SVP-24 vs. JDAM

[C130]

http://nationalinterest.org/feature/did-russia-really-build-smarter-smart-bomb-15484

Russia claims to have developed an ingenious new smart bomb.

Or rather, instead of making the bomb smarter, it's the aircraft carrying the bomb that has all the brains, according to the Russian news site the Saker.

The Saker article attributes the "amazingly accurate" and "quasi-miraculous" Russian bombing in Syria to a weapon called the SVP-24. The SVP-24 is a system that turns unguided conventional bombs into precision-guided weapons, similar to the U.S. Joint Direct Attack Munition (JDAM). But whereas the JDAM is a guidance kit attached to an iron bomb, Russia's SVP-24 attaches the guidance kit to the bomber itself.

"What this system does is that it constantly compares the position of the aircraft and the target (using the GLONASS satellite navigation system)," theSaker says.

"It measures the environmental parameters (pressure, humidity, windspeed, speed, angle of attack, etc.). It can also receive additional information from datalinks from AWACS aircraft, ground stations, and other aircraft. The SVP-24 then computes an 'envelope' (speed, altitude, course) inside which the dumb bombs are automatically released exactly at the precise moment when their unguided flight will bring them right over the target (with a 3-5 meter accuracy)."

Thus, "the pilot does not even have to worry about targeting anything," according to the Saker. "He just enters the target’s exact coordinates into his system, flies within a defined envelope and the bombs are automatically released for him. He can place his full attention on detecting any hostiles (aircraft, missiles, AA guns)."

And why is this better than the JDAM? It's cheaper, the Saker argues. Each JDAM kit costs around $25,000 per bomb, and when the bomb is dropped, the kit it expended. Because the SVP-24 is fitted to the aircraft rather than the bomb, it can be reused each time.

Don't these tropes sound familiar? Brilliant new weapon unveiled (a constant refrain since the Smart Bomb Revolution in the Vietnam War). It is, it seems, the story of simple Russian engineering versus over-complicated American technology.



Yet before we pronounce a smart bomb breakthrough, let's take a closer look.

The SVP-24 sounds like nothing more than an automatic bombing system where the aircraft does all the computing and the bomb just lands where it is supposed to. This has been indeed the goal of military aviation since the first bombsights were developed before World War I.

Unfortunately, bomb-aiming systems have consistently missed the mark. Despite claims that the World War II U.S. Norden bombsight could drop a bomb into a pickle barrel from 20,000 feet, the Circular Error Probable—the distance from the target that 50 percent of the bombs would fall on—of a B-17 was 3,300 feet. Hence, all those photos from World War II or Vietnam of bombs landing around—but not on—the target.

The beauty of smart bombs is that they can be guided precisely onto a target, meaning one bomb can accomplish what an entire saturation raid cannot. If an aircraft-based system like the SVP-24 really can compute every factor, from aircraft motion to wind gusts, then the bomb should land on the target. But if one bit of data is wrong, and the bomb is descending on an incorrect trajectory, then there is no way to guide it in mid-air.

Perhaps that's why Russia has been accused of hitting targets such as medical centers in Syria. Maybe real smart bombs are a smart idea, after all.

 

[C130]

I'd still take JDAM, but countries on a budget this system is a godsend.

seems pretty accurate too me.

 

[500]

I'd still take JDAM, but countries on a budget this system is a godsend.

seems pretty accurate too me.

If u call +-100 m accurate then it is.

In WW2 diving bombers achieved much better accuracy, especially German Shtukas.

 

[C130]

If u call +-100 m accurate then it is.

In WW2 diving bombers achieved much better accuracy, especially German Shtukas.

ehh lol, yeah you are right, but 90% of the time do you need that surgical pinpoint accuracy?

 

[500]

ehh lol, yeah you are right, but 90% of the time do you need that surgical pinpoint accuracy?

You need high accuracy:

1) When you attack hardened targets like concrete buildings, bunkers, bridges.
2) When you act in populated areas.
3) When you attack small mobile targets.

Basically in overwhelming majority of cases.

 

[C130]

interesting video of Tu-22M3 dropping dump bombs. not sure if SVP-24 is installed or if it was just using the optical bomb sight.

pretty damn good accuracy anyhow for cheap dumb bombs, though I would love to see the Tu-22M3 dropping like 8 2000lb JDAMs though.

 

[cabatli_53]

I'd still take JDAM, but countries on a budget this system is a godsend.

seems pretty accurate too me.

This bomb certainly causes many civilian casualties. It has a huge CEP rate seen in video.

That's 6m CEP HGK

 

[C130]

This bomb certainly causes many civilian casualties. It has a huge CEP rate seen in video.

That's 6m CEP HGK

i am more going on about how cost effective it is.

that TU-22M3 sortie was probably 1/5 the cost of similar Western sortie using a F/A 18 and a few JDAMs

and the argument about civlian casualities you are going to get those whether you are using dumb bombs or smarts ones, especially when you got rats hiding in cities and taking over peoples homes and using them as shields.

 

[Oldman1]

I'll take the JDAM.

 

[Sage]

I'll take the JDAM.

Beautiful

 

[Yongpeng Sun-Tastaufen]

Best to have both kinds. SVP-24 is not nearly as accurate as PGM but if you are gonna bomb a building what does 1 meter matter? Russia uses both SVP-24 and PGM, and mix and match between the two depending on operational requirements, so it's more versatile.

 

[A.P. Richelieu]

Best to have both kinds. SVP-24 is not nearly as accurate as PGM but if you are gonna bomb a building what does 1 meter matter? Russia uses both SVP-24 and PGM, and mix and match between the two depending on operational requirements, so it's more versatile.

This is the same idea as was used in the Norden bombsight during WW2, but more automatic.
The Norden bombsight used speed, temperature, windspeed, height and humidity to achieve a CEP of 23 meters during testing. That is, 50 % of the bombs fell within a circle with a radius of 23 meters. When testing in warlike conditions, the average CEP in 1943 was 370 meters.

The precision of an unguided bomb is proportional to the height where it was dropped.
If You drop a number of bombs, they tend to separate themselves from each other randomly,
and regardless how accurate a computer is, this randomness is going to cause errors in the range of 50-100 meters if you drop the bomb at 5,000 meter, the preferred minimum altitude to avoid ManPADS. You can only reduce this error by flying low, exposing the aircraft to all kinds of hazards.

If I were the US, I Would develop a model for how a guided bomb works that can run on a PC, and set up a competion for people to write an App for a mobile phone which guides the bomb.
A price for the winning App of a couple of million dollars, and then you have a cheap solution.

 

[Yongpeng Sun-Tastaufen]

This is the same idea as was used in the Norden bombsight during WW2, but more automatic.

Digital fire control computer and laser rangefinder was already introduced on Su-22 in the 1970s. It's nothing new. SVP-24 was introduced in the early 2000s with the advent of GLONASS. The only new thing SVP-24 adds is GLONASS guided fire control, interfacing the autopilot with GLONASS input, fully automated bomb delivery, unlike previous fire control which required the pilot to steer the plane and press a trigger to drop bombs.

SVP-24 can be used at night. It only requires input from GLONASS. MANPADS don't work at night.

 

[A.P. Richelieu]

Digital fire control computer and laser rangefinder was already introduced on Su-22 in the 1970s. It's nothing new. SVP-24 was introduced in the early 2000s with the advent of GLONASS. The only new thing SVP-24 adds is GLONASS guided fire control, interfacing the autopilot with GLONASS input, fully automated bomb delivery, unlike previous fire control which required the pilot to steer the plane and press a trigger to drop bombs.

SVP-24 can be used at night. It only requires input from GLONASS. MANPADS don't work at night.

IR sensors should work BETTER at night, since the contrast vs the sky is increased.

 

[Yongpeng Sun-Tastaufen]

IR sensors should work BETTER at night, since the contrast vs the sky is increased.

View attachment 469487

Verba MANPADS also has thermal sight.

But terrorists don't have that. And having it turned on all the time carrying a MANPADS on your shoulder 24 7 is too heavy and uses up too much battery when an airstrike takes only a few seconds from start to finish.

Speaking of a few seconds for an airstrike, Su-24 has crosswind sensor. The computer takes in all kinds of info like GPS, wind speed, wind direction, air pressure, humidity and all that and computes the fire solution. Even if there is wind it don't blow big bombs off course too much in only a second or two.