"Advanced Precision Kill Weapon System"

A kit to turn dumb hydra rockets into laser guided rockets/missiles. Supposedly to fill the gap between area effect hydra rockets and precision ammunition like the hellfire.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_Precision_Kill_Weapon_System

"Any platform that can launch 2.75" rockets can launch APKWS without modification." ... I want these!!! Can't someone make a mod for these? Pretty please? Like copying the lua for the hydras and making them a semi-hellfire? :D

Given the bit at 3:50, when will they appear in DCS A-10C?

I'm super keen for these.

Given the bit at 3:50, when will they appear in DCS A-10C?

Regarding the wikipedia entry, in RL they made first tests in 2012.

But for DCS A-10C ... they will never be available for us .... unless we find someone who makes an appropriate mod for us! :o)

Given, that it is "simply" a weapon that we already have in game and "only" needs to learn the laser guidance part (that we also have for other weapons already), it could be relatively easy to do. I would try do do it on my own, but there is a "but" ... in DCS there seems to be a strict distinction between rockets, which are unguided, and missiles, which are guided. So our rockets would need to be made a missile ... which isn't that easy anymore and that is where my own LUA-Fu gets to its limits, I am afraid ... (not to speak of a new 3d model ... but that might be considered as of secondary importance anyways)

Regarding the wikipedia entry, in RL they made first tests in 2012.

 

But for DCS A-10C ... they will never be available for us .... unless we find someone who makes an appropriate mod for us! :o)

 

Given, that it is "simply" a weapon that we already have in game and "only" needs to learn the laser guidance part (that we also have for other weapons already), it could be relatively easy to do. I would try do do it on my own, but there is a "but" ... in DCS there seems to be a strict distinction between rockets, which are unguided, and missiles, which are guided. So our rockets would need to be made a missile ... which isn't that easy anymore and that is where my own LUA-Fu gets to its limits, I am afraid ... (not to speak of a new 3d model ... but that might be considered as of secondary importance anyways)

I was thinking that given the approximately similar range and operation, you could just copy and paste the Vihkr M code across and reduce damage parameters. So make the 7-shot Hydra pod a missile store equipped with 7 Vihkr Ms with reduced damage and made to look like a Hydra.

AFM is the problem there. In that case Hydra would fly like Vikhr and they have a very different control systems. Coders would have to create AFM code for the Hydra, otherwise it would be very unrealistic.

is US adopting Russian policy of making rockets guide-able a sign of giving respect where respect is due?.. and why did it take US soo long to come to this logical conclusion that using guided rockets is better than guided missile which are much more expensive and few..

The Russians saw this logic back in the 80's... from simple financial reality of it and testing on the ground they came to conclusion that the money spent on missile does not answer for the results they give compared to guided rockets..

Vikhr guided rockets/missiles seem more and more advanced technologically and ideologically/doctrine wise ..

is US adopting Russian policy of making rockets guide-able a sign of giving respect where respect is due?.. and why did it take US soo long to come to this logical conclusion that using guided rockets is better than guided missile which are much more expensive and few..

 

The Russians saw this logic back in the 80's... from simple financial reality of it and testing on the ground they came to conclusion that the money spent on missile does not answer for the results they give compared to guided rockets..

 

Vikhr guided rockets/missiles seem more and more advanced technologically and ideologically/doctrine wise ..

Hrm? My knowlege is surely rather limited, but where do the russians have guided rockets? Isn't it more doctrinal to use cheap weapons, but then plenty of them?

Afaik that is also true for i.e. the Vikhr - but then on the other hand the Vikhr is more the equivalent to the Hellfire, not the Hydra.

I think Vikhr is much closer to the APKWS and even worse technology. Vikhr indeed is a guided rocket, though with a much more specialized armor piercing warhead. Hellfire and the like are really useful in real war scenarios with their different attack profiles and lock on after launch making them superior to Vikhr in modern warfare.

Another very useful feature in modern missiles compared to Vikhr is that ground troops can lase the target which is not possible with ze old Rjashian.

The small diameter bombs and guided rockets are great use in the current US war theaters where Hellfires are an overkill in many scenarios.

While Russian weapons might be cheap and simple, I wouldn't want to go to a modern war with them.

S-25L is the guided version of the S-25 rocket.

Another very useful feature in modern missiles compared to Vikhr is that ground troops can lase the target which is not possible with ze old Rjashian.

I think you have a point there, at least based on the game. When the Vikhr loses its beam ride for a brief moment it just veers off into some trees.

I think Vikhr is much closer to the APKWS and even worse technology. Vikhr indeed is a guided rocket, though with a much more specialized armor piercing warhead. Hellfire and the like are really useful in real war scenarios with their different attack profiles and lock on after launch making them superior to Vikhr in modern warfare.

 

Another very useful feature in modern missiles compared to Vikhr is that ground troops can lase the target which is not possible with ze old Rjashian.

The Vikhr is 'modern' too, just with different priorities.

It's cheap, really cheap for a precision weapon, and doesn't need a whole lot of ducks in a row to use correctly.

What's noteworthy is that it has concrete advantages over its more expensive counterparts. It has slightly longer range than the Hellfire and is much faster, which counts for a lot when your targets are shooting back or running for cover. You can also carry more of them.

I think it's rather impressive that the Russians managed to eek out a few things that the missile does better than the competition while still requiring much less resources.

The Vikhr is not as accurate as it might seem. The crazy spinning makes it much less accurate for example dug in tanks where you don't see much more than the turret and even in an open area, a side or front penetration is not guaranteed.

In this video an Mi-28 fires a missile with a similar trajectory to Vikhr. In tight spots like in the edges of forest and urban areas that might be a big problem when precision matters.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LO77pkn0ChA

In this video a US Cobra fires TOWs and Hellfires. At 10:04 a Hellfire is fired at a target behind some palm trees with a top attack trajectory where a Vikhr would smack right into the trees.

IMO Vikhr is poor mans version of APKWS with a tandem HEAT.

What's noteworthy is that it has concrete advantages over its more expensive counterparts. It has slightly longer range than the Hellfire and is much faster, which counts for a lot when your targets are shooting back or running for cover. You can also carry more of them.

When launched from a plane it has a longer range than a Hellfire launched from a helicopter but from a helicopter it's about the same and unlike an AGM-114L it isn't fire-and-forget, so you have to linger in front of that enemy fire until it hits. Futhermore the 'L' version works in an obscured environment.

In this video a US Cobra fires TOWs and Hellfires. At 10:04 a Hellfire is fired at a target behind some palm trees with a top attack trajectory where a Vikhr would smack right into the trees.

 

At 9:30, why is it flashing 'FAIL'? Is that just the missile's opinion of the enemy?

is US adopting Russian policy of making rockets guide-able a sign of giving respect where respect is due?..

NEVER!:megalol:

Lol, no, I totally agree. As an American, I've always had a lot respect at what the Russians come up with. For some reason, the US government just refuses to ever copy what some other government comes up with, no matter how good it is. Our stupid loss.

Price and possibly ease of manufacture is the only thing it does better. You have to carry more of them because they are less lethal than a more precise, more expensive missile.

They cannot be used in as many roles as other missiles, they cannot be buddy-lased for, they cannot be launched in LOAL modes or select top attack trajectories, etc.

Likewise this weapon being demonstrated is an increase of lethality with the rocket system - using a single rocket accurately is cheaper than using a spray of rockets to achieve the same purpose, or a single hellfire.

I think it's rather impressive that the Russians managed to eek out a few things that the missile does better than the competition while still requiring much less resources.

Assuming they is Vikhr;

is a lot faster

is far more resistant to jamming/countermeasures then other missiles.

Can carry more of them, and have spare pylons for whatever else you need.

You can jam a vikhr with flares or a dazzler, or good-old fashioned smoke screen. More specifically, you can do that to the helis guidance system. Same deal for the Tunguska.

Any hellfire is more resistant than a Vikhr simply because you only need to guide that thing in the last 5 seconds and it's not coming along the line of sight of the laser, so a dazzler may not know where to 'point', assuming it can duplicate the guidance code right away. In fact, you don't even have to see your target, you just have to launch the thing over a hill and some guy with his pocket laser will guide it for you ;)

You get what you pay for.

Assuming they is Vikhr;

is a lot faster

is far more resistant to jamming/countermeasures then other missiles.

Can carry more of them, and have spare pylons for whatever else you need.

You can jam a vikhr with flares or a dazzler, or good-old fashioned smoke screen. More specifically, you can do that to the helis guidance system. Same deal for the Tunguska.

 

Any hellfire is more resistant than a Vikhr simply because you only need to guide that thing in the last 5 seconds and it's not coming along the line of sight of the laser, so a dazzler may not know where to 'point', assuming it can duplicate the guidance code right away. In fact, you don't even have to see your target, you just have to launch the thing over a hill and some guy with his pocket laser will guide it for you ;)

 

You get what you pay for.

i thought 1 of the points of the vikhrs guidance was that its hard to jam.

Yeah, it might be a little harder than the typical TOW-like setup :)

When launched from a plane it has a longer range than a Hellfire launched from a helicopter but from a helicopter it's about the same and unlike an AGM-114L it isn't fire-and-forget, so you have to linger in front of that enemy fire until it hits. Futhermore the 'L' version works in an obscured environment.

No one ever said the Vikhr was better than the Hellfire L, which is unique in it's guidance capability. The Longbow radar is hardly standard on the modern battlefield. A comparison to just about any helicopter weapon is unfair.

It's not fire and forget, anyhow. The Longbow radar dome has to remain LOS to target.

Radar Hellfire is Fire-and-Forget and more specifically inertially guided and radar assisted. You don't even need a Longbow radar in order to use it as all the missile needs is target coordinates and velocity vector which can be acquired with TADS if need be. The missile will fly to the coordinates provided (if it's moving, it will calculate the current position using velocity vector) and search the ground for a target. You will need to have LOS to the target only when acquiring the target.

A smoke round will do the job. If the launch aircraft loses the target, it can't designate. Not a problem with AGM-114L and longbow radar. Furthermore it can engage 16 targets simultaneously as opposed to one at a time.

How did a thread about american dumb rockets getting laser kits become about Russian versus American guided AT missiles?