Russia and its “Special Operation” in Ukraine

[chrisp65]

1 minute ago, blandy said:

A missile traveling at extreme velocity creates a number of difficulties - firstly you have to be able to track it accurately in order to determine its trajectory, and that is difficult with the speed it's going and the processing time and computing necessary. Then you have to take that predicted trajectory and calculate where it will be at a specific moment, and that moment will be extremely fleeting, with almost no margin for error. Then you have to very accurately place the intercepting item (whatever that is, a missile or "lead" or whatever) in the exact position you've calculated, at the exact moment that the hypersonic threat is going to be there. You have to account for wind speed and direction, variations in the precise velocity of your intercepting agent, variations in guidance accuracy, the precise timing of any explosive triggering in your missile (does the fuse always trigger after 0.1 second, or does it sometimes take 0.2 secs - because in that 0.1 sec difference the threat has moved - something travelling at 1000 mph moves 45 metres in a 10th of a second, and you've missed... and so on.

But… surely the principle is not one accurate shot at a moving target, rather, it is partly knowing where the missile is likely to be heading so you’ll be protecting more valuable assets first, anticipating it’ll be arriving around about here in around about 3 minutes.

So you (in theory) have a barrage of fire power say 50 metres long with your bullets spaced slightly closer together than the known width of the incoming missile.

The wall of fire, knowing the missile arrives in about 3 minutes throws up an absolute shit ton of munitions from 2 minutes 45 seconds until 3 minutes 15 seconds. You’re not so much aiming at the missile, but putting up an obstacle the missile will run in to.

Like casting a net.

Now the obvious problem is a sufficiently long wall of these ‘guns’ and sufficient ‘bullets’ but in principle, it could be done.

Actually, I like the nets. Nets hanging from barrage balloons around obvious targets. Just imagine Russia’s new wonder weapon, beaten by barrage balloons. 

[sidcow]

39 minutes ago, chrisp65 said:

But… surely the principle is not one accurate shot at a moving target, rather, it is partly knowing where the missile is likely to be heading so you’ll be protecting more valuable assets first, anticipating it’ll be arriving around about here in around about 3 minutes.

So you (in theory) have a barrage of fire power say 50 metres long with your bullets spaced slightly closer together than the known width of the incoming missile.

The wall of fire, knowing the missile arrives in about 3 minutes throws up an absolute shit ton of munitions from 2 minutes 45 seconds until 3 minutes 15 seconds. You’re not so much aiming at the missile, but putting up an obstacle the missile will run in to.

Like casting a net.

Now the obvious problem is a sufficiently long wall of these ‘guns’ and sufficient ‘bullets’ but in principle, it could be done.

Actually, I like the nets. Nets hanging from barrage balloons around obvious targets. Just imagine Russia’s new wonder weapon, beaten by barrage balloons. 

I think you're vastly underestimating just how fast these things are travelling, several times the speed of sound.  A jet fighter would be left floundering in its wake. 

You lock on and it's gone. 

If you were on ground zero looking up for it your brain wouldn't even register it was on its way before it hit. 

You'd need a wall of lead filling the sky for miles for several minutes as you couldn't track it fast enough. 

Edited May 16, 2023 by sidcow

[tinker]

45 minutes ago, chrisp65 said:

But… surely the principle is not one accurate shot at a moving target, rather, it is partly knowing where the missile is likely to be heading so you’ll be protecting more valuable assets first, anticipating it’ll be arriving around about here in around about 3 minutes.

So you (in theory) have a barrage of fire power say 50 metres long with your bullets spaced slightly closer together than the known width of the incoming missile.

The wall of fire, knowing the missile arrives in about 3 minutes throws up an absolute shit ton of munitions from 2 minutes 45 seconds until 3 minutes 15 seconds. You’re not so much aiming at the missile, but putting up an obstacle the missile will run in to.

Like casting a net.

Now the obvious problem is a sufficiently long wall of these ‘guns’ and sufficient ‘bullets’ but in principle, it could be done.

Actually, I like the nets. Nets hanging from barrage balloons around obvious targets. Just imagine Russia’s new wonder weapon, beaten by barrage balloons. 

Like this?

Phalanx CIWS
The Phalanx CIWS (often spoken as "sea-wiz") is a gun-based close-in weapon system to defend military watercraft automatically against incoming threats such as aircraft, missiles, and small boats. 

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

75 rounds a second.

[blandy]

1 hour ago, chrisp65 said:

But… surely the principle is not one accurate shot at a moving target, rather, it is partly knowing where the missile is likely to be heading so you’ll be protecting more valuable assets first, anticipating it’ll be arriving around about here in around about 3 minutes.

So you (in theory) have a barrage of fire power say 50 metres long with your bullets spaced slightly closer together than the known width of the incoming missile.

The wall of fire, knowing the missile arrives in about 3 minutes throws up an absolute shit ton of munitions from 2 minutes 45 seconds until 3 minutes 15 seconds. You’re not so much aiming at the missile, but putting up an obstacle the missile will run in to.

Like casting a net.

Now the obvious problem is a sufficiently long wall of these ‘guns’ and sufficient ‘bullets’ but in principle, it could be done.

Actually, I like the nets. Nets hanging from barrage balloons around obvious targets. Just imagine Russia’s new wonder weapon, beaten by barrage balloons. 

There's two sub conversations going on here - it started with mention of Patriot shooting down hypersonic missiles, and whether Ukraine fettled the software/hardware to improve its efficacy. Patriot doesn't use "a wall of fire" it uses single missiles with proximity fuses, and the missile seekers are guided by Radar. The challenge is that with the patriot and the incoming hypersonic missile having a closing speed of maybe 4 or 5 times the speed of sound there are all kinds of technical hurdles to overcome to give a high probability of intercept.

The second part of the convo was around a wall of lead barrage. It's typically used, for example on naval platforms as a last line of defence against (slower) anti-ship missiles, typically coming directly towards the ship at low level (to avoid early radar detection). The multi barrel guns fire off rounds incredibly fast and in a narrow cone pattern, but they don't have much endurance of fire - they get super hot and also use up ammunition incredibly quickly and are emptied within a second or so, I think. Transfer that situation to a descending hypersonic missile descending near vertically and not directly towards the gun(s) (unlike a ship borne defensive gun). The timing of firing, when you're at a tangent to the missile path, in order to intercept and destroy in is one more a huge technical and aiming challenge. It's like standing on a hilltop with a shotgun and trying to hit a supersonic jet whizzing past, but much harder.

So, like you say, perhaps balloons (maybe in the shape of clowns, or bears) and re-purposed cricket or tennis nets are the next best thing?

[Lichfield Dean]

Meh, they aren't that fast...

[foreveryoung]

1 minute ago, Lichfield Dean said:

Meh, they aren't that fast...

Do you know how fast he is, can't you remember when he turned back time. 

[Anthony]

8 minutes ago, foreveryoung said:

Do you know how fast he is, can't you remember when he turned back time. 

He found a way... 

[magnkarl]

4 hours ago, blandy said:

A missile traveling at extreme velocity creates a number of difficulties - firstly you have to be able to track it accurately in order to determine its trajectory, and that is difficult with the speed it's going and the processing time and computing necessary. Then you have to take that predicted trajectory and calculate where it will be at a specific moment, and that moment will be extremely fleeting, with almost no margin for error. Then you have to very accurately place the intercepting item (whatever that is, a missile or "lead" or whatever) in the exact position you've calculated, at the exact moment that the hypersonic threat is going to be there. You have to account for wind speed and direction, variations in the precise velocity of your intercepting agent, variations in guidance accuracy, the precise timing of any explosive triggering in your missile (does the fuse always trigger after 0.1 second, or does it sometimes take 0.2 secs - because in that 0.1 sec difference the threat has moved - something travelling at 1000 mph moves 45 metres in a 10th of a second, and you've missed... and so on.

If Ukraine have shot down that amount of them, then they must be doing something right.

It's a big if, but the missile geeks seems to have confirmed it. Maybe they've got leaks from Russia, or alternatively the kinzhal, much like most of what Russia have been bragging about for years, isn't that fast or hard to find.

[sidcow]

1 minute ago, magnkarl said:

 or alternatively the kinzhal, much like most of what Russia have been bragging about for years, isn't that fast or hard to find.

This could well be the crux of it. 

All their other "top" tech seems to be nothing more than a mirage. Doesn't seem to be anything close to as advanced as Western weapons. 

So why have they against the odds and all evidence of their other stuff being able to design and manufacture a missile so advanced that even The USA have not managed to get any in service yet. 

It could well be their missile is not actually anywhere near as fast or difficult to take out as they say. 

I'm still worried about that Tidal Wave bomb though

[blandy]

7 minutes ago, magnkarl said:

If Ukraine have shot down that amount of them, then they must be doing something right.

It's a big if, but the missile geeks seems to have confirmed it. Maybe they've got leaks from Russia, or alternatively the kinzhal, much like most of what Russia have been bragging about for years, isn't that fast or hard to find.

Absolutely. Stuff has been done right. Intelligence, fettling by the US (not Ukraine) with the Patriot system and Russian exaggeration of capabilities.

[Mandy Lifeboats]

Russia has a problem with their missiles.  The US knows where they are and when they will be fired. 

The infamous leaked US document did say that the US had infiltrated the Russia Army so well that orders issued to the front line were received in the Pentagon BEFORE they reached the front line.  

[LondonLax]

How do we actually know they were kinzhal? Has that come from the Russians?

[bickster]

31 minutes ago, LondonLax said:

How do we actually know they were kinzhal? Has that come from the Russians?

Least likely source

Like I said early, the Ukrainians claimed it

[villa89]

1 hour ago, magnkarl said:

Alternatively the kinzhal, much like most of what Russia have been bragging about for years, isn't that fast or hard to find.

This is my working theory. They were rushed into action before they were ready and are probably not much more than rebadged cruise missiles. Informing Putin that they are rubbish and not ready to be implemented would result in a staircase issue for all involved. 

[LondonLax]

6 hours ago, villa89 said:

This is my working theory. They were rushed into action before they were ready and are probably not much more than rebadged cruise missiles. Informing Putin that they are rubbish and not ready to be implemented would result in a staircase issue for all involved. 

But again, if it is only the Ukrainians calling these Kinzhals perhaps they are in fact just regular cruise missiles? The Russians have never ‘rebadged’ them or claimed they are a hypersonic weapon they are firing. 

[bickster]

15 minutes ago, LondonLax said:

But again, if it is only the Ukrainians calling these Kinzhals perhaps they are in fact just regular cruise missiles? The Russians have never ‘rebadged’ them or claimed they are a hypersonic weapon they are firing. 

First one the other day has been confirmed by US now

[LondonLax]

9 minutes ago, bickster said:

First one the other day has been confirmed by US now

Have you got a link to that? I have seen the US confirming that one of the Patriot batteries was hit and damaged during the strikes. 

[bickster]

8 minutes ago, LondonLax said:

Have you got a link to that? I have seen the US confirming that one of the Patriot batteries was hit and damaged during the strikes. 

Confirmed by Brigadier General Pat Ryder. Look it up yourself, plenty of outlets out there reported that

[LondonLax]

31 minutes ago, bickster said:

Confirmed by Brigadier General Pat Ryder. Look it up yourself, plenty of outlets out there reported that

I had a look, is this the quote you are referring to?

Quote

“I can confirm that they did down a Russian missile by employing the Patriot missile defense system,” press secretary Brig. Gen. Pat Ryder toldreporters.

“As you know, that system is part of a broader range of air defense capabilities that the United States and the international community have provided to Ukraine.”

 

[bickster]

Quote

"I can confirm that they did down a Russian missile by employing the Patriot missile defense system," said Pentagon Press Secretary Brig.-Gen. Pat Ryder, later clarifying that he indeed said this in relation to a Kinzhal

Jpost