Press of Ukraine: The war in Donbass forced the United States to immediately create a short-range air defense system IM-SHORAD

The American company Leonardo DRS has announced the first deliveries of equipment kits (MEP) for the new IM-SHORAD (Initial Maneuver Short-Range Air Defense) anti-aircraft missile systems. The main requirement of the military to the manufacturer was as follows: the new machine should be able to independently identify and destroy air targets, especially UAVs, as well as helicopters, airplanes and cruise missiles.

The Ukrainian press called the new complex "impossibly armed, expensive, but overdue."

Leonardo DRS has announced that it will supply the US Army with the first kits for 28 short-range self-propelled air defense systems IM-SHORAD manufactured by General Dynamics Land System for their final integration into new Stryker armored personnel carriers. These will be the first deliveries under a five-year contract worth more than $ 600 million signed with the US military on December 2 last year. The total amount of contracts for this project is $ 1,2 billion. Its performers are General Dynamics Land Systems, Leonardo DRS and Raytheon.

The centerpiece of the MEP kit is the unique integrated tower armory platforms. Its uniqueness, among other things, lies in the "stuffed" means of destruction of both air and ground targets. These are the 7,62-mm M240 machine gun, the 30-mm XM914 cannon, Hellfire missiles for destroying ground and air targets, and Stinger anti-aircraft missiles.

Oddly enough, the creation of this technique is connected with the events in Ukraine. At least, this is how they think in Ukraine itself. The war in Donbas forced the United States to immediately create short-range air defense systems IM-SHORAD. In particular, the idea of ​​​​creating a new complex for the US Army was prompted by a report by the Congressional Research Service from 2015, which described the successful use drones both sides of the conflict in southeastern Ukraine.

The threat was re-voiced in 2018, when Iraqi forces tried to recapture the city of Mosul from radicals, but were attacked by small drones dropping grenades for a long time. Although the US Air Force planes dominated the sky, they were powerless against quadcopters flying at an altitude of 60-100 meters.

Comments

[Cowbra]

Yes, rather, they were prompted to do this by the unpunished attack on the Arab-American plant Aramco

[Cruorvult]

And how will this miracle help?

[Cowbra]

As usual. You can write a report on the advanced American industry, then about the fifth generation of the air defense system, then cut a little ... Well, in short, as with the Patriots

[zlinn]

But what is actually wrong with the patriots? This is not the first time I see remarks that patriots are full of hell, but I don’t understand where it came from?

[Cowbra]

* First Iraqi. 22 launches to intercept one Scud missile. Ancient, Iraqi. The missile was not intercepted.
* "Pompeo explained the failure of the Patriot systems in the attack on Saudi Arabia
Read more at RBC:
https://www.rbc.ru/politics/19/09/2019/5d82af799a7947fed324eab1?"
* In the American magazine "Foreign Policy" there was a publication in which the air defense systems "Patriot" were criticized. The United States supplies these systems to various countries. According to the magazine, such air defense systems are simply useless in real combat.
More details at: https://avia.pro/news/v-ssha-priznali-bespoleznost-kompleksov-patriot
* The Saudis managed to get the Patriot through their city. At the same time, for example, the Patriots are not able to repel real attacks on Riyadh - how many times the Houthis have successfully hammered the same airports there ...
Well, another carriage. In fact, it is very difficult to remember successful cases of repelling attacks behind the Patriots, in fact there were none. This AA defense is not designed for protection, but for sale.

[Slipper 2]

Ayu planet, we are, all of us is happening on you

[Al_lexx]

It looks like a serious machine.

[lucul]

It looks like a serious machine.

According to air defense capabilities - not steeper than our Wasp)))
Only Osu, oppas were scolded for uselessness, and this one will be extolled to heaven.)))

[venik]

Quote: Al_lexx

It looks like a serious machine.

=========
So it is so ... But I just did not understand why they were there (in anti-aircraft (!) the system) also got Hellfire in? He has extremely limited capabilities when shooting at aerial targets !?
Not otherwise they are trying to concoct something "universal"?

[Al_lexx]

Quote: venik

Just didn’t understand why did they put the Hellfire in there (into the anti-aircraft (!) System)?

If memory serves, Hellfire has a bunch of modifications, incl. and with a kind of universal guidance, which allows you to shoot at air targets (not very maneuverable). Well, and an additional bonus on land. Or vice versa.

[Rusticolus]

Not otherwise they are trying to concoct something "universal"?

In general, this is so. This unit is nothing more than a replacement for the outdated Bradley m2 / m6. Only on Bradley ATGMs and Stingers were put on different modifications. And then they decided that everything could be collected on one body. Otherwise, in general, nothing new, except that the platform has become wheeled. This is the biggest difference from the analogue of the previous generation.

[V.I.P.]

It's strange how they were going to fight drones using this technique? Stinger in modification E, catching up with a range of 8 km, an altitude of 3,5 km .... Which drone can they fight with? ATGM will also not shoot down. A gun? I do not think that a drone will hit at 8 km in range ....... To combat the SU-25, the Mi-8/24/28 will do, but not for drones.

[OgnennyiKotik]

Kamikaze drones, low-altitude / light reconnaissance, civilian converted drones - 99% of the market. Against them, new means are needed, given the pace of development, urgently.
Medium-altitude and high-altitude drones are knocked down by other means.

[Thrifty]

V And P is air defense for low-flying small-sized targets, such as kamikaze drones, or light UAVs and quadcopters ! They don't really have analogues of our Torah, Buk, Tunguska, Pantsir, because they used to think that they didn't need such a weapon - a dollar type would solve all problems, but life has shown how wrong they are. ...

[Zoldat_A]

Quote: Thrifty

They have no real analogues of our Torah, Buk, Tunguska, Pantsir

Itself not air defense at all, not a specialist. Therefore, explain who understands - in terms of combat use, is it somewhere analogous to our "Shell"? If so, then something his missiles are somehow small, judging by the photographs ...

[Berber]

Not even close. The stinger has a much shorter range than the shell missiles. And the density of anti-aircraft fire in the "shell is many times greater. This, as it is written in the article, is mainly against drones.

[Zoldat_A]

Quote: BerBer

Not even close. The stinger has a much shorter range than the shell missiles.

I did not mean the type of missiles used and firepower, but the purpose, type of targets ... Is it designed for the same thing as our "Shell" or are they fundamentally different things?

[Thrifty]

Zoldat A is an attempt to create some kind of unversible from the United States, and it can work like the Carapace for, say, high-speed low-flying targets, but the effectiveness of the Carapace is an order of magnitude higher! Right there artillery from the category of shooting at crows, there is only one barrel, and a machine gun, rockets are actually close combat, unlike those that we have on Shell! To hit the target at the height of 8 km, and in 3 km the difference is huge! This usa complex is only for close combat, it is not enough to protect a subdivision in the field or on the march! Ammunition even for missiles is small, about the cannon, about its effectiveness in general it is better not to talk about. ...

[Zoldat_A]

That's what I asked about. Thank you.

[Al_lexx]

Quote: Zoldat_A

Itself not air defense at all, not a specialist. So explain who understands - in terms of combat use, is it somewhere analogous to our "Shell"?

Closer to "Tunguska", but somewhat thinner. We have no other comparable analogues, everything is clearly heavier in armament.

[Zoldat_A]

Quote: Al_lexx

Closer to "Tunguska", but somewhat thinner.

"Tunguska" is understandable. When I served in the army, they were already graduated. And "Armor" just appeared much later - that's why I asked about it.

Well this is what comes out? "New" American air defense systems thinner than our "Tunguska" early 80s? Well, then "hello ardent" to the American "defense" ....

[Al_lexx]

Quote: Zoldat_A

Well this is what comes out? "New" American air defense systems thinner than our "Tunguska" early 80s? Well, then "hello ardent" to the American "defense" ....

In terms of targeting accuracy, the American is most likely better than the Tunguska. After all, it's a modern development. But the American has four anti-aircraft missiles, and the Tunguska has eight (the characteristics of the missiles are approximately equal). There is no need to talk about cannon armament. In a second salvo, the Tunguska covers the US fart like a bull a sheep. But again, targeting accuracy and ammunition can play a significant role here. If an American has an advanced MSA and programmable detonation ammunition, then this can negate the superiority in the mass of the Tunguska's second salvo. On the other hand, the cost of conventional Tunguska shells can be ten / twenty (or even more) times lower than the American programmed ones, and then a certain parity is obtained in terms of ammunition consumption, in terms of spending money per second.))
In any case, everything is relative and primarily depends on the skill of the crew.

[Crimean partisan 1974]

SU-25, Mi-8/24/28 will do, ... Ka-50 can work out for 10 miles with its vortices ... it's a misunderstanding ... but why is Ka-50 ... a barefoot Hussite will work it out with a bassoon for just

[rotmistr60]

the creation of this technique is associated with the events in Ukraine

It is necessary to be able to tie any event to events in Ukraine. Without Ukraine, the Americans would certainly not have thought of creating a medium-range air defense system. But at the same time they complain

a new complex "armed to the point of impossibility, expensive, but belated».

What have you created or are you hoping for NATO in the person of the United States?

[Lipchanin]

Quote: rotmistr60

It is necessary to be able to tie any event to events in Ukraine.

Yes, the whole world does not sleep and looks at what's new there in Sumeria

[Zoldat_A]

Quote: rotmistr60

It is necessary to be able to tie any event to events in Ukraine.

The Americans, too, invented the Internet solely in order to cover the "Russian aggression" in Ukraine.
Nothing that there is a 45-year difference between one and the other - they PRESENT ...

[Thrifty]

Well uk-riyam believe, do not respect yourself! The Yankees created this something, seeing that they did not have a whole air defense segment in their arsenal, to deal with small and low-flying targets! For hitting a quadcopter with a rocket at a cost of hundreds of thousands of dollars is at least wasteful, and in the long run even unprofitable!

[Lipchanin]

Quote: Thrifty

For hitting a quadcopter with a rocket at a cost of hundreds of thousands of dollars is at least wasteful, and in the long run even unprofitable!

And you still have to manage to get

[Doccor18]

..called the new complex “armed to the point of impossibility ..

A stupid phrase, to the point of impossibility ...

[Dimka75]

How much of this word ! ) Press "Ukraine". And that's all. Go find Vasya Pupkin from Ukraine who said something on his twitter. And the article about that is ready. And comments under 100.
Bender also gave such advice. How to sculpt articles. Border ornament. Soar, develop. Aryk, apricot. I monitored the "press of Ukraine", period.

[Avior]

not quite clear.
Stinger's GOS is not very designed for UAVs, its targets are helicopters and low-flying aircraft.
The engines of low-altitude small UAVs do not give very much heat for the operation of the seeker of MANPADS, although it is theoretically possible to get there under some circumstances. And high-altitude large UAVs will be unattainable because of the height.
And to be honest, the Americans, if they go to war, will clean up all helicopters and planes that can create a threat throughout the district.
It begs rather air defense against UAVs. Maybe the GOS is supposed to be finalized? Or is there already a matrix GOS on Stinger? then it is possible to use it against UAVs.

[Sergey_G_M]

It suggests itself that they simply stuck everything that was on the car.
To combat small UAVs, the stinger ammunition load is critically small.

[Crimean partisan 1974]

Stinger's GOS is not very much designed for UAVs, ..... as you can see, in the sting the GOS has 2 ranges in the IR and one in the FD, ... the only thing the sting is tied to. this is for the "friend or foe" system - without this system, sting is useless, unlike Russian-Soviet MANPADS, Chinese clones of Soviet production, RBS-70 and English Javilin MANPADS (not to be confused with the striped ATGM Jov), .... striped ones value this , therefore, until now, the aircraft allied to them have not yet shot down a single

[rocket757]

Good old Stinger ... there is work for him too, if that.

[Crimean partisan 1974]

The old "good" Stinger ... there will be work for him, if that ... not Vitya, it is very difficult to bypass the "friend or foe" interrogator's grid. ... it is roughly equivalent to buy a pair of three Eagles for these funds, well, if it is possible a pair of Verbs ... and a sting ... well, so it was done ... respect striped ... does not bite its own

[rocket757]

Quote: Crimean partisan 1974

bypassing the friend-or-foe interrogator grid is very difficult.

The question was why they needed it ... it was said about them that THEY would find a complex application.
Unfortunately, in terms of electronics, microelectronics, they are ahead of us, because our industry, electronics, will never come out of a coma ...

[Ros 56]

Well, these Banderlog still not fantasize. Soon a handbook on the origin of the striped from the Ukrainian dill monkey will be compiled.

[Guru]

As I understand it is the American Terminator? When the active phased array antenna (AFAR) is screwed onto ours.

[Cruorvult]

Meaning, with 2a42 to beat? This requires a single concept of terminator + derivation, a module with 57 broads and programmable landmines with ready-made striking elements, then there is a sense of AFAR.

[orionvitt]

Comrades from Ukraine, they will not die of modesty. Everything in the world is based solely on the events in Ukraine. And here is the conflict on Dobassa, if the militia has no aviation at all. But the main thing is to let the gases into a puddle, where is America without Ukraine, the Americans themselves do not know anything.

[Al_lexx]

Quote: lucul

According to air defense capabilities - not steeper than our Wasp)))

I would not compare them. The Yankes have an emphasis on the stinger, which does not need a backlight. Wasp needs.
Their range and altitude are also different, in favor of the Wasp (almost twice), in which the rocket is almost three times heavier than the stinger.
The discussed American air defense missile system in terms of performance is closer to Tunguska, but the latter has two gun barrels and eight purely air defense containers. Those. the density of gunfire is twice and twice the ammunition load of missiles, although there is no analogue of the hellfire.

[Crimean partisan 1974]

although there is no analogue of a hellfire ..... in Tunguzka and Pantsyr, the rocket can hit ground targets with about the same warhead as that of the helfire - 9 kg, .. only the helfire rocket at a distance of up to 3000 meters from the ground, the speed drops to 300 m per second, for 9m311 at a speed of 900 meters per second at a distance of 6 km, this is more significant than a ground helper, along the way, the shell's rocket is even more poisonous

[Al_lexx]

Quote: Crimean partisan 1974

.... along the way, the shell rocket is even more poisonous

It is quite possible, although the warheads there are completely different. I cannot say, but I suspect that for a good armored personnel carrier, a small anti-aircraft missile is not very effective. Hellfire was created precisely for such purposes.

[Crimean partisan 1974]

an entertaining toy of a light ... and a 125-mm OF-36 will do it from 5000 meters ... and if a cornet sneaks up from the same distance ... yes ... fun

[Lord of the Sith]

The main requirement of the military to the manufacturer was this: the new machine should be able to independently identify and destroy air targets, especially UAVs, as well as helicopters, airplanes and cruise missiles.

Finished dodiks, our main force in Donbass is reconnaissance and artillery, what the hell are helicopters and airplanes, not to mention cruise missiles)))

Let them fight with windmills)))

[tarakanovaleksei]

It will probably burn well. Like abrams.

[Petro_tut]

Rather, the war in Karabakh contributed to this