SPAAS Thread

[Hobbes]

How about a tank (or APC) hull with a set of vertical launch tubes (armored) attached to the rear, and a retractable radar and/or optical guidance set. A missile like Sea Wolf is small enough to be deployed like this (with, say, 8 rounds).

Using a tank hull makes sense only if you can protect the AA components against hits from an enemy tank.

I think Goalkeeper is too large to be used on a vehicle: it's 6 m high (about 2.5 m of which is normally out of view below decks).

[Maverick]

Hobbes,

I doubt there is any currently or previously fielded SPAAS (missile, gun or otherwise) that is capable of taking a hit from an enemy tank.  Although Gepard is based on a Leo 1 hull, the turret doesn't have the same protective properties as the original vehicle.  The chances of making something that would be capable are slim in my opinion, but really, what's the use.  Regardless of it's weapons, it's just going to end up as a target for MBTs if it's around them, hence my earlier suggestion that SPAAS would hardly be within an armoured formation during tank-vs-tank combat.

Regards,

Mav

[Weaver]

How about a tank (or APC) hull with a set of vertical launch tubes (armored) attached to the rear, and a retractable radar and/or optical guidance set. A missile like Sea Wolf is small enough to be deployed like this (with, say, 8 rounds).

Using a tank hull makes sense only if you can protect the AA components against hits from an enemy tank.

I think Goalkeeper is too large to be used on a vehicle: it's 6 m high (about 2.5 m of which is normally out of view below decks).

The Russian Tor-M1 system manages to have 8 x VLS SAMs inside the turret....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u-GIUR3vjHY&feature=related

[pyro-manic]

How about a tank (or APC) hull with a set of vertical launch tubes (armored) attached to the rear, and a retractable radar and/or optical guidance set. A missile like Sea Wolf is small enough to be deployed like this (with, say, 8 rounds).

I think CAAM would be ideal for this (in fact, I think it's designed for this - to be used as point-defence on ships and as a Rapier replacement for the army) - there's also Mica-VL. Perhaps one of the command vehicle hulls for the M113 or FV430 family, but with a VLS system on the back instead.

[Maverick]

I'm not a naval guy, so I can't comment regarding the application of VLS type systems, but I think that using an M113 or FV430 hull isn't a good idea in any shape.  I mean 12.7mm weapons penetrate the M113 hull with comparative ease (unless you have one of the new armour upgrades) so I'd have to think that a later hull like the Bradley or Warrior would be the better choice to allow for some degree of survivability.

On the VLS issue, what would the possiblities be of fitting a system into the troop compartment of an APC be?  If it were enclosed within, I'd assume that the launch gases would vent out the top of the system.  It would allow the parent hull to retain its turret ring for either a dedicated radar system or weapon turret (or both of course).

Another question regards VLS would be are the weapons agile enough to be vertically launched and yet provide the engagement parameters that a turreted or externally mounted system can?

Regards,

Mav

[Weaver]

Another question regards VLS would be are the weapons agile enough to be vertically launched and yet provide the engagement parameters that a turreted or externally mounted system can?

Regards,

Mav

Have you watched that video I posted the link to? 

[Maverick]

Weaver,

Unfortunately not.  Due to a bloody slow connection (+/- 30kbs) I find online video tends to either take a dog's age to download or if it is streaming merely clogs the connection until it comes to a grinding halt.  As I've said, VLS isn't something I'm across, which is why I asked about their engagement evelope.  Had I been able to watch said link, I guess my question would have been answered and therefore non-existent.

Regards,

Mav

[Hobbes]

Mav, the video shows a missile being launched vertically using cold gas. When the missile is safely out of the tube (at about 10 m), a small thruster tips the missile in the direction it needs to go, and the main motor is ignited. It's much faster than having to slew a turret to the correct azimuth.

[Maverick]

Thanks for that Hobbes,

I figured there'd be something like that as part of its operation, but as I said, with precious little knowledge of all things squiddy, I wasn't aware of the advantages/limitations of the system.

I guess for vehicle based system, you'd either have a choice of being limited in weapon size by the dimensions of the lauch vehicle's hull, have a raised hull to house the weapons or have an externally mounted 'box', although I tend to think that would be quite a bit more complex than a hull-based system.

I'm equally guessing that this whole launch, tip, fire sequence is in the sub second kinda range?

As a secondary thought (& GTX will love this coming from me!) why not have tracked UGV with a box of weapons supported by a manned radar system that could, I guess feasibly be miles in the rear?  Once a bogey comes up on the radar, the weaopn would be remotely launched (I also guess that slaving it to an AWACS platform would be possible, all very 'net-centric' donchathink?).  At the end of the day, if the UGV gets nailed on the battlefield, it just makes for an expensive fireworks display rather than getting crewies fried.

Regards,

Mav

Regards,

Mav

[Weaver]

Fair enough Mav, I tend to only watch video at work myself due to the superior connection (in breaks only boss.... ) The VLS is REALLY fast, certainly comparable, if not better, than the average slew+elevate time of a traditional launcher. The TOR-M1 has a boxy turret with search radar at the back, tracking radar at the front, and the VLS cells in the middle, so they get the advantage of the floor-to-turret-roof height.

I'm all for distributed, networked air defence, so that the firing units and sensor units can both be in the optimum locations (which are not neccessarily the same). However, one thing you DON'T want is a manned search radar, since that's the first target for ARMs. Ideally, you'd have a handful of smallish, "disposable" search radars and passive fire vehicles, all datalinked to a control centre that keeps it's location protected by neither emitting radar nor firing.

[Maverick]

When I said 'manned search radar', I didn't mean front-line stuff.  I know enough about the habits of Weasel & Iron Hand crews and SEAD in general to realise that that's not the nicest of places to be.  The UGV/remote system I had in mind was more a sort of 'God's Eye' view for the operator either deeply 'in the rear with the gear' or on an AWACS platform, both of which would obviously be fairly well protected from enemy action (one would hope).

Regards,

Mav

[GTX]

As a secondary thought (& GTX will love this coming from me!) why not have tracked UGV with a box of weapons supported by a manned radar system that could, I guess feasibly be miles in the rear?  Once a bogey comes up on the radar, the weaopn would be remotely launched (I also guess that slaving it to an AWACS platform would be possible, all very 'net-centric' donchathink?).  At the end of the day, if the UGV gets nailed on the battlefield, it just makes for an expensive fireworks display rather than getting crewies fried.

I'm not adverse to the idea  .  It would fit in nicely with some of the United States Army's Future Combat Systems (FCS) ideas.  Also somewhat similar to Netfires.

Regards,

Greg

[Jeffry Fontaine]

Found a PDF file on the Raytheon web page for the Centurion CIWS that describes the weapon system. 

[PanzerWulff]

How about upgrading the old Chapparal concept and base it around the SLAMRAAM concept I read about a while back,I used to have some pics of the SLAMRAAM mounted on a hummer in a 4 missle rack
"Panzer"

[Sauragnmon]

One of my latest thoughts was taking a standard MBT these days, with the back extended turret, like, say, an Abrams or the Leopard II.

From there, we expand the back section, probably raise it up a little, put in a collection of short-medium range VLS SAM missiles, and place a scanned array on either of the side slopes of the front of the turret.  Perhaps enclose the commander's section and put on a slightly heavier AA gun, give it a LADAR array, make it a CIWS of a sort?

Random thoughts.