Jump to content
Sturgeon's House


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Ronny

  1. Carl Sagan once said: " There are naive questions, tedious questions, ill-phrased questions, questions put after inadequate self-criticism. But every question is a cry to understand the world. There is no such thing as a dumb question" And he was an astronomer, cosmologist, astrophysicist, astrobiologist...etc , overall, pretty knowledgeable guy. Arguably far more knowledgeable than anyone here can even dream to be, yet he don't oppose the act of asking "stupid" question. Personally, i would rather ask "stupid" question than pretend to know something i don't and stay ignorance. Besides, how exactly do you define a useless thread? after all we are all here to discuss about aviation topics, some may be interesting to you , some may not, but overall we discuss it because it is our hobby , that it. Not like any of us gonna use the knowledge here to earn money or design something, so in essence: all thread are equally useless-useful. Secondly, i don't force anyone to go into my thread, nor did i made so many threads that they block the whole first, second, third pages of this forum, so in essence, if anyone hate or dislike my question, they can simply click in another thread instead and discuss what they like. They don't have to waste their time at all. Finally, if my thread is really that terrible and useless then i think @Collimatrix would have simply delete the thread and ban me since he is the Admin and all that, yet it is still interesting enough that he participated in the discussion.
  2. From some source that i was able to find, it seem that they was able to overcome the communication issue (plasma sheath) thanks to powerful transmitter and unique antenna arrangement. http://www.decadecounter.com/vta/pdf/ABM Research & Development at Bell Laboratories - Project History [1975-10].pdf Though on the other hand, you brought up interesting point, because these missiles fly very quick, they probably pierce through the atmosphere to very high altitude before they can change direction.
  3. Nuclear warhead for interceptor could also be useful when you are attacked by multiple ballistic missiles. Furthermore, as far as i know, one of the reason THAAD, PAC-3, GDI use hit to kill method instead of blast warhead is due to the extreme closure rate between the interceptor and the RV => the fragments of HE warhead don't move fast enough to destroy RV, so we can predict that nuclear warhead is useful also because the neutrons rays can move faster than normal HE warhead fragments. Why do you think my link doesn't support my claim? They clearly stated that Sprint is accurate enough to hit RV head on. By saying PRS-1M is a new missile, i want to say that not all ABM with nuclear missiles are old missiles with old electronics
  4. I think it could be very simple At speed of 4 km/s, the distance of 40 km is covered in 10 seconds. In 10 seconds, your fighter fly at Mach 1 sea level can move at most 3.3 km in any direction from the original position. The 1 Mt nuclear warhead has: Fire ball radius of 0.97 km 5 psi air blast radius of 7.3 km 3 degrees thermal radiation burn radius of 12.2 km. In my opinion, the missile don't even need to turn.
  5. That was a myth: http://www.nuclearabms.info/Sprint.html These ABM was equipped with nuclear warhead so that they can hit multiple RV at the same time. Another thing i want to add: PRS-1M is a very new missile, recently introduced.
  6. That probably true, but SAM don't need to match the turn radius of fighter to intercept them. For interceptor what important about the target is the distance deviated from original course. A target moving at 100 km/h, but can turn 50 degrees/second is easier to intercept than another target moving at Mach 10, and can turn only 5 degrees/sec. Secondly, these missiles have nuclear warhead, and given their massive detonation/lethal radius (13 km) + the missiles super speed (mach 7-17) , i don't think they even need to turn, just launch toward the general direction of target and detonate
  7. Thermal radiation burn of 1 Mt nuke is 13 km btw https://nuclearsecrecy.com/nukemap/
  8. I think not all ABM lack kinematic capability, for example 53T6 is able to intercept incoming re-entry vehicles at a distance of 80 km. The missile achieves speeds of approximately Mach 17 (20,826 km/h; 12,941 mph; 5.7849 km/s) with maximal load manoeuvre capability is 210 g longitudinal and 90 g transverse. That is far better than any fighters, beside, all these ABM are equipped with nuclear warhead. In case of 51T6, the warhead yield is 2 megaton even. So even a near miss is highly destructive
  9. There is some bug with the earlier post that i can't edit , sorry, posted again For just a moment, let say cost and logistic is not an issue, and these following SAM are your only available weapons, can they be used against normal aircraft (such bomber or fighter)? if it is possible, how effective are they?. If it isn't possible then why? 1- Sprint The Sprint was a two-stage, solid-fuel anti-ballistic missile (ABM), armed with a W66 enhanced-radiation thermonuclear warhead used by the United States Army. It was designed to intercept incoming reentry vehicles(RV) after they had descended below an altitude of about 60 kilometres (37 miles), where the thickening air stripped away any decoys or radar reflectors and exposed the RV to observation by radar. As the RV would be travelling at about 5 miles (8.0 km) per second, Sprint had to have phenomenal performance to achieve an interception in the few seconds before the RV reached its target. Sprint accelerated at 100 g, reaching a speed of Mach 10 in 5 seconds 2- 51T6 Mass 33,000-45,000kg (73,000-100,000lb) Length 19.8 m Diameter 2.57m Blast yield Nuclear warhead equivalent to 10 kilotons of TNT Engine 2-stage solid fuel Operational range 350-900km Flight ceiling 350-900km Speed Mach 7 3- 53T6 missiles The missile is able to intercept incoming re-entry vehicles at a distance of 80 km. The 53T6 is a two-stage solid-propellant rocket armed with a 10 kt thermonuclear weapon. The missile is about 10 meters in length and 1.8 meters in diameter. Its launch weight is 10 tons. The 53T6 missile is kept in a silo-based launch container. Prior to launch its cover is blown off. The missile achieves speeds of approximately Mach 17 (20,826 km/h; 12,941 mph; 5.7849 km/s). Maximal load manoeuvre capability is 210 g longitudinal and 90 g transverse. 3-PRS-1M missiles the PRS-1M is the fastest rocket in the world much more deadly than its predecessors of the type 53T6. It can reach speeds of four kilometres per second which is about 14,500 kilometres per hour. PRS-1M manages to achieve speed in its rising phase unlike the Hypersonic gliders in the fall back to earth. Additionally the range of use in width and height it is one and a half times that of its predecessor. It can intercept approaching rockets at a height of 50 kilometres and the range should be around 350 kilometres. A special heat shield is developed to enable enormous speed and complete electronics have been designed to withstand an acceleration 300 times the gravitational force. It is a true doomsday weapon which can only be used in a war that destroys the world. PRS-1M does not come with a conventional warhead with fragmentation shell and is built to protect Moscow from US missiles with nuclear warheads.
  10. For just a moment, let say cost and logistic is not an issue, and these following SAM are your only available weapons, can they be used against normal aircraft (such bomber or fighter)? if it is possible, how effective are they?. If it isn't possible then why? 1- Sprint
  11. Why does pointy projectile create jamming? Can you elaborate, i dont get it
  12. Thanks everyone for these great answer: So basically to simplify Btw, does anyone have answer for the bonus question about 50 m supershot round ?
  13. I know APFSDS have very thin body because the more smaller the impact area, the higher the pressure with the same amount of force, therefore the round can penetrate deeper than if it was fat and short However, one thing i don't understand, why is the internal penetrating steel/tungsten core have such a blunt nose? not only that make the impact area bigger, it also mean the "real" perpetrator is effectively shorter. So what is the point? Bonus question: why does the 50 mm super shot have a blunt nose? isn't that draggier ? i know it is a sabot round but a draggier start also mean the round will accelerate to lower velocity, so why did they do that
  14. wow where did you got that
  15. But it won't hit moving target at that range right?
  16. Yes, but neither does infrared, furthermore, i don't think this is spoon feeding, provide source to what one claim is pretty common accepted rules for proper discussion. Burden of proof lies upon a person making claims I tried to look up laser side lobe but really i can't find anything, unlike radio frequency beam: Laser beam pattern: Radar beam pattern: I am not sure if that because laser beam has no side lobe or it is extremely in significant that it is not mentioned I have a look at several laser designators: Can be carried by infantry, max range 20 km => basically, you can illuminate enemy tank and they can't do anything Beam divergent: 130 micro radiance = 0.007448 degrees. At 20 km the beam spot is 2 meters in diameter, at 8 km the beam spot is only 1 meter in diameter
  17. I checked your source, but it seem that particular occasion was due to insect sticking to the seeker head more than anything else. Furthermore, it is impossible to compare when we only have Hellfire accuracy and nothing else, for example the accuracy of Sabot, Heat and MPHE round. For comparison, the PK of air to air BVR missiles is 55 %, the PK of anti aircraft cannon in Viet Nam war was 3-5%. Yet no one can doubt their danger. So I still think PK of 0.76 is pretty decent ATFLIR IOC in 2002 about 17 years ago, there are many newer system now such as ATP-SE. About spot size, this is what i can find: With beam width of 0.25 mrad or 0.01432394 degree, spot size at 74 km is 18 meters and spot size at 8 km is 2 meters 57E6 and 9M330 both have proximity fuse so they can also attack heli behind terrain masking AIM-9X has both terminal seeker and proximity fuse Never mind the fact that unlike MPHE tank round, these SHORAD all out range AGM-114 significantly and can be guided toward targets. Whereas for MPHE tank round, the helicopter can either stay further than 5 km or higher altitude and they would be effectively outside the engagement envelope . MPHE round are not guided either so i highly doubt that it can engage fast moving helicopter, can tank FCS even lead a helicopter moving at 200 km/h or faster? Non APFSDS round seem to have very significant gravity drop at distance: M820 round need about 4.2 seconds to fly out to 3 km, in that time a helicopter with speed of 200 km/h could have move 222 meters. At 5-8 km, the situation will be even worse for an unguided round. Overall, MPHE tank round seem like pretty pathetic threat to helicopter when comparing to dedicated SHORAD and MANPADs, i do not think MPHE tank round is the reason for NLOS missiles.
  18. I cound be wrong but i think 16 inch cannon round is bigger than Moskit warhead and probably faster too
  19. But the frontal shape charged of Bunkerfaust is far bigger than the follow through warhead, unlike BROACH
  20. Thank you for your thoughtful reply, it answer many of my questions. One thing though 1-What is the range of HE round on tank? Shouldn't it be shorter range than APFSDS since it is slower and draggier? 2- the question about Howitzer round vs modern MBT is because i was thinking, if poor countries can't make tank with proper armor and proper APFSDS rounds, then it probably better for them to design a thin skin armor and 152 mm HE
  21. 2. I have, but i honestly have no idea , they said it is equipped with Zaslon so... https://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/ukraines-tough-t-84-oplot-m-tank-wont-fight-russia-being-17817 3. was't K5 very good ? beside, APS still quite unpopular now so i guess GL-ATGM will be very useful in the past 4. Let say it hit the middle of the turret front? can the tank survive that Edit: ok you are right, i just realized now that Zaslon has very distinct shape so clearly they don't put it on Oplot (the operation seem pretty lame though)
  22. As far as i know, later Hellfire was equipped with MMW to give multi target engagement along with the Longbow radar plus the Fire and forget capability But i have never seen report of laser designation difficulty for early version of Hellfire though. I mean, if targeting pod on fighter can designate target from 72 km away i would expect helicopter laser designator at least 1/8 as good as that. https://www.raytheon.com/capabilities/products/atflir Beside, there are many long range weapons with SAL guidance: for example SPEAR, Brimstone II, AGM-65, JAGM, SDB II ..etc so I really skeptical that laser designation is problematic at merely 8 km Regarding the switch to NLOS missiles, i don't think the reason is MBT's MPHE. There are others threat to helicopter which are far far more dangerous to helicopter than tanks, for example: SHORAD such as Tor-m1 or Pantsir-S1. Compare to their missiles, the capability of MBT's MPHE is rather pathetic. Also what if we use something like this: Any way, about full size ATGM, there isn't really a fix definition i think, so when you said full size atgm, i just instantly think about F-16, A-10 weapons. What was the PK of AGM-65 anyway? i thought it got enough power to penetrate turret front of M1?
  23. 1- I got that if a tank which used LAHAT is only 2-3 km away from enemy then sure its enemy can retaliate with an APFSDS round, which is much faster and harder to defend. However, i can't see how that could be suicide if you use LAHAT to engage enemy tank from 6-8 km away? yes you have to illuminate target for the whole duration, so what? if enemy tank have no ATGM then they will have no way to retaliate . How is it any different from an AH-64 launching Hellfire at enemy tank? a helicopter have negligible armor yet they can be fairly effective tank hunter http://www.designation-systems.net/dusrm/m-114.html 2- I mentioned Maverick because you said damage by 155 mm hitting the turret is no worse than a full size ATGM. AGM-65 is a full size ATGM. AGM-65 was originally an anti armor missile with 125 lbs shaped charge warhead: AGM-65A, AGM-65B, AGM-65C, AGM-65D all use shaped charge warhead, the 300 lbs warhead only integrated in AGM-65E, AGM-65F and AGM-65G. I don't think mentioning AGM-65 is retarded though, it was a very popular anti tank weapon of F-16, F-4 and A-10 Though, I am quite curious why you call the shaped charge variant low energy and sad, 56 kg HEAT is still pretty massive is it not?
  • Create New...