Unguided aircraft missiles S-13 "Tulumbas". Flexible Tool for Special Operations

134

Su-25 attack aircraft involved in the Special Operation

In service with the Russian front and army aviation consists of a wide range of different means of destruction, including several types and modifications of unguided missiles. All this weapon finds application in the current Special Operation and ensures the demilitarization of Ukraine. Together with other weapons, S-13 Tulumbas unguided aircraft missiles are used. Recently, the Ministry of Defense showed episodes of the use of such products.

Rockets in the frame


On May 30, the Ministry of Defense published a video showing the combat work of Su-25SM3 attack aircraft using S-13 missiles. It is reported that the pilots-heroes of the video carried out attacks on enemy positions, equipment and weapons. The flight was carried out at low altitudes in the zone of the possible presence of enemy air defense, as a result of which decoys and anti-missile maneuvering were used.



The video begins with a demonstration of the work of the technical staff. It loads the S-13 NAR into the B-13L launch block under the wing of the attack aircraft. It can be considered that the payload of aircraft includes external fuel tanks, unguided missile units and containers with equipment of an unknown purpose.


Loading S-13 missiles into B-13L blocks

It is shown how aircraft, flying at low altitude, launch unguided missiles at a distant target. Launches are carried out in pairs and in series, from level flight and from pitch-up. Several rocket launches are shown through the "pilot's eyes" - from a helmet-mounted camera or through an indicator on the windshield that displays flight and other information.

Having completed the combat mission, the attack aircraft returned to the airfield and landed. Unfortunately, the results of a missile attack on enemy ground targets were not shown. However, the experience of the Syrian and Ukrainian operations show that the Su-25SM3 with unguided S-13s is a very effective strike system. It can be assumed that after the arrival of the NAR, only debris and destruction remained on the ground.


The rocket leaves the guide

Weapon family


Our military aviation has at its disposal a whole family of S-13 unguided missiles with the code "Tulumbas" (a percussion musical instrument, a type of timpani). The first samples of this family were developed in the early seventies by the Novosibirsk Institute of Applied Physics. Subsequently, serial production was organized, and new modifications and variants of the NAR with certain features were developed.

The process of rocket development is still going on with the help of various enterprises. Together with NIPF, Technodinamika holding, Tekhmash holding, etc. participate in it. So, at last year's forum "Army-2021" for the first time showed the layout of the next NAR of the family called S-13B "Tulumbas-3". According to some reports, this product has already passed all the necessary tests and was put into service.

The Tulumbas missiles of the first version were intended to destroy manpower and equipment in open areas and in buildings, incl. protected. In the future, new modifications were developed with other combat units for various purposes. The flight characteristics of the products also changed.


Pair launch, view from the cockpit

All NARs of the S-13 family are used with B-13L launchers for five items each. The blocks can be installed on almost any modern front-line aircraft and combat helicopters of domestic design. In this regard, the S-13 practically does not differ from other domestic unguided missiles.

The effectiveness of the use of NAR C-13 depends on the characteristics of the carrier. For example, modern PRNCs of front-line aviation aircraft make it possible to increase the accuracy of firing unguided missiles over the entire range of ranges and in different flight modes. In particular, it becomes possible to shoot more accurately not from a dive.

Line features


All missiles of the S-13 family are built according to the same scheme and are unified as much as possible. They are carried out in a cylindrical body with a diameter of 122 mm and a length of 2,5 to 3,1 m. The head compartment of the rocket with a warhead is distinguished by a reduced diameter of 90 mm. In the tail are the stabilizers laid out in flight.


View through HUD

The basic S-13 missile was a 57-kg ammunition with a penetrating warhead weighing 21 kg. It was intended to destroy protected objects and was capable of penetrating 3 m of soil and / or 1 m of concrete. Launch range - up to 3 km. Subsequently, on the basis of the first Tulumbas, an improved NAR C-13T was developed. It became heavier up to 75 kg and received a reinforced warhead with the ability to break through up to 6 m of soil or undermine it on contact with the surface. The range has increased to 4 km.

High-explosive fragmentation S-13OF and S-13OFS1 are proposed with a range of up to 3 or up to 6 km, respectively. They carry warheads weighing 33 or 38 kg. At the same time, OFS1 is distinguished by an increased explosive charge - more than 15 kg. S-13D and S-13DF unguided missiles are equipped with a volume explosion warhead. With a mass of 68 kg, they carry 14,6 kg of flammable liquid. The explosion power is equivalent to 35-40 kg of TNT.

The newest of the presented missiles, "Tulumbas-3", is multi-purpose and made on the basis of existing units. With its help, it is possible to defeat both unprotected targets and shelters and fortified buildings. Such functions are provided by a concrete-piercing warhead weighing 41 kg with a hardened hull and a charge weighing 5,6 kg. A bottom fuse is used, controlled by the so-called. initiation block. Detonation can be performed on contact with the target, as well as with a short or long delay. The mode of operation is selected in preparation for a flight, depending on the nature of the reconnoitred target.


S-13T missiles

Flexible Tools


The S-13 unguided rocket family includes several products for various purposes, and new ones appear regularly. There is reason to believe that the modernization potential of Tulumbas has not yet been exhausted. Thanks to this, in the future, new modifications and versions with certain advantages over existing NARs may enter service.

From the point of view of operation and use in the Air Force, the C-13 family is a convenient, inexpensive and effective tool for solving a wide range of combat missions. The ability to select missiles with different flight data or warheads provides a certain flexibility in combat use. Accordingly, the design characteristics of products are used more fully.

It should be noted that in addition to the S-13, the Russian Air Force has several other types and modifications of aviation unguided missiles. These are lighter products S-5 and S-8, as well as heavy S-24 and S-25. Such NARs are also carried out in various modifications and may differ in the characteristics and capabilities of combat units.


Start NAR S-13 fighter-bomber

Thus, thanks to the work of our defense industry, combat aviation has a wide range of unguided missile weapons with different capabilities and different potentials. Many years of experience have repeatedly demonstrated and confirmed the advantages of both individual missiles and the entire complex of weapons as a whole.

Current successes


Right now, unguided rockets of various types, including S-13s of various modifications, are being used in the course of the demilitarization of Ukraine. Frontal and army aviation make dozens and hundreds of sorties a day and constantly use one or another weapon. One of the main tools for hitting ground targets is precisely the NAR, which combines low cost, simplicity and high combat qualities.

Apparently, the use of S-13 "Tulumbas" and other unguided missiles will continue in the future. There are still many targets for such weapons on the battlefields and behind enemy lines, and foreign countries are constantly bringing up new ones. However, the results of these processes are predictable.
134 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +11
    5 June 2022 04: 43
    It can be assumed that after the arrival of the NAR, only debris and destruction remained on the ground.
    after their use on the ground, a "lunar landscape" remains, and the actual positions of the enemy can remain safe and sound.

    In general, of course, the last century. Drive an expensive plane to shoot rocket heels into the white light ...
    1. +4
      5 June 2022 09: 44
      containers with equipment of unknown purpose.
      On external hangers, containers of the EW complex "Vitebsk-25"
      1. 0
        5 June 2022 10: 12
        Kolya! hi and what is the passage about the use of unguided rockets from a pitch-up?
        1. The comment was deleted.
        2. +6
          5 June 2022 11: 26
          Hello roma hi By area. The SLA is modern (I’m not very familiar with it, alas, there is no access for pensioners) It seems like such a method of application can be calculated. At one time, the Na Su 17 (PRNK 54 according to the meme) allowed the use of bombs from the cabriolet. You start from the point of the beginning of the maneuver to perform a maneuver with the start or reset pressed, and the PRC considers that when the aircraft is at the reset point, the reset is automatic, taking into account all the parameters. Well, here, as it is probably. hi
          1. +1
            5 June 2022 13: 20
            given the spread - to the village of grandfather, Nikanor Ivanych
            1. +8
              5 June 2022 13: 32
              Well, a little more precisely. the characteristics of the ammunition and the flight parameters of the launch are taken into account by the SLA. I think about the accuracy of a city. Previously, they sometimes used NAR launches from a pitch-up when it was necessary to transfer them over a hill, that’s how it will turn out there, but here, taking into account the development of the SLA, it will be more accurate. You noticed that the helicopter begins to increase the pitch angle and at about 30-35 degrees some of the missiles come off, then the nose drops and starts to rise again, the second part comes off, this is the FCS firing in the allowed range.
              1. 0
                5 June 2022 13: 37
                well. C-5 can also be used as hail, and C-13 is desirable to be more precise, to the desired point. and there are only 5 of them per block
                1. +5
                  5 June 2022 13: 41
                  I won’t say anything about accuracy, I just don’t know, request NAR itself and when firing at a visible target do not have special accuracy.
                  1. +2
                    6 June 2022 00: 38
                    Quote: NIKNN
                    I won’t say anything about accuracy, I just don’t know, request NAR itself and when firing at a visible target do not have special accuracy.

                    The accuracy is usual for a NAR "over the area", and when launched from a pitch-up, it drops by an order of +/-. But it allows you to launch without entering the MANPADS affected area, something like that.
            2. -1
              13 August 2022 21: 51
              The Hermes MSA is called, it was tested in Syria, free-falling bombs from 10 m, they say it is calculated in such a way that they are approaching NATO planning GBUs in accuracy, and NARs from a jump, tyuyuyu - right in positions and lay down!
  2. -5
    5 June 2022 05: 15
    Adversaries of a dozen countries have a bunch of options for controlled homing nurses. They are already shooting down drones. And we have Katyushas of the 30s and square-nested sowing from the air
    1. +6
      5 June 2022 05: 35
      the principle of simplicity and cheapness in a protracted war has not been canceled. You rivet a lot of expensive controlled NURS .. which a priori should be simple and cheap. Well, if you fight with an army of natives with bows of 1000 fighters, then yes ...
      1. +8
        5 June 2022 06: 23
        Golden words, there are probably still mosquitoes and BTR-40s in the warehouses ... and return the footcloths ...
        1. +17
          5 June 2022 11: 55
          And why footcloths are bad, I think it's much more convenient than socks
          1. +4
            5 June 2022 13: 41
            Quote: Andrey VOV
            And why footcloths are bad, I think it's much more convenient than socks

            For the army, many times more convenient.
            1. fiv
              +2
              6 June 2022 07: 27
              And they help with interrogations
            2. +1
              13 August 2022 21: 58
              Well, you need to return the tarpaulin to the footcloths, otherwise they will flutter over the berets.
          2. -1
            17 August 2022 08: 54
            At the exit, yes, when without taking off the boots for three days, footcloths are a thing. If it is possible to rest the legs, then socks are more comfortable. Consider the moment of putting on boots with footcloths in case of a sudden attack. There is no need to put on footcloths with a parachute, it is convenient only when there is an urgent formation in the barracks.
        2. +4
          5 June 2022 19: 33
          Quote: Vladimir Michailovich
          and return the footcloths ..

          It would be much better than now socks. The footcloths have one drawback, such as the Stone Age is not cool, but surpasses any socks in its merits. And here is an option, either cool PR, or reliability and convenience.
          1. -1
            17 August 2022 08: 56
            I’ll write again, footcloths are more convenient in certain conditions, as well as socks.
            1. 0
              17 August 2022 09: 35
              Quote: igorka357
              I’ll write again, footcloths are more convenient in certain conditions

              And we are considering certain operating conditions - military service, and it doesn’t matter where in the field or in the barracks and footcloths are out of competition here. But if you go AWOL or a leave of absence for girls, then definitely socks.
              1. -1
                17 August 2022 10: 34
                We are not talking about girls. It is more comfortable to wear socks in the barracks. There is not enough combatant now, they wash their feet every evening, conscripts have hothouse conditions, footcloths are useless. But the field, yes. A footcloth is, first of all, reliability, practicality and ease of providing drugs.
                1. 0
                  17 August 2022 10: 51
                  Quote: igorka357
                  There are few combatants now, they wash their feet every evening, conscripts have greenhouse conditions

                  I'm not at all sure about this. Most people don't change. It's like before, some people wash their feet, and some don't. Little construction worker? Again, it's interesting, it's like our fathers-commanders immediately became wiser, that instead of combatant they suddenly began to teach combat work. There are no miracles, and combatant in this regard is a very convenient tool to develop vigorous activity with a minimum of knowledge and effort. And in the barracks you need to walk in general in slippers on your bare feet.
        3. 0
          28 July 2022 04: 01
          BTR-40 in the current conditions would be relevant. A sort of ancestor of the tiger
      2. +16
        5 June 2022 06: 35
        Well well ! Guided (!) NURSs (Unguided Rockets)! There are NARs (Unguided Aircraft Missiles) for aviation! And then even ... not "NURSov", but "NURSOV"! Teach me Chinese! I do not want to see the suffering of the grammar of the Russian language!
        1. +1
          5 June 2022 18: 40
          Brace yourselves .... here abroad will not help us.
      3. +4
        5 June 2022 07: 45
        Quote: Skipper
        the principle of simplicity and cheapness in a protracted war has not been canceled. You rivet a lot of expensive controlled NURS .. which a priori should be simple and cheap. Well, if you fight with an army of natives with bows of 1000 fighters, then yes ...

        When ours tried to develop a similar Threat system, it was calculated: a 50-fold reduction in ammunition consumption, and a 4-fold reduction in the cost to hit a target. This is despite the fact that such RSs were supposed to be used in volleys, and the shells were actually two-stage missiles. Here, count
        1. +3
          5 June 2022 09: 33
          No one denies the high efficiency of guided missiles compared to NUR. But there are significant “BUTs”: 1- the cost of such a missile is an order of magnitude higher, 2- for the production of SD, completely different technologies and a different level of production are needed, 3-for SD, additional equipment is needed for external target designation, 4- SD to one degree or another subject to interference, 5-UR require completely different conditions for transportation, storage, maintenance, pre-combat training.
          1. 0
            5 June 2022 12: 12
            The cost of controlled RS will decrease with an increase in serial production, NURS need to be discontinued and a line of guided RS with various GOS should be prepared: according to GLONASS (to destroy dugouts, firing points, warehouses, towed artillery, etc.), according to a laser beam, with optical and IR heads (for the destruction of moving targets). NURS is the last century, they need an order of magnitude more in number to destroy a target compared to URS.
        2. +3
          5 June 2022 10: 54
          Quote: Tlauicol
          cost to hit the target by 4 times
          What is the purpose? Dugout - maybe. And if the goal is a battalion on the offensive?
      4. +30
        5 June 2022 08: 39
        the principle of simplicity and cheapness in a protracted war has not been canceled. You rivet a lot of expensive controlled NURS .. which a priori should be simple and cheap. Well, if you fight with an army of natives with bows of 1000 fighters, then yes ...


        It is better to launch 3 missiles and accurately hit a tank, an armored personnel carrier, a dugout, than to launch hundreds of missiles with an eye on whom God will send somewhere in the direction of the enemy, risking losing the plane, the pilot and burning tons of kerosene.

        Nurses are not very lethal anyway, and shooting from a roll-up generally reduces their effectiveness to zero. I can’t even imagine how and what you can get into ?! Especially on a entrenched enemy.

        All this looks more like a show to justify the low efficiency of our aviation and heavy losses. But in fact, for 3 months we have not suppressed the artillery of the Armed Forces of Ukraine with such shooting even in Avdiivka, and the dill from there shell Donetsk every day.

        But in the reports of Konashenkov, 100500 enemy batteries were suppressed.
        1. +1
          5 June 2022 11: 08
          Quote: Ratmir_Ryazan
          It is better to launch 3 missiles and accurately hit a tank, an armored personnel carrier, a dugout, than to launch hundreds of missiles with an eye on whom God will send somewhere in the direction of the enemy, risking losing the plane, the pilot and burning tons of kerosene.

          This only works:
          1. You were able to determine where the enemy is during reconnaissance.
          2. We were able to determine the coordinates of the target with high accuracy.
          3. You are sure that at the moment of striking the target will remain in the same place.
          4. At the moment of impact, you will have high-quality target designation (better than external).
          If at least one point is not met, then high-precision weapons cannot be used.
          Now let's recall a typical picture that our army has to face. The enemy took up defensive positions in a small town. Between private houses (and under them) trenches are laid. Equipped with a lot of spare and false firing positions. The location of the enemy is currently unknown. And where will he be at the moment of striking, all the more so! And where will you deliver a high-precision strike?
          Actually there are two options:
          1. Rely on high-precision weapons and spend an unrealistic amount of time to identify most of the enemy's beds and shelters. To do this, it is necessary for weeks (!) to track the movements of enemy soldiers from drones. And according to these data, in an analytical way, calculate most of the necessary goals.
          The key issue is time. If we spend so much time on overcoming one defensive position, then we will liberate Donbass in 20 years.
          2. Demolish all enemy defensive positions with thousands of unguided projectiles and rockets.
          And I want to remind you. When the United States faced the same situation in the fight against ISIS, that is, the enemy occupied positions in urban areas and it was not clear where to hit with precision weapons, the Americans turned these quarters into rubble. Unguided weapons.
          Simply because for the effective use of high-precision weapons it was impossible to comply with those mandatory conditions that I listed above.
          1. +2
            5 June 2022 12: 59
            Turkish American French Korean, etc. ammunition perfectly hit moving targets. From infantry to drone
            1. 0
              6 June 2022 15: 55
              Quote: Tlauicol
              Turkish American French Korean, etc. ammunition perfectly hit moving targets. From infantry to drone

              You are comparing ammunition that is generally different in purpose.
              For example :
              A sniper at distances from 500 meters is incomparably more accurate than a machine gunner. And it spends thousands of times less ammunition to hit the target.
              So, replace all machine guns with snipers!?
              Of course not!
              After all, despite the above comparison, a machine gun is MUCH more effective, more useful, more versatile than a "sniper".
              And if snipers are removed from our army, this will only slightly reduce the combat capability of our army. But if machine guns are removed from the army, then there will be a DISASTER.
              And the analogy with precision-guided munitions is complete. From the outside, everything looks beautiful. With one bullet at maximum range, the sniper deals the maximum possible damage. But in a real combined-arms battle, even a crowd of snipers cannot replace one machine gun. Simply because the exact work of a sniper depends on many factors. Which in a real battle may not work out. And in this case, the sense of the sniper is zero.
              Whereas the features of the machine gun work lead to the fact that there is almost always a benefit from it (and most often significant).
              1. 0
                6 June 2022 16: 11
                But in a real combined-arms battle, even a crowd of snipers cannot replace one machine gun.

                And therefore, in the Great Patriotic War, in order to disrupt enemy counterattacks, they practiced giving platoons of snipers to the main forces. Because they did it better than machine guns.
                1. 0
                  6 June 2022 20: 44
                  Quote: Nefarious skeptic
                  Because they did it better than machine guns.

                  If a sniper did the job of a machine gun better than the machine gun itself, then the sniper would have been forced out of the army by machine guns back in WWII.
                  But more than 70 years have passed since then. And not in one army of the world snipers are not competitors of machine guns. Which clearly says that you are wrong in your statements. And most likely you make global conclusions from rare piece episodes.
                  1. 0
                    7 June 2022 09: 21
                    then the sniper would have been forced out of the army by machine guns back in WWII

                    In your opinion, a sniper is anyone who has a rifle with a telescopic sight thrust into their hands? How would you get the right number of specialists for such, even theoretical, replacement?
                    Well, after the incident of 70 years, in many armies of the world, the machine gun is already being used as an ersatz sniper rifle, and not as, in fact, a machine gun - the time of attacking with a chain also ended 70 years ago.
                    Meet the REGULAR optical sight for single machine guns NATO - M145

                    Well, I won’t mention that in general an attempt to replace the gap in adjustable and guided weapons and justify ineffective tactics by transferring the situation to a comparison of a machine gunner and a sniper is pure manipulation
                    1. 0
                      28 July 2022 04: 12
                      The lag is due to the lack of a developed microelectronic industry in the country. Although there are definitely controlled versions of the S-25 and S-8, they are developed
          2. +6
            5 June 2022 13: 46
            This only works:
            1. You were able to determine where the enemy is during reconnaissance.
            2. We were able to determine the coordinates of the target with high accuracy.
            3. You are sure that at the moment of striking the target will remain in the same place.
            4. At the moment of impact, you will have high-quality target designation (better than external).


            The Jews somehow manage to get a TV-guided missile into the Pantsir ZRPK in the vicinity of Damascus from the territory of Lebanon, and we cannot cover the artillery in Avdiivka, but we find a bunch of explanations for this, instead of recognizing the problem and solving it.
            1. +5
              5 June 2022 23: 14
              You compare the defeat of a single target, when everything is thrown to search for it, with a war in which hundreds and thousands of heavy weapons are massively used.
              It is easy to hide Arta in an area of ​​tens of square kilometers. You will never see her disguised. And when she starts shooting, while you determine the shooting area, she will already curl up, leave, and disguise herself again.
              1. +1
                7 June 2022 12: 12
                It is easy to hide Arta in an area of ​​tens of square kilometers. You will never see her disguised. And when she starts shooting, while you determine the shooting area, she will already curl up, leave, and disguise herself again.


                What are you justifying? That on the territory of a settlement of 30 people we cannot detect artillery?

                Yes, we can’t, and not because the area is large and the front is 1000 km., But precisely because we have NO effective ground artillery reconnaissance stations and no UAVs capable of detecting camouflaged targets.

                Yes, there is Orlan-10, but its image quality is such that on a clear day it is difficult to see an uncamouflaged target.

                And it should be so, the counter-battery radar immediately turns on as soon as the shelling of our territory begins and gives out the coordinates of the enemy to our battery to suppress return fire and to UAV operators who are already holding an attack UAV in the air and instantly rush to the area where artillery was found to adjust fire and destruction of individual targets (even at 200 km / h, in 15 minutes they will overcome 50 km, which is a lot on the line of contact).

                And we have neither the first nor the effective second. That is why we cannot hit the enemy artillery in Avdiivka, and not because the front is large.
          3. +1
            5 June 2022 19: 56
            Quote: Serg4545
            This only works:

            Very well explained, thanks.
            What are they minus, all the propellers? Is this an assignment? laughing
        2. -4
          5 June 2022 11: 57
          And you video fortifications in Avdiivka? Or can't you see them from the sofa?
          1. 0
            5 June 2022 18: 45
            Don't stress. not in horse food. We are all smart. True, I don’t think that someone experienced a NUR gap nearby, even on the square
        3. +1
          5 June 2022 17: 51
          Quote: Ratmir_Ryazan
          And in fact, for 3 months we have not suppressed the artillery of the Armed Forces of Ukraine with such shooting even in Avdiivka, and the dill from there shell Donetsk every day.

          But in the reports of Konashenkov, 100500 enemy batteries were suppressed.

          Yes, and how many command and control posts. Judging by the reports, they should not have officers left. Everyone fell on these points.
        4. 0
          7 June 2022 00: 00
          In the Korean War (1950-1953), UN troops fired 50 shots to destroy one enemy. In Vietnam (1965 - 1973), American soldiers spent 200 thousand rounds of ammunition. The Soviets in Afghanistan (1979 - 1989) - according to some sources, 50 thousand, according to others - all 250 thousand ... Of course, the calculations are very rough, but I think they caught the trend ...
      5. +7
        5 June 2022 10: 40
        Quote: Skipper
        the principle of simplicity and cheapness in a protracted war has not been canceled. You rivet a lot of expensive controlled NURS .. which a priori should be simple and cheap. Well, if you fight with an army of natives with bows of 1000 fighters, then yes ...

        Well, yes, but at the same time, while spending these cheap NURSs, you are losing expensive planes of expensive pilots and infantry that you have to support by destroying the enemy, and since you were shot down, you didn’t complete the task, but the infantry raked, and you lost expensive equipment .. Take it and count, But are such "cheap" munitions needed? Don't they go a circle an order of magnitude more expensive than "expensive" guided munitions?
        1. +7
          6 June 2022 10: 05
          This has long been calculated and proven, in Vietnam the Americans bombed the bridge with cast iron for several years and everyone could not get in. There was one stingy and counted the sorties, the number of bombs dropped and everything else, turned out to be an astronomer. The figures for the burned fuel, and the discarded cast iron and everything else. bombed to hell. and we have all these dances with a tambourine with nurses and hephaestus from the technical lag in electronics and its complete absence, they pass off as virtue.
          1. +3
            6 June 2022 11: 38
            The funny thing is that there is accurate ammunition, but our illiterate warriors can’t come to an understanding of this. they see piles of cast iron and say, well, there’s nothing to spend money on!

            They save money so they care about the country!
            1. 0
              13 June 2022 13: 33
              "they see piles of cast iron" Uh-huh, the funny thing is, the piles of cast iron from among the most sought after, like the FAB-500 or shells for the D-30 (which are used in the NM), seem to be gone. Most likely, the rusty illiquid remained and that's it.
      6. +2
        5 June 2022 14: 50
        Accurate may not necessarily be a rocket, artillery can also be accurate, when the gunner of the self-propelled guns has a tablet on which arrivals can be seen and immediately correct the fire.

        [media=https://www.youtube.com/shorts/fmgnj3OdjtE]
      7. +5
        5 June 2022 17: 54
        Quote: Skipper
        the principle of simplicity and cheapness in a protracted war has not been canceled. You rivet a lot of expensive controlled NURS .. which a priori should be simple and cheap. Well, if you fight with an army of natives with bows of 1000 fighters, then yes ...

        The problem is that when trying to implement the principle of cheapness, pilots are forced to expose a very expensive aircraft to a possible enemy strike, whenever they want to shoot "somewhere there."

        If they really wanted to implement the principle of cheapness and dispose of old stocks that all the same cannot "Live" endlessly ... then it would be more logical to put them like ISIS .. an installation with nurses on a pickup truck, drove up, fired in the direction of the enemy and left.
        Here you have the training of such a .. pickup manager will be much cheaper than training a pilot.
        And the cost of the pickup itself is incomparable with the aircraft.
        Shoot as much as you like.

        And so ... even if out of 100 (conditionally) sorties, due to the need to shoot in the old fashioned way, we will lose 1 aircraft ... you will never pay off such a method due to ammunition. On the contrary, you will go into the minus ... due to the lost aircraft and turntables
    2. 0
      5 June 2022 05: 43
      For adversaries, controlled nurses would have ended in a week. And then what?
      1. +10
        5 June 2022 06: 15
        What stops you from having both? Unmanaged PCs will run out with the square-nest method before the ground. And I would like to hit the target
        1. +1
          5 June 2022 09: 17
          Sexual orientation known laughing, although as far as we know, our flyers have both.
      2. +1
        5 June 2022 10: 09
        Quote: malyvalv
        controlled nurses

        Ha.
        The great and mighty Russian language ....
        Nurs, he is therefore Nurs, because he is not controlled.
      3. +2
        5 June 2022 10: 43
        quote = malyvalv] The adversaries would have run out of controlled nurses in a week. And then what?[/quote]

        Well, if at the same time the goals end in three days, then everything is fine .. [
    3. +10
      5 June 2022 05: 52
      managed nurse with homing.

      Funny! NURS (unguided missile) with homing fool
      1. -4
        5 June 2022 06: 04
        You laugh. But that’s what it’s called: a guidance system for nurs or for unguided airborne ammunition
        1. +6
          5 June 2022 06: 26
          Quote: Tlauicol
          Take a laugh

          Already laughed! Moreover, in aviation they are secretly trying to use the term "NAR" (Unguided Aircraft Missiles)
          1. 0
            5 June 2022 06: 37
            They try. This is not a rule, and not a dogma. And these devices with guidance are used by both the fleet and landmen. Therefore Nurs
            1. +2
              5 June 2022 07: 24
              Quote: Tlauicol
              Therefore Nurs

              And yet, NAR ... By the way, this was preceded by the abbreviation NARS! But not NURS!
        2. +1
          5 June 2022 06: 27
          But that's what it's called: guidance system for nurs or for uncontrollable air ammunition

          Guidance system (i.e. control) of unmanaged ...
          I agree. It's not funny. This is a diagnosis.
        3. +1
          5 June 2022 07: 34
          However, you must agree that aviation NURs are a flying city that has specific tasks for working on areas. For example, targets hidden in a forest area are much more effective to hit with NURs, because homing is either impossible or difficult.
          1. +2
            5 June 2022 07: 54
            I agree. NARs have a niche. But corr bomb in the woods is better
      2. 0
        5 June 2022 12: 00
        IKspert)) however ...
      3. -2
        6 June 2022 13: 32
        Quote: Nafanya from the couch
        managed nurse with homing.

        Funny! NURS (unguided missile) with homing fool


        You can laugh, but the Americans have NUR / NAR Hydra - 70mm.
        Not so long ago, they equipped it with a WGU-59/B targeting unit.
        Thanks only to brains, the combat range of NUR / NAR was increased by 30%.
        The signal from four optical receivers of laser radiation on the leading edges of the tail is transmitted via LEDs to the missile seeker. Target illumination is carried out by standard laser rangefinders-target designators of the carrier aircraft or gunners from the ground.
    4. +8
      5 June 2022 06: 20
      Quote: Tlauicol
      a dozen countries have a bunch of options for controlled homing nurses.

      And now let's read it more slowly ... controlled (!) Unguided Rockets (NURS) with homing (!) ... "poor, poor" Russian language ... poor spelling! Moreover, NURSs are now "trying" to use in MLRS, and in aviation - NARs (Unguided Aircraft Missiles)!
      1. +1
        5 June 2022 06: 33
        Quote: Nikolaevich I
        Quote: Tlauicol
        a dozen countries have a bunch of options for controlled homing nurses.

        And now let's read it more slowly ... controlled (!) Unguided Rockets (NURS) with homing (!) ... "poor, poor" Russian language ... poor spelling! Moreover, NURSs are now "trying" to use in MLRS, and in aviation - NARs (Unguided Aircraft Missiles)!

        Thank you!
        "Slower" is spelled "with a cast"
        1. +3
          5 June 2022 06: 45
          Quote: Tlauicol
          "Slower" is spelled "with a cast"

          And thank you for the correction! I'm not Copenhagen! Now I will know that C LITNO! Or else you’ll write something else when you were awakened at 4 in the morning, and went to bed at one in the morning!
          1. 0
            5 June 2022 06: 57
            "From litno" is from you!
            In general, I didn’t start a conversation about the Russian language, but about the need to be armed with high-precision guided nurses
            1. +1
              5 June 2022 07: 28
              Quote: Tlauicol
              "From litno" is from you!

              I guessed...
    5. +7
      5 June 2022 06: 22
      Quote: Tlauicol
      Adversaries of a dozen countries have a bunch of options for controlled homing nurses. They are already shooting down drones. And we have Katyushas of the 30s and square-nested sowing from the air

      For your satanic words, you should be punished with 10 visits to Patriot Park with penance in the main temple of the RF Armed Forces, with kneeling and repulsing 1000 prostrations.
      1. -3
        5 June 2022 06: 30
        Quote: Vladimir Michailovich
        Quote: Tlauicol
        Adversaries of a dozen countries have a bunch of options for controlled homing nurses. They are already shooting down drones. And we have Katyushas of the 30s and square-nested sowing from the air

        For your satanic words, you should be punished with 10 visits to Patriot Park with penance in the main temple of the RF Armed Forces, with kneeling and repulsing 1000 prostrations.

        And what, the war is going on in Patriot Park?
        1. +3
          5 June 2022 14: 55
          Quote: Tlauicol
          And what, the war is going on in Patriot Park?

          By and large, Patriot Park was built at the expense of the future the war NWO.
      2. +6
        5 June 2022 07: 21
        And so that at the same time the newly created church choir of engineering troops sang
    6. +5
      5 June 2022 06: 40
      Oh, and you are much more stupid to write. Well, to whom that is given from mother nature. Sorry for the statement.
    7. +2
      5 June 2022 07: 39
      Quote: Tlauicol
      controlled nurses with homing

      NURS, in principle, cannot be controlled; this follows from the abbreviation itself. And on the basis of NURS, yes, we also have a little.
    8. The comment was deleted.
    9. +1
      5 June 2022 11: 12
      have a bunch of options for managed nurses

      I'm wildly sorry, but NURS is
      - ground guided missiles
      - unguided missile
      - unguided missile
      In our case, NAR.
      But if NAR makes you manageable, then it sounds stupid
      Guided unguided aircraft missile
      Guided unguided rocket
      belay
      some kind of oxymoron
  3. -1
    5 June 2022 05: 15
    Go on. But the logic is lame..
  4. +6
    5 June 2022 05: 33
    Thus, thanks to the work of our defense industry, combat aviation has a wide range of unguided missile weapons with different capabilities and different potentials.

    And exactly ours, and not the Soviet one?
  5. +12
    5 June 2022 06: 17
    I would suggest the author not to stop and write an article on the advisability of using the BMP-1, for example.
    1. +1
      8 June 2022 10: 55
      No matter how funny it is, the author already has it:
      https://topwar.ru/196912-otechestvennye-bmp-v-specialnoj-operacii-staraja-tehnika-i-novye-reshenija.html
  6. +9
    5 June 2022 06: 50
    Launches are carried out in pairs and in series, from level flight and from pitch-up.

    You don’t even need a sight ... on whom God will send ...
    And at the beginning of the Great Patriotic War, Rechkalov launched the RS-82 from his Chaika from a dive ... 80 years have passed.

    From the cabling ... into the white light like a pretty penny ...
    1. +1
      5 June 2022 07: 38
      in Afghanistan, our helicopter pilots launched the S-24 in a volley from a cabriolet over the squares, this made it possible not to enter the * spirit * air defense zone, since by accelerating the * turntable * on a dive and launching at an angle of 45 degrees, it increased the launch range, I clarify, something they didn’t scoff - the helicopter accelerated at the peak and made * a hill * and launched 4 S-24s at the top, there was enough warhead power to hit targets, accuracy and accuracy, too
  7. +11
    5 June 2022 07: 09
    Ryabov is apparently not aware that the use of NURS is generally ineffective in modern warfare, and the large losses of attack aircraft in the presence of MANPADS and air defense systems and their low efficiency back in the 90s led many to think about the need for UAVs. And if our military leadership was engaged in business and not in parades and window dressing, then we would have hundreds of strike UAVs, and there would be no losses of attack aircraft pilots. UAVs with KAB and ATGMs are much more effective and, most importantly, cheaper to use than attack aircraft, whose time has long passed.
    A hundred shock UAVs, constantly hanging in the air, together with hundreds of loitering ammunition, would make almost impossible any movement in the tactical depth of the enemy’s defense, including the supply of ammunition and reserves, with minimal civilian casualties and destruction.
    1. -9
      5 June 2022 11: 59
      Oh, and witnesses of the UAV sect reached out
    2. -1
      5 June 2022 15: 03
      Quote: ramzay21
      A hundred shock UAVs, constantly hanging in the air, along with hundreds of loitering ammunition

      ... would effectively gobble up the budget of the Moscow Region. We would repeat the US experience in Afghanistan, when it turned out that even the budget of the US Department of Defense cannot pull off an operation in which the cost of the target and the ammunition spent on its destruction differ by one or two orders of magnitude (not in favor of the ammunition).
      In a large-scale operation, reconnaissance UAVs included in reconnaissance and strike complexes of different levels will be more effective, where their task will be reconnaissance, fire adjustment and control of target destruction, and cannon and rocket artillery, as well as OTR, will deal with the defeat.
      1. +2
        5 June 2022 20: 37
        Quote: Alexey RA
        when it turned out that even the budget of the US Department of Defense cannot pull off an operation in which the cost of the target and the ammunition spent on its destruction differ by one or two orders of magnitude (not in favor of the ammunition).

        The US Department of Defense had no problems with the budget. There are questions exclusively to the State Department. If the country does not need victory, then no military budget will help - on the contrary, even the Pentagon will show all the theft, madness and bungling that is characteristic of any state structure.
      2. +1
        5 June 2022 22: 23
        effectively gobbled up the budget of the Ministry of Defense. We would repeat the US experience in Afghanistan, when it turned out that even the budget of the US Department of Defense cannot pull off an operation in which the cost of the target and the ammunition spent on its destruction differ by one or two orders of magnitude (not in favor of the ammunition).

        Do you think that a Su-25 with two jet engines needs less fuel than a UAV with a 120 hp engine? Or is the Su-25 cheaper than a UAV? Or are maintenance and spare parts for the Su-25 more expensive than for UAVs? Or that KAB 25 costs more than S-13? Maybe the training of an UAV operator who risks nothing is more expensive than the training of a Su-25 pilot, of which we have already lost a lot?
        In a large-scale operation, reconnaissance UAVs included in reconnaissance and strike complexes of different levels will be more effective, where their task will be reconnaissance, fire adjustment and control of target destruction, and cannon and rocket artillery, as well as OTR, will deal with the defeat.

        You described the concept of using UAVs, modern for the 90s. It is outdated, but relevant for areas in which there is artillery, within its range and in the presence of rapid interaction between UAV operators and artillery, and provided that the target is not moving. And what about those units that do not currently have artillery. Well, I spotted a reconnaissance UAV target, so what? How will you destroy them?
        A modern strike UAV operates autonomously, it does not need artillery, the operator detects the target and immediately strikes, even on a stationary target, even on a moving one, he does not need to waste time on coordination and waiting. It can operate at a depth of more than 100 km, where no artillery will finish off and can quickly reinforce our units, in which there are no tanks and artillery. This is the modern replacement for attack aircraft and front-line bombers, only cheaper, safer and more accurate.
        1. +2
          6 June 2022 12: 02
          Quote: ramzay21
          Do you think that a Su-25 with two jet engines needs less fuel than a UAV with a 120 hp engine?

          А UAV with 120 hp engine and the Su-25 carry a comparable mass of combat load for a comparable range? Otherwise, according to the same logic, all truckers need to be transferred to "gazelles".
          Quote: ramzay21
          And what about those units that do not currently have artillery. Well, I spotted a reconnaissance UAV target, so what? How will you destroy them?

          What it means no artillery? We do not have a conflict of low intensity, in which an equivalent division can be spread in small groups across the expanses of the republic. We have a full-fledged military operation against a technically comparable enemy, in which complete battalion and regimental tactical groups operate. Where did the BTG fall in love with its own and attached self-propelled guns, MLRS and mortars?
          And most importantly - if she did this (and fell in love with communication with supporting artillery along the way), then she also fell in love with the communication and control necessary for working with UAVs.
          Quote: ramzay21
          A modern strike UAV operates autonomously, it does not need artillery, the operator detects the target and immediately strikes, even on a stationary target, even on a moving one, he does not need to waste time on coordination and waiting.

          In theory - when we have 100% control of the battlefield and an excess outfit of forces. Then yes - anarchy can be allowed when UAV operators independently hunt for targets.
          But in practice, the UAV operator must work strictly at the request of the Control Center, which "holds" the picture of the battlefield, processes the requests of ground units, conducts the final confirmation of "friend or foe" (including on the basis of data on the current situation of units from reconnaissance UAVs) and issues targeting operators. Otherwise, we will suffer with only friendly fire - after all, both sides of the operation have visually similar equipment from the Soviet heritage. And the stripes of quick identification can be faked.
          Quote: ramzay21
          It can operate at a depth of more than 100 km, where no artillery will finish off and can quickly reinforce our units, which do not have tanks and artillery.

          In the wars of the third world. In a modern war, an UAV with a radius of more than 100 km and any serious payload will be a noticeable target for air defense, and one should not forget about electronic warfare. Our opponents are still not zusuls, but a country that has not completely fallen in love with the Soviet legacy, and even receives help from behind the hillock.
          1. 0
            6 June 2022 19: 26
            A UAV with a 120 hp engine. and the Su-25 carry a comparable mass of combat load for a comparable range?

            Let's count.
            Su-25 with a normal combat load of 1400 kg has a range of 500 km near the ground and at an altitude of 650 km while it needs 3 kilograms of fuel.
            The Inohodets UAV has a combat load of 200 kg, with which it can fly for 12 hours at a speed of 120 km per hour, that is, it has a flight range of 1440 km, while their combat radius is the same about 300 km. Full refueling with gasoline he has 300 kg.
            It turns out that having refueled 3 thousand kilograms of fuel, the Su-25 carries 1400 kg of ammunition and the Inohodets UAV carries 2000 kg of ammunition, while the UAV can perform air duty for 12 hours and 10 UAVs can control a much larger area than one Su-25.
            What do you mean no artillery?

            The total length of the LBS is more than 1000 km, and do you think that there is artillery along the entire length?
            In theory - when we have 100% control of the battlefield and an excess outfit of forces. Then yes - anarchy can be allowed when UAV operators independently hunt for targets.

            Operators are allocated a patrol area where they destroy targets. And for operations near the LBS, there are tactical signs on the roof of equipment that are dangerous to fake for unencircled enemy troops, you can get hit by your own artillery and UAVs.
            In a modern war, an UAV with a radius of more than 100 km and any serious payload will be a noticeable target for air defense, and one should not forget about electronic warfare.

            To cover the entire LBS with air defense and electronic warfare means is simply not enough air defense systems, neither in our country, nor even in the Armed Forces of Ukraine. And for MANPADS, the flight altitude of the UAV is not available. Therefore, the use of strike UAVs is more effective than the use of the Su-25.
            In addition, in an air defense-saturated zone, the combined use of a cheaper version of a strike UAV (without expensive equipment) and a Su-34 or Su-30 with anti-radar missiles can be an excellent way to detect and destroy enemy air defenses.
      3. 0
        13 June 2022 13: 36
        You don't have to cosplay the USA. The Israelis and Turks took a more realistic approach.
    3. 0
      5 June 2022 18: 02
      I fully support you regarding the UAV
  8. +2
    5 June 2022 07: 16
    The S-13 family of missiles has, though experimental, the S-13L missile with a semi-active laser seeker, created "by analogy" with the S-25L! According to reports at the end of 2019, a high-precision 122-mm Monolith rocket is being developed and ready for state tests ... (an unguided version is not excluded ...)! Unfortunately, for some reason, "Monolith" has not been mentioned lately! PS С-13kor "Threat" I deliberately do not mention ...
  9. +2
    5 June 2022 07: 51
    Quote: Tlauicol
    Adversaries of a dozen countries have a bunch of options for controlled homing nurses.

    NURS is a non-guided missile. Therefore, there are no controlled NURSs.
  10. -8
    5 June 2022 07: 52
    Thus, thanks to the work of our defense industry, combat aviation has a wide range of unguided missile weapons with different capabilities and different potentials.


    So don’t worry, Ukronazis will have enough missiles and ammunition for you, otherwise everyone yapped that Russia was running out of missiles.
  11. +15
    5 June 2022 08: 17
    One title is worth something - "flexible tool"
    please find at least one article here on the resource where will the special operation talk about the need or effectiveness of the use of unguided missiles? That's right, you won't find the point. Because it was clear to anyone that it was necessary to use guided weapons.
    And the way aviation is used now is a shame and a disgrace.
    There are no strikes even on the near rear, not to mention the distant one, which could impede the movement of troops. The rarest videos of the use of guided missiles.
    And this video from the Ministry of Defense is impossible to watch without the deepest despondency from the very presentation of the material.
  12. +11
    5 June 2022 08: 26
    I know now the slippers will fly, but I won’t like this video, in essence it’s not combat work, but fierce hack work, though this allows you to survive and earn money.
    1. +6
      5 June 2022 09: 16
      True, this allows you to survive and earn

      During the Second World War, they knew how to count money and paid attack pilots according to the results,
      proven by the photofixation system. I would like to say, sit already at the airfields, there is zero sense from such "tactics", only a waste of missiles, fuel and resources. Unfortunately, we don't have air superiority. The supply of the Armed Forces of Ukraine in the Donbass does not stop, it is simply impossible to drive them away from Donetsk with shelling and force them to stop shelling the city. Our aviation did not cope with the counter-battery fight and the blocking of supply routes. Planes and helicopters worth a billion rubles each turned out to be no more effective than planes of the Second World War.
      1. -10
        5 June 2022 12: 01
        Well, yes, everything is gone, the plaster is being removed, the client is leaving. And how are the troops there without you then? Oh Yolki and the General Staff ?? Such a specialist is lying idle on the couch
        1. +4
          5 June 2022 13: 12
          Well, yes, everything is gone, the plaster is being removed, the client is leaving. And how are the troops there without you then? Oh Yolki and the General Staff ?? Such a specialist is lying idle on the couch


          Got up off the couch? Who are you in life to point? What is the number of the VUS and where did you serve?

          Some strange comments you have. Consequences of covid? Or drunk alcohol in the service?
  13. +5
    5 June 2022 08: 48
    Abroad, there are developments to equip the NAR GOS. For example, the cost of the American upgraded rocket "Hydra" APKWS II is about a third of the cost of "Hellfire". It is made on the basis of NAR caliber of the order of 70 mm (type "Hydra")
    https://military.wikireading.ru/56140?
    We also did this.
    https://www.aex.ru/docs/3/2019/12/22/2994/?
    But for the S-13 Tulumbas, such an upgrade was not made.
  14. 0
    5 June 2022 08: 56
    Rutskoi told on TV. Flying low, the Su-25 had to make two approaches to the target, did not have time to detect and hit the target from one approach. He asked the block with NARs to turn 180 degrees. After detecting the target and passing over it, it hit the target from a roll-up, firing backwards. I tried it in battle, it turned out to hit the target effectively.
    1. +4
      5 June 2022 09: 42
      It was a long time ago when the effectiveness of MANPADS, etc. was significantly lower.
      1. -3
        5 June 2022 12: 02
        In Afghan Tanya, the stinger was the same as, now practically, nothing new has been radically invented and is not being used
        1. +1
          5 June 2022 12: 21
          Now a completely different "stinger"
          Stinger RMP Block I
          In Afghanistan there was a basic
          It's like Igla-1
        2. -1
          6 June 2022 18: 36
          you are wrong. GOS now the stinger has two band infrared and ultraviolet.
    2. 0
      6 June 2022 13: 24
      He asked the block with NARs to turn 180 degrees.

      belay
  15. +4
    5 June 2022 08: 56
    Quote: serg.shishkov2015
    in Afghanistan, our helicopter pilots launched the S-24 in a volley from a cabriolet over the squares, this made it possible not to enter the * spirit * air defense zone, since by accelerating the * turntable * on a dive and launching at an angle of 45 degrees, it increased the launch range, I clarify, something they didn’t scoff - the helicopter accelerated at the peak and made * a hill * and launched 4 S-24s at the top, there was enough warhead power to hit targets, accuracy and accuracy, too

    Not from a good life. What is more efficient, more accurate, cheaper and more reliable to use the Grad MLRS installation or the Su-25 attack aircraft to cover areas?
  16. +5
    5 June 2022 09: 11
    In Iraq, the Americans came to the conclusion that it is easier and cheaper to launch a Hellfire (accuracy and range) than a whole Hydra-70 unit based on the enemy’s position.
    C-13 is an anachronism that should be buried long ago.
  17. +8
    5 June 2022 09: 40
    Launching NUR from a distance of 3-5 km is like sparrows from a cannon.
    It seems that the effectiveness is much lower than the risks of losing pilots.
  18. +8
    5 June 2022 10: 28
    The use of nurses from a roll-up, as it is now, is a sinecure designed to cover up the problem of the impossibility of the normal use of aviation due to the total saturation of the enemy with MANPADS.
  19. +9
    5 June 2022 11: 13
    Another enchanting, pseudo-patriotic board of IKspert.))
    the experience of the Syrian and Ukrainian operations show that the Su-25SM3 with unguided S-13s is a very effective strike system

    Effective, on barmaley without air defense, but this is how it looks from the trenches in Ukraine!
    The “Syrian adventure” didn’t help at all, that is, it didn’t help at all to “test new high-tech types of weapons”, because there is essentially no difference between using them against Igiloid partisans and targets at the training ground - both of them cannot use this interfere. That is, the Su-34 with its “latest sighting and navigation system”, which, to put it simply, calculates the fall trajectory of a cheap unguided bomb and, accordingly, gives the right drop point to get to about where you need it, without all these bourgeois frills with guided munitions, in exactly the same way he throws these "cast iron" both at range targets and at the Basmachi - the Basmachi cannot physically reach him from their MANPADS.

    But when the same Su-34 flies to bomb the Ukrainians, who have full-fledged air defense ... The Armed Forces of Ukraine work on it from a full-fledged air defense system, which has a completely different reach in height and range, and that's it. After several attempts to indulge in such “high technologies”, the Su-34s began to rapidly run out, and our aviation switched to the use of tactical “high-precision weapons”. Su-25 attack aircraft and helicopters, in order not to enter the zone of operation of the MANPADS of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, practiced volleys of unguided missiles at the enemy from a distance, from a pitch-up, and left. The surrounding yards around the same 29th checkpoint suffered thoroughly from this, and the enemy ... well, a parry, probably, if he noticed at all against the background of our artillery.

    Such is the hi-tech. The newest Ka-52s are hammering powerful fortifications from a distance with a small-caliber analogue of the Grad MLRS. Very expensive, but completely useless circus.

    When a pair of Ka-52s or Mi-28s tried to work accurately, at least with some benefit, and desperate flyers risked going straight to the target and aiming, it was obvious that they were just a pair ordered for surrender from the palaces of Putin, Medvedev and seasonal change of Moscow tiles. And the cars came under fire from the Ukrainian MANPADS. Often - were shot down. To stand above the target in a circle, say, a figure eight, and work continuously on the target so that the enemy’s MANPADS calculations cannot raise their heads is a completely different matter. Especially if on approach and departure MANPADS are pressed to the ground by our artillery. That's how you can fight. This is how they are trying to fight now, realizing that a couple of helicopters arriving without coordination with the ground forces will not solve the matter. But those who died in February, March and April cannot be returned.

    Sooooo I want all the IR experts to go and see ...
    1. +5
      5 June 2022 12: 03
      Sooooo I want all the IR experts to go and see ...

      It's not a chance, it's so convenient to get sick from the couch.))
    2. 0
      7 June 2022 18: 32
      what kind of nonsense are you printing a link to yksperd in quotation marks, you can
  20. 0
    5 June 2022 11: 30
    Are we swimming against the current? Described in the article: the launch of NUR from a manned attack aircraft (1980s) against loitering ammunition launched (and controlled) by an infantryman, for the same tasks - hitting single targets. Loitering ammunition, at the same time, is more expensive than one NURS. That's all it came together! We will not consider it differently, taking into account the risk to the life of the pilot, the cost of the take-off aircraft, the availability of infrastructure for it and the price of "extra" issued NURSs, coupled with the destruction of what was not planned to be destroyed, but "it just so happened ..." .

    I don’t consider the option of shooting with NURSs at squares at an enemy who is walking carelessly and without shelters. Another TVD. In the mountains of Afghanistan, probably, NURSs could be extremely effective.
    1. 0
      7 June 2022 18: 34
      Nurses in aviation are no longer there are bunks. and what is nur? unguided guided missile?
  21. +3
    5 June 2022 11: 49
    If the rocket is unguided, then it can be effectively used only from a dive of 18 ... 20 degrees. In all other cases, she simply shoots back.
  22. +3
    5 June 2022 12: 09
    I got lost in the article.
    Delov something for 2 paragraphs, and here the whole book
    1. +6
      5 June 2022 13: 33
      I got lost in the article.
      Delov something for 2 paragraphs, and here the whole book

      This is how the justification for the worthlessness of modern manned aircraft against modern air defense systems looks like.
      1. +2
        5 June 2022 14: 16
        Do you think the author "justifies"?
        Purely my deer opinion - he just does not understand what he is writing about
        One of the main tools for hitting ground targets is precisely the NAR, which combines low cost, simplicity and high combat qualities.
  23. +3
    5 June 2022 18: 11
    The launch of NAs from a fighter-bomber in the 21st century is, of course, a complete "masterpiece". Taking into account the launch range and its speed characteristics
    1. +2
      5 June 2022 19: 03
      This is suicide (unless the opponent is armed with a bow and arrow). But very romantic. Especially when filming.
  24. -1
    5 June 2022 21: 00
    And why such a dismissive attitude in bomb-rocket throwing from a nose-up? Yes, the accuracy is reduced. The same wind will blow the "pencil" off course. But after all, these missiles are not intended to hit the "tank muzzle".
  25. -2
    5 June 2022 22: 14
    Quote: Tlauicol
    Adversaries of a dozen countries have a bunch of options managed nurse with homing. They are already shooting down drones. And we have Katyushas of the 30s and square-nested sowing from the air

    What does this mean?
    1. 0
      6 June 2022 10: 38
      This probably means the conversion of NUR into precision-guided munitions - APKWS for the USA is a relatively inexpensive undertaking. We have also developed a similar system - corrected missiles S-5Kor, S-8Kor and S-13Kor, created on the basis of standard NARs of 57, 80 and 122 mm caliber. But developing and implementing it on a full scale are two different things.
  26. 0
    6 June 2022 12: 38
    Could you already offer a corr option ..... Is the S-13 a Grad rocket?
  27. -1
    6 June 2022 18: 04
    Little has changed since World War II. There, the same NURs were installed on the IL-2 RSs and now we use them on the SU-25, MIG-29 and helicopters. But with a range of 3-4 km, the pilots who launch them, with modern air defense systems, are more likely not to return from the mission. The effectiveness of these missiles is very low due to their low areal accuracy. This weapon is outdated and needs at least modernization, if nothing new has been invented so far. First of all, increase their range to at least 15-20 km and make them manageable. Now even air bombs with the help of simple devices can fly 100 km and be controlled.
    1. 0
      7 June 2022 20: 21
      Then why all these Su-25s, MiG-29s ... It was necessary to produce the Il-2. Although there is a gasoline engine ... Competences have been lost.
      1. 0
        28 July 2022 04: 28
        IL-2 would be an excellent UAV. Joke
  28. 0
    6 June 2022 23: 38
    NAR are used to destroy area targets, which for one reason or another cannot be hit at the required time by cannon artillery or MLRS. It makes no sense to use something like Hellfire or Attack to hit area targets, even the aiming point is unknown.
  29. 0
    7 June 2022 18: 27
    c-5 seems to be just a story
  30. -1
    17 August 2022 08: 47
    View from the cockpit: on the left of the counter, the GPS device is clearly civilian. And how will we fly in a war with the US and NATO? By compass?