Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
That was another thing I was thinking. The standard warhead must be pretty useless against most fixed targets.As they also fitted with a warhead designed to take
on aircraft there is little effect on protected targets as the S-300 is a wide area fragmentation device.
As far as I'm aware there is only one type of warhead although it has 133kg or 143kg of explosive to allow a big spread.That was another thing I was thinking. The standard warhead must be pretty useless against most fixed targets.
There are alternative warheads for the S-300 more suited for ground attack or the damage is planed only by the kinetic energy of the missiles?
Okay, this just validating my hoarding relative's mantra of never throw anything away since you never know when you'll need it in the future. Thanks Russia, idiot.More weapons from the museum to the front.
An explanation.The Russian military intends to reactivate and upgrade some 800 Soviet-era T-62 tanks in the next three years to balance its significant losses in the ongoing Ukraine war.
I wonder what happened with the T-14 Armata?
Biggest Upgrade In History? Russia To Reactivate 800 Cold War-Era T-62 Tanks Amid Depleting Arsenal
Russian military intends to upgrade some 800 Soviet-era T-62 tanks to balance its significant losses in the ongoing Ukraine war.eurasiantimes.com
If used properly with infantry support the AFU can use the captured T-62s well enough, despite their low penetrative ammunition and lack of modern ERA armour. Most AFU tank engagements would be against hardened infantry positions and IFVs, not other tanks. That's what MANPATS are for.On a side note, it looks like t-62 are way more likely to be captured than the average Russian tank.
I wonder if its because: 1) they break more often and are abandoned, 2) crews feel more insecure and are more predisposed to abandon them, or 3) both of them.
Maybe they're trying to scrounge up a few 74LS221N chips or a DAC03CDX1 or two.The Russian military intends to reactivate and upgrade some 800 Soviet-era T-62 tanks in the next three years to balance its significant losses in the ongoing Ukraine war.
I wonder what happened with the T-14 Armata?
Biggest Upgrade In History? Russia To Reactivate 800 Cold War-Era T-62 Tanks Amid Depleting Arsenal
Russian military intends to upgrade some 800 Soviet-era T-62 tanks to balance its significant losses in the ongoing Ukraine war.eurasiantimes.com
That article is a bit datedAn explanation.
Why Russia’s New T-14 Tank Wouldn’t Be a Game Changer in Ukraine - Even if it Had More of Them
The T-14 Armata next generation battle tank has for years promised to revolutionise the armoured warfare capabilities of the Russian Army, and following its unveiling inmilitarywatchmagazine.com
The accuracy may not be that poor.
I can't speak specifically for the S300, since I do not know how it works in the SS mode. However, I can speak to how a generic command guided (CG) SAM might be used in an SS mode.
From open sources, including the Australian Airpower article I listed before, the original S300 missiles, the 5V55K and KD models, are described as CG. Later versions apparently added additional capability.
For those not familiar (buffnut453 , I assume you know this, I am describing it for others that might not), CG missiles are basically radio controlled missiles. The radar tracks the target of interest, and then it uplinks (sends) commands to the missile to guide the missile to the position in space that the radar believes the target to be at. The missile does not guide itself, the radar on the ground tells the missile how to correct its path, and the ground radar guides the missile all the way to the target. It is, by design, accurate enough against a flying jet to get the missile within the kill radius of the warhead of the missile. For some CG missiles this might require putting the missile within ~25 feet of the moving target in order to be lethal.
Because the ground radar guides the missile, and radar track error naturally get larger with range, the CG system has practical accuracy limitations based on range. You don't use this technique for very long range shots, because at very long range the missile miss distance (based on track errors), on a moving target, might exceed the kill radius of the warhead.
Now lets apply this technique to a non-moving ground target. The radar does not even have to see, or be able to track, the target, all you need is surveyed numbers from the radar to the target, i.e., the target is 100.2 degrees azimuth true, 0.4 degrees elevation, and 50.4 km away. If the missile is launched in an up and over trajectory, the radar will provide guidance as if it was tracking that unmoving target at those coordinates. It will continue to guide the missile as long as it can see the missile. In an up and over it (the radar) might be able to see the missile until the missile is within a few thousand feet of the target, and the last command would arrive with the missile pointed right at the unmoving ground target.
For an unmoving ground target the accuracy might be better than for a moving flying target, particularly at longer ranges.
T!
They are probably working 24/7 to get these tanks back into service or to cannibalize them for spare parts
Interesting video of T-62 tanks being refurbished and upgraded in Russia.
Reports suggest some 800 T-62s are undergoing such work in preparation for operations in Ukraine. Does that imply, perhaps, that stocks of newer T-64s, T-72s and T-80s are dwindling, and newer T-90s can't be produced quickly enough?
There's also reporting that Russia has run out of 2S19 self-propelled artillery and drawing on old Soviet D-30s and 2A36 towed artillery, which are more vulnerable to counter-battery fire.