MANPADS: Detailed Look At The Most Cost-Effective Air Defense
Вставка
- Опубліковано 17 тра 2024
- MANPADS (Man-portable Air Defense Systems) are amongst the most respectable and cost-effective air defense systems out there . Although simple in comparison to the more impressive long-range systems, the versatility and pop-up threat posed by MANPADS makes them a special threat to pilots.
- 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
- Social Media -
Twitter: / milavhistory
Instagram: / milaviationhistory
- Sources -
Arms Control Today; Countering the MANPADS Threat: Strategies for Success¸ n.D. available at www.armscontrol.org/act/2007-... [last accessed 27.06.2022].
BAE systems, AN/ALQ-144 Infrared Countermeasures Set, available at www.baesystems.com/en-uk/prod... [last accessed 27.06.2022].
Directorate of Tactics; Training and Doctrine, Systems Training Plan for Man-Portable Air Defense System (MANPADS) Crew Member, June 1999.
European Security and Defense; Super Alligator Price Disclosed, 19th Oct. 2021, available at euro-sd.com/2021/10/articles/... [last accessed 27/06/2022].
Israeli Weapons, Flight Guard, available at www.israeli-weapons.com/weapo... [last accessed 27.06.2022].
Raytheon: Raytheon Missiles & Defense awarded $624 million for Stinger missile production, 27th May 2022, available at www.rtx.com/news/news-center/... [last accessed 28/08/2022].
Reuters; U.S. buys more Stingers after missiles' success in Ukraine, 27th May 2022, available at www.reuters.com/business/aero... [last accessed 27/06/2022].
Man-Portable Air Defense System (MANPADS) Proliferation, Federation of American Scientists, 2004.
Northrup Grumman, AN/AAQ-24(V) DIRCM (Directional Infrared Countermeasure), available at www.northropgrumman.com/what-... [last accessed 27.06.2022].
Pastor, Alvaro; Infrared guidance systems. A review of two man-portable defense applications, Universitat Oberta de Catalunya, Barcelona, Spain, n.D.
Schroeder, Matt; Black Market Prices for Man-portable Air Defense Systems, Federation of American Scientists, 2010.
U.S. Army; Army intensifying Stinger air missile training as part of new strategic initiatives, January 2018, available at www.army.mil/article/198986/a... [last accessed 26/06/2022].
US Army; FM 44-18-1 Stinger Team Operations, US Army, Washington DC: December 1984.
U.S. Army; Army rebuilding short-range air defense, July 2019, available at www.army.mil/article/224074/a... [last accessed 26/06/2022].
U.S. Department of Defense; Contracts for May 27, 2022, available at www.defense.gov/News/Contract... [last accessed 28/08/2022].
DoD; Ukraine MoD;
- Timecodes -
00:00 - MANPADS
00:47 - The Basics of Cost-Effective Air Defense
05:20 - Why We Need To Care About MANPADS
09:05 - Countermeasures
13:38 - Example: Helicopter shot down [Ukraine]
16:12 - Conclusion
- Audio -
Music and Sfx from Epidemic Sound
#manpads #militaryaviationhistory
Hi Chris, I was a uk military helicopter pilot and had a manpads fired at me one night in Iraq. Not a nice experience and over in a heartbeat, saved by the man pad being detected quickly by our missile warning system and a combination auto flares/dircm response defeated it. Literally over in a heartbeat. Several months later in the same spot my squadron boss was shotdown and killed by a man pads…they got lucky with him and unlucky with me. They are lethal and in a hostile environment you need not just the right equipment but the right training (tactics and procedures - ie avoid/low fly/intelligence/formation flights etc) to survive. Great video, thank you.
Good that MWS worked in your case! Any idea why it didn't for the squadron leader? Was this the Lynx in 2006 by any chance?
@@MilitaryAviationHistory yes that’s right it worked perfectly for me but it was Wing Commander John Coxen (not squadron leader). I do know why they were shotdown but can’t say on here, sorry.
That's alright, thanks for the response
I recall at the time the city was very busy with trouble for the city battlegroup that tour. When the Lynx was recovered I was on patrol and we cleared part of the route back into Basra Air Station and it was a big pile of wiring on back of a low loader. The city Bg had a lot of public order to deal with to get to the site to secure it.
IIRC there were 3-4 days of mass riots and piles of contacts straight after that hot night. We’d already called a “SAFIRE” on a Puma earlier that night that was on a familiarisation flight of the city. I think we had the new tour coming into the AO starting to shadow our patrols before taking over hence the increased activity from us.
Can’t recall if a lot of the trouble was due to local elections as my unit’s tour extended to help our replacements out.
@@stevepirie8130 hi Steve yeah it was a rough time alright - worse for you guys on the ground of course though - I take my hat off to you. Thanks for recovering the boys (and girl) from the Lynx, that was a really horrible day. I only knew John and Sara-Jayne but both were really wonderful human beings, gone way too soon. Funny thing was I went into work on the Monday after John was killed and had unopened emails from him that he’d sent a day or two before he was killed whilst I was on leave myself. Very odd experience.
Air defense does not need to shoot down enemy aircraft to be effective.
If the presence of AA forces the enemy to change his behavior, fly only single passes on a target or prevents prolonged loitering, thus reducing the effectiveness of the enemy air force, then that is a success.
I believe the term is "Virtual Attrition "
1:33 "Air Defense in Ukraine - Watch This First" video, mentioned for (SAC)LOS manpads:
ua-cam.com/video/6NwO098v3zM/v-deo.html
@@JdeMonster Both observations are *true*
Although *Actual Attrition* is an even more effective deterent.
It probably also really depends on how the system “looks” while working for a lack of a better term. Something like a Man-pad doesn’t really look threatening in comparison to a stream of bullets from a Gepard. It also is bad for the moral of your ground troops if they see your helicopter or airplane getting shot out off the sky. Is there actually any known combat that the Gepards took part in?
@@exo068 MANPADS can induce fear, especially because they are basically invisible.
Never thought of how fast MANPADS are. Mach 2 is 1.5 seconds per km, just 6-7 seconds to reach its max range, not much time to see and react.
Yup, reaction time is minimal provided you even know it's on the way
fun fact probability to hit decreases at speeds higher than Mach 2.0.
you don't react. there's a system that does that for you
@@riskinhos You can't really pull Ace Combat maneuvers when carrying weapons on pylons.
@@MilitaryAviationHistory 1:33 "Air Defense in Ukraine - Watch This First" video, mentioned for (SAC)LOS manpads:
ua-cam.com/video/6NwO098v3zM/v-deo.html
As a former door gunner on modern helicopters, that is the most terrifying thing that you can see coming at you.
Question: what do you do as door Gunner seeing that coming for you?
Hold on, try your hands at manual CWIS, throw whatever holy book you carry with you at it, tell the pilot you love them, jump off with a parachute (that I guess you wont be equipped with)?
@@TheDemigans close the door
@@TheDemigans I believe some helicopters have been upgraded with 'panic switches' for attached crew such as the crew chief, though I have no idea how extensive their deployment are.
I feel like the reason you're saying that is because the ones that see a fighter jet coming at them don't survive to talk about it.
@@TheDemigans you throw some damp low effort memes at the missile and hope it dies of cringe before it hits you?
I've been in an Eastern Ukrainian city since April and early on there was some aircraft activity, su25 runs and attack helos, but it has fallen off almost completely. In may I personally witnessed 4 su25 attacks and one attack helo (which got shot down near the highway to Severdonetsk) but for the past two months the only aircraft I've seen or heard have been Ukrainian flying over us toward the east.
Slava Ukraini
Freedom from imperialists, wherever they’re from.
How has your access to supplies been?
So pround of all ukrainians being so strong and resilient. You will be free again.
Roll tide roll
@@joearnold6881 *Heroyam slava.*
One often sees the defensive bomber gunners of WW2 called ineffectual because they did not shoot down as many fighters as they claimed. This misses the point that their job was to protect the bombers. Shooting down fighters was desirable but incidental to the main job. As with MANPADS, a miss was nearly as good as a hit if the fighter was discouraged from doing his job. Memoirs of German fighter pilots recall that one approached American heavy bomber formations with extreme trepidation and made a quick getaway because of the massed fire of heavy machine guns. Modern pilots flying into known MANPADS territory must have the same feeling.
good post
Like with HMS Prince of Wales and Repulse not having tracer ammo for their AA batteries. Really decreased the deterrent effect because the Japanese pilots couldn't see the amount of AA being thrown their way so they pressed home their attacks ignorant of the danger they were in.
Given as the claims where often from multiple gunners from multiple planes just for one fighter there massively over the real number of losses.
Exactly, just like the tankers firing machine gun’s tracer ammo in front of the plane, if the pilots misses great, if he’s shot down even better.
All of this systems have something in common, they’re air defense, not air destruction, which most people seems to miss understand,
@@SuperFunkmachine
Which was irrelevant except insofar as it boosted the spirits of the bomber crews, who could believe they were at least hurting the enemy as badly as they were being hurt. USAAF intelligence probably knew better, but let them believe the inflated kill numbers for the sake of morale.
I remember when I was able to "fire" a training stinger system at a Boy Scout event in 2005 that was hosted on a US Army Base. It wasn't easy to use, but it also wasn't hard to get a "kill" either.
I was in the Canadian Army during the cold war. Our MANPADS was Blowpipe and later upgraded to Javelin. At the time, the US were using the Gen 1 Stinger system. I really got a lot out of this video. The final footage of the Russian helicopter being taken out by an old MANPADS system by simply waiting for the flares to run out was fascinating.
I was surprised there was no real mention of the type of missile aimed by the operator, such as Blowpipe, Javelin, Starstreak and HVM. The counter-measures for these must be very different and are probably much less effective - especially as HVM flies at over mach 4.
This is funny because '11-'15, I was a Marine stinger gunner in 3rd LAAD (every picture of a Marine with a stinger in a desert or near an ocean was one of us) and we were a joke. Everyone thought we were useless, but not more than us. Circa 2011, a lot of the top officers were going on about how drones were the most dangerous threat and we needed to counter them. Apparently, LAAD has lasers, new trucks, and all that, now, with stingers being another tool in the toolbox.
I think a great system would be an semi-autonomous unmanned anti-aircraft mine, of sorts.
As in, unmanned ground based vehicles with AA systems connected to something like an AWACS system?
Barrage baloons
A drone with some sort of radar on its nose for detecting enemy drones and then ramming into them. That would be an amazing anti drone weapon
Thank you for your service.
We use to come down and quality on your guys dome. Fun times.
I Batt, 1/11 ACR
I have watched missiles (tethered to a sled on rails) being fired at an aircraft that was fitted with a missile warning and automatic defense system.
There are missiles out there that do come at you at Mach 4.
The test pilot knew the missile was going to be launched but when he saw the launch he only just got his finger onto the flare fire button before the missile was on him. Way too late to fire a flare. The automatic system reacted pretty much instantaneously upon missile launch.
On a battlefield where you don't know where a missile is coming from or when, if the computer doesn't see it and react then you are toast.
Hug your avionics engineers warfighting pilots. 😁
As a former 16S - stinger crewmember who was stationed in Germany in the 1980s, I really enjoyed your video Chris. Thank you!
Interesting and informative video. Thanks Chris 😊👍
Hi Chris I just wanted to say that your videos are amazing! I've watched about 10 videos so far and am already a subscriber :)
I love the fact that you're not pushing anyone's propaganda, but instead providing us viewers with excellent facts about military aviation. You're one of a kind man!
Greetings from Belgrade, Serbia and wishing you all the best of course!
I'm glad you mentioned the effect of MANPADS in the area without any kinetics needed to cause battlefield wins. Think about how many wire strikes and controlled flight into terrain US helicopters had in Iraq and Afghanistan. They were flying low to avoid MANPADS. Even things like engine failure are handled better at altitude, but if you're avoiding a MANPADS, master warning to contact with the ground is about three seconds.
I like your video but I want to tell you it took me less than an hour to train Ukrainians how to use the stinger and they were able to get a rotorwing kill within a few days (time mostly spent waiting for an aircraft to appear) after receiving training without ever having any other MANPAD training before.
Ukrainians are special by being so highly motivated.
#StandingWithUkraine 🇺🇦 💪
#FightLikeUkrainians 🇺🇦 💪
Sure, but if we simplifiy it to the extreme we can also teach someone in an hour anything from shooting a gun or to the main cannon from a tank. I am not understating the simplicity of MANPADS - like I said in the video they are simple to use by all accounts I have (including now yours) - but given how these things tend to work there is still a difference between being able to operate it, and operating it well + having convienent targets to fire at.
The United States Army learned how to train stinger operations in the Afghanistan war (when the Soviets were occupying)
The Ukrainians had training with similar systems - USSR's Strela-2 for example.
The MANPADS are highly simplified in operation, so the training necessary for "acceptable" performance is limited (getting "good" performance gets much tougher than an hour training).
Converting from - let's say - an S-400 to Patriot would be much more difficult.
Ah, the "anecdote to generalisation" method of discussion. Very not convincing.
If you look at historical data, manpads have a roughly 1 in 7 success rate in the 1973 Arab-Israeli war. Given the improvements in the weapons AND countermeasures over time it seems that ration still holds basically true. There are specific systems (eg. Star Streak) that are better that, but those systems are both more expensive and also harder & more dangerous to use.
Training is not just the physical systems use. It also includes tactics and context training. When to use. Where. Why and why not. You're not doing that in just 1 hour.
As an aside, one tactic the Russians developed in Afghanistan (and seemingly not used in Ukraine so far - they have perhaps forgotten it after so many years?) was MANPAD hunting teams of helos, where one helo (usually a Mil-8 or 24) would do a high speed run across known activity area to prompt a launch. When that happened 2-3 Hinds at ~5+km stand off distance would target the launch area (detected via IR and active spotters/callers from the sacrifice helo) with blanket cannon and rocket fire. Only mildly sophisticated in terms of technical application in today's context, but it worked to suppress/kill manpad activity and made good use of what they had available to work with at the time.
It's crazy seeing this videos as someone who's a MANPADS soldier. He hit a good portion of the points that go into manpads
As the Chieftain would say, the MANPADS causes "a significant emotional event."
Thanks Chris, always like to watch your aviation related content. MANPADS have definitely changed how aviation has been used in this conflict. Bad guy pre-flight mission briefs must have been very somber meetings.
Going to be fascinating to see MANPAD's change to meet new defensive systems. Seeing lots of Russian Helicopters being saved not just by flares but by their DRICM systems.
Most informative as always Chris.
Thanks for a comprehensive yet accessible overview of this apparently game changing and relatively new (in historical terms) weapon category. Beyond learning about the technical aspects, I had never considered that the mere presence of MANPADS in a particular combat environment, or even a lanch that fails to hit its target, can greatly influence an adversary's tactics and morale. A superior video and a valuable contribution to helping the public gain a richer understanding of the Ukrainian conflict. Thank you.
Very interesting!
I know you are more into aviation than counter aviation, but i would love a short series / look on other medium range stuff like the Bloodhound (what we had here in switzerland)... i saw an exhibit at the Flieger Flab Museum in Dübendorf and that thing looked scary enough just standing there... Thinking of how it must have been for a pilot where such a thing gets yeeted in your direction... phew.
Also Greetings from Switzerland from one of your Patrons :D
Well that is one heck of a channel I just came across, right here. Holy smokes, where were you hiding?! You're exactly the sort of material I often watch, I can't believe the algorithm just picked you up. Very nice quality material, instant sub. 👍
Chris up until a year ago I thought the flares were engine problems lol, I was utterly clueless. Very interesting, please continue!
good to see you again. thanks
Excellent video. I always learn something from your content.
a really informative video, thank you.
Excellent presentation! Subscribed.
Man portable anti materiel weapons writ large are of great service as systems in being. Their mere existence somewhere affects the enemy everywhere. When infantry is a real threat you can never ignore a bush again.
Really enjoying your content sir!
MANPADs can shut down airfields, just through their presence in the area. I was at BIAP when a C5 and C17 were hit, not long after a DHL bird was hit. This would have been late 03 to early 04. I went on a few of those buyback missions you mentioned with OSI. We only ever recovered old SA-7s.
Well researched video, thank you.
Your work is amazing!
awesome video chris
Awesome work. Thanks 👍🏻
Hey Chris. Good video !
As this is the only military aviation channel I know that features & is honest about manpads,congrats.Manpads are the main reason why I prefer craft with ecm,MWS & CMWS.
Stingers aren't obsolete quite yet, but their age is showing.
It's about time we get one or multiple replacements that are up to date, have better batteries, improoved friend or foe detection, smarter seekers that avoid countermeasures...
(no snark intended, just making talk) I have heard much discussion about "replacing" Stinger, but little about "upgrading". Unless its replacement has a radically different method of operation, why not just upgrade Stinger? Stinger was originally called "Redeye II" after all, because of its clear lineage from the preceding Redeye MANPADS.
I would bring up AIM-9X as another. It is a "Sidewinder" missile, like its progenitors from the 1950s, but its sophistication and capability far exceeds anything which existed at that time.
The Stinger replacement may very well be another Stinger itself. Stinger II or Stinger Block II, among other potential names.
@@ndx6779 Have you seen StarStreak compared to stinger? Twice as fast, twice as high, twice as far and three independently seeking sub munitions that hit the target from different angles. It can be fired at a retreating aircraft going flat out and still hit as the StarStreak goes to Mach 4+.
@@mbak7801 I'm aware of the Starstreak, but it's another can of worms, mainly considering that it's foreign system. I can imagine that the US would like to pursue a home-grown solution instead. US designers could draw upon Starstreak's features, but Starstreak does have an eccentrically unique set of features (no doubt proving their merit). Many of the newest MANPADS are still IR/UV fire-and-forget guidance so perhaps there is still room for a more conventional system, like Stinger or an upgraded descendant.
@@ndx6779 stinger will continue to get upgraded with more powerful engine and better sensors. The new point defense US carrier truck will have stingers for AA, and I believe cruise missiles but I'm not sure.
@@ndx6779
The primary reason folks talk about "replacing" systems is because their continued upgrades are usually a given. The U.S. will continue to upgrade Stinger but sometimes a new development is much better at accommodating the last decades of technological progress.
Thank you, interesting video.
That manpad launch you showed at the start looked scary af to me.
I can imagine when you're on a mission there may be more than one thing to focus on on top of flying the aircraft.
Then, even if you've deployed your defence systems and got away from the first rocket there's no guarantee you're not getting hit by another one.
That combined with manpad accuracy must be an exceptionally good deterrent.
Great review
Very interesting. Makes me want to unretire and work on some of these things. Seems like an incentive to use UAVs for low and slow ground support or threat reduction/control. Also to 'defoliant' the target and level all structures so the ground force has trouble hiding. I can think of a nice missile that rides the smoke trail down and looks for anything moving/running if we can get that at a low enough cost and I bet we could.
I am suprised none has done fume / fuel / exhaust seekers in some form (i know heat is somthing that there.)
You have torpedos that loiter and has a set grind search pattern looking for a particular bullbling that happens for subs
Nicely done..!
British forces in the Falklands successfully used Stinger without the 6-week course. Reading the manual as they got it on the shoulder proved adequate.
I'm not aware of any MANPAD seeker that ever locked on to terrain. The early ones were so insensitive that the target had to be really hot to get a lock and that meant staring up the jet pipe. The ground would be invisible to them. The sun can dazzle the seeker but it won't get a lock.
Modern IRCM do indeed start with a missile warning system that will automatically trigger a response. As you say pilot reaction is not good enough and prophylactic dispensing can burn through your flares very fast.
Flares can't prevent lock; they are designed to look to the missile like a valid target. So you can get a lock and launch, but it will guide on the flare.
Flare technology is also designed to defeat flare rejection technology in SAMs; as with all EW it's a continuous circle.
Those old jammers didn't work as you say. The seeker itself actually chops what it sees into pulses to decide where the target is. The jammer generates similar pulses that confuse the seeker and steer the missile away. By the way, missiles like the SA-7 and -18, as seen in the final clip, are blind directly on the forward axis so they have to corkscrew to keep the target in sight.
DIRCMs don't work by dazzle as you suggest, although there have been European and Russian proposals that would work that way. In-service DIRCMs use deceptive jamming just like the old omni-directional flash-lamp systems but because it's a narrow beam or laser you can get a lot more energy into the seeker. ALQ-24 LAIRCM is widely fitted to transport aircraft as well as helos, and has been for many years. The 'Large Aircraft' bit in the abbreviation is the clue.
Great stuff. I see why it's important to keep these off the black market.
Smoked a Metal Gear REX in Alaska with a Stinger back in '98.
Good times.
That is all I can think of when I see those Stingers. Brings me back to the time when I used to travel in a cardboard box covered in dog piss.
Really good stuff.
Seems at least worth mentioning that
1. Manpads are of no use against aircraft flying at medium+ altitude.
2. Compared with AAA (guns), they have no alternate use case.
3. From the time you press the button on that battery/coolant unit, you have something like 1-5 minutes to fire the missile. When it runs out, it's junk. This depends on the specific system to some degree.
4. The reaction time problem applies to the manpads operator to. Aircraft are fast, and the time from when they come into view to when they leave view is pretty short if they're at 100 feet AGL, even if they're only flying at 400 knots. This is less of an issue if you're sitting in the middle of a massive wheat field, I.E. the Donbass.
5. They probably aren't of much use against low altitude high speed strike packages, the mission profile for which the F-111 was originally intended.
6. And lastly, they're countermeasures. Not measures. The machine gun didn't make infantry irrelevant, and manpads won't make planes (or helos) irrelevant, because infantry and helos are war winning tools.
As a former 16S (Stinger missile gunner), I approve of this!
I was fortunate enough to get to fire 3 of them (none in combat), we were told at the time the missile was worth about $110k USD, this was in 1992/93. For what little that is worth. Did get a cool solid gold General Dynamics pins for each missile I fired. So there's that cost, too. lol
ManPADS as ShorAD, you can't overstate the flexibility. I was trained as mechanized infantry, light infantry, IFV/CFV (M3/M4 Bradley) dismount, and even Air Assault. Basically, a ManPADS gunner is infantry first, but has the ability to be anywhere a CAS threat may present itself. Does suck to carry one around though...heavy bastards.
The biggest problem with these missiles is the fact it literally pinpoints the gunner with the smoke plume. Gotta fire and run like Hell, additional CAS or enemy troops will zero in instantly.
As an aside....you showed an Avenger system in one of those clips. Are they still being used? They were a fun toy. LOL
Nice presentation
The RBS70 is an interesting system it needs three people to carry it but it provides a heavier missile and a longer engagement range. It was also the first all aspect system with it's laser beam riding technology, the missile is also large enought to fit a proximity fuze.
The latest versions of the firing unit has automatic target tracking.
Blowpipe predates RBS70, and is all aspect (since its manually controlled), although Blowpipe did suck. A better equivalent for the UK to RBS 70 would be Javelin or Starburst, which are man portable but use SACLOS guidance (later we got Starstreak and now martlet).
Great video
I just read "Across and angry Sea", which is about the Falklands War from the perspective of the SAS (one part of it). In it the Author describes how his party engaged an argentine Pucara after the SAS performed a diversionary attack on Goose Green on the night of the San Carlos landings.
The operators didnt have much if any training because the system had just been given to them by the americans and the only guy with a bit more training had died in a helicopter crash (Along with some 19 other SAS and attached soldiers). Apparently the Pucara wasnt the ideal target and the sun was up and so on.
Nevertheless they did hit the Pucara. But not any of the other planes they fired at that day, during the air attacks on the Bridgehead.
Thinking about the airbattle for the San Carlos bridgehead, a few more Stingers distributed around the box could have made a real difference under the conditiions at the time.
Enjoyed the video
MANPADS are very deadly to helicopters and slow moving aircraft. It's a very deadly and effective system if used properly. Having experience with them in a helicopter game, I can say that they are an even bigger threat than AA vehicles because you aren't going to see the person with a MANPADS like you would with a vehicle
I like that you specify your experience in a helicopter game, and not claim to be an air force general
1:33 "Air Defense in Ukraine - Watch This First" video, mentioned for (SAC)LOS manpads:
ua-cam.com/video/6NwO098v3zM/v-deo.html
A well camouflaged AAA or SAM position can be as hard to detect as MANPADS. Also what you are really comparing is detectability of infantry vs. detectability of a truck, but you can mount MANPADS on a truck (looking at you North Korea) or other vehicles and have AAA without a truck. Although I guess an Igla is more easily transportable by infantry than a ZU-23.
I realise games improve constantly.
But recall a group of guys who worked together also played 'shooter' games and one guy, an ex Marine, was always the lowest scorer.
Then they all went on a paintball range ............. One session it was him against ALL the others -
He won.
@@Farweasel I've played against marine group vs my group and I've played for 2 years. Anyways they destroyed us in about 10 minutes. It was jaw dropping how effective their training is!
Remembering the picture of a Kamov KA-52 that had its left outrigger blown off in exactly the spot where its IR-countermeasures are located, I wonder if there are manpad missiles that have some similar capabillity to Iris-T's beam ride mode or some other home-on-jam option.
Great to see a video from you again, Chris. I wonder what improvements are being implemented into the newer production Stinger systems as well as other Western systems used by the Ukrainian defenses.
Main improvements are to the seeker heads, which now tend to use dual band detection
PPZR Piorun is doing a hell of a job in Ukraine from what I hear, already purchased by the US and recently Estonia.
@@Szweminek797 wait, doesn't the US already have the Stinger? Why would they buy the Piorun?
@@SHVRWK Probably for teste, but as far as I know Piorun is significanfly better than the Stinger
Thanks. I knew the very basics, but your more in depth explanation is incredibly helpful in understanding the Russo-Ukrainian Air War.
Absolutely amazing context for how systems impact tactics. Thanks very much!
I think your point on how it changes the planning and execution of the mission is great. The battle is half won if the target is not hit by the aircraft because it is too far away, or too high, or too scared.
I wonder how many manpads the US left in afghanistan?
could you do a video on other types of systems than IR like starstreak etc, and say what advantages/disadvantages these newer types have please?
video at 2:11 is definitely something bigger than a manpad, as is the shot at 0:08. Longer version of the videos shows the launcher, and the smoke density and burn time is a really good indication of the size of the SAM
what a plot twist. 17 minutes into the video.
I remember the Blowpipe simulator at Larkhill in the 80's, I got the impression the instructors thought actually throwing the whole thing at an aircraft with a catapult would have been more effective...
I seem to remember reading somewhere that during the Falklands war the Blowpipe missiles flew so slowly that they struggled to catch up the Argentinian jets that they’d been fired at?!
I love how "voldymyr and his friends" became a thing between youtubers.
MWS set to auto have the problem though that they are too sensitive and the amount of false threats you get renders the system fairly ineffective. I saw an interview of the WSO of a F-15E Strike Eagle say they always have it set to manual, and that one time someone left it in auto and while they were refueling from the tanker something triggered the MWS and it auto deployed flares, freaking everyone in the flight.
Yes I was on a Merlin and it was coming into the drop-off point for my patrol and a few metres over a nearby village it launched flares on auto and set fire to fishing boats, nets, a car and some poor woman’s washing hanging out.
I had a heap of forms to fill out so they could claim compensation the next day 😂
Anecdote from a former AD officer in the swedish army. My company commander said that if we shoot down one russian aircraft (usually implied SU-24) the entire company had payed for itself.
Personally I don’t like the ”manpad ” nomenclature as it only says ”man portable” for example RBS-70 has at times been called man portable, which I claim it is not (having lugged it around I should know). In my view a ”air defense system” needs integrated radars and communications not just a missile launcher as well.
That said the primary task of SHORAD and vSHORAD systems are to influence the ability of opponents to freely use the airspace more than actually shooting anything down. That is for the airforce and longer range missiles.
Manpads are to aircraft as the Panzerfaust was to tanks (but far more effective). When you take away the advantage of closing with the enemy, you create mission kills without a shot being fired.
In 1995 Ecuadorian forces fought peru on mountainous jungle, so theEcuadorian soldiers climbed the trees, did some gardening, built some discreet platforms and used Iglas to down 1xMi 24 and 3 armed Mi 8s that were trying to attack Ecuadorian positions... that and the Ecuadorian Air Force Mirage F1s downing 2xSu22s and 1xA-37 put an end to their air operations.
The Peruvian helos were moving a slow speed when they got popped - easy targets. The Peruvian attack jets just got run down by a vastly superior fighter jet. Not a good example.
@@andreinarangel6227 Helos are always slow... and they were overconfident, didnt expect to take missiles from a treetop in the middle of a jungle, so they didnt even use flares... boom.
The peruvian Su 22s never knew what hit them, they were overconfident too, didnt check six and got smashed as a result, the F1s werent "vastly superior", their pilots simply did their job competently, the peruvians didnt and paid the price.
Trauko: Nice war story but irrelevant to the topic.
@@KB4QAA Not really, its about MANPADS, the peruavians felt safe since they were flying over a triple canopy jungle, no way you could launch one from under the trees... they didnt expect the Ecuadorians to simply climb them, build platforms and launch from there affectively.
THAT stopped them cold, abandoning their air attacks, exactly like in Ukraine today, where the Russians underestimated the threat and will to fight.
I do recall the Soviets had a mine or booby trap version of MANPAD they could mount up a tree and was seismic activated to turn on then launched on lock. Was for Spetsnaz to harass our airfields.
Mad respect for this weapon, just watched a video of manual taking down a Russia cruise missle.
Definitely would like to know more about non-IR systems like STARStreak.
The Alvis Stormer HVM is an interesting one, I'd like to know more about how the missile is guided to target.
Former AD operator here, Blowpipe, S15 and Javelin. Starstreak seems to be doing well in Ukraine unlike Blowpipe in the Falklands conflict. Would be nice to see a video about the Stormer an upgraded version of my old Spartan CVRT.
@@devildogswatching2216
Wow, thanks for the info.
I've seen Stormer HVM moving in Ukraine, don't think I saw it firing.
It's such a left-field British invention, I'm excited to see results, especially with the computer controlled sight on Stormer.
Have you seen the Ukrainian mechanised guys blitzing through kharkiv on Spartan?
So good to see those things doing what they were built for and against whom.
Can't think of a better vehicle for Ukrainian mud either!
Are you on Twitter? There's some fantastic info on there.
@@MostlyPennyCat havnt seen the Spartan out there but will have look for them. I have some old footage of Spartans in the Gulf 91 on my page. They are perfect for the AD role but useless in a tank battle.
@@devildogswatching2216
They're using them for thunder runs.
Hurtle down the road at 60, shoot at everything, dismount when in contact.
@@MostlyPennyCat sounds like fun, Fuckin brave Ukrainians them vehicles have no armour ! They are fast though :)
Nice video
very good
Marketing material of newer MANPADs asserts that their resistance to countermeasures keeps getting better and better and ever since that video of the PKK destroying that turkish supercobra with an Ancient 1st generation Igla I'm wondering how much that even matters
1.) Never trust marketing material. While outright claiming false things is legally punishable in many countries, "embellishing" the truth isn't.
2.) That Super Cobra? Also never deployed flares in the video of it I saw. It had no idea it was even fired upon - until it hit it and blew off the tail that is.
For every measure, there is a counter-measure (ex: look at the low-kill ratio achieved by the AIM9L in the Gulf War, they kept getting "spoofed" by the Soviet-built IR flares.).
p.s. Almost all the kills in Gulf War (1991) were with the AIM7.
It's the age old cycle. The weapons or armor get better, so then the armor or weapons have to get better. Sometimes, one side does get a massive advantage, at which point things may change (how armor for infantry mostly disappeared for a while, for example), but generally speaking, it just cycles.
MANPADS (the 's' is part of the acronym) do get better, but then, the defenses have as well.
I would expect countermeasures to be almost completely ineffective against modern heat seeking systems. The simple reason is that the computers guiding them are just that much better.
In the old days, a heat seeking missile would just steer toward the hottest point in its view. You could trick it by dropping flares, and it would have a bad time if the sun was behind you.
Fast forward to a couple decades into the 21st century, and let's look over at the image recognition that companies like Googe have achieved. We should also look at how good modern camera sensors are, even for cheap(ish) consumer cameras. Now, I don't have any insight into state of the art missile guidance, but I would be rather disappointed if they didn't use these same technologies. So instead of the old "follow the light" guidance used by the missiles in the '70s and '80s, a modern missile should be expected to recognize the difference between flares and aircraft, recognize different types of aircraft, and see in the dark in the visual spectrum in addition to infrared, and so forth. How do you even begin to defeat such a system?
(just to note I'm not even an amateur in this subject let alone an expert) Ever since I found out about MANPADs I knew that they'd be the real game changer in air combat in wars that excluded the US and NATO. When I asked why they aren't a more prominant feature of militaries around the world I was told by many that they're not as useful as the more expensive equipment. I had a hard time believing that since they were just so relatively cheap, but I wasn't an expert so I simply defered to their expertise in the subject. The recent war I feel has vindicated my prediction (though my prediction was focused more on Taiwan and Venezuela and not Ukraine it still applies).
MANPADS definitely have limits. Fast moving jet fighters, or really anything going above 300-400 knots and doing maneuvers is going to force even stingers to pull almost more G's than it is rated for. they're purpose built for low, slow targets and anything else is...well, still gonna be viable targets, but the probability of kill will be much lower because these missiles actually don't turn all that sharp. Compared to more expensive systems, the dude you talked to is actually kinda right. Mach 2 is pretty slow for a SAM, and while it may be perfect for the MANPADS job, different larger SAMs will almost always be more maneuverable and deadly against the real fighter threat- which is a very different job from that of the Stingers.
MANPADS also are required to be small and light, which means the rocket motor will be small, and it will probably only burn for a few seconds. Proper SAMs that you'd find on platforms can have rocket motor burns that go into the 30 to 60 second territory. you don't see people talk about this lots, but burn time is VERY important because it means that during this time, the missile can pull G's to reach the target and *still* also be accelerating towards the target at the same time. Once that burn runs out, any G's pulled will lose the missile of it's speed and it just falls short of the target (assuming they take evasive action)
(or you could be like some EU countries and develop an extremely maneuverable MANPADS capable of 30Gs like the Mistral lol)
As Chris said they alongside AAA fire help push targets up into the SAM envelopes of bigger and better systems.
I have some questions about ww2 cockpit canopies. A lot of them slides back and forth like Spitfire, but some are on hinges, like the 109. Some had doors, like the P39. My questions are: are there any significant differences between all those canopies? What are the factors those designers had to think of on the drawing board? Structural strength and ergonomics? From your inside-the-cockpit, do they differ all that much or just a matter of preference?
The P39 car door had no design at all. It could not be opened at flying speed. Therefore the USAAF refused to use it in combat. Most were given to the Russians. They were used for training for a while in WWII in the US I guess for lack of more suitable aircraft. Bell aircraft designed them - think of any other Bell aircraft that flew in WWII ! As for the others - a canopy with rails is always going be easier to parachute from, but the downside is that a railed system may get distorted and be impossible to open.
I imagine some super advanced (and expensive) future countermeasure for MANPADS on helicopters could work like some tank anti-missle systems. It could shoot a controlled or dumb fire projectile or projectiles to try and destroy the missile before it impacts. I bet it could be made to work, but the whole idea sounds incredibly expensive and difficult to make.
I can imagine an APS "Active Protection System" could be adapted from a tank system. They can already intercept long rod perpetrators flying at 1500 meters/sec (5000fps)
Polish manpads in action called piorun, nice Job
I find it absurd that these systems still have maximum active times of around 60 seconds. These systems came out in the late 60s surely things should be hugely improved by now
I would say they have, but shoulder fired weapons system still has to account for portability, and the ability for the soldier to fire it from their shoulder.
But why?
Longer times means more temptation to shoot it too early or at too hard to hit of a target.
60 seconds is a nice amount of time to make a hit, and short enough that a pilot can’t reasonably react.
@@kevinalmgren8332 I think the flare launching shows why you might want more than 60s. 96 flares per side, launched over an extended time period. So if you turn on your system, start tracking, then flares start launching, and now you are waiting for the right time to fire... and then the battery goes out. Also, imagine that situation with better cover. Again, you could have to track multiple targets or the same target multiple times before you have a good shot.
You can swap out the battery for the latter situation, but that means you have to haul around an extra piece of gear, and you do create a gap in your ability to use the system in a more intense situation, where you might need to use it over an extended period of time.
Keep in mind that that 60s isn't a limit for the missile itself. It's for the launcher. The missile won't need 60s, since it doesn't have that much flight time.
it probably deliberate to be like that. So if it get stolen or sold on the black-market to terrorist it would be useless without battery or coolant, which goes bad real fast!
It probably all comes down to sice. Your missle can only be so large & heavy if you want it to be a manpad. That limits what kind of hardware you can put in for target aquisition and tracking.
I’m not sure if anyone is using a towed IR decoy? In the mid late 1990’s there was some rumblings about using a towed decoy. It would unspool and trail the aircraft at a range greater than the destructive blast radius of a man pad warhead. The d3coy could be cut loose when used up or possibly reeled back in. There was also going to be a radar jammer of the same design. Can’t remember who was going to build it though
Helicopters can also mount shrouds to reduce heat signature or extended exhausts to project the heat bloom further away too
can u do one on the effectiveness of Sams in past,present and future theatres of war such as vietnam,yom kippur and gulf,iraq war when facing an overwhelming foe technologically and resource.
That Infrared footage of 2 helicopters lobbing unguided rockets is dope. Never seen it. Do you mind providing the link to the source ?
May be a 50bmg gun type CWIS anti manpad pod will save the slow moving aircraft in future
This video reminded me of a question that I've been having for a while. An UAV like a TB2, what antiaircraft system would be most appropriate to take that out, and are there any dedicated systems? It would seem to me that a TB2 is a tricky target, for several reasons I don't think MANPADS can take them out, and when you launch a Patriot or an S-400 missile at it, it seems like overkill. In that case, you are likely spending more on ammo than the system taken out is worth. Of course, that can still be worthwhile, but it still seems to me that many armed forces don't have an appropriate solution to counter this threat. Of course, I am not an expert on the topic, I am probably overlooking something.
In Ukraine they are firing these couple of hundred thousand dollar missiles at several hundred dollars worth of drones. What's the return on investment? Well the shot down drone does not (hopefully) have gotten a peek at your people and positions and relayed it to Mr Arty. That's the ROI for spending so much to take down so little.
#StandingWithUkraine 🇺🇦 💪
@@josephking6515 Yes, of course, that is why I said: "Of course, that can still be worthwhile"... However, one can quite easily imagine a scenario where relatively few and expensive AA systems get saturated by mass-produced, cheap drones. The situation screams for something more appropriate.
I imagine a radar guided auto cannon like the Gepard would be good against drones, as it's ammunition is cheap and the target is slower than a jet. Even better if you can lock onto the radio signal being broadcast from the drone.
the biggest countermeasure is the oldest move - simple altitude. the higher up you can drop your weapons from effectively, the higher up the manpads have to reach, the more expensive and burdensome they become. its no comfort to choppers and attackers but it may mean a return to investments in high altitude bomber research and construction. modern optics and guidance systems could do a lot from out of reach of anything but heavier missiles or other aircraft.
Could you make a video about Me-163? Quite a unique plane in my opinion
I wonder if the "kemp bush" was a Jingles reference :D an old one for sure but it checks out.
Also MANPADS is the least threatening name for a system like this. Sounds more like something the twitter community argues about
The interesting thing about manpads are that terrain altitude is highly advantageous for the user and disadvantagous for the pilot. Altitude hinders the pilots altitude because of the airframe, it also makes the missile preform through thinner air and pilots are not as aware of manpads when cruising up high and without MAW (missile approach warning) by way of sensors it will be very hard mentally for a pilot to get shot at high. a negative is that clouds and weather may hinder sight for the manpad crew.
I think you forget that planes go fast and manpads have a short effective range, you might get away with firing at an oncoming plane up high but anything that is oblique or cold is a no-go, this is because the real distance to the plane is where its going to be when the missile reaches it, if you fire at something high up its going to take far longer and the plane will MOVE far further before the missile reaches it, effectively the manpads loses performance exponentially to a target up high. Manpads really needs planes to be down low, for up high the Ukrainians have the S-300.
Didn't the Mujahedeen in Afghanistan climb above the Soviet rotary wing operating altitude and shoot *down* on them?
MANPADS are used against low-flying aircraft. Flying at low altitude is a necessity for non-stealthy aircraft, as flying at high or medium altitude will put them in the engagement envelopes of much more capable long-range radar-guided SAMs. This is broadly why the increasing number of stealthy aircraft will have fewer problems with MANPADS (although MANPADS will be vital against Group 1, 2 and 3 UAS) as they will be able to fly at high and medium altitude without worrying as much about radar-guided SAMs, and flying at these altitudes will put them outside of the engagement envelopes of MANPADS
@@castor3020 Afghanistan manpads were hiked up to high mountains to be able to shoot at F-14's in the high sky, most missed but they got alot closer than thought by pilots, mostly spirals indicating a bad missile but it made the F-14 pilots think twice before decending down to strafe and the only saviour was the Swedish BOL-IR system which made the F-14D's hold over 200+ flares. I however agree with your points.
Good stuff. Thanks!
Ok, I am IT guy with some experience with AI image recognition. And after this video, I am quite sure that the moment the AI acceleration chips become more reliable (more than your usual consumer phone reliable I mean, where these chips have a boom already) in combination with a better IR camera the flares will become quite useless. It is only a matter of pattern recognition software to reach a stage where just like you as a human would never go for a flare, the software would also not fall for it. Actually even easier if the missile has both IR and visual spectrum lenses so that one it gets closer it switches to the visual range, where most of the existing AI recognition systems are trained. I do not know how far something like this is in military industry complex, but I can put together a Raspberry PI system that would do this (actually the more expensive part would be the lenses on a good camera), I guess some more professional contractor can package that to the tip of the missile.
Hi. why is the shooter pressing the uncaged switch at the grip stock before pulling the trigger ?
Can us build new manpad which ignoret the flare and keep follow target?
I am not really an expert of course, but I think one of problems aircrafts have compared too tanks is that got tougher then older missiles could really destroy, however aircrafts can't really get thicker armor too the same level do too weight.
That means even older missiles can destroy them if there counter measures fail.
When I originally joined the Army in '06 in Air Defense, all the rage was the new patriot missiles and THAAD. But those stinger missiles are quite useful! When I was in Iraq, that chaff would routinely pepper the FOB I was on, was a bit annoying.
How can you have a missile warning system for MANPADSs?
What are they detecting?
Regarding what is filming this clip, if the bottom left text is correct its likely a Leleka-100 UAV
MANPADS is what you have to wear when you're playing Warthunder with Bo & Stick
A big thing to watch out for in future is an air-to-air UAV that is effectively a MANPAD missile carrier. If it's small enough, it'd be hard to spot on radar, and it would be able to snipe low-flying aircraft and helicopters on the wing.
MANPADS are the "small arms" of the strategic weapons category, they relatively cheap for they can accomplish, because they can change radically the balance of power on a war theater and perhaps the outcome of the war, as we are seeing in Ukraine.
Manpads still need a proper SAM threat to get the enemy to fly low enough to engage .
SAM or interceptors. Something that makes the planes want to fly low. But that's not necessarily true. Helicopters and such aren't exactly known for flying high. And if you do push the enemy up high or further away, then you reduce the accuracy of their non-guided weapons, as well as eliminate the use of certain weapon systems entirely (the GAU-8 during Desert Storm, for example, once the flight floor was implemented).
These active directional IR countermeasures, are they IR lasers that just burn out the sensor on the incoming IR missile?
I wonder if they could use a conventional camera with machine learning on device to create a rocket system that can't really be jammed using ML and optical flow control system? System might be a lot less than 50K (I don't know what the cost of propulsion and explosives are). If this system was accurate enough you could launch a propeller driven drone to get to altitude/interception with a Carl gustaf rifle which may be cheaper and just as or more difficult to evade. You may be able to reuse the drone system since it's recoiless.
Wonder if next generation manpads would be equipped with smokeless propellants, like CL-20 or ADN based? That would make them practically undetectable by eye, though I guess IR systems would still see them.
Kinda hard to make smokeless rocket propellant. High explosives are not suited as solid rocket fuel, you want something that burns more slowly not detonate in an instant.
@@user-lv7ph7hs7l Indeed, that's why they are still research projects and not in deployed rockets. AFAIU CL-20 and ADN-based smokeless propellants both look quite promising, although more work is needed.
@@jbepsilon I don't know, I mean I'm sure it might be possible with the cash they have but I don't see how. If you really need smokeless go liquid fueled. Simple pressure fed system with an engine similar to an RCS thruster burning propane and oxygen or something like that. And is it really that necessary? If you're relying on the smoke trail, you got about 2 s to live.