tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-386077914312449748.post4139911923184745079..comments2024-03-27T20:37:08.065+01:00Comments on Defence and Freedom: A moment of uncertainty about RMAUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-386077914312449748.post-24144499408586707222011-12-17T01:09:22.310+01:002011-12-17T01:09:22.310+01:00Good sensors are expensive and less capable sensor...Good sensors are expensive and less capable sensors directing at short range could really make a difference. <br />What if stand-off was using a far away platform, but a hidden very close observer for terminal guidance support? <br />The problem is that all sensors rely more or less on waves with decreasing intensity according to the power of two of the distance. So good sensors for longer distance pose staggering demands and come with a price tag (companies like). Can you rather hide close to the target a cheap sensor that can communicate and escape after accomplishing the mission? An even better sensor would be a tracking device on the enemy target, offering a very clear guidance.<br />In my opinion this is an essential gap and a less capable enemy can try to exploit it with much higher effective fire results.<br />That leads me to the question how smart must a bomb be? If you can combine a less capable bomb with a returning UAV without stellar avionics wouldn't that enhance the economy of many strikes and still provide a very long stand off due to refuelling on the route.<br />The concept of one-way expensive missiles is likely an error in development because these weapons will rather serve a task similar to sniper rifles in the infantry, but you need much more automatic firearms, grenade launchers and machineguns to be effective on the target at acceptable costs.<br />A kind of simplified unmanned A10 would be my choice for many missile and bombing tasks supported by infantry scouts, unmanned submersibles and small scout UAVs.<br />The mentioned marking could be carried out with a large number of small inexpensive short range missiles using not a destroying, but a marking, de-stealthing, warhead.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-386077914312449748.post-3829717826595148182009-03-05T15:59:00.000+01:002009-03-05T15:59:00.000+01:00Overly obsessed with "scorin'" zero-...Overly obsessed with "scorin'" zero-casualties. A post - Vietnam symptom is all that can be said of RMA, methinks. War, precise and clean. Like a video game. Wonder if they knew what happened when they started dropping those graphite bombs...<BR/><BR/>Then we have the quagmire of Iraq & Afghanistan where all the high -tech tools were not really "force - multipliers".Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-386077914312449748.post-77625865242281529402009-02-28T09:39:00.000+01:002009-02-28T09:39:00.000+01:00Well, the RMA/NCW answer to shoot&scoot is the...Well, the RMA/NCW answer to shoot&scoot is the integration of aerial SAR/GMTI radar technology:<BR/><BR/>The counter-artillery radar measures the ammunition's external ballistics and calculates their origin.<BR/>Datalink.<BR/>One such aerial radar looks in SAR (synthetic aperture radar) mode at the area or origin and identifies one or more vehicles as the evil ordnance.<BR/>The enemy ordnance begins to move, the aerial radar switches to GMTI (ground moving target indicator) and tracks the movement till the ordnance rests again. Then switch to SAR, identification again, comparison of SAR picture with map, to determine the exact coordinates.<BR/>Datalink.<BR/>Own MLRS fires one or several guided munitions at exactly the right spot.<BR/>BDA (battle damage assessment) by aerial radar in SAR mode, also checking for movement.<BR/>The target could also be included in the flight path of a recon drone in the next hours to confirm the kill.<BR/><BR/>The SAR/GMTI works at range in excess of 300 km, even 40 km guns cannot hide if the terrain is flat.<BR/>An alternative to large SAR/GMTI radar aircraft would be a drone with a smaller-ranged, but equally performing radar - there's one such package for the Predator. It could be fitted into seriously survivable drones.<BR/><BR/>By the way; the movement of the OPFOR artillery can also be blocked in a somewhat closed terrain by MLRS rockets with AT mines like AT-2 as cargo. I've never seen a SPH with a dozer blade or similar mine-clearing equipment.<BR/><BR/>The problems are numerous, of course; enemy electronic warfare, camouflage, concealment, deception and hard kill attack on the actively emitting radars.S Ohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03359796414832859686noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-386077914312449748.post-39981713829796649982009-02-27T20:33:00.000+01:002009-02-27T20:33:00.000+01:00Many of today's precision weapons are far less pre...Many of today's precision weapons are far less precise than the military would have you believe. Sheer firepower will still be important, and modern armies shouldn't make the mistake of relying too much on their precision weapons, especially since these weapons systems tend to be quite expensive. Another thing to keep in mind when talking about long range weaponry is the mobility of the target. It takes a while for an artillery shell fired from long range to hit its target, with modern self-propelled artillery, we could see prolonged artillery duels between self-propelled artillery batteries that can coordinate attacks from dispered positions and move before the enemy can return fire. In the meantime tank forces could close in and engage the artillery. In any case mobility is key to defeat long range weaponry, and increased volume of fire is the key to defeat mobility at range.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com