I wonder when armies are actually gonna protect their soldiers from being detected by thermals.
Most modern uniforms have chemical treatments to reduce their IR signatures.
Ratnik and its future replacements also have such things too.
Early treatments washed out fairly easily and so were not so good but I expect newer chemical treatments will be more effective.
Problem is that thermal sights are becoming more useful and cheaper too.
The main problem with thermals is that it shows heat, not light, so it is rather difficult to distinguish different people... the main way would be the type of weapon being used... but obviously in places like the Caucasus that wont be that helpful...
Vehicle camouflage systems like Nakidka try to conceal the vehicle in visible, IR and radar wavelengths.
Following your logic, tank crews could also fire targetting rounds to determine the aimponint, yet they prefer to use fire-control-systems instead.
The use of a spotting rifle is a common method of checking the aim for light portable anti armour weapons... I believe the LAW80 used a spotting scope as well, with ammo calibrated so its trajectory is the same as the main weapon. The Russians have a gun insert that holds a small rifle with an ammo feed for about 5 rounds or so in 14.5mm calibre for training that fires a 14.5mm calibre projectile that has a ballistic path similar to a 125mm shell. The projectile itself has a flash explosive so you can see where the round hits and a tracer element so you can follow the round from 1km to about 2km... which is its effective range as a training round... much cheaper than 125mm rounds for training purposes while giving a much more realistic idea of where the round will go than just pretending.
But it still looks like it takes time to vaporize and mix.
No.... the impression I got was that it detonated as it expanded so there was very little delay.
Older western FAE weapons were easy to spot as they tended to look like they created a grey cloud for an explosion before a bright orange flash of that grey cloud. The Russian Thermobaric weapons I have seen explode (like RPO and TOS just look like orange flashes to me.
Since thermobaric explosives don't carry their oxidizer, they would need some time to be prepared for detonation.
The Soviet and now Russian ones detonate as they expand.
I heard that some substances with aluminum are used for that and for increased power, but I'm not sure
Aluminium powder is added to HE and even black powder... the former in HEI or high explosive incendiary, and the latter... to make the white sparks in fireworks.
That, and also note that even the thermobaric explosion itself is slower than conventional.
Not that much slower, but longer and hotter... for a while the US was investigating them for blowing up targets that might include WMDs like bio and chem warfare agents with the intention of destroying factories and storage areas but also incinerating the contents in a bid to make them safe.
Besides, your earlier statement about shooting down helis with FAE is wrong. In case of direct impact, HEAT is entirely sufficient. But in the case of proximity detonation, air blast alone is not effective, fragmentation warheads are required.
Helicopters are not MBT... the blast equivalent of a 4-7kg thermobaric warhead would be equivalent to up to 15-20kgs of HE and even if it could not penetrate the armour of a Hokum or Havoc would shatter its main rotor blades and likely turn the crew inside into blancmange.
Against UAVs it would be plenty as most UAVs are fairly fragile, and against the most common target... MG nests or snipers it would also be very effective too. In comparison a standard attack hand grenade has rather less than 1kg of HE...
I had explicibly stated, that this system at long ranges is effective only against immobile, or slow moving targets. Haven't you read it? Also, crosswind is also calculated in the FCS, so this problem isn't as large as you suggest.
The problem is rather more complex than you seem to be suggesting.
Sophisticated sights and laser range finders don't make assault rifles sniper rifles. The thermal sight the Russians are introducing that can detect humans at 2km range does not mean you can fit it to any old AK and get hits first shot. There is only one Kalashnikov you could do that with and it would be a PKP or PKM.
The chances of a kill on a stationary target 500m away with an RPG or CG are no where near 100%... thinking hits at more than 1,000m would even just be likely is stretching things in my opinion.
So you are honestly suggesting, that 200m/s direct LOS projectile would reach the target faster than 400 m/s lofted one? Shocked I think, to determine the truth, we should use mathematics on this one Smile
Not sure about CG but the current RPG-29 does not have a sustainer motor on the rocket so after launch it only gets slower and slower till it hits the target or the ground. The RPG-7 has a sustainer motor that accelerates it to higher speed, but with a modern 105mm warhead it has the ballistic path of a rainbow and the rocket motor burns out at 900m, so by 2,000m it will likely get passed by the Metis. RPG-29 would be worse off and the CG is a recoilless rifle so unless you fit it with a rocket motor... which will make it heavier... more expensive... and less predictable... what is its trajectory as it burns fuel and reduces in weight?
Why couldn't an RR round (with fire-control systems) achieve the same at 2km?
Because artillery has a whole network with weather balloons to determine wind at different altitudes 24/7 to calculate trajectory... shooting rockets in the mountains or even over flat open plains can involve lots of variable the average soldier is not in a position to compensate for.
Metis-M1 already exists... based on a model that entered service in 1977, and does the job very cheaply and effectively.
RPG units generally operate as close range defence for ATGM teams or in units as direct fire support... they likely wont even see enemy MG positions 2km away let alone be tasked with engaging them.
Some tanks do have coaxial mg that fires tracers for same reason.
Would be rather rare for a standard coaxial MG to have the same trajectory as the main gun of the tank. I remember the British had an MG called the BESA that was a 50 cal weapon that could be used as a spotting rifle... the huge advantage is that it is always ready to go... no warming up or collecting data... just fire and observe... get a hit and fire the main gun... miss and adjust your aim and fire again... Cheap, simple, and effective.
I would think, that mg is fired to determine the cross-wind, in case tank is at the edge of the forest, for example.
light small MG ammo will not be effected by cross winds the same as full calibre tank ammo would. It is mostly for trajectory rather than external influences like temp and wind...
Home
Latest images
Register
Log in
).
), and would have a faster rate of fire as well 
.
I think, to determine the truth, we should use mathematics on this one 
