The British Army will receive 'undetectable' counter-battery radars from SONUS.

The British Army is preparing to use Leonardo's advanced SONUS detector to detect gunshot sources, including through acoustic analysis of explosions. Essentially, it's a counter-battery radar detector capable of detecting various types of artillery enemy without revealing your own location.

The manufacturer claims this is a next-generation system. SONUS is described as an evolution of the HALO counter-battery radar line, with improvements in both weight and dimensions. SONUS is 70% lighter than the previous version of HALO.

The system is developed using an open architecture, which ensures compatibility with other systems and allows for future updates without affecting the platforms with which it integrates.

SONUS is equipped with ultra-sensitive microphones. The entire system can be deployed to a combat position in less than three minutes.

The manufacturer claims that the technical solutions implemented in the SONUS system make it undetectable to many modern detection systems.

Ollie Manning, a representative of the manufacturing company's management:

We look forward to working with the British Army to ensure SONUS provides them with an accurate, reliable and robust passive detection system that will keep their forces safe – now and in the future.

Leonardo plans to deliver SONUS systems to the 5th Regiment Royal Artillery within a year. The contract is valued at £18 million (approximately 1,9 billion rubles).

Comments

[Andrey K]

The British Army will receive 'undetectable' counter-battery radars from SONUS.

Well, and invisibility caps, why bother with trifles.
Another "Wunderwaffe", for which our bright minds will find an antidote.

[don_Reba]

Quote: Andrey K

an antidote that our bright minds will find.

What a crazy idea. Is it really against mortars? It's "visible" anyway.
The speed of sound in air is 330 m/s - 340 m/s
vs
The flight speed of modern artillery shells is typically 600–800 m/s in the first second of flight.
High-speed armor-piercing projectiles can reach 1700 m/s
The speed of howitzer shells is lower from 200 m/s (mortar/mortar) to 800 m/s (D-30, M777).
The projectile travels faster than the speed of sound. Sound attenuation is approximately -6 dB per doubling of distance.

[solar]

The article is simply a clumsy translation. Sound-based artillery reconnaissance has existed since time immemorial, even before World War I. https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Звукометрия

[don_Reba]

Quote from solar

The article is simply a clumsy translation.

What does the translation (clumsy) have to do with it?
You can also read the original
https://uk.leonardo.com/en/news-and-stories-detail/-/detail/leonardo-providing-british-army-with-hostile-artillery-location-system
I know about "existed", but all this was in the pre-rador-computer era.
I have given figures regarding the speed of "sound reading" of a shot.
Despite all the denominative detection speeds, such ear methods are very susceptible to nature, mountains, forests, background noise, and determine the accuracy of the source with the accuracy of a lapta.

[solar]

What does the translation (clumsy) have to do with it?
You can also read the original
https://uk.leonardo.com/en/news-and-stories-detail/-/detail/leonardo-providing-british-army-with-hostile-artillery-location-system

Try searching for the word "radar" in your link.

SONUS counter-battery radars

[don_Reba]

Quote from solar

Try searching for the word "radar" in your link.

Ah, so that's what you're talking about... "Radio Detection and Ranging"
Well, the woman was translating, a journalist. What can you do? Azus, for example, isn't shy at all: ASUS Sonic Radar (3rd generation, I think)
detect system, HALO (Hostline Artillery Location Leonardo) - they are pranksters, though.
But this does not cancel out the fundamental shortcomings of the ears.

[Carib]

Judging by the appearance of the semi-spheres, they're not acoustic microphones but seismic sensors. The mention of acoustics is just to confuse the reader.

[don_Reba]

Quote: Carib

Judging by the appearance of the semi-spheres, they do not contain acoustic microphones, but seismic sensors.

We have the same ones.
"Seismicity" (whatever you call it) is even worse (although the speed of propagation in the ground is better in some places)
surface acoustic waves (SAW), and everything that is high-speed: P- and S- waves are not for this
from 100 to 2000 m/s and more.
In loose soils the speed is lower (100-300 m/s), in dense soils (sand, clay) it is higher (300-1000
m/s), and in rocky formations it can exceed 1000 m/s to 2000 m/s
In the air it is at least more or less stable at 330-34 m/s
There will be mush in the soil

[your1970]

This is the exact shape of the microphones used in our AZK-5 artillery sound measuring system.

[Junior Private]

Radar is indeed undetectable, but only when it's turned off. And microphones can't detect anything far away.

[Dost]

https://topwar.ru/148924-kompleks-zvukoteplovoj-artillerijskoj-razvedki-1b75-penicillin.html?ysclid=mlphmjan3u565714730
10-18 km is quite enough.

[Junior Private]

Thank you for the link. I've heard about Penicillin, and I've also heard that it has seismic sensors and television. But I have serious doubts about the claimed detection range. Radar is essential; that would be more reliable.

[Dart2027]

Quote: Dost

https://topwar.ru/148924-kompleks-zvukoteplovoj-artillerijskoj-razvedki-1b75-penicillin.html?ysclid=mlphmjan3u565714730

The article says that

Penicillin-OEM includes six television cameras and the same number of thermal imagers.
Using the Penicillin-OEM module, the artillery reconnaissance system is designed to monitor a designated sector and detect muzzle flashes or shell explosions. By processing data from a set of cameras, the automated system is capable of accurately determining the direction of the muzzle flash.

That is, it is possible to simply track the trajectory of a projectile by its thermal contour.

[Dost]

And by the sound. Up to 18 km. So I'm going to the cameras.

[Dart2027]

Quote: Dost

And by sound. Up to 18 km.

I doubt it's possible to track by sound at such a distance. There's too much interference, distorting the results.

[Cympak]

Quote: Dart2027

That is, it is possible to simply track the trajectory of a projectile by its thermal contour.

Hurry to detect the flash of a gunshot

[Dart2027]

Quote: Cympak

detect the flash of a gunshot

And that too.

[don_Reba]

Quote: Dart2027

That is, it is possible to simply track the trajectory of a projectile by its thermal contour.

hardly.
Shot and explosion - this energy is detected.
And the projectile itself: the heat capacity of the casing is such that it flies for seconds, so it’s definitely not “hot” and can’t be detected

[Dart2027]

Quote: don_Reba

The case has such a high thermal capacity, but the seconds fly by that it's definitely not "hot" and can't be detected

Doesn't it heat up when fired? Plus the friction with the air.

[don_Reba]

It heats up (thick-walled metal: heat capacity) from friction, but not enough: time is short, the bottom doesn’t keep up either.
And yes, the braking temperature will remain the same for now.
T~=T0* (1+ 0,7M^2)

[Dart2027]

Quote: don_Reba

It heats up (thick-walled metal: heat capacity) from friction, but not enough: time is short, the bottom doesn’t keep up either.

No one's saying it heats up like an open-hearth furnace. But there is heat, and a good thermal imager can detect it.

[don_Reba]

Quote: Dart2027

But there is heating

Enough of telling fairy tales
at 2M the flow stagnation temperature (at the tip itself) will be 76 degrees Celsius, with an ambient temperature of 20 degrees Celsius (if this is the case at the projectile's flight altitude).
This is braking (ideal), without taking into account scattering, carryover, re-radiation.
and the heat will immediately go to heating the "tolerant" piece of iron, and not to radiation into the air
This is just rub and rub.

Quote: Dart2027

and a good thermal imager can detect it.

Well, show me, please

[Dart2027]

Quote: don_Reba

and the heat will immediately go to heating the "tolerant" piece of iron, and not to radiation into the air

This means they'll be detecting the piece of iron itself and determining the point from which it's flying. Essentially, nothing will change.

Quote: don_Reba

Well, show me, please

A thermal imager can detect a person from several kilometers away. Their temperature is still lower than that of a projectile.

[don_Reba]

Quote: Dart2027

A thermal imager can detect a person from several kilometers away. Their temperature is still lower than that of a projectile.

All the more so! Please show me.

[Dart2027]

Quote: don_Reba

please show me

Vumii Imaging, an Atlanta-based thermal imaging manufacturer, is launching a new series of products—the Accuracii thermal and visible-light turrets. The key advantage of this new product is its long range: some device versions can detect a full-size figure at a distance of approximately 10 km. And this is in the thermal imaging range!

Most device variants feature 20x zoom optics for both conventional and thermal imaging cameras. Thus, when using a thermal imaging camera with a zoom lens, the equivalent focal length of which ranges from 21 to 420 mm, a full-length figure will be detected from 13 km away.
https://secnews.ru/foreign/17703.htm

[don_Reba]

Projectiles in flight please!
Shells☝️
Spotting, tracking, calculating the firing point.
🥱 Have you ever gone hunting (wild boar, elk, bear or wolf (but this is more difficult)) with a thermal imager?
Personally. Ourselves.
I read the advertising excerpts from Cheburnet myself.
I recommend: in Cheburnets there are experiments on tracking Phalanx CIWS ammunition, the OES installed on the installation, using a heat signature.
Clear and understandable.

[Dart2027]

Quote: don_Reba

Have you ever gone hunting (wild boar, elk, bear or wolf (but this is more difficult)) with a thermal imager?
Personally. Ourselves.

Have you ever worked with this type of military equipment yourself?

[don_Reba]

No.
Teplak/PNV on variations of AK, poncho IK protection were tested and sent to the guys.
A German professional thermal imager was used to detect heat loss in a family's hut.
I didn't have access to the ECO.
I had more radars and all sorts of products with rai under my command.

[Dart2027]

Quote: don_Reba

No.

That's exactly what I'm talking about. It's safe to say that the projectile will heat up when fired. It's safe to say that there are means to detect an object with elevated temperature. How this is implemented and the actual performance characteristics are a matter for the experts, but in principle, it's possible.

[don_Reba]

Repeat: at the current level of development it is impossible, or completely unprofitable.
It's a bullshit.
You don't need any experience in the military-industrial complex. A 10th-grade or higher education background is sufficient. And some thinking skills are also required.
The rest is buffoonery

[Dart2027]

Quote: don_Reba

Repeat: at the current level of development it is impossible, or completely unprofitable.
It's a bullshit.

Are you a leading expert in this field? No. So how do you know?

[don_Reba]

1. You (in my opinion) are also neither a “specialist”, nor even a “leader”.
Otherwise it would be like this:
Quote: Dart2027

That is, it is possible to simply track the trajectory of a projectile by its thermal contour.

did not generate, however, as in the classics

you allow yourself, with a completely unbearable impudence, to give some advice of cosmic proportions and cosmic stupidity

2. I express my opinion based on education and knowledge (10 years of school + university + practice)
Everything is in accordance with Article 29 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation.
3. Instead of finally introducing yourself

Quote: don_Reba

Quote: Dart2027
and a good thermal imager can detect it.

Well, show me, please
Copy-paste an advertisement about thermal imagers for people.

Quote: Dart2027

So how do you know?

out of my head, of course

[Dart2027]

Quote: don_Reba

you allow yourself, with a completely unbearable impudence, to give some advice of cosmic proportions and cosmic stupidity

Are you this to me?

Quote: don_Reba

Copy-paste an advertisement about thermal imagers for people.

Said the man who can't point to anything other than the fact that he thinks so.
The source of what you cannot show?

[don_Reba]

Of course you!
And here in dialogus there was a third one?
You immediately reminded me of Mikhalkov:
[media=https://vkvideo.ru/video-194944166_456239595?list=ln-TdV0frDdyCj5CYXYwq&t=1s]
Not a great-grandson by any chance?

[Dart2027]

Quote: don_Reba

Of course you!
And here in dialogus there was a third one?

Sometimes quotes are written to someone else by mistake; this happened to me.

Quote: Dart2027

The source of what you cannot show?

[october]

There is such a book
Artillery sound reconnaissance, 1993 edition
Page 11 - it says up to 10-12 km, air gaps up to 16 km
And in modern conditions, a microphone can be installed on a drone, and the capabilities of computing equipment are incomparable.

[Junior Private]

Compare the range with radar. And drones are easily detected. The topic of the article is about something undetectable.

[october]

Radar (usually understood as active radar) is easily detected due to its radiation. Acoustic radar, however, is passive. As for drones, there are a lot of them patrolling the area. If one is shot down, another one will be launched. It's just a microphone with a transmitter and some GLONASS. The reconnaissance computer station is passive.

[Junior Private]

A passing crow quacks, or a gust of wind. Sure, an oscilloscope can detect all of this, but it's not that simple. A proper counter-battery system can't be built using passive radars.

[october]

A flying crow will quack or gusts of wind

Not a question at all with modern signal processing and machine learning methods.

It is impossible to build a normal counter-battery warfare system using passive radars.

You're wrong, they have their own very promising niche. The book mentioned above states that during World War II, acoustics accounted for up to 70% of all enemy battery intelligence.

[spectr]

The British Army is preparing to use Leonardo's advanced SONUS detector to detect the source of gunshots, including through the acoustic analysis of explosions.

I finally took the trouble to find a similar proposal in my message archive, dating back to 2024. Smart people think alike.

[virA]

I remember back in 2023, some craftsman assembled an "undetectable counter-battery radar."
Based on several smartphones, connecting them to a local network. A sensitive microphone/seismic sensor was connected to each smartphone. He then created a program that, based on the delays in the signals from the sensors, calculated the location of the firing weapon.
The homemade product was used in the DPR and LPR.

[Mouse]

Yes, a tinfoil hat will help them...

[Sergey Kirakosyan]

"...will receive "undetectable"..."
Damn, half of our bureaucrats went to Britain to exchange experiences...!!!

[Viktor Sergeev]

They'll steal your money, but the radar won't find it.

[Sobol]

Are these radars also visually “undetectable”?

[Junior Private]

A niche is a niche, but without a proper radar, reaction speed will be abysmal. And hesitation is tantamount to death. Ballistics for a counter-battery can be calculated instantly. I'm in no way criticizing passive means; they are also necessary.

Quote: October

that during World War II, acoustics provided up to 70% of all enemy battery intelligence

Wars are completely different now. It's not fair to compare.

[Arkady007]

Our people urgently need to find comrades who are ready to blow something up on British territory as a training exercise and preparation for repelling their possible invasion of the uninhabited island.

[Ukuntold]

Will it stop missile and drone strikes 🤔

[Cympak]

A poor translation. We're not talking about radars, but about acoustic sensors.
If we talk about radars, we can consider a network of distributed radars operating in a pseudo-random interval mode with centralized processing of their signals.

[Mikhail3]

Not about sensors, but about detectors. An acoustic sensor is a microphone. And that's it. With two forlornly dangling wires.
Well, if there are a hundred thousand distributed radars... Or better yet, a million. Otherwise, instead of one strike, ten will be needed to destroy them. That's perfectly acceptable; the damage inflicted will justify the cost of missiles and drones.

[gridasov]

Is it possible to make a radiation source undetectable in a known range of disturbances of the electromagnetic potential pulses and with known parameters of the electronic components?!

[Mazunga]

If a megaton is hit, the data from these radars will be useful to archaeologists in 400 years.

[Mikhail3]

Once again, this site demonstrates the high level of expertise of its authors. Do they know the difference between a radar and a detector? Judging by the text, no. It's not known. Or do they not even bother to read the Google translation, rushing to make money? Most likely, both. Sigh...