Jump to content


Photo

Germany Wants Agm-88E's


  • Please log in to reply
25 replies to this topic

#21 BansheeOne

BansheeOne

    Bullshit filter overload, venting into civility charger

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 14,956 posts

Posted 09 February 2020 - 1250 PM

See post #3.
  • 0

#22 DB

DB

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 11,714 posts

Posted 11 February 2020 - 1031 AM

I think that the RAF doesn't seem to care for a dedicated ARM in the inventory. I wonder if OA after Bosnia came to some conclusions related to anecdotes that Bojan had provided about relatively poor effectiveness against an intelligent opponent.

I think I've mentioned before that the emphasis seems to be on emitter location by the launching platform or other assets, followed up by generic guided weapons for effect.
  • 0

#23 bojan

bojan

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 12,337 posts

Posted 11 February 2020 - 1040 AM

Ironic, considering that British were way ahead of game with ALARM which was considered way more dangerous then HARM*, both due the mode of operation and the fact that it covered some of the frequencies that HARM did not.

 

*Thing is, that is a perception. But since whole thing is incredibly badly covered in the serious literature, only exception being RAND's "NATO's Air War for Kosovo", (and it covers only US participation) it hard to correlate to gain anything close to truth. In fact none has came even with claims of ALARM effectiveness...


Edited by bojan, 11 February 2020 - 1045 AM.

  • 0

#24 DB

DB

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 11,714 posts

Posted 11 February 2020 - 1151 AM

It's speculation on my part, of course.

It's also possible that ALARM was "capability gapped" at the MLU point to save money. Sea Eagle went the same way, I think.
  • 0

#25 bojan

bojan

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 12,337 posts

Posted 11 February 2020 - 1206 PM

Local experience was that most dangerous was visual observation (well, assumed to be visual visual observation since radars were not emitting and radio silence was observed) followed by guided weapons strike. Heaviest loses were inflicted that way.


Edited by bojan, 11 February 2020 - 1209 PM.

  • 0

#26 Chris Werb

Chris Werb

    In Zod We Trust

  • Staff
  • PipPip
  • 11,181 posts

Posted 11 February 2020 - 1306 PM

My guess is ALARM was capability gapped for a few reasons.

 

At the time, it didn't look like we would be getting into a peer-peer conflict for some time, by which time SPEAR Capability 3 would enter service. SPEAR offers a better and more versatile capability against a much wider range of fixed, semi mobile and mobile targets on land and sea and offers the ability to mount multi axis time on target saturation attacks. We had already discovered that trying to penetrate an even moderately effective modern IADS to attack targets directly was becoming suicidal, particularly in an increasingly risk averse world. Instead we would most often hit targets within the IADS from outside using Storm Shadow and Tomahawk. On the subject of risk aversion, SPEAR Capability 3 and Storm Shadow both have modes where they fly to a safe point and crash if they don't acquire targets, whereas ALARM would land randomly and either explode or cause a UXO hazard. Now, better still, it would appear there is an anti radiation (jamming) capable version of SPEAR 3 in the pipeline.  


  • 0