Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Air Defence Regiment Orbat

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

  • #16
    They purchased 5 operational and 2 spares

    Comment


    • #17
      Anyone heard if the Flycatchers have been offered for sale or just locked in shed somewhere?

      Comment


      • #18
        I'd imagine the prospect of selling or gifting something so unambiguously warry to another nation would give the DoD nightmares.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by pym View Post
          I'd imagine the prospect of selling or gifting something so unambiguously warry to another nation would give the DoD nightmares.
          It's a purely defensive weapon. You ain't invading anyone with it.

          The flycatcher/bofors combo were a stop gap post 9/11 opportunity buy when they were offloaded by the Dutch. They were already well on their way to obsolescence in 2001. A huge step up on the L60 and by all accounts a massive improvement in accuracy. However in any sort of contested environment the radar operator in the trailer would probably have been occupying the worst seat in the DF. Museum pieces now.

          The newer Giraffe radar sets that were sourced from Norway are only marginally newer than the original DF operated version and themselves would certainly be having obsolescence issues by now. Another stop gap.

          Wonder what stop gap they'll find next.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by Jetjock View Post
            It's a purely defensive weapon. You ain't invading anyone with it.

            The flycatcher/bofors combo were a stop gap post 9/11 opportunity buy when they were offloaded by the Dutch. They were already well on their way to obsolescence in 2001. A huge step up on the L60 and by all accounts a massive improvement in accuracy. However in any sort of contested environment the radar operator in the trailer would probably have been occupying the worst seat in the DF. Museum pieces now.

            The newer Giraffe radar sets that were sourced from Norway are only marginally newer than the original DF operated version and themselves would certainly be having obsolescence issues by now. Another stop gap.

            Wonder what stop gap they'll find next.
            Agree with all of that, just feel they'd be very reluctant to supply them to any nation that might actually use them operationally - lest an An-2 be knocked out of the sky in Mali or Latvia followed by "these were supplied by Ireland..." stories and diplomatic fidgeting.

            But perhaps I'm wrong.

            God forbid we'd ever tag on to an order for Giraffe AMB's with the neighbours
            Last edited by pym; 14 October 2015, 22:36.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by Jetjock View Post
              It's a purely defensive weapon. You ain't invading anyone with it.

              The flycatcher/bofors combo were a stop gap post 9/11 opportunity buy when they were offloaded by the Dutch. They were already well on their way to obsolescence in 2001. A huge step up on the L60 and by all accounts a massive improvement in accuracy. However in any sort of contested environment the radar operator in the trailer would probably have been occupying the worst seat in the DF. Museum pieces now.

              The newer Giraffe radar sets that were sourced from Norway are only marginally newer than the original DF operated version and themselves would certainly be having obsolescence issues by now. Another stop gap.

              Wonder what stop gap they'll find next.
              There are possibly a few Gulf war era Rapiers going cheap.
              For now, everything hangs on implementation of the CoDF report.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by na grohmití View Post
                There are possibly a few Gulf war era Rapiers going cheap.
                if they come with a support package then they'll remain servicable, and capable of point defence against civil aircraft and lower grade military aircraft well into the future. the problem in terms of defending - for example - an EU leaders summit is of course is their range. they'll be able to stop someone piling into Dublin Castle, but where will the wreckage fall...

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by na grohmití View Post
                  There are possibly a few Gulf war era Rapiers going cheap.
                  Not a big fan to be honest. Radar slewing to optical CLOS guidance with an impact rather than proximity fuse doesn't seem like the greatest combination.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by na grohmití View Post
                    There are possibly a few Gulf war era Rapiers going cheap.
                    Giraffe Mk4 radar & RBS70 with BOILDE
                    Radar range 50km
                    BV206 mounted
                    Tracks up to 20 targets
                    Controls up to 20 RBS70 FUs (each engaging 1 target at a time)
                    Max range 8km
                    Max alt 4km

                    Rapier 2000
                    Radar range 16km (upgradable to 32km)
                    Towed by 4x4
                    Up to 75 targets
                    Controls 1 Rapier FU AFAIK (can engage 2 targets simulatiously)
                    Max range 8km
                    Max alt 3km
                    Last edited by DeV; 18 October 2015, 01:06.

                    Comment


                    • #25


                      Sweden are looking at replacing the RBS 70 with the RBS 98 (ground launched IRIS-T)

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by DeV View Post
                        https://www.armyrecognition.com/nove...dish_soil.html

                        Sweden are looking at replacing the RBS 70 with the RBS 98 (ground launched IRIS-T)
                        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.

                        Such is the situation facing the Swedes, they reactivated RBS70/90 units to protect Gotland in the last year.

                        ÖB presenterade under Folk och Försvars Rikskonferens i Sälen att arméns brigader nu ska få bättre luftvärnsskydd. Detta genom att använda äldre men väl fungerande system.



                        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.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by DeV View Post
                          https://www.armyrecognition.com/nove...dish_soil.html

                          Sweden are looking at replacing the RBS 70 with the RBS 98 (ground launched IRIS-T)
                          Nope, they aren't looking, they are deploying

                          The Swedish Armed Forces’ Air Defence Regiment has received firing units for the ground-based IRIS-T SLS air defence system.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            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.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              I would presume the attraction of AA guns is that they are low-tech in comparison with missile systems, low cost and low maintenance, both the guns and ammo.

                              In “modern” (ie asynchronous) warfare, the use of guns offer an advantage, as a single missile launch can be targeted quickly and accurately, but taking out a grid square that contains four guns being used in an AA role but also contains a few dozen non-combatants gets frowned upon by media, UN, ICRC etc. which western nations take more notice of. Also, collateral damage from AA gun projectiles (which can be considerable) might be of less concern to some nations than others.

                              Therefore a lot more of them can be deployed, and quantity has it’s own quality.

                              Just my uneducated thoughts. I’m sure someone with more insight like Ropebag will be along to give the DS answer
                              '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


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by Flamingo View Post
                                ..... and quantity has it’s own quality.
                                That's quite a phrase ..

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X