RBS-70NG
Images are sometimes not shown due to bandwidth/network limitations. Refreshing the page usually helps.
You are currently reading a thread in /k/ - Weapons
You are currently reading a thread in /k/ - Weapons
>deployable in 30 second flat
>has integrated night sight
>has effective range of 8km
>UNJAMMABLE, immune to any countermeasures
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uGqAcYyy4cM
Is this the perfect air defence missile?
>>30558967
>UNJAMMABLE, immune to any countermeasures
Yeah, no. That's the shitty marketing spiel for companies using beam-riding missiles with a man in the loop instead of fire and forget.
>>30559031
It's not a lie tho.
>>30559050
It is tho.
This is updated 1970s technology. It died out because there's a really easy way to jam it - look back in a straight line and spray the launcher with bullets because they can't take cover.
It's making a brief comeback because modern computers are basically free, so why not update second-tier gear?
>>30559050
Here's another counter, break line of sight.
No laser on the plane means no guidance.
Not op but I just thought of a way to make this thing more unjammable
>1. Launch switchblade like drone with a laser on it
>2. Drone lases plane
>3. Missile launches
>4. No los needed
Find a flaw
>>30559078
> look back in a straight line and spray the launcher with bullets because they can't take cover.
Because helicopter crews and low flying jets are renowned for being able to fire "bullets" against a concealed, likely protected position, 8km away, in the mere seconds it takes for the missile to fire and reach them, and thats not counting the delay on even noticing the threat in the first place.
Don't be a fucking idiot.
>>30559353
Money
>>30559413
You're even more historically ignorant than I thought. This system started with ATGMs; and yes, advanced DIRCM will automatically detect and may be able to jam the tracking camera for the targeting laser.
>>30558967
>deployable in 30 second flat
>has integrated night sight
>has effective range of 8km
>UNJAMMABLE, immune to any countermeasure
Strange. It reads like one of those horrible "NATO FEARS THIS!"-posts made by Russian fanboys, but its a Swedish weapon. Never seen that before
>>30559413
just break line of sight you fucking mong. slam down to near ground level and floor it.
>>30559078
Its an improvement on probably the cheapest and most common MANPADS on the market. And of course they are updating it, it was built to be modular to begin with.
>>30559482
So avoid it is your suggestion as to why it is bad.
Fucking idiot...
>>30559491
>most common MANPADS on the market
That's either Stinger or Igla. RBS-70 is in use by a good number of nations but none of them bought that many. The US and USSR still have cold war stocks of stingers and Iglas they can dump.
>>30559546
>being in an aircraft flying through the air
>have laser placed on you and get aa missile on your ass
>use terrain to your advantage, go low and as fast as possible to avoid the missile
Fotze.
>>30559353
Jam the drone?
>>30559589
>being in an aircraft flying through the air
>have laser placed on you and get aa missile on your ass
>use terrain to your advantage, stay high, and turn to burn out its energy stores
MANPADs are meme weapons. I can't wait until aerial active defenses finally crush their dreams.
>>30559606
Shoot the drone and the missile and the launching gunners with a 150kw laser automatically targeted through EODAS or Gorgon Stare II?
>>30558967
>UNJAMMABLE, immune to any countermeasures
Same level as someone trying to sell you a computer network that is "unhackable" and immune to security threats.
Its a blatant and total lie.
>>30559643
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bz85WpSB6JM
>>30558967
>only works in clear weather, smallest of clouds will jam it
>modern aircraft have laser warning systems, so the missile will never come as a surprise
>hard to track maneuvering target manually
>>30558967
>unjammable
It absolutely is. The whole thing is propaganda for sales.
>>30559745
How?
Seems like /k/ has found a way to shoot down lasers
>>30559772
Beam riding is not new technology, it's old technology, countered by things like IR smoke and clouds FFS.
>>30559802
So you will jam the system by using clouds? Or using the plentiful IR smoke launchers on aircraft? Neither of which would constitute jamming the missile however, and just because technology is old, it isn't automatically bad.
FFS.
>>30559853
> Or using the plentiful IR smoke launchers on aircraft? Neither of which would constitute jamming the missile however,
Jam the system, jam the missile, this is all trying to achieve the same goal.
>>30559900
What are you talking about? They make the claim that the missile can't be jammed, which is true, and you're throwing goalposts all over the place.
>>30559955
The claim is about the system; and its not just "unjammable", actually IMMUNE to countermeasures.
Which isn't true. LBRSC is capable of jamming beam riding missiles, and the system relies on automatic tracking if I'm not mistaken, which would be open to regular IR countermeasures like flares and DIRCM.
>>30559955
Incorrect. The advertisement simply claims that the product is unjammable, without explicitly referring to a specific part of the system.
>>30559990
Again, what LBRSC means is a)detecting the guidance laser and b) firing a strobe light in the direction of the manpads, hopefully blinding the operator for long enough for him to miss.
Does it even have any operators? At all? It isn't jamming either, but whatever.
>>30559589
>I have magical god sight to be able to recognise, determine location, judge surrounding terrain, adjust flight direction, and successfully gauge impact time then actually execute all this in the mere five seconds it takes for some modern missiles of this type from launch to intercept (and thats at its maximum range).
Yeah, no.
All the people saying "Oh I'd just to this" are completely forgetting how little time you actually have to react against these fucking things. RBS70 is only mach 2, so it's not QUITE as bad, but some of the others like Starstreak travel at more than Mach 4.
If you don't think that's one fucking massive threat with a tiny reaction window, then you're fucking insane.
I'm sure we have something far superior
Sincerely,
Great Britian
>>30560228
Just the thought that a pilot in a low-flying helicopter or logistical aircraft will be able to detect, react, analyse and finally move out of los in under 5 seconds is silly.
>>30559802
>an aircraft
>shit moves at hundreds, if not thousands of km per second
>hurr let's pop smoke
there's no such thing as immune to countermeasures
at the very most it can avoid current ones
>>30560393
It doesn't say immune to countermeasures. It says immune to jamming, which it is. But hey, why trust some random anon, when you can trust the DoD?
>Laser Beamrider weapons are extremely difficult to countermeasure since the missile data acquisition sensors face away from the attacked target, making it impossible to disrupt from the target angle.
>>30559955
it claims their anti-air missile system is immune to countermeasures
>>30558967
hey guys, can't we all just agree on one thing?
It looks like it's fun as fuck to shoot.
>>30559413
Lol, fly towards the missile? Great.
>>30560342
Hundreds of km per second? Fuck.
>>30560425
>It doesn't say immune to countermeasures
OP's imagine you cretin
>>30558967
Not fire and forget, not point and shoot, and doesn't even have the stressball- total disgrace - saab!
>>30558967
It's like a TOW missile, but against aircraft.
Sounds like a fucking horrible idea.
>>30560425
>missile data acquisition sensors
The system's camera, OTOH, has to face the target to guide the missile, and unlike the missile, it's both stationary and usually attended by human operators.
A modern IIR missile is more reliable. Inb4 "(antique) IR is jammed by DIRCM/flares" from the people who can't into floating notch filters.
>>30558967
swedbros without splinter?
how
all that kinect shit and we are still not able to make a missile that can track its target by its shape.
>yep, that's a plane
>those sparky things aren't a plane, you can't fool me plane, you still gonna get it
>>30560801
This. SACLOS on a MANPADS is some kind of bad joke.
>>30561739
>all that kinect shit and we are still not able to make a missile that can track its target by its shape.
Lots of missiles can do exactly that
>>30560801
Seriously though. It's just a trumped up way to get the Navy back into the fight on a personal level instead of button pushing, prayer and computer reliance.
>>30561739
The rbs 70 has automatic tracking though. Literally anyone can use it with very little training, there isn't a whole lot of skill involved.
>>30560803
That isn't necessarily a drawback though. You've stated things that are correct but failed to make an analysis or conclusion from it.
>>30563499
The drawback is it's shit against peer forces because it offers no benefits, while creating major drawbacks such as "laser beam pointing at your position" and "having to stay at your position or missing."
it's fine for forces that don't plan on any major fights and/or don't care about their troops' lives, or forces that combine the two (e.g. no wars, but plan for freak Russian invasion killing every1) such as all of Europe.
>>30561739
>we are still not able to make a missile that can track its target by its shape.
Imaging IR has been around for at least a decade if not longer, friendo. At this point, everything with an IR head except antique Russian surplus can be assumed to use it.
>>30563458
The irony of course being that it means its just a system that moves the IR seeker from the missile to the launcher, transferring all the limitations and vulnerabilities with it.
The beam-riding part is just adding another step. It IS jammable, but why bother? You'll still spoof the launcher (and thereby the missile) through anything that would defeat an AIM-9.
>>30563636
>its just a system that moves the IR seeker from the missile to the launcher, transferring all the limitations and vulnerabilities with it.
That's the benefit! Poorfags can't afford a seeker for every missile, so they need a Rube-Goldberg'd way to make their weapons cheaper.
>Perfect air defence missile
>SACLOS, not F&F
>8km range
>Requires at least 2 men
It's 2016. There's no need to fly right into MANPADs.
>>30558967
Why can't countries create a counter missile threat which would consist of cables spinnining in front or towards A General direction... Cutting guiding wire or fins and stabilization... I'm not a scientist mate... What's the reality of such a device ability?
>>30563754
High-explosive active protection systems launched from a flare dispenser are more effective.
>>30563754
>>30558967
>SACLOS
JUST
>>30559643
You do not understand what Gorgon Stare is.
>>30561739
I know at least ASRAAM, AIM-9X, Python, Stinger F, and IRIS-T can do exactly that.
Those missile have an imaging IR seeker, which means instead of seeing a heat source, they see an IR picture and their on-board computers have image recognition software that can tell the difference between flares and the plane.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6YMSfg26YSQ
In this video, @ 0:45, there's a little black and white camera in the upper left hand side. That's actually what the missile sees through it's seeker, and it's definitely clear enough to make out what's the plane and what's a flare.
