The Russian lack of Precision Guided Munitions

Like most other countries, the Russians import most of their consumer electronics from China.


Is every jet in the RAF capable of using every weapon in the RAF inventory? I don't think so. Stuff has to be integrated, that costs money, and in the case of older planes it often makes more sense from a cost basis to just use up the remaining life in older planes with a more limited capability than to spend money on upgrading old kit.
Not that far off actually and we can qualify as quickly as we need to for war situations. See Aim 9 on Harrier, Nimrod and Shrike on Vulcan for the Falklands war.
 
No runways out of action and it isn't because of BDR - Ukrainian AF still getting jets into the air

Yup, I saw on the news. Maybe their guided weapons GPS only does 4 figure grid references.
 
Yup, I saw on the news. Maybe their guided weapons GPS only does 4 figure grid references.
Targeted hangers, bomb/missile storage and POl I think but there's are a few sat pics which show new swimming pools dug in wide open spaces having well missed runways/aprons
 
Like most other countries, the Russians import most of their consumer electronics from China.


Is every jet in the RAF capable of using every weapon in the RAF inventory? I don't think so. Stuff has to be integrated, that costs money, and in the case of older planes it often makes more sense from a cost basis to just use up the remaining life in older planes with a more limited capability than to spend money on upgrading old kit.
In the main UKR thread there is imagery of SU-34 loaded with dumb/iron bombs, as are Fencer.

Both are cleared for a wide variety of PGM. The former type is supposed to be the dogs danglies for penetration strike - like the F-15E took over from the F-111 for that role in the US the SU-34 has done the same for the Fencer for RUS.

It also has the ‘supposedly’ dog danglies EW fit. RUS love their EW. Yet a few have now been shot down doing what appears to be CAS - presumebly the Frogfoot is suffering the same problems the A-10 has in contested airspace (ie - it will have a short, busy and very interesting life).

In Syria you saw Backfire bombers doing carpet bombing of towns where insurgent targets were located. We and the US would just have put a Paveway IV or Brimstone through their window - the Ruskies just decided to level the whole neighbourhood.

It could be doctrine - but there was one occasion where the Russians did a mahoosive long mission to Syria using a number of different strike assets, with a cruise missile strike at the end. I can’t remember when but I remember telling my mum about it and saying it looked like an exercise to see if they could do it with genuine targets at the end of it. They have also a number of corvettes about the size of a river class that can take Kalibr cruise missiles - and they were used against Syria too. Just a case of ‘lets see if we can do this’ and perhaps as an advert to help in sales?

It really could be that there are shortages.

Or that Putin is keeping his best stuff for what he might think could be an existential struggle against the West. And if that is the case then what does that say about his manufacturing capability to replace combat expenditure (not to mention his mental state).

Or that they lack the abiility to utilise it due to incomplete targeting chains, plus lack of practice in multi-ship packages - we would have a massive air tasking order, tankers, stand-off and escort jammers, SEAD and Iron Hand, CAP and different waves to roll back the defences - we are not seeing this with the Russians. They were getting about half the hours we do and don’t have the synthetic trainers we do either.

We also know that they have invested a lot into Anti-Access and Area Denial (A2AD - as has China) after seeing how we took down Iraq. Have they failed to invest in offensive capability as a result?

Lots of questions and very few answers - I posted a version of this in the main UKR thread and also the following. Lots of people are asking WTF is going on - mainly so other people can state F’ knows!
 
(...) Or that Putin is keeping his best stuff for what he might think could be an existential struggle against the West. And if that is the case then what does that say about his manufacturing capability to replace combat expenditure (not to mention his mental state). (...)
So you think it's possible that they're worried about escalation of the situation to direct combat with NATO and want to make sure they haven't used up all their limited supply of their best stuff on lesser targets? I would have to admit that's a possibility.

Quite possibly their stockpiles of newer bombs, ammunition, fuel, spare parts, etc. are very limited, but they have loads of left over or refurbished stuff from Soviet days. However, whether that is an effective strategy is another question. "Dumb" bombs may be cheaper than "smart" bombs, but you need to deliver a lot more of them to do the same job.

I do have to wonder how long most NATO countries could fight a war of that size without running their stockpiles empty if they couldn't run to the US with a big bag of money and ask for replacements.
 
So you think it's possible that they're worried about escalation of the situation to direct combat with NATO and want to make sure they haven't used up all their limited supply of their best stuff on lesser targets? I would have to admit that's a possibility.

Quite possibly their stockpiles of newer bombs, ammunition, fuel, spare parts, etc. are very limited, but they have loads of left over or refurbished stuff from Soviet days. However, whether that is an effective strategy is another question. "Dumb" bombs may be cheaper than "smart" bombs, but you need to deliver a lot more of them to do the same job.

I do have to wonder how long most NATO countries could fight a war of that size without running their stockpiles empty if they couldn't run to the US with a big bag of money and ask for replacements.
Given that the Russians always had to plan on a NATO escalation it makes perfect military sense to hold back a vast reserve especially if they thought Ukraine was going to be a relatively minor conflict. After seeing how ineffective the Russians have been I can imagine a discussion within the Pentagon that maybe now is the time to just go in balls to the wall and end the Cold War for ever. But even if it remains unspoken if the Ukraine war does escalate the European contingent would be holding the fort until the U.S brought in their vast amount of equipment and manpower and has you said how long would it be before our (E-NATO) stockpiles run out.
 
Given that the Russians always had to plan on a NATO escalation it makes perfect military sense to hold back a vast reserve especially if they thought Ukraine was going to be a relatively minor conflict. After seeing how ineffective the Russians have been I can imagine a discussion within the Pentagon that maybe now is the time to just go in balls to the wall and end the Cold War for ever. But even if it remains unspoken if the Ukraine war does escalate the European contingent would be holding the fort until the U.S brought in their vast amount of equipment and manpower and has you said how long would it be before our (E-NATO) stockpiles run out.
Save your pandemic masks, you might need them for the nuclear fall out.
 
Yup, I saw on the news. Maybe their guided weapons GPS only does 4 figure grid references.
GLONASS and GPS are more or less equivalent in terms of accuracy. GLONASS however is apparently optimized for higher latitudes where GPS may not work reliably or at all. Which one is "better" may depend on where you are on the planet.
 

Yokel

LE
GLONASS and GPS are more or less equivalent in terms of accuracy. GLONASS however is apparently optimized for higher latitudes where GPS may not work reliably or at all. Which one is "better" may depend on where you are on the planet.

I am not entirely sure of the details of GLONASS, and like Soviet/Russian communications satellites it might use a Molnya orbit - which is better suited to extreme Northern latitudes compared to Geosynchronous orbits which have visibility issues at the Polar regions.

220px-NASA_molniya_oblique.png



Molniya.jpg


However, the GPS constellation uses satellites in six orbital planes at twelve hour orbits, in order to provide global coverage.

1646996069931.jpeg


Pictures from Google Images/Wikipedia.
 
Last edited:
I am not entirely sure of the details of GLONASS, and like Soviet/Russian communications satellites it might use a Molbiya orbit - which is better suited to extreme Northern latitudes compared to Geosynchronous orbits which have visibility issues at the Polar regions.

220px-NASA_molniya_oblique.png



Molniya.jpg


However, the GPS constellation uses satellites in six orbital planes at twelve hour orbits, in order to provide global coverage.

View attachment 646401

Pictures from Google Images/Wikipedia.
I believe that GLONASS uses more or less circular orbits. However, their orbits have a higher angular inclination than GPS, which is why they are more visible at high latitudes.

There are probably pros and cons to each, and the US and Russia probably made choices which were more relevant to what they were most concerned about.
 
Given that the Russians always had to plan on a NATO escalation it makes perfect military sense to hold back a vast reserve especially if they thought Ukraine was going to be a relatively minor conflict. After seeing how ineffective the Russians have been I can imagine a discussion within the Pentagon that maybe now is the time to just go in balls to the wall and end the Cold War for ever. But even if it remains unspoken if the Ukraine war does escalate the European contingent would be holding the fort until the U.S brought in their vast amount of equipment and manpower and has you said how long would it be before our (E-NATO) stockpiles run out.

I just don’t see the US being able to do that. APS stocks in Europe amount to 5x brigades. Nothing is coming by sea from a standing start before the Russians go nuclear. So 5x brigades by air. Complete clusterfck as 100K blokes sign for kit, get bombed-up while under fire. The Russians aren’t going to sit back and let 100K blokes get ready to oppose them. It’s clear they aren’t playing by the niceties of cricket.

Unless there is a gradual build up of forces (over years), the reinforcement of Germany from the US is limited to 5x brigades (at best).

 
Last edited:
Over the last couple of weeks there has been no evidence of any attempt ty Russian forces to use precision weapons to avoid things like schools, hospitals, and residential areas. Likewise the years of Russian air strikes in places such as Syria have seen the used of dumb bombs with no great effort put into avoiding civilian casualties.

Why is this:

Not caring about civilian casualties and damage? Moscow does seem to have a very Hobbesian view of the world.

A preference for quantity over quality? If you drop enough bombs some should hit the right target.

Cost? The guidance systems cost money.

Technical problems? Does Russia have issues with developing and producing Electro Optical technology?

I am starting this in response to a comment by @Rodney2q on the Ukraine thread. Perhaps @Archimedes et al are able to share something about Soviet/Russian doctrine - surely in planning for fighting NATO they would have had lots of precision targets such as bridges or runways?
What's the susceptibility of Russian PGMs to offensive EW? Are they being jammed or otherwise thrown off?
 

Yokel

LE
What's the susceptibility of Russian PGMs to offensive EW? Are they being jammed or otherwise thrown off?

No idea - I suppose it depends on what they are using for guidance. I cannot imagine that a laser (either from the aircraft or a pod, or from a designator on the ground) can be jammed. I assume that GLONASS can be jammed or spoofed, but I do not think that there was any such jamming in Syria - where there was little evidence of PGM use.
 
No idea - I suppose it depends on what they are using for guidance. I cannot imagine that a laser (either from the aircraft or a pod, or from a designator on the ground) can be jammed. I assume that GLONASS can be jammed or spoofed, but I do not think that there was any such jamming in Syria - where there was little evidence of PGM use.
"Shtora-1 (Russian: Штора, "curtain") is an electro-optical active protection system or suite for tanks, designed to disrupt the laser designator and laser rangefinders of incoming anti-tank guided missiles"
 

New Posts

Latest Threads

Top