LargeDiameterBomb
Posts: 80
Joined: 3/3/2019
Status: offline
|
Engagement of weapons with guns by aircraft, except for straight flying cruise missile (Ie cruise missiles in their cruise phase) should in my opinion be impossible.
But I don't find it hard to believe that for instance two Oerlikon GDF-005 AAA pieces (ROF 2x550 rds/min each) with AHEAD ammunition and a Skyguard 3 fire control system and fire control sensors (Released to the market in the Late 90s if I remember correctly) or a Breda Twin Fast Forty (ROF 2x 450 rds/min) with PFHE grenades with a modern fuze (Late 80s) or a very sopisticated super-quick fuze (Late 2000s) controlled by a 90s fire control system and fire control sensors should be able to hit and/or detonate close enough to a weapon and destroy the seeker portion of a Paveway, Walleye, GBU-15, AGM-65, SDB-II and so on - ie weapons dependant on a nose mounted TV, CCD or IR camera, a nose mounted laser seeker or an nose mounted radar which, depending on the weapon, would make it crash several hundred meters from it's target (An old AGM-65B for instance) or continue rougly on it's ballistic path (A sturdy bomb, for instance a Mk84 with a GBU-12 guidance kit that is completely destroyed - on the other hand if it's just damaged it might very well send commands to the guidance surfaces which makes it miss the target by quite a bit).
Especially the AHEAD ammunition, which releases a swarm of wolfram pellets in front of the target with the help of a timed fuze, a muzzle velocity indicator and a fuze programmer, and the pellets then use kinetic energy to penetrate and damage the target (a 20 round burst fired in 1,1 seconds releases about 3700 pellets each weighing about 5 grams) should have a good chance of destroying or damaging any nose-mounted seeker or perhaps the maneuvering surfaces of almost any weapon. It should be especially effective at weapons that don't maneuver much in the terminal phase and that therefore becomes much easier to hit.
And there really is no reason why a AMRAAM shouldn't be able to hit a JDAM, but the signature modifier should probably be quite severe. The part where the problem comes in is doing enough damage to a weapon that has armor equivalent to maybe two inches of hard steel. On the other hand, if the guidance or maneuvering sections are destroyed early in it's flight the bomb missing it's target is all but guaranteed.
The Israelis allegedly shot down an SA-5 GAMMON missile fired by the Syrians and aimed against one Israeli fighter that was on a strike mission near or in Syria with an ABM, an Arrow III if i remember correctly. I don't know how much value one should afford such statements as they have an obvious large propaganda value , plus a tactically deceptive value, but it doesn't seem impossible with the right engagement geometry considering the size of the SA-5 missile.
Perhaps the solution is bringing the system that was constructed for calculating what parts of an aircraft is damaged when hit which was introduced with CoW and if i remember correctly further refined later to take into consideration from what aspect a target was hit and using it for missile or AAA hits on guided weapons as well.
Here is a quickly thought out suggestion on how that could be used..
A) For missile direct hits:
A1) If the guided weapon is not built around a iron bomb (Walleye) there is a large chance of destroying the guidance system and maneuvering surfaces (95+ %) in which case CEP changes to height at hit in meters x 0,75 m and a slightly smaller chance of detonating the warhead (75 %), in which case the weapon disappears.
A2) If the guided weapon is built around a iron bomb (Paveway, JDAM, GBU-15) there is a large chance of destroying the guidance system and maneuvering surfaces (95+ %) in which case CEP changes to height at hit in meters x 0,5 m and a small chance of detonating the warhead (10 %) which could represent the guided weapon's fuze being activated, in which case the weapon disappears.
B) For missile near misses and proximity fuzed ammunition detonations of the warhead/grenade of guided weapons constructed around an iron bomb:
B1) If the missile/grenade detonates in front of a guided weapon the guidance section can be assumed to be destroyed or malfunctioning. If seeker is destroyed that gives a CEP equal to height at hit in meters x 0.2-0,5 m (a variance depending on the exact placement of the steering surfaces at the time they were immobilized or the amount of damage). It gives a very small chance of detonating the warhead regardless of type of guided weapon (5 %)
B2) If the missile/grenade detonates behind a weapon it gives a small chance of destroying/incapacitating the maneuvering surfaces and a much larger chance of affecting them. The first case increases CEP to height at hit in meters x 0,1-0,5 m if maneuvering surfaces destroyed (Representing the surfaces steering the missile wildly off course) and the latter case increases CEp to height at hit in meters x0,02-0,1 m. If It gives no chance of detonating the warhead regardless of type of guided weapon.
B3) If the missile/grenade detonates to the side of any precision guided weapon constructed around an iron bomb (JDAM, Paveway) it has only a small chance of destroying either the seeker or a small chance of affecting the maneuvering surfaces. If seeker destroyed that gives a CEP equal to height at hit in meters x 0.2-0,5 m (a variance depending on placement of steering surfaces at the time they were immobilized). If the maneuvering surfaces are affected it gives a CEP of equal to height at hit in meters x 0,05 m. If maneuvering surfaces destroyed CEP is equal to height at hit in meters x 0,75 m.
C) If the missile/grenade detonates to the side of any other precision guided weapon not constructed around an iron bomb it has only a small chance of destroying either the seeker, a small chance of affecting the maneuvering surfaces or a small chance of detonating the warhead/destroying the weapon outright (The larger the warhead in the missile/grenade the greater chance of damage). If seeker destroyed that gives a CEP equal to height at hit in meters x 0.2-0,5 m (a variance depending on placement of steering surfaces at the time they were immobilized). If the maneuvering surfaces are affected it gives a CEP of equal to height at hit in meters x 0,05 m. If maneuvering surfaces destroyed CEP is equal to height at hit in meters x 0,75 m. If warhead detonated weapon disappears.
D1) If a CIWS type weapon with non-detonating ammunition (C-RAM, Phalanx, Millenium 35/1000 with AHEAD ammuntion) is used against a weapon built around an iron bomb it can only hit the seeker or maneuvering surface depending on the CIWS is attacking the PGM from the front or the rear but there is a very large chance of destroying respective part if weapon is hit (Perhaps 99%). If seeker destroyed that gives a CEP equal to height at hit in meters x 0.2-0,5 m (a variance depending on placement of steering surfaces at the time they were immobilized). If the maneuvering surfaces are destroyed the CEP is equal to height at hit in meters x 0.75 m
D2) If a CIWS type weapon with non-detonating ammunition (C-RAM, Phalanx, Millenium 35/1000 with AHEAD ammuntion) is used against a weapon not built around an iron bomb it can hit the seeker or maneuvering surface regardless if the CIWS is attacking the PGM from the front or the rear and there is also a large chance of activating the warhead in the guided weapon (75 %) but there is a very large chance of destroying the other respective parts if weapon is hit (99 %). If seeker and maneuvering surfaces destroyed that gives a CEP equal to height at hit in meters x 0,75-1,25 m (a variance depending on how damaged the seeker, guidance module and maneuvering surfaces are). If the warhead is activated the weapon disappears.
Let me say that the numbers that i thought up regarding increased CEPs are just guesses.
Of course, I don't expect this to be implemented, it's probably far too complicated for the devs to spend the time on it, but think of it as a friendly suggestion for how one could think about this subject.
Keep up the good work.
< Message edited by LargeDiameterBomb -- 1/20/2020 3:06:48 AM >
|
Printable Version
[Logged] Shooting down projectiles. - 
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread