Ground Vehicle Recce

[SupersonicMax]

I've got a little question for army guys or air force guys for that matter.  What are the physical differences between the SA-10, SA-12A and the SA-20?  I can't seem to differenciate them on pictures....

Thanks!!

Max

 

[George Wallace]

???

SA-10   Surface-to-air S-300PMU  missile launcher.  The weapon is carried and vertically launched from a dedicated four-round capacity transporter-erector launcher vehicle based on the MAZ-7910 ( 8 x 8 ) truck chassis. 

SA-12A  Surface-to-air missile launcher in a dual role as anti-missile or anti-aircraft with a max range of 75 to 90 km.  The 9A83-1 tracked vehicle carries four 9M83 SA-12a GLADIATOR missiles. 


SA-20  The 9M96 missile is designed to destroy aircraft and air- delivered weapons at ranges in excess of 120 km. The missile is small-- considerably lighter than the ZUR 48N6Ye used in the S-300PMU1 systems and the Favorit. The missile is equipped with an active homing head and has an estimated single shot kill probability of 0.9 for manned aircraft and 0.8 for unmanned maneuvering aircraft. a gas-dynamic control system enables the 9M96 missile to maneuver at altitudes of up to 35 km at forces of over 20g, which permits engagment of non- strategic ballistic missiles. A mockup of the missile was set up at an Athens arms exhibition in October 1998. One 9M96 modification will become the basic long-range weapon of Air Force combat aircraft, and may become the standardized missile for air defense SAM systems, ship-launched air defense missile systems, and fighter aircraft.

S-400 (SA-20 Triumf)
Alternate Name:  SA-20 Triumf
Country:  Russia
Basing:  Land

Details

The S-400, also known by its NATO designation, SA-20 Triumf, is an advanced Russian surface-to-air missile system. Once operational, it will be able to destroy aircraft, cruise missiles, and short- and medium-range ballistic missiles at ranges of up to 400 kilometers. The Russians eventually plan to phase out their existing S-200 (NATO: SA-5 Gammon) and S-300P (NATO: SA-10 Grumble) systems and replace them with S-400 complexes.

A standard S-300P tracked 8 X 8 MAZ-7910 truck chassis launcher originally designed to carry four 5V55 or 48N6 missiles would now be used to transport up to 16 9M96 missiles. In addition, the S-400 would use the S-300P control complex and multifunctional radar, thus allowing for a smooth, cost-efficient transition between the two systems.


The differences are all in the Launcher, TELAR, Radars, and missiles.

 

[SupersonicMax]

I know the technical differences, but looking at a picture, I can't find obvious differences (with the launchers).

 

[George Wallace]

???

I'm missing something here.  The SA-10 has 4 tubes arranged in a "square" mounted on a 8 X 8 Truck with no radars.  The SA-12A has four tubes in a row mounted on a Tracked vehicle.  The SA-20 uses the same Tracked vehicle truck chassis as the SA-10 but mounts more missile tubes. 

Are you telling me that you can not tell the difference between a truck and a Tracked vehicle, nor count the missiles or look at their mounting configuration and tell the differences?

 

[Franko]

Max,

Go onto Janes Defence and go through the pictures. Better yet, invest in Janes AFV Vol2.

There are significant differences between the launchers and the vehicles they are mounted (too many to really list here) and it's just better to go through them by yourself and draw out your own conclusions.

If you were based here in Pet I could loan you a complete study package on almost every conceivable modern AFV and their variants.

Let's see what we can do in the AFV thread....

Regards

 

[SupersonicMax]

The SA-12A is a more obvious now that you pointed out the tracked vehicle, but the SA-20 and SA-10 are still hard to identify.  I'll show you 2 pictures, and you tell me which is which.

Thanks for your input, RBD.  I'd love to have a good study package.  All I have is powerpoint slides with vehicles and a word document that identifies every slide.  Better than nothing I guess! 

I'm very new at indentifying ground vehicles (started seriously yesterday with the Ground-to-Air defence), so please, don't think I'm an idiot.  Still trying to find tricks to identify them...

Max

 

[George Wallace]

Now that brings up a question that I was wondering about; do you have a package which contains mistakes?  It is all too common that AFV packages go out and someone has identified an aircraft or AFV incorrectly.  It really doesn't help the student.

 

[SupersonicMax]

I think this package has been proven over and over again by experts and time.  But I guess it is possible that there are mistakes.  Those 2 IDs really puzzle me.  I would go for the SA-10 for both, but 1 of them is a SA-20.  Everything else seems pretty reasonable though (every others in the package)

 

[aesop081]

I think this package has been proven over and over again by experts and time. 

The recce package on my MOAT course had been in eistence for several years but still contained errors. Don't let the "experts and time" thing lead you to beleive there's no errors.

 

[George Wallace]

How old is the package?  I may speculate to say that at the time it was produced, someone could not find a photo of a SA-20 (or there were no known photos of it), so knowing it was on the same launcher, substituted a SA-10 photo.

 

[SupersonicMax]

I don't have a date on it, but I would say fairly recently (3-4 years ago?).  Max 8 years ago (when NFTC was created)

 

[Danjanou]

Max I'll be the first to admit my own AFV recognition skills have gotten a bit rusty over the years from a lack of need to know to keep my but in one piece 8)

A quick google image and wiki search showed me enough pictures etc to quickly spot the differences already given here, tracked vs wheeled, number and configuration of missile launchers etc.

Obviously this is a must know in your new profession and kudos for taking it seriously. Fell free to join one of more of the AFV, weapon and aircraft recognition games ongoing on the site. There is a wealth of expertise on here and I find them a great mental exercise.

 

[TangoTwoBravo]

Max,

It seems to me that asking someone to tell an SA-10 from an SA-20 from those views is a bit much.


As an aside, I find AFV recognition fun (in an army way).  I have found that, at first, it is best to focus on the big things.  Get to be able to tell the type of vehicle first.

I look at size, suspension, turret, shape (both of the hull and the turret) and the gun.  Using these things one can quickly learn to tell a tracked APC from an IFV from a tank from an SP gun from a wheeled recce vehicle from a wheeled APC (although there will always be weird harolds).

Size can be a problem without a frame of reference, but it can be used to quickly differeniate between vehicles.  The suspension may not always be visible, but tracks vs wheels is probably the easiest way to narrow down your choices.  The presence or absence of a turret is another quick and easy way to narrow down choices.  The size and shape of the turret can also be considered (some look like frying pans etc).  The gun is usually quite obvious.  A tank will tend to have a big gun that protrudes well beyond the front of the vehicle (assuming that the turret is over the front aspect).  IFVs and recce vehicles will tend to have thin guns (25mm chain guns etc).  SP arty vehicles will have large guns on a turret, but on an SP gun the turret will usually be set-back on the hull compared to a tank.

Once you've got the hang of quickly telling a tank from a wheeled APC or a tracked IFV or an SP gun you can then get fancy and start telling individual vehicles by name.  I use the same things but go into details.

For the suspension you can look for things like the number of wheels and their layout for wheeled vehicles (4x4, 6x6, 8x8 - are they evenly spaced or are they grouped etc).  For tracked vehicles you can count road wheels and also see if there is live or slack track.  Slack track just hangs there above the road wheels while live track is supported by return rollers. 

Looking at the turret you can focus on the shape (angular vs frying pan etc) and where it is set on the hull.  Sight and episcope arrangements can also give clues.  Bear in mind that stowage and camoflague can obscure things.

The gun can give details such as the precensce or absence of a fume extractor as well as the position of said fume extractor.  A muzzle brake might be present.  There might be a thermal sleeve.  The mantlet might be distinctive.  A muzzle reference system on the muzzle of the gun can also give a hint. 

One big caveat is that with all the upgrades out there many of the details can change.  Basic size, shape, turret and suspension, however, usually stay fairly consistent.

I am not suggesting that a pilot count roadwheels on a tank as he zooms in.  You can use these little things in training, however, to give yourself some tricks.  Over time, your brain will learn the "gestalt" of the AFV world and you will instantly recognize a T-80 where before you were counting the road wheels and their grouping along with counting the episcopes.  That being said, telling a T-72 from a T-80 in combat conditions (ie not looking at a parade or arms show demo) might be stretching our capabilities and we should remain realistic. 

It is the same thing when you are fishing.  At first you are checking the eye location relative to the mouth and counting fins etc.  Later, you can instantly tell a Smallmouth Bass from a Largemouth Bass because you have trained your mind to recognize it without having to think about it.

Cheers
     

 

[SupersonicMax]

T2B, thanks for the tips.  Those 2 pictures are what we have to ID in that particular package...

Again, I really appreciate the tips.  I just hope I'll soon be able to ID AFV as quickly as I can ID airplanes!

Max

 

[George Wallace]

Key features will usually follow these rough guidelines:

HATS:        Hull, Armament, Turret, and Suspension.

WEFT:        Wings, Engine, Fuselage, and Tail.

MASH:        Masts, Armament, Superstructure, and Hull.

 

[TangoTwoBravo]

Key features will usually follow these rough guidelines:

HATS:        Hull, Armament, Turret, and Suspension.

WEFT:        Wings, Engine, Fuselage, and Tail.

MASH:        Masts, Armament, Superstructure, and Hull.

George,

Speaking of the HATS, I had a friend on Phase II who was only able to tell the difference between the BTR-60, BTR-70 and BTR-80 by memorizing the different hats that the crew commanders were wearing in the parade ground pictures used in the slide package (the BTR 70 guy had a very impressive forage cap).  The slide deck was rather limited, so he just memorized the pictures.

 

[George Wallace]

George,

Speaking of the HATS, I had a friend on Phase II who was only able to tell the difference between the BTR-60, BTR-70 and BTR-80 by memorizing the different hats that the crew commanders were wearing in the parade ground pictures used in the slide package (the BTR 70 guy had a very impressive forage cap).  The slide deck was rather limited, so he just memorized the pictures.

Funny that (s)he wasn't pointed out the exhausts on those three vehicles; as model number increased, the exhaust became more horizontal.  Also the fact, that as the model year increased, so did the improvements to the crew exits, from top to small hatch between 2nd and 3rd wheel, to a larger, more efficient, clam shell hatch on the BTR-80.

 

[TangoTwoBravo]

Those were all, indeed, teaching points.  Different people learn differently, and the different hats that the crew commanders were wearing were what he liked to use.  An illustration of the pitfalls of using the same slides over and over again.

 

[Franko]

Those were all, indeed, teaching points.  Different people learn differently, and the different hats that the crew commanders were wearing were what he liked to use.  An illustration of the pitfalls of using the same slides over and over again.

Hence why I teach with different slides from different angles and test with videos mixed in with totally different photos.

Regards

 

[George Wallace]

;D  

So he took HATS literally.    ;D

It is a problem if the same slides/photos are used constantly.  It really shows up when the students have no problems with recognition during quiz's, and classes; but can't recognize the same vehicles on a test when a "new" photo is introduced.