#3930436 - 03/26/14 08:13 PM
Re: 9K33M2 OSA-AK (SA-8B Gecko) work in progress...
[Re: Hpasp]
|
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 2,011
piston79
Member
|
Member
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 2,011
|
|
|
#3937487 - 04/10/14 08:05 PM
Re: 9K33M2 OSA-AK (SA-8B Gecko)
[Re: Hpasp]
|
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 68
Vympel
Junior Member
|
Junior Member
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 68
Jugoslavija
|
|
|
#3937915 - 04/11/14 04:31 PM
Re: 9K33M2 OSA-AK (SA-8B Gecko)
[Re: Vympel]
|
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 2,011
piston79
Member
|
Member
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 2,011
|
Pretty good advance, from: ou know - my friend take a part on VictorStrike2000 and 2001 in Drawsko Pomorskie trening center in Poland.
During this trening fight (whit using MILES system) american regiment Ah-64A + OH-58 Kiowa where coopereting whit MLRS battery. The target was polish air defence using non-downgraded SA-8M Gecko (now Sting" SA-8P Sting ADMS Air Defence Missile System) And what? And US fools lose whole AH-64 regiment during polish AA ambush. And thanks to not using radars in long mode (only short for directing) and very quick change of position Sa-8 lost only 2 complex for MLRS battery fire. Quite low when we consider the fact that US army "lost" in this MILES battle more then 30 Ah-64...
In next year "battle" where repeated - This time with ridiculous restrictions for Sa-8Gecko battery (fire range limited to max 2km, no using radars, 2times shorter time for MLRS battery countrfire) and what? ~4-6 Sa-8 lost and... 16 Ah-64 "killed" in this MILES battle.
And in both cases Ah-64 regiment whit MLRS COOPERATION was not able to destroy the target (mechanizated batalion). The Sa-8P not guilty Ah-64 regiment near target area. The Ah-64 was not able to using weapons because there was not able event to approach near target.
The key was using terrein for ambush and using non advanced posoration system (ex: microwave on jeep, or a small motor connected to the radio station). This, and well-trained Sa-8 crews was enought to "destroy" Ah-64 regiment during first battle, and stop during second. In both cases the target was not destroyed becouse Ah-64 regiment was not able to attack near target area.
And old Sa-8 is not Tor... It's not only example when even polish slighty downgraded WarPac AA was better then US army image...An there was more suprises - ex the same time to "Fire task" fo MLRS battery and... polish BM-21 GRAD battery (using Topaz system). to: Before the AH-64D entered service the US Army flew test missions against high threat ground threats (this was 1996). Eight AH-64A and six AH-64D took part in the trials. Ground threat was 20 M1A1, 20 M2, six 2S6, two SA-8B, one SA-11, three SA-13, one SA-15, 10 SA-18 and Swedish Giraffe radar. They also used smoke, RF/IR blankets, conformal RAM camouflage netting, decoys, corner reflectors and active jammers. The Apaches did not use the standard SEAD or artillery support (the test was to compare the two models). They flew the seven close attack and five deep attack times at night only. AH-64A scored 75 kills and lost 28 aircraft. They also made 34 blue on blues. (friendly fire). AH-64D scored 300 kills and lost 4 aircraft. No blue on blues. In its doctrinal manuals the US Army acknowledges the deep strike is a high risk move. For more on 2003 action, see page 235 of this document: http://www.cgsc.edu/carl/download/csipubs/OnPointI.pdf
|
|
#3940342 - 04/16/14 06:24 PM
Re: 9K33M2 OSA-AK (SA-8B Gecko)
[Re: Hpasp]
|
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 916
farokh
farokh
|
farokh
Member
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 916
I-RAN
|
hi guys... a little exam who knows 9K33M2 missile capable how many G forces in over load and why /?? 16 G ? 18 G ? 20 G ? 22 G ? more than 22 G ?
Last edited by farokh; 04/16/14 06:30 PM.
|
|
#3940348 - 04/16/14 06:36 PM
Re: 9K33M2 OSA-AK (SA-8B Gecko)
[Re: farokh]
|
Joined: May 2013
Posts: 339
ePap
Member
|
Member
Joined: May 2013
Posts: 339
Athens
|
hi guys... a little exam who knows 9K33M2 missile capable how many G forces in over load and why /?? 16 G ? 18 G ? 20 G ? 22 G ? more than 22 G ? 20,345 G if I remember well ...
|
|
#3940361 - 04/16/14 07:10 PM
Re: 9K33M2 OSA-AK (SA-8B Gecko)
[Re: ePap]
|
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 916
farokh
farokh
|
farokh
Member
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 916
I-RAN
|
hi guys... a little exam who knows 9K33M2 missile capable how many G forces in over load and why /?? 16 G ? 18 G ? 20 G ? 22 G ? more than 22 G ? 20,345 G if I remember well ... nope epap think again you are close
Last edited by farokh; 04/16/14 07:20 PM.
|
|
#3940374 - 04/16/14 07:34 PM
Re: 9K33M2 OSA-AK (SA-8B Gecko)
[Re: farokh]
|
Joined: May 2013
Posts: 339
ePap
Member
|
Member
Joined: May 2013
Posts: 339
Athens
|
hi guys... a little exam who knows 9K33M2 missile capable how many G forces in over load and why /?? 16 G ? 18 G ? 20 G ? 22 G ? more than 22 G ? 20,345 G if I remember well ... nope epap think again you are close 20,348G ???
|
|
#3940375 - 04/16/14 07:38 PM
Re: 9K33M2 OSA-AK (SA-8B Gecko)
[Re: ePap]
|
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 916
farokh
farokh
|
farokh
Member
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 916
I-RAN
|
. Capable of pulling 25G epap
Last edited by farokh; 04/16/14 07:39 PM.
|
|
#3940387 - 04/16/14 07:55 PM
Re: 9K33M2 OSA-AK (SA-8B Gecko)
[Re: farokh]
|
Joined: May 2013
Posts: 339
ePap
Member
|
Member
Joined: May 2013
Posts: 339
Athens
|
. Capable of pulling 25G epap Can you prove it ? From where did you get this information ?
|
|
#3940400 - 04/16/14 08:20 PM
Re: 9K33M2 OSA-AK (SA-8B Gecko)
[Re: farokh]
|
Joined: May 2013
Posts: 339
ePap
Member
|
Member
Joined: May 2013
Posts: 339
Athens
|
Can you prove it ? From where did you get this information ?
But this is refered of fins capabilities not the missile ... It's like the tires your car can wear. Capable to run 240 km/h but your car can go only with 170km/h...
Last edited by ePap; 04/16/14 08:23 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exodus
by RedOneAlpha. 04/18/24 05:46 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|