Posted on 11/26/2022 1:04:44 PM PST by Its All Over Except ...
Meanwhile, the Russian artillery has lost accuracy because the tubes are worn out. There are no replacements.
GPS is easy jammable. But inertial guidance? Good but the precision will go down significantly. And I doubt you may cram reliable gyro into a artillery’s shell. So it is a hoax.
The latest drones use a combination of mapped terrain memory, GPS, and inertial guidance systems. Nearly impossible to jam.==
Drone yes. But drones are sitting ducks themselves and can’t approach closer then 100 miles or be shot down. If drone will emit anything then it will be useful for homing on this drone. Drone will drag the AA missile to itself literally.
I worked with the developement/developers of this stuff for decades.
You do not know what you are talking about.
Inertial guidance and gps have been used in smart munitions from artillery, for at least a decade.
The systems, last I heard, were being used in 120 mm mortars.
The systems and miniaturization have only gotten better. They. Do. Not. Need. Laser. Guidance.
Drone yes. But drones are sitting ducks themselves and can’t approach closer then 100 miles or be shot down. If drone will emit anything then it will be useful for homing on this drone. Drone will drag the AA missile to itself literally.
Use your head a bit. If what you say is correct, then how are those Iranian drones hitting so much Ukrainian infrastructure?
There are several solutions to the problem of emitting a target signature. Drones do not have to emit continuously. AA has to have a continuous signal to home in on, to be very effective, because they have a limited timespan to find and kill the drone.
Inertial guidance and gps have been used in smart munitions from artillery, for at least a decade.==
GPS yes but not inertial guidance. You may embed gyro to a missile but not to artillery’s shell. Also if you check Wiki on Excalibur then you see that it has GRS and laser homing. But not gyro.
The systems, last I heard, were being used in 120 mm mortars.==
Not gyro. GPS and laser homing too. Russia has such mortar shells also.
Use your head a bit. If what you say is correct, then how are those Iranian drones hitting so much Ukrainian infrastructure?==
There is a different kind of drones. There are 2 kinds. The surveillance - targeting drones and bomb-drones. Those Iranian are bomb-drones. Such drone actually similar for cruise missiles so they fly very low and do not emit anything. And the route always is layed around posotions of AA machines. The targeting is by Glonass.
I worked extensively with the people who developed the systems.
Yes, they have inertial guidance. You do not need mechanical gyros for inertial guidance. You use electronic ones. Tiny, minuscule, electronic ones.
You are mistaken about wikipedia here is a quote from them:
"It is a GPS- and inertial-guided munition capable of being used in close support situations within 75–150 meters (250–490 ft) of friendly troops or in situations where targets might be prohibitively close to civilians to attack with conventional unguided artillery fire."
Inertial guidance systems keep getting smaller and smaller.
A German test of the smart fuse which is added to conventional 155mm artillery shells found, at 27 km, 90% of the smart fuse shells hit within 5m of their target. That was in 2014.
Those fuses are very cheap compared to Excaliber rounds. The conventional shells do not have the extended range of Excaliber rounds.
They have gotten better. Most of the correction to the trajectory occurs before apogee of the flight of the projectile, so local defenses, such as jamming, are useless, and are mostly overcome by the inertial guidance, anyway.
The targeting is by Glonass.
GPS is at least as robust as Glonass.
I was part of the very large team which developed GPS. My contributions were data collection.
I studied Glonass, a bit. Not a bad system, but, unfortunately, with GPS already there, very little commercial market for Glonass. This limits the incentives for continual improvements.
As I have written, repeatedly: Smart munitions do not need laser guidance. It can be used with many. It can drop the error from 5 meters to .5 meters. But with an artillery shell, 5 meters is almost always enough.
Yes, they have inertial guidance. You do not need mechanical gyros for inertial guidance. You use electronic ones==
Electronic gyro? Let them use them. They are very inaccurate.
A German test of the smart fuse which is added to conventional 155mm artillery shells found, at 27 km, 90% of the smart fuse shells hit within 5m of their target. That was in 2014.==
It is GPS guided. It can be if GPS is not jammed. But all real material depos at this war always defended by AA machines and GPS jammers.
Most of the correction to the trajectory occurs before apogee of the flight of the projectile, ==
Why to correct at this stage? You kind of defeat a purpose. During flight there can be like atmospheric turbulence which drag away projectile and you are not correcting it anymore.
Russian shell is corrected just when it goes down on target so they are more precise then.
Not a bad system, but, unfortunately, with GPS already there, very little commercial market for Glonass. This limits the incentives for continual improvements.==
How GPS may get a commercial returns if it is just broadcasting system for anyone to listen? I doubt that GPS got any penny from Russia for example but we use it for years.
But Glonass is embedded to any weapon system Russia sells. SO any country say from Afrika may have a cheap high precision weaponry with satellite targeting. SO it is a commercial returns.
As I have written, repeatedly: Smart munitions do not need laser guidance. It can be used with many. It can drop the error from 5 meters to .5 meters. But with an artillery shell, 5 meters is almost always enough.===
If you need to hit up say one blindage or one tank or one ICV which you see from your drone then you will very need 0.5m precision. Russia uses them today exactly this way. To take out a blindage or a tank or a group of soldiers and so on. 5m is too much for such targets to destroy tank or blindage if it is just 10-20 pounds of explosive but just shake it and scratch it.
It might take two or three smart munitions to kill one.
A hit a meter away will disable one, at minimum.
Then there are the loitering munitions which deploy above tanks, and pick out the tank to hit, all internally programed. Multiple munitions from one shell. Takes out 2 tanks with one munition each, through the top.
You may believe differently, at your peril, but that is your choice.
One possibility is the system learns what is going on in the atmosphere on the way up, and applies those corrections on the way down by memory.
Atmospherics are very important, but are most important in the first two thirds of the flight. They are least important at the termination of the flight.
It might take two or three smart munitions to kill one.==
If there no a direct hit then you won’t kill a t72 at all. You may incapacitate it and the crew may be stunned but repairmen will fix it back to action to a next day.
But it needs only one Krasnopol shell hit to completely kill a tank or blindage full of ukie soldiers. Proved many times on this war. Because it is a laser-guided and precision 0.5m.
Then there are the loitering munitions which deploy above tanks, and pick out the tank to hit, all internally programed.==
Yes Russian variant is called Lancet and widely used in this war. They use it for artillery’s pieces hunting in a tactical back zone. There are a lot of clips for this matter.
Last month they tripled number of hits. Seems like the military plants are working non-stop 24 hours and number of them going up.
You may believe differently, at your peril, but that is your choice.===
Same to you)))...
Be sure to also say something to Speedy here:
Attack On Europe: Documenting Russian Equipment Losses During The 2022 Russian Invasion Of Ukraine
https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/4112328/posts
😁
He just made one post with, and I know this is a new concept for some, paragraphs separating the different ideas.
The Ukranians are relying on the accuracy of the US supplied Howitzers and take them out of action once their accuracy is compromised while the Russians really don’t care to much about accuracy and rely on volume. Believe me, their artillery is wearing out, too.
In battleships, the rounds fired were all sized to account for barrel wear with sequential rounds slightly larger than previous rounds.
I think that Russia is also wanting a cease fire to rearm, having never accounted for a protracted war.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.