Kiev Is Burning

[Stuart Galbraith]

10 hours ago, jmsaari said:

Can see if looking at is one thing, can find is quite another. You have no radar, no thermals, no datalink to get air picture data.... while your supposed target has radar, thermals, missiles that outrange yours by about double, appears to be mostly operating well on their own side, and has a generation newer and much more numerous ADA threat in support, plus air cover. To say it's going to be risky for the Hind is an understatement, more like a suicide mission and unlikely to create enough of a threat to push the Ka-52s back.  

Its very difficult, sure. Im not aware of anyone else offering any alternatives, other than forward deploying AD vehicles, which are going to be no less vulnerable than tanks to artillery, or just leaving the Russians to act like online campers with their Helicopters. And as said, they already have drones forward looking for targets to hit with artillery. is it really that difficult to relay to a helicopter crew 'There are helicopters at grid reference xyz'?

The real solution to this problem is to use drones equipped with air to air missiles, then you arent even risking an airframe. But nobody in the west seems to have anything like that on the drawing board, the nearest we seem to get is building them to carry ASW torpedo's or Brimstone. There is a lack of imagination of the overhead battle between helicopter forces, and there shouldnt be. We imagined this as long ago as the 1980's. The British even went so far as to develop a version of Starstreak they could hang on Apache, and then never bought it.

Yes, the air cover keeps being brought up. Has anyone really considered how hard it is for an aircraft designed to go mach 2 engaging an attack helicopter which itself has air to air weapons and can hide in the weeds? The only one Id really worry about is the Su25 which has the turning circle to do something about it, and he doesnt have an on board radar.

[Stuart Galbraith]

10 hours ago, James1978 said:

Umm . . . the US Army's Future Attack Reconnaissance Aircraft (FARA) program would like to have a word with you.

Well I was listening to Casmo's podcast on spotify, and he said that currently all the recce helicopters have been withdrawn. There are no OH58's in the inventory, they were all withdrawn by July 2020 and the task is being taken over by drones. Remembering how long it took the Comanche to go no where, Im far from convinced that any manned replacement wont do the same. 

Correct me if im wrong, didnt the AH64E add a datalink for drone operation? Why do they even need a manned recce helicopter anymore?

[Stuart Galbraith]

8 hours ago, Roman Alymov said:

What you describe is Soviet A-stan war-time technology (but still effective) - now many RusAF (and not only AF) helicopters have active suppressors that derect incoming SAM (as far as i understand, by use of UV-sensors) and poing suppression beam at them

   Video of this system in flight https://t.me/milinfolive/104085

 

In Afghanistan they affected weight and top speed, and didnt work that well anyway. In fact I had grave difficulty finding one fitted to KA52. This  it seems is about it.

[Stuart Galbraith]

9 hours ago, Yama said:

Plenty of Ukrainian drones seem to be able to fly up to 10km deep to Russian airspace, otherwise we wouldn't get all these hits by guided munitions. Of course we only see successful ones. TB 2 sized drone is probably so large that it shows up in a radar long way, and gets shot down if it tries to get too close.

Right. How does anyone think the Ukrainians are using their artillery?

[jmsaari]

8 hours ago, Roman Alymov said:

What you describe is Soviet A-stan war-time technology (but still effective) - now many RusAF (and not only AF) helicopters have active suppressors that derect incoming SAM (as far as i understand, by use of UV-sensors) and poing suppression beam at them

   Video of this system in flight https://t.me/milinfolive/104085

 

Terminology/language confusion here, suppressor = device to reduce IR signature by shielding and cooling the hottest metal parts, while what you are describing is a directional IR countermeasure (DIRCM). I wonder how common they are in Ka-52/Mi-28N though? I haven't paid too much attention but seems some Ka-52 have it, others don't (assuming they're those two smallish domes near the undercarriage) 

[Stuart Galbraith]

10 minutes ago, jmsaari said:

Terminology/language confusion here, suppressor = device to reduce IR signature by shielding and cooling the hottest metal parts, while what you are describing is a directional IR countermeasure (DIRCM). I wonder how common they are in Ka-52/Mi-28N though? I haven't paid too much attention but seems some Ka-52 have it, others don't (assuming they're those two smallish domes near the undercarriage) 

 

Is this it?

[jmsaari]

23 minutes ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

In Afghanistan they affected weight and top speed, and didnt work that well anyway. In fact I had grave difficulty finding one fitted to KA52. This  it seems is about it.

Not sure which you're talking about, IR suppressor or DIRCM, but the exhaust suppressor is there, compare to this where it isn't: 

Vice versa with the DIRCM, which I've understood are those two small domes near the main undercarriage that are present in the lower picture, but absent in yours.... how well either works is anyone's guess. Exhaust suppressor isn't a magic trick that makes the helicopter invisible in IR, but reduces acquisition range especially vs older seekers and improves IRCM effectiveness. But as we've seen everything frrom Mi-24s in Afgganistan to Apaches in Iraq getting hit by IRH SAMs, it's not a Klingon masking device vs seekers in any case... and performance of one from just looking at from outside is impossible to even guess, beyond that the one in Ka-52 seems fairly small which would seem to indicate they've emphasized perhaps weight saving over signature reduction performance - but even that's little more than guessing.

[jmsaari]

5 minutes ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

 

Is this it?

I think that's the UV sensor for detecting the missile launch

[Ssnake]

1 hour ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

The real solution to this problem is to use drones equipped with air to air missiles, then you arent even risking an airframe.

Doesn't solve the problem of finding the helos. You just bring a missile forward, which is commendable, but it has no aim.

This doesn't even touch the implications of it to survive the EW environment. With a 90+% loss rate per sortie, I don't know how one can propose drone usage without even mentioning EW.

[Ssnake]

13 hours ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

helo sitting there firing atgms leaving a nice accusing vapour trail 

I'm no longer certain that you talk about the topic with competence. Exhaust trails are visible for the booster phase, about 1km out from a launch location 8km away from the target area.

[ink]

There are numerous problems associated with using helicopters in the A2A role. Quite apart from time on station in the CAP role and time to target in the interceptor role, in this particular conflict, there is also the problem of having to cross the front line to engage the enemy. And all that without tackling target acquisition and identification in circumstances where the Ka-52s are clearly taking care not to spend a long time at altitude.

We have seen Ka-52 videos where the launch aircraft veers off (and presumably drops altitude) after a target is struck even when there are more targets to engage. This seems to suggest that they're very actively avoiding being exposed for extended periods of time. Which, when you think about it, makes a certain amount of sense. Better to take out one Bradley and go home (or relocate for another shot from a different firing location), than to take out two or three but risk being detected and eating some return fire.

[Stuart Galbraith]

1 hour ago, Ssnake said:

I'm no longer certain that you talk about the topic with competence. Exhaust trails are visible for the booster phase, about 1km out from a launch location 8km away from the target area.

Self evidently I didnt mean they were going to follow the trails all the way in from the target. And yes, I do know they have a boost phase, thanks very much. But there is plenty of plume from just that to pick it up if you are looking in the likely locations.

If these were fire and forget missiles, yes Id say its hopeless. But if they are tied to the target designating after they have fired, there is some potential for catching them doing it and calling in a helicopter to engage them. After all, they arent going to bug out after firing 2 missiles. They are going to go to another fire position and probably another before they go home. That all takes time. You know they are in the combat zone because you are taking hits, you may know where they have been via a drone, at that point you increase the chances of acquiring them via a helicopter. Its not long before you would get a feel for the positions they are firing from.

And if this sounds like a forlorn hope and inviting a high loss rate, I would suggest its somewhat better odds than just sitting there and taking it and doing nothing about it. After all, how many of them are you going to have to kill before they stop sending them forward? They dont exactly have that many for them to waste at this point.

 

 

1 hour ago, Ssnake said:

Doesn't solve the problem of finding the helos. You just bring a missile forward, which is commendable, but it has no aim.

This doesn't even touch the implications of it to survive the EW environment. With a 90+% loss rate per sortie, I don't know how one can propose drone usage without even mentioning EW.

Lets think how a helicopter pilot thinks. He wants cover to duck behind cover after he fires. So you look at how many locations in a 20 by 20km box they can have decent firing positions. He isnt going to fire sit between the trees or over a meadow, he is going to be spotted. Behind treelines, behind hills. When you stop to think about it, its not that many good positions he can fire from. And that I think is why NATO helicopter crews were so nervious about artillery. There isnt THAT many decent fire positions you can shoot from.

As for drones, they are using them even in that kind of EW environment. What is the lost rate, 1000 a month? But they are still using them, and if they are using them it strikes me as no reason why they cant look for helicopters at the same time as they looking for artillery targets to stonk. Its no different from the general reconnaisance effort they are already carrying out.

As for competency, all ive ever claimed is that im just an enthusiastic amateur that takes an interest in the subject. If its sparks an interesting debate often in disagreement, so much the better. But this isnt the womens guild, and I have no reputation Im anxious to maintain among the other flower arrangers. Yes, I think I might be right and I have a point here, but people are as alwasy free to disregard it as they wish. Its not a popularity contest, and Im not here for prizes.

 

Edited July 25, 2023 by Stuart Galbraith

[Stuart Galbraith]

28 minutes ago, ink said:

There are numerous problems associated with using helicopters in the A2A role. Quite apart from time on station in the CAP role and time to target in the interceptor role, in this particular conflict, there is also the problem of having to cross the front line to engage the enemy. And all that without tackling target acquisition and identification in circumstances where the Ka-52s are clearly taking care not to spend a long time at altitude.

We have seen Ka-52 videos where the launch aircraft veers off (and presumably drops altitude) after a target is struck even when there are more targets to engage. This seems to suggest that they're very actively avoiding being exposed for extended periods of time. Which, when you think about it, makes a certain amount of sense. Better to take out one Bradley and go home (or relocate for another shot from a different firing location), than to take out two or three but risk being detected and eating some return fire.

That may be, but I doubt they are going home after that single shot. They are going to set up in another fire position, probably latterally to the one they have just used, because they probably are going to want to have another go at the target from a different angle. That is all time in a finite area.

Oh, the Ukrainians would lose a lot of helicopters, and that is going to be a heavy loss in crews. But as they seem primarily to be using them for pray and spray rocket attacks, then bluntly, its not really going to be that much of a loss, at least compared to the halting of the offensive which might be the consequence.

It would I think probably only work with an acceptable loss rate at night, and the problem there is the Hind night optics are crap. One area where you would have hoped we would have tried to help them out with night vision equipment for the pilots. Seems unlikely they could do much to upgrade the aircraft at this point.

[bojan]

37 minutes ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

...Oh, the Ukrainians would lose a lot of helicopters, and that is going to be a heavy loss in crews....

Just for you, translation of local saying - "It is easy to whack hawthorns with someone's else dick"

Edited July 25, 2023 by bojan

[TrustMe]

4 hours ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

Well I was listening to Casmo's podcast on spotify, and he said that currently all the recce helicopters have been withdrawn. There are no OH58's in the inventory, they were all withdrawn by July 2020 and the task is being taken over by drones. Remembering how long it took the Comanche to go no where, Im far from convinced that any manned replacement wont do the same. 

Correct me if im wrong, didnt the AH64E add a datalink for drone operation? Why do they even need a manned recce helicopter anymore?

It does indeed have drone controlling technology by the grey eagle UAV https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Atomics_MQ-1C_Gray_Eagle  .

 

The doctrine is based on two Apache's sub groups. One having the longbow radar amd one controling the drone using datalinks so that all apache's can see the battlefield picture.

[TrustMe]

14 hours ago, jmsaari said:

Mid-90's I believe, quite shortly after 1991. F-15s,  IIRC the pilots "visually identified" 2 helicopters as Iraqi Mi-24s (or were the supposed to be Mi-8s, not sure) and with that got permission to engage from AWACS... 2xUH-60 shot down. 

Thanks for that I couldn't remember the details.

[Stuart Galbraith]

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/russia-ukraine-war-live-moscow-launches-drone-strikes-on-kyiv-un-says-mines-found-at-zaporizhzhia-plant/ar-AA1ejoff

The UN’s atomic watchdog said it saw anti-personnel mines at the site of Ukraine‘s Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant which is occupied by Russian forces. On 23 July International Atomic Energy Agency experts “saw some mines located in a buffer zone between the site’s internal and external perimeter barriers,” agency chief Rafael Grossi said in a statement on Monday. The statement did not say how many mines the team had seen. The devices were in “restricted areas” that operating plant personnel cannot access, Grossi said, adding the IAEA’s initial assessment was that any detonation “should not affect the site’s nuclear safety and security systems”.

[Stuart Galbraith]

48 minutes ago, bojan said:

Just for you, translation of local saying - "It is easy to whack hawthorns with someone's else dick"

Well they are already getting wacked arent they? Look at the loss rate that was posted up earlier. If its a choice between losing all that fancy western kit in an effort to break through, or losing some helicopter crews whom have yet to impact the war yet in any meaningful respect, maybe its worth the cost.

It wouldnt be the first time in history some mens lives have been ruthlessly spent to save many others. Never heard of a Forlorn hope?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forlorn_hope

 

Edited July 25, 2023 by Stuart Galbraith

[Stuart Galbraith]

8 minutes ago, TrustMe said:

It does indeed have drone controlling technology by the grey eagle UAV https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Atomics_MQ-1C_Gray_Eagle  .

 

The doctrine is based on two Apache's sub groups. One having the longbow radar amd one controling the drone using datalinks so that all apache's can see the battlefield picture.

Cheers for that. I remember ridiculing it at the time but, ultimately, if they arleady have the capablity, you have to wonder why they need a manned recce helicopter at all at this point.

[Perun]

47 minutes ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

Well they are already getting wacked arent they? Look at the loss rate that was posted up earlier. If its a choice between losing all that fancy western kit in an effort to break through, or losing some helicopter crews whom have yet to impact the war yet in any meaningful respect, maybe its worth the cost.

It wouldnt be the first time in history some mens lives have been ruthlessly spent to save many others. Never heard of a Forlorn hope?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forlorn_hope

 

Those life could be saved by other, less costly, means and methods

[txtree99]

Key Takeaways:

Likely Ukrainian forces conducted a drone strike near the Russian Ministry of Defense (MoD) building in Moscow on July 24.

Likely Ukrainian forces targeted Russian military assets in occupied Crimea, temporarily disrupting Russian logistics through Crimea on July 24.

Russian President Vladimir Putin signed an article published on July 24 likely intended to mitigate damage to Russia’s position in Africa and his own reputation resulting from Russia’s withdrawal from the Ukraine-Russia grain deal, Russian attacks on Ukrainian grain and port facilities, and Putin’s inability to attend the upcoming BRICS summit due to the International Criminal Court (ICC) arrest warrant issued for him.

Russia conducted another drone strike on Ukrainian port infrastructure in Odesa Oblast overnight on July 23-24.

Ukrainian forces continued counteroffensive operations along at least three sectors of the front on July 24 and have reportedly advanced in certain areas.

The Kremlin continues to codify domestic repression into Russian law, generating minimal opposition from select Russian lawmakers.

Russian forces conducted offensive operations along the Kupyansk-Svatove-Kreminna line, in the Bakhmut area, and along the Avdiivka-Donetsk City line and made marginal gains south of Kreminna.

Ukrainian forces conducted offensive operations along the Kupyansk-Svatove-Kreminna line, and in the Bakhmut area and reportedly advanced in the Bakhmut area.

Russian forces conducted offensive operations in western Donetsk Oblast and did not make any confirmed or claimed gains.

Ukrainian forces conducted offensive operations in western Donetsk Oblast and in western Zaporizhia Oblast and reportedly advanced in the Orikhiv area.

Russian officials continue to highlight the claimed successes of the Russian defense industrial base (DIB).

Ukrainian officials continue to reveal the involvement of Belarusian entities in the forced deportation of Ukrainian children.

https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment-july-24-2023

[Roman Alymov]

Lancet vs. AD C&C van covered in village barn https://t.me/anna_news/53284

[Roman Alymov]

3 hours ago, ink said:

We have seen Ka-52 videos where the launch aircraft veers off (and presumably drops altitude) after a target is struck even when there are more targets to engage. This seems to suggest that they're very actively avoiding being exposed for extended periods of time. Which, when you think about it, makes a certain amount of sense. Better to take out one Bradley and go home (or relocate for another shot from a different firing location), than to take out two or three but risk being detected and eating some return fire.

Interview with Ka-52 pilot https://t.me/boris_rozhin/93057

"We were on duty, and got infromation from ground control about <enemy> column. First what we see with navigator on termal vision screen was just unclear shape. As we approached, it started to separate into individual light dots, so we understood it was <vehicle> column.  Me and my wingman took classic position and started to work - I set fire to the front vehicle. The wingman set fire to the last vehicle in the column. Then we moved away, approached from a more convenient angle – at an angle so that the column could be seen – and began to snap them out one by one. We were not aware it is Leopards and Bradley  - as you can't see it clearly at night, just silouetes. We were told about it only later on the ground. Column was finished by another group <of helicopters>" 

[Stuart Galbraith]

1 hour ago, Perun said:

Those life could be saved by other, less costly, means and methods

Go ahead, I dont claim to have a copyright on prescience. How would you do it?

Same goes for everyone else too. You all want to knock my theory off the wall, go ahead. But consider first if you can offer anything better yourself.

[Ssnake]

We need to find the helicopters first, or suppress them while in missile range. We know what to do with them once that we found them, but finding is the problem right now. At the current distances that's evidently very difficult. The highest resolving passive sensors are optics, where the signature is low. Thermals don't seem to have the resolution to passively cover a sufficiently large field of view.

Either we need better passive sensors, or back to radar. If the latter, how about a distributed system where if a few emitters get knocked out, there's so many of them that they are easily replaced, or it becomes pointless trying to get rid of them. I don't know enough about radar whether such a system is even conceptually feasible from the requirements of energy supply and the resulting volume and mass, whether it's feasible at all in the required numbers, and/or as a semi-autonomous drone swarm.

 

Detection is key.