Let's talk about SPAAG's !!

N

NickV801

New Member
Hey guys!

This is my first post on this site... it seems to be right up my alley.

I noticed there isn't much talk about Self-Propelled Anti Aircraft Guns on here. In case some of you don't know what they are - here are a few (pretty cool, IMO) examples:


UK Marksman Anti-Aircraft System

4239861983_9b4947a2ec_z.jpg





Russian Pantsir S1

96K6E-Pantsir-S1E-UAE-2S.jpg



US m42 Duster (Retired)

M42_Duster_Anti-Aircraft_Armoured_Vehicle_US_14.jpg




Just a few examples (sorry if the pics are too big!)... I really like these things, SPAAGs just look mean. But yeah, I was wondering if any of you guys had a favorite, an opinion on what one is the best (not of these three, of ANY), or just had anything to say about them.


Just my $0.02, I think the Pantsir S1 is the best from what I've seen and read, the Tunguska M1, Type 87, Gepard and Marksman all seem pretty good, but really similar. The canceled Canadian MMEV seems pretty good, and I hate to say it...but the US seems to be lacking when it comes to these. Only thing I can think of is we thought these guns might have seemed obsolete and went with purely missile based ones, such as the Avenger.

So...any thoughts on these bad boys?

Lookin forward to talkin with ya'll!
 
My girlfriends father served in the Romanian Army in the Cold War, and he saw a lot of ZSU's during his time. In his opinion, the ZSU could have taken out any helicopter, Soviet or Western, during the Cold War with ease.

The Pantsir and Marksman look pretty cool.
 
Last edited:
Wow. some nice pics. SAdly I know very little on SPAANGs but I must admit I do like they roles. And they always look very cool.
 
Why do I think of old WWII aircraft and Panzer I's put together?
Just kidding. I know self-propelled artillery, but never heard of self-propelled anti-air. Nice pics.
The Russian Pantsir looks like something from a comic book or a novel, but if it works, then I know 2 things:
1)Very expensive
2)Very effective
 
Thanks KoreanSeaboy, yeah SPAAGs make for great pics lol.

And yeah Stealthy...i'd hate to be in a Helicopter and see the tracers from these things coming at me...
 
OK
Actual purpose of such systems are different to current potential war scenarios. Today any military plan goes as following:
Air supremacy; artillery;invasion... the part as where such would be effective (mainly/mostly) are against Helicopters or aircraft attack defense are not very likely. Any invasion would be first secured by Air supremacy and those vehicles as nice in concept, but vulnerable to Missiles from air and land launched, also Artillery makes them no more valuable, than APC or Howitzer.
 
NickV801 said:
I gotta say...that Pantsir S-1 looks a little more valuable than an APC. ;-)
Click to expand...
What looks- means nothing!
AAMS alone are probably 2% of costs and availability and non-vulnerability...
Nice concept for Cold war, but take a Stinger- job done
 
1. SPAAGS look awesome, this is a fact.
2. Unfortunately, SPAAGS have never been a large factor in warfare. Generally, they can't make up for lack of air superiority. And, from what I gather, the main instance of really effective AA making up for air superiority was the Syrian SAMS in the Yom Kippur War, and I think those were mostly emplaced missile batteries.
 
MC Martel, I dont agree mate.

Remember the war between Israel and Egypt? Egypt was successful as its infantry and armor were under an umbrella of SAMs. But when they decided to move up to support their allies who were pounded (Syria I believe), they made a terrible mistake, the Israeli regained air supremacy over their armor and they lost the battle and maybe the whole war...

If the Egyptians had more mobile SAMs to follow their tanks and protect them from aircrafts... Israel history would have been very different, and maybe even shorter.

And remember the 88mm anti aircraft gun the Germans were using in WWII? it wasnt really self propelled... But they used it against tanks in desperation and discovered that their gun was a real tank killer.

It's the same here, many of the modern Self propelled anti aircraft guns/systems can be used to take out all sorts of targets...

exemples:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M163_VADS

A vulcan canon on a light armored vehicle. It's capable of engaging light armor and personnel too... And it's US technology by the way ;)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starstreak_missile
This one comes with a wonderful thermal camera, giving the armored vehicle using this equipment the ability to engage lightly armored and fast targets if it's necessary... And it can work as some kind of scout to spot enemy units or for surveillance duty...

Well there is always different uses for big guns and missiles in a battlefield, and if you add good radars/observation devices to the mix... You get yourself a hell of a weapon for the modern battlefield...

edit:
got more for you guys, looks like this category is evolving, it might disappear already ^^
http://www.angelfire.com/art/enchanter/starstreak.html

Recently trials have been conducted using this missile against ground targets. The results were surprising and impressive. In brief, the Starstreak darts can each penetrate over a metre of armour (presumably RHA) at a range of 6000m - nearly twice the range of a TOW. While TOW takes 21 seconds to reach 3,750m Starstreak takes less than 5 seconds to reach 6000m.
Click to expand...

This "new" class of weapon needs a designation. "HVGM" is what it is, but also for what it does. ADAT has been used -ATAD is Ok-ish, but I like "A4GM"- Anti-Armour/Anti-Aircraft Guided Missile
Click to expand...

They have a lot of ideas... They want to add hellfire missiles/hydra rockets etc to the weapon system... Crazy stuff...
 
Last edited:
1. Those sams were large emplaced sams, the SPAAGs of the time were generally smaller and shorter ranged, what DID happen was that the emplaced SAMS helped, but there is not nessicarily reason to beleive mobile SAM fire would have been as effective. Therefore, we can't nessicarily conclude anything would have significantly changed.
2. WWII was a perfect example of the relative ineffectiveness of SPAAGS, SPAAGs are almost always used in relatively small numbers and were completely unable to make up for the allied air superiority in the skies over france and germany, or poland. The use of the emplaced 88 as an anti tank weapon neither discusses SPAAGs or makes a point about them.
3. The only case I can think of about non-emplaced SAM's having a major effect on war is in Afghanistan during the 80's when the shoulder launched Stingers did a number on soviet air superiority. And those were shoulder, not SPAAG launched.
 
MC Martel, there is no ultimate weapon on the battlefield. They are used for a particular duty.

But my point here is that denying the enemy his air superiority is very useful.
And my second point is that if these weapons are good enough for air targets, they can engage other types of targets as well.

The simple presence of these weapons on the field makes the use of helicopters a very dangerous action.

And when I see how effective helicopters can be on tanks, and even modern tanks... I believe that it's already a wonderful job.

I dont know what kind of SAMs the Egyptians were using... But if they had a mobile air umbrella for their advancing troops... The Israelis would have taken a serious beating. Even if they cant destroy every airplane closing in... They can just give better odds to the troops on the field. This alone can make a difference between victory and failure.

And I took the 88mm canon example for it's power. Someone designed the gun for aircrafts... And some soldier on the field said "eh, why dont we use it on tanks?"... The concept is born then, the concept is the use of an anti-aircraft gun on a different target.

You dont want to be infantry next to fast reloading Vulcan canon capable of aiming at high targets and capable of engaging fast targets... If it have enough ammo, it can level a whole city in a few hours...
And they have different kinds of ammunition, changing following the targets.

One question:
When you SPAAG, are the missile weapons included? or just big fat canons shooting shells at aircraft?
Because I saw the Russian Pantsir S1, and I think these are missiles... And I believe that this two big black things look like canons... They look like laser canons too, damn...
 
Well..ive studied almost all of the system but i must say that Pantsir S1 is a menacing weapon platform..probably the best in its class..just not yet combat proven.
 
Do SPAAGS still have a role?

Impressive as these vehicles look I wonder about utility compared to short ranged missile systems. Most short-ranged Air to Ground Missiles have ranges greater than that of the gun, meaning enemy choppers and aircraft can engage the targets SPAAGS are suppose to defend without being threatened by the SPAAGS.

Because of information technology, todays aircraft electronics are far more advanced than those of 20-30 years ago. A pilot would have to be caught completely off guard (not terribly likely) to be engaged by a SPAAG.
 
Last edited:
From what I've heard, they're pretty effective against helicopters, yet if they're against something as fast as the F-22 or the F-35, then they're about as useful as mobile SAMs, which are pretty ineffective against most modern aircraft
 
Korean Seaboy said:
From what I've heard, they're pretty effective against helicopters, yet if they're against something as fast as the F-22 or the F-35, then they're about as useful as mobile SAMs, which are pretty ineffective against most modern aircraft
Click to expand...

Only if the helicopter is within range. Chances are its the helicopter that will destroy the SPAAG rather then visa versa.

For example the AH-64 Apache, it carries 8-16 Hellfire AT missiles with a range of 6 Miles. A SPAAG has a range of 2 miles.

I don't know what the SOP is on a attack helicopter in terms of target priority, but it would make sense that unless otherwise ordered the weapons operator would eliminate any threat to the helicopter first long before the enemy could engage it.

The only real chance a SPAAG would have would be surprise *if* it can remain undetected.

The real solution are the hybrid gun/missile systems.
 
Last edited:
Personally, I've always liked the look of the German Gepard but later I changed favourites to the Russian 9K22 Tunguska
640px-2008_Moscow_May_Parade_Rehearsal_-_Tunguska.JPG


However I do also kind of like the look of the Chinese Type 95 SPAAG
640px-Type_95_SPAAG_-_Beijing_Museum_1.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top