Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Gun Grape
Just my 2 cents worth. How did this thread slip under my radar earlier?
An answer to some of your questions Garry.
I’ll give you 1 reason that MLRS is more advanced (and survivable)
Fire control: the M-270 MLRS is a self contained firing unit. Capable of receiving, processing and firing a mission with no outside support. They can conduct a technique that use to be called roaming gun. A launcher can ride around (or hide in a garage) until it receives a fire mission, pull into an open space, push a button and fire all 12 rounds in less than 2 min. No need to establish comm. with a command vehicle. No need to survey the position. Then it can move to a reload/firing site. A place where another 2 6 packs have been dropped off. There it can drop the empty 6 packs. An empty launcher can reload both 6 packs of rockets, fire a mission, and be moving to another position in under 5 min.
The Smearch relies on a separate command vehicle to plug into all the launchers. It takes 2 mins from reception of fire mission to fire, and this from a position that they are already surveyed in and hooked up to the command vehicle. Which BTW displays a pattern on the ground that can be identified as a Smearch unit. Pretty high on the target list.
|
Hi Gun Grape! Now I see the advantages of M-280. Indeed being autonomous increases its chance of survival until firing.... but then it is too late for enemy. Listen - can it be compared to a short version of Smerch - two vehicles, a command and laucher? This group is not that easy to find as a group of 6 vehicles. It would still be cheaper than one M-280 and have higher range, weight of salvo, and cost per salvo. I agree that hiding a group of six vehicles is quite a hard task but two is more mobile group!
Quote:
That and their fire computations sucked. We would pull up in front of the grunts (FLOT) prior to the ground war and shoot a few rounds. Their Counterbattery response would always be a few clicks off. (Thank God) Part of it is how they split a circle. Soviet fire support and survey use a circle with less mils than the US/English standard.
And our response would either be MLRS or grab something from the CAS stack.
|
I still can not understand why they never barraged brindges with salvo from Nasriya? And why they needed so much of computations if they had MANY month for testshooting of every inch of important areas which coalition would definitelly pass. One barrage would have destroyed a bridge and a lot of troops. It is far smarter than the suisadal tank attack they did in the night without air support and artillery preparation. They could have calculated fire computations for long before!!!
Quote:
|
Not a good idea if they are moving. Smerch , US MLRS and ATACMs are better suited to 2 different missions. 1 being counter battery. The other large C4I targets (div CPs) and staging areas. They are not weapons that you use against moving targets
|
In Chechnya one salvo from one Grad launcher did heavy dammage to a armored colunm. Smerch is much more powerful. I remember it was aimed to attack advancing enemy. It can cover large areas...... where enemy is moving. I am not expert but I see no problems here
Quote:
|
Nothing much, most ICM AT bomblets are good against a few inches of steel if they hit at the proper angle and force. All these systems have a high dud rate (up to 70% depending on terrain) If they don’t hit solid, the striker will not hit the primer hard enough to work. According to the Army Tech site you gave Smerch only uses AP (HE) bomblets so little or no damage to the structure but will shread any antennas that the unit was stupid enough to have colocated. The Unitarian blast warhead is the same as hitting with a ground burst HE. Most of the explosive force will go everywhere except against the bunker.
|
yes, it is not good against heavy bunkers but a fortified positions that are open to air fuel bombing can be destroyed by Smerch.
http://www.splav.org/en/arms/smerch/m55c.asp
this is very much like the famours Buratino which is a very short range thing but destroys everything in square of 200m x 400m.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita...ssia/tos-1.htm
http://warfare.ru/?linkid=1582&catid=240&image=338
I agree about few inches of steel. Its self guided cassets can penetrate 70mm armor at 30 degree angle - just enough for any tank from top. here it is not translated from Russian properly - Russian it is called a self guiding cassete
http://www.splav.org/en/arms/smerch/m55k1.asp
Quote:
|
Within 2 minutes of you launching that UAV, a MLRS salvo or a JDAM/JSOW will be coming your way. The US excels at battlefield surveillance. The Smerch launched UAV was a very bad idea in a high CBR environment. You will notice that we don’t do UAVs that way. We know better. A Q-37 radar/MLRS team can have rounds downrange before the enemy’s rounds impact their target. And I’m talking 152/155mm cannon TOF
|
it depends on where do you shoot it.... UAV may come not on direct trajectory but be launched to some area and then fly away. Moreover this shell has special fuel which leaves little trace. So it would be hard to calculate a trajectory on which UAN came to your position..... it may be launched up and then fly to you from anywehre. All you would know is that somebody observing you and preparing a salvo which may go in minutes on your positions.
Quote:
Not according to your references you do not have laser guided Smearch rockets. We also have the parachute antiarmor rounds , SADARM, that have been used in Iraq. And BAT.
What does the US care about expensive rockets? A drop in the bucket to a country that operates the B-2, F-22 and CBGs. We will run out of targets before we run out of money 
|
This is a bit separate system. Krasnopol is used to guide any atrillery/MLRS shells to a target..... it is add in to an normal artillery but guided by lazer. Same was applied recently to MLRS. A Rockets with Kranopol guiding were fired and tested. But it requries somebody sit on spot and guide them..... and SMERCH then shoots from 90km range only few of its rockets which go preciselly to any moving/unmoving target.
http://www.shipunov.com/rus/kuwr/krasn.htm
http://www.shipunov.com/eng/kuw/kuw.htm
So Krasnopol complex was used by SMERCH and evaluation was positive... it will be fielded.
I agree that it is better to pay many times for being sure that what needs to be destoyed is destroyed!