SPAAS Thread

[GTX]

Over in the M1 thread, MAD suggested the following:

Maybe we should start a new 'thread/post' on how you would design a SPAAG/SPSAM or combination?

Well here it is - the Self Propelled AA System (Gun or Missile or both) thread.

Here's a few ideas to start things off:

• A Chieftain hull with a Rapier Missile system instead of standard turret;
• A Chieftain hull with twin 40mm Bofors cannon instead of standard 120mm gun; or
• A Chieftain hull with a Bloodhound SAM system instead of standard turret.

Regards,

Greg

[Weaver]

Marconi Marksman (2 x 35mm Oerlikon) on a Chieftain chassis. The radar looks like an adaption of one of their naval Sea Cobra sets, which makes sense, since they were marketing those fitted to the top of OtoBreda twin 30mm Mauser turrets.



Source: http://kr.blog.yahoo.com/shinecommerce/14405.html?p=1&t=3

According to that, the Finns actually bought some, fitting them to T-55 chassis.

[pyro-manic]

Goalkeeper turret mounted on a Chieftain/Challenger/Leopard chassis? That could look rather cool. Maybe with a box launcher for CAAM/Stinger/Starstreak or something on the side...?

[Maverick]

Amongst my armour profiles (yet to be loaded into the Gallery), I've done some SPAAS based on Cents & Challengers, using a Gepard turret as a base wth gun-only, SAM-only and combo systems.

But as MAD did say, the Russkies have already done it with Tunguska.

Regards,

Mav

[Weaver]

Goalkeeper turret mounted on a Chieftain/Challenger/Leopard chassis? That could look rather cool. Maybe with a box launcher for CAAM/Stinger/Starstreak or something on the side...?

In the mid-'80s, the French Navy tested two variants of the Goalkeeper with French electronics and three or four Mistrals side-by-side on top of the gun "cage". They worked perfectly well, but they decided that they didn't like guns full stop and went for all-Mistral solutions.

Speaking of the French, ever seen a Javelot? Early '80s SPAAR (Self Propelled Anti-Aircraft Rocket Launcher): typical SPAAG turret with radar on an AMX-30 chassis, but the weapon was a central box full of long, closed-breech tubes, each loaded with multiple high-velocity rockets (think the calibre was 57mm, but I'm not sure). The idea was to fill a box of sky bigger than the error margin of the radar with sufficient density of warheads to ensure a hit. There was a naval version, which looked very different called Catulle, too. The whole thing was dropped for reasons I don't know.

[Burncycle]

What about a land based RAM launcher?

[Thorvic]

Chieftan Marksman

http://www.boltonipms.co.uk/Reference/Tracks_Real_Thing/Chieftain_Marksman.html

[Jeffry Fontaine]

What about a land based RAM launcher?

It would have to be dragged around on a tractor trailer rig due to the amount of equipment needed to make it work.  A similar proposal was made to mount the Vulcan CIWS on a 10 ton HEMTT truck for defending Patriot SAM sites from incoming missiles.  I recall seeing an image of a CIWS actually mounted on a flat bed trailer and it looked quite impressive.  The proposal neglected to provide any additional information on what other equipment would be necessary to operate the CIWS as a ground based system.  Since the ship board CIWS is much more than the R2D2 unit that you see mounted on the deck, there are many other components to the system that take up more space below decks and out of sight.  While it did look good on paper it would have been a Gypsy caravan in real life. 

The RAM system would be faced with a similar problem since it relies on other ship board sensors to cue it to the target prior to launch.  I think a better solution would be to adapt the RAM missile to the Avenger and Linebacker air defense systems where it would replace the current Stinger missile in the launch tubes contained in the four round launcher boxes. 

[GTX]

there is a land based Phalanx, though it's not really self propelled - the U.S. Army's version of the Navy's CIWS Phalanx anti-missile system is called the C-RAM, part of the US Army's Counter-Rocket, Artillery, Mortar initiative. The land-based Phalanx was deployed in Iraq in the summer of 2005.



Regards,

Greg

[Mossie]

A Chieftain hull with a Bloodhound SAM system instead of standard turret.

I've thought about this myself Greg.  The Bloodhound Mk.IV was to be a mobile version based on Swedish experience with the missile, but Iv'e never found any information as to exactly what form it would have taken.  Wether it was a version that could simply have been towed behind a truck (like the EE Thunderbird before it) & deployed anywhere, or wether it would have been mounted on a tank chasis I have no idea.  My idea was for two Bloodhounds mounted on a Centurion or Chieftain chassis, similar to the SA-4 Ganef.

A Chieftain hull with a Rapier Missile system instead of standard turret

There is a tracked version of Rapier, on a lighter chassis than a Chieftain.  I guess you could mount it on a tank chassis if you wanted to carry more rounds or a beefier radar system, but Tracked Rapier is more mobile & can fit in the back of a Herc.

[Mossie]

More ideas:

This is the Falcon, a AA system based on the Abbot SPG chassis.  It never went into production, one of the reasons being it was difficult to house sufficient ammo within the hull.  Maybe a light SPAAG could be effective with a little more consideration?


This was a tank from the Transformers movie, which had a secondary turret that appears to be AA armament.  It's fantasy & probably impractical, but would be a way of providing self AA protection for heavy armour & possibly giving MBT's a dual role.


The Humber Pig was an armoured truck & light APC designed to protect the troops inside effectively, a lesson that was forgotten & that has lead to the rushing in of types like the Mastiff & BAE RG33 (albeit much larger than the Pig).  I guess it's a matter of time before someone mounts a missile or gun system on one of these large vehicles, much like the Malkara system on the Humber Hornet variant of the Pig?

[Maverick]

Simon,

I think the idea of a light SPAAG has merit, as more systems could be fielded from a monetary pov and the system would be a lot easier to deploy.  Perhaps something based on Warrior would be a good start, much like Vulcan got put on the M113.  Of course, you'd add missiles, perhaps like the Blazer turret of the LAV-AD.  The system would be a SHORAD though, whilst heavier guns & larger missiles would be appropriate for a DIVADS.  Whether this is able to be mounted on Warrior is an unknown I guess, although the Soviets were able to field DIVADS type systems on lighter chassis.

I don't think the idea of a dual role MBT/SPAAS is feasible in complete honesty.  The two roles are quite worlds apart from deployment, concept and design.  Whilst SPAAS are supposed to be capable of keeping up with MBTs, no-one would ever expect a SPAAS to be able to survive in a MBT type environment.  To give a vehicle enough survivability to perform in this environment would impact quite heavily upon it's capabilty of being an effective ADV.  One hit on the battlefield that could be shrugged off by a normal MBT would be enough to either take out the vehicle's radar or air-defence systems.

I think, however, that SPAAS should have a secondary role in ground combat, much like the Duster in Vietnam.  If there's an air-threat, it does its job, if there isn't, it has the capability to nail softskins or personnel.

Regards,

Mav

[Weaver]

One argument for putting SPAAS on tank chassis is simply logistics: if they're operating as part of a tank unit most of the time, then they share part of the tanks' maintenance/supply chain instead of having their own. Another argument is that a tank chassis is more able to absorb the recoil stress of powerful automatic weapons, so something like a Gepard doesn't have to deploy stabilising jacks before firing like smaller systems do.

[Maverick]

Weaver,

I totally agree with you on the heavier systems, after all, look at what happened to the Stryker MGS 

That said, SHORAD is ably suited for lighter platforms, that should still be fairly capable of maintaining position within an armoured unit and obviously at some point, they'd fall behind whether they were MBT or otherwise based once the formation happened upon on conventional tank battle (is there such a thing anymore??).  I still can't see MBT based systems being capable of remaining organically within an armoured formation throughout the entire scope of the unit's activities.  In convoy, bivouac or rear area patrols, sure, but at the front-line?

Regards,

Mav

[ysi_maniac]

Currently I am working in a new concept (inception phase):

1 Abrams hull.
2 Scratch built turret: inspired in GM's entry for DIVAD, eqipped with 75 mm gun (ARES or OTO's 76 mm) to deal with distant targets (helos or planes) and a Gatling gun (12.7 or 20 mm) to deal with close targets, mainly missiles.

Ideas?