The G-5 is simply a gun. But the G-6 was also a self propelled vehicle. Every time that they used their G-5, the Cubans in «Pechora» were able to determine the trajectory of the projectile. They would then send their MIG-23s to destroy the battery. As a result, the South Africans began to use their G-6. It was, after all, mobile: it fired a few volleys and moved off. Just like that!
The G-5 is simply a gun. But the G-6 was also a self propelled vehicle. Every time that they used their G-5, the Cubans in «Pechora» were able to determine the trajectory of the projectile. They would then send their MIG-23s to destroy the battery. As a result, the South Africans began to use their G-6. It was, after all, mobile: it fired a few volleys and moved off. Just like that!
That's highly unlikely. 155-mm artillery shell has an RCS on the order of 0,001 square meters, IIRC. Remember how difficult it is to lock on that F-117 with a comparable RCS in the skies over Serbia? Locking on a shell that flies very fast will be next to impossible. Also, chances that P-15 radar will ever see it are very minimal.
Thing is that shells don't fly 'very fast'... they are nearly universally below 200m/s near their practical ranges for indirect fire ~ only with low angle direct fire over open sites can you expect supersonic flight throughout.
The trajectory is fairly predictable once you have 2-3 points you can rapidly estimate an origination... anything else coming from this region will confirm the exact firing site.
There exist a specialist (but not more complex) series of counter artillery and counter mortar radar that perform this exact function. I think it possible that there is some confusion about exactly what is being discussed, but equally I can see a gun position that was static and a 'nuisance' being pinpointed over a matter of hours or days, even with the 'wrong' equipment...
Flash and sound ranging could give some indication of 'grid square' and then a systematic 'search' with radar of this zone during gun activity should pinpoint the location.
Is it also possible that the Rgt had attached a 'proper' counter artillery radar element, using the ADA net to coordinate with fixed wing strike aircraft?
** And to add to the AD-system as C-Arty Radar... the 'official' Counter artillery radar was a development using elements of the Krug Radar, on an MTLB chassis...
That's highly unlikely. 155-mm artillery shell has an RCS on the order of 0,001 square meters, IIRC. Remember how difficult it is to lock on that F-117 with a comparable RCS in the skies over Serbia? Locking on a shell that flies very fast will be next to impossible. Also, chances that P-15 radar will ever see it are very minimal.
You made an interesting post. I did a little googling, and found a few different places that give the RCS of shells as 0.001m², so I think I know where you got it from.
But, I found a couple of other places that supposedly give theoretical or real RCS from a shell depending on the angle to the shell, and the RCS varies hugely depending on the angle to the radar.
From side-on a shell can give an RCS of 0.01m² between 70 and 110 degrees, or 0.1m² if even closer to side on, around 80 to 90 degrees. Even at less perfect angles, it can still be over 0.001m² with a little luck.
Now I'm sure all this depends on lots of factors, such as radar frequency, shell shape, shell trajectory, etc... but it doesn't seem as impossible as it initially seemed, and that an SA-3 could see a shell with a bit of luck.
Thing is that shells don't fly 'very fast'... they are nearly universally below 200m/s near their practical ranges for indirect fire ~ only with low angle direct fire over open sites can you expect supersonic flight throughout.
I think that modern long-range howitzer shell never goes subsonic. About 320-350 m/sec. is the lowest speed for maximum range.
Quote:
There exist a specialist (but not more complex) series of counter artillery and counter mortar radar that perform this exact function. I think it possible that there is some confusion about exactly what is being discussed, but equally I can see a gun position that was static and a 'nuisance' being pinpointed over a matter of hours or days, even with the 'wrong' equipment...
Yes, but these radars use a specialized search mode, not a manual-steered narrow "pencil beam".
Quote:
Is it also possible that the Rgt had attached a 'proper' counter artillery radar element, using the ADA net to coordinate with fixed wing strike aircraft?
** And to add to the AD-system as C-Arty Radar... the 'official' Counter artillery radar was a development using elements of the Krug Radar, on an MTLB chassis...
There was a specialized artillery radar, designated as 1RL239, but it appears that it wasn't exported from USSR.
Not the G5, but the similar GC-45, because I have three 'extracted from FT' values for max range firing of ERFB-BB, ERFB, M107 ammunition natures.
The 'headline figures' are:
ERFB-BB mass 48kg, V0 (zone 10) 897m/s Range 39600m, *average* range-rate zero-zero 353m/s ERFB mass 45.5kg, V0 (zone 10) 897m/s Range 29900m, *average* range-rate zero-zero 302m/s M107 mass 43kg, V0 (zone 8) 675m/s Range 17800m, *average* range-rate zero-zero 274m/s
The actual path travelled will approximate a parabola, so 'actual average' velocity will be a bit higher, however the minimum velocity, which is usually near or just after the apex, is considerably lower.
For the M107 projectile at max charge I get 'around' 250m/s at between 10, 11km, for projectile impact at 17800m. For ERFB, 'around' 260m/s at 15km, for projectile impact at 29900m.
The actual value may differ by a few m/s, but I'd be *very* surprised if the minimums exceeded the 'average range rate' for a max-range shot.
Last edited by Lieste; 04/05/1310:15 PM. Reason: ERFB, not ERBB for second example.
Is it also possible that the Rgt had attached a 'proper' counter artillery radar element, using the ADA net to coordinate with fixed wing strike aircraft?
At same article - complaining about counter battery commands (probably used some old sound tracking devices), that they didn't do anything...
Originally Posted By: Lieste
** And to add to the AD-system as C-Arty Radar... the 'official' Counter artillery radar was a development using elements of the Krug Radar, on an MTLB chassis...
Share some!
p.s. Could they used Karat for tracking muzzle flashes?
(I'm familiar with these systems from other research some time ago, but these pages were the best that I could 'grab' quickly ~ my Google-Fu is being overwhelmed by a surfeit of Lamphreys silly copy & paste lists, such as the "armour and penetration" wargame estimates lists ~ which make it *very* hard to find the primary or secondary sources needed to evaluate information for value).
Not the G5, but the similar GC-45, because I have three 'extracted from FT' values for max range firing of ERFB-BB, ERFB, M107 ammunition natures.
The 'headline figures' are:
ERFB-BB mass 48kg, V0 (zone 10) 897m/s Range 39600m, *average* range-rate zero-zero 353m/s ERFB mass 45.5kg, V0 (zone 10) 897m/s Range 29900m, *average* range-rate zero-zero 302m/s M107 mass 43kg, V0 (zone 8) 675m/s Range 17800m, *average* range-rate zero-zero 274m/s
The actual path travelled will approximate a parabola, so 'actual average' velocity will be a bit higher, however the minimum velocity, which is usually near or just after the apex, is considerably lower.
For the M107 projectile at max charge I get 'around' 250m/s at between 10, 11km, for projectile impact at 17800m. For ERBB, 'around' 260m/s at 15km, for projectile impact at 29900m.
The actual value may differ by a few m/s, but I'd be *very* surprised if the minimums exceeded the 'average range rate' for a max-range shot.
OK, I got it. Still, I wouldn't belive that lock on 155-mm shell with SNR-125 can be achieved - it still flies fast, and it has a small RCS. Anywhere near the apex it would be simply too far and too high, and at the terminal phase it would dive quickly. Maybe, some top-notch crew at the range could do that for an experiment, but in a combat situation... Besides, even if you did traced a few shells, you still need to calculate the firing point from this data, which is quite challenging. You need a very accurate flight profile and some really complex calculations. Possible theoretically, but practically... Very unlikely. More like one of countless tales from that war, like making boots from the skin of captured South Africans and presenting them to the Soviet general, and so on.
It isn't intrinsically more difficult than working the equations several times in reverse.
Two data points for each trajectory are considered sufficient for a mortar trajectory ~ I'd think that 2 would also be enough for a BAI strike on a detected firebase*. Bombs and rockets are easier to aim using a Mk1 eyeball than artillery against a 'vague' but "confirmed" location. *So perhaps one, plus the impact crater...?
I'd be happy that no 'kills' arose from this ~ but the uncomfortable 'arrival' of fixed wing air during the operation right on top of and looking for your fixed artillery base which has limited mobility would be a nuisance. At the least it would neutralise the artillery position until the air rtb'd.
I don't have any information that this *did* happen ~ just demonstrating that it isn't an impossible task, and armies actually routinely use this technology, or close derivatives of it to perform this function.
Note that a fully encapsulated G6, with INS can move, set-up, fire several rounds, and displace within a few minutes... which is *much* faster than any towed unit, particularly one which is planning on supporting a long duration, low force size expeditionary force. Things can go very badly if artillery becomes unavailable for long periods and you meet superior forces.
Hpasp Free SAM Simulator, "Realistic to the Switch" (U-2 over Sverdlovsk, B-52's over Hanoi, F-4 Phantoms over the Sinai, F-16's and the F-117A Stealth bomber over the Balkans.) http://sites.google.com/site/samsimulator1972/home
Tomorrow will be the 15th anniversary of an event nobody expected before...
Last edited by Hpasp; 03/26/1404:29 PM.
Hpasp Free SAM Simulator, "Realistic to the Switch" (U-2 over Sverdlovsk, B-52's over Hanoi, F-4 Phantoms over the Sinai, F-16's and the F-117A Stealth bomber over the Balkans.) http://sites.google.com/site/samsimulator1972/home
I think I will replay the situation tomorrow It was a GREAT achievement. It is hard even in SAMSIM without life dangering threat from HARM's. And you know the F-117 will fly. They did not know in 1999.
Hpasp Free SAM Simulator, "Realistic to the Switch" (U-2 over Sverdlovsk, B-52's over Hanoi, F-4 Phantoms over the Sinai, F-16's and the F-117A Stealth bomber over the Balkans.) http://sites.google.com/site/samsimulator1972/home