What does /k/ think of anti proximity fuse protection? Russ

It's Russian so /k/ will say its absolute shit and hate it.

>>34876864
It's shit

>>34876864
I hate it.

>>34876864
>What does /k/ think of anti proximity fuse protection?

Extreme skepticism that is what it is given you don't use proximity fuzes on ground vehicles.

>>34876864
It's the next generation of defence in the modern battlefield. Russia could take over the continental United states with 100 of these vehicles and 2000 foot soldiers

>>34876864
If it works against top-attack weapons then its a serious improvement as it forces the enemy to hit the heavier parts of the armor.

>>34877332
Stuff like landmines and air-dropped cluster munitions do.

Though the likelihood of needing protection against those kinds of threats in any realistic conflict is a little unlikely, doesn't hurt to have the capability I guess.

>>34877372
>Stuff like landmines and air-dropped cluster munitions do.

No, they don't.

>>34877391
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/CBU-97_Sensor_Fuzed_Weapon

You'll notice it isn't called an 'impact fuse weapon'

>>34877421
>https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/CBU-97_Sensor_Fuzed_Weapon
>The laser sensor detects changes in apparent terrain height such as the contour of a vehicle. At the same time, infrared sensors detect heat signatures, such as those emitted by the engine of a vehicle. When the combination of height contours and heat signatures indicative of a target are detected, the Skeet detonates, firing an explosively formed penetrator (EFP)

it uses a laser range finder not a magnetic proximity fuse. This system is useless against the CBU-97.

>>34877292
>>34877323

haha!
a magical place!

include me in the screencap bro :)

>>34877332
If you watch the video, you'll see Grad rockets, the Russian copy of what was used in Ukraine to wipe out a tank battalion, that explode in air before it can reach its target. The good part about it is that Russian tanks won't need to use infantry as anti-tank defense against rounds or rockets that use proximity fuze.

File: 1500312783066.gif (899KB, 600x600px)

899KB, 600x600px

>>34877332
Just a thought
Aren't most HEAT rounds better from a slight standoff distance?
Why not use proximity fuzing?
Also, artillery + cluster uses proximity fuzes, if the shells burst at a high attitude they're effectively harmless against tanks unless somebody is turned out.

what does radio controlled fuse mean in moon rune speak?

>>34878181
>Radio frequency sensing is the main sensing principle for artillery shells.

>The device described in World War II patent[30] works as follows: The shell contains a micro-transmitter which uses the shell body as an antenna and emits a continuous wave of roughly 180–220 MHz. As the shell approaches a reflecting object, an interference pattern is created. This pattern changes with shrinking distance: every half wavelength in distance (a half wavelength at this frequency is about 0.7 meters), the transmitter is in or out of resonance. This causes a small cycling of the radiated power and consequently the oscillator supply current of about 200–800 Hz, the Doppler frequency. This signal is sent through a band pass filter, amplified, and triggers the detonation when it exceeds a given amplitude.

By throwing a radio wave at the same frequency as the antenna, the jammer can make the shell think it is at the optimum height for detonation when it actually isn't. China has mastered this technology.

File: m830.jpg (66KB, 875x514px)

66KB, 875x514px

>>34878147
the standoff distance on shaped charges is relatively short so a physical fuze/switch is simpler.

File: 440px-125mm_3BK29_HEAT.jpg (18KB, 440x248px)

18KB, 440x248px

>>34878305
another example

File: 3bd199f73c9663894d9093f630a7c23f.jpg (261KB, 1261x1311px)

261KB, 1261x1311px

>>34878147
and since you mentioned yes it IS possible. The Brunswick RAW uses an optical standoff sensor to reduce the size.

>>34878206
You don't use VT fuses against tanks, though.

The only possible AT weapons this might be good against are TOW-2B and DPICM (to throw off the dispersion pattern), and I'm not very certain that either uses a VT-style proximity fuse.

Everything else uses impact fuses, except for skeet, which uses IR targeting with a laser rangefinder for optimal fusing.

>>34878305
Thanks for your examples, but I know about that. I was under the impression "optimal" standoff distance is usually much further than those few inches though, for modern rounds.
If it's lighter/easier to handle, and you can use a more aerodynamic shell profile, and gets you potentially a few hundred mills of RHA, why not?
Hell better fuzing on HEAT could lead to a true multipurpose round, with delayed impact for use against structures, and more usability against lowflying helos.

>>34876864

Alright, lets say this works as intended. It doesn't, but lets just assume.

How are they planning to stop 120mm DU APFSDS? How are they planning to stop the Mavericks? Or the GBUs? What about the CBUs? But most importantly will this do anything to stop a TOW-2?

>>34878502
Afghanit APS can stop 120 mm APFSDS
>implying someone would let you fly over battlefield
Russia is not Iraq mr.Bush

File: Untitled.png (250KB, 1026x1300px) Image search: [Google]

250KB, 1026x1300px

>>34878468
But they do, have a Javelin missile.

>>34876864
Rtut-BM might work against radio fuses but, the standard gravity fuses will still work. if it costs less than $5k/unit than it is a good idea otherwise seems very illogical and should only be equipped for command vehicles

>>34878502
It's not the only defense you know. They're just covering their bases, since proximity fuzes are popular with artillery and artillery wrecks tanks.

It still has Afghanit and Shtora for other purposes. Also why would you want to drop a GBU on the tank? Why not drop it first on the Tunguskas and Tors that accompany the tanks?

>>34876864
>Why can't they just go the easy and correct way and just buy Chinese?
I'd really love to see your flag, you spam this every day and somehow I feel like it's neither Russian nor Chinese.

>>34878315
What is Bofors BILL2?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/BILL_2_Anti-tank_guided_weapon

>B-B-B-B--B-B-B-B-B-B-B--BUT YOU DON'T USE PROXY FUSES AGAINST TANKS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Oh, I guess the other 99% of stuff on the battlefield is irrelevant then. Better just let it all die.

>>34878206
>proximity fuze for AAA

>>34879709
You don't use proximity fuzes on ground targets.