Stupid question but...

[Spirale]

Hello ,

i often wondered why RB15's couldn't impact a terrestrial object?

A ship is a solid, a building is a solid.

A ship is mostly a metal structure,  a bridge is a metallic structure often.

What is the best explanation for this paradox?

Thx for your replies

Edited December 15, 2021 by Spirale

[Scandfox]

Your Question is not stupid it is adequate.......

Next generation RB-15 with name Gungnir will be used against Sea and Land Target

https://monch.com/fia-saab-gungnir/

[Spirale]

Thx a lot

Edited December 15, 2021 by Spirale

[Spirale]

For "our" RB15F: What are the limitations that prevent this missile from heading towards a land target?

[Machalot]

28 minutes ago, Spirale said:

For "our" RB15F: What are the limitations that prevent this missile from heading towards a land target?

Speculation:

It's programmed to look for the radar return contrast between a ship and the water, which is a lot greater than between a building and the ground.

Its radar image may become cluttered by the typical kind of ground objects and textures like trees, rocks, roads, which do not appear in water, and it doesn't have the processing algorithms to handle it.

It has a radar altimeter for sea skimming, but it doesn't have terrain following radar that would be necessary to navigate anything other than flat plains.

Edited December 16, 2021 by Machalot

[Spirale]

3 hours ago, Machalot said:

Speculation:

It's programmed to look for the radar return contrast between a ship and the water, which is a lot greater than between a building and the ground.

Its radar image may become cluttered by the typical kind of ground objects and textures like trees, rocks, roads, which do not appear in water, and it doesn't have the processing algorithms to handle it.

It has a radar altimeter for sea skimming, but it doesn't have terrain following radar that would be necessary to navigate anything other than flat plains.

 

Yes, why not but what about waypoints for the RB15F? It can follow a route so i expect it can hit a waypoint, a target?

Speculations ok but....what are the real reasons?

Edited December 16, 2021 by Spirale

[Machalot]

2 hours ago, Spirale said:

Yes, why not but what about waypoints for the RB15F? It can follow a route so i expect it can hit a waypoint, a target?

Speculations ok but....what are the real reasons?

 

I don't have anything better than that. However, I can provide more speculation for you .  It is grounded on engineering principles so you can decide how much you believe it. 

The ability to fly waypoints is not sufficient to hit ground targets at long range. It has to fly waypoints very accurately.  Even a few tens of meters of inertial drift can be enough to reduce the lethality depending on the target, or even to hit the wrong target.  Or impact terrain along the route 

Maybe the RB15F didn't have the inertial accuracy required to be useful or safe for land use. 

[IronMike]

Might also have to do with taking chances. If you think of it: the swedish military (in modern times), is not one to go and fight wars all over the world, but mainly is there to defend themselves. So say you have a russian invasion, and your target is in proximity to one of your hospitals, schools or just generally: living areas. How much chances are you willing to take? Even abroad: the west still tries to avoid as much collateral damage as it can by principle, and I would imagine the Swedes are no different there. In DCS attacking stuff on the ground and leaving a wake of craters behind you is of no concern to us. In real life the ethics and optics of a war can very much be decisive. So blasting a bunch of missiles into the unknown is not really what anyone likes to do. This is all speculation on my side, of course, expanding on @Machalot's input.

[Spirale]

54 minutes ago, IronMike said:

Might also have to do with taking chances. If you think of it: the swedish military (in modern times), is not one to go and fight wars all over the world, but mainly is there to defend themselves. So say you have a russian invasion, and your target is in proximity to one of your hospitals, schools or just generally: living areas. How much chances are you willing to take? Even abroad: the west still tries to avoid as much collateral damage as it can by principle, and I would imagine the Swedes are no different there. In DCS attacking stuff on the ground and leaving a wake of craters behind you is of no concern to us. In real life the ethics and optics of a war can very much be decisive. So blasting a bunch of missiles into the unknown is not really what anyone likes to do. This is all speculation on my side, of course, expanding on @Machalot's input.

Agree with you with hypthetics colateral damages...but...Is it possible to target  other things than ships with RB15F was my question in DCS? I really don't see any reason why it can do it . What are the limitations?

Edited December 16, 2021 by Spirale

[MYSE1234]

52 minutes ago, Spirale said:

Is it possible to target other things than ships with RB15F was my question in DCS?

No, it can not.
 

Quote

I really don't see any reason why it can do it .

Neither do I, it wasn't designed to do it so it probably can't.

 

Quote

What are the limitations?

Ships only


As was mentioned earlier the newer version of the Rb15 is able to hit ground targets, probably due to it having a GPS in addition to the INS already present. And most likely other upgrades from the version we have in DCS; radar etc.

[Spirale]

Thx for your reply Myse, but overall it's kinda weird not knowing why he can't spot some other "solid" than a simple ship.

In DCS there are tons of discussions about weapons employment and often a result/solution are given (after pages of discussions). For the RB15F the mystery is here.

Edited December 17, 2021 by Spirale

[Machalot]

2 hours ago, Spirale said:

Thx for your reply Myse, but overall it's kinda weird not knowing why he can't spot some other "solid" than a simple ship.

In DCS there are tons of discussions about weapons employment and often a result/solution are given (after pages of discussions). For the RB15F the mystery is here.

 

I gave you reasons above why hitting a ground target is different from hitting a ship. Those are not mysterious reasons.  I don't understand what your are asking for. 

[Spirale]

1 hour ago, Machalot said:

I gave you reasons above why hitting a ground target is different from hitting a ship. Those are not mysterious reasons.  I don't understand what your are asking for. 

I know Machalot BUT, for me ( only if you want/accept), the RB15 have his own detection system in terminal guidance phase. This is why i wonder why it is impossible to use it againt a bridge for example. I hope i am clear enough. Imagine a 100m long ship and a 100m long metallic bridge/ What's the difference for the missile ( understand : why it is impossible IRL and/ or in DCS)?

For me ( again) it's a question.

Edited December 17, 2021 by Spirale

[Hextopia]

16 hours ago, Spirale said:

I know Machalot BUT, for me ( only if you want/accept), the RB15 have his own detection system in terminal guidance phase. This is why i wonder why it is impossible to use it againt a bridge for example. I hope i am clear enough. Imagine a 100m long ship and a 100m long metallic bridge/ What's the difference for the missile ( understand : why it is impossible IRL and/ or in DCS)?

For me ( again) it's a question.

 

The seeker on the RB-15 almost certainly isn't built to deal with the vastly different environment on land vs a ship on water, so you'd have no idea what it would end up targeting.

It might hit a building or bridge or something, but it also might just hit a random tree, car, rock, etc.  No way to know what it'd actually hit.