Explaining Ground-Based Air Defense (GBAD) - Missiles & Guns vs Aircraft
Вставка
- Опубліковано 7 чер 2024
- Should Ukraine receive NATO/Western Air Defense systems? A MANPADS is one thing, but what about more sophisticated systems? That is one of the hot questions nowadays - so I thought, let me make a primer on air defense, what the different weapon systems do and let you decide yourself what can/should be send, or not.
- Check out my books -
Ju 87 Stuka - stukabook.com
STG-44 Assault Platoon - sturmzug.com
German Panzer Company 1941 - www.hdv470-7.com/
- Support -
Patreon: / milavhistory
Channel Memberships: / @militaryaviationhistory
PayPal: www.paypal.me/MilAvHis
- Museum -
Footage used includes scenes filmed at the Deutsche Museum Flugwerft Schleissheim:
www.deutsches-museum.de/en/fl...
- Social Media -
Twitter: / milavhistory
Instagram: / milaviationhistory
Facebook: / militaryaviationhistory
- Sources -
JWP 3-63 Joint Air Defence - Joint Warfare Publication 3-63, 2nd Ed., 2003.
Reach, Clint; Geist, Edward; Doll, Abby; and Cheravitch, Joe; Competing with Russia Militarily - Implications of Conventional and Nuclear Conflicts, RAND Corporation, June 2021.
US Army; FM 3-01; US Army Air and Missile Defense Operations, Dec 2020.
US Army; FM 3-01.7, Air Defense Artillery, Brigade Operations, 2000.
US Army; FM 3-01.11, Air Defense Artillery Reference Handbook, October 2007.
US Army; FM 44-18-1, Stinger Team Operations, December 1984.
- Timecodes -
00:00 - Intro
00:21 - Air defense for Ukraine
01:07 - Types of air defense
03:47 - Air defense weapon types
03:56 - Infrared homing (IR)
05:04 - CLOS and Radar guidance
07:52 - Air defense weapon systems
08:18 - AAA/SPAAG
10:07 - CIWS
11:00 - Missiles (Surface-to-air SAM)
12:19 - MANPADS
15:26 - Short-range missiles
17:40 - Medium-range missiles
18:33 - Long-range missiles
19:38 - Paper vs reality
21:49 - Scenario example
23:34 - Conclusion
24:51 - Outro
- Audio -
Music and Sfx from Epidemic Sound
#militaryaviationhistory #airdefense
*Edit* I realize the transition between a generic 'IADS/IAMD' and the Russian Joint CIS Air Defense system is a bit awkward, a better comparison would have to explain IADS, and then mention examples like NATINADS and Объединённая система ПВО СНГ. #inb4
You forgot to mention the lasers:( The Soviets had laser tanks that could fry the optical equipment on helicopters and planes. They could also do the same to tanks and to people.
@@jakobc.2558 He offered a romanization of the cyrillic/Russian term used in the video to help with pronunciation, on a channel that focuses on the mechanics and an academic angle on modern conflicts so not at all out of place for a comment like that, and you're trying to turn the comments section into a shit show over that. I wonder who the real nationalist is...
Non ADA question: Where did you get that sweater?
Given the poor morale in the Russian Army and the high level of corruption, I think the best think NATO could do is increase the offers to Russian soldiers for turning in their equipment to the Ukrainians. I think it might be worth it to offer 10% of the value of the equipment turned in, providing it is in good working order and readily usable by Ukraine. Perhaps include an all expense paid vacation in Brazil, as Brazil is not part of NATO.
SA-13 is being supplied to Ukraine.
It depresses me when I hear people ignore the need for training, so I found this clear, informative and rational. Thank you
Thanks so much!
that's the problem with ignorant people claiming to be "experts"...
The Donbass rebels were using the Buk missile systems in 2014. If they can use that system, why can't the Ukrainians be trained to use Western systems?
@@tcm81 That assuming the Donbass rebels that used the BUK missile systems weren't coming out of Russia. Not sure if it's been proven yet, but it's certainly a theory floating around.
@@martijn9568Well, we could do that too then and send in our own operators under the guise of civilian technicians. Putin could hardly complain about it, if it was something he was doing himself. In his paranoid mind he probably already thinks we are doing it.
Several decades ago, I was involved in a division level exercise. It was all computerized, but the officers and senior NCOs were involved. I was the ADA (Stinger plt) liaison to the battalion commander as a new Lt. I was surprised that most ADA assets were placed on Weapons Hold (do not fire unless fired upon) for the bulk of the exercise. That was because the higher ups managing the airspace over the battle space did not want us accidentally wishing friendly aircraft. I did not realize how complicated the situation was and how much coordination was involved.
That’s because your stinger missile’s IFF doesn’t work half the time LoLz.
I had the same job as a ADA lieutenant in Korea, serving a stinger platoon leader and AD advisor to an armor brigade.
The Cavalry pilots were always concerned about Stinger Teams shooting at their aircraft. I told them 50% of our training was aircraft recognition and you can’t mistake the “cigar” profile of the AH1 Cobra.
@@royhuang9715 You don’t need the IFF as Russia and Chinese aircraft are visible different.
@@philipgates988 so? British convey looks visibly different then Iraqi convey. Doesn’t change the fact A-10 pilot just strafed British regardless how they look.
@@royhuang9715 there were no wheeled armor personnel carriers in the US Army at that time. I remember in a training session in 86 while the in the infantry how much the British APC looked like a Russian model.
Obviously, the airman made a mistake. Remember, the US Military moves much faster than a Russian unit, who have proven to be a stagnant fighting force.
Hi there , I’m trained in the US Army Patriot missile system and The THAAD missile system , serving with 94AAMDC ( Pacific) and 10AAMDC (Europe) the need for good logistics can not be understated their is Usually an entire section of an Air defense unit devoted to maintenance , these systems can be very sensitive in more ways than one
So, no jokes about the missiles’ mother, at least not within earshot. 😉 Thank you for protecting us.
Can Ukrainian soldiers be trained in the Operation of These systems in a realistic timespan? Should we Deliver These systems to Ukraine?
curious if you served on Guam
Stingers nowadays don't actually use exclusively IR, but also UV, targeting the UV shadow of the target as seen against the UV canvas that is the sky. This allows them to pretty much ignore countermeasures after locking onto the target under normal circumstances. Flares can still disrupt the shooter attempting to lock onto the target, but that in turn is a passive process (doesn't send out any signal towards the target), so the target has no way of knowing it's being locked onto and will only receive a warning once it's too late with the missile already on its way.
Might also add that training the use of Stinger is indeed extremely fast and you can fully train someone to shoot things down with one literally in a couple of minutes. Beyond that it's just practicing and learning more how to actually operate as a missile team/squad.
You are forgetting how small the window is, you need to be active, alert, and hunting, with intel, long range, short range radar and spotters, in the right position, but never twice. Transport, storage, maintenance, passive defence, target selection, counter surveillance, kill recording, debris projection, self destruct training,
Its as simple as point and shoot - at the postage stamp section of sky at exactly the right time with all other factors on your side.
I was of course referring more to how the Stinger itself works, rather than the bigger picture of how to get to the scenario in the first place, as that's less relevant to the Stinger itself as a weapon system and more to the military in question. I know perfectly well first hand how they work and what it may take to get the most out of them operationally.
I don't know exactly how Ukraine uses their Stingers, but here in Finland we have Stinger ("ITO-15") batteries. I can't go into exact details, but a full Stinger battery can actually cover a rather significant area with full readiness around the clock, essentially acting like a vast air defence minefield against low flying aircraft, primarily helicopters. What all the intel about air space activity does is make their job easier and the battery more efficient, but it's by no means required to get the job done. The actual requirements, including the rest of what you mentioned, is naturally included within the battery itself by default, like any other military unit. Even without advance warning, it is a lot harder for a helicopter to get past an area covered by a Stinger battery than it is for a single Stinger squad to shoot it down.
Stinger's range is too short and it's rather insufficient against hi speed aircrafts like Sukhoys or Migs. Not even counting hi-altitude heavy bombers !
@@vencdee This is correct, but then again that is not its intended purpose anyway as a very short range anti air missile. Its intended primary targets are helicopters and other low flying aircraft, such as close air support / attack aircraft, against which its range is sufficient enough. It is by no means going to (or even supposed to) cover the entire air defence of a nation, as explained by this video, being limited to the inner air defence layer.
@@rothary1641 I understand, I didn't want people getting the wrong impression from your original comment.
I've been interested in historical aviation since I was a kid in the 60s but I've really let my knowledge of the contemporary state of the art slide.
This is a remarkable exposition of the current state of play. I've enjoyed your more historically focused videos but this really feels exceptional Chris. Once it becomes generally available I'll be recommending it to other folks I know who will be equally impressed. Hopefully they will subscribe or join the channel.
I'm going to have to watch this again and this time I need to take notes. It's explained remarkably well, but there really is a lot to take in here. I must say that for someone whose native language is not English, you have an excellent way of breaking down and detailing complex material, supported by simple clear graphics and relevant footage that works really well for an English ear. Great work, thank you for this!
Thanks so much, Tim, I appreciate it a lot!
@@MilitaryAviationHistory I was a kid in the 70's and 80's but otherwise am in exactly the same position as Tim and I completely agree with what he says. I have also had to take this video gradually as there's so much to take in but it's been hugely informative (as I have found all your videos to be) and the clarity and concision with which you present it is an enormous help. Thank you and please keep up the good work!
Same here. I love all aviation, modern-civilian or military-, but the war birds are my true passion.
I'd love if you did a video on the history of SEAD and DEAD doctrine and tactics. Starting with WW1, how planes handled getting rid of pesky AA gunners, to WW2, and so on.
Pretty sure I heard somewhere that apparently AA gun suppression/destruction was the primary purpose of those small bombs Zeros were known to carry on rare occasions.
This and Chieftain's vid yesterday on handling video footage have been great additions to what the layman can pick up and use. The only problem is that it took an actual war for it to happen (and the general public to care)...
Can you give me Chieftans channel?
@@RobinTheBot it's just "The Chieftain"
This video is very didactic, Chris. For people not familiar with modern air defense systems like me, this video explains lots of things. Many thanks.
I have done some training on ultrasound testing of welds. The basic theory of sending out a signal and using the return to identify something. As an inspector I can say that there is a very large difference with operators and that training is extremely important. I am sure it takes a lot of training to be effective.
By the way, thanks for making this.
This seems to support a triage based on learning curve; Soviet era systems that may be available in former Warsaw pact states and the black market; newer hand held systems that have short learning requirements and more complex systems*.
Since this hierarchy also roughly follows cost the, most dense system would suggest frontloading the closest and cheapest systems, Soviet era and older NATO systems.
*an interesting way the kearning curve might be shortened is one we may never see. Outside "volunteers" leading local teams operating complex systems.
The 'volunteers' aspect seems obvious, given immigrant nations like the USA are likely to have a significant diaspora population.
And if it is good enough for Russian servicemen to go on 'holiday' to far flung destinations, and take their equipment with them...
Excellent Video Sir! I spent years working in British Army AD as initially a user and later a Warrant Officer Instructor / Advisor. Could not have explained the definition better myself. Well done.
Training to use the longer ranged systems takes weeks to months. Perhaps we should start bringing small teams of Ukrainians out of Ukraine and start training them. We are already 1 month into this. The sooner we start, the sooner the option might become available, at least putting the option on the table, rather than having it perpetually out of reach.
Which might already occurring (or might not). If it is occurring, it might not be announced to great public fanfare. To be sure, we do not really know everything that NATO is sending in to Ukraine. Nor do we know to what lengths NATO will go to keep secrets.
Remember the recent big foofara about the Polish MiG-29s? What if that was all a ruse, from Poland’s announcement, to the U.S. refusal, to Zelensky’s continual requests for aircraft? Meanwhile, the planes are being stripped of the NATO package and reconfigured for Ukrainian pilots, and shipped over one at a time. I’m not saying this is happening, just that it could be happening.
Videos like this are the reason I keep coming back to this website! Fantastic in-depth analysis. Keep up the excellent work!
Amazing quality and quantity the past couple weeks. I appreciate that your still putting on a ton of work to research and get sources, while pushing out more content.
Love your stuff, can’t wait to see more.
That is the best video you have ever made in my opinion. Clear, concise and informative. No fluff and nothing but practical content. Keep up the good work. Give us more like that!!!!
Fantastic, thoughtful content as usual! Loved the deep dive and the pains taken to illustrate the complexity of deploying and maintaining modern air defense systems!
I actually this is misleading information. Modern long range air defense systems are incredibly complex. And a high level of training will make them more effective. But that does not mean they can't be used with relatively little training. Much of the complexity is taken care of by software even in terms of maintenance. Yes giving one to a group with a few weeks worth of training vs a few years of training might results in a system that is only 50% as effective. But a 50% as effective patriot system would still be a massively valuable asset.
We have to give them something that can be learned (or is already learned) and effectively used in a matter of days or weeks, not months or years. Stinger MANPADS takes a day for Ukrainian civvies to learn and it doesn't require any logistics chain other than spare batteries and missiles. All the other, largely Soviet-designed air defense systems (S-300s, Buks, Tors, Osas, Shilkas, etc.) that NATO can scavenge in ex-Soviet NATO-member stocks or around the world should be sent as well; depending on the variant, the Ukrainians are already well-trained on it and have the logistics chain and maintenance knowhow.
Chris is right about being realistic and practical about this. Those silly demands of some pundits for Patriots or Sky Dome or old Rapiers to be sent in don't take into account the time it takes to train on those systems and what has to go along with it. Unless our ground troops and support chain are included - which current policy disallows - those transfers will do little in theater.
That's right. But the Ukraineans should also be trained in modern western systems right now because what shall they do, when their Soviet equipment is (nearly) completely used and the war rages on?
@@ReisskIaue That's the beauty of Soviet equipment. There's always more out there. Either way, it's too late to give them the modern stuff now. Should have been done at least 20 weeks ago. Their troops are too busy to learn something new full-time.
@@ReisskIaue Honestly, if this war goes on long enough for Ukraine to *get* trained up on modern sophisticated ADA (beyond your basic MANPADS and such), they will have effectively lost already, and any such training will have to take place *outside* Ukraine, because they won't have a "safe space" to train in from the ground up. (Note, growing your ADA capability by using existing crews as cadre to expand into larger numbers of basically the same type of systems they currently have crew for are different. Worst case, they can filter them in as crew and give them in the job training, while the newbies are embedded into a crew that could conceivably operate - albeit at reduced effectiveness - without the newbies at all, as if they were casualties.)
Shovel systems they can use *now* - that is useful to them. Whether that is systems (like almost every MANPADS out there) that are simple enough that front line operators can be trained in a few hours, or simply examples (or even close variants) of systems Ukrainian Armed Forces are already trained to operate.
@@eddietat95 It’s never too late to plan for the next several months ahead. If you think this war will be over soon, you are gravely mistaken. Even if some peace agreement is reached in the next few weeks, it will not hold for long. Ukraine needs to be ready for the next assault and the training as well as logistics needs to be happening now.
Like one comment said, send equipments like S-300 and other soviet stuff Tungeska
This series continues to be excellent. Thanks for doing a quick explainer on all the complexities.
Thanks for this excellent video. A fast jet pilot once told me they are called missiles because they often miss. Your video explains the challenges of air defence very well.
30-40 years ago I was a Cactus/Crotale SAM platoon leader. Weapons have got more sophisticated, than the MIG 21's and 23's we had to deal with, but the basics probably still apply.
Firstly it takes about 6 months to train an SAM radar operator, and 3 years to train a skilled operator. Training involves exercises with friendly jets are essential, which I would say is not feasible once a war starts within disputed airspace. Basically it is a bit like a navy, your have the assets you start the war with, and those you can capture.
The primary air defense is the fighter interceptor controlled by an early warning radar system, which are hence the priority targets in the first few days of an attack.
What is left after that has to deal with several threats, enemy jets and ground attack planes, low flying guided missiles (ballistic missiles are a separate issue), helicopters. Jet pilots tend to avoid ground mission profiles once a few missiles are shot at them from close range! Usually flying higher. The main effect of short range AAA and SAMs and manpads is to push the enemy to fly higher and into the range of other air defense assets. Deterrence is more effective and common than just shooting down aircraft.
Once the initial formalities are over, mobility and ambush tactics come into play. Manpads and other mobile short range weapons then become important for ambushes. Helicopters are especially vulnerable, perhaps ten to twenty times more vulnerable than jets. Helicopters are also very vulnerable to long range artillery, which can destroy them on the ground. Artillery is alo an effective way of knocking out enemy short to medium range air defences. Long range SAMs are is a major deterance to air operations.
Nowadays drones are quite prominent and offer their own challengers. Drone pilots typically prefer not to have more than three UAVs shot down before they scale back their activity over a defended area.
Captured equipment i not immediately useable, mainly due to low serviceability rates and lack of trained personal to fix and operate them. We managed to capture Strelia missiles that were used by special force operators, behind enemy lines. We also captured a 9k33 Oca Sam-8 Gecko, but it took many month to translate the button witches and dials before performing a test firing in 1989. The missile however did not launch.
The main issue is serviceability of the weapons, which requires support personal with even more specialized training. I would suggest a 33% serviceability rate is doing well. You cannot just pull old stock out of a warehouse, and expect them to be serviceable. Also there probably aren't even trained operators and technicians around anymore.
Very informative and well organized. Great presentation and delivery.
Good in-depth piece Chris, very impressive, you've done your homework. Thanks for the post.
Thank you for your effort in making these well presented and informative videos.
Outstanding video and presentation.
Outstanding, concise, informed!! The best you have done!! Worth watching to the end.
Thanks for taking time to collate & provide the data in this video , as you said there's no substitute for hands on training to get the best from any weapon system from a basic field knife to a fully operational Air defence grid , well put together.
Great video examining the multiple layers of air defenses. Your use of graphics to support your narration-which is very clear, by the way-is especially polished. Thanks very much! It’s kind of amazing that the first airplane flew (putt-putt-wheeze-putt-putt) only in 1903, but planes have advanced so far so fast that all this specialized weaponry’s needed to defend against them.
An informative primer on Air Defense. Great work as always Chris.
Thanks Chris! Great video overview.
This channel... Its sooo good! Thanks for another great video!
As you’re the only military aviation channel I know that features such topics & features them honestly,congrats.
Awesome video! Thanks for putting this together. 👍
Very informative, thank-you. A lot of input! Gives a lot of room for further studies... thanks too for the chapters on the video (even if I don't use them). I appreciate the work that you put into the content! Viele Grüsse 😉
I trained at redstone arsenal! The amount of time and technical know how to operate these antiaricarft and anti missile systems was staggering! You are absolutely right training is key nuff said!
Just exceptional Chris. You must be up for an award with this superb presentation.
Great Video Chris!
Thank you so much'!
Thorough and detailed analysis making a complex, multi-level Defensive doctrine into easily-understood, common sense.
Extremely professional graphics adds a lot!
Thank you. Excellent analysis and summary.
love your work and learned something new with MANPADS. "Ranges are guidelines" reminded me of a certain pirate movie franchise
You are among the few channels that I watch and always look forward to your informative videos. I see you did not include the British Army Sky Sabre ( CAMM ) system. It uses the Army version to the Sea Raptor ) It is replacing the Rapier Missile.
Sky Sabre is so new system, that Brits have not enough to supply them selves for now. One battery with british crew is deployed in Poland on Polish - Belorussian border?
Excellent primer, thanks!
Excellent video, as always.
Bloody good video, exposition and graphic design.
Great primer on Air Defence Systems! Sehr Gut Bismark!
Thanks! Good thoughtful analysis!
Yes, excellent communication of complex topic. Thank you
Truly excellent video essay.
Succinct, informative, well researched and clearly explained…text book example of a great YT video.
Immediate Sub and Like, well done.
(Your English is superb as well btw).
That an excellent show of knowledge. Thank you 👍
A very informative introduction to air defence.
Glad you think so!
Thank you for an enlightening and informative overview of a complex topic. I think you should consider doing a weekly bulletin on the Ukrainian crisis for those of us who don't have your technical knowledge?
Excellent presentation!
Clear concise and very informative
Well done. This is the best overview of air defense that I have heard. The only thing you did not cover was that Home on Jam works both ways, examples are HARM and AMRAM missiles.
Excellent as always.
Finally a person talking about this that actually has a clue
I am no expert but I feel like this video was actually pretty misleading. I mean it has a tough challenge covering a very wide field in a very short amount of time. But even so I feel like it could have done a better job. You can watch this entire video for example and gain almost no understanding of why radar is generally used for longer range engagements. It is also really misleading about training.
Good stuff, keep it up.👍
Thank you for this. A great & infortamite video
Excellent info!
Excellent video!
Doesn’t the contrail of a low altitude SAM act as a deterrent by itself? You don’t necessarily have to bring down an enemy aircraft, as long as you disrupt or abort their attack.
You're correct. As demonstrated with Package Q Strike (though with bigger SAMs like SA-2/3/6). The F-16s done little damage against their intended targets in Baghdad, because the planes either had to jettison their payload or that they were not able to get the ideal lineup due to heavy AA fire.
I suppose this is why PGMs are important nowadays because it gives planes the ability to hit targets from a height and/or distance which minimizes risk against AA.
@@RainKing048 In a possible high threat environment like the Russians are flying in, shooting off fireworks would be enough to spook them. Especially if the occasional MANPAD is hidden among them!
"... and finally I will give a practical example of their deployment."
I could hardly wait until "finally" came; what better finale than the prospect of Chris firing a Stinger through his skylight?
That was fantastic, thank you!
Another through and well explained analysis of modern air combat (from the ground perspective), everyone should watch.
I completely agree anyone (eg: the Ukrainians) need weeks of training on the latest mid-to-long range SAM systems to be able to use them, in short term replenishing old existing hardware they are familiar with is best policy.
Long term, *starting now*, there must be a expedited training path to use the latest equipment. The Ukrainian war likely will continue for a very long time, months at least, and those obsolete systems will be consumed extremely quickly.
On what do you base your assessment of the duration of the conflict in Ukraine? I am finding it incredibly difficult to sort through both Russian and Ukrainian/West propaganda. It seems to me that, despite the Russians clearly having taken more losses than they are willing to admit, the Ukrainians also do not seem to be making any significant progress in REVERSING the invasion. In fact it seems to me that Russia is succeeding in surrounding key cities now, and I do not see how this conflict can last much longer without some sort of diplomatic resolution, and soon. If NATO had jumped in from day one, I think an outcome in NATO/Ukraine's favor would have been a lot more likely, albeit possibly at extreme risk of escalation too.
@@CheeseDanish85 Good question, answers:
1. Russians have occupied about 10% of Ukraine, there is much more to occupy.
2. Capturing Kyiv (now looking very unlikely) does not capture Ukraine
3. Assuming this will be months long war. Better to be trained and not use, than have and not be trained.
@@pricelesshistory Agree. Assuming Ukraine can pull it’s regular army in the east out before any Russian encirclement trap closes, and assuming supplies continue to pour in over the western border, then the area around Lviv could remain a Ukrainian redoubt for years.
In addition, Ukraine is mobilizing conscripts on war footing against one enemy. Russia appears to be avoiding mobilizing more conscripts and is having to keep forces in reserve facing NATO and the east coast. Ukraine appears to be holding with indications that Ukraine is maybe getting stronger while Russia is weakening. I know stories are just that, but one said Ukraine has lost about 40 tanks, but recovered about 130 functional tanks from Russia. Meanwhile, Russia has lost about 400 tanks. Again, these are just stories, but Russia still has not captured many (if any) large Ukrainian cities.
@@rogerexwood6608 Yes, that is danger for Ukrainian army, but to their credit the Russians have in 28 days failed to take key cities, and today loss of 1 supply ship and 2 other supply ships flee might make a Russian cutoff attempt impossible, or delay it for months.
Excellent work.
Very good & timely story.
An excellent video. Very educational
Nice, very comprehensive.
Thank you for the information.
A very good discussion on air defense, very good, thanks 😎
Speaking in a very cynical way, and very cheeky, Western countries could make use of both the Western volunteers and private military companies, to help the Ukrainians use newer, Western air defense systems. If enough, trained, veteran men already are in or on their way to Ukraine, they could be sorted by the Ukrainians at the border into: trained in air defense systems, and which; and only just MANPADS trained. That could help use systems like Starstreak or Sky Sabre. They could make mixed units of Western-trained operators and future Ukrainian operators, for training on the go. The other way I would think is to use third countries, or indirect ways, to get funding, for the Ukrainians to "hire" private military companies with staff trained in this systems, to help "support" Ukrainian units manning this new systems, for "training" purposes. Both could be used at the same time, too.
Another difficulty that nobody is mentioning is that the Ukrainians, given they are given the missiles, need reliable IFF systems for their own aircraft. That is one of the reasons quoted on why the Russians are not quite effective at CAS, or why they don't use as many smart munitions for CAS(besides their low stocks). Ukrainian aircraft, current and future, need good IFF, so the Ukrainians can fire more reliably and timely on aircraft. The Russians themselves seem a bit reluctant to shoot at everything that flies, because of the similarities in equipment, and are seen to use very low tech solutions, like the big painted Z on their vehicles. IFF is a relatively cheap and small piece of equipment that is way more valuable than it seems...
Cynical ?! It's only possible way to win this "special operation" war ! The clock is ticking fast !
Beat the Russians at their own game.
This is exactly what the Russians have been doing for a while now. We have to embrace some of our enemies' dirty tricks and turn them against those bad actors.
Or they could use Halliburton and Wagner contractors. Highest bidder.
@@Didyoureallythinkaboutit I believe “Wagner contractors” are not available to Ukraine at this time… 😉
Ukraine military just doesn't have the training cycles immediately available to become proficient on complex NATO ADS. On the other hand, we just don't know how long Russia's Ukraine invasion will last, and whether the Ukraine military will be operating in purely guerilla mode if the stalemate extends into the near future. Should a subgroup of Ukraine military start training on larger, longer-range systems now, or focus completely on short-range MANPADS for immediate success and to deny Russia's air force the CAS role?
I don't know. My crystal ball seems to have malfunctioned.
The same question I had. It's already been a while and seems it will be going forward
I think the answer is both. There's enough medium - long range SAM systems operational to force the VVS low down and thus into MANPADS range. Start a training program now and in six months Patriot batteries etc. could be operating.
You might be incorrect. Ukraine fought two wars with NATO over the first decade of the 20th century. They buried sons in US wars. They were put forward by the USA for that reason. Should the US have considered Russia’s feelings, maybe.
@@WilliamSanderson-zh9dq no one asked that question or had an opposing view. Yet you went out of your way to be wrong. Nice.
Very well done.
Good analysis and presentation. Makes what appears on mass media almost meaningless.
The material on this channel is of top tier.
All of these integrated air defence systems rely upon interconnection using some sort of electromagnetic transmission. As the data stream becomes more complex, it seems to me that they would be very susceptible to jamming/spoofing/hacking. In a nuclear environment, you'd wonder if they'd operate at all after being exposed to electromagnetic shock. I could see something like a very low yield nuclear device that pumps out a lot of gamma and not much else exploded up in the high atmosphere, not even targeting personal or property shutting down a country's air defences in a second.
Super analysis
Great video as always Chris. One thing I would add is that NATO still has medium range AA defenses in use namely in the form of relatively new NASAMS 2 & 3 batteries.
Old air defender here, blowpipe, javelin, and S15. Great vid lots of info, shared to my old Bty webpage. Thanks for all your work. Slava Ukraine.
could you talk about communitcation systems? particularly, battlefield comms? what communcations are there and how are they distributed and how are they vulnerable?
(four minutes into the video) the AD engagement areas are not "bubbles" but rather "funnels" especially with the long range systems.
Good stuff!
Chris you are indeed a real Pro!
I'm a old Army Stinger gunner and seeing stingers in war us satisfying to watch
You might want to have a look at the Norwegian NAMAS system it's very flexible also it's in the short/medium/ and medium+ range. Also it can use both IR and radar guided missiles.
Great explanatory video, for completeness' sake though when explaining the components of a SAM (or missile in general), the electronics controlling the whole thing should be taken into account. That part usually takes up quite a lot of room next to the warhead. Otherwise very well done and a lot of great footage!
All these manpads etc,when this war ends and it will how can all these systems be accounted for,they could pose a serious threat to civilian aviation if they fall into the wrong hands I would think
Excellent job on your presentation you have good grasp on the the weapons being used by the different nations.
SFC David o Darling U.S. Army Retired
Well that answered a lot of questions I had. Should be required viewing for some of our journalists.
I honestly don't get it why systems by Western countries like the Adats and Roland were discontinued. So much potential...
I think your point on training is crucial. It’s like if you give someone a car or truck to get around, but they don’t know how to drive.
Great show you covered more than I knew about the available missile systems. We used the Dusters (2-40mm POM-POMs on a track) for perimeter defense in our larger Recon support or fixed firebased, boy were they effective. I agree if we give Ukraine help it should be something they can use now, for instance the 300 systems the baltic and a couple of other NATO countries have. Patriots would be cool but not if they just sat there and no one could operate them. enjoy your presentations.
Where those Dusters used in a direct fire mode in exercises often?
"Perimeter defense" like as an anti-personnel weapon?!
because that's exactly how I play Battlefield... 😂
@@CarHubTalk The NVA we fought were hardcore but not stupid, the 1/10th Cavs FSBs had 4 Dusters, 4to 6 M48 tanks and 4 PCs around the perimeter, there was also 4 8 inch tracked Howitzers. It would have been suicide to attack one of three that the Cav manned, there were also built by Combat Engineers and were really well made. The Dinks would mortar them sometimes just to keep us honest.
On FSB Hardtimes a duster crew was up early on morning and saw the flash of a mortar and heard the bloop. He went to yelling his crew and the 155mm Paladin Howitzers opened up at about 200 to 300 meters and all they found was the tube. Dusters were awesome. They hade 4 of them but the other three could not reposition fast enough to get in the fight because they are setup for perimeter defense.
@@unbearifiedbear1885 YES, 40mm explosive rounds are as anti-personel as they come.
@@johngilbert6036 lol.. no doubt
High quality education as always.
Thanks for this great explaination of modern day Air defense I really liked theexplanation of the US army air defsne command structture!
Which another thing about sending anything bigger then MANPADS is geting in country then setting it up.
It is also important IMO to consider the effectiveness of a widely distributed observer corps.
Aircraft flying below radar are very noticeable to people they fly over ;)
If these ground observations can be quickly entered and plotted on an air control network, you would be able to warn MANPADS operators of incoming targets.
I suspect I am not the first to have thought of this.
To be honest a Automatic Anti ballistic missle defence like Irone Dome, 2-3 batteries for Kiev Kharkov would be such help. Or GoalKeeper kind of system against Grad barrages etc. Place them around stratigic places like barracs, artillery etc. And it will make a huge difference imho
There's also the legal limitations (e.g. ITAR) where Country A may not be allowed to access / use the technology in Country B's weapon systems. Similarly the German limitations on exporting weapons, etc.
Nicely done again! Cheers from a former Patriot guy! 5./22 for ever!
The point about how much training is needed to be effective w/ the more advanced air defense systems makes a lot of sense, although not letting advanced systems fall into Russian hands has got to be another motive. I don't have the insider knowledge to judge which is the bigger factor - just hope they are able to get what they need to repel the invasion