Jump to content

Ground surveillance radars


Recommended Posts

It seems soviets will get something almost as good as FLIR. Ground surveillance radar! 

Use these as your eyes and have them well connected to your C2 network. I usually have the recon platoon commander in the same vehicle/actions spot as the highest level HQ/XO, or but the XO inside the BRM. (I have used these in CMBS)

CM: COLD WAR TO&E has "BRM-1"
https://www.battlefront.com/cold-war/cmcw-base-game/?tab=toe

more info on couple of variations of BRM-1
https://fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/row/brm-1.htm
https://weaponsystems.net/system/346-BRM-1K "Korshun"

Video demonstrating ground surveillance radar on BRM-1K in CMBS (K just means the command version):
https://youtu.be/unTyMNPIGLc

Link to comment
Share on other sites

GSR of BRM-1K is Doppler-effect radar, which detects moving targets only. In CMBS it unrealistically detects also stationary targets. Also real PSNR-5 never get to you exact target location (radar has an error, which rise with the distance) and exact type of target (in the sense it couldn't define T-72 it ahead or Abrams). Operator listen a squeeks of radar and by their tonality, defines this is an group of infantry or tank. Result of detection of the tank is "something armored moving in that point area". So to correct GSR radar work in the game should be next - when target is detected, that icon with common picture of infantry or vehicle appears approx in the palce of target

Edited by Haiduk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Perhaps stationary targets might be detectable if they have different reflectivity to the radar beam.  If they are distinguishable from the background in any way that can be visualised by the operator or distinguished by the device they could be detectable.  This would be easier in open ground or with tanks in cover.  A good analogy would be that (as I understand it) IR systems like the Javelin lock via visual differences in the image.

Similar systems can map large areas over time (not using doppler shift) and show changes over time (eg vehicle tracks).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My limited understanding of tactical GSR, on-ground and airborne, is they are dependent on doppler effect and signal processing of movement to be able to seperate a ground unit from the background and any debris in the air.  Larger systems that cover wide areas can pick up some non-moving large ground units, but these tend to mostly strategic or maybe high-level operational.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess it depends if it is creating an image, or superimposing detected movement onto a range scope (ie top-down).  If it is showing the operator an image, they will be able to use it to spot stationary targets through obscurants and at night.  It could even do 3D mapping etc.  Seems a waste to just use doppler.

For example: https://www.thalesgroup.com/en/countries/europe/united-kingdom/markets-we-operate/defence/air-systems-uk/isr-air/imaster

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do not confuse capabilities of todays radars with those of the 80s. At that time a ground surveillance radar needed the doppler effect to discriminate targets from ground clutter. Today there is massive signal processing power.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I presume that it won't be impossible to implement this restriction (i.e. only moving targets and no type classification) in the game engine for ground surveillance radars.

To say the truth, I'm hoping radars will be modeled not for the BRM but to get this toy! 😁

full?d=1514061651

MT-12R Ruta 100mm antitank gun with radar sight.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/27/2021 at 3:44 PM, Amedeo said:

To say the truth, I'm hoping radars will be modeled not for the BRM but to get this toy! 😁

MT-12R Ruta 100mm antitank gun with radar sight.

MT-12R also has doppler radar, which maintains a firing in bad weather or in the night conditions. It can detect a target, which moves with speed not less 5 km/h. Calculating system automatically computes the point of targeting and lock the target for 3 seconds. Alas, I havn't info about radrar precise.

Edited by Haiduk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My understanding is the radar was mostly used for ranging and long range aiming.   It's like a radar version of a laser ranging system, but with poor visibility capability.  When it was introduced, the USSR had no access to thermal imaging and lasers were heavy, bulky, and expensive.  It was actually easier to mount a small radar to extend the range and life of the 100mm gun.  There's a reason it didn't show up on tanks and other combat vehicles.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/26/2021 at 10:02 PM, fireship4 said:

I guess it depends if it is creating an image, or superimposing detected movement onto a range scope (ie top-down).  If it is showing the operator an image, they will be able to use it to spot stationary targets through obscurants and at night.  It could even do 3D mapping etc.  Seems a waste to just use doppler.

For example: https://www.thalesgroup.com/en/countries/europe/united-kingdom/markets-we-operate/defence/air-systems-uk/isr-air/imaster

Modern Russian modifications like PSNR-8 already have signal processor and color display, but in 70-80th all what operators had were an oscilloscope and squeaks in headphones... 

Edited by Haiduk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Thewood1 said:

My understanding is the radar was mostly used for ranging and long range aiming.   It's like a radar version of a laser ranging system, but with poor visibility capability.  When it was introduced, the USSR had no access to thermal imaging and lasers were heavy, bulky, and expensive.  It was actually easier to mount a small radar to extend the range and life of the 100mm gun.  There's a reason it didn't show up on tanks and other combat vehicles.

Well, they actually tried to make a tank destroyer out of it: the 2S15 Norov.

news-133_1.jpg

The radars sight of the MT-12R antitank gun only provided the gunner a reference into his sight to guide his manual aiming. With this AFV they tried to design a completely automated system but when they managed to have the thing actually working (mid '80s, IIRC) they realized that a 100mm gun wasn't going to be a viable solution against modern NATO tanks in long range frontal engagements and the project was cancelled.

If I'm not mistaken, there was also a previous attempt to make something like this on a T-62 tank chassis but I have no info about this prototype AFV.

Edited by Amedeo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, presumably it worked but it had limits: no target recognition, no engagement of stationary targets. A good TI with an advanced FCS (and a skilled gunner) is a better all around solution.

A more advanced radar paired with a modern computer would be another matter. After all the present 9P157 missile tank-destroyer has also a radar FC. Moreover, if I'm not mistaken, the US Army trialled a radar FC system (based on the Apache Longbow radar) on the Abrams: results were good but this gadget was considered too expensive and was never fielded.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Lethaface said:

Another drawback of (a actively emitting) radar is that it's quite easy to detect if you're looking for it, instead of a FLIR optic.

A lot of this type of radar had a negligible signature though.  The UK's MSTAR which is either end of Cold War or immediately post Cold War being an example.  Neither side had enough EW/ELINT to go around and spend time looking for tactical battlefield surveillance radars used by recce assets, especially if the latter were employing even the most rudimentary EMCON drills.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I joke about modern day APS like Trophy that  with a little ingenuity the enemy would be able to triangulate on each vehicle's radar like in those old Star Trek episodes where they're tracking a cloaked Romulan Bird of Prey. After all, they're broadcasting radio waves like a AM country station.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Combatintman said:

A lot of this type of radar had a negligible signature though.  The UK's MSTAR which is either end of Cold War or immediately post Cold War being an example.  Neither side had enough EW/ELINT to go around and spend time looking for tactical battlefield surveillance radars used by recce assets, especially if the latter were employing even the most rudimentary EMCON drills.

Interesting (no subject specialist myself 🙂 ). So even if let's say all MBTs etc would be outfitted with 'radar targeting', it'd be still the question whether it's worth it to pursue developing a tactical level capability to detect and target such devices? 

In game (CM:BS) the Khryzantema-S can be a real nasty surprise with it's ability to spot and fire through all types of smoke. I guess it would make quite the difference (in CMBS) if there would be more Russian assets having that capability. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Radar was used for counter artillery in the 60's. They could pick the shells in flight and compute the counter artillery. @Lethaface that's where the tactic shoot and scoot originated from. Till now they don't apply this in Combat Mission. Flying Command Centres aka AWACS woud make the game one-sided. 

Edited by chuckdyke
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, scoot and shoot had been around since WW2.  Counterbattery was a well understood science even in WW1.  Radar-based counterbattery fire was even used in Korea.  My Uncle was in a special unit built to detect mortar fire in Korea.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Lethaface said:

Interesting (no subject specialist myself 🙂 ). So even if let's say all MBTs etc would be outfitted with 'radar targeting', it'd be still the question whether it's worth it to pursue developing a tactical level capability to detect and target such devices? 

In game (CM:BS) the Khryzantema-S can be a real nasty surprise with it's ability to spot and fire through all types of smoke. I guess it would make quite the difference (in CMBS) if there would be more Russian assets having that capability. 

Well we're sort of drifting off topic now but in this day and age, Blue Force Tracker emits all the time - it has to in order for a vehicle/squad's position to be updated.  I have no idea what its signature is but that is how I would envisage focusing tactical ELINT.  I don't see radars on every tank as an act of war - who looks at the screen, how much training does the crew need to calibrate, operate and maintain it?  How easily will it break?  Oh ... and how much does each radar cost.  That is why GSRs are limited to certain recce platforms.

Back on topic, my understanding of battlefield survevillance radars in the Cold War era is that they were designed to give an indication of where the enemy was coming from, approximately where they were, where they appeared to be going and in what strength.  This allowed for the surveillance plan/ISTAR plan to be adjusted to confirm/deny the radar plots - one of the principles of ISTAR being to have redundancy in your coverage and overlapping sensors, which could be a dude with a pair of binos.  I think people are getting a bit too excited about the topic to be honest - I would be surprised if a Royal Artillery FOO/Tac Party started whanging fire missions down based on a couple of blips on a battlefield surveillance radar; artillery/mortar locating radars, yes of course, but not a battlefield surveillance radar in this class.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...