            1. Potato
              Potato 14 November 2019 08: 59
              -1
              And in what are they measured? 3000 meters and ideal weather conditions? And why then? Purely in the desert barmaley once bombed?
              1. Good_Anonymous
                Good_Anonymous 14 November 2019 11: 14
                -1
                Quote: Potato
                And in what are they measured? 3000 meters and ideal weather conditions?


                Unreasonably believe that 4-5km and dive.

                Quote: Potato
                Purely in the desert barmaley once bombed?


                Well yes. Or, politically correct, "after the suppression of air defense." The live air defense seems to be bombed with UAB from pitching up, and not with cast iron, at least from 8 km.
                1. Potato
                  Potato 16 November 2019 16: 47
                  0
                  Even in crushed air defense there can be arrows and wasps, for example. And hello on a dive from 4 ... 5 km
                  1. Good_Anonymous
                    Good_Anonymous 16 November 2019 20: 06
                    -1
                    Quote: Potato
                    Even in suppressed air defense, there can be arrows and


                    4-5km - just the upper limit of defeat.
          3. Serg4545
            Serg4545 14 November 2019 10: 56
            0
            // And I can answer my question. In a hundred meters, or even more. Without calculations, purely in the literature .//

            I will ask for a reference to this original literature.
            1. Potato
              Potato 16 November 2019 16: 49
              0
              I won’t give a direct link.

              And if you want to see for yourself - look at the footage of the bombing from the post of WWII. It is clearly visible)
  8. knn54
    knn54 13 November 2019 20: 01
    0
    To paraphrase A.V.Suvorov: a fool's bomb, a well-aimed gun.
    1. Evil echo
      Evil echo 13 November 2019 20: 15
      -1
      A bullet is a fool, a pomegranate is an insane woman, and finally a bonba can turn out to be zvizdets how scary.
  9. 113262a
    113262a 13 November 2019 20: 34
    -2
    By the way, in winter 14, they used some kind of sighting bombs, in which there was a small weather station and a smoke marker, besides it was brightly lit. Such a bomb was found and handed over to specialists. Sense analysis from the point of discharge of all atmospheric parameters. and further adjustment. After this approach, either bombs or NAR were changed. To the campaign, the discharge point was detected by the ZhPS, as was the drop point. Often, a CHANDELIER was hung near the discharge point — something like a phosphorus charge that slowly sinks and is a trap — and these are not shot traps that are familiar to everyone!
    1. Potato
      Potato 13 November 2019 20: 46
      +2
      These are lighting bombs, known since WWII. The leader, as the most experienced, searches for the goal and drops it onto it, and the followers work on it. Everything is simple.

      And Kohls used this tactic because of hopelessness.
      1. 113262a
        113262a 13 November 2019 21: 56
        -3
        The bomb is not on a parachute! It is free-falling, inside is full of electronics, antennas, batteries. A chandelier is not a bomb, but thousands of small phosphoric checkers.
        1. Potato
          Potato 14 November 2019 09: 00
          -1
          Interesting. Have you seen her yourself? Are there any photos? Describe in more detail
          1. 113262a
            113262a 14 November 2019 10: 30
            0
            Yes, I saw it, after a fall from about 2000 m. The stabilizer and the bursting weld body remained relatively intact. Fell in the area of ​​Georgievka, on the stones, a funnel of 1,5 meters there is a savage stone. Inside, there were broken batteries, such as aviation batteries, such as the NKBN, or so, not lead, and radio elements, wires. A day later, the specialists took away. So they explained the sighting bomb.
        2. kvs45
          kvs45 15 November 2019 01: 07
          0
          not phosphorus, but a mixture of magnesium and ammonium perchlorate. Rubber-plasticized white phosphorus can be used in incendiary bombs
          1. 113262a
            113262a 15 November 2019 10: 27
            0
            The smell of baby crackers.
    2. Bad_gr
      Bad_gr 15 November 2019 00: 06
      0
      Quote: 113262
      ... Often, a CHANDELIER was hung near a discharge point - something like a phosphorus charge ......

      In Kabul in 1983 I have seen enough of such chandeliers. They will drop one such - and throughout the city even read the newspapers, it can be seen as during the day.


      And it’s even more beautiful when, in complete darkness, Shilka from the Army headquarters pounds from four trunks around the city, from the place from which the headquarters had been fired before.
      1. Andrey VOV
        Andrey VOV 15 November 2019 11: 28
        0
        In Grozny, too, they hung up .. deer from them ...
  10. sevtrash
    sevtrash 13 November 2019 20: 46
    +1
    Improving the accuracy of free-falling bombs is good, of course, but the thesis in the article that they are comparable to guided weapons in accuracy is obviously wrong. Type a cheap substitute for guided weapons, but not full.
  11. Rostislav
    Rostislav 13 November 2019 21: 18
    +3
    Minimum air handling unit brought to 30 m

    ... or maximum? The minimum deviation is 0,0 m.
  12. _Ugene_
    _Ugene_ 13 November 2019 21: 33
    +2
    SVP-24 brings the accuracy of free-falling bombs closer to the characteristics of guided weapons. After modernization, obviously, the parameters of the two classes of weapons will become comparable.

    neither the first nor the second is true, the parameters of these two classes of weapons will never be comparable for the simple reason that it is physically impossible to take into account all the factors affecting the trajectory of unguided munitions, for example, at the moment of discharge there was a certain wind speed, and after the discharge suddenly a gust of wind is stronger or vice versa the wind is gone, the guided munition will drive regardless of the changing conditions, the uncontrolled will fly far from the target, but in terms of efficiency / cost this is a great idea
    1. Lopatov
      Lopatov 14 November 2019 15: 18
      0
      Quote: _Ugene_
      for the simple reason that it is physically impossible to consider all factors

      And this is not necessary. It is enough to take into account the really influencing ones. And it is possible
  13. Tavrik
    Tavrik 13 November 2019 21: 56
    +3
    I tried to imagine how conscripts in the "Era" improve mathematical models ... No, it didn't work out.
    And SVP-24, yes, the thing is useful.
    1. Vlad.by
      Vlad.by 13 November 2019 22: 48
      +4
      if the conscript from the 5th course of MVTU im. Bauman - easily!
      I just had a couple of these at one time. They helped a lot with modeling for the dissertation, by the way. )))
  14. Shahno
    Shahno 14 November 2019 18: 07
    0
    Quote: neri73-r
    Quote: Professor
    When we run out of smart bombs and goals are not achieved, then no cast irons will help. There will be no one to fly on.

    Of course! So you will never start and will not fight with an equal opponent, which is gratifying! good

    Besder. And whom do you consider an equal adversary?
    By the way. Let's start more than once. Well, if you mean the quantitative side ...
  15. Karaul14
    Karaul14 14 November 2019 20: 37
    +1
    A solution with the goal of economy, this technology will not be able to compete with modern high-precision ammunition.
  16. Andrey VOV
    Andrey VOV 15 November 2019 11: 30
    +1
    I read the comments, well, all specialists are just top class in the field of bombing and all sorts of bells and whistles, and the professor of Israel is so we have the broadest genius specialist in all areas of human existence ... but the pilot who gives the most objective characteristic to Hephaestus can give the same navigator SU-24 flown a lot of hours in Syria and dropped tons of bombs on the Barmels
  17. picus
    picus 9 February 2020 06: 39
    0
    Quote: okko077
    And why calculate, this is yesterday. Correctable bombs simply or by JPS ... No need to deceive anyone, you need to keep up with the times ...

    Too shy to ask ... So what is this your JPS?
  18. Chetbor
    Chetbor 28 May 2020 20: 38
    0
    Su-34 not It is completed with “Hephaestus” - this suggests that new developments can also be used in the development of other sighting and navigation systems. In this way, the improvement of all major VKS strike aircraft is ensured.

    This suggests that flyers know the true price of Hephaestus.
    The truth is from my hands - in an orange country, if you need to get somewhere, then they go 24, if you take out 2-3 quarters - then 34