Home » Gadgets and Gear » Tough lesson: The dumber the threat, the harder it is to defeat

Tough lesson: The dumber the threat, the harder it is to defeat

by philewing on August 8, 2011

Last month, you read here about the prospects for a new laser countermeasure that defense contractor ITT hopes could protect Army helicopters from missiles. Long story short, here’s how it works: A sensor detects a launch, slews a laser onto the vector of the incoming missile, and then blinds the sensors in the weapon’s nosecone in mid-flight, all in seconds or less. Problem is, this system and others like it depend on bad guys using relatively “smart,” guided missiles that have sensors for your laser countermeasure to defeat. As Saturday’s horrific helicopter crash in Afghanistan showed, sometimes the bad guys aren’t that advanced.

Pentagon officials said Monday their best guess is the Army CH-47 Chinook went down after being struck by a simple, unguided rocket propelled grenade — in all likelihood, the ubiquitous, shoulder-fired RPG-7. The flight path of its warhead is determined by simple physics, not complicated electronics: You aim, pull the trigger, and its round flies until it runs out of fuel or hits something. DoD officials acknowledged it’s one of the toughest weapons to guard against, along with simple small arms. If a helicopter is moving slow and low enough, and you’re a good enough shot, you’ve got a chance of at least damaging it, even with an RPG or a rifle.

So what can be done? In an ideal situation, you don’t want to get shot at in the first place. In Iraq and Afghanistan, transport helicopters often operate with escorts from gunships — Marine Corps AH-1 Cobras or Army AH-64 Apaches — which arrive bristling with missiles and their main guns to make sure landing zones are safe before troops go in. But they’re not always available. So would it be possible to adapt a laser countermeasure against an unguided rocket? Theoretically, yes, but your laser would have to be powerful enough to destroy the threat, and that probably means you have to add a lot more weight to your aircraft and draw a lot more energy — if your sensors can spot and track an incoming RPG well enough. It’s a daunting challenge, but in the aftermath of Saturday’s crash, don’t be surprised if there’s a renewed interest in exactly such a system.

Share |

{ 90 comments… read them below or add one }

Mike August 8, 2011 at 4:58 pm

The IDF was working on an RPG countermeasure that would be mounted on armored vehicles. While I am unsure of the weight, I wonder if that could be a solution to these types of threats.

Reply

joe August 9, 2011 at 5:30 am

It's called Trophy. And yes, it's bloody heavy.
Probably feasible for a Chinook – if you're prepared to make some fuel/cargo/range sacrifices – but less so for anything smaller.

Reply

USSHelm August 8, 2011 at 5:01 pm

I wonder how the Taliban hit a moving helicopter with an RPG at night. Maybe the RPG had a infrared guidance system or maybe it was a MANPADS.

Reply

MRC August 8, 2011 at 6:37 pm

Or it was one of many RPGs fired in a spread, and the lucky shot found its mark.

this is all baseless speculation. without video or eyewitness reports, we won’t know specifically how this aircraft was downed.

as to putting all your eggs in one basket, there have been a proliferation of reports of the military complaining about a shortage of workable aircraft in the AFPAK theatre. the CH/MH-47 aircraft has been the mainstay there because of its ability to haul heavy loads at high altitudes.

**** happens, I for one am surprised it has happened so rarely.

Reply

Riceball August 9, 2011 at 2:24 pm

Like what MRC said, a variation of the old "golden BB" concept from Vietnam, where the VC would fire anything and everything they had at low flying aircraft, including whatever rifles they had, in the hope that one would get lucky and actually hit. Same deal here and same as they did in Somalia, just fire a bunch of RPGs in the air and hope to get lucky. Maybe not the most efficient means of trying to shoot down a helo but it obviously works and it's damned hard to counter, unfortunately.

Reply

brian August 9, 2011 at 8:41 pm

In Somalia, they understood our tactics and were tipped off to the impending raid by our "allies"

Reply

TMB August 9, 2011 at 9:36 pm

We didn't have any allies in Somalia except for a couple UN countries, and we didn't even tell them we were going out that day which is why it took all damned day to get reinforcements from them. The Somali militias learned our tactics and had spotters watching the airfield.

Reply

brian August 9, 2011 at 11:28 pm

Yup US special forces directly accused the Italians of signaling the spotters long before the us left base. You can watch the Frontline interview on this point and see for yourself. Those guys were pissed.

brian August 8, 2011 at 5:27 pm

Night vision googles, or maybe just BS. Who knows, the only way those insurgents could have been ready for an attack like this at night at a random target with relatively useless weapons was with advanced intel. We were sold out, and someone is going to have to pay for this murder.

Reply

Hunter78 August 8, 2011 at 6:19 pm

What murder? This was a genuine military strike. How about dropping a bomb on the wrong house killing women and children, or maybe on some allied Canadian soldiers?

Reply

brian August 9, 2011 at 3:56 pm

the Taliban are cold blooded pakistani invaders. They do not have the right to invade Afghanistan and kill their people or the US troops helping restore a civil society to it. Yes its murder even by convention. they don't wear uniforms, they use civilians as human shields, they represent no lawful government.

Reply

TMB August 8, 2011 at 8:40 pm

The RPG isn't useless. It has been in use mostly unchanged since the 1960s. Millions of them have been built and hundreds of thousands used in combat. We know NOTHING about what happened that night. For all we know they heard the helicopter, pointed 4 or 5 RPGs at the sound and got lucky. It's happened before without a conspiracy occurring.

Reply

brian August 9, 2011 at 3:52 pm

An RPG has an effective combat radius of about 200 meters during the day by a highly trained operator at a stationary target. Against a fast moving target traveling at least a 100 miles an hour in pitch at night, operated by the typical Taliban fighter at a random takeoff, effective range would be about 10 maybe 20 meters. They would have had to by luck of the draw stumbled upon the exact flight path of that helicopter at takeoff or landing.

However If "allied" forces had given the exact location of the landing to the Taliban, thats all they would have needed. They could have waited in ambush just like what happened in somali with black hawk down.

If you were to give me the 2 scenarios, I think the later is far more likely. To believe the former is absurd.

Reply

Hunter78 August 9, 2011 at 6:52 pm

RPG's in Afghan are commoner than ticks. This could simply have been a secured area where one of their paid soldiers got a good shot at our paid soldiers. If the Seals were attacking a high value target, it's likely that nearby terrain was controlled by the insurgents. Giving these these shooters vectors would probably be more confusing than helpful. A helicopter can always become suddenly detectable.

We don't have enough public knowledge to make a firm decision.

Reply

Brian August 9, 2011 at 8:39 pm

No one doubts there are lots of RPGs, but the probability of having one at the exact place and time to hit a chinook on a combat landing or takeoff in those operating conditions are so remotely small, it's like winning power ball several times in a row.

Joris Gadellaa August 9, 2011 at 2:20 pm

You don't have to be a genius to sord things out. As a taliban commander you know: A. when there is a fight nearby and you can pin the enemy down for long enough,
B. reinforcements will come,
C. most helicopters are trust/altitude limited and can only use certain routes or,
D. they send in a CH-47 that does has less weight (trust/altitude) limitations and,
E. when the Ch-47 flies in to the LZ it will be heard and from miles away, and
F. due to size and downwash cannot land everyware.
A good commander will do the math.

Reply

Tee Rye August 8, 2011 at 6:23 pm

What about active protection systems? You could do a low cost sense and defeat with a variety of kill mechanisms. Weight shouldn't be an issue on a CH-47 or even a Blackhawk.

Reply

SC578 August 8, 2011 at 8:03 pm

How, exactly?

Reply

Matt August 8, 2011 at 8:56 pm

Tee Rye: Same reason you can’t mount them on light skin vehicals. The frag from you own APS/remains of the RPG will hit you. I assume you mean systems like Trophey, Quick Kill, Iron Fist, etc.

Reply

Larry August 8, 2011 at 6:23 pm

The commanders over there should stop underestimating the enemy. That's a start. To load 30 of the most elite troops on the planet in large, slow moving helo and then landing/taking off in a hotzone is insanity. Plan and simple. Someone needs to be help responsible for this disaster. They obviously didn't learn from the last time this happened in almost the exact same circumstances and 15+ SEALs died.

Btw, what the hell were we using SEALs to rescue an infantry force? These guy are way to valuable to use in that situation. Send in more Rangers or Airborne.

Reply

jjasd August 9, 2011 at 3:32 am

didn't some Afghan official say the SEALs were lured by a fake tip off claiming there were high ranking Talibans having a meeting there?

Reply

Mister Rose August 9, 2011 at 10:48 am

The infantry force that was being rescued were Rangers.

Reply

Hunter78 August 9, 2011 at 7:06 pm

Too sensible!

Reply

traindodger August 8, 2011 at 7:44 pm

Weapons-grade lasers made with present-day technology are big, heavy and inefficient:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lU9SRVs5kV8

It takes several seconds for the Boeing Laser Avenger (an AN/TWQ-1 with a solid-state laser in place of one of the Stinger launchers) to burn through the casing of an 80mm mortar. At the ranges that helicopters are engaged from the ground with RPG fire, there is not enough time to react. While a laser can easily be steered onto a target in a short amount of time, it still takes a bit for the threat to be neutralized. A hard-kill APS system mounted to a helicopter would need to engage and destroy the incoming warhead in a fraction of a second.

An ideal hard-kill APS for a helicopter would be similar to Quick Kill, only side-launched instead of vertically-launched:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rgWywHPVzMg

There would be a small bulge in the fuselage to accommodate the peripheral radar and missile cells. The system would be capable of shooting down not only unguided rockets and MANPADS, but air-to-air missiles of both the close-range and BVR type.

Reply

Joe Schmoe August 8, 2011 at 9:00 pm

Except for one major problem.

Unlike in the movies, most SAM's aren't designed to hit the aircraft itself. Rather, it detonates several meters away sending a shotgun like blast at several times the speed of sound ripping through the aircraft. This is a completely different threat than the one tanks face.

Reply

Bead August 8, 2011 at 8:00 pm

RPG warheads are set to explode automatically at a certain range. With practice a gunner can get proficient at bringing down a helo with either an indirect explosive blast or direct fire targeting a weak spot.

Reply

Bob August 9, 2011 at 12:46 pm

Actually the base RPG warhead uses a simple crush cap to detonate. Its all impact driven.

Reply

blight August 9, 2011 at 2:10 pm

The Jane's summary regarding VP-7M fuze mentions "The main body of the fuze is made from Bakelite plastic, and incorporates a set-back igniter, a self-destruct unit and spring-loaded shutter containing a spark-gap detonator. "
http://articles.janes.com/articles/Janes-Explosiv

Reply

Stephen N Russell August 8, 2011 at 8:28 pm

Need that sensor type that detects rifleshot, applied to RPG, then use Laser to smash RPG alone.
Hear Noise, crack Laser to noise source.
Or armor up US copters??

Reply

phrogdriver August 8, 2011 at 9:30 pm

Helicopter "armor" is a misnomer. People are sometimes under the impression that certain helicopters (e.g. attack helos in particular) bounce bullets off. Other than some plating on pilot seats and critical flight control components, that's usually not the case. You can make them more survivable through redundant components, self-sealing fuel lines, etc, but you can't armor that much. Certainly not enough to cover the fuselage, but even just covering the engines and transmission is prohibitively heavy. Just think of an how much an LAV weighs to protect a small number of Marines against just rifle bullets, not even RPGs.

Reply

TLAM Strike August 9, 2011 at 1:08 am

Quite sure a small arms fire detector for helis has been written about in a previous Defense Tech article.

Anyways, real armor is impractical. Most armor on helis is Kevlar based, its the only thing light enough to be used other than Titanium. Titanium has its drawbacks, the Mi-24 uses Titanium armor and its so heavy that when the heli is fully loaded (troops and ammo) it can no longer take off vertically.

Reply

traindodger August 9, 2011 at 1:46 am

There have been some advances in materials science as of late that should make it easier to armor up helicopters while keeping them about the same weight. Stuff like nano-structured aluminum alloys and new carbon composites using graphene or nanotubes. That stuff's pretty expensive and difficult to produce in bulk right now, but mark my words; by the 2020s or 2030s, that stuff will be in everything.

Reply

joe August 9, 2011 at 5:33 am

True. But, not to put too fine a point on it, an RPG is designed to defeat battle steel plating on tanks.

Play all the tribology and materials science games you like, you will not put simple plate capable of deflecting it on anything that can fly.

Reply

blight August 9, 2011 at 2:41 pm

And it's easier to develop more powerful anti-tank shaped charges than it is to develop featherweight armor materials.

Reply

t.patriot August 10, 2011 at 1:05 am

Such a system would only be effective if the helo wasn't taken down by the first shot. Small arms fire is supersonic but, fortunately, are much less likely to get a one-shot kill on a helo. RPG's are subsonic by only about 15%. So, at a range of 200m, the computer is going to register the sound when the RPG is only 30 meters away. If the target is stationary, that is about 1/10th of a second before impact. If it is moving away from the RPG you can maybe double that to 2/10ths of a second.

Reply

SJE August 8, 2011 at 9:23 pm

Laser countermeasures could be used to target people targeting RPGs at you, blinding them, and can be coupled with directional microphones etc. This would not stop the first RPG, but would prevent the second RPG. This is relevant when multiple RPGs are fired.

Riskier, you could link the directional microphones with a minigun. That RPG you fired would be your last. Of course, there is a risk of civilian deaths, limiting use in certain situations.

Reply

Tom August 9, 2011 at 9:58 am

I believe at least one of the systems in competition for the new missile countermeasure system has proposed the ability to use the laser to 'dazzle' enemies using non-guided weapons. The tricky part about such a system would be how to detect the threat before it fired to put the laser in the righ spot to 'dazzle' the threat, I'm not sure it would be feasible to 'dazzle' anyone looking at the helicopter.

Reply

Oblat August 8, 2011 at 9:56 pm

The problem is that the Taliban are just smarter and tougher than our troops. Anyone who believes that you can win an insurgency by flying around in helicopters is going to lose. Tourists always lose.

Reply

William C. August 8, 2011 at 10:41 pm

Thank you Oblatski for proving everything I have ever said about you.

Reply

Andrew August 8, 2011 at 10:05 pm

Homefield advantage does not equate to smarter or tougher.

Reply

Jr Birman August 8, 2011 at 10:11 pm

I'm just speculating, but what would happen if you fired a thermobaric rpg warhead with a timed fuse above or below a helicopter? You wouldn't need to be that accurate, would you?

Reply

mpower6428 August 8, 2011 at 10:34 pm

for 30 years we've spend a zillion dollars on bombers that are too expensive to use, stealth fighters that dont work, tilt-rotor ospreys more dangerous to their operators then the enemy, FCS that is consistantly outpaced by the latest I-phone apps…. etc etc.

all we really needed was a family of simple, cheap but effective heavy lift helicopters.

Reply

SJE August 9, 2011 at 2:37 pm

We could also do better with CAS to protect the landing zone. Actually, if we had more CAS options, maybe it would not have been necessary to send in a seal team to rescue the earlier guys. We could retrofit turbo props with miniguns on turret mounts to provide cover fire. Cheap to make, cheap to fly, short take off and landing. Only risking 1 pilot and 1 gunner. Every base could have a handfull of these instead of having to call in the flying armored division that is a C130.

Reply

blight August 9, 2011 at 3:07 pm

Then the peril is shooting down these flying turboprops. Yes, you won't kill 30 DEVGRU, but attrition is attrition. And when enough wrecks of turboprop CAS aircraft fill a vehicle graveyard there will be negative press (like with the unarmored Humvees).

Reply

SJE August 9, 2011 at 3:37 pm

The turboprop would be flying several hundred feet up, shooting down. It is far more difficult for an RPG to hit that.

Yes, it could still be hit, and people would die. But people die on the ground too waiting for help. You could have a couple of these in action quickly, providing CAS, instead of having to wait for an AC130 gunship or an entire response force.

Hell, you could have planes doing light cargo delivery tto FOBs and ready to intervene for CAS when necessary.

Reply

blight August 9, 2011 at 3:19 pm

Though I'm kind of the opinion that more sustained orbit CAS would be nice. AC-130s were pulled off of Roberts Ridge and they might've made a difference. There are risks involved in daylight operations of AC-130s, as Spirit 03 demonstrated in GW1. However, a AC-130 has bigger teeth and self-defense capacity than a vulnerable MH-47 carrying DEVGRU operators.

Reply

OliSki August 8, 2011 at 10:47 pm

It would also be a good idea to invent cheap helium balloons that can be fired and tether themselves to the ground strategically. They would have off the shelf cheap cameras and infrared and even wireless tech that way these ballons become the eyes and ears in battle to prevent something like this from happening.

Reply

jamesb August 8, 2011 at 10:51 pm

s*#t happens…..

you can't stop EVERYTHING they throw at ya…..

Reply

howie October 2, 2011 at 10:32 am

they are "arm chair vets" who haven't gotten any further than their video games obvioulsy…

Reply

Maxtrue August 8, 2011 at 11:28 pm

http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2011/08/taliban-c

If it wasn't the cause, they are coming. I have serious questions regarding the persecution of this Afghanistan operation. Hundreds of manpads are in possession of those who fought us in Iraq and are now in Libya. Iran and China also involved in weapon trade to destabilize the ground situation for US forces, so nothing should be surprising.

Reply

Jay August 9, 2011 at 12:32 pm

Indeed, Iran has been supplying terrorists in Iraq with very nasty stuff including explosives and detonators, NVG, and small arms.

Also, lots of Kadafi's arsenal has been "liberated" and sold to Hizballah and Hamas. Who knows where that stuff will end up.

China probably sees the whole thing as a big opportunity to test their small arms against our forces and make some money too.

Reply

blight August 9, 2011 at 2:37 pm

Hezbollah is directly supplied by Iran. Why get leftovers from Gaddafi?

As for Hamas…?

Regarding China, we bought our RPGs for the Muj from China during the '80s.

Reply

STemplar August 9, 2011 at 4:25 am

How about launching a real offensive across the imaginary line in the mountains between Afghanistan and Pakistan and fighting a war, instead of sitting across the imaginary line while the Taliban go back and forth resting and refitting every year. If we don't want to fight a war, then maybe just come home.

Reply

sarcastic nerd August 9, 2011 at 4:53 am

Surround the helicopter by a swarm of robot mini-helos. When a rocket approaches, one of them will sacrifice itself by moving into the rocket's path.

Reply

opto August 9, 2011 at 6:17 am

V-22 Osprey is much more silent and speedy, so it is much more dificult to aim a RPG to it.

Reply

Dave October 2, 2011 at 9:40 am

not really an osprey may be faster at certain altitudes but when it approches a landing zone its as good a target as any chopper and its not silent at all in fact it has two engines that create alot of noise its loader then say a UH60 Blackhawk

Reply

Jonathan August 9, 2011 at 12:31 pm

Osprey silent? I dont think so.

Just look for the tornado of dirt, trees, and people flying into the air. Thats where the Osprey is landing.

And have you seen how much those things cost? They are nothing but air show queens. If we use them for anything else, then we are being irresponsible with our money and resources.

A better thing to invest in is sensors, optics to DETECT the enemy within the flight path with the RPG. 30+ Navy Seals and they didnt see one guy with an RPG. Not saying its their fault, its our fault for not having the technology to detect that person.

Avoiding the RPG is better then trying to take on the RPG. Cheaper I would imagine then trying to outfit helicopters with defenses to shoot down/mitigate RPG blasts.

Reply

opto August 10, 2011 at 7:23 pm

"The Osprey flies faster, climbs faster, is smoother – and quieter. Proponents have long said this was case but up to now have been unable to prove it to anyone outside the pilot/engineering fraternity. Critics have stood their ground claiming maneuverability issues, inherent handling flaws and overall maintainability will make the Osprey case unsupportable. OT IIG results refute all these things and more. But if that’s not enough just one simple maneuver, pick-up off a landing site – like any old helicopter – followed by an immediate boost from zero to 250 knots in just a few seconds should be enough to convince them a generational change in the way rotary wing aviation does business is at hand".- David S. Harvey (2005)
http://www.navair.navy.mil/v22/index.cfm?fuseacti

Reply

opto August 10, 2011 at 7:34 pm

"So we fly the V-22 at 200 ft and 220 kts over these sensors at a five-mile range. Then the Cobra did it. The unclassified data showed that if you were at the target you would hear the Cobra two minutes before he reached you; with the V-22 it wasn’t heard until 10 seconds beforehand [the author experienced and can verify the quietness of the aircraft over several days at Al Asad with Ospreys, CH-46 Sea Knights, CH-53s, [UH-1]] Hueys and AH-1 Cobras flying in and out during the period – the V-22 was the quietest of the lot]."
http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/V-22_Osprey

Reply

Bob August 9, 2011 at 1:12 pm

1. The RPG is now responsible for the deaths of 30 SEALS in Afghanistan across two helicopter shoot downs. Not to mention the 160th SOAR aviators form the first incident, and the aircrew, and other US and Afghan military personnel on-board the CH-47 shot down on Friday.
2. The RPG was also the weapon used to bring down Super Six Four (Micheal Durant) in Mogadishu, Somalia. This incident led to the deaths of, and subsequent award of the MOH to, two Delta operators (Randy Shughart and Gary Gordon).

The SEALS lost on 5 August, just like the ones lost in 2005, were the QRF. They responded to the sound of the bugles and mounted up to assist their comrades-in-arms.

Luck, and Bad Luck in the form of one Mr. Murphy, is always a player on the battlefield. The terrain in Afghanistan, high mountain tops and valleys, favor an opponent who can secure the high ground.

The Taliban/Al Queda fighters have become very adept at utilizing this weapon over the years. We, the US, shipped hundreds of thousands of rounds to the Mujaheddin during the Afghan war. The warhead, kept in its shipping crates, is pretty robust. As long as the cap on the nose is not crimped and the guide rod that slides into the wooden and stamped sheet metal launcher is not damaged it is a viable round for a long time. The launcher is very simple and shares some of the same parts as the trigger assembly on AK.

In 1998 you could get a round for approximately $70 ea if bought in quantity.

It is difficult, if nigh on impossible, to defend against the RPG. The two best defenses:
armor plating or an active system like the Israeli Trophy system are impractical on a helicopter.
1. Armor is too heavy, even loads of Kevlar. Especially in a hot and high environment like Afghanistan.
2. Trophy would at best work only in limited envelopes around the airframe due to the rotor disc and would have to have a separate design for each airframe driving up the unit costs

The only current effective counter is tactics. More assets in the air support role and perhaps larger initial insertions. I have no idea of the size of the Ranger element initially deployed.

Reply

blight August 9, 2011 at 1:30 pm

You forgot Super 61, also shot down in Mogadishu.

The insurgents are beginning to learn that you can get body counts from attacking QRFs, especially since they are vulnerable in the air and in transit. Now what?

Reply

Bob August 9, 2011 at 3:28 pm

The real interesting question then becomes, if I know who the QRF is (how hard do you think that is for them to find out from an inside-source, and I wanted to set a trap how hard would it be to plant some disinformation and get someone to bite and set an ambush? Especially since I know the QRF is the same guys that took out my 'Dear Leader'?

Yes, indeed, Super Six One did take an RPG in the tail and started the entire episode.

Reply

blight August 10, 2011 at 12:20 am

To be honest, does it matter at all who they kill?

If they get some Delta, or some Rangers, it's all the same. We assign the value to the soldiers lost, but to our enemies, they're all dead Crusaders and Zionists. And if we don't care enough about the casualties, they'll step up the game with desecration and head-sawing.

Reply

Riceball August 9, 2011 at 3:04 pm

I wonder how much it would take to disrupt the flight path of an incoming RPG enough to throw it off target.flying back to the ground? I was thinking that a good solution would some kind of launcher that shoots out bolos or weighted nets to simply knock the incoming RPG out of the sky either simply away from the helo or cause it to tip nose down and fly back down to the ground. Of course for such a system to work it would require a combination of detection gear and a small radar to track the incoming RPG which, combined with the launcher, would probably amount to a lot of weight; but it's an idea I suppose.

Reply

blight August 9, 2011 at 3:22 pm

Then the issue might be how big a net do you want to capture a RPG rocket? A high density weave to ensure the rocket doesn't pass through? A fire control computer that compensates for ambient wind and turbulence, etc to lob a net into a RPG?

I imagine developing defenses are feasible, but that weight is still the great killer. A Chinook can carry a fair amount, and perhaps cutting into weight to carry countermeasures and weapons in addition to troops could be an option.

Reply

Riceball August 10, 2011 at 10:35 am

Yeah, I thought of the same things myself. I think the big killer for any effective countermeasure system is going to be the detection system. But there has to be a light weight system out there or way of creating a light weight system that would allow you to detect and then disrupt the flight path of an incoming RPG.

Reply

Bob August 9, 2011 at 3:29 pm

See the Trophy system.

Reply

Lance August 9, 2011 at 3:43 pm

No way a RPG shot it down I bet it was a MANPADS like a SA-7 or SA-14 left over from the old Soviet days.

Reply

SJE August 9, 2011 at 4:20 pm

Why not? RPGs are used all the time. They just happen to miss most of the time. A huge Chinook close to the ground is a big target, and it seems that RPGs are everywhere in the 'stan.

Reply

Bob August 9, 2011 at 4:35 pm

The Muj, and their descendents, the Taliban, never had SA-14s.

They got whatever SA-7s they may have captured (not many), and the Stingers from the US via the CIA. The Stingers have a shelf life cause of the battery. Much less being knocked around being carried all over the a-hole of the world on the back of a donkey or some guys back. The Muj and the Taliban aren't exactly known for weapons maintenance.

Also, in the 90's the CIA ran a pretty big buyback program to try to recover the weapons that had not been fired.

Reply

Foreign.Guy August 9, 2011 at 4:55 pm

Instead of destroying the warhead, could there be a way to disrupt its aerodynamics?

We're all speculating though. We don't know at what point the helicopter was struck. Even if they did have a laser that could take it down, if the shooter was close enough and good position (or cover) they could deliver a killer blow no matter the case.

Especial with things that fly. Part of the problem is that they impacted the ground. Maybe if there was some sort of 'crash foam' that could have saved their lives. Granted in a combat situation (and a fire situation) foam isn't the answer.

Reply

SJE August 10, 2011 at 4:13 pm

RPGs already have terrible aerodynamics, but big warheads.

Reply

sic August 9, 2011 at 6:57 pm

Soviets lost a lot of choppers to RPGs in the 'stan – locals would position themsleves in the chopper's path nd shoot from a tree or a ridge either as the helicopter was apporaching or after it made a pass, greatly increasing hit probability. Because of how fast the rocket gets to targer your only option is for escorts to spot a gunner and send some rounds his way.

Reply

Sad Sheepdog August 9, 2011 at 7:38 pm

However interesing these discussions about helicopter defense technologies is, we should keep in mind that any technological solution is going to be risky, expensive, and have drawbacks. Meanwhile.. we already have the capabilities that could and should have prevented this and can reduce the possibility in the future. We could have had more CAS assets to suppress the enemy, more ISR to find and target them. We could invest in more human intelligence. We could invest more in weapon buy back programs to get these RPG's off the street to begin with.

Reply

TMB August 9, 2011 at 10:07 pm

Agree with most of your comment; however, according to Wiki, there are over 9 million RPG launchers in the world with a market price of $500/launcher and $50/rocket. I don't see a buyback program being any use since the buyback programs in Iraq just allowed the insurgents to replace their junk with new gear on our dime.

Reply

Engineer Economist August 10, 2011 at 9:16 am

$4.5B? that's a quarter of what we pissed away in FCS alone, and 3% of F-35's projected cost overrun. plus we would obviously just target specific areas in Afghanistan. and you can use the buyback program as a way to gather intel to get deeper and deeper into the roots of where these weapons and insurgents are.

Reply

Anlushac11 August 9, 2011 at 7:54 pm

Seems like the low/high tech approach would be to have sensors to ID incoming round, target it, and then fire something like a shotgun shell at the round to blow it apart.

Reply

amauyong August 10, 2011 at 12:56 am

I wonder is it possible or feasible to add the following:

1) Reflectors that blind people looking or even glancing at the craft temporarily x seconds in the vicinity prior to taking off or landing in “hot” zones…

2) Laser emitters that blind people looking at the craft for more than x seconds temporarily too in the “hot” zones.

3) Smoke created temporily around similar “hot” zones prior to landing/taking off since we have infrared to help land or take off (if it is feasible by the pilot of the craft).

4) A blanket of chemical “rain” that creates noxious fumes for a few minutes prior to landing/take-off from confirmed hot zones.

Unsure if the above are feasible…just some ideas…sorry.

My condolences for the loss and sincere regards to loved ones.

Reply

traindodger August 10, 2011 at 6:06 am

1) Only works during bright sunlight. Could blind friendlies too.

2) That might work, but you would need to know where the enemies are. Acoustic, radar-based or infrared gunfire locators would help the dazzler zero in on the source. Also, there's a very high likelihood that the salvos will come from multiple directions, so you might have trouble focusing the laser dazzler on all of them unless you chain multiple independently-targetable dazzlers together.

3) If you create enough smoke to conceal the aircraft, you must also necessarily blind the pilot. Obscured vision and helicopters do not mix.

4) In order to protect the aircraft within a 400-meter radius, you would need to spray about 125 acres with the stuff. That's a lot of terrain to cover. Also, depending on which way the wind is blowing, you might end up gassing yourself.

Reply

blight August 10, 2011 at 9:38 am

In brainstorm mode, I would wonder if Yehudi lights on helicopters might help.

Phosphorus based smoke tends to rise in columns rather than spread, so it might not help helicopters much. It'll also likely disperse quickly because of the rotors. And smoke works best on slow targets, so if you slow down enough to use smoke effectively, you are /more/ vulnerable to RPGs.

I wonder if gliders might be the way forward. Or parachuting in. There's vulnerability on the descent and landing, but helicopters are detected by noise, and as we know they remain quite capable of taking them out.

Reply

Anthony August 10, 2011 at 2:09 am

MTSX – Metal Storm, Australian company. lock onto the rpg and fire a half dozen proximity detonation 40mm grenades in a fraction of a second.

Their Redback or whatever its called has already been tested against RPG's…problem is they are a relatively cheap and easy to install, but we Cut all funding to their United States based research facility in favor of more expensive waste of time earmark spending.

It will take a generation for all the old losers in charge of what weapon systems get used and which dont get any funding to die off or retire…then we can finally start shooting down rpgs.

the technology is out there. we just dont want to use it unless Lockheed charges us 1000x what it actually costs, and congressman's family and friends get paid 150k a year to work on it (dont forget a year or two of delays to keep the paychecks flowing!)

p.s. u would think as the 10th anniversary of sept 11 comes up, our Afghanistan based troops would be using a replacement for the M4…something as strong as our WW2 savior the Garand…since engagements are almost always out of effective range for the tiny 5.56…just a thought. It is sad SEALs are still losing their lives in this wretched country after so long. Maybe someday we will put a hold on all of our $10 Million Dollar "smartbombs" and go back to what wins wars…pummeling our opposing country into a parking lot. Keep fighting for Afghans who hate us while our country goes broke and our middle class disappears into 99% poor and the 1% super rich. Come on America!

Reply

Jamie August 10, 2011 at 11:30 am

In a rare article about Canada’s JTF2 one of the operators stated in essence that he prayed not going into combat but when he went in a helicopter because he couldn’t fight back from a helicopter. On the ground he was fine, in the air he felt vulnerable and helpless.

Reply

demophilus August 10, 2011 at 4:03 pm

Some of the commenters above (Bead, blight) refer to the RPG's self-destruct fuzing, which may have some applications against aircraft — ranged and/or volley fire, etc. Let's not go into the details on an open board. IIRC, there have been rumors that the mujahideen were taught such tactics by Western SOF when fighting the Russians back in the 80s.

Also, at least some RPG fuzes can be swapped out. IIRC, there have been rumors that various proximity fuzes have been designed for RPGs. Again, let's not go into details on an open board.

So the RPG may not be a great anti-helicopter weapon, but with certain upgrades and/or tactics, in certain environments, it might not be too bad either.

Apart from responding to the threat with tactics (CAS, varying infil and exfil routes, etc.), other countermeasures may work. A laser dazzling system might actually work against a optical proximity fuse. A low power pulsed laser directed energy system might touch off whatever fuze the RPG uses. It doesn't have to destroy the rocket grenade body; all it has to do is an EMP kill on the fuse.

IIRC, some of our aerospace contractors are working on upgrading laser IRCM systems to provide such capability. For example, they're building in the capability to upgrade to more powerful laser emitters.

That may take years. Until then, it looks like the only fix is better tactics. Turboprop (or UAV) CAS is interesting, but we lost a lot of CAS and FAC assets in Viet Nam to direct fire. Sad to say, but until better machinery comes on line, the best fix is better TTP, and you generally learn that by studying mistakes.

RIP, SEALs, pilots, and friendly Afghan forces. May your loss not be in vain.

Reply

blight August 10, 2011 at 7:14 pm

To be fair, the notion of firing rockets to exploit their self-destruct has been floating around the internet for quite some time, and is fairly distributed, though no specifics are discussed. That said, the guys who allegedly have this technique probably already know far more than most of us ever will about the subject.

That said, the standard RPG warheads seem to lend themselves to the standard impact-based fuze…though I think the million dollar question is actually whether or not the self-destruct fuze can be modified, either by a end-user or a trained armorer to extend or decrease the self-destruct time; but VT fuzes aren't exactly garden variety stuff, unless you take them from another source and try to McGyver them to work with an RPG.

The RPGs come in a variety of flavors, and all of which /sound/ like they would use impact fuzes. I imagine the exotic warheads would come with delay or standoff systems: Ideally an APERS rocket would have a timer of some kind…or not. Or the thermobaric, but I have no data on either rocket type, and it's probably not a good idea to get into that.

Reply

SteveR October 2, 2011 at 9:44 am

why cant the israeli trophy system be adapted to be used on choopers instead of investing money in creating something new
use an existing system and invest in miniaturizing it to allow for less weight
taking something that has been proven in combat (by the israeli army) against rockets of all kinds including but not limited to RPG's,AT3 SAGGER, and other guided missiles as well
why go and waste money AGAIN

Reply

Some Guy August 9, 2011 at 8:03 am

Yeah, because the lives of the highly trained special forces arent worth it. *Rolls eyes*

Reply

SJE August 9, 2011 at 2:30 pm

The cost per unit is also higher than guided rounds. The cost per unit is not relevant: only the cost of what is being protected. This is why we have soldiers wearing armored vests costing $hundred-thousands to defeat bullets costing a few cents.

Reply

blight August 9, 2011 at 2:35 pm

It takes seventeen years to "grow" people, raise them…and that's before army service. Followed by basic training, AIT and priceless combat experience. If they are in special operations…

You can throw money at your troops to keep them alive, but you can't grow them quickly by throwing money at something. Wars are often won by whoever still has supply flow and doesn't run out of equipment, and manpower counts too.

Reply

TMB August 9, 2011 at 9:44 pm

You know how many times a helicopter has been shot down in Afghanistan? Take that number, divide it by how many times they've been fired upon, and there's your probability (it's remote, but more likely than the lottery). Where do you get 20 meter effective range from? Whether it's aimed or not, that RPG is still traveling 200 meters with the same blast radius. You also contradict yourself by saying the bird is traveling 100 miles per hour, then describe it getting attacked during a landing. Which are we talking about? Also, see my post earlier about Somalia. You don't have a clue about how that battle went down.

Reply

brian August 9, 2011 at 11:49 pm

Have you ever seen an RPG shoot off? The thing is like snake withering through the air. It's amazing you can hit anything with it let alone something 200 meters out. Then take a chinook doing a combat landing, that is crazy!!! It comes in full and does ht looks like a crash landing almost, slowing down at the very last second – no running lights, steep pitch! Pow those guys are running out ready to kil in seconds, while rangers looking out the die with night vision ready to shoot guys with RPGs. If you don't think you need to be at the ight exact spot, under cover your mad. Because at night at those speeds and tactics your ability to do something like that is going o be greatly dimished at that time of night. Your ability to hit a target is going to be determined by visibility, experience, skill, arc to it target, and the speed of your target. I'm not seeing how you are going. Translate that 200 meter stationary accuracy to this situation, and you'll see how reasonable it is.

Reply

Leave a Comment

Previous post:

Next post: