Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Air Defence Regiment Orbat

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by GoneToTheCanner View Post
    I always wonder why Western armies are always keen to scrap anti-aircraft guns systems as fast as they can, yet the Russians, Chinese and all their client states adore the things and constantly deploy and use them. Time and time again, we see Western armies encountering anti-aircraft calibres from 12.7mm up, both for AD and for engaging ground targets yet Western forces seem to prefer the missile as the primary defender every time. There's a very interesting video about an Apache operation in Iraq that had it's arse handed to them and most of the damage was from 7.62 and 12.7mm, with some 23mm thrown in. They lost one aircraft shot down, two put beyond economic repair and all of the rest damaged to a greater or lesser degree, from simple, manually aimed guns. I would argue that a layer of gun defence is necessary for an AD envelope around a formation and the secondary function of direct fire is also essential.
    The are many "Western" nations with guns still in service; Austria, Finland, Spain, Greece, Sweden, Switzerland...…………………

    However there are some reasons why they are not as numerous as by the Russians etc. This has to do with the fact to be effective in a modern battlefield they have to be controlled by an all-weather control system. This is what makes up the vast majority of the system cost. Then comes the range issue; the main threat was seen as Soviet attack helicopters and when they began to get armed with longer range air-to-surface missiles it was clear that the effective range of 35-40mm guns was no longer effective. Any gun position could be knocked out before the target came into range. Lastly was logistics, the often overlooked factor in war. A modern gun system such as the twin barrel GDF 35mm cannon has a fire rate combined of 1100 rds/min. Even with short bursts this required vast quantities of ammo to keep it in the fight.

    However as warfighting is always evolving there is a come back to some extent for guns. The first is the new ammunition like AHEAD or DART which combine programmable fuses with sub-munitions to greatly increase the effectiveness. Then there is the emerging drone threat where small cheap targets need to be engaged. Here high rate of fire guns have a part to play although they do not have the field to themselves as laser and electronic weapons come online.

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by pym View Post
      I'd be surprised if the IRIS-T based RBS 98 replaces the RBS 70 completely - it's not a MANPAD. It would seem more likely to replace the RBS 90 - which is a sort of static air defence system based around the RBS 70.It will be interesting to see what replaces the RBS 70 in Irish service, but beyond the recent upgrades, I don't see it happening in the near future.
      The RBS70 is more a short-range GBAD system than a MANPAD. Its system weight is 87kg compared with 15kg for a Stinger or Starstreak!
      It is not just Sweden that is replacing the RBS70 with a longer range larger missile, Australia is replacing them with the local version of the NASAMS2.
      While some may be kept in both countries for specific operational issues (rapid deployment) there is a move to larger systems.

      Given how we use the RBS70 together with Bv206 mounted Giraffe radars and our lack of fight aircraft it would be logical to suppose any replacement would be from the IRIS-T SL, NASAMS2 or Sky Sabre (CAMM) systems now being introduced. However given that even one battery of these would likely cost upwards of $55m, I cannot see it happening unless we host a major conference like G7!

      Comment


      • #33
        We just recently upgraded the RBS 70 we got in 1982, to the modern version. Don't expect any further update until hostile aircraft start falling onto the lawn at Merrion Square.
        For now, everything hangs on implementation of the CoDF report.

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by Orion View Post
          That's quite a phrase ..
          Not original

          La recherche intelligente de Bing facilite la recherche rapide et vous récompense.
          'He died who loved to live,' they'll say,
          'Unselfishly so we might have today!'
          Like hell! He fought because he had to fight;
          He died that's all. It was his unlucky night.
          http://www.salamanderoasis.org/poems...nnis/luck.html

          Comment

          Working...
          X