• tal
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    This is a lightweight AA Gun that can be mounted on a cheap pickup truck. This isn’t a “Static” defense,

    It’s static from the standpoint of being required to meet an incoming Shahed-136, which can move more quickly than it; you cannot substantially reposition vehicles on ground-based vehicles to meet incoming attacks from the air. The critical factor is whether you can concentrate your defenses in time to meet an attack, once you have detected that incoming attack.

    • dragontamer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      The critical factor is whether you can concentrate your defenses in time to meet an attack, once you have detected that incoming attack.

      Force concentration is a job for fighter jets. Most jets can fly at Mach 1, or even Mach2 (700mph to 1500mph). At which point, a 120mph Shahed-136 is basically standing still.

      Different weapons for different tasks. The AA Gun is cheap and meant to be widely deployed across the whole frontline. Infantry could use them against other infantry (30mm airbursts will still wreck enemy infantry), and also rely upon those guns to protect themselves vs enemy drones.

      • tal
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        9 months ago

        Different weapons for different tasks.

        I think that we may be violently agreeing. What I had in my original comment:

        They may both have a role.

        If you know that a given point is at risk of attack, using a static defense like AA guns is practical. Say you have some sort of specific, high-value target that you can put AA guns around. That may be a very sensible thing to do.

        But the problem, if you intend to rely only on those, is that there is then a concentration of force issue. The attacker can choose which point to attack; they get the initiative.