Experts believe that the GLSDB "smart" ammunition of the Armed Forces of Ukraine could be shot down by the Russian Tor-M2 air defense system

As reported today by the military department in the person of Lieutenant General Konashenkov, the Russian military managed to shoot down a special enemy rocket at one of the sites of the special military operation. We are talking about the GLSDB ammunition for multiple rocket launchers.

This is the so-called "smart" bomb, which has a rocket engine and plumage, allowing it to maneuver in the air, entering the target.
According to the latest information, this “smart” munition was fired from an American-made HIMARS universal rocket launcher in one of the northeast directions. According to some reports, the blow was delivered against Russian positions in the Svatovo region, according to others, to the northeast of Kupyansk.

By itself, the fact of GLSDB interception is by no means of ordinary significance. Created on the basis of the GBU-39 GLSDB aerial bomb, it is capable of covering a distance of up to 110 km, but this is when dropped from an aircraft carrier. When used in the version of the MLRS ammunition, the distance is shorter, but also quite large - up to 70-80 km. In this regard, it is not at all necessary for the enemy to bring the launcher directly to the front line.

It has not yet been reported by what means GLSDB was intercepted, however, experts agree that it could be the Tor-M2 air defense system. Its characteristics include the defeat of not only aircraft, helicopters and missiles of various modifications, but also planning bombs. GLSDB could be hit at a distance of up to 16 km from the location of the Russian air defense system.

Comments

[Uprun]

For every cunning ass there is a corkscrew. Respect to the guys and it’s not a sin to hang on the chest, there are a lot of stamped medals in the country today.

[dmi.pris1]

Well, if you succeeded. Practice is a great thing. They learned how to intercept missiles from chimeras, they will learn from these too. Every action has a counteraction

[aars]

The target is high-altitude, not very fast ...
The only problem is the small size of PMSM
But the news is good

[constructor_sidorov]

God forbid, quickly knock the brains out of all these "smart bombs"!

[tralflot1832]

Air defense systems all over the world have only one problem - low-flying targets. But we added a second problem to NATO, hypersonic missiles.

[aars]

The Chinese have already added

And more

[nik-mazur]

Quote: aars

The Chinese have already added

First, not before. And secondly, you showed a computer render ...

[aars]

First: much earlier
Secondly: photo from here - https://topwar.ru/199951-giperzvukovoj-raketnyj-kompleks-df-17-i-ego-potencial.html
And under it is the signature:

Complexes DF-17 at the parade in 2019. Photo by Nevskii-bastion.ru

Although it looks like a render...
But other pictures to the fig and more.

[bayard]

Quote: tralflot1832

we added a second problem to NATO, hypersonic missiles

Historically, quantity has always beaten quality. German tanks were better than ours in terms of optics, the range of aimed combat of the gun, the quality of ammunition ... but the industry produced more of our tanks. Therefore, in a real battle against the "Tiger" or "Panther" they simply rolled out five T-34-85s, and albeit with losses, they destroyed them. "Tirpitz" (and "Bismarck") was better than any English battleship separately, but entire squadrons came out to intercept it ... Quantity is always more important. with acceptable quality, of course.
And with close / comparable quantities, QUALITY will win.
The Armed Forces of Ukraine now have an overwhelming superiority in long-range precision-guided munitions, in the number (and probably quality) of strike and reconnaissance UAVs ... with an already comparable number of artillery pieces, but with the superiority of NATO guns in range and accuracy ... Guided munitions for "Haymars" also in larger quantities than ours. At the same time, the Armed Forces of Ukraine allowed for multi-stage mobilization and training of reserves, fresh formations are armed with highly protected infantry fighting vehicles, armored personnel carriers, Western-made tanks (and Soviet ones too), France announced the delivery of 40 Mirage-2000, and this is only France ... With their advantage in intelligence (satellites, RL and RT reconnaissance aircraft, agents of the entire NATO) ... And all operations are planned by the best NATO staff members.
Against this background, our "hypersound" looks somehow ... unconvincing.
in the current conflict.
There are simply too few sea carriers for the Zircon (now there are only two ships - frigates 22350 of the first sub-series). And in the former Ukraine, he has no goals at all.
"Dagger"?
In principle, the same targets could be hit with the Iskander, the range is enough. This is most likely just a test and demonstration.
The Armed Forces of Ukraine are fighting on drugs - combat psychotropics, so that psychological pressure will be ineffective - taking such a drug addict first for 2-3 days in the basement until the effect of the psychotropic ends, and only after that interrogation and other conversations ...
You have to fight SERIOUSLY. The second year of the NWO, and the RF Armed Forces are waiting ... for the Nazi offensive ... "There will be no militarization of the economy !!!" (D.A. Medvedev, GDP) - it's like last year "There will be no mobilization !!" Nothing changes, the contingent (leading) is not trained ... UAVs, incl. there are still not enough mavics, normal-protected communications ... the Civil Society is engaged in deliveries ... And what is the Ministry of Defense concerned about at this time? "Army just enough"??! How is the Logistics Service doing there? Doesn't hiccup?

Quote: tralflot1832

Air defense systems around the world have only one problem - low-flying targets.

To intercept them, fighter aircraft and AWACS aircraft are needed. The air defense system for such targets has an interception range of 10 - 30 km. depending on the height of the target and they cannot be closed from the targets on the WWI.
Aviation is needed.
And AWACS aircraft !!
At worst, anti-submarine helicopters with side-looking radars can be used in certain areas - at least the Navy has them ... But they still need to be paired with aviation in the air and air defense systems on the ground.
The Ministry of Defense and the defense industry completely failed these tasks ... like many other things.

[nik-mazur]

Quote: bayard

The Armed Forces of Ukraine now have an overwhelming superiority in long-range precision-guided munitions, in the number (and probably quality) of strike and reconnaissance UAVs ... with an already comparable number of artillery pieces, but with the superiority of NATO guns in range and accuracy ... Guided munitions for "Haymars" also in larger quantities than ours

Are you ready to illustrate this most overwhelming superiority with numbers? And then everyone is talking about dill, but more and more on emotions and in terms of “female logic”: more/less, better/worse, ̶t̶o̶n̶b̶sh̶e̶/̶t̶o̶l̶sh̶e̶... well, etc.

[bayard]

Watch Sladkov’s last video message (in my opinion, he was also published on VO), he is there just about the fact that in artillery duels we are usually outplayed. Because their artillery systems have a longer range, they have the ability to fire from the zone of inaccessibility of return fire, and even with guided projectiles. In our range, only 203 mm are comparable. "Malki", but they have a very low rate of fire and there are no guided projectiles for them.
There are no "Coalitions-SV", despite so many years in parades. "Msta-S" is also not too much, and their range leaves much to be desired.
Recently, the first "Tornado-G" with guided munitions and a range of 40+ km have appeared. , this is already reassuring. Controlled PSUs also appeared for the "Tornado-S" ... But these PSUs also need target designation. And these are r\l artillery reconnaissance stations, acoustic systems, as well as loitering reconnaissance UAVs. All this is more (and as they say higher in quality) from the enemy.
Why are they better?
Yes, because they did it (of course, I'm talking about the USA and NATO countries).
In order to overcome this lag, it is necessary to build up reconnaissance complexes and increase their capabilities. Finally put an end to the insufficiency of UAVs. And since we will not have long-range artillery systems soon, then all hope is for sufficient range of MLRS with controlled power supplies, as well as for aviation and their UAB and KAB.
No one will tell you the numbers today, but the ratio in long-range systems is not in our favor, and anyone interested in the issue knows this. We still have more towed artillery of shorter range, but the former expanse with ammunition is no longer there.
And everyone knows this too. Even the Supreme High Command (aka GDP) spoke about this / admitted / did not hide it.

Quote from: nik-mazur

And then everyone is talking about dill

Advantages in numbers, in long-range artillery and reconnaissance / target designation equipment.
The RF Armed Forces have an advantage in other components. Air defense , Aviation , KR , OTRK , shorter - range towed artillery and shells for it , tanks .
Now the Armed Forces of Ukraine have a decent number of highly protected infantry fighting vehicles. Fortunately, we still have BMP-3s, which are approaching in terms of security, but fall short. BMP-3M "Dragoon \ Manul" could rectify the situation, but nothing is known about their release yet.
We need TBMP and TBTR based on the T-64 and T-55 hulls, following the example of such KhTZ machines of the 2013 model - TBTR-55 and TBTR-64.

Quote from: nik-mazur

"feminine logic"

Well, you drive up to us in Donetsk and tell us how everything is great and wonderful with us. Unlike people with special logic, I hear artillery duels live.
But our air defense works ... for a solid "5", although there are gaps, but I have heard more than once (and this is easier to hear aurally, and not visually due to closing angles) interceptions of the enemy's Hurricane full packets - when they work two "Shell", one missile for each missile.

[sgrabik]

I agree, this is just the case when the quality of weapons, their high performance characteristics, and their sufficient quantity on the battlefield are equally important, if we can achieve both, we are definitely guaranteed to win.

[Boa kaa]

Bayard! Yes, you didn’t “overheat” in any way and begin to carry a blizzard! Somehow:

Quote: bayard

German tanks were better than ours in terms of optics, range of aimed combat of the gun, quality of ammunition ... Therefore, in a real battle against the "Tiger" or "Panther" they simply rolled out five T-34-85 ...

Yes, the Tigers and Panthers were with "Zeissian" optics, with 88-mm anti-aircraft guns, in which the range of a direct shot was under 1,5 km (!) ... And what they started with (T-III, T- IV) and other trophy shushval from the Czech Republic - and was not suitable for our T-34/76. Yes, an 34 mm cannon was put on the T-85 so that it could fight the Tigers ... That's right. But KV had to fight the Tigers! - heavy tanks, not medium ones, like the T-34. But the KV-2, and then the ISs, already fought on equal terms with the German "beast". This is one!

Quote: bayard

"Tirpitz" (and "Bismarck") was better than any English battleship separately, but entire squadrons came out to intercept it ...

And also not quite "fair" infa. Bismarck could have avoided the tragedy if Adm. Lutyens would not have let Prinz Eugen go, and, secondly, he would have finished off the damaged English. Lk Prince of Wales, who had practically no GC art left. Among other things, if KR Suffolk had not received the latest radar with a circular scan, then the British would hardly have been able to maintain radar contact with Bismarck all the time.
Thirdly, if Lutyens had not fallen into a Fuhrer-worshipping frenzy and for a whole HOUR would not have driven RDO about how he loves the Fuhrer and is ready to die, but to fulfill his order, but would observe secrecy or even radio silence. That result for the impudent could be much more deplorable.

Quote: bayard

Quantity is always more important. with acceptable quality, of course.

Quantity is sometimes defeated by TACTICS. Suffice it to recall the gladiator fights of Spartacus, when up to 10 fighters were put up against him. Spartacus ran away. They rushed in pursuit of him in a crowd, then stretched into a chain. The first, 1-2 opponents, he killed when, unexpectedly for the pursuers, he turned around and struck too hasty, but not as skillful as he was. The tanks, being in the minority, acting from ambushes, essentially repeated the Spartacus technique.

Quote: bayard

our "hypersound" looks somehow ... unconvincing.

But this is a false statement! Even the Ministry of Defense of the Armed Forces of Ukraine was forced to admit that the Ukrainian air defense was powerless against the Daggers. A similar statement was made at one time by the military leaders of the United States and NATO. So the GZO is now too tough for dill warriors and their NATO patrons ... And this is a FACT!

[bayard]

Quote: Boa constrictor KAA

Bayard! Yes, you didn’t “overheat” in any way and begin to carry a blizzard!

It's not hot enough yet, it even rained in Donetsk.

Quote: Boa constrictor KAA

what they started with (T-III, T-IV) and other trophy shushval from the Czech Republic - and our T-34/76 was no match

Actually, I wrote well-known things and wrote not at all about tanks, but about the fact that quantity in a war (and not only in l / s) always matters and in the long term it almost always beats quality. Of course, if the differences in quality are not critical and overwhelming.
Yes, in 1941, the T-34-76s were superior to the T-3s and T-4s in terms of armor and gun range, but (!) The T-34s were raw machines then, had a lot of childhood illnesses, and often critical ones:
- very poor visibility from the tank for the commander, while the German tanks had commander's cupolas with all-round visibility.
- unreliable chassis, especially the gearbox, this drawback was overcome only in 1943, often the gunner-radio operator helped the driver to change the speed, because the strength of one person was not enough.
- the quality of armor-piercing shells.
- and of course optics.
- I'm not talking about the convenience of the crew.
Therefore, as a rule, it was not possible to realize its advantage of the T-34 in 1941. I'm not talking about the total superiority of the Red Army in the number of tanks (and fighter aircraft). It was then - in 1041 and 1942. the Germans defeated us with tactics and operational skill. As well as general training and specialization.

Quote: Boa constrictor KAA

The Tigers and Panthers were with "Zeissian" optics, with 88-mm anti-aircraft guns, in which the range of a direct shot was under 1,5 km (!)

But at this stage, tactical and operational skill, as well as the qualitative superiority of armored vehicles, could no longer help the enemy, because the gap in training began to narrow, as did the qualitative gap in armored vehicles. "Tigers" and "Panthers" appeared in the Wehrmacht in 1943, and T-34-85 and IS-2 only in 1944 - following the results of the Battle of Kursk. But even then, the advantage in armor resistance and range was for the Germans, as was the quality of the optics. But the numerical superiority was ours and was overwhelming. Therefore, even with greater losses in tanks, victory always remained with us.

Quote: Boa constrictor KAA

Quote: bayard
German tanks were better than ours in terms of optics, range of aimed combat of the gun, quality of ammunition ... Therefore, in a real battle against the "Tiger" or "Panther" they simply rolled out five T-34-85 ...

This is essentially a literal quote from a veteran - about how they fought the "Tigers" and "Panthers" - three or four tanks tied up a fight with the "Tiger" at a long distance, and one or two cars went around from the flank and hit the cat on the side with less distances. The quote is almost literal. Yes, many wrote about such techniques in their memoirs.

Quote: Boa constrictor KAA

. Bismarck could have avoided tragedy

Bismarck at that time was practically the only battleship in Germany, look how many battleships and battlecruisers (with 16 "guns) England then had. They brought several squadrons to intercept one Bismarck at once, raised aircraft ... The German surface fleet against England to catch there was nothing... Although the Bismarck was much better than any English battleship.
The same could be said about the Japanese fleet - they had excellent cruisers, battleships and aircraft carriers, but they did not come close against the US (and British) fleet in quantity. And so we lost in the long run. Although, thanks to tactics and operational skills, as well as the surprise of attacks and the secrecy of their preparation, they had success in the first period of the war.
The United States has always taken by numbers and technical superiority.
And I wrote this to the fact that the bet on the "Small, but well-trained and armed Army" did not materialize. And they couldn't make excuses.
Moreover, we didn’t even prepare a reserve of this Little Army, there were no mobplanes, mobilization warehouses were plundered, there weren’t even lists of those liable for military service in the military registration and enlistment offices, and even during the SVO, until September, no one prepared them.
This is sloppiness and sabotage.
Russia, with its size, length of borders and turbulent borders, does not have the right to have a "Small professional army". The Russian army cannot be small and therefore must be conscripted. And you should not call on ... year, but at least 2 years. And better - for 3 years. As it was before Damansky.
And since the Army will be "not small", then the defense industry must comply with this, and science, and training, and rear services, and mobilization plans, and strategic reserves in case of war.
The current ones simply parasitized on Soviet stocks, and now, faced with the harsh reality ... they begin to understand with amazement that it turns out that the Soviet Union did everything right. And that thanks to the same Soviet "galoshes" it is possible somehow and somehow to fight and arm the deployed formations.

Quote: Boa constrictor KAA

But this is a false statement! Even the Ministry of Defense of the Armed Forces of Ukraine was forced to admit that the Ukrainian air defense was powerless against the Daggers.

So what ? Did they somehow manage to shoot down the Iskander OTRK? I haven't heard of such a thing. Moreover, no one strikes at Bankova, the bridges across the Dnieper are standing, railway crossings in the Lviv region are functioning, the tunnels have not collapsed.
Yes, and we tried to scare non-Sumers with launches of "Daggers" and "Zircons". The Sumerians don’t pay attention to this at all - they fight in the field, where they have long-range NATO guns with guided projectiles and Haymars, just a breakthrough of UAVs for reconnaissance and full access to NATO reconnaissance and target designation resources.
But the appearance of AUB and KAB at the VKS and the beginning of their use is an argument.
And the appearance of corrected ammunition for "Tornado-S" and "Tornado-G" is an argument.
If AWACS aircraft appeared, which the ill-fated Vega never gave birth to, this would be a very serious argument.
And if several Tu-214Rs were operating on the theater in a constant - on-duty mode, this would be more than a VERY serious argument.
and our troops also need highly protected infantry fighting vehicles and armored personnel carriers - TBMP and TBTR. The enemy has already had such ones and is reducing their losses ... And in our country, instead of the banal BMP-1 \ 2, MTLBs are used more and more often.
Positional warfare turns into a war of attrition, a war of resources. the military-industrial complex of the entire NATO and their allies are against us, and we again sang "There will be no militarization !!"
AGAIN!
There is a war for the survival of the state and the People, a healthy militarization of the economy can allow the launch of many previously stopped production, provide orders for our metallurgical enterprises, now deprived of orders from Europe and the USA. People are again trying to get "not to think about the bad", that "nothing is happening", "everything is going according to plan". Instead of the mobilization of society and the Healthy Militarization of the Economy.
Now we need tanks, TBTRs, TBMPs, long-range self-propelled guns "Koalitsiya-SV", shells, aircraft, UAVs, secure communications, uniforms, equipment, equipment ... Maximum use of the civil initiative on the state defense order. And the nationalization of "domestic" business. Either they are included in the defense programs, or all their assets and production must return to the state and work for the benefit of the Defense and Society.

[South Ukrainian]

So, from the moment the Americans announced the supply of these "smart bombs", experts said that this planning bomb would not be a difficult target for our air defense. And they shot down just now, because the ho..ly probably tried to use it for the first time, against the backdrop of our successful use of our own UMPC planning bombs. They hold the rest of the GLSDB to the offensive.

[bayard]

Quote: South Ukrainian

They hold the rest of the GLSDB to the offensive.

When ensuring proper massing and providing combined strikes with different weapons (together with the GLSDB, together with Grad, Hurricane, aviation weapons), air defense can either be overloaded or disoriented by an abundance of heterogeneous targets. And they prepare carefully. And they put their entire future (and not only the Armed Forces) on this offensive.

[Eug]

Hmm... how much does one GLSDB cost and how much does one Tor-a rocket cost? And if the rocket is needed not one, but at least 2? In my opinion, a very devastating crash. And in the case of a massive application of GLSDB, is it realistic to create a grouping of Tors in the right direction? And is there enough ammo? I am not a supporter of taking into account the cost of a protected object when analyzing the cost of protective equipment; in any case, the work of a protected object will be extremely difficult during shelling. In any case, a very effective weapon is both about GLSDB and Tors.

[Uprun]

And if this bomb flew to the BC warehouse for the Thors? Will we continue to talk about the cost of a bomb and an air defense missile?

[solar]

managed to shoot down a special enemy rocket. We are talking about GLSDB ammunition

curious, but how did you determine what exactly GLSDB was? Are there debris? Then why is there no photo?
It is strange that ammunition with a range of 150 km was fired at a target in the front line area.

[Thorvlobnor IV]

Ts-s-s! Don't scare off paramoga... GLSDB hasn't been shipped yet. It's like with the Bradleys, who began to be destroyed long before the start of deliveries.

[The pilot's son]

We need some kind of device like a corncob with a fluff like HP-23, which could fly for hours along the line and receive target designations. Joke.

[solar]

Created on the basis of the GBU-39 GLSDB aerial bomb, it is capable of covering a distance of up to 110 km, but this is when dropped from an aircraft carrier.

The nonsense is written.
GLSDB is a combination of an engine from Himars (more precisely, from an M26 rocket) and a GBU-39 planning bomb, in principle it is not dropped from an aircraft, it is fired from a Himars launcher, its range is 150 km.
A GBU-39 is dropped from an aircraft, really 110 km when dropped from a high altitude.

[Ratibor_A]

Glory to Russian weapons !!!!!!! !!!!!!!