It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Number 1 rule for mortar teams against airstrikes, cover and conceal.

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 14 2006 @ 06:00 PM
link   
www.youtube.com...

These insurgents made a mistake of not covering themselves from aerial observation. This in turn brings in an airstrike. Professionals would use defilade or concealed positions. Even if they are trying to launch mortars and getting the hell out fast, the aircraft immediately spotted them and dropped a bomb on them. Nobody on the ground can outrun a fighter bomber thats spotted you.




posted on Nov, 14 2006 @ 07:01 PM
link   
What they need is one of these, it makes every shot count, thankfully only we have them.



posted on Nov, 16 2006 @ 02:25 PM
link   
DB,



These insurgents made a mistake of not covering themselves from aerial observation.


Remote firing pits/vehicles and multiple tubes in action with a fixed limit of rounds dropped before scooting is also a good general rule of thumb, particularly when you have not timed out the typical response delay on airpower overhead.



This in turn brings in an airstrike. Professionals would use defilade or concealed positions. Even if they are trying to launch mortars and getting the hell out fast, the aircraft immediately spotted them and dropped a bomb on them. Nobody on the ground can outrun a fighter bomber thats spotted you.


COMINT and a dedicated 'observer corps' (some inside the wire) can do a lot to alleviate the fighter bomber threat, sooner or later this will extend to acoustic and optics systems which are cheap enough to be used by guerilla forces, whether they are standalone or AHM type systems with a secondary kill mechanism.

The problem comes from the fact that mortars are short range systems and so you 'never know' when you are entering an area monitored by UAV and/or REMBASS or equivalent UGS in attacking fixed targets which are about the only thing they are good for engaging.

This is what kills you because the effort to prepare a position may not be worth the extended exposure of doing so with a 6X3ft manprint key signature.

Mortars are thus a dangerous game all-round when you don't dictate the engagement conditions. The best weapons for anti infantry use will almost certainly come to be seen as UGV-based using the equivalent of knee-mortar 45-60mm caliber systems on elevateable installations where (several) vehicles are in fact also selflevelling stable tables and simple compass driven pointing system with autocalc under remote control (Goliath as TEL).

The alternative being sacrificial systems as with fast-laid, preloaded, tubes using stacked rounds ala Metalstorm. Whether you implant ala posthole digger-like fireworks tubes or 'deploy' them out the back of a moving jeep or cart or motorbike like a tossed newspaper, the BIG DEAL is that there are enough of them to play MX Missile type games with ZERO human presence as the dominant signature driver during actual ops, the emplacement force having prepped and left the scene, perhaps /days/ before.

First gen will likely require wires. Second gen will be able to exploit 'broadcast mode' crypted cellular networking. Third gen will be airdeployable and able to function as independent hunter killer networks with both intelligent projectiles (to compensate for limited tube articulation) and the ability to use remote sensors to cue the tubes, creating area or passage denial on a zero occupation basis of continual harrassment.

Obviously, these offer the hope of a 'new kind of mine' to insurgents that can't afford to get close in emplacing an IED/ORM. But they may be equally useful in allowing UAVs to spread themselves 'thin but not too thin' to seal off a border.

At some point, when dominant air superiority is lost to hunting weapons and heavy lasers, you may also see these or similar devices replace or augment the mortar carrier.

For now, the smallest signature in warfare is always going to be the man who emplaces, rigs and operates a direct fire weapons system. But as forces like Hamas and Hezbollah are 'required to become more civilized' they will likely lead the way in leveraging the fewest number of skilled operators (training and asset value leveraged themselves) vs. the maximum in COE fires delivery which simply stacks the odds until the 'pros' can't stand in the bleep storm of splinters. The pros themselves will then follow on the basis of 'what works' and the notion that they can afford to buy more of any given counter (cheap ass UGV) so long as THEY do not bleed like stug pigs on TV. The value of offense being that, anything which FIRES at them becomes targetable and once the ground is robotically secured, you can go in and find/disarm the individual autonomous threat systems under the coverage of a local blanket jammer before leapfrogging your (much reduced) logistics tail on through to rinse and repeat the process.

So it will be that Guerillas fight like main forces (tech enabled) and high intensity units will be so labelled by the size of inventory they have to expend in penny-ante small unit increments, just like guerillas.


KPl.

mod edit: added quote tags
Quote Reference (review link)

[edit on 19-11-2006 by UK Wizard]



posted on Nov, 16 2006 @ 02:30 PM
link   
It seems odd, but I thought I saw several figures moving around in the smoke after the smart bomb went off. How could somebody survive a blast so close?



posted on Nov, 19 2006 @ 02:44 AM
link   
I watched the video, but for the life of me I didn't see a mortar team. I did see a couple of fellow near a white Nissan pickup though.

Anybody actually made out a mortar base there?



posted on Nov, 27 2006 @ 09:00 AM
link   
Actually cover and concealment is not enough. Sweden has leased some units of ARTHUR to the brits and Canadians. This is a artillery finding radar system. The moment the shell leaves the barrel the radar can tell exactly where the shooter is and where the shell will land. It's sent electronically to a artillery battery/airplane/heli and in the case of artillery they can fire straight away. And the bonus is that the radar sees your own shells and can give you a correction as the shells are flying through the air.. So before the shells have landed your firing the next corrected set of rounds. I've seen it live and it's a beauty!



posted on Nov, 28 2006 @ 01:48 PM
link   

Sweden has leased some units of ARTHUR to the brits and Canadians. This is a artillery finding radar system. The moment the shell leaves the barrel the radar can tell exactly where the shooter is and where the shell will land.


That's been around for years. I can't remember exactly how long ago it was, but even battleships had shell tracking radars which calculated reverse trajectory to pinpoint the origin of enemy fire.

It's pretty much a necessity for any Navy when facing coastal defenses.

From that point on the systems were continuously miniaturized, and transitioned to field artillery, mortars, MLRS tracking, etc.

Old news really, but in any case, any positive ID on that mortar team?

I still can't see it.



posted on Nov, 28 2006 @ 02:36 PM
link   
Its the one where the group is crowding around the tube, and you can see what look like muzzle blast in the beginning before the camera pulls out and you can see couple more white smoke from the tube as they launch more mortars.



posted on Nov, 28 2006 @ 03:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by iskander
That's been around for years. I can't remember exactly how long ago it was, but even battleships had shell tracking radars which calculated reverse trajectory to pinpoint the origin of enemy fire.


Yeah some battleships in the latter stages of WWII had this, they could even see their "splashes" and re calculate to hit the target.



posted on Nov, 28 2006 @ 07:57 PM
link   

Its the one where the group is crowding around the tube, and you can see what look like muzzle blast in the beginning before the camera pulls out and you can see couple more white smoke from the tube as they launch more mortars.


What are the time codes?

The clip is so low rez I can only see the detonation at 00:42.


Yeah some battleships in the latter stages of WWII had this, they could even see their "splashes" and re calculate to hit the target.


Yep. Also older battleships that did not have the system used a relay to correct their fire to soften up beaches before the assault.



posted on Nov, 29 2006 @ 09:50 AM
link   
I like to post the time, but now I can't even see the freaking video now. Gonna have to wait.



posted on Dec, 1 2006 @ 10:59 AM
link   
Okay I finally was able to look at youtube videos again finally...as you can see iskander 00:04 time is the clearest indication of tube launch where you see white smoke coming out within the small group gathering around.



posted on Dec, 1 2006 @ 04:28 PM
link   
You're right, I did see something at 00:04.

Again, deltaboy, I hope you'll take my comments for what they are and please believe that I hold no bias or any agendas in my assessments, it's just that back in 1999 I was analyzing insurgent videos to gather investigation data so I'm really picky when it comes to details.

At 00:04 there is indeed something emanating from the location of the three men by the pickup.

What concerns me is that it takes 2 seconds for that cloud to fully expand, and additional second to dissipate.

If the video clip was in slow motion it would have been plausible, and if it was in fact a mortar, judging by the smoke expansion pattern it was fired from a very low elevation.

What does not fit, is that the time counter in the upper right corner the time ticker runs in real time.

29 Sep 2004

The initial smoke appears at 13:08:29 GMT, and ends at 13:08:32 GMT.

My take on this is that the resolution and the frame rate of the clip is just to low establish if it was in fact a mortar launch.

Heavy video compression does create a ghosting effect which makes smoke appear to look like it's in slow motion.

I'm not doubting that it was a mortar team because the profile does fit, but at the same time I can't conclude that it was, because the video simply does not contain enough information to establish it with any degree of certainty.

Chances are it was a mortar team, but at the same time it could have been a number of other things. With out a decent quality clip I just can't tell.



posted on Dec, 1 2006 @ 07:21 PM
link   
Well look at the same time, but do not look at the large white smoke on the left of the group, but on the right side of it, you notice a split second smoke coming out. Its smaller but noticeable.



posted on Dec, 5 2006 @ 09:13 PM
link   
I havent seen the video yet but a strategy of concealment and cover was a mistake to have been made. But then again this is like the vietnam war, with high casualty results and more victories but they are going to win and these enemies you are talking about have high intensity training. They are definately not low class or low key. They can stand up to our army! @_@. morter or no morter.



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join