(Thread IKs:
fatherboxx)
|
BougieBitch posted:I seem to remember something like this coming up 6 months or a year ago and the actual plan wasn't to use the clusters as-is, but to treat them like a Valu-Pak of attachments for small drones ala the grenade droppers from early on. No idea how valid that is or if there are fuse issues with doing it that way, but given that we are getting reposts of guns chained together for anti-drone purposes it hardly seems out of the question that something could be modified to serve a different purpose than the "intended" use you're remembering back at the beginning of the war when drones were dropping modified cluster submunitions
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2023 15:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 14:39 |
|
|
BougieBitch posted:Edit: welp, reading the WaPo article it seems like they actually are short enough on conventional artillery ammo that this wouldn't be the case, honestly pretty poo poo that the collective West can't keep one front supplied with a blank check and so much lead time quote:Cluster munitions are particularly ubiquitous in the stores of U.S. ground forces. According to the DoD report, the Army has about 638.3 million cluster submunitions (88 percent of the total inventory) and the Marine Corps has about 53.3 million (7 percent). The report states, “Cannon and rocket artillery cluster munitions comprise over 80% of Army fire support capability,”13 and they “comprise the bulk of the Marine Corps artillery munitions.”14 the US barely has any regular shells left but we have a lot of these child-manglers to send over
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2023 15:32
|
|
|
i say swears online posted:the US barely has any regular shells left but we have a lot of these child-manglers to send over There's already thousands of Russian mines everywhere. The UXO from the clusters isn't going to make any difference. It's all going to have to be carefully demined regardless.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2023 15:36
|
|
|
i say swears online posted:the US barely has any regular shells left but we have a lot of these child-manglers to send over Those munitions were designed to be used in places where the children are brown and therefore don't factor into the calculus.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2023 15:37
|
|
|
Deteriorata posted:There's already thousands of Russian mines everywhere. The UXO from the clusters isn't going to make any difference. It's all going to have to be carefully demined regardless. intuitively it feels like landmines are easier for uxo teams than cluster munitions, but yeah those are also bad
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2023 15:39
|
|
|
Djarum posted:Dude isn't bothering to lead his target either. I say let's give whaling harpoons a whirl. Drone mounted, obviously.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2023 15:41
|
|
|
Owling Howl posted:I say let's give whaling harpoons a whirl. Drone mounted, obviously. I think they have been using nets against them like in WW2. Honestly I think balloons with giant nets would be a great drone defense in general, at least in the rear. At the front you would have to do something like them being hauled by drones and do coordinated sweeping. I would be amazed if the US isn't doing testing with such tech now.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2023 15:56
|
|
|
Glad the cluster munitions thing is happing at last. Although these weapons are problematic since they can leave behind uxo, this isn't really a relevant issue in a war where both sides have made extensive use of actual mines and one side has been happily using cluster munitions the entire time. Even the opening argument on outlawing them by HRW states that they are only useful in the exact type of war Ukraine is fighting right now and their entire argument for banning them is build on the idea that a war like this is impossible. https://twitter.com/JimmySecUK/status/1677293159947153409 In this case, hand wringing about increasing the amount of uxo by a tiny amount at the cost of potentially extending the war by years is absurd. If reducing civilian casualties is a priority then a quick and decisive Ukrainian victory is the way to achieve that.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2023 16:28
|
|
|
Dunno why the US hasn't sent dedicated anti drone weaponry. Seems weird that there is such a massive shortage of arms and ammunition. Edit: vvvvvvv interesting, how many? Cpt_Obvious fucked around with this message at 16:37 on Jul 7, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2023 16:29
|
|
|
lol a ton of it has been sent
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2023 16:30
|
|
|
Cpt_Obvious posted:Edit: vvvvvvv interesting, how many? Lasers, EM guns, AA missile systems, Stingers, mobile ECM warfare vehicle, etc etc. Literal tons and tons of stuff.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2023 16:43
|
|
|
The US knows about the problem, for example: https://www.defense.gov/News/Releases/Release/Article/3350958/biden-administration-announces-additional-security-assistance-for-ukraine/ mentions 10 C-UAS laser guided rocket systems which turns out to be using BAE’s APKWS laser-guided rockets and optimistically should already be in the field: https://www.defenseone.com/defense-systems/2023/04/us-sending-experimental-anti-drone-weapons-ukraine/384801/ also noted that other thing sent are: quote:Other anti-aircraft assistance in the $2.5 billion aid package announced today included munitions for the National Advanced Surface-to-Air Missile Systems, or NASAMS; anti-drone 30mm gun trucks; three air-surveillance radars; and 30mm and 23mm anti-aircraft ammunition. The aid is a mix of equipment drawdowns and procurement, according to a U.S. senior defense official. The problem with gbad is always going to be mobility and coverage.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2023 16:45
|
|
|
i say swears online posted:intuitively it feels like landmines are easier for uxo teams than cluster munitions, but yeah those are also bad Uxo is usually just lying somewhere and might be inert anyway. Whereas mines you will have to locate, then dig up and hope that you don't encounter any booby traps. It helps if you know all the locations where cluster munitions have been deployed so you can cordon off those areas until they have been cleared. You will get unexploded ordinance from all types of projectiles and bombs, too, so there's going to be a hell of an iron harvest afterwards...
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2023 17:06
|
|
|
WarpedLichen posted:The US knows about the problem, for example: Interesting, thanks for the link: quote:Nine counter-Unmanned Aerial System 30mm gun trucks;
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2023 17:07
|
|
|
you can find anti drone systems both explicit and non-explicit (but still intended as such) in virtually every single major assistance package that has been sent to Ukraine
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2023 17:09
|
|
|
Cpt_Obvious posted:Doesn't seem particularly effective. True but you should never underestimate the "it looks cool and is fun to use" factor in improvised military engineering.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2023 17:17
|
|
|
U.S. ADAM/RAAM mine dispersing shells are sometimes included as cluster munitions depending on whose reporting. U.S. doctrine mainly uses them for disruption of enemy attacks but they have an absolute shitload since they are utterly useless in COIN warfare. I could see them being sent. The are programmable to self-detonate a set amount of time after dropping (~10% failure on self-detonate), each shell has 4 antitank mines and I think 12 anti personnel mines. The mines shoot little trip wires out in random directions and anything they disturbs them causes the mine to go off. Seeing how innovative Ukraine has been, I can see them repurposing them to suit their needs.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2023 17:21
|
|
|
Dirt5o8 posted:U.S. ADAM/RAAM mine dispersing shells are sometimes included as cluster munitions depending on whose reporting. U.S. doctrine mainly uses them for disruption of enemy attacks but they have an absolute shitload since they are utterly useless in COIN warfare. I could see them being sent. Ukraine is already using those it seems https://twitter.com/DefenceHQ/status/1636258087517536256 This is another reason why the conversation about preventing them from using cluster munitions is so insane if they're already using systems like this to distribute literal mines. Chalks fucked around with this message at 17:33 on Jul 7, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2023 17:30
|
|
|
there's a significant qualitative (and hell quantitative) difference between munitions that release a handful of submunitions and what are conventionally referred to by the term cluster munitions which are dropping many hundreds of submunitions. the blue on blue and civilian impact of the latter is much greater and the work required to clean them up is much, much more substantial than an artillery shell that pops out a dozen AT mines, of which 3/4 self destruct as designed
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2023 17:42
|
|
|
Herstory Begins Now posted:there's a significant qualitative (and hell quantitative) difference between munitions that release a handful of submunitions and what are conventionally referred to by the term cluster munitions which are dropping many hundreds of submunitions. the blue on blue and civilian impact of the latter is much greater and the work required to clean them up is much, much more substantial than an artillery shell that pops out a dozen AT mines, of which 3/4 self destruct as designed The dud rate of the cluster munitions that the US is sending to Ukraine is around 2-3%. Of the actual UXO left behind in these two scenarios, how big is that difference? In terms of the actual UXO itself, which is the bigger threat? By this I mean, a literal land mine is designed to detonate when interacted with and the failure is the self destruct vs a munition designed to detonate on deployment and the failure was its detonation trigger. Some of these duds may be incapable of detonating, and they're certainly not designed to detonate when interacted with (although they very well could) It's not really that big a difference, IMO. And in a battlefield where Russia is regularly not only deploying their own cluster munitions, but also air dispersed butterfly AP mines the whole discussion is purely academic. The UXO from cluster duds is a drop in the water compared to the current situation, even if every single dud behaves the same as an AP mine.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2023 18:14
|
|
|
Mr. Apollo posted:Here's a work safe clip of the AA AK74(?) in action. Looks like it is being used against Shahed drones.  I maintain my conclusion from early/mid-2022 that the future is autocannons. I actually we should be looking at smaller, low-power, short-ranged radars to fit on existing IFVs, if such a thing is possible. (I am not a radar expert.) If goons are interested, I have an effort-post in mind discussing lessons from the War in Ukraine for the US Bradley replacement program.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2023 18:25
|
|
|
Chalks posted:The dud rate of the cluster munitions that the US is sending to Ukraine is around 2-3%. And what is the dud rate of russian artillery shells?
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2023 18:27
|
|
|
Ynglaur posted:If goons are interested, I have an effort-post in mind discussing lessons from the War in Ukraine for the US Bradley replacement program.  Would be great, feel free to share!
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2023 18:27
|
|
|
fatherboxx posted:
 Any system that can cheaply handle drones is probably going to be very important.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2023 18:29
|
|
|
MikusR posted:And what is the dud rate of russian artillery shells? WaPo's source claims "more than 8%" https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2023/07/06/biden-cluster-bombs-ukraine/
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2023 18:30
|
|
|
Chalks posted:The dud rate of the cluster munitions that the US is sending to Ukraine is around 2-3%. Of the actual UXO left behind in these two scenarios, how big is that difference? In terms of the actual UXO itself, which is the bigger threat? By this I mean, a literal land mine is designed to detonate when interacted with and the failure is the self destruct vs a munition designed to detonate on deployment and the failure was its detonation trigger. Some of these duds may be incapable of detonating, and they're certainly not designed to detonate when interacted with (although they very well could) US DoD itself concluded that the dangers of UXO from cluster munitions particularly to friendly forces that then move into recently contested areas is so bad that outside of a few specific use case cases it's better to just use either large unitary warheads, inert kinetic sub-projectiles or a small handful of larger submunitions or actually guided systems. Give Ukraine whatever they need, probably including these, but no it is not an inconsequential drop in the bucket. Someone has to clean them up later and it's going to lead to even more maimed people. Responsibility lies entirely on Russia, but it still sucks. the entire uxo situation is a loving nightmare and you can support Ukraine without being blase about it getting even worse. Herstory Begins Now fucked around with this message at 18:47 on Jul 7, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2023 18:44
|
|
|
Is the use case for these weapons that compelling? I think the idea is to use DPICM to clear trenches? I guess are they that short on conventional 155mm ammo that having something to shoot is better than nothing?
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2023 18:46
|
|
|
effective yes, just with a gnarly cost:benefit analysis
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2023 18:47
|
|
|
Speaking as someone who has to deal with UXO for work way often then you would think given my job I would rather deal with mines then cluster munitions when dealing with clean up.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2023 18:51
|
|
|
Herstory Begins Now posted:effective yes, just with a gnarly cost:benefit analysis I mean sweeping infantry out of a trench with artillery doesn't seem like a big game changer to me, but I'm not gonna arm chair general and pretend I know how to evaluate that risk.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2023 18:55
|
|
|
Ynglaur posted:AA-AAK74-6 I recently saw a video about some strikers being tested with their own radar and laser specifically to deal with the drone problem. They went as far as to confirm variations of this concept have been deployed for testing, but where it was deployed was classified. Phone posting, so I dont have a link. It was on Task and Purpose's channel.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2023 19:24
|
|
|
I suspect the provision of DPICM has more to do with reduced availability of unitary 155mm and GMLRS ammunition. This war had been going for over a year before Europe started ramping up 155mm production, and the US isn't much better, and has lower capacity than Europe, too. The US assessment of "we wish we'd just used unitary warheads" has a couple implicity assumptions/biases an informed person should keep in mind:
The US executive policy against using them wasn't even absolute: the issue was not that any UXO remained, but that the UXO rate was too high. Someone can correct my numbers, but I think original DPICM had something like a 3% dud rate. The executive order demanded that the dud rate be less than 1% before using it. Basically, we're willing to assume some risk in order to use them, but not that much risk. And don't kid yourself: DPICM has capabilities that unitary warheads do not. A 155mm shell has a kill radius of 50-150m ("kill" meaning you'd expect ~50% of people in that radius standing up on perfectly flat terrain to be killed). A DPICM volley from an MLRS would cover a 1,000m x 1,000m square (approximately). There's a reason that GMLRS--even with unitary warheads--shoot a shotgun blast of tungsten darts. Area-effect weapons are more effective when they cover bigger areas. Finally: yes, the UXO sucks. It's going to suck for years, but I think defeating Russia more quickly will be less sucky than letting this war go on for longer.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2023 19:29
|
|
|
Herstory Begins Now posted:US DoD itself concluded that the dangers of UXO from cluster munitions particularly to friendly forces that then move into recently contested areas is so bad that outside of a few specific use case cases it's better to just use either large unitary warheads, inert kinetic sub-projectiles or a small handful of larger submunitions or actually guided systems. Give Ukraine whatever they need, probably including these, but no it is not an inconsequential drop in the bucket. Someone has to clean them up later and it's going to lead to even more maimed people. Responsibility lies entirely on Russia, but it still sucks. What was the basis of that analysis though? Was it based on a peer conflict where the friendly forces are moving through an area that's been heavily mined by the enemy, or was it in a asymmetric war like the US has been accustomed to fighting? That's the big problem with the historical conversation about cluster munitions, the assumption that there will never be a peer conflict, so every weapon should be viewed through that lens. I can absolutely believe that the weapons would cause significant problems for friendly troops in scenarios where the only UXO is friendly. I would love to see some analysis of the weapons that concludes that their use on a heavily mined front line where the enemy is using cluster munitions already has a noticeable impact on the amount of de-mining you have to do when advancing. MikusR posted:And what is the dud rate of russian artillery shells? It's not a terribly fair comparison, even though there are probably far more dud artillery rounds. Where a dud artillery shell will likely bury itself in a small and obvious crater, a dud cluster bomblet will likely be lying on the surface and are easily obscured. For infantry at least, I imagine you're far more likely to step on a cluster bomblet than a dud artillery shell without noticing it. Chalks fucked around with this message at 19:36 on Jul 7, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2023 19:30
|
|
|
Don't get me wrong, the US maintains stocks for a reason, it's just unambiguously wrong to say that there would be no or an insignificant added UXO cost to using them. That's the one point I take particular issue with. the issue with cluster munitions is not that they're ineffective, very much the opposite.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2023 19:34
|
|
|
Ynglaur posted:AA-AAK74-6 Thumbs up to that. Curious if you can expand generally, what's your background for your extensive know-how?
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2023 19:38
|
|
|
WarpedLichen posted:I mean sweeping infantry out of a trench with artillery doesn't seem like a big game changer to me, but I'm not gonna arm chair general and pretend I know how to evaluate that risk. I think the bigger factor is that they have it available to send, so really it's about having something vs. nothing. That it's also very effective in some roles is secondary.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2023 19:47
|
|
|
Chalks posted:Some of these duds may be incapable of detonating, and they're certainly not designed to detonate when interacted with (although they very well could) They are extremely unstable and have been shown time and again to maim people. It doesn't help that they are brightly coloured so kids in Iraq and Afghanistan pick them up thinking they are toys.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2023 19:50
|
|
|
Chalks posted:It's not a terribly fair comparison, even though there are probably far more dud artillery rounds. Where a dud artillery shell will likely bury itself in a small and obvious crater, a dud cluster bomblet will likely be lying on the surface and are easily obscured. For infantry at least, I imagine you're far more likely to step on a cluster bomblet than a dud artillery shell without noticing it. This is correct, but the quote in the WaPo article (and I think what the poster was referring to) was Russian cluster munitions specifically. The other problem with cluster munitions is that they don't really look like traditional cone-shaped warheads and are much more likely to be confused with a toy by some kid 10-50 years down the line 
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2023 19:51
|
|
|
saratoga posted:I think the bigger factor is that they have it available to send, so really it's about having something vs. nothing. That it's also very effective in some roles is secondary. NYT seems to be reporting as much, or at least headlining as much --- don't feel like dealing with this login wall
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2023 19:52
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 14:39 |
|
|
Huggybear posted:Thumbs up to that. Curious if you can expand generally, what's your background for your extensive know-how? Former tank platoon leader and mechanized scout platoon leader. I've driven, fired, and commanded M1A1s (the "heavy" variant) in Korea, M1A2s in garrison in the States, and M3A2 (the cavalry version of the Bradley) in Iraq. I've also studied tactics, operations, military history, and military systems (mostly ground systems) since the mid-80s. I understand tactical logistics (convoys, logpacs, etc.), but operational logistics are a bit hand-wavey for me. Formal education is computer science, so pretty unlikely that any of the analytics shops would even glance at my resume, but I can generally read and understand their reports with good contextual understanding.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2023 19:56
|
|