Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Australia Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: Latest Kopp Crap
Aussiegunneragain    10/28/2009 6:39:26 AM
I was browsing the stands at the news agency the other day and saw the latest editon of "Defence Today". I would never buy that rubbish but I speed read pretty well and I like to amuse myself by ready Carlo Kopp's articles without putting any money into his pocket. In this he had one about the "shoot and scoot" SAM threat, which basically went like this: 1. Advanced mobile Russian SAM's have radars that are hard to detect and neutralise using current ESM/ECM equipment on the likes of the EF-18F. 2. The sites will be protected by 30mm autocannon and short range SAM's that can shoot down a HARM missile in flight (!!!), neutralising Western SEAD capabilities. 3. The F-35 is effectively "neutered" against this thread (he didn't say why). 4. The only modern aircraft types that can survive are the F-22 and the B-2. Does this idiot every give up?
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5   NEXT
jackjack       10/28/2009 8:49:03 AM
are you sure of your speed reading skills ?
wouldnt it be, the F-22, B-2 and the uberpig
 
Quote    Reply

VelocityVector       10/29/2009 1:03:25 AM

I'll concur with Kopp on #2 up until "neutralizing."  Pantsir system appears to be a modern, capable near-target defense against incoming munitions even in busy ECM.  It shouldn't snare the launch a/c but can act as forward eyes and ears for other assets that can grab the ac/ depending on what it is and how its pilot operates.  I'll concur with Aussiegunner on ##1, 3-4 and "crap."  Somebody though keeps buying the rag.

v^2

 
Quote    Reply

gf0012-aust       10/29/2009 2:25:55 AM
Does this idiot every give up?
yep, he was at last years MilCiS but failed to attend and give his briefing - much to the disappointment of a number of real Radar and EWarfare systems engineers who wanted to publicly flagellate him in public.

alas he chickened out.

hopefully he will be at this years event in 2 weeks time so that I can at least get additional jollies.

 
Quote    Reply

Aussiegunneragain       10/29/2009 3:10:16 AM

I'll concur with Kopp on #2 up until "neutralizing."  Pantsir system appears to be a modern, capable near-target defense against incoming munitions even in busy ECM.  It shouldn't snare the launch a/c but can act as forward eyes and ears for other assets that can grab the ac/ depending on what it is and how its pilot operates.  I'll concur with Aussiegunner on ##1, 3-4 and "crap."  Somebody though keeps buying the rag.


v^2



Having just read about the Pantsyr I agree that it is an impressive system on paper but I'm not sure that they have a 10 inch, Mach 2 missile in mind when they talk about hitting incoming munitions. If a HARM shooter was to use a low-level approach behind terrain to within 3 or 4 km of the radiation source that it wants to hit and then pop up to fire, the transit time for the missile would be about 10 seconds. The Pansyr apparently has a 5 or 6 second reaction time but against one or more small, probably crossing target(s) hitting them both is going to be a big ask. Furthermore if it was a link 16 networked aircraft the HARM shooter would undoubtedly be able to fire off data from another aircraft loitering out of range, reducing the "pop up" time to the amount needed to press the button.
 
Quote    Reply

gf0012-aust    correction   10/29/2009 3:25:31 AM

yep, he was at last years MilCiS but failed to attend and give his briefing 
should have been:

yep, he was scheduled for a presentation at last years MilCIS but failed to attend and give his briefing 


 
Quote    Reply

Aussiegunneragain       10/29/2009 3:44:13 AM

Does this idiot every give up?

yep, he was at last years MilCiS but failed to attend and give his briefing - much to the disappointment of a number of real Radar and EWarfare systems engineers who wanted to publicly flagellate him in public.



alas he chickened out.




hopefully he will be at this years event in 2 weeks time so that I can at least get additional jollies.





What I don't get is why he gets invited to these things. I know he runs a course on EW but he has never actually served in the military and nor as far as I know in the Department of Defense. All of his knowledge has to be entirely theoretical based on publically available information, which doesn't sound that credible to me.
 
Quote    Reply

gf0012-aust       10/29/2009 4:03:25 AM
What I don't get is why he gets invited to these things. I know he runs a course on EW but he has never actually served in the military and nor as far as I know in the Department of Defense. All of his knowledge has to be entirely theoretical based on publically available information, which doesn't sound that credible to me.
NFI.  all I know is that in the operational community he is regarded with a degree of contempt and quizzical bemusement.  quite funny when you consider that he doesn't get access to anything except whats in the public domain so is not in a position to talk about anything operational with the remotest degree of authority - let alone his blind belief in his own technical superiority.

The EW guys just fall over at what he trots out with as "fact".

go figure. :)



 
Quote    Reply

Volkodav       10/29/2009 4:12:53 AM
What I don't get is why he gets invited to these things. I know he runs a course on EW but he has never actually served in the military and nor as far as I know in the Department of Defense. All of his knowledge has to be entirely theoretical based on publically available information, which doesn't sound that credible to me.
 
Unfortunately his research skills put him ahead of a few defence "professionals" I have come across. A small but still disturbing minority, some quite senior, are absolutely clueless about anything slightly outside their area of expertease, i.e. they don't even know the public domain stuff. Some are even oblivious to things that have a direct impact on their deliverables.
 
Quote    Reply

gf0012-aust       10/29/2009 4:16:48 AM
A small but still disturbing minority, some quite senior, are absolutely clueless about anything slightly outside their area of expertease, i.e. they don't even know the public domain stuff. Some are even oblivious to things that have a direct impact on their deliverables.

ah, but thats why you always deal with operators.  :)  theory is always different from operations
 
Quote    Reply

Volkodav       10/29/2009 7:19:09 AM


A small but still disturbing minority, some quite senior, are absolutely clueless about anything slightly outside their area of expertise, i.e. they don't even know the public domain stuff. Some are even oblivious to things that have a direct impact on their deliverables.




ah, but thats why you always deal with operators.  :)  theory is always different from operations



Actually got some ex operators in the same team as me and we are recruiting more.  The cousins are very good too, I find them very approachable and helpful, not to mention extremely knowledgeable. 
 
Its the home grown cabbages, more often than not armed with MBA's (or "More Bugger All" to quote an old boss), that give me grief.  They will expend more time and effort to avoid reviewing a task than it would have taken to complete it and the joy of copping smug, condescending comments from someone who we have serious doubts knows how to tie his shoes laces just puts icing on the cake.  I did enjoy the look of terror in his eyes when I finally got him to understand that the task wasn't just something I invented to make myself feel important, but was something the customer had contracted us deliver, that he had not been doing and may not be able to recover.
 
I just can't pick what Kopp is, an amature who mistakenly believes most decission makers are cabbages, or a cabbage himself?
 
Quote    Reply
1 2 3 4 5   NEXT



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics