US Army AAA in T2K

[Panther Al]

I'm personally mystified by the decision to withdraw the Linebacker. I'd love to hear the thinking at the top on that decision. It seems like the perfect vehicle for its mission, since it's almost entirely a Bradley except for its mission fit and fits in perfectly with a mechanized or armored division.

Indeed, they went with us (3d ACR) for the invasion/OIF1 and they made a very effective regimental fire brigade/reserve manpower pool that the regiment was able to flex where-ever and however when needed. True, not much need for the stingers, but the 25mm was still able to shoot stuff up just fine.

The Avenger on the other hand... What good can be said of it other than it exists so the Army can claim they have an AA platform. At 40k a missile, and assuming only 1 miss out of the 8, its a hell of lot more expensive than say, a 40mm cannon would be for the same level of effectiveness. Sure, it can be said that the stinger can reach out farther than a gun, but outside of the open desert, or down into mountain valleys from ridge line firing positions, not going to be much chance for that, for I think most shots will be hip shots at a threat that pops out of (relatively) nowhere. So, give a SPAAG platform a good gun system: 30mm, 40mm, 25Gat, 30Gat (Ohh... GAU8 anyone) or whatever and tack on a brace of missiles for when you do have those money shots presented to you.

*edit*

More I think about it, the more I like the idea of mounting (if possible, I don't know for sure) a goalkeeper system on a tank chassis, add in a four cell stinger box, do a little tweaking to the programing for a logic circuit to decide if its a missile engagement or gun for effectiveness, and you get something that *I* don't want to get in the same zipcode with.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

Seems the Pentagon ponies should ask some of the British veterans of the Falklands War.
Ask them how they learnt to operate Argentinian AA guns they'd captured so they could fire back at the aircraft strafing them.

[Tegyrius]

More I think about it, the more I like the idea of mounting (if possible, I don't know for sure) a goalkeeper system on a tank chassis, add in a four cell stinger box, do a little tweaking to the programing for a logic circuit to decide if its a missile engagement or gun for effectiveness, and you get something that *I* don't want to get in the same zipcode with.

Funny you should say that. As soon as this thread started up, I was thinking about other hypothetical stopgap AAA systems from the 1996-1998 period and immediately turned to a Phalanx bolted to a Bradley or Abrams chassis.

- C.

[Abbott Shaull]

Indeed, they went with us (3d ACR) for the invasion/OIF1 and they made a very effective regimental fire brigade/reserve manpower pool that the regiment was able to flex where-ever and however when needed. True, not much need for the stingers, but the 25mm was still able to shoot stuff up just fine.

The Avenger on the other hand... What good can be said of it other than it exists so the Army can claim they have an AA platform. At 40k a missile, and assuming only 1 miss out of the 8, its a hell of lot more expensive than say, a 40mm cannon would be for the same level of effectiveness. Sure, it can be said that the stinger can reach out farther than a gun, but outside of the open desert, or down into mountain valleys from ridge line firing positions, not going to be much chance for that, for I think most shots will be hip shots at a threat that pops out of (relatively) nowhere. So, give a SPAAG platform a good gun system: 30mm, 40mm, 25Gat, 30Gat (Ohh... GAU8 anyone) or whatever and tack on a brace of missiles for when you do have those money shots presented to you.

*edit*

More I think about it, the more I like the idea of mounting (if possible, I don't know for sure) a goalkeeper system on a tank chassis, add in a four cell stinger box, do a little tweaking to the programing for a logic circuit to decide if its a missile engagement or gun for effectiveness, and you get something that *I* don't want to get in the same zipcode with.

Interesting set up.

[Abbott Shaull]

Yeah that is one of the down falls. I think for most part, US Troops haven't come under constant enemy aircraft since Korea. Yeah, ask the veterans who have been under fire and it doesn't take an genius to figure out after 6 weeks of constant bombing, why so many of the Iraqi Army just gave up in 1991.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

I think part of the problem is that the USAF assures the Pentagon that it is more effective at getting the job done than putting troops on the ground is. They point to their success in Gulf War 1 & 2 conveniently forgetting that they didn't face a foe on the same level as Korea, Europe or the Pacific in the 1950s & 1940s respectively. They assume that they will always have air superiority.

They overlook the fact that the Russians have fielded the ZSU-23-4 for decades and partially replace/supplemented it with the 9K22 Tunguska and then gone further and supplemented/replaced the Tunguska with the Pantsir S1 because they (the Russians) aren't assuming they'll always have air superiority.

The Tunguska is in service with a handful of countries outside Russia (Belarus, the Ukraine, India and Morocco) but the Pantsir is in service with Syria who apparently sold approximately ten units to Iran.

[Legbreaker]

And of course ten units don't make an air defence network...

[Panther Al]

Funny you should say that. As soon as this thread started up, I was thinking about other hypothetical stopgap AAA systems from the 1996-1998 period and immediately turned to a Phalanx bolted to a Bradley or Abrams chassis.

- C.

No doubt that the thought would have hit: We are from what I read doing just that with the 20mm Phalanx mounted on a Himmit in Iraq for inbound artillery/mortar/rocket interception. That could use some fact checking, but if thats the case... I could *very* easily see it happening in the TW as ships become laid up due to parts/fuel.

The Goalkeeper is a similar setup using the GAU-8 gatling off of the A10. According to NAH, you are looking at a range of 450, with a ROF of 135 and a pen of 18/12/5. Not too shabby. With Ammo, just over 1800kg. So... I can see it happening.

[Tegyrius]

No doubt that the thought would have hit: We are from what I read doing just that with the 20mm Phalanx mounted on a Himmit in Iraq for inbound artillery/mortar/rocket interception. That could use some fact checking, but if thats the case... I could *very* easily see it happening in the TW as ships become laid up due to parts/fuel.

Yup. I believe the system you're thinking of is Centurion C-RAM. It's what got me thinking about a Phalanx Bradley. I wasn't sure of that proposal's plausibility for AAA, though, because one of the ostensible goals behind DIVAD was to produce a gun with longer effective range than the 20mm. On the other hand, it has some story potential as a stopgap solution thrown together in my hometown...

The Goalkeeper is a similar setup using the GAU-8 gatling off of the A10. According to NAH, you are looking at a range of 450, with a ROF of 135 and a pen of 18/12/5. Not too shabby. With Ammo, just over 1800kg. So... I can see it happening.

I'm a long-time Warthog fan and, having looked at the GAU-8, I've always considered Goalkeeper mildly terrifying (you want to put a what on a ship). The suggestion of putting it on an MBT chassis is awe-inspiring in a truly disturbing way, and that'd certainly solve the range problem.

- C.

[Panther Al]

And of course ten units don't make an air defence network...

Well, thats the thing:

NATO on the whole doesn't go for networked defense. Thats a Russian thing.

Russians (Or Soviets to be accurate) came up with the whole, for a lack of a better term, Zone Defense strategy using a broad spectrum of guns and missiles of various capabilities, each of which supported the other with the mission of making the air above the battlespace a no fly zone, even for themselves, as they clearly stated that it was impossible for air defense to do a adequate job of preventing friendly fire. As to how well it works, ask the Israeli's, there is a reason that they don't have very many aircraft that predate 1973. And that was a Arab manned Soviet Air Defense Net (Again, I'll grant that there was more than a few "advisors" present). One guy I know whose job was to simulate russian air defense nets in a opfor role for the airforce likened it to a arial no-mans land mentality from the first world war. He was somewhat known for the nastiness he could achieve with the lowly SA2 - everyone he said always looked out for the newer, better, stuff. Spent all the time countering it: By the time they did so, the telephone poles have snuck through is how he put it - Too stupid and primitive to be vulnerable to current ECM.

We never felt much need for the same: NATO Air Forces was assumed to have total domination of the air, at worst, the soviets might achieve local air neutrality. Because of this, the doctrine was for Point Air Defense, where a handful of vehicles, sent to the most vulnerable point.

[Panther Al]

Just for S's and G's sake

In the timeline I use, the Twilight War kicks off in 2016, hence TW2020. This thinking and chat has inspired me, so I bring you the first draft of the M73 Eaton SPAAG.


M73 Eaton SPAAG

Developed in 2014 by the US Army, this vehicle was introduced for three main reasons: One, it was determined that a dedicated gun based air defense system was needed; Second, that any system adopted had to use off the shelf equipment as much as possible. The Eaton achieved that by using up surplus M1 hulls released by the drawdown in armored forces, and by using the gun system off of the recently retired Air Force A10 Thunderbolts. With the addition of the already developed Goalkeeper fire control system, and the incorporation of a four-cell slammer launch module, this was accomplished. The finished product served admirably, it was well liked by the crews who felt that not only was the missile system good at its job, the gun itself allowed them to project a no fly bubble in excess of its actual capabilities due to the legend of the GAU-8. When the Twilight War began, these expectations were met in spades, causing the US to start production of new systems, although few were actually built before the TDM. The reputed third reason, though never officially acknowledged by anyone, was that the adaptation and naming of the system after the then currently sitting President (A former Sergeant in the 3d ACR) was in order to shut him up and get his nose out of meddling with the way the Army was doing things oe especially after his direct meddling with the make up of the reestablished 1st, 2nd, and 3rd ACR"s.



Stats:

Same as M1A2 except as following:

Armament 4 AIM120 Slammers, GAU-8 30mm Gatling, M240 ( C ).
Ammo: 4 AIM120, 1178rd 30mm, 800 7.62
Price: 550,000
Veh Wt: 52 Tonnes
Crew 3
MNT 14
Fuel Cons 520
TF 40, TS 20, TR 12.


Flame away!

[pmulcahy11b]

Sounds good -- keep the capacious ammunition stowage for the 30mm rounds. However, I thought the AIM-120 was called the Rattler and not the Slammer. Although...SLAMRAAM -- Slammer -- makes sense for the ground-launched version.

[Panther Al]

I've no idea what the ground launched version of the AMRAAM is called, so Slammer it is. I decided on 1178 as the fluff says the system was ripped out of retired A10's, so for cost savings they just used the same drum. I personally would have more, but, fluff won out here.

[pmulcahy11b]

I've no idea what the ground launched version of the AMRAAM is called, so Slammer it is. I decided on 1178 as the fluff says the system was ripped out of retired A10's, so for cost savings they just used the same drum. I personally would have more, but, fluff won out here.

They're called the SLAMRAAM (Surfaced-Launched AMRAAM), so Slammer for the SAM version sounds good. Can anybody on the boards draw good enough to make a sketch

Would the Goalkeeper's radar be modified to be able to track land-based surface targets

[Panther Al]

Dunno. I would say no though. But thats a easy fix, repurpose the existing FC system, and bobs your uncle, since its all software based these days.

As to art, Not I. I wish I could though as I think this vehicle is about to make its appearance in the game I've got sorta going. But will it be in the hands of the good guys or bad guys... muahahaha

*edit*

While you could drop in the Goalkeeper turret, its not as big as I thought it turns out, just tall, I am thinking more along the lines of a fairly boxy, but lower profile turret, more along the lines of Gun on Centre line, the round dish (I think its tracking) radar to the left, the Slammers to the right, and the search radar mounted on the back topside of the turret - perhaps on a mast