All Things Air Defence/AA (merged)

[a_majoor]

Another sideways digression, but while reading an article on the US Navy's quest to replace the LCS with a frigate design, I was a bit surpirsed to see the selected design uses a "through tube missile" as it's primary air defence weapon:

US Navy scuppers flawed Littoral Combat Ship fleet

https://asiatimes.com/2020/07/us-navy-scuppers-littoral-combat-ship-program/

The Italian FREMM type is equipped with two optimized 76mm super rapid guns that can fire the DART missile. DART is a type of guided ammunition housed inside a standard 76mm ammunition canister.

When DART is fired, the outer housing drops off and the missile, with a special fragmentation warhead, can fly considerably farther than a standard 76mm round. More importantly it has control fins and can be steered to intercept a target such as an incoming missile.

While a 76mm mounted on an armoured chassis isn't impossible, it would be rather large and unweildy. It would be interesting to see how small this could be shrunk, I've seen articles of things like 50mm "Chain Guns" which could be mounted on a LAV chassis, and having something like the "Dart" shrunk down to that size would be useful. A fire support LAV with conventional 50mm ammunition and linked to a fire control system could also add in using something like AHEAD ammunition, filling the sky with fragments, and being a useful ammunition against unarmoured ground targets.

 

[FSTO]

Provocative.

See article here

:stirpot:

Our CAF doctrine is based on borrowing from our allies. Does the Minister know this? :rofl:

 

[Colin Parkinson]

While a 76mm mounted on an armoured chassis isn't impossible, it would be rather large and unweildy. It would be interesting to see how small this could be shrunk,

It's been done http://www.army-guide.com/eng/product4507.html

 

[a_majoor]

It's been done http://www.army-guide.com/eng/product4507.html

Well then - the 100% solution is already here. Now we just need to coordinate the planning and political will to actually get the thing....

 

[CBH99]

I would think jumping onboard the American IM-SHORAD vehicle, based on the Piranha / LAV chassis, would be our best vehicle-based solution. 

Hop on the production line.  Our numbers would be fairly limited anyway, as would the American order compared to the numbers of things they usually order.

Only thing I'd like to see is perhaps a gun system on one side, rather than missile systems on both sides.  A missile might be a wee bit overkill and brutally cost inefficient if your just taking down a small drone, for example.  (Didn't the ADATS have a gun system, in addition to the missiles?)

Vehicle commonality with our existing fleet.  Commonality with spare parts, training, vehicle support infrastructure, etc etc.  Could introduce the vehicle to the Army fairly easily, and provide an extremely important capability.



I would also be satisfied, even if just in the short term, of a MANPAD system.  Some of the current MANPAD systems out there are extremely potent and deadly, and can kill drones/helicopters/low flying aircraft with ease.  (Which is what the vehicle based system would be engaging also.)    :2c:

 

[FJAG]

I would think jumping onboard the American IM-SHORAD vehicle, based on the Piranha / LAV chassis, would be our best vehicle-based solution. 
...
Only thing I'd like to see is perhaps a gun system on one side, rather than missile systems on both sides.  A missile might be a wee bit overkill and brutally cost inefficient if your just taking down a small drone, for example.  (Didn't the ADATS have a gun system, in addition to the missiles?)
...
I would also be satisfied, even if just in the short term, of a MANPAD system.  Some of the current MANPAD systems out there are extremely potent and deadly, and can kill drones/helicopters/low flying aircraft with ease.  (Which is what the vehicle based system would be engaging also.)    :2c:

I think IM-SHORAD incorporates a 30mm cannon and a 7.62mm machine gun just for that purpose. I agree having the system on our fleet of vehicles would have several advantages; local manufacture and maintenance; vehicle system compatibility; weapon/sensor/control system integration with future US AD systems.

My thought on an interim measure is a bit different and goes to renting one or two Avenger batteries from the US to provide training and experience using vehicle born and networked AD solutions. If we did that we could also lean on the US system for trg and lessons learned as they upgrade from Avenger to IM-SHORAD.

:cheers:

 

[GK .Dundas]

I think IM-SHORAD incorporates a 30mm cannon and a 7.62mm machine gun just for that purpose. I agree having the system on our fleet of vehicles would have several advantages; local manufacture and maintenance; vehicle system compatibility; weapon/sensor/control system integration with future US AD systems.

My thought on an interim measure is a bit different and goes to renting one or two Avenger batteries from the US to provide training and experience using vehicle born and networked AD solutions. If we did that we could also lean on the US system for trg and lessons learned as they upgrade from Avenger to IM-SHORAD.

:cheers:


As I recall didn't GDC also build the USMC's Air defence system based on LAV 25 ?
Using the GAU 25 Equalizer and dismounted Stingers.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

I think IM-SHORAD incorporates a 30mm cannon and a 7.62mm machine gun just for that purpose. I agree having the system on our fleet of vehicles would have several advantages; local manufacture and maintenance; vehicle system compatibility; weapon/sensor/control system integration with future US AD systems.

My thought on an interim measure is a bit different and goes to renting one or two Avenger batteries from the US to provide training and experience using vehicle born and networked AD solutions. If we did that we could also lean on the US system for trg and lessons learned as they upgrade from Avenger to IM-SHORAD.

:cheers:

Very much agree, then we avoid the dogs breakfast that is our procurement system. 

 

[Retired AF Guy]

I think IM-SHORAD incorporates a 30mm cannon and a 7.62mm machine gun just for that purpose. I agree having the system on our fleet of vehicles would have several advantages; local manufacture and maintenance; vehicle system compatibility; weapon/sensor/control system integration with future US AD systems.
:cheers:

Info sheet for the IM-SHORAD:

 

[a_majoor]

Just to play devils advocate, the 76mm cannon used to fire the Dart SAM can also fire programmable munitions (think of AHEAD ammunition) which are much larger and more lethal than any 30mm cannon round - the gun can take on adversary attack helicopters if needed and probably at a longer range as well. You also have the option to use this against ground targets, one again with greater range and effect than a 30mm cannon. This is one singular weapons system which does not need separate launchers and guns.

I think the essentiall simplicty of the 76mm cannon and only two natures of ammunition (DART and AHEAD) should be considered as a positive when studying the trade offs between systems.

 

[FJAG]

A low velocity radar guided gun that fires proximity fuzed flechette rounds would probably be effective too against helicopters and UAVs and put much less stress on the carriage/vehicle.

If that's a new idea then I claim intellectual property rights.  ;D

:cheers:

 

[CBH99]

A low velocity radar guided gun that fires proximity fuzed flechette rounds would probably be effective too against helicopters and UAVs and put much less stress on the carriage/vehicle.

If that's a new idea then I claim intellectual property rights.  ;D

:cheers:

As far as I know, you are the only lawyer here.  If anybody knows who to actually do that, it's you. 

 

[FJAG]

As far as I know, you are the only lawyer here.  If anybody knows who to actually do that, it's you. 

Been there; done that; got the T-shirt:

Halford v Seed Hawk and Simplot Canada Ltd. Fed Ct of Appeal

I was counsel for Simplot Canada. Long case - eleven years. Really long trial - spread over four years.  :facepalm:

:cheers:

 

[Old Sweat]

A low velocity radar guided gun that fires proximity fuzed flechette rounds would probably be effective too against helicopters and UAVs and put much less stress on the carriage/vehicle.

If that's a new idea then I claim intellectual property rights.  ;D

:cheers:

I don't know about originality, but it is a good idea. It, however, has one drawback, and that is the limited direction of a flechette round, unless you are thinking about launching them in all directions. The number of flechettes, as opposed to splinters from a fragmentation round detonation, would be limited. When we first took delivery of the Blowpipe missile back circa 1975, NDHQ had neglected to procure a decent target system. While we eventually got a very good device, for the first couple of years training operators, we used 105mm illuminating rounds as targets. A few students would get lucky and their missile would pass close enough to the round to initiate the missile's proximity fuze, but the number was certainly less than one per course serial. I wonder how many illuminating canisters descending under a parachute would have been hit by a flechette.

 

[Spencer100]

This

https://www.defensenews.com/digital-show-dailies/smd/2020/08/05/armys-interim-short-range-air-defense-system-on-track-despite-minor-hiccup-in-tests/

 

[Colin Parkinson]

We could jump on this by adding another 15 LAV 6 hulls to be fitted with the AD system and take part in their training. That way we use their learning curve, missile buys and can easily integrate into their AD plan.

 

[FJAG]

We could jump on this by adding another 15 LAV 6 hulls to be fitted with the AD system and take part in their training. That way we use their learning curve, missile buys and can easily integrate into their AD plan.

Unfortunately we already have the Ground Based Air and Munitions Defence project which will probably take 10 years to figure out that defence systems against drones, aircraft and "munitions" are very different things than what IM-SHORAD will deliver and that no one system will do it all and that the only suite of solutions for the protection of a brigade will costs significantly more than the $250-499 million estimates and will miss the 20125 IOC by a half a decade.

Or, maybe I'm being unfair. Maybe.

:waiting:

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Well i think a all in one Canada designed system would be perfect, by the way can you get it to kill tanks as well?

 

[FSTO]

Been there; done that; got the T-shirt:

Halford v Seed Hawk and Simplot Canada Ltd. Fed Ct of Appeal

I was counsel for Simplot Canada. Long case - eleven years. Really long trial - spread over four years.  :facepalm:

:cheers:

Farmers can be stubborn SOB's if they feel that they've been screwed over. Especially if its a neighbour. I see that SeedHawk was bought out by a Swedish ag company but are still a successful producer of farm equipment. Vale just built a massive shop outside of Indian Head SK to manufacture material handling equipment and parts for the John Deere Air Seeder.

 

[FJAG]

Farmers can be stubborn SOB's if they feel that they've been screwed over. Especially if its a neighbour. I see that SeedHawk was bought out by a Swedish ag company but are still a successful producer of farm equipment. Vale just built a massive shop outside of Indian Head SK to manufacture material handling equipment and parts for the John Deere Air Seeder.

It's a dynamic industry. At the time that Vale and Seed Hawk were start-ups everyone else in North America was using big discers and stuff from the more established companies that needed a lot of horsepower to pull. The air seeders really made a difference but still had a hard time penetrating the market. While Seed Hawk was bought out, Norbert, the guy behind the Seed Hawk opener formed a new company in 2002 called SeedMaster which is still independent and where he is still inventing new high technology solutions. I particularly like this foray into the field of autonomous farm machinery. https://industrywestmagazine.com/cover-story/autonomous-farming-reaches-infinite-horizons-seedmaster-manufacturing-inc/

I remember in court describing the opener as an "elegant" device. They're still doing it that way.

:cheers: