- Joined
- 27 May 2008
- Messages
- 1,054
- Reaction score
- 2,026
Some more on Starstreak;- well LMM (Martlet) really https://viraltab.news/ukrainian-par...-using-british-starstreak-air-defence-system/
Last edited:
So how is this mix of missiles intended to be used? Is Starstreak reserved for higher value targets while the presumably cheaper Martlet more useful for engaging UAVs and slower less well protected aircraft?
Starstreak for anything manned. Martlet for UAV's appears to be the way its used. I guess the frequency of when those targets are encountered is seen by the loading scheme.So how is this mix of missiles intended to be used? Is Starstreak reserved for higher value targets while the presumably cheaper Martlet more useful for engaging UAVs and slower less well protected aircraft?
Original video was from @shtirlitz53 on Twitter, he was responsible for the earlier tweets of a Stormer in Post 83, which suggests that this video is from the same unit which is in the Kyiv Region.....which means the object being shot down is more than likely a Shahed 131 or 136.A Stormer kill (of something) has been posted on Reddit, not sure where the original footage was released.
Missile appears to be a Martlet (no Dart seperation and large explosion seen), I think the target is a UAV of some kind, buts its very unclear. This is the first time we've seen a Stormer kill from inside the vehicle, previous footage of the console showed another system shooting down a target (believe it was SA-8 that time).
View: https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/11aq2lo/ukraine_troops_destroy_russian_aerial_target/
Obviously its not a radar image...
View: https://twitter.com/PStyle0ne1/status/1629110187746369538?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet
Does anyone know why some tweets like this one don't show on forums?
Does anyone know why some tweets like this one don't show on forums?
Nah, there's a couple of peoples' accounts that I posted on other forums and they appeared for a long time, and then suddenly they stopped appearing, no notifications or explanation. I asked Twitter but no reply as of yet.Could it be some sort of age-restriction thing?
I asked Twitter but no reply as of yet.
I asked Twitter but no reply as of yet.
It would appear that Twitter management and their moderators are playing games.
Trying to force people onto the actual Twitter site to engage with the advertising. Not a huge shock.
Nah, there's a couple of peoples' accounts that I posted on other forums and they appeared for a long time, and then suddenly they stopped appearing, no notifications or explanation. I asked Twitter but no reply as of yet.
Here you go...live shoulder mounted Starstreak in the wild
Nothing whatsoever. Truth is I don't think we will get proper analysis on amy MANPAD either, not sure the crews will be recording details of engagements in detail if at all. LMM does appear at least to be one of the more effective systems at killing Orlan and other ISR drones though.On another note have there been any recent new stats on how the Starstreak has been performing in Ukraine?
LMM does appear at least to be one of the more effective systems at killing Orlan and other ISR drones though.
The KA-52 was definitely hit by LMM, as the engagement was recorded on video, but IIRC the impact with the ground wasn't seen in the video that was released. It was certainly damaged and had a very hard landing, and given the rapid speed of its descent from the hit it probably was a kill, but until we definitively see evidence on the ground we won't know for sure.LMM does appear at least to be one of the more effective systems at killing Orlan and other ISR drones though.
Video evidence also of kills against Mi28, Ka52 and Caliber cruise missiles. A downed Su34 also was noted to have damage consistent with a Starstreak hit.
On this forum the link appears, but on some forums even the link doesn't even appear.Trying to force people onto the actual Twitter site to engage with the advertising. Not a huge shock.
The KA-52 was definitely hit by LMM, as the engagement was recorded on video, but IIRC the impact with the ground wasn't seen in the video that was released. It was certainly damaged and had a very hard landing, and given the rapid speed of its descent from the hit it probably was a kill, but until we definitively see evidence on the ground we won't know .
Oryx lists as destroyed, Ka52 loss number 18.
Pre-war they were said to have 133, according to Oryx 33 have been confirmed destroyed, so 25% of the fleet has been destroyed (granted we don't know how many have been delivered in 2022/23, but its not likely to be a huge amount). Given that some helo losses are bound to have not been recorded I think you can count on them having at least 25% loss rate.Oryx lists as destroyed, Ka52 loss number 18.
How many Ka-52s are there left? I mentioned this in passing to my brother a few weeks ago and he said Russia never had many and had lost a significant number of them in service.
Mi-28 appears to have suffered at least a 10% attrition rate as well.25% loss rate is bad and that will have severely impacted the squadrons using them.
Over in the South African arms thread is a mention from someone who spoke to Rheinmetall reps at a show about a cost comparison between the Cheetah C-RAM missile and the necessary number of AHEAD shells necessary to down a target...it appears Rheinmetall believed that the Cheetah missile would be cheaper than a few bursts with AHEAD. Complex ammo is expensive...One wonders how much cheaper, allowing for size of production run, a guided, gun-launched projectile is than a pocket-propelled one with the same level of performance.
One wonders how much cheaper, allowing for size of production run, a guided, gun-launched projectile is than a pocket-propelled one with the same level of performance.
Depending on brains in the shell, the quick references I found for M982 Excalibur and Ground Launched GBU39 put the advantage well in favor of the cannon projectile, even with recycling existing and paid for rocket motors for the GLSDB.One wonders how much cheaper, allowing for size of production run, a guided, gun-launched projectile is than a pocket-propelled one with the same level of performance.
Similar to or more expensive per kill.
Ok I thought this was a thread about Starstreak.
Depending on brains in the shell, the quick references I found for M982 Excalibur and Ground Launched GBU39 put the advantage well in favor of the cannon projectile, even with recycling existing and paid for rocket motors for the GLSDB.One wonders how much cheaper, allowing for size of production run, a guided, gun-launched projectile is than a pocket-propelled one with the same level of performance.
Similar to or more expensive per kill.
GROUND LAUNCHED SDB, not a basic GBU-39.Depending on brains in the shell, the quick references I found for M982 Excalibur and Ground Launched GBU39 put the advantage well in favor of the cannon projectile, even with recycling existing and paid for rocket motors for the GLSDB.One wonders how much cheaper, allowing for size of production run, a guided, gun-launched projectile is than a pocket-propelled one with the same level of performance.
Similar to or more expensive per kill.
You found some weird references, because GBU-39 is cheaper than M982, as of FY2019. $40,000 USD versus $85,000 USD.
A Stormbreaker costs twice as much as M982 but can hit moving targets without external guidance. It's still cheaper than a Javelin, because it's a glide bomb deployed by aircraft. Excalibur is a single 155mm shell with an INS kit. It's $70,000. Copperhead was similarly expensive, but can hit moving targets, but also requires a ground designator team which needs to be emplaced and in the proper position...
A self-guiding Copperhead would probably cost similar to Stormbreaker or Javelin, so six digits (maybe twice as much as Excalibur), because it requires shock hardened electronics.
Once you factor in the ancillary equipment like laser designators, or amount of munitions needed to be expended to hit mobile targets, the advantage of the single unit cheaper shell tends to evaporate. Per pound of explosive, a missile or rocket will always deliver more killing power for less cost, at least when it comes to delivering ordnance against wide area targets, than shells.
This is one of those immutable things and is the main reason why multiple rocket launchers have survived for 75+ years in military use.
Rockets are better for delivering large blast-type warheads to kill particularly annoying things, like warships or reinforced structures, while cannons and aviation bombs are better at delivering penetrating warheads due to the high speeds they impact. It would be hard to fit a reinforced bunker buster into a GMLRS but trivial to fit a blast-frag warhead or DPICM, which can annihilate soft targets like C3I and SAM sites.