Stingers vs Bombs

[major_sam47]

Ground Based Stinger Missiles against Incoming Bombs Dropped from High Altitude, and Missile Separated Warheads

I am seeking the opinion of experienced military personnel on some questions I had regarding a hypothetical method to intercept incoming bombs dropped from high altitude, and high altitude missile separated warheads. I’d greatly appreciate any time you could spare to respond.

1. How many stingers would be necessary to take out one or several of the largest bomb types currently available, in terms of their destructive power, that descend onto a target from a high altitude, solely under the influence of gravity ? Would it be possible to use stingers ? If not, is there a viable alternative ?

2. What could be the range in terms of size and surface geometry of such bombs that could be successfully intercepted by such stingers ? What could be the range in terms of size and surface geometry of each separated warhead that could be successfully intercepted by the stingers ?

3. What area of the bomb would the stingers have to strike in order to successfully destroy it while it is descending - center of geometry, center of gravity, mid-section, head-on ? Similarly for separated warhead.

4. Could such high altitude objects – bombs and separated warheads - be detected by a high altitude loitering UAV equipped with suitable stand alone radar sensors, with the latter transmitting the incoming object’s trajectory information to a stinger system on the ground, to enable successful intercept and destruction of the object at a low altitude point ? If this is viable, how high would the UAV have to fly ? Would it be viable to arm the UAV with air to air stingers as well ?

5. If such a concept is viable, would there be interest from the Indonesian, Malaysian, Turkish, Pakistani, Central Asian militaries, Arab militaries, to procure such a system ? Who would be the real decision makers in the country on the procurement of such systems – generals or ministry of defence ?

6. What simulation and CAD programs, by name, could be used to adequately test and develop the concept ? What software programs could be used to develop a prototype of the UAV ?

7. Could it be possible to develop a man-portable version of the UAV and the ground mounted stinger system ? – that is, weight and size effective enough for transport by infantry, without the aid of a vehicle.

Thank you for your time.

 

[Zeeshan S.]

1. How many stingers would be necessary to take out one or several of the largest bomb types currently available, in terms of their destructive power, that descend onto a target from a high altitude, solely under the influence of gravity ? Would it be possible to use stingers ? If not, is there a viable alternative ?

Hey,

The Surfaced-Launched Advanced Medium Range Air-to-Air Missile (SLAMRAAM) is the Army’s future shortrange air defense weapon. The SLAMRAAM program is intended to eventually replace all the Army’s shortrange air defense weapon systems that employ the Stinger missile. The SLAMRAAM system intends to give the Army the capability to engage targets (including cruise missiles and helicopters) to beyond line-of-sight and at greater ranges than the Stinger-based systems. SLAMRAAM is also intended to defend against the evolving air threat from unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) and cruise missiles.

It is very possible that Stringers can actually shoot down cruise missiles, the system works on many different factors, such as time available to shoot down the incoming bombs dropped by a high altitude long range bomber. It also depends on how many ground based SLAMRAAM are available compared to the bombs being dropped. It is very possible and impossible depending on these factors.

I dont know why anti-aircraft guns can't be used in this? I understand the its range, but many aircraft stationed to guard one place supported by various SAMs including long range, short range, and middle range, can be turn out to be very effective to guard a target from the huge monsters above *(long range bombers, stealth aircrafts.) I believe the anti-aircraft guns can also be used in this situation to shoot down the incoming dropped bombs.

Thats just for now.

 

[major_sam47]

mysterious,

I had no idea about this system. Do you know of any links where this SLAMRAAM system is discussed in more detail, being approved for public release ?

I would imagine the system you mentioned is not man-portable and could be like a sitting duck when deployed if its hard to move it to another location. How big is it ?

Do you see any value in having such characteristics fulfilled in a man-portable version - man-portable UAVs launched and networking radar acquired target information about incoming objects such as cruise missiles to ground based man-portable tripod mounted SA missiles (similar to stingers) to be able to target and destroy the object in flight ? That way, you'd have a much high rapid response ability, and much better evasion to recon. It would be lighter and cost effective. Why have something the size of a patriot system to drag around.

What are your thoughts on this ?

 

[Zeeshan S.]

Hey bud,

you can get the information of it from this site, http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/sys...ns/slamraam.htm

Its pretty informative. Regarding if the portable systems like Anza and Stringer types can have a higher rate of being successful is doubtful, cause it heavily depends on the person who is carrying it. Personally i would get the scare the hell out if cruise missile is coming on my way, and that too is smarter than me. LOL its like one of those cartoons they show on the TV! :laughing: where they guy runs around but the missile never gives up.

I would not consider it effective as the SLAMRAAM (its basically like PAC-3, but PAC-3 is even more effective)

Look at this, you said about the advantage of being it lighter, well the SLAMRAAM fire unit consists of four to six ready-to-fire AIM-120C-7 AMRAAMs mounted on an Army High Mobility Multi-Wheeled Vehicle (HMMWV). Which i think would be enough to counter the threat of cruise missile not just that it will be more effective to shoot down low range aircrafts and probably bombs too that may be dropped by the beasts.

 

[major_sam47]

Hi there mysterious,

Was it the US Army you were referring to in your first reply, or the Pakistani army ? If you meant the latter, how far could the PK Army be in the development or deployment of such a system ?

Looking at the system described on the link you referred to, I wonder to what extent that could be scaled down in size some more even, but still have the same effectiveness as the SLAMRAAM depicted. How much could the missile size be reduced to enable a man-portable version ? It looks great on a hummer. But hummers are still big targets from a recon point of view don't you think ? Would it not be best to have something which could be assembled from various modules in a short time ? The modules could all be man portable ?

Do you not see better value in such a scenario ? That way enemy recon by sateillte or other means would be less effective.

Lets say the situation deteriorated to the point where there were only horses available to the defending people, like the Afghans against the Soviets - fuel would be scarce, and all people would have are horses and whatever they could carry on these horses.

What could be the next best option above Anza and Stingers that could be technically possible and have the same effectiveness as the SLAMRAAM, when assembled, to deal with cruise missiles and other medium altitude objects ? Something that could be carried in 3 to 4 sub-modules by different cavalry units, and therefore by highly mobile and minimally detected. Modules that could be carried on horses if necessary. In addition to this, why not have man-portable UAVs assist such a system in medium altitude recon ?

Could a medium altitude loitering man-portable recon UAV assist the SLAMRAAM system or hypothetical system described above in terms of decreasing response time for interception of incoming objects ?

Am I off my rocker in thinking this way ? I wanted to see what could be technically possible in a worst case scenario. What are your thoughts on this ? Could it be technically feasible ?

In addition, you've suggested the effectiveness of an Anza or Stinger is impacted by the operator. Are these systems not configurable in an autonomous operating mode such they could be tripod mounted on a moment's notice and be automatically fired by digitized commands from a recon UAV flying at medium altitude ? In such a configuration, could not the operator deficiencies by compensated for, and system response be improved ? Do you know if this sort of configuration has been developed and tested ?

What do you think about all of this ? I welcome any constructive criticism.

 

[Zeeshan S.]

Originally posted by major_sam47@Dec 24 2005, 12:12 AM
Hi there mysterious,

Hey!

Was it the US Army you were referring to in your first reply, or the Pakistani army ? If you meant the latter, how far could the PK Army be in the development or deployment of such a system ?

I was reffering Pakistani army, as U.S doesn't have Anza S-to-A missiles. Pakistan army is really far and i mean really far from getting SLAMRAAM but there have been rumours that it is been kneen on getiting FT-2000 system which is very close to it, but its not western rather cheap chinese system price vice. It has a good quality and can perform very well with the threats of aircrafts, cruise missiles and maybe bombs for the air defences. This was forced because of Indian build up of its aircraft supremecy, and the possible induction of PAC-3 by United States some say india will not induct it cause its really expensive, and still its not stable yet.

Looking at the system described on the link you referred to, I wonder to what extent that could be scaled down in size some more even, but still have the same effectiveness as the SLAMRAAM depicted. How much could the missile size be reduced to enable a man-portable version ? It looks great on a hummer. But hummers are still big targets from a recon point of view don't you think ? Would it not be best to have something which could be assembled from various modules in a short time ? The modules could all be man portable ?

SLAMRAAM can be scaled down to fit in the mobile APCs and even tanks and with that they can perform very well. Anza(stringers) can also perform well but there is a need for courage to do that.

I agree hummers, tanks, and APCs will be a great target for such systems, but if you have money like U.S for defence there is a no need for worry, you are much secured through capability of SLAMRAAM. It can also support fellow armour to guide into an enemy's hearth while keeping it safe for armours from bombers, air superirioty fighters, etc..

The idea of man portable is not bad, but the research & development is not that far yet. Currently in my opinion only stringers class are doing well with man portable and it has even proven itself by shooting down Russian aircrafts in Aghan-Soviet war, India-Pak war, etc.. But for that there is a need for multiple units to secure the area effeciently.

Do you not see better value in such a scenario ? That way enemy recon by sateillte or other means would be less effective.

Lets say the situation deteriorated to the point where there were only horses available to the defending people, like the Afghans against the Soviets - fuel would be scarce, and all people would have are horses and whatever they could carry on these horses.

Same idea as of Man portable system. Only stringers can do well with this kind of situation and it has done well.

What could be the next best option above Anza and Stingers that could be technically possible and have the same effectiveness as the SLAMRAAM, when assembled, to deal with cruise missiles and other medium altitude objects ? Something that could be carried in 3 to 4 sub-modules by different cavalry units, and therefore by highly mobile and minimally detected. Modules that could be carried on horses if necessary. In addition to this, why not have man-portable UAVs assist such a system in medium altitude recon ?

Anza is effective as much as it could, but the man is not effective versus the machine. If a man has courage, traning, accuracy it hell can do well.

Could a medium altitude loitering man-portable recon UAV assist the SLAMRAAM system or hypothetical system described above in terms of decreasing response time for interception of incoming objects ?

Yes, possible through communication and satellite systems.

Am I off my rocker in thinking this way ? I wanted to see what could be technically possible in a worst case scenario. What are your thoughts on this ? Could it be technically feasible ?

The idea of having the system effective as SLAMRAAM but portable can be worked on. Portable systems have been perform very well in ground support for destroying armours as well as air-to-surface objects. Pakistan has indeginiously produced Baktra-Shikan system that can act as close brother of Stringer air-to-air missiles. Baktar-Shikan is used for destroying heavy armours, easily. I am sure U.S has such system too maybe only better, but doesn't care to show off, or the media is not strong enough to show off these products. As for Pakistani forces community, we save all the information that comes out from media and they remain save in the web pages where as U.S forces community is not strong enough.. more are in international forums as a whole.

In addition, you've suggested the effectiveness of an Anza or Stinger is impacted by the operator. Are these systems not configurable in an autonomous operating mode such they could be tripod mounted on a moment's notice and be automatically fired by digitized commands from a recon UAV flying at medium altitude ? In such a configuration, could not the operator deficiencies by compensated for, and system response be improved ? Do you know if this sort of configuration has been developed and tested ?

UAVs are acting a very good part in this kind scenerios these days, though the systems are not automatic but are peforming very efficiently through communication and visibility of enemy's position, and also by the radar power of course. UAV's now days actually send the video data to air defence positions for surface side enemy (armours), as for the the air, it is the radars that are doing the main job in these scenerios, and then systems like SLAMRAAM, Stringers, and other systems do the job.

Sorry for my bad english..as its not my first language, and if anything is not clear to you feel free to ask.

 

[EagleEyes]

Hey sam,

Just for the benefit, here is a video i have found for SLAMRAAM.

Clich here to see: http://video.greatestjournal.com/node/969

 

[Sharjeel]

Originally posted by WebMaster@Jan 5 2006, 04:13 AM
Hey sam,

Just for the benefit, here is a video i have found for SLAMRAAM.

Clich here to see: http://video.greatestjournal.com/fil...MRAAM_Boom.wmv

[post=5094]Quoted post[/post]​

stingers are heat seekers. bumbs doent make heat...!!!

also we use anza not stinger as the main manpad.

and anza also is a heat seeker.

also detection of the bombs via radar would be a bit of a challange hour ever i am sure we can rig important areas with that projectile thingi radar. (detects incoming projectiles) and copule it with radar guided anzas....

 

[major_sam47]

Hi mysterious, webmaster, others...sorry for my late reply...interesting comments you have offerred mysterious...I wonder how any of this can be simulated and what software tools are available for that

Continuing on that discussion of possible man-portable, rapidly deployable, cruise missile defence system, what advantage could a radar UAV provide a hypothetical ground based system such as a Pakistani SLAMRAAM, Anza, or Stinger system, in terms of successfully sensing and providing accurate trajectory information to such SA systems to successfully intercept an incoming supersonic cruise missile, such as Brahmos, Tomahawk, Onyx, Sunburn, or anything moving around mach 3.0 ? How could the AWAC, as a look down radar, be scaled down and miniaturized to a man-portable and launched medium altitude, radar UAV, capable of sensing supersonic or hypersonic cruise missiles ? Could there be a significant response time advantage ?

If Pakistan was attacked with such cruise missiles how would it defend itself ?

 

[major_sam47]

Yahya...thanks...

Webmaster...that link didn't work...is there another one ?

 

[Sharjeel]

Originally posted by major_sam47@Jan 14 2006, 12:03 AM
Hi mysterious, webmaster, others...sorry for my late reply...interesting comments you have offerred mysterious...I wonder how any of this can be simulated and what software tools are available for that

Continuing on that discussion of possible man-portable, rapidly deployable, cruise missile defence system, what advantage could a radar UAV provide a hypothetical ground based system such as a Pakistani SLAMRAAM, Anza, or Stinger system, in terms of successfully sensing and providing accurate trajectory information to such SA systems to successfully intercept an incoming supersonic cruise missile, such as Brahmos, Tomahawk, Onyx, Sunburn, or anything moving around mach 3.0 ? How could the AWAC, as a look down radar, be scaled down and miniaturized to a man-portable and launched medium altitude, radar UAV, capable of sensing supersonic or hypersonic cruise missiles ? Could there be a significant response time advantage ?

If Pakistan was attacked with such cruise missiles how would it defend itself ?

[post=5347]Quoted post[/post]​

yes the awacs will have the ability to spot incoming targets no matter how low they are.

the awacs will be linked to our c41. which enables all sensory information to be presented on one massive war room screen and on any other screen in any other location at any time simultaniusly.

i suppose with rocket men positioned everywhere (how do we do this?) could be instructed to fire before the missile reaches them.

anza one: maximum target speed 250m/s thus anza cant lock onto mach 3.

anza 2: reaction time 3.5 seconds it reali depends on from how far it can detect the target. the enemy missile travels 1km a second so it is unlikely for this missile to get it. never the less its still worth a shot.

stinger blk 2: 750ms. this also has some chance. (mach 2.2)

 

[EagleEyes]

Originally posted by major_sam47@Jan 13 2006, 07:04 PM
Yahya...thanks...

Webmaster...that link didn't work...is there another one ?

[post=5348]Quoted post[/post]​

Here it is: http://video.greatestjournal.com/node/969

I would also suggest you contribute in the whole forum too maybe you will learn something new. :wink:

Enjoy!

 

[major_sam47]

Thanks Webmaster....alot of music in that one

Yahya...intercept speed would be a critical factor. I thought Anza analogs of the Stingers were developed and already deployed by PK. Could not a 750 m/s Stinger analog be extended to 1.00 or 1.25 km/s.

Regarding the AWACs, I mentioned those b/c they currently seem to be the only airborne early warning platform, which incidentally can detect multiple incoming projectiles (600 simultaneoulsy according to one reference I read).

PK doesn't have the AWACs. What do you say of the feasibility in developing a scaled down, AWAC equivalent, in terms of a group of medium altitude UAVs, that are man-portable, and that would form a radar network, in which each element of say 4-5 UAVs contributes look-down sensory information, on incoming cruise missiles or other low altitude missiles to appropriate ground based, man portable, intercept systems, with capabilties between the Stinger and SLAMRAAM systems.

Has PK developed an intercept missile like that ? Mach 3.0 speed or greater ? And man portable ? If not, is it technically feasible ? What would be the current limitations in making a such man-portable system - rocket motor ?

What kind of sensor package would be needed on these hypothetical UAVs to be able to provide good early warning sensory information to the man-portable ground SA intercepters to enable successful destruction of an incoming cruise missile, such as a Sunburn ?

This needs to be developed by PK. How can this be technically analyzed ? Is there software available to test the concept ?

 

[major_sam47]

Some other questions as well:

1. How similar is the Baktar-Shikan to the French Mistral.

BTW, Yahya, French Mistral can move at Mach 3.5. Pakistan acquired Mistral from France. Has an analog been developed by PK ?

2. Has Pakistan developed, in addition to Anza, analogs of Raytheon's Stinger, Javelin, and Spike ?

3. What maximum weight could an infantry soldier handle in terms of equipment ?

4. The US F/A-22 is supposed to be capable in detecting cruise missiles in look down radar mode. Could its radar be scaled down for UAV applications ?

5. How could Aerostats be effectively employed, and at exactly what altitude, with what kind of stand-alone radar, to be able to achieve successful combat identification of cruise missiles moving in a terrain hugging, circuitous path ? The radar would also need to be immune to interference from topographical features. How could a visual radar be effectively employed for this ? What type of radar would be the best option, for a 15-20 km detection radius ?

6. The UAV radar would need to tansmit the trajectory information to a Mistral type of MAN-PORTABLE SA missile (maybe the Baktar-Shikan could be used for this), to intercept successfully.

Does anybody have anything to offer here ?

WS,

major_sam47

 

[Zeeshan S.]

AWACs can't have a scaled down version for UAV. Its just impossible. AWACs is not just a radar, but also a war room for planning, detecting, and sending out information. Even if a UAV can have strong radar to detect multiple targets, how is the data going to respond to the ground base. In AWAC it is all about time and how fast they provide information to the friendly aircraft about the incoming enemy's aircraft. If the information to provide is slow, there will be no purpose that AWAC will serve. Besides i dont think UAV will have enough strong radar to act as a AWAC maybe mini AWAC but that too is really advanced.

Currently the Su-30MKI has a mini AWAC supported by BARS and other western tech, while performing long range missions, and getting edge in the warfare.