dummies and decoys: inflatable tanks, planes and rocket launchers

[nscode]

Maybe you can get a clue ;)

[EtherealN]

It amazes me people are still joyous over shooting down one (1) stealth aircraft 10 years ago like its their single greatest achievement in the world. Ridiculous. Its about as annoying as a case of chlamydia.

 

Wasn't that an other thread? I actually went back through this thread to see where stealth aircraft were mentioned at all, and maybe I'm blind but I can't find any. Let's not derail this thread when there's already a flamefest on the subject in a different one.

[Groove]

It amazes me people are still joyous over shooting down one (1) stealth aircraft 10 years ago like its their single greatest achievement in the world. Ridiculous. Its about as annoying as a case of chlamydia.

 

rep inbound

[hitman]

Maybe you can get a clue ;)

Maybe you should find something else to brag about. ;)

 

Wasn't that an other thread? I actually went back through this thread to see where stealth aircraft were mentioned at all, and maybe I'm blind but I can't find any. Let's not derail this thread when there's already a flamefest on the subject in a different one.

Its not so much just stuck to that one particular thread, but this one "special" individual who just has to make it known to everyone whenever he chooses who needs to be smacked upside the back of the head once in a while.

Edited March 28, 2009 by hitman

[Namenlos Ein]

Ill remember Serbs using human shields to deter NATO air strikes.;)

 

Decoy with human shield.

 

[hitman]

Decoy with human shield.

 

:O

[nscode]

When did I brag about it? I only mention it when someone asks about something, or when I find some new info. But ok. From now on when someone talks about stelth, I'll just come and simply say what a huge penis I have :)

 

And if you're talking about Hajduks "Reminder" that's just a sig war he has with GG :)

[hitman]

I'll just come and simply say what a huge penis I have :)

Even though I have no problem with that, it will also get old and tiresome...but be prepared for competition.

 

And if you're talking about Hajduks "Reminder" that's just a sig war he has with GG :)

Ill keep this half in PM.

[Shrubbo]

hahaha

 

Decoy with human shield.

 

[CE_Mikemonster]

Oh dear lol

 

I'm sure physical tank decoys are nothing new. I'm certain that we used rubber tanks in North Africa in WW2 to confuse Rommel.

 

Never considered their application on the modern battlefield, but i'd be grateful for people to stick some more info on here to read. I'm loving the mentions of microwave's for HARMS :)

 

For an IR camera, would the decoys look different? And would the reflection from a laser beam be any different, i.e. noticable?

 

 

As for the partially veiled nationalism shown by a few characters on here (on both 'sides'), for the rest of us it's a bit embarassing to listen to, to be completely honest. If all of us acted like that it would be a pretty stupid forum, so what makes you so special?

[hitman]

A few months ago I saw life size F-16 inflatable decoys sold on ebay. I havent seen anything like that lately, but they were selling them at 15k a pop.

[4c Hajduk Veljko]

I'm sure physical tank decoys are nothing new. I'm certain that we used rubber tanks in North Africa in WW2 to confuse Rommel. ....

 

.... For an IR camera, would the decoys look different? And would the reflection from a laser beam be any different, i.e. noticable?

Well, there is nothing new about physical airplanes either. But they are better nowadays.

 

That is the whole point of this thread. That this Russian company makes decoys that have similar radar and IR signature. With little bit of "masking" it will be impossible to tell the difference from the air.

[JaNk0]

Oh dear lol

As for the partially veiled nationalism shown by a few characters on here (on both 'sides'), for the rest of us it's a bit embarassing to listen to, to be completely honest. If all of us acted like that it would be a pretty stupid forum, so what makes you so special?

 

:thumbup: Rep

 

Anyways, keep up with the thread guys.

[MoGas]

Oh dear lol

 

As for the partially veiled nationalism shown by a few characters on here (on both 'sides'), for the rest of us it's a bit embarassing to listen to, to be completely honest. If all of us acted like that it would be a pretty stupid forum, so what makes you so special?

 

true, and this is not the only topic!:megalol: :thumbup: NO this is better then yours, and this......:lol: rep

 

cheers

[4c Hajduk Veljko]

Russia’s balloon defense

 

There's video on that page as well.

[topol-m]

Russia’s balloon defense

 

There's video on that page as well.

 

Man, thats a great video. Now i`m even more convinced that a lot of missiles will be wasted when attacking these false vehicles. The new materials that are used are making these baloons pretty "important" military targets. They are just begging to be attacked.

[4c Hajduk Veljko]

Maverick missile is (my guess) price $100 000 to $150 000 + logistics to bring it to the airplane + cost associated to fly it to the target and launch it. On top of that is tactical and strategic aspect of missing the real target.

 

These decoy's are going to be a real headache for potential adversary.

[Namenlos Ein]

I'm sure physical tank decoys are nothing new. I'm certain that we used rubber tanks in North Africa in WW2 to confuse Rommel.

Never heard about rubber tanks. Bur I heard about trap trucks.

 

 

By the way here is the picture of inflatable S-300 SAM complex: http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=664414&postcount=16.

[4c Hajduk Veljko]

That looks like real indeed.

 

[CE_Mikemonster]

Russia’s balloon defense

 

There's video on that page as well.

 

Hahaha good link, nice quirky video lol

 

I'm taking it that the only countermeasure when these are used will be signals intelligence and good photo recon?

I mean.. If there are two SAM sites and only one is confirmed to be operating in that sector then good sigint and thermal imaging (of the SAM's deployment) should be enough to only prosecute the right target.

 

Cost isn't really an issue here though (you don't win the initial 72hr air war by bankrupting your enemy do you?).

 

Who's saying that these would be GREAT targets for cannon-practise? LOL, any takers?

 

 

Never heard about rubber tanks. Bur I heard about trap trucks.

 

 

By the way here is the picture of inflatable S-300 SAM complex: http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=664414&postcount=16.

 

Interesting image, i'll see if I can find the name of the guy who's idea the rubber tanks were [Found it: Jasper Maskelyne]. He used to be a stage 'magician' before the war, old habits die hard I suppose! Also i'm sure he had something to do with a group of signallers in Scotland imitating full scale military manouvres being carried out.

(Sorry for OT)

 

Edit: on the subject of WW2 decoys and deception, i'll make a new thread.

Edited April 4, 2009 by CE_Mikemonster

[Boberro]

These decoy's are going to be a real headache for potential adversary.

 

Yep, of course if adversary somehow doesn't detect false positions.

[4c Hajduk Veljko]

Cost isn't really an issue here though (you don't win the initial 72hr air war by bankrupting your enemy do you?).

Does this number ring a bell 78 800 000 000 000? And yes, you can bankrupt your opponent into loosing a war, cold war is one example.

[Groove]

The soviets should have built more rubber army back than to prevent bancrupcy!

 

T-72R

 

MiG-29R

 

R-77R

 

And so on! :D

 

PS: Love that rubber thing sales man: "From 300 Meters you cant see if its a rubber S-300 site or a real one...." RIGHT, lol.

[CE_Mikemonster]

The soviets should have built more rubber army back than to prevent bancrupcy!

That made me laugh out loud, thanks!

 

 

Honestly you would not bankrupt your opponent by making them fire twice as many missiles at fake tanks.

These decoys (if they are as good as claimed) would be useful, but for other reasons which i'm sure you could point out Hajduk.

 

 

Logic says that the situation where these decoys would be used would either be:

 

1). Full scale war.

- You will not bankrupt your oppenent using decoys because modern wars happen so fast that ammunition produced after the start of hostilities would probably only arrive in-theatre after land or air superiority had been won.

 

or

 

2). A prolonged bombing campaign against a small/vulnerable state (with full air superiority to the aggressor).

- You will not bankrupt NATO in this circumstance (as was proved by operation Allied Force). You stand just as little chance of bankrupting the United States.

- They may run low on weapon stocks [NOT RELEVANT TO MY/THIS POINT please don't start a new argument topic] but that is NOT the same as 'bankrupting' themselves.

 

 

 

The cold war was not a 'war', it was a confrontation. The USSR was bankrupted, but not because it was actively 'fighting' a war. NATO decoys made no contribution to it's bankrupcy.

Edited April 5, 2009 by CE_Mikemonster

[topol-m]

The soviets should have built more rubber army back than to prevent bancrupcy!

 

T-72R

 

MiG-29R

 

R-77R

 

And so on! :D

 

PS: Love that rubber thing sales man: "From 300 Meters you cant see if its a rubber S-300 site or a real one...." RIGHT, lol.

 

There is much more use for these decoys, than just causing waste of weaponry. For instance - the enemy revealing its firing position, the enemy recieving false information about the quantity, type and position of your forces.