MANPADS Starstreak in Ukraine. Low efficiency and reasons for failures

89
MANPADS Starstreak in Ukraine. Low efficiency and reasons for failures
Portable air defense system Starstreak. Photo by the US Department of Defense


Over the past year, foreign states have massively transferred to Ukraine man-portable anti-aircraft missile systems of various types. In particular, the UK has shipped a large number of its Starstreak products in their original portable version and self-propelled chassis. High hopes were placed on such complexes, and it was expected that they would be able to cope with the threat posed by the Russian aviation. However, it is now becoming clear that the British MANPADS did not live up to expectations and showed extremely low efficiency.



Hundreds of products


In early March 2022, it became known that the British military department plans to transfer to the Kyiv regime a certain number of MANPADS from the presence of its units. A few days later, the leadership of the ministry confirmed this information. At the end of the month, they announced the completion of the preparation of the first Ukrainian calculations and the imminent dispatch of the complexes. The volume of deliveries was not specified.

Already in early April, Ukrainian propaganda and the foreign press friendly to it announced the start of the use of Starstrikes. Moreover, it has been claimed that such MANPADS are already shooting down Russian planes and helicopters. Photographs and video recordings of poor quality were cited as evidence of this, which did not allow unequivocally determining all the circumstances.


Installation on three missiles. Photo by the British Ministry of Defense

It should be noted that at that time, the Kyiv regime was supplied with a variety of MANPADS from different countries, but it was British products that constantly appeared in propaganda and were presented as “miraculousweapons". The reasons for this soon became known. According to unconfirmed reports, Ukrainian formations and propagandists were instructed to record all the successes of air defense only on Starstreak MANPADS from friendly Britain. In fact, the Ukrainian side paid for the supplies with advertising.

Soon, already in mid-April, the British leadership decided to transfer Stormer HVM self-propelled anti-aircraft systems armed with Starstreak missiles to Ukraine. Deliveries began a few weeks later and did not differ in large volumes or high rates. So, in mid-July, it was reported about the transfer of only six combat vehicles and several hundred missiles for them.

In recent months, Ukrainian sources have repeatedly demonstrated the combat operation of the Starstreak and Stormet HVM complexes. There were also reports of downed air targets. However, as before, convincing evidence of such successes is not given. In addition, now the advertising of the British "Starstreaks" is given much less attention. Propaganda switched to other foreign samples, already delivered or only promised so far.

Lack of success


The exact volumes of deliveries of British anti-aircraft systems in portable and self-propelled versions are still unknown. Apparently, from a few hundred to several thousand Starstreak missiles were sent to Ukraine, as well as a small number of compatible combat vehicles on the Stormer chassis. The British "Starstreak" has become one of the most massive foreign MANPADS at the disposal of the Kyiv regime.


Starstreak rocket. Three combat elements in the head part are clearly visible. Photo Missilery.info

It is known that Ukrainian formations are actively using their MANPADS in all sectors of the front to combat Russian front-line and army aviation. From the available data, it follows that during the entire period of our Special Operation, the enemy used several thousand missiles of portable systems. At the same time, the “successes” of such air defense cannot be called even modest. In fact, they are absent.

Accurate data on the work of Ukrainian air defense of all types and on the losses of our aircraft are not yet available. Foreign services of "intelligence by open sources" estimate the losses of Russian aviation at 130-150 units. The destruction of a similar number of UAVs is also mentioned. At the same time, it must be remembered that such "scouts" are prone to biased assessments or even outright falsifications. They overestimate Russian losses, attribute destroyed enemy equipment to them, and so on.

However, even overestimated estimates of losses show the extremely low effectiveness of Ukrainian air defense and its weapons. Thus, in recent months, Ukrainian formations have used thousands of Soviet and NATO-style MANPADS, as well as hundreds of "large" SAM missiles. At the same time, only dozens of aircraft and helicopters were hit, and not every hit had fatal consequences.


Thus, only a few percent of launches end up hitting an air target. These are extremely low figures, indicating poor air defense organization and low calculation skills. In addition, all this indicates the low quality and effectiveness of the weapons used - incl. British Starstreak MANPADS.

original principles


In terms of goals and objectives, the Starstreak product developed by Thales is a typical modern MANPADS. This is a compact (length 1,4 m) light (14 kg) anti-aircraft system designed to protect ground forces from various means of air attack within a radius of 7 km. The portable complex missile can also be used on the Stormer HVM self-propelled air defense system, which has some advantages.

"Starstreak" differs from other modern MANPADS in the original design of the rocket and in an unusual way of guidance. The developer claims that due to this, the probability of hitting an air target increases, and the damage dealt also increases. However, the rocket becomes much more complicated and more expensive than similar products of the traditional look.

MANPADS Starstreak includes a fire control device. It is equipped with optical means for observing and searching for a target, and also has a laser rangefinder-target designator. With the help of the latter, the complex determines the range to the target and highlights it when firing. The Stormer self-propelled air defense system receives a full-fledged optoelectronic station with higher performance and the same functions.

[Center]
Rocket launch. Photo by the Ministry of Defense of Ukraine

The Starstreak rocket consists of several main parts. The largest is the booster stage with a solid propellant engine. Three combat elements are fixed on it, which are dropped after acceleration to a speed of about 4 M. The combat element is a non-motorized projectile in a carbide case 396 mm long, 22 mm in diameter, weighing approx. 900 g. It has a semi-active laser homing head and rudders for maneuvering. The target is hit due to the speed and strength of the hull, as well as with the help of a warhead weighing 450 g.

Starstreak has a specific algorithm of work. The operator must visually detect the target and accompany it, highlighting the laser. At the same time, a rocket is launched. The ammunition accelerates to a predetermined speed and drops the submunitions. Then three projectiles fly to the target due to the received energy and are directed to the reflected laser radiation.

Causes of failure


At the development stage, it was assumed that the operator would be able to track the target and provide reliable guidance even when the enemy used interference. Due to the three combat elements, it was planned to increase the probability of hitting the target, and their strong hull and warhead should have given sufficient damage.

However, the unusual guidance method has serious drawbacks. So, the effectiveness of the use of "Starstreak" directly depends on the ability of the operator to see the target and observe it until the moment of defeat. Even a momentary loss of contact with the target can lead to a miss. This means that launch success depends on the position of the operator, the target's trajectory, weather conditions and other factors. At the same time, such problems are typical for both portable and self-propelled air defense systems with standardized ammunition.


A number of Stormers still remain in service. Photo Telegram / Bmpd

As the experience of recent months shows, the original and technically interesting method of guidance has not justified itself in practice. In a real conflict involving a technically advanced enemy, the Starstreak MANPADS and its self-propelled version showed extremely low efficiency. The number of successful launches is actually at the level of statistical error, which is several times lower than the promises from advertising.

Current problems


British deliveries of Starstreak MANPADS look favorably against the background of other foreign military-technical assistance. Unlike other states, Great Britain provided Ukraine with a large number of quite modern products with high design characteristics. Other states, promising help, often got rid of unnecessary and obsolete products.

However, it is now clear that the real performance and capabilities of modern British MANPADS are far from tabular. The extremely low efficiency of the Starstreak is due to a number of factors, and one of the main reasons for the failures was precisely the unusual way of control and guidance. As practice has shown, the need for manual control by the operator eliminates all technical advantages. And as a result, the mass supply of modern MANPADS turned out to be useless.
89 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +10
    16 January 2023 05: 47
    MANPADS are certainly a powerful thing, but here's an example:

    https://ok.ru/video/4294453037696

    Try to aim and accompany the target with laser illumination. A hundred times hehe. According to UAVs in the Kyrgyz Republic that do not maneuver and fly during daylight hours, and the use of such MANPADS will be effective. Calmly got up, took aim, launch and escort. When everything whistles around, explodes, or it will just sit in your brain that you can be at the front sight of a sniper. To stand calmly and accompany the target with a laser pointer, you need to have steel ...
    1. -2
      16 January 2023 14: 59
      Low-flying helicopters and planes, try to escort and constantly highlight? Unreal!
      Even at the first mention of this MANPADS, they raised this topic!
      To date, everything has been confirmed in practice!
      Not all modern weapons are good on the battlefield!
      We also received our lessons in the practical use of weapons in Syria and Ukraine!
      1. +1
        17 January 2023 18: 53
        the effectiveness of the use of "Starstreak" directly depends on the ability of the operator to see the target and observe it until the moment of defeat

        So they are not even homing?!
        And how many pumps were there! "There is no reception against scrap, and even from triple scrap ..."
        Hmm ... Perhaps their "Dreadnought" was the pinnacle of their design military genius. Their subsequent accomplishments aroused a grin from competitors. And so it is still.
  2. +13
    16 January 2023 05: 48
    If the effectiveness of strikers and other MANPADS is so low, then why is our aviation on the front line only occasionally visible?
    1. 0
      16 January 2023 05: 56
      Quote from: User_neydobniu
      If the effectiveness of strikers and other MANPADS is so low, then why is our aviation on the front line only occasionally visible?

      Are you writing from this line? Even if you do not believe the reports of the Ministry of Defense, but look through the channels of military correspondents, then our aviation is working intensively precisely on the LBS.
      And according to Strastrik, it was already clear that he was somehow effective against low-speed targets, moreover, when he himself was in an open field, because even a bush is capable of disrupting target tracking with a laser.
      1. +12
        16 January 2023 06: 02
        Even if you do not believe the reports of the Ministry of Defense, but look through the channels of military correspondents, then our aviation is working intensively precisely on the LBS.

        So intense that instead of destroying fortified areas from the air, they are stormed head-on by ground units ....
        1. -7
          16 January 2023 06: 39
          Quote from: User_neydobniu
          So intense that instead of destroying fortified areas from the air, they are stormed head-on by ground units ....

          The fact that SD in settlements are with civilians, do you care? It is clear that...
          1. +12
            16 January 2023 08: 04
            The fact that SD in settlements are with civilians, do you care? It is clear that...

            Well, you don’t mind that in the Russian Federation 300 thousand civilians were put under arms and sent to grind, in the assaults of the SD, instead of destroying the SD by aviation ... So why should I not be on the side of your civilians?
            1. -12
              16 January 2023 08: 10
              Quote from: User_neydobniu
              Well, you don’t mind that in the Russian Federation 300 thousand civilians were put under arms and sent to grind, in the assaults of the SD, instead of destroying the SD by aviation ... So why should I not be on the side of your civilians?

              Ege, these are cissos ears about "grinding mobilized Russians" in assaults. Where are you broadcasting from, such a compassionate? Do you know that Soledar was taken by Wagner fighters?

              Quote from: User_neydobniu
              So why should I have no side on your civilians?
              Don't care about civilians. A familiar bandera song...
              1. +10
                16 January 2023 11: 13
                That is, the jingoistic patriots who wrote here that it is necessary to erase Ukrainian cities with carpet bombing or nuclear weapons - are they Bandera?
                1. +3
                  16 January 2023 15: 44
                  That is, the jingoistic patriots who wrote here that it is necessary to erase Ukrainian cities with carpet bombing or nuclear weapons - are they Bandera?

                  You are confusing something, the patriots on this site are just the opposite, they love grinding troops, they love mobilization very much (but for some reason they themselves do not fall under it). And they are furious with all their souls when they offer to inflict any blows on xoxlams ...

                  In general, the xoxlyatsky lobby masquerading as citizens of the Russian Federation "Vladimir_2U" is a vivid example of such representatives
                  1. -4
                    16 January 2023 16: 15
                    Quote: spektr9
                    In general, the xoxlyatsky lobby masquerading as citizens of the Russian Federation "Vladimir_2U" is a vivid example of such representatives

                    Come on, noname with a Western nickname, what of these words in support of the marginal:
                    Quote: Vladimir_2U
                    Quote from: User_neydobniu
                    Well, you don’t mind that in the Russian Federation 300 thousand civilians were put under arms and sent to grind, in the assaults of the SD, instead of destroying the SD by aviation ... So why should I not be on the side of your civilians?

                    Ege, these are cissos ears about "grinding mobilized Russians" in assaults. Where are you broadcasting from, such a compassionate? Do you know that Soledar was taken by Wagner fighters?

                    Quote from: User_neydobniu
                    So why should I have no side on your civilians?
                    Don't care about civilians. A familiar bandera song...
                2. 0
                  16 January 2023 16: 13
                  Quote: Mikhail Krivopalov
                  That is, the jingoistic patriots who wrote here that it is necessary to erase Ukrainian cities with carpet bombing or nuclear weapons - are they Bandera?

                  Yes, or idiots. Two options.
                  1. 0
                    8 March 2023 19: 28
                    Ladies and gentlemen!
                    Please forget about the possibility of using nuclear weapons in Ukraine!
                    A blow can only be delivered to a "probable" enemy who crap to get close to it.
                    And the carpet bombing is carried out by dill instead of us.
                    If anyone is interested, see what my hometown of Severodonetsk looks like, or Lisichansk and Rubizhne nearby.
              2. +1
                16 January 2023 22: 24
                SD is not only in settlements. And the settlements themselves after the assaults are such that the phrase "settlement" must be written in quotation marks. If you look at the channels of military aircraft - flightbomber - it will become clear that unsuppressed air defense and the presence of a large number of MANPADS critically limits the capabilities of aviation.
                1. -1
                  17 January 2023 05: 12
                  Quote: Plover
                  SD is not only in settlements.

                  It is that in the NP, in the forest belts, ordinary oporniki.

                  Quote: Plover
                  And the settlements themselves after the assaults are such that the phrase "settlement" must be written in quotation marks.

                  However, cellars and cellars in them allow you to survive. Civilians from Soledar and other NPs were taken out during the assault and immediately after the lesson, don’t you know?

                  Quote: Plover
                  If you look at the channels of military aircraft - flightbomber - it will become clear that unsuppressed air defense and the presence of a large number of MANPADS critically limits the capabilities of aviation.


                  This is undeniable, but it is the large air defense that is critical. Yes, and the claim was to lie, or stupidity:
                  Quote from: User_neydobniu
                  If the effectiveness of strikers and other MANPADS is so low, then why is our aviation on the front line only occasionally visible?
              3. 0
                11 March 2023 22: 14
                You directly answer the man, hero, do you give a damn about my ilized peaceful? There is virtually no aviation in this conflict. Why is another question, but it doesn't work. Your words about work on LBS are generally funny to read. Aviation should bomb ktev and lions daily, dropping thousands of tons of bombs, and not just a couple of fabs a day.
            2. +1
              16 January 2023 10: 48
              The sarcasm about 300 thousand is understandable, but they are not civilians. But they are conscripts who are in the reserve.
              1. +2
                16 January 2023 21: 19
                Oh, well, then, according to this logic, there are no civilians there either. And our conscripts are closer to me than their civilians.
          2. +7
            16 January 2023 09: 44
            Quote: Vladimir_2U
            The fact that SD in settlements are with civilians, do you care?

            Well, for example, Maryinka. Russian propaganda claims that the peaceful people have not been there for a long time and this is a solid fortified area. Which of course is not true, peace is everywhere, the question is its quantity. And somehow this peacekeeper, for example, did not prevent Mariupol from being razed to the ground, incl. and aviation. And all because Mariupol was in the rear and the work of Ukrainian air defense there was limited. But, the main question is not even this, but that the losses among civilians during an infantry assault with the support of artillery are no less, but rather more than if KABs were used to open these fortified areas.
            1. -2
              16 January 2023 09: 52
              Quote: Ohsetin
              And somehow this peacekeeper, for example, did not prevent Mariupol from being razed to the ground, incl. and aviation. And all because Mariupol was in the rear and the work of Ukrainian air defense there was limited.

              As such, Mariupol was also stormed without aviation. She was attracted only by Azovstal.

              Quote: Ohsetin
              But, the main question is not even this, but that the losses among civilians during an infantry assault with the support of artillery are no less, but rather more than if KABs were used to open these fortified areas.
              It is very doubtful that a 120 mm mine or even a 152 shell will open the basement under the house, which a 250 kg bomb will undoubtedly open.
        2. +3
          16 January 2023 11: 35
          Aviation will not chase individual fighters. It does its job of destroying equipment and structures of fortified areas, as well as places of accumulation of personnel. But if the soldiers are dispersed in trenches, bushes, forest belts or sit in basements in houses, and so on, then only infantry and artillery can take it and knock it out.
          1. +1
            16 January 2023 22: 39
            Well, why not? The entire forest belt is taken out. The cellars are "filled up" with rubble. And the artillery is already finishing off the remaining pockets pointwise.
        3. +2
          16 January 2023 19: 59
          Yes, how are you going to destroy fortified areas from the air - drop unguided bombs from a height of 5 km in horizontal flight? You can’t go lower - there are MANPADS. MANPADS will be always and everywhere - this is a fact.
          1. 0
            16 January 2023 22: 37
            Without guided bombs, of course, nowhere. But, upgrade kits, it seems, have already begun to be made for ordinary ones. But without suppressed air defense, alas, nowhere
    2. AAC
      +7
      16 January 2023 07: 07
      Still remained in the ranks of the S-300. And they have proven their effectiveness.
    3. +11
      16 January 2023 08: 41
      Quote from: User_neydobniu
      then why is our aviation on the front line only occasionally visible?

      Because front-line aviation crews do not read these articles. If they were revered, they would stop launching NARs from a roll-up, but began to strike with precision. If they did this 24/7, the enemy would have fled to the border with Poland.
      But the reality is in the video, not in the article. On them, Starstreak shoots down the Mi-28 and Ka-52.

      1. +2
        16 January 2023 09: 01
        Quote from cold wind
        But the reality is in the video, not in the article. On them, Starstreak shoots down the Mi-28 and Ka-52.

        And what, both times Starstreak? Well, if the first one is still so and so (although it’s not a fact that it’s a starstrike), then the second time is definitely not, obviously a much larger caliber. Well, to identify on the second video is not only whose helicopter, but at least the type, it’s generally impossible, maybe it’s a Khokhlo-Mi-8.
        1. +3
          16 January 2023 13: 19
          On the second video, ka 52. Our best crew died there. There was even news about it on VO. And it was a S 300 rocket.
        2. 0
          16 January 2023 22: 35
          The first Starstreak is precisely because of the features of this rocket. The second is, unfortunately, our Ka-52 Beard. And they destroyed it just at the moment of leaving the MANPADS - by means of air defense.
          1. -2
            17 January 2023 05: 17
            Quote: Plover
            The first Starstreak is precisely because of the features of this rocket.

            How was it determined? Stinger and Arrow also do not give a smoky trail.

            Quote: Plover
            And they destroyed it just at the moment of leaving the MANPADS - by means of air defense.
            Care where, to a height with a loss of speed? Don't write nonsense. They caught it just outside the MANPADS coverage area, the pilots relaxed ...
      2. +4
        16 January 2023 09: 46
        If you read the article, then the second video is 100 pounds not Starstreak.
      3. -1
        16 January 2023 11: 46
        You are new to aviation. From a pitch, launching modern NURSs is almost the same effective as with line of sight. Moreover, they are used against infantry and lightly armored vehicles - vehicles, artillery mounts (where you can hit the calculation). Armored vehicles are still affected by ATGMs designed for this.
      4. +4
        16 January 2023 11: 57
        On the first one, it’s really Mi, it hit the tail boom, but on the second video it’s not clear what. There and the height, 150-200 meters, and the speed is almost zero. Mi and Ka do not go to such heights in combat zones, the terrain is flat.
      5. 0
        16 January 2023 21: 20
        Why are you - "low efficiency."
    4. -2
      16 January 2023 12: 34
      If the effectiveness of strikers and other MANPADS is so low, then why is our aviation on the front line only occasionally visible?

      Well, firstly, they write here not about "and others", but specifically about Starstreak. Secondly, the effectiveness of "and other MANPADS" is quite relative, which corresponds to the number of launches and the number of aircraft destroyed. Thirdly, our aviation (it is very doubtful that it is yours at the same time) is quite actively used over the battlefield. What is the mass of video evidence and confirmation of the fighters themselves (and they have much more faith than such talkers as you). Fourthly, enemy air defense is not limited to MANPADS, against which our aviation has developed counter tactics in Syria. Unfortunately, UkroPVO includes both medium and long-range air defense systems. What limits the use of aviation, and not excluding it completely.
      1. +3
        16 January 2023 22: 40
        It would not be desirable, but, alas, there is no data on "efficiency" or "not efficiency". And the article is about nothing. Unfortunately.
    5. -4
      16 January 2023 15: 07
      Do you have information on the combat use of aviation on the battlefield?
      From where, It is possible for us sitting on the couch to determine how aviation is often used!
      Difficulties in application, there is! There is a war! But, these difficulties are associated with a complex of air defense applications, from S300, Bukov to MANPADS (from different countries of the world).
      1. +2
        16 January 2023 22: 41
        Indirectly, you can watch on TG channels. Flightbomber - problems specific to aviation.
        1. +1
          16 January 2023 23: 30
          Flightbomber is still a guard. And indirectly, it can be judged by the fact that I live not far from the "Sushny" airfield and, compared to the summer, they have practically stopped flying. I don’t even know who shoots down 2-3 aircraft of the Armed Forces of Ukraine every day at Konashenkov :-/
    6. +1
      16 January 2023 19: 56
      The efficiency is low, but the quantity is large. Is it worth exchanging one SU-35 for 100 MANPADS, of which 1 will hit?
    7. +1
      16 January 2023 23: 33
      then why is our aviation on the front line only occasionally visible?

      Well, of course, it is always more visible from the sofa than from the trench. If aviation also flew over your sofa, the losses would be much higher.
    8. 0
      19 February 2023 12: 03
      with such a chase, you can immediately see the Cossacks
    9. 0
      19 February 2023 12: 14
      Are you not listening to the president? Russia hasn't started yet
  3. +14
    16 January 2023 07: 39
    Dear author, if you undertake to assert something, then it would not be bad to confirm this with facts and figures.
    Quote from publication:
    MANPADS Starstreak and its self-propelled version showed extremely low efficiency. The number of successful launches is actually at the level of statistical error...

    Without statistics on the number of launches and the number of targets hit, everything said in the publication is nonsense. negative
    It can be stated that this is another empty article written by the author for the sake of a fee.
    1. +9
      16 January 2023 09: 21
      Quote: Tucan
      It can be stated that this is another empty article written by the author for the sake of a fee.

      This is Kirill Ryabov, sir. And that's it... wassat
    2. +7
      16 January 2023 09: 27
      everything said in the post is nonsense.

      Does this author have other sorts of publications?
    3. -7
      16 January 2023 12: 46
      Without statistics on the number of launches and the number of targets hit, everything said in the publication is nonsense.

      sorry, but statements such as yours are baloney. What the hell "statistics" can be during the war? Firstly, who and how will collect the evidence base in the conditions of large-scale hostilities? Secondly, your "statistics" will always be under the control of military censorship or propaganda. Which unrecognizably turn over any data according to the results.
      According to the experience of past wars, some more or less sane statistics appeared years after the end of the fighting. And it wasn't easy to find her. For example, I somehow found statistics on the effectiveness of American pilots firing explosive missiles in Iraq and Yugoslavia. These data were made public only in 2008, that is, after the whole saga with Iraq.
      1. The comment was deleted.
        1. -3
          17 January 2023 05: 59
          In vain you speak in defense of the author.

          I'm not defending the author at all. I'm just pointing out the stupidity of the requirement to confirm the statistics of any information by the commentator above. The author in his definition of "low efficiency" may have many criteria of grounding. It may even include the impossibility of capturing the GOS of a high-speed low-flying target missile, when there is, in principle, no possibility to launch. Or in general even estimates of operators. This is a more free character. The words of the author can be taken into account, but you can not accept - there is no big trouble. But statistics cannot afford such freedom to operate with unverified data. Therefore, as you correctly pointed out, the ratio of the number of missile launches to the number of targets hit matters. And I do not believe in the possibility of collecting this information now. request
          Please study how the Starstreak missiles are guided.

          again you are confused. Speaking about PA LGSN, I did not write in relation to Starstreak, but answered Vladimir (Nikolaevich) to his remark regarding the author's mistake in the definitions. Classically, the GOS, which aims at the reflected laser beam, is called a semi-active head homing. Not remotely controlled, not some other.
          1. The comment was deleted.
            1. -5
              17 January 2023 10: 49
              since the author makes statements about the extremely low effectiveness of the British MANPADS.

              Are you on the principle of "I read here, but I don't read here"? )) I answered - low efficiency can be, including at the stage of launch preparation. In order not to explain a lot to me, refresh your memory of the instruction on firing from MANPADS. I'm not familiar with Starstreak, but I do remember our Arrow. I think you will agree that in the presence of low-altitude high-speed targets, here the speed of bringing the ready-to-fire complex is no less important than the ability of the GOS to keep the target in the coordinator's alignment. Accordingly, low efficiency can begin even BEFORE the launch of the ZR and it will not be determined by any of your statistics
              And here is a semi-active laser seeker, and why did you remember it

              probably because there is one on Starstreak. I read in the description:
              A distinctive feature of the rocket is the original warhead, which consists of three arrow-shaped spears and their breeding system. Each spear (spear length - 0.45m, diameter - 0.02m) has its own control and guidance loop along the laser beam,

              After turning off the main engine, three arrow-shaped spears are automatically fired at the signal of the velocity pressure sensor. Arrow-shaped spears are guided by a laser beam formed by an aiming unit using two laser diodes, one of which scans in horizontal and the other in vertical planes.

              now explain to me that this is not PA LGSN
              1. +1
                18 January 2023 06: 33
                Yes, and they also say that "women are fools." wassat
                Even I understand the difference between a semi-active head aimed at a naked laser spot and a "laser trail" used to target British air defense missiles. The only thing common between them is the use in both cases of a laser radiation source. you a few people Russian they explained in language that the arrow-shaped elements fly inside the corridor formed by laser beams.
                As for "low efficiency" - this is generally a masterpiece! It is absolutely clear that the author, having no information about the use of Starstreak, sucked it out of his finger. Your stubbornness looks very strange. Maybe it's age?
                1. -4
                  20 January 2023 06: 26
                  Yes, and they also say that "women are fools." wassat

                  in your case it is more than relevant.
                  Even I understand the difference between a semi-active head aiming at a naked laser spot and a "laser path"

                  no, you don't understand anything. There is a control principle: photodetector-coordinator-gyroscope-plane control. And the laser path is it or the laser beam reflected from the target - it does not matter. It's just that the first photodetector is located in the tail of the rocket, and the second - the head part.
                  As for "low efficiency" - this is generally a masterpiece! It is absolutely clear that the author, having no information about the use of Starstreak, sucked it out of his finger.

                  well, if you tried to move your brain matter not only for writing stupid comments, but also in principle for the process of thinking, you could understand that I did not defend the author (I repeat what Bongo wrote earlier especially for those who are hard to understand). I was responding to a comment by another who traveled like you, who demanded that the author present evidence in the form of statistics. The main leitmotif of my comment is - inability to obtain statistics during the war. And fools here like you have been crediting me with defending the author and the content of his article for several days now.
          2. +2
            17 January 2023 10: 34
            I'm just pointing out the stupidity of the requirement to confirm the statistics of any information by the commentator above. The author in his definition of "low efficiency" may have many criteria of reasoning.
            Join the criticism of the article. The author refers to the calculated number of launches and defeats, but does not give the numbers themselves, but speaks of a certain "statistical error". There is no exact number, so you can at least voice the order of numbers in order to understand the scale of application.
            1. The comment was deleted.
      2. +1
        16 January 2023 16: 05
        Quote: Ka-52
        sorry, but statements such as yours are baloney

        I'm not sorry..
        balabol one who is not able to answer for his words or written. am
        And if you don’t have information, why open your mouth at all and pass off your Wishlist as the truth? This has the most negative impact not only on the credibility of a particular author, but also on the attitude towards the resource as a whole.
        1. -4
          17 January 2023 06: 10
          I answered Bongo above, I think it makes no sense to write twice
      3. +3
        16 January 2023 22: 47
        Sorry, but then why is this article needed? It is better to overdo it and consider the danger increased than to get burned.
    4. -6
      17 January 2023 08: 43
      Can you write something yourself or just bawl in the comments much?
  4. +5
    16 January 2023 08: 27
    It has a semi-active laser homing head... Then three projectiles, due to the received energy, fly to the target and aim at reflected laser radiation.
    What here, heel, homing! ? When "laser-beam" guidance ("telecontrol") is used! "Talked", the author!
    1. -7
      16 January 2023 12: 56
      It has a semi-active laser homing head ... Next, three projectiles fly to the target due to the received energy and are guided by the reflected laser radiation.
      What here, heel, homing!

      it’s called that - it’s a semi-active homing head (laser) :))) that is, a device that has a target gyrocoordinator, a multi-area FPU, a gyroscope with a correction system is a PA LGSN. As in the case of PARGSN, where guidance is made on the reflected radio signal of the radar
      1. +2
        16 January 2023 22: 57
        Quote: Ka-52
        it’s called that - it’s a semi-active homing head (laser) :))) that is, a device that has a target gyrocoordinator, a multi-area FPU, a gyroscope with a correction system is a PA LGSN. As in the case of PARGSN, where guidance is made on the reflected radio signal of the radar

    2. -3
      17 January 2023 05: 48
      What here, heel, homing! ? When "laser-beam" guidance ("telecontrol") is used

      Laser telecontrol??? You still write "mechanical-quantum." I met a lot of dumb definitions, but yours is the dumbest of them
  5. +2
    16 January 2023 08: 39
    And there is also antires ... but how did the "Martlet" MANPADS show themselves? And the thought began to stir ... If the "laser-beam" zura showed themselves "cloudy" in modern warfare, then how will the "Pine", which they are now trying to foist on the army, show itself? what
    1. +1
      16 January 2023 08: 53
      Quote: Nikolaevich I
      If the "laser-beam" zura showed themselves "cloudy" in modern warfare, then how will the "Pine", which the army is now trying to foist, show itself?

      Well, there the platform is more solid, with noticeably greater detection capabilities and at least automatic beam retention on the target, and a missile with a normal warhead and proximity fuse.
    2. +1
      16 January 2023 19: 43
      Isn't there a laser trail near Pine???
    3. +1
      16 January 2023 22: 28
      Quote: Nikolaevich I
      And the thought began to stir ... If the "laser-beam" zura showed themselves "cloudy" in modern warfare, then how will the "Pine", which they are now trying to foist on the army, show itself?

      Sosna has a laser rangefinder, allowing for pre-hunting methods.
      1. +2
        16 January 2023 23: 04
        Quote: Comet
        Sosna has a laser rangefinder, allowing for pre-hunting methods.

        Miles sorry! But Starstreak also has a laser rangefinder! Yes
        1. -2
          16 January 2023 23: 56
          Quote: Nikolaevich I
          Quote: Comet
          Sosna has a laser rangefinder, allowing for pre-hunting methods.

          Miles sorry! But Starstreak also has a laser rangefinder! Yes

          Where is he at the MANPADS?
  6. +6
    16 January 2023 09: 26
    Cloudy.
    No one expects high efficiency from portable air defense systems. Small mass, low speed, range, etc. In general, like anti-tank rifles in the Second World War.

    But even if you spend 20 missiles at 100 thousand dollars for 1 helicopter for 20 million dollars, it's still profitable ...
    1. +7
      16 January 2023 10: 04
      uh ..
      MANPADS are a fairly effective weapon that drives aircraft from low altitudes. It's just that the radius is limited .. well, the warhead is not enough .. although there is not even a task to destroy the aircraft, the main thing is to damage it so that it cannot perform combat missions.
      I would not consider MANPADS to be an ineffective weapon, quite effective.
  7. +4
    16 January 2023 10: 52
    It has a semi-active laser homing head and rudders for maneuvering.
    ... three projectiles, due to the received energy, fly to the target and are guided by the reflected laser radiation.

    Well, is it possible to replicate such nonsense?
    The Starstreak submunition does not have any homing heads and does not aim at the reflected signal !!!
    The Starstreak submunition has an ACLOS laser beam guidance system. If you do not go into details, the sighting device emits a directional signal to the target. Two sensors in the tail of the submunition pick up this signal. The electronics keep the submunition in the center of the beam.
  8. +11
    16 January 2023 11: 27
    The author talking about the Starstreak guidance system writes:
    It has a semi-active laser homing head

    This ammunition does not use a "semi-active laser seeker", as we say at Krasnopol, but the so-called "laser trail", and this is far from the same thing.
    I don’t want to comment on the narrative of this publication, I will only say that it has the same relation to reality as a “semi-active laser seeker” to a “laser path”.
  9. +9
    16 January 2023 11: 32
    According to unconfirmed reports

    You can put an epigraph to the article, it will be just right.
    Accurate data on the work of Ukrainian air defense of all types and on the losses of our aircraft are not yet available.

    That does not prevent the author from drawing deep conclusions.
    Thus, in recent months, Ukrainian formations have used thousands of Soviet and NATO-style MANPADS, as well as hundreds of "large" SAM missiles. At the same time, only dozens of aircraft and helicopters were hit.

    Did the author not hear about UAVs and missiles?
    induced on the reflected laser radiation

    Judging by this phrase about the principles of guidance of Star Trek, the author has no idea.
    the effectiveness of the use of "Starstreak" directly depends on the ability of the operator to see the target

    Do other MANPADS operators launch without seeing the target?
    and watch her until the moment of defeat

    Did the author read his article? It also says that the speed is 4M. Darts fly to the target at real ranges for 3-5 seconds.
    the real performance and capabilities of modern British MANPADS are far from tabular.

    For all air defense systems, in real conditions they are far from "table". Otherwise, aviation would have been liquidated long ago as a class of weapons due to the impossibility of use.
    And as a result, the mass supply of modern MANPADS turned out to be useless.

    So useless that very often they shoot NAR from a nose-up, without crossing the LBS.
  10. +5
    16 January 2023 16: 30
    Speaking about the unsatisfactory statistics of the use of British MANPADS, let me remind the author that, firstly, the first Soviet MANPADS gave a kill probability coefficient of only 0.2-0.25, i.e. this is for the learned MANPADS calculations. Those. it was considered normal if four out of five went into "milk". Secondly, in WWII Germany, about three million panzerfausts of various models were manufactured. This is 56,5 thousand pieces for each T-34 of the Second World War. This did not prevent the thirty-fours from reaching Berlin. However, the use of hand-held anti-tank grenade launchers for some reason was not recognized as unjustified, in vain, and ineffective, even though the thirty-fours defeated the Panzerfausts. And after WWII, all the leading countries of the world started producing RPGs, despite the modest statistics on their use. Well, it's not a secret about the fact that our aviation works from a pitch-up. I can tell you how it looks close to the front line, because I have the opportunity to observe. Therefore, I think that the author should not breed carelessness on our side. Carelessness and fighting spirit are two different things. Fighting spirit is based on training, experience, work and the ability to soberly assess risks, and therefore work confidently in a combat situation. And carelessness is based on hatred, lies, laziness and inadequate assessments of possible risks. Perhaps from the outside, outwardly, these processes, when a smart guy and a non-wise guy run side by side, it all looks the same, but the essence of these things is fundamentally different, and the result is usually different. Carelessness leads to unjustified losses and loss, while fighting spirit, on the contrary, leads to victories, despite some justified losses. There is no need to produce hatred and carelessness.
  11. +2
    16 January 2023 19: 22
    Several thousand were handed over, how much? Wiki gives the number of missiles fired over the years 7000 thousand, how many were shot during the exercises, half were written off, the expiration date was over, where does the information about the thousands come from?
  12. -3
    16 January 2023 20: 08
    I, too, was surprised that they suddenly stopped talking about these old streaks. It’s just one laudatory ode after another, what a child prodigy it is. And then they quieted down. Even on the Western Khokhlyan resources, fawning over everything, they suddenly forgot about this air defense system.
  13. +4
    16 January 2023 21: 35
    How tired of these articles about "that is not effective, this is not effective." Dear author, it’s effective / inefficient, it’s not only dry numbers that launched / hit / didn’t hit, but these are very real lives of real people, and when this MANPADS shoots down at least one of our aircraft / helicopter and its crew dies, then for these people this MANPADS turned out to be damn effective , only now they can not say about it. But, by the way, they can say about inefficiency, for example, the surviving "Akhmadovites" or the military from Makeevka, for example, the same Khaimars.
  14. +3
    16 January 2023 22: 00
    Written nonsense. This is a complex with laser command beam guidance. After launch, the gunner holds the target and a coded laser beam is directed at the target parallel to the axis of sight. The shells have a photodiode in the tail, a cat. receives the code and the autopilot compensates for the deviation by changing the structure of the encoded laser field. Just like in Cornet, Invar, Whirlwind, Kombat ...
    But with ATGMs, it’s easy for the gunner to keep the brand on the tank, and in aviation, the dynamics and the unprepared gunner can’t cope, everything flies by.
    1. +4
      17 January 2023 01: 21
      This is a complex with laser command beam guidance. After launch, the gunner holds the target and a coded laser beam is directed at the target parallel to the axis of sight.

      Just not the way you described. Star Trek creates not a beam, but a tunnel, a large spot on the target, and darts fly in this tunnel, which fundamentally simplifies targeting, unlike conventional command-beam darts.
  15. +4
    16 January 2023 22: 34
    Well, as many have already written, the author messed up with the method of pointing Starstrike. The guidance method used in Starstreak allows only the non-preemptive guidance method to be implemented, which is not effective against high-speed maneuverable targets with a large heading parameter. It is dangerous for low-speed non-maneuverable targets.
    1. +4
      17 January 2023 01: 18
      The guidance method used in Starstreak allows only the non-preemptive guidance method to be implemented.

      What is generally characteristic of MANPADS.
      But unlike other MANPADS, Startrek is very fast, the speed is more than 4M, it takes 3-5 seconds to reach the target, it is dangerous for everyone at low altitudes.
      1. -1
        17 January 2023 22: 42
        Quote from solar
        The guidance method used in Starstreak allows only the non-preemptive guidance method to be implemented.

        What is generally characteristic of MANPADS.

        This is, to put it mildly, an incorrect statement. SAM MANPADS with homing use the method of proactive guidance.
        Quote from solar
        But unlike other MANPADS, Startrek is very fast, the speed is more than 4M, it takes 3-5 seconds to reach the target, it is dangerous for everyone at low altitudes.

        There is no speed at all here. The non-preemptive guidance method used in Starstreak noticeably loses its effectiveness with an increase in the angular velocity of the target's line of sight, which occurs with an increase in target speed, target parameter, target angle and a decrease in the range to the target. Simply put, it is dangerous for low-speed targets or targets that fly directly at it or directly away from it.
  16. 0
    17 January 2023 17: 52
    These systems are doing their job.
    They are afraid.
    They do not allow attack helicopters to reach the effective range of NUR strikes.
    And you have to shoot from exorbitant distances from a pitch-up.

    Videos of helicopter downings were Starsticks.
    And much better quality than regular MO videos...
  17. 0
    18 January 2023 09: 06
    Quote: YOUR
    According to UAVs in the Kyrgyz Republic that do not maneuver and fly during daylight hours, and the use of such MANPADS will be effective. Calmly got up, took aim, launch and escort.


    Will not be. Whoever wants to make sure: let him take a laser pointer and try to accompany a calmly flying bird (pigeon, crow to choose from) with a laser "bunny". Even in the absence of stress and interference - not so easy.

    P.S. Even UAVs and KR do not always fly in a straight line (and no one will tell the shooter the exact route). Yes, and in the zone of direct visibility from the surface - they stay for a very short time, especially if the surface is not even, like a table, steppe or desert. It seems that this "wunderwaffle" was developed by a British shkolota.
  18. +1
    18 January 2023 09: 10
    Quote: Max1995
    No one expects high efficiency from portable air defense systems. Small mass, low speed, range, etc. In general, like anti-tank rifles in the Second World War.


    From what? Against attack aircraft and helicopters - MANPADS are quite effective. If they have good performance characteristics, there are prepared calculations that receive timely target designation.
    This is more likely not an anti-tank rifle, but an "anti-aircraft" RPG. The striking ability is enough even to shoot down an armored attack aircraft (like the Su-25).
  19. 0
    19 January 2023 01: 36
    The complex is interesting. It would be logical to do the same. It is good because it is multifunctional. That is, if the army is at war with an enemy who has little or no aviation, the brigade’s gunners do not turn into shitty submachine gunners who still don’t get specialized experience, but actually become ATGM operators.
    Due to the universality, as a result, it is possible to place such complexes in fact right at the forefront. Since the role of aviation, including UAVs, will grow, the meaning in such complexes will grow.
    This does not mean that it is necessary to abandon the classic MANPADS, no. The calculation simply must be able to work with both and take on a combat mission the weapon that is more suitable for it.
    In addition, UAVs with electric motors are not actually captured by classic MANPADS, and here again weapons can insure.
    Not a child prodigy, it requires good earnings from the calculation, but the weapon is interesting, as they say, has no analogues. And it would be nice to create an analog. I am sure Kolomna or Tula can do even better than the Britons.
  20. -1
    19 January 2023 23: 48
    Quote from: User_neydobniu
    If the effectiveness of strikers and other MANPADS is so low, then why is our aviation on the front line only occasionally visible?

    But because Ukraine had 52 divisions of Soviet air defense weapons before the NMD, and MANPADS were not only British.
    Plus accurate early target designations from NATO.
    Once again: 52 divisions! Including the S-300, which is still comparable to the coveted Patriot.
    Saddam did not have so many air defenses, and he was carried out for a whole month before the land invasion.
    There are not so many in any European army, and I don’t know if there are in the United States.
    So, only we and the PRC are cooler than air defense, India’s mod, and now Turkey has it in terms of range. In Israel, the territorial tasks can rather be called object-based, because of the size of the country, as, for example, we have air defense / missile defense in Moscow.
  21. 0
    8 March 2023 20: 30
    This MANPADS lacks an automatic mode, but it will already be an air defense system with a radar, control and guidance systems, and 7 km is already the minimum range, Tunguska will be cooler, and Pantsir is already a medium-range air defense system.
  22. +1
    April 8 2023 12: 55
    Quote: Ryabov Kirill
    MANPADS Starstreak in Ukraine. Low efficiency and reasons for failures

    Take away his pen and paper (keyboard and Internet access), he is already delusional.
    I understand writing this, if the Russian Air Force dominated Ukraine, would often visit Kyiv, cut communications in the Ukraine-Europe crossings.
    However ... however, the tanks and infantry fighting vehicles of the Armed Forces of Ukraine calmly drive along the luce, conduct duel firing with Russian tanks and concentrate perfectly; where necessary) for the May strike.
    People like Ryabov led the USSR by June 1941, and the Russian Federation by April-October 2022
  23. 0
    April 14 2023 12: 41
    The effectiveness of the use of air defense systems, such as Starstreak, is formed through the use of MANPADS paired with a locator. Standing in an open area and waiting for the target is pointless