gatnerd

Military Guns and Ammunition

Hosted by gatnerd

This is intended for people interested in the subject of military guns and their ammunition, with emphasis on automatic weapons.

  • 3333
    MEMBERS
  • 189410
    MESSAGES
  • 12
    POSTS TODAY

Discussions

Ukraine weapons thread   General Military Discussion

Started 24-Feb by gatnerd; 119449 views.
In reply toRe: msg 475
gatnerd

From: gatnerd

23-Apr

UA sniper at work; AR10 with a pretty serious scope:

schnuersi

From: schnuersi

23-Apr

BruhMomento said:

looks goofy af

I agree. A pick up truck especially one with a vintage look would be more fitting.

schnuersi

From: schnuersi

23-Apr

autogun said:

A pertinent question, judging by the experience of other navies equipped with advanced CIWS.

I have ready somewhere else that the radar/one radar (my knowledge of this system is very limited) for the S300 system is in the stowed position on the pictures after the hit. Which suggests the system was not online at the time of the attack. Unless of course the crew bothered to retract it after the ship was hit. Which seems unlikely.

My might be onto something. An awefull lot of ships hit by or lost to ASMs seem to not have their CWIS systems switched on. Is this an SOP during peactime thing? Are these systems so unpredictable that they can't be left activated without endangering friendlies? Are naval commanders so concerned about their EM emmitions?

taschoene

From: taschoene

23-Apr

schnuersi said:

Is this an SOP during peactime thing? Are these systems so unpredictable that they can't be left activated without endangering friendlies? Are naval commanders so concerned about their EM emmitions?

Yes, absolutely.  CIWS never goes into AUTO unless you're on a range or have confirmed missiles inbound.  (and confirmed can be hard, hence Stark's f'up in the Gulf.)

Yes.  See, for example, USS Jarrett in the first US-IRaq War.  They were in company with USS Missouri during a missile attack.  Their CIWS was in auto and it accidentally engaged a chaff cloud from Missouri and put four rounds into the other ship from a range of 5km.  

Yes, sometimes.  Probably not in Moskva's case, though,  It sounds like they were busy with another problem (the TB-2 drone) and the might not have seen the Neptune attack coming at all.

renatohm

From: renatohm

23-Apr

If it works it ain't stupid

In reply toRe: msg 482
gatnerd

From: gatnerd

23-Apr

Excellent history and analysis of the war so far, and where it is likely headed:

https://static.rusi.org/special-report-202204-operation-z-web.pdf

There are a number of interesting technical details on weapons, making it relevant to this thread as well as general knowledge.

One interesting point is the number of western components in Russias PGM's; with sanctions in place replacing these components in the supply chain, or smuggling them into russia covertly, will become key to any resupply of these munitions for Russia.

In regards to ATGMS, these were credited as being highly effective, but Artillery was still cited as the primary killer:

In regards to RU equipment; 30mm cannons are cited numerous times in the article. 

In reply toRe: msg 483
gatnerd

From: gatnerd

23-Apr

Total US equipment sent:

Farmplinker

From: Farmplinker

23-Apr

Another factor, electric primers. My cousin told me when they needed to load a Phalanx, all radios and radars were shut off; they could detonate primers if radiating.

TOP