Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Air Defense Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: Minimal Air Defense
Roman    5/29/2007 8:57:07 PM
What kind of minimal air defense (in terms of personnel and equipment) would be the smallest air defense worth having? By 'minimal' I mean the smallest that is still worth obtaining and maintaining at all - any smaller and one would be better off not fighting for the skies at all and investing the money elsewhere.
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Pages: PREV  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9   NEXT
Roman       6/5/2007 12:58:56 PM
Great discussion, by the way! Although my lack of knowledge on the topic precludes me from contributing meaningfully, I am learning a lot from the discussion that is taking place. 
 
Just out of interest and to enlarge the discussion, is there any advantage to having AA-guns in the current era of missiles and MANPADs? AA-guns would intuitively seem like decent 'minimum air defense' systems, but upon closer look MANPADs seem to have higher ceilings, longer range, higher kill probability and greater mobility/portability. What's more, MANPADs tend to be cheaper. True, ammunition is cheaper for AA-guns, but cost to kill ratio would probably still be in favour of MANPADs. Is there a place for AA-guns in a minimal air defense system on the modern battlefield?
 
Quote    Reply

french stratege       6/5/2007 1:26:28 PM
The only interest for gun would be possibility of dual use agaisnt ground also and to counter stand off ammuntions (see the concept of Skyguard III 35 mm Ahead gun )
h*tp://www.rheinmetall-detec.de/index.php?lang=3&fid=2894
You shoot down JDAM in a economical way
For planes and helos , MANPADS are better with their much better range.
Now two ways: the expensive with Mistral like missile or the cheaper with RBS70 like missile where ammuntion cost few and is unjammable.They are much better than a gun to counter aircraft.
Ideal system is combination of course.
 
Quote    Reply

Roman       6/6/2007 12:05:47 PM
Interesting... I am actually rather impressed that some AA-Guns can be targetted and effective against precision munitions and cruise missiles. I wonder, whether in principle, they could also be targetted at ballistic missiles  in their terminal phase (assuming they are set for ground burst)?
 
You mentioned that you would recommend obtaining jammers and decoys before moving to medium/high altitude air defense. What kind of jammers and decoys would you recommend?
 
Also, at what point in the process of air defense buildup is it worthwhile to introduce:
 
1) Some kind of air defense command & control, rather than leaving each AD asset to its own devices
2) Radars and perhaps other sensors (IR or others) to scan the sky and search for enemy air assets, rather than relying on the good old eyeball
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

VGNTMH    AAA   6/7/2007 12:06:18 AM

I see AAA (anti aircraft artillery) as having some role to play in GBAD.

After all, as recently as the Falklands, the Argentine 35mm Skyguards (radar predicted twin 35mm) were arguably their most effective GBAD. They shot down several Harriers if I remember correctly and seemed to be more effective than the Argentine Roland SAMs or Blowpipe MANPADs (I think the Argentinians had Blowpipe as well as the British).

Sure AAA has the following limitations:
· Short range.
· Low ceiling.
· Inaccuracy at longer range as the rounds are not guided once fired.

But AAA has the following advantages:
· Low cost per target. This makes them suitable and cost effective for shooting down small UAVs, JDAM and other PGMs, and possibly even C-RAM targets.
· Difficult to decoy and thus can operate in high ECM environments. What I mean here is that a radar predicted GBAD AAA can operate using radar if it can and passive EO/laser range finders (which are not passive!) if ECM is too heavy or the target is stealth. Though I guess this can apply to CLOS guided SAMs as well.
· Simplicity.
· Some AAA can be used for C-RAM as well as air defense.
· AAA can be used against ground targets in an emergency.

The best arrangement would probably be to have a GBAD system which incorporates both high altitude SAMs, shorter ranged SAMs (probably IIR guided, and thus non line of sight, possibly derived from WVR AAMs or MANPADs), AAA, sensors, and a control system.

 
I wonder, whether in principle, they could also be targetted at ballistic missiles  in their terminal phase.

Not really. Maybe against artillery rockets in a C-RAM setting but not ballistic missiles. AAA is really too short range.

 
Quote    Reply

murabit821       6/7/2007 3:43:45 PM
that minimal AD what Roman mean is for small fictional country
1,8 mil population
area 18000km2
Military budget 144mil usd
Army of this fictional country is on militia base like swiss army

this country have two possible enemies

East state
9mil Population state with 450mil usd military budget
which have 6 air squadrons  and 6 helicopter squadrons
1 sqd with 12x Mig-29
2 sqd with 30x Mig-23/27
2 sqd with 20x Su-25
1 sqd with 15x Mig-21

3 sqd  36x Mi-24
3 sqd  20x Mi-8/ 20x Mi-2


South state
2,5 mil population state with 300 mil usd military budget
south state have 7x Composite helicopter squadrons
with total 60x Mi-24 /25x Mi-8 /16x Mi-17


map on >

that what is minimal  AD for this country with this two possible enemies ?






 
Quote    Reply

displacedjim       6/7/2007 11:14:42 PM


that what is minimal  AD for this country with this two possible enemies ?




Just keep using whatever the USSR left behind, especially those SA-10s.
 
Quote    Reply

murabit821       6/8/2007 3:38:24 AM

S-300P i think is not good solution
that keep this systems in service in expensive and can be complicated for militia soldiers
may be some other soviet/russian AD systems ?

 missions for Air defence

1, defence maneuver units
2, keeping enemy aircrafts on high altitude

condition for Air Defence

1, army is on militia base, that AD systems/weapons must be simple for training
2, we need more systems for sreading cross country
3, that this country are poor country , we dont have a lot of money

questions
which AD systems can be best for this (from world AD weapons)?
which AD systems can be best for this (from USSR waepons) ?

another question
what structure of AD can be best ?

one of  our approximate solution
HQ
Observation unit/command (with survey radars, ground observers)
7x regional units


sorry for english











 
Quote    Reply

FJV    I have a problem with the concept   6/8/2007 12:43:05 PM
Generally speaking without air superiority you cannot win a war. Air defense is part of that. Once you lose air that the enemy can strike you with relative impunity. Staging grounds for attacks will be bombed, troop movements will be observed from air and be communicated real time, enemy troops can call in CAS, etc.

In my opinion air defence / gaining air superiority is so important that it would be way down on my list of making a minimal effort on. So making a maximum effort at seizing air superiority at the 1st oppertunity would be the cheapest air defense I guess.








 
Quote    Reply

french stratege       6/8/2007 1:36:50 PM
murabit821    
You don't understand what is a militia army like Swizz for example.
In such army the very few people who have real technical task like flying aircraft, maintaining sophisticated parts or using air defense radars are professionals.
Youhave maybe 10% of men of a air defense SA300 (or Patriot) regiment of 1000 men or likely, to have technical task on maintenance or using system.
Evn in an army of few hundred thousand men (so a big one), you have few long range air defense regiment and so few hundred of men which are long range air defense professionals.
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

murabit821       6/10/2007 10:03:22 AM


murabit821    


You don't understand what is a militia army like Swizz for example.

In such army the very few people who have real technical task like flying aircraft, maintaining sophisticated parts or using air defense radars are professionals.

Youhave maybe 10% of men of a air defense SA300 (or Patriot) regiment of 1000 men or likely, to have technical task on maintenance or using system.

Evn in an army of few hundred thousand men (so a big one), you have few long range air defense regiment and so few hundred of men which are long range air defense professionals.

 

 

 yes that all i know (same in conscript army)
 that our design propose that staff , radar crew , technical and some other personal all of them are proffesional
 but in this small country , this country is poor (people are poor) 
 S-300 is expensive system , my country (Slovakia) have one battery /group of S-300P (first version) service of this system is very expensive for Slovakia ,
Slovakia is rich than this Fictional country

have one regiment or battery of S-300 is not solution for this Fictional country , also for Slovakia (when i talk with one AD officer he say better have more hybrid systems as Slovakian BRAMS (30mm guns + 9M313 misiles on 8x8 vehicle) than curent 4x battery SA-6 and 1x Battery SA-10)

for this country we need more spreading AD
which systems you propose ?
or better have no Air defence ?






 
Quote    Reply
PREV  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9   NEXT



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics