2020 Nagorno-Karabakh war #3

All of this talk about the drones in this war. But this wasn't the first war with drones. There was Georgia. This is the Mig 29 vs Israel drone in Georgia. Obviously drone tech has improved since 08. But this Mig 29 makes it look easy. What would have happen if Mig 29's and su 25's just flew into the same air space as the Bayraktar's ? Could they just take them out like this ?


This guy is coming in hot

Backman wrote:All of this talk about the drones in this war. But this wasn't the first war with drones. There was Georgia. This is the Mig 29 vs Israel drone in Georgia. Obviously drone tech has improved since 08. But this Mig 29 makes it look easy. What would have happen if Mig 29's and su 25's just flew into the same air space as the Bayraktar's ? Could they just take them out like this ?


This guy is coming in hot

Rosoboronexport is already developing cheaper counter-drones to defeat UAV's/UCAV's like the Turkish Buyfucktard's. Almaz-Antey already have whole vehicles that launch target drones to train air defence. All it would take is to make those target drones dual use....empty payloads for training IAD, or loaded with HE-Frag to target UCAV's, or have cheap electro-optical modules attachments near the tip of the target drones that give live feeds to users, and empty slots at the bottom with Saiga-12 shotguns with barrel drums ammo stored in the body, the gun being upside with only really the barrel sticking out. Maybe not even shotguns, it could be the anti-drone ECM gun, or a net gun, or a combination of the suggestions.

This one was developed by Almaz-Antey

^ Yeah but again that suggests something has to be reinvented to counter drones. When it looks like a Mig 29 with a functioning radar and some air to air missiles can get it done
In 2008, the Russian airforce shot down 7 Hermese 450 drones.

This is the size of them. Similar weight class as the TB2.

Why are MANPADs not a viable option? Deploying a full sized jet to shoot down glorified toys seems to be wasteful.
If the range of MANPADs is too small, then perhaps scaling them up would be a good idea. As long as they remain
relatively portable.

or manpads on drones.

Armenia had manpad during NK war and I don't remember videos of their successful use.

Also drones have optics and atgm that allow an engagement of more than 6km which is the max range of most Manpads and none of thrm will be able to lock on a drone at such ranges anyway.

A fighter is also traveling at 600km/h with a powerfull radar and can cover almost all the battlefield in 1 hour looking for targets. A manpad is just a fixed position.

Puting money on fighters means that you also have it as an attack weapon and can bomb the enemy. S-400 and manpads are good only for defending when they see a target.

If Armenia had 12 mig-29SMT with 70 r-77 and some 30 kh-25P anti radar missiles they would have won easily. Instead they bought 4 su-30 with no weapons.

That does not make an infantry portable anti-drone weapon a useless concept. Nobody is going to have jets loitering
over every ground forces deployment so their added value is not really a selling point. As with all other weapons systems
there is an evolutionary process. If drones are designed to avoid MANPADs, then design new MANPADs.

The same goes for S-400 systems. They are too few and too precious to cover every soldier. MANPADs are cheaper
and more practical. Too much masturbation about drone capability these days.

That is what will probably happen. Seeking new manpads and anti air systems to be cheaper and reach higher altitudes.

kvs wrote:Why are MANPADs not a viable option? Deploying a full sized jet to shoot down glorified toys seems to be wasteful.
If the range of MANPADs is too small, then perhaps scaling them up would be a good idea. As long as they remain
relatively portable.

Ceiling.

Backman wrote:^ Yeah but again that suggests something has to be reinvented to counter drones. When it looks like a Mig 29 with a functioning radar and some air to air missiles can get it done
In 2008, the Russian airforce shot down 7 Hermese 450 drones.

This is the size of them. Similar weight class as the TB2.

Just fueling, then flying, then maintenance afterwards for a modern fighter jet would greatly supersede the cost of just flying a drone with optical feed and a Saiga-12 shotgun by a few orders of magnitude. A civilian with a meager income saved up could afford purchasing a flying shotgun drone, they're that cheap. By flying a fighter jet to intercept a UAV/UCAV as the main means of drone interception is basically falling for the enemies plans of asymmetrical warfare. You don't fight cheap with expensive, you fight OPFOR's means of cheap warfare with a even cheaper means of warfare.

That does not make an infantry portable anti-drone weapon a useless concept. Nobody is going to have jets loitering
over every ground forces deployment so their added value is not really a selling point. As with all other weapons systems
there is an evolutionary process. If drones are designed to avoid MANPADs, then design new MANPADs.

The same goes for S-400 systems. They are too few and too precious to cover every soldier. MANPADs are cheaper
and more practical. Too much masturbation about drone capability these days.

Not useless but very limited. With their small ranges they will always be near the targets so the guy in the air knows where they are and wheb to flare and escape.

Verba is a new manpad nd its barey better than igla-S in terms of range. They are meant to be carried by a man so very light. Also it means optical seeker with lock on before launch.

Anything bigger will still be limited by the optics.


You don't need your jet to loiter around your forces if you use them to destroy enemy airfields from where drones come. You see weapons only from a defensive point of view which limits their usefullness.

Against Azerbaijan 12 mig-29SMT could have done so much damages in the first week of war that they would have backed down very quickly. Neither Armenia nor Azerbaijan have ressources to only defend. Azeri understood that and attacked quickly key targets. Armebia choosed a defensive strategy because they were in the mountains and underestimated the drones. At the end they lost.

IMO they never plabed to face drones this way. They were too confident that they never studied the opponent force.

On a paper a drone can't change a war but it did. Thry used their stuff effectiveky with very cleaver tactics by obliging armenian AD to show themselves agaibst those an-2 and then they tracked and destroyed them.

Little by little they destroyed everything on the battlefield.

Like I said, why not a UAV that carries Verba/Igla?

Simply have a drone that can fly high and far enough to provide close AD without it being expensive. Wouldn't face much trouble from the enemy.

Only major issue is now tracking the enemy drones. So more radar/optronics systems for mobile units need to be created that may be paired with such drones.

Because if the enemy has fighters with r-73 like missiles those manpad carrying drones will be easy pray. They will very easily tatget them since small drones like TB2 can't carry manpads, you would need a bigger drone.

Just see in Libya how 4 mig-29 stopped the operation of Turkish drones without even fighting them. Before that they had chinese attack drones which didn't really helped. Using real fighters efficiently is way better than using some drones efficiently.

kvs wrote:Why are MANPADs not a viable option?   Deploying a full sized jet to shoot down glorified toys seems to be wasteful.    
If the range of MANPADs is too small, then perhaps scaling them up would be a good idea.   As long as they remain
relatively portable.

If you have an air force (and unlike Armenia, you use it), you are always going to have fighters patrolling your airspace. For them to use ten rounds (probably it is difficult to use less with the high rate of fire guns they carry) to shoot down a MALE UCAV that costs several million is not wasteful at all. Those things don't even have the means of self defence to force the fighter to use a missile.

These are means to do the war on the cheap and stand no chance against even moderately capable enemies.

They can always use the old r-60 which should be available in huge numbers in stocks.

But I agree the 30mm guns are the best.

KoTeMoRe wrote:

kvs wrote:Why are MANPADs not a viable option?   Deploying a full sized jet to shoot down glorified toys seems to be wasteful.    
If the range of MANPADs is too small, then perhaps scaling them up would be a good idea.   As long as they remain
relatively portable.

Ceiling.

Current models.

miketheterrible wrote:or manpads on drones.

This may be the path since fighting gravity to get to drone altitude starts to cost in terms of SAM size. So drones
will be facing drones.

Isos wrote:Because if the enemy has fighters with r-73 like missiles those manpad carrying drones will be easy pray. They will very easily tatget them since small drones like TB2 can't carry manpads, you would need a bigger drone.

Just see in Libya how 4 mig-29 stopped the operation of Turkish drones without even fighting them. Before that they had chinese attack drones which didn't really helped. Using real fighters efficiently is way better than using some drones efficiently.

Except it goes back to same addage - cheaper vs expensive. The manpads drone would be great for point defense or when you know enemies drones are in your area.

Different sized drones create different problems.

Small hand held ones are hard for fighters to detect and would be a problem for most types of weapons to shoot down.

Larger weapon carrying drones are much easier to find and attack and shoot down with radar and IR guided missiles or indeed cannon fire.

There wont be one solution to every drone problem... the Serbs flew helicopters like the Mi-8 or perhaps Mi-2 along side the drones as they flew along and shot them down with rifle calibre machine guns in the cargo doors...

The Russians are developing an unmanned helicopter to find and hunt drones... a helicopter can track hovering and low speed drones, but faster drones could be used against bigger better drone targets.

The Mi-28NM is getting 30mm airburst laser beam detonated shells which would be ideal for use against enemy drones.

The drone shown above with an auto shotgun payload would also be very useful in bringing down drone targets cost effectively... but the main problem for that drone would be locating enemy drones and then getting close enough to bring them down with shotgun fire.

I have mentioned a simple 40mm grenade that explodes forward in a cone of fragments after travelling 30-40m from the muzzle would be an interesting round... the fixed fuse would be cheaper than laser initiated fuses, but laser detonated rounds would be rather more useful because it could be fired from any distance and the grenades could be modified to have a more spherical blast that could be used amongst a group of drones or against ground targets.

There is also scope for jammers and directed weapons intended to damage electronics like EMP beams or bombs...

Drones are always going to be a problem... just like anti tank and anti aircraft missiles are always going to be a problem...

Isos wrote:Because if the enemy has fighters with r-73 like missiles those manpad carrying drones will be easy pray. They will very easily tatget them since small drones like TB2 can't carry manpads, you would need a bigger drone.

Just see in Libya how 4 mig-29 stopped the operation of Turkish drones without even fighting them. Before that they had chinese attack drones which didn't really helped. Using real fighters efficiently is way better than using some drones efficiently.

... Only they really didn't .

The Turkish Op was stopped because they couldn't support their drones up to Al Jufra and they lost 6 more from may to Augustus.

Something seemingly Mi-8/17 based getting shot down. Allegedly in Karabakh, allegedly Azerbaijanian.

https://twitter.com/gunner_schmulke/status/1340771463570350081

Armenian opposition proposes to place a second Russian military base in the country

Russia may place a second military base on the territory of Armenia, which will be located near the border with Azerbaijan. This proposal was made by the Armenian opposition.

According to the leader of the Enlightened Armenia party, Edmond Marukyan, Armenia should sign a new security agreement with Russia, within the framework of which it will provide for the creation of a second Russian military base in the south of the country in the Syunik region, bordering on Azerbaijan. He stressed that negotiations on a new Russian base are "vital" for Armenia.

(...) we consider it vital to start urgent negotiations on the deployment of a new Russian military base in the Syunik region. The military base will, on the one hand, support the effective, dynamic activities of the Russian peacekeeping forces in Karabakh, on the other hand, the guarantor of long-term peace and security in the region - said Marukyan.

The Armenian politician noted that Armenia already has a positive experience in the deployment of the 102nd Russian military base in Gyumri. This base has been the guarantor of the republic's security for decades and ensures the inviolability of the border from Turkey.

The 102nd Russian military base has been deployed in Gyumri since 1995. The total number of personnel is about 5 thousand people. The base also includes the Erebuni airfield in Yerevan. The airbase is armed with modernized MiG-29 fighters, Mi-24P attack helicopters and military transport Mi-8MT.

Initially, the period of stay of the Russian military on the territory of Armenia was 25 years, but in 2010 the document was amended, increasing the period from 25 to 49 years.

But the real opposition in Armenia does not count. Only fringe lunatics calling themselves "the Russian opposition" count.
Expect the usual NATzO propaganda about how this Armenian opposition is "pro-Russian". In the eyes of NATzO that
makes them less than a lunatic fringe.

franco wrote:Armenian opposition proposes to place a second Russian military base in the country...

First intelligent idea from Armenia in very long time

But I think Russia will want to see some actual gesture of loyalty from Yerevan before they decide to make any further commitments

franco wrote:..Initially, the period of stay of the Russian military on the territory of Armenia was 25 years, but in 2010 the document was amended, increasing the period from 25 to 49 years.

25 years since 1995 would be, with for it... 2020

So kids, let's imagine how NK war of this year would have gone if Armenians told those pesky Russians to leave their democratic soil

Somehow I have a feeling that presidente Erdogan would have been having that victory parade in Yerevan instead of Baku