1B75 Penicillin

A few weeks ago the Russian military started a systematic counter artillery campaign which has since made great progress. The typical western way of detecting enemy artillery units is by radar. The flight path of the projectile is measured and the coordinates of its source are calculated enabling ones own artillery to respond. But counter-artillery radar itself depends on radiating. It is thereby easily detectable and vulnerable to fire. Over the last months Russia deployed a very different counter-artillery detection systems with the rather ironic name of Penicillin:

Penicillin or 1B75 Penicillin is an acoustic-thermal artillery-reconnaissance system developed by Ruselectronics for the Russian Armed Forces. The system aims to detect and locate enemy artillery, mortars, MLRs, anti-aircraft or tactical-missile firing positions with seismic and acoustic sensors, without emitting any radio waves. It locates enemy fire within 5 seconds at a range of 25 km (16 mi; 13 nmi). Penicillin completed state trials in December 2018 and entered combat duty in 2020.

The Penicillin is mounted on the 8x8 Kamaz-6350 chassis and consists of a 1B75 sensor suite placed on a telescopic boom for the infrared and visible spectrum as well as of several ground-installed seismic and acoustic receivers as a part of the 1B76 sensor suite. It has an effective range for communication with other military assets up to 40 kilometres (25 mi) and is capable to operate even in a fully automatic mode, without any crew. One system can reportedly cover an entire division against an enemy fire. Besides that, it co-ordinates and corrects a friendly artillery fire.

  1. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    The Penicillin system can hide in the woods and stick up its telescopic boom to look at and listen to the battlefield. As it does not radiate itself there is no good way for an enemy to detect it.

    The system pinpoints Ukrainian guns as they fire. They are then eliminated by immediate precise counter-fire. As the artillery relevant part of today's 'clobber' list provided by the Russian Ministry of Defense claims:

    Operational-Tactical Aviation, Missile Troops and Artillery of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation have neutralised an artillery ordnance depot of 114th Territorial Defence Brigade near Veliky Burluk (Kharkov region), as well as 82 artillery units at their firing positions, manpower and hardware at 98 areas.

    Counterbattery warfare operations have resulted in destruction of:

    one Polish-manufactured Krab howitzer near Peschanoye (Kharkov region);
    one U.S.-manufactured M109 Paladin howitzer, and one fighting vehicle equipped with Grad multiple-launch rocket system (MLRS) near Lozovaya (Kharkov region);
    one D-20 howitzer near Terny (Donetsk People's Republic);
    two Giatsint-B howitzers near Maryinka and Orlovka (Donetsk People's Republic);
    two Akatsiya self-propelled howitzers near Nevskoye (Lugansk People's Republic), and Preobrazhenka (Zaporozhye region);
    five D-30 howitzers near Zmiyevka, Novokairy (Kherson region), Sofiyevka (Donetsk People's Republic), and Orekhov (Zaporozhye region).
    Four U.S.-manufactured counterbattery warfare radars have been destroyed:

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      https://i.imgur.com/jqWMpb4.jpg

      two AN/TPQ-50 stations near Mylovoye and Dudchany (Kherson region),
      one AN/TPQ-36 counterbattery warfare radar near Ugledar (Donetsk People's Republic),
      one U.S.-manufactured AN/TPQ-48 counterbattery warfare radar near Senkovo (Kharkov region).
      Air defence facilities have shot down six Ukrainian unmanned aerial vehicles near Kremennaya (Lugansk People's Republic), Nikolskoye, and Petrovskoye (Donetsk People's Republic).

      14 rocket-propelled projectiles launched by HIMARS and Olkha MLRS have been intercepted near Udy (Kharkov region), Smolyaninovo (Lugansk People's Republic), Donetsk, and Khartsyzsk (Donetsk People's Republic).

      One U.S.-manufactured anti-radiation missile has been shot down near Radensk (Kherson region).

      One Ukrainian Tochka-U ballistic missile has been shot down near Berdyansk (Zaporozhye region).

      The above is the equivalent of two artillery companies (batteries with six guns each) eliminated in just one day. Ukrainian counter-battery fire against Russian artillery is no longer possible as the necessary detection equipment gets eliminated and as Ukrainian counter-fire is shot down by Russian air defenses.

      This Russian counter-artillery campaign has been going on for several weeks. It has disabled large parts of what was left of Ukrainian longer range capabilities. Meanwhile the Russian artillery keeps on knocking down Ukranian troops that hold the frontline. Only when all parts of the Ukrainian trenches have been hit by intense fire will the Russian infantry move in to clean up whatever is left behind.

      This form of battle is causing huge losses on the Ukrainian side while the Russian forces incur just a minimum of casualties.

      https://www.moonofalabama.org/2023/01/ukraine-sitrep-media-ignorance-counter-artillery-war-three-lost-armies-.html

      >dude just trust me it works

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      https://i.imgur.com/jqWMpb4.jpg

      two AN/TPQ-50 stations near Mylovoye and Dudchany (Kherson region),
      one AN/TPQ-36 counterbattery warfare radar near Ugledar (Donetsk People's Republic),
      one U.S.-manufactured AN/TPQ-48 counterbattery warfare radar near Senkovo (Kharkov region).
      Air defence facilities have shot down six Ukrainian unmanned aerial vehicles near Kremennaya (Lugansk People's Republic), Nikolskoye, and Petrovskoye (Donetsk People's Republic).

      14 rocket-propelled projectiles launched by HIMARS and Olkha MLRS have been intercepted near Udy (Kharkov region), Smolyaninovo (Lugansk People's Republic), Donetsk, and Khartsyzsk (Donetsk People's Republic).

      One U.S.-manufactured anti-radiation missile has been shot down near Radensk (Kherson region).

      One Ukrainian Tochka-U ballistic missile has been shot down near Berdyansk (Zaporozhye region).

      The above is the equivalent of two artillery companies (batteries with six guns each) eliminated in just one day. Ukrainian counter-battery fire against Russian artillery is no longer possible as the necessary detection equipment gets eliminated and as Ukrainian counter-fire is shot down by Russian air defenses.

      This Russian counter-artillery campaign has been going on for several weeks. It has disabled large parts of what was left of Ukrainian longer range capabilities. Meanwhile the Russian artillery keeps on knocking down Ukranian troops that hold the frontline. Only when all parts of the Ukrainian trenches have been hit by intense fire will the Russian infantry move in to clean up whatever is left behind.

      This form of battle is causing huge losses on the Ukrainian side while the Russian forces incur just a minimum of casualties.

      https://www.moonofalabama.org/2023/01/ukraine-sitrep-media-ignorance-counter-artillery-war-three-lost-armies-.html

      Proof?

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >Four U.S.-manufactured counterbattery warfare radars have been destroyed
      How would an "accoustic-thermal" recon system detect a radar?

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        radars get hot retard

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          So does a house when the sun is on it. Unless the Russians have invested thermals that somehow disregard physics there’s no way they can detect radar stations miles away.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >
          So does a chimney, a campfire a truck exhaust, etc. Thermal data is kind of useless and easy to spoof on its own.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Russian superiority, like magic
        Don't ask stupid questions anon

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >As it does not radiate itself there is no good way for an enemy to detect it.
      contradicts
      >It has an effective range for communication with other military assets up to 40 kilometres (25 mi) and is capable to operate even in a fully automatic mode, without any crew. One system can reportedly cover an entire division against an enemy fire. Besides that, it co-ordinates and corrects a friendly artillery fire.
      fantastic, you have a fancy cherry picker with some shotgun mic's running some rudimentary triangulation, now explain how it's of any use without communicating at all (if it's truly passive and non-radiating), or how it will be defended while emitting any useful information to command

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      https://i.imgur.com/jqWMpb4.jpg

      two AN/TPQ-50 stations near Mylovoye and Dudchany (Kherson region),
      one AN/TPQ-36 counterbattery warfare radar near Ugledar (Donetsk People's Republic),
      one U.S.-manufactured AN/TPQ-48 counterbattery warfare radar near Senkovo (Kharkov region).
      Air defence facilities have shot down six Ukrainian unmanned aerial vehicles near Kremennaya (Lugansk People's Republic), Nikolskoye, and Petrovskoye (Donetsk People's Republic).

      14 rocket-propelled projectiles launched by HIMARS and Olkha MLRS have been intercepted near Udy (Kharkov region), Smolyaninovo (Lugansk People's Republic), Donetsk, and Khartsyzsk (Donetsk People's Republic).

      One U.S.-manufactured anti-radiation missile has been shot down near Radensk (Kherson region).

      One Ukrainian Tochka-U ballistic missile has been shot down near Berdyansk (Zaporozhye region).

      The above is the equivalent of two artillery companies (batteries with six guns each) eliminated in just one day. Ukrainian counter-battery fire against Russian artillery is no longer possible as the necessary detection equipment gets eliminated and as Ukrainian counter-fire is shot down by Russian air defenses.

      This Russian counter-artillery campaign has been going on for several weeks. It has disabled large parts of what was left of Ukrainian longer range capabilities. Meanwhile the Russian artillery keeps on knocking down Ukranian troops that hold the frontline. Only when all parts of the Ukrainian trenches have been hit by intense fire will the Russian infantry move in to clean up whatever is left behind.

      This form of battle is causing huge losses on the Ukrainian side while the Russian forces incur just a minimum of casualties.

      https://www.moonofalabama.org/2023/01/ukraine-sitrep-media-ignorance-counter-artillery-war-three-lost-armies-.html

      Ah yes, surely THIS wunderwaffe can turn the tide of the war.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >one U.S.-manufactured M109 Paladin
      Literally impossible as no M109A6 Paladins are in theater.

      Why lie?

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >Literally impossible as no M109A6 Paladins are in theater.
        They announced a delivery of them 14 days ago

        https://www.armyrecognition.com/defense_news_january_2023_global_security_army_industry/for_the_first_time_us_to_supply_ukraine_with_18_m109_paladin_155mm_howitzers.html

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          And they're still not in country, so how could any of them been destroyed as of 3 days ago?

          Again, why lie?

  2. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    So why haven't they destroyed any HIMARS?

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      10 mile range.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        And precision of a mile too.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >It locates enemy fire within 5 seconds at a range of 25 km
      GMLRS vastly outranges this thing. Shit, I think some of the western arty they've been getting does as well, just barely.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Isn't 25km max range of the standard 152mm howitzers? Meaning that everything better can't be detected by "Penicilin"?

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Nowadays it's 30km for standard shells. Older systems like M109 have about 22km range with those, but both can use base bleed and rocket assisted shells up to about 40km and 30 km respectively. Guided shells like Excalibur can extend that range even more and teh most modern howitzers can sling them 70km, while M109s and M777 can still reach 40km.

  3. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    two AN/TPQ-50 stations near Mylovoye and Dudchany (Kherson region),
    one AN/TPQ-36 counterbattery warfare radar near Ugledar (Donetsk People's Republic),
    one U.S.-manufactured AN/TPQ-48 counterbattery warfare radar near Senkovo (Kharkov region).
    Air defence facilities have shot down six Ukrainian unmanned aerial vehicles near Kremennaya (Lugansk People's Republic), Nikolskoye, and Petrovskoye (Donetsk People's Republic).

    14 rocket-propelled projectiles launched by HIMARS and Olkha MLRS have been intercepted near Udy (Kharkov region), Smolyaninovo (Lugansk People's Republic), Donetsk, and Khartsyzsk (Donetsk People's Republic).

    One U.S.-manufactured anti-radiation missile has been shot down near Radensk (Kherson region).

    One Ukrainian Tochka-U ballistic missile has been shot down near Berdyansk (Zaporozhye region).

    The above is the equivalent of two artillery companies (batteries with six guns each) eliminated in just one day. Ukrainian counter-battery fire against Russian artillery is no longer possible as the necessary detection equipment gets eliminated and as Ukrainian counter-fire is shot down by Russian air defenses.

    This Russian counter-artillery campaign has been going on for several weeks. It has disabled large parts of what was left of Ukrainian longer range capabilities. Meanwhile the Russian artillery keeps on knocking down Ukranian troops that hold the frontline. Only when all parts of the Ukrainian trenches have been hit by intense fire will the Russian infantry move in to clean up whatever is left behind.

    This form of battle is causing huge losses on the Ukrainian side while the Russian forces incur just a minimum of casualties.

    https://www.moonofalabama.org/2023/01/ukraine-sitrep-media-ignorance-counter-artillery-war-three-lost-armies-.html

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >This form of battle is causing huge losses on the Ukrainian side while the Russian forces incur just a minimum of casualties.
      source?

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        It's the latest cope, it'll be here for a while and then memoryholed like all the previous ones.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >>This form of battle is causing huge losses on the Ukrainian side while the Russian forces incur just a minimum of casualties.
        >source?
        how else would these few RU and Wagner units be pushing back this mass of UA ones in Soledar and SW of Bakhmut if the UA ones were not seriously undermanned and spread thin because of said casualties?

        https://militaryland.net/maps/deployment-map/

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Nice b8 but overused

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous
    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >moonofalabama
      lmao, one of the last holdouts of merely 99% brain fried pro-russian boomerism.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >All of these claims at once
      Look, if you just made a claim that they were killing one or two things, perhaps like 10 artillery systems (just trust me bro) you'd have got a good thread going, but instead you decided to sperg some vatnik media outlets entire claim about shooting down a gorillion missiles and shells as well as blowing up 5 GORRILION artillery with your wonderwaffen that somehow detects artillery faster than the speed of sound lmao

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >but instead you decided to sperg some vatnik media outlets entire claim about shooting down a gorillion missiles and shells as well as blowing up 5 GORRILION artillery with your wonderwaffen that somehow detects artillery faster than the speed of sound lmao
        Those numbers and types of equipment hit come from a daily briefing that the Russian MOD updates on their website every day, that media outlet was just repeating for the reader what the Ru MOD officially claimed occurred in that single day.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >Russian MOD daily briefing
          The same daily briefings in which they claim to have destroyed more HIMARS then were delivered?

          Anon, you should know better than to post the word of proven liars.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >https://www.moonofalabama.org/2023/01/ukraine-sitrep-media-ignorance-counter-artillery-war-three-lost-armies-.html

      Protip for next time Boris: if your source looks like it hasn't been updated since the Clinton administration, it's probably not the best source for credible info.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >Russia has a hugely effective counter-artillery campaign in progress
      >Ukrainian long range fires are hugely reduced
      Yet ziggers keep dying by the bucket load to artillery whilst their own artillery volume is a fraction of what it was. Curious.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      www.moonofalabama.org

      > The war the U.S. provoked in Ukraine has been won by Russia even when no one wants to note it.

      Great source. Just dandy.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >Great source. Just dandy.
        He is right. The USA provoked the war by encouraging UA to ignore minsk agreements while allying with them in all but name. The outcome is already set and UA is just harming itself by prolonging the inevitable outcome at a significantly greater cost.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          you are mentally ill

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            That's an ad hominem fallacy

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              you are mentally ill: this is a declared fact, not an argument; you can argue you are not mentally ill, but so far you aren't making a very good case to be honest

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >The inevitable outcome
          Russia failing to beat a state 1/28th their size just because they were given a slight technological boost that *still* isn't on par with what russia has? It's the gulf war of europe. Big retard state invades for no truly good reason, gets stuck.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >Big retard state invades for no truly good reason, gets stuck.
            You are braindead if you think the initial wave was an earnest attempt to conquer the whole country, at first it was to pressure the UA gov into signing a peace agreement to resolve the donbass conflict and agree to not join NATO, that's why RU weren't targeting UA barracks with long-range weapons at first despite knowing where plenty of them were.

            After Boris Johnson convinced Zelensky to back off the peace he was thinking of agreeing to in the first month or so, RU realized that UA not capable of reaching an agreement and shifted to an economy of force mission to grind down UA while RU assembled enough forces for the eventual big blow. This has been successful and UA has lost most of its tanks and artillery and has 100,000+ soldiers listed as "missing". We are now approaching the point when the big blow will fall (and when PrepHole will seethe). Russia has the capacity to assemble many more troops and vehicles than UA can so unless the RU gov decides not to utilize the resources at their disposal this war is not likely to be won by UA.DG4TAS

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              >You are braindead if you think the initial wave was an earnest attempt to conquer the whole country,
              >we invaded and lost thousands of men and had hundreds of tanks captured as a joke!

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >>we invaded and lost thousands of men and had hundreds of tanks captured as a joke!
                War is nothing more than the continuation of politics by other means - Clausewitz

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              >You are braindead if you think the initial wave was an earnest attempt to conquer the whole country
              Ah yes, I also routinely attack from three capital directions and go out of my way to move troops through neutral countries in order to attempt decapitation strikes against an enemy capital, during my "limited interventions" and "special military operations", my brown friend.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                If they had wanted to siege Kiev they had enough troops in Russia available to do that, and they chose not to. The push towards Kiev in addition to raising the chances of a peaceful settlement (the political objective) also prevented UA from sending as many reinforcements to the south and donbass in the first few weeks

  4. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I'm sure Russia has a lot of these systems because they aren't a destitute shithole.

  5. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    why did they wait a year to start using them?

  6. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >more wunderwaffe posting
    "independent" western media is so fucking braindead it hurts

  7. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >within 5 seconds at a range of 25 km
    >sound takes 75 secs to travel 25 km
    russians never have been good liars. dedicated liars, yes; but not good ones.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      takes 75 secs to travel 25 km
      it combines acoustic detection with ground-mounted seismic sensors so it presumably doesn't have to rely on sound alone

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        And? How fast do you think seismic disturbance travels?

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >And? How fast do you think seismic disturbance travels?
          Brittanica says P waves travel at speeds of about 6 km (3.7 miles) per second in surface rock, so that should theoretically be fast enough for Penicillin to detect it within 5 seconds because the seismic wave from an artillery blast would have already traveled 30 km by the time 5 seconds had passed

          https://www.britannica.com/science/seismic-wave

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Have you ever held a shovel in your life?

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Sound waves travel faster through rock and earth than they do through the air.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >Sound waves travel faster through rock
            Yes
            >and earth
            LOL. LMAO, even.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        It’s doesn’t matter either way since the energy expended by an active artillery piece 10 miles away from this vatnik sooperweapon will have dissipated and become mixed in with the general background noise before it ever reaches it. And don’t even get me started on how minor things such as fluctuations in weather, the soil composition, existing obstructions, etc… would fuck with this sooperweapon. Yeah, thermal and acoustic devices exist, but they’re not some magic device that can pinpoint something miles away simple by a faint energy reading. Honestly, you vatmorons would have been better off saying it could detect human bio-signatures.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          True to some extent but also not entirely. The biggest issue with it is the time taken to actually hear it in the first place, process and aim a location and then the time it takes for a shell to actually return is longer than most Ukrainian artillery stick around for.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >The biggest issue with it is the time taken to actually hear it in the first place, process and aim a location and then the time it takes for a shell to actually return is longer than most Ukrainian artillery stick around for.
            If you have an artillery team on standby 24/7 within range and an automated computer program that integrates data from sensors monitoring acoustic waves (which travel at 6 km a second) it's not theoretically impossible that the artillery team could receive the output of the program, reorient their gun to the corresponding location and return fire within a few minutes of getting the location data if they had done many drills practicing exactly this

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              Look up the speed of sound for fuck sake retard.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                this is what it's monitoring you dumbass

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >In rock
                Anon
                ANON

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                the seismic waves that ground-mounted sensors monitor travel through both rock and soil after being produced by artillery blasts

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                You're looking at 1.5km/s at best, and then there is shell time.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                It's also not accurate, since ground sound propagation is even worse than air due to the variability in medium without continual monitoring.
                Basically these things aren't moving for weeks on end listening out for artillery to get any sort of 2km accuracy, in the meantime they're vulnerable to being spotted by western radar and sats

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                This. This is basically the point I have been trying to make. Unless the vatniks have made physics defying sensors they are going to spend months sitting in a single spot listening to vague sounds they can’t really identify while drones, regular counter battery systems, and satellites run laps around them.

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              > acoustic waves (which travel at 6 km a second)
              This entire website is just poison.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >> acoustic waves (which travel at 6 km a second)
                >This entire website is just poison.
                Is the Encyclopedia Brittanica poison my dude? This coping is getting more and more hilarious by the minute

                >In the Earth, P waves travel at speeds from about 6 km (3.7 miles) per second in surface rock to about 10.4 km (6.5 miles) per second near the Earth’s core some 2,900 km (1,800 miles) below the surface. As the waves enter the core, the velocity drops to about 8 km (5 miles) per second.

                https://www.britannica.com/science/seismic-wave

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >in rock
                >earth's core

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Are you ESL? It says 6 km per second in surface rock (right underneath the soil) and 10.4 km per second near the earths core

                >per second near the Earth’s core
                You do realise that's more compressed and transfers energy faster because of it right?
                Rock is more compressed than the thick mud of Ukraine too.

                The underlying bedrock is close enough to the soil on the surface in most of the world that an artillery blast on the surface would send a wave through the bedrock that could be detectable by a seismic sensor also located on the soil some number of kilometers away

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >What is a seismic wave
                >How do they spread out and become quieter over time due to sqr rt law and bounce off of things (and become exponentially weaker through that, too)
                "Bedrock" isn't just some singular solid rock either, and varies significantly in depth depending on the land.
                Please, I know you're trying, but you're googling the answers to something you had no idea about and trying to argue that you were right all along.

                It can work, but the ranges for it to be effective it needs to be relatively close, and as I said earlier you're gonna get roughly 1.5km/s, also you need more than just two sensors realistically to determine distance, you need controls and other various sensors near the target location. It's rather primitive unless you have several sensors interlinked, and even then the accuracy is gonna be poor with something as quiet as an artillery round going through air, propagating into mud (hard for sound which is why during an explosion above ground you jump into water), again into mixed ground, though mud again to the sensor 20km away.

                I see it, but also I don't see Russia effectively doing it well enough at this time with effectively 80's tech and without some sort of testbed location to test sound waves from the source as a control.

                It's also not fast enough or accurate enough to catch Ukraine. Sorry.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >per second near the Earth’s core
                You do realise that's more compressed and transfers energy faster because of it right?
                Rock is more compressed than the thick mud of Ukraine too.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >near the Earth’s core some 2,900 km (1,800 miles) below the surface
                Again, this site is literally poison.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                According to National Geographic the core is 2,900 kilometers (1,802 miles) below the surface, both websites agree, what exactly is the issue?

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >what’s the issue?
                Are the Russians and Ukrainians currently fighting 1,800 miles below the surface of the earth?

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >Are the Russians and Ukrainians currently fighting 1,800 miles below the surface of the earth?
                The waves that these things detect are traveling through the bedrock which as a layer starts about 10-20 feet below the soil and grass on the surface, its not that hard to detect because its not that far away

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                See

                It's also not accurate, since ground sound propagation is even worse than air due to the variability in medium without continual monitoring.
                Basically these things aren't moving for weeks on end listening out for artillery to get any sort of 2km accuracy, in the meantime they're vulnerable to being spotted by western radar and sats

                You’re not getting 6km per second or a definitive position. You’re getting background noise.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >You’re not getting 6km per second or a definitive position. You’re getting background noise.
                BACCARA and SL2A have been exhaustively tested on the field during numerous ground tests and
                operational assessment trials. SL2A is in service in the French Army since 2004.
                Minimum detection ranges depend on met conditions and weapons charge but may summarised as
                follows:

                Artillery guns (105 mm, 155 mm) : >10 km (typically 15 km)
                Tank guns, 120 mm mortar : >10 km
                81 mm, 60 mm mortars (and smaller calibre guns): ≥ weapons firing range
                Of course, longer ranges have been observed under favourable conditions (> 25 km on artillery guns, > 15
                km on 81 mm/120 mm mortars, > 20 km on tank guns).
                Location accuracy also depends on sensor posts configuration (network extension). Though CEP of a few
                meters has been observed under very favourable conditions, CEP is more typically of 100 m under 8 km
                range, and 1%-2% of range at longer range.
                False alarm rate is low (specified as 1/24 h, it is consistently lower than this value).

                https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/ADA479047.pdf

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >SL2A is in service in the French Army since 2004.

                Current Organisation
                The current organisation of the regiment is:[2]

                Command and Logistics Battery
                1ére Batterie (MLRS M270 and 120 mm mortars)
                2éme Batterie (MLRS M270 and 120 mm mortars)
                3éme Batterie (MLRS M270 and 120 mm mortars)
                4éme Batterie (COBRA counter-battery radars, SL2A acoustic artillery location systems, and GA10 ground alert and impact zone early warning systems)
                5éme Batterie (COBRA counter-battery radars, SL2A acoustic artillery location systems, and GA10 ground alert and impact zone early warning systems)
                6éme Batterie (Reserve)
                Maintenance Battery

                https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1st_Artillery_Regiment_(France)

                >b-but the Russians can't have one... it's i-i-impossib-

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >b-but the Russians can't have one... it's i-i-impossib-
                Proof they do?

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >>b-but the Russians can't have one... it's i-i-impossib-
                The Russian don't have the technological industry Europe has, or even France alone.
                They are barely capable of making soviet tech, bigger, like submarines or spend most of their budget on hypersonic missiles.
                (and before someone ask the only reason the US don't have theirs ready is because neither Russia or China posses defense to intercept the classic missiles)

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >Location accuracy also depends on sensor posts configuration (network extension).

                >What is a seismic wave
                >How do they spread out and become quieter over time due to sqr rt law and bounce off of things (and become exponentially weaker through that, too)
                "Bedrock" isn't just some singular solid rock either, and varies significantly in depth depending on the land.
                Please, I know you're trying, but you're googling the answers to something you had no idea about and trying to argue that you were right all along.

                It can work, but the ranges for it to be effective it needs to be relatively close, and as I said earlier you're gonna get roughly 1.5km/s, also you need more than just two sensors realistically to determine distance, you need controls and other various sensors near the target location. It's rather primitive unless you have several sensors interlinked, and even then the accuracy is gonna be poor with something as quiet as an artillery round going through air, propagating into mud (hard for sound which is why during an explosion above ground you jump into water), again into mixed ground, though mud again to the sensor 20km away.

                I see it, but also I don't see Russia effectively doing it well enough at this time with effectively 80's tech and without some sort of testbed location to test sound waves from the source as a control.

                It's also not fast enough or accurate enough to catch Ukraine. Sorry.

                As I said. It can work, but it's requires not only modern technology, but an extensive knowledge of the grounds structure and far more than two sensors as shown and "favourable conditions" such as "nothing else making noise at all" and a good sensor package in the first place, as well as long term data analysis to setup in the first place.

                Tracked vehicles are more vulnerable due to further sound propegating into the mud easier.

                Also stop googling things you don't know about just to instantly post it without context of actually understanding it holy shit.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >imagine being this retarded
        dirt is an efficient energy dissipator. Unless both those ukrainian guns and the russian sensor are mounted directly to bedrock, that ground mounted sensor isn't picking up anything beyond a quarter mile.

  8. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >acoustic-thernal detection
    wtf does that even mean. it tracks the sound of the howitzer firing or the shell flying through the air? and thermal so a FLIR? it kinda sounds too good to be true

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      The reverse. It's WW1 tech: sound and flash spotting.

      >russians or chinks do something
      >burger zoomzooms say it's impossible
      >actually white people invented it long before they were born
      Many such cases.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >burger zoomzooms say it's impossible
        No, just that they're lying about its capabilities, and use. Just like they've been shown to do with their EW and AA/SAM systems.
        >flash spotting
        From 30ft in the air? Come on, now.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >From 30ft in the air? Come on, now.
          >many such cases!
          In WW1 they did it from 6ft above the ground. 5'10" even.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            It's not WWI, and ranges are a lot further, now. Kinda pointless if it needs to be within eyeball seeing distance from an enemy to do anything. It will just get clapped, like Russia counter battery radars have been doing.

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              >capability x means nothing because our high tech y beats it in z way
              Yes, but this covers D-30s. Which Ukraine has. Tactically, if this works (which it probably doesn't) and it's used in an area where Ukrainian CAESAR/M777s/etc aren't operating, it might actually help.

              Realistically it won't and they'll just use counterbattery radars, scouts, Orlans, etc like normal but hey if it works and they can find the right place to use it it'll help.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >Yes, but this covers D-30s.
                Again, proof?

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >effective firing range 15 km
                >Ukraine had 150 of them

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              > Kinda pointless if it needs to be within eyeball seeing distance
              It doesn't. That's what the sound part is for. Why not simply admit Russia can wire a calculator to some microphones and cameras? This is primitive technology but for some reason (reddit?) you can't admit it exists because it might slightly help Russians.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >Why not simply admit Russia can wire a calculator to some microphones and cameras?
                Because we know for a fact that Russians are retarded.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >Why not simply admit Russia can wire a calculator to some microphones and cameras?
                Can they? Any proof that they have?

                >effective firing range 15 km
                >Ukraine had 150 of them

                Neat, show me a D-30 it has helped destroy with proof of it in Ukraine.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                > Kinda pointless if it needs to be within eyeball seeing distance
                It doesn't. That's what the sound part is for. Why not simply admit Russia can wire a calculator to some microphones and cameras? This is primitive technology but for some reason (reddit?) you can't admit it exists because it might slightly help Russians.

                Also, how are they distinguishing between their own acoustic signals from that of the Ukrainians?

              • 2 weeks ago
                RC-135 Rivet Joint

                sound profiles and intelligence (ie homie we gonna be shooting at this time listen and then remove that freq from the search) you need to feed this sensor a LOT of data for it to work right

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >expecting this level of coordination from the Russians
                Lol. Lmao.

              • 2 weeks ago
                RC-135 Rivet Joint

                oh it's probably a complete shit show but the technology and concepts are sound.

                It uses a Russian computer so it's probably no where near as effective as the Thales/NATO test program (s) But it should be able to detect,track and ID road vehicles and build a data base of sound profiles even if idiots are using it.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                > But it should be able to detect,track and ID road vehicles and build a data base of sound profiles

                Lol. You’re not doing that with vehicles miles away. Unless the vehicles are as hot as the sun and traveling in a perfect medium for the propagation of sound you will never get an identifiable pattern from them. At best you’ll be able to tell there’s something man made in that general direction, at worst you’ll just be receiving a background energy with occasional unattributable spikes here and there.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Being fair you can detect ICBMs launching from high orbit space. Signatures are possible especially at night. But this detector is too close to the ground to actually be effective at seeing these hidden 10km+ Ukrainians due to earth curve, and foliage gets in the way too at closer range.
                IR is extremely limited unless it's airborne.

              • 2 weeks ago
                RC-135 Rivet Joint

                BRUH i posted NATO documents proving the opposite. I'll add another.

                this tech works in theory you can literally use sonar technology with seismic data to track and ID ground vehicles.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                I see where you have made your errors. You have confused Russia with NATO, and have confused "test environment" with "real world". These are perfectly understandable mistakes, if you're a retarded vatnik.

              • 2 weeks ago
                RC-135 Rivet Joint

                naw this technology works in real life but if you don't actually learn about it and just hand wave it you're just as bad as the average vat.

                This thread shows we can't even discuss war tech without shit flinging

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                You can tell what direction they are coming from I think especially when you have multiple fine-tuned sensors in a circle or square so you can tell when one side gets hit by the wave first

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >4chan transplants are at the point of denying that Russia can figure out a flash/sound counterbattery system when manually performed flash/sound counterbattery was done in world war one
                I genuinely hate you people.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Anyone who knows the speed of sound makes OP's claims look retarded.
                The reason we use emitting radar for detection is because it's faster at detecting shells trajectories, as they fly faster than the speed of sound.

                Caesars and Krab outrange most Russian artillery anyway (and ALL it's accurate artillery) if they have to resort to only firing at max ranges.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Anon you tectonic retard, the point of the system isn't to track the shells, it's to get a most recent position of the gun battery then saturate it plus the likely routes the battery will take when it is displacing. They did this in WW1, I don't know why you're having trouble with it.

                >Caesars and Krab
                Guess what, Ukraine has like 80-100 modern artillery pieces in total. The rest are Soviet pieces. You're a fucking retard.

                >Russia can figure out a flash/sound counterbattery system
                Can they, though? I've yet to get proof they have. Got any test data on the system from 2018-2020? What about data from its claimed use in Ukraine. Shouldn't be hard to produce some test data if it's been in use and tested since 2018. That's five years to produce just one test.
                >I genuinely hate you people.
                Why, because I don't just believe whatever you say? Maybe Russia shouldn't have lied so much about its capabilities, then. Sounds like you should be pissed at Russian, not me.

                OK and this guy is just picking a fight because he wants to do le epic debunking of le vatniks.

                You both are seriously attempting to dispute the existence of a capability that was invented 100 years ago. Studies have been linked in this thread that prove automating it is feasible. Russia has a good reason to specialize in this capability because any peer it would fight would have enough SEAD capability to attack counterbattery radars in addition to everything else.

                I swear to god you stupid cunts are only interested in tanks and shit. Talking with you clowns about anything that doesn't go boom and kill people is worthless.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                You... You track the shells to get its origins... You can't be serious?
                Accurate artillery is more important than 10x the same shit artillery but ok. If it takes you 4000 shells to clear a trench and it takes one Caesar 10 airburst is it really a competition in numbers. Also western artillery numbers are increasing.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                He's a confirmed retard don't even bother
                He just outed himself as a literal shill that doesn't actually know what he's talking about

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >locating the battery based on flash and seismic activity isn't the same fucking thing as tracking the shells
                You cunts are straight out of reddit. I hate you all so much.

                He's a confirmed retard don't even bother
                He just outed himself as a literal shill that doesn't actually know what he's talking about

                have a nice day.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >He doesn't realise you can accurately predict the location of a battery faster using radar to determine the launch origin of something miles away faster than it takes the speed of sound to get to his gay microphones.
                Lol
                Lmao even.

                You even resorted to the age old "Reddit" on the bingo board. Kindly go back tourist shill.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                You are honestly talking like a redditor who found out about counterbattery radar two weeks ago.

                Everyone knows this. It is basic knowledge. Any conscript who drove trucks for 6 months in Finland in the early 2000s knows that an artillery battery will get counterbattery fire. You are not being clever.

                The point of doing it passively is to avoid emitting, you retarded /r/CombatFootage frequenter. Please go the fuck back.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >Emitting
                >When you have to stay static and get spotted anyway
                I don't think an issue with Russian counter artery radar is actively emitting honestly.
                I get it, you think it's a wonderwaffen but it isn't. And the more you keep referencing specific things about Reddit the more I know you're a damn tourist.

                The west has been using shot detection like this for small arms for over a decade you low tier retard maggot. Go the fuck back to your gay German forum where you jerk off Russia.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >spoken by a moron who doesn't know the Soviets made a bunch of SPGs
                >"counterbattery radar emitting isn't a problem"
                >passive counterbattery systems are a wonderwaffen
                I bet your picture of "Russian artillery column getting shelled" is a bunch of D-30s in a perfect doctrinal line. You're a fucking idiot and you shouldn't be allowed to use the internet.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                They are still using them in doctrinal lines though, lmao.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Confirmed for seeing one video of D-30s getting shelled and making broad conclusions based on it. I bet I know the exact video you saw too.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >B-but this video doesn't count
                >Nor does this one
                >O-or this one
                >Or t-this one too
                Kek

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Guess what, the Ukrainians don't record strikes on SPGs being used properly because they displace before the drone gets there. I know I know this is a hard concept for you to grasp.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Ah so you're guessing. Got it.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                You do realise Russia has been taking heavy counter battery losses itself right? And it's firing more often?

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >locating the battery based on flash and seismic activity isn't the same fucking thing as tracking the shells
                You cunts are straight out of reddit. I hate you all so much.

                [...]
                have a nice day.

                >t.
                Go back to leftypol, you retard tankie chud.

                You can tell what direction they are coming from I think especially when you have multiple fine-tuned sensors in a circle or square so you can tell when one side gets hit by the wave first

                >multiple fine-tuned sensors
                Russia has these? Can you show me them, please?

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >Can you show me them, please?
                look on the ground in this picture

                https://i.imgur.com/jqWMpb4.jpg

                two AN/TPQ-50 stations near Mylovoye and Dudchany (Kherson region),
                one AN/TPQ-36 counterbattery warfare radar near Ugledar (Donetsk People's Republic),
                one U.S.-manufactured AN/TPQ-48 counterbattery warfare radar near Senkovo (Kharkov region).
                Air defence facilities have shot down six Ukrainian unmanned aerial vehicles near Kremennaya (Lugansk People's Republic), Nikolskoye, and Petrovskoye (Donetsk People's Republic).

                14 rocket-propelled projectiles launched by HIMARS and Olkha MLRS have been intercepted near Udy (Kharkov region), Smolyaninovo (Lugansk People's Republic), Donetsk, and Khartsyzsk (Donetsk People's Republic).

                One U.S.-manufactured anti-radiation missile has been shot down near Radensk (Kherson region).

                One Ukrainian Tochka-U ballistic missile has been shot down near Berdyansk (Zaporozhye region).

                The above is the equivalent of two artillery companies (batteries with six guns each) eliminated in just one day. Ukrainian counter-battery fire against Russian artillery is no longer possible as the necessary detection equipment gets eliminated and as Ukrainian counter-fire is shot down by Russian air defenses.

                This Russian counter-artillery campaign has been going on for several weeks. It has disabled large parts of what was left of Ukrainian longer range capabilities. Meanwhile the Russian artillery keeps on knocking down Ukranian troops that hold the frontline. Only when all parts of the Ukrainian trenches have been hit by intense fire will the Russian infantry move in to clean up whatever is left behind.

                This form of battle is causing huge losses on the Ukrainian side while the Russian forces incur just a minimum of casualties.

                https://www.moonofalabama.org/2023/01/ukraine-sitrep-media-ignorance-counter-artillery-war-three-lost-armies-.html

              • 2 weeks ago
                RC-135 Rivet Joint

                Yup but you can't PASSIVELY

                Russia is getting RAPED by EW so this system probably is godsend.

                It works too Thales proved it (for the acoustic shit at least) but as I said it's Russian so its probably mid

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >You both are seriously attempting to dispute the existence of a capability that was invented 100 years ago
                No, I'm disputing Russia's claims that is how their system works, that it actually works, and that they're using it in Ukraine. Quite the difference, brainlet. Now, where is that test data? Where are the pictures of it in Ukraine? Where are the pictures of equipment it helped destroy? You seem upset that I'm not taking your word for it, why?
                >Russia has a good reason to specialize in this capability because any peer it would fight would have enough SEAD capability to attack counterbattery radars in addition to everything else.
                What does this system have to do with SEAD? Is it going to hit anti-radiation missiles in midair? How? Is it going to hit GMLRS launchers from 100 km away? How? Is it going to hit F/A-18 Growlers, F-16CJs, or F-35s running SEAD/DEAD? How? Do you even know what you're talking about?

                >Lmao what kind of Russian honeypot did I just give my IP to.
                he is a former member of the german military who still lives in germany and maintains his blog there

                Proof?

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >this fucking guy
                Counterbattery radars show up on HTS and HAS, stupid cunt.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Neat, now, answer my questions, vatnig diaspora living in German.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                You do not know what you're talking about. Until I pointed it out to you you were unaware HARMs can hit counterbattery radars. Your opinion is worthless and you, having lost the argument, are now trying to "dox" me as Dennis or whoever the fuck that is.

                Never post again.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >You do not know what you're talking about.
                Proof?
                >Until I pointed it out to you you were unaware HARMs can hit counterbattery radars.
                It's an emitting radar, brainlet. Why wouldn't it be able to?

                >Proof?
                He occasionally talks about himself on his blog and has incidentally described serving in the German military I think in the late 80's or 90's in some of the articles but I can't find them at the moment. He is relatively well-known in the geopolitics/war blogging sphere and has blogging for a while including when the whole Syria affair was going down. Chomsky and Alexander Mercouis have cited him before.

                He has never been to my knowledge accused of being some Russian or Chinese intelligence front in any report issued by any US or NATO organization while other media sites like South Front and Strategic Culture have been accused of been intel cutouts by reports issued by these groups, so that makes me think he is telling the truth. He was also affiliated with some former forum and created it which he talks about on the about section on his website. I wouldn't be surprised if at some point his reporting/blogging annoyed some spook and they looked into him and found he was just some German blogger, if he wasn't they would have tried to expose him.

                He has a twitter account so you can ask him directly too

                https://twitter.com/moonofa

                What is his name?

                >Can you show me them, please?
                look on the ground in this picture [...]

                Those could be shit buckets for all I know. Got any actual proof of the "fine-tuned" acoustic sensors?

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >What does this system have to do with SEAD?

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Yes, what? What does an artillery counter-battery radar have to do with AIR DEFENSE? Again:

                What does this system have to do with SEAD? Is it going to hit anti-radiation missiles in midair? How? Is it going to hit GMLRS launchers from 100 km away? How? Is it going to hit F/A-18 Growlers, F-16CJs, or F-35s running SEAD/DEAD? How? Do you even know what you're talking about?

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Anon you still don't understand that a plus of not having an active counterbattery radar is that any random SEAD flight won't launch on it the moment you turn it on. You don't have a clue. You're calling the EA-18G Growler the "F/A-18 Growler" ffs. Go to bed.

                You are making claims about manufacturing capabilities of a country that cant figure our cargo pallets, basic command structure, tactics beyond literal human waves and socks.

                Penicilin sounds plausible but just one system producing useful results outside of
                >Yep somewhere within 25km there was artillery.

                >le dumb Russians doing human waves!
                At some point you're going to figure out that people aren't mocking you because you're a Ukraine supporter or whatever, but instead because you're following trends so hard it's easy to pick you out as a redditor.

                Literally just a sound detector, proven technology, combined with a seismic analysis system, proven technology if a bit unreliable. Networking these things isn't difficult either, the Russians have a plethora of ELINT systems that do the same thing. We are at 115 posts and you are still babbling about socks and pallets.

                You don't seem to understand that the Russians have been triangulating radio transmissions from Ukrainian units and directing artillery fire on them since 2014. I would bet all the money in my wallet that you started posting here in March.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >Reverts to redditor posting
                This shilling is like listening to paint dry

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >Anon you still don't understand that a plus of not having an active counterbattery radar is that any random SEAD flight won't launch on it the moment you turn it on.
                How does one use it for AIR DEFENSE? Also:
                What does this system have to do with SEAD? Is it going to hit anti-radiation missiles in midair? How? Is it going to hit GMLRS launchers from 100 km away? How? Is it going to hit F/A-18 Growlers, F-16CJs, or F-35s running SEAD/DEAD? How? Do you even know what you're talking about?

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Are you autistic?

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                No. Are you retarded? Now:
                What does this system have to do with SEAD? Is it going to hit anti-radiation missiles in midair? How? Is it going to hit GMLRS launchers from 100 km away? How? Is it going to hit F/A-18 Growlers, F-16CJs, or F-35s running SEAD/DEAD? How? Do you even know what you're talking about?

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Ok now that you've buried yourself:

                I wasn't saying it had anything to do with SEAD or air defense you moron. I was saying that emitting counterbattery radars are vulnerable to aircraft doing SEAD operations, since they show up on HARM targeting displays.

                Now leave the thread in embarrassment pls.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >Ok now that you've buried yourself:
                How so? Be detailed.
                >I wasn't saying it had anything to do with SEAD or air defense you moron.
                You did EXACTLY that here:

                Anon you tectonic retard, the point of the system isn't to track the shells, it's to get a most recent position of the gun battery then saturate it plus the likely routes the battery will take when it is displacing. They did this in WW1, I don't know why you're having trouble with it.

                >Caesars and Krab
                Guess what, Ukraine has like 80-100 modern artillery pieces in total. The rest are Soviet pieces. You're a fucking retard.

                [...]
                OK and this guy is just picking a fight because he wants to do le epic debunking of le vatniks.

                You both are seriously attempting to dispute the existence of a capability that was invented 100 years ago. Studies have been linked in this thread that prove automating it is feasible. Russia has a good reason to specialize in this capability because any peer it would fight would have enough SEAD capability to attack counterbattery radars in addition to everything else.

                I swear to god you stupid cunts are only interested in tanks and shit. Talking with you clowns about anything that doesn't go boom and kill people is worthless.

                >Russia has a good reason to specialize in this capability because any peer it would fight would have enough SEAD capability to attack counterbattery radars in addition to everything else.
                You know the AD in SEAD stands for AIR DEFENSE, right?
                And here:

                Anon you still don't understand that a plus of not having an active counterbattery radar is that any random SEAD flight won't launch on it the moment you turn it on. You don't have a clue. You're calling the EA-18G Growler the "F/A-18 Growler" ffs. Go to bed.

                [...]
                >le dumb Russians doing human waves!
                At some point you're going to figure out that people aren't mocking you because you're a Ukraine supporter or whatever, but instead because you're following trends so hard it's easy to pick you out as a redditor.

                Literally just a sound detector, proven technology, combined with a seismic analysis system, proven technology if a bit unreliable. Networking these things isn't difficult either, the Russians have a plethora of ELINT systems that do the same thing. We are at 115 posts and you are still babbling about socks and pallets.

                You don't seem to understand that the Russians have been triangulating radio transmissions from Ukrainian units and directing artillery fire on them since 2014. I would bet all the money in my wallet that you started posting here in March.

                >Anon you still don't understand that a plus of not having an active counterbattery radar is that any random SEAD flight won't launch on it the moment you turn it on.
                You're claiming it can replace radar in an Air Defense role.

                Now:
                What does this system have to do with SEAD? Is it going to hit anti-radiation missiles in midair? How? Is it going to hit GMLRS launchers from 100 km away? How? Is it going to hit F/A-18 Growlers, F-16CJs, or F-35s running SEAD/DEAD? How? Do you even know what you're talking about?

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                You are autistic. Actually.

                SEAD is a tasking, dipshit. I was saying aircraft running SEAD that don't have pressing targets will shoot at counterbattery radars. I did not say that counterbattery radars are used for air defense.

                Holy fucking shit you're stupid. Probably the dumbest fuck I've talked to so far in 2023.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >You are autistic. Actually.
                Proof?
                >SEAD is a tasking, dipshit.
                SEAD is a very specific job, with specialized assets they wouldn't waste on a shitty counter-battery radar.
                >I was saying aircraft running SEAD that don't have pressing targets will shoot at counterbattery radars. I did not say that counterbattery radars are used for air defense.
                Why, when they just kill it with artillery, as Ukraine has done multiple times?
                >Holy fucking shit you're stupid. Probably the dumbest fuck I've talked to so far in 2023.
                Proof? You sound extremely asshurt, my friend. Why?

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >An F-16 with a HARM seeing and shooting at a counterbattery radar is a "specialized asset"
                You don't have a clue.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                An F-16CJ Wild Weasel with the Have Glass treatment is most definitely a specialized asset. Hence, them making it. They would hit it with a 155mm - exactly like Ukraine has done, or have ELINT triangulate it and smack it with a GMLRS or JDAM.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                What a fucking moron.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Now, you.
                https://test.mensa.no/

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >believes online iq tests
                bottom 99% behavior tbh

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Who cares if it's online. It’s to compare me to you, using the same test. Seems you're scared to take it.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                That was a new IP, autistic newfag.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Was he your boyfriend? Now, take the test, brainlet.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                I'm a bystander irked by your incessant sperging.
                You can estimate my IQ from the fact that I made the idiotic mistake of engaging your dumb ass.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Cope, and seethe, you retarded shitskin.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >SEAD is a very specific job, with specialized assets they wouldn't waste on a shitty counter-battery radar.
                Proofs?
                >Why, when they just kill it with artillery,
                Well, I guess there's no point in having an airforce at all then, because literally every task that planes can do can be done by artillery and AA. Why even send F-15s if you can just missile spam with HIMARS?

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                He doesn't have any. If a brigade commander finds out you're ignoring good fixes on counter battery radars because "hurr that isn't air defense :*~~" he's going to grab his command helicopter, fly over to your airfield and personally shove his rifle up your ass.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >Proofs?
                Wild weasels, Growlers, F-35s with specialized AARGM-ERs, and specialized training and tactics. Which I already posted.
                >Well, I guess there's no point in having an airforce at all then, because literally every task that planes can do can be done by artillery and AA.
                Why would you need an air force to kill artillery counter batteries?
                >Why even send F-15s if you can just missile spam with HIMARS?
                Worked so far for destroying Russian counter battery radars, hasn't it?

                He doesn't have any. If a brigade commander finds out you're ignoring good fixes on counter battery radars because "hurr that isn't air defense :*~~" he's going to grab his command helicopter, fly over to your airfield and personally shove his rifle up your ass.

                >brigade commander
                >Air force

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >Proof?
                He occasionally talks about himself on his blog and has incidentally described serving in the German military I think in the late 80's or 90's in some of the articles but I can't find them at the moment. He is relatively well-known in the geopolitics/war blogging sphere and has blogging for a while including when the whole Syria affair was going down. Chomsky and Alexander Mercouis have cited him before.

                He has never been to my knowledge accused of being some Russian or Chinese intelligence front in any report issued by any US or NATO organization while other media sites like South Front and Strategic Culture have been accused of been intel cutouts by reports issued by these groups, so that makes me think he is telling the truth. He was also affiliated with some former forum and created it which he talks about on the about section on his website. I wouldn't be surprised if at some point his reporting/blogging annoyed some spook and they looked into him and found he was just some German blogger, if he wasn't they would have tried to expose him.

                He has a twitter account so you can ask him directly too

                https://twitter.com/moonofa

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                I think you're ignoring that this post is trying to sell this thing as an amazing and powerful military marvel (when it isn't) and also the parts where it disingenuously presents the claimed successes of all Russian counterbattery fire as if it were attributable to the system being hyped.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Yeah, I completely ignored that the moment I saw it. If you don't have a mental vatnik filter I don't know what to tell you.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                I think at least two third of this thread is people objecting to the specific claims made about this system and not the underlying principle behind it.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >Russia can figure out a flash/sound counterbattery system
                Can they, though? I've yet to get proof they have. Got any test data on the system from 2018-2020? What about data from its claimed use in Ukraine. Shouldn't be hard to produce some test data if it's been in use and tested since 2018. That's five years to produce just one test.
                >I genuinely hate you people.
                Why, because I don't just believe whatever you say? Maybe Russia shouldn't have lied so much about its capabilities, then. Sounds like you should be pissed at Russian, not me.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >https://www.moonofalabama.org/
                >Claims to be an open forum where all sides are heard
                >Nearly all posts are Doomposting about Ukraine failing and the West being ineffectual.
                Lmao what kind of Russian honeypot did I just give my IP to.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >Lmao what kind of Russian honeypot did I just give my IP to.
                he is a former member of the german military who still lives in germany and maintains his blog there

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Yeah, had a feeling you'd know, now go back.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                are you going to be okay?

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                You are making claims about manufacturing capabilities of a country that cant figure our cargo pallets, basic command structure, tactics beyond literal human waves and socks.

                Penicilin sounds plausible but just one system producing useful results outside of
                >Yep somewhere within 25km there was artillery.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >manually performed flash/sound counterbattery was done in world war one
                it was. but not by the russians.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >Why not simply admit Russia can wire a calculator to some microphones and cameras?
                Oh, they're perfectly capable of doing that. What I'm objecting to is the part where they pretend it's some futuristic technological breakthrough instead of something made obsolete by the invention of radar.

  9. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Fantasy.

  10. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >thermal
    Bound to LOS-only simply because of how radiation works.
    >acoustic
    Requires two cooperating units assuming a flat plane, more given absolutely any form of toporaphy or acoustic irregularity, scaling to infinitely more incredibly quickly.
    Neither system could possibly facilitate targeting of "U.S.-manufactured counterbattery warfare radars."
    Simply put, I do not believe you.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >Simply put, I do not believe you.
      It uses ground-based sensors that monitor seismic waves in order to detect artillery based on the 'mini-earthquake' an artillery piece produces when firing and combines that with sound to identify its location.

      The same tech has been investigated in the US since at least the 1970's but never has been implemented in NATO militaries afaik

      >This report comprises the final statement regarding some initial exploratory research done by the Institute for Acoustical Research IAR on the Hostile Artillery Location HAL project. The objective of this research was to re-examine experimental data collected by Honeywell, Inc. and the Environmental Research Institute of Michigan ERIM during December 1975. The data collected comprised a series of digital tapes recording the response of a seismometer array to the firing of various howitzers at various ranges. IARs analysis of this data, though not considered technically complete, nevertheless is considered very successful at least with respect to bearing estimates at 5 km. The composite IAr estimate on three firings is within a few hundredths degree of true and the standard deviation is 1 12 degrees. Range estimates can be improved with a larger array and a more sophisticated second stage
      >Report Date: 1978-07-01
      https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/citations/ADA070633

      This is a 2006 paper
      https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/ADA479047.pdf

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >opponent "discovers" a technology the US investigated 40+ years ago and discarded
        >trots it out as some wunderwaffen
        You love to see it. My previous statement stands.

  11. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >range of 25 km
    Unless they triple that it's kinda meh

  12. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    *yawn*
    whatever, 10k more vagnerites died today as pussya installed air defense across moscow office buildings

  13. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Looks like an optical and/or thermal detection issue.
    >Seems like it needs to extend above any topographic feature to properly aquire an acoustic
    /visual/thermal signature. That includes the tree line.
    >Ask any arborist or Forester, it is easy to spot trees growing faster or just taller than their neighbors.
    >Ask the same arborist or Forester and they can almost instantly point out the man made feature innawoods or inna canopy. Even those structures that are disguised and made to blend into the natural surroundings.
    >Figure out the thermal emission range of the common high growing tree species, both in daylight conditions and nighttime ones.
    And on the other hand.
    >This system seems very range limited in the modern battlefield.
    >I also wonder if tactics like firing barrages of lower range and unguided munitions, could act as cover for more precise munitions.
    >Also begs the question of potential baiting. Firing of munitions from highly mobile platforms, while spotters, drones, aircraft or NATO glowing eyes, keep tabs on the retaliation. With the real heavy hitters being hidden, just waiting for the reactionary fire to get their targets.

  14. 2 weeks ago
    RC-135 Rivet Joint

    This technology is so fucking cool.

    Basically you need Western sonar analysis technology for it to be good (like all sensor tech lol)

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Kek that reminds me that a the beginning of the war Russian telegrams shilled "look we found illegal daisy chained cluster Munition IEDs !!??!?!?" What were just geoelectric measuring systems. And soil sample extractors from AliExpress

  15. 2 weeks ago
    RC-135 Rivet Joint

    If you are denying this technology exists and works you need to take a break from the war watching lol.

    This technology exists and works and is really good for passive intelligence gathering in a specific zone. Russia if they are even using it are tracking the movement of towed and road mobile guns via sound and using the flashes to detect incoming rounds and give warning.

    it's neat.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      > Russia if they are even using it are tracking the movement of towed and road mobile guns via sound and using the flashes to detect incoming rounds and give warning.

      You are fucking retarded

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        It has a trip what did you expect

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      > Russia if they are even using it are tracking the movement of towed and road mobile guns via sound and using the flashes to detect incoming rounds and give warning.

      You are fucking retarded

      It has a trip what did you expect

      >Russia if they are even using it are tracking the movement of towed and road mobile guns via sound and using the flashes to detect incoming rounds and give warning.

      >tfw you rev your engine so a shell comes flying at you from 40km away
      the thing is, most of the OP was believable. It's when he started trying to defend his stance is when it all fell apart

  16. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    ah, yes the mighty
    >1B75 Penicilin
    But here's a counterpoint - let us remember this classic pre-war piece:

    This is 2015 rant by russian Duma deputy Alexandr Luchin

    >There has been a lot of speculation lately about a "Russian invasion of Ukraine". The "experts on the couch" are especially trying. Let me remind you that the Russian army has been "invading" Ukraine for 7 years, but it still does not "invade". The Russian invasion still needs to be earned, but just like that, for free, the Russians do not invade anywhere.
    In this regard, I want to describe to you the real signs of the "Russian invasion".

    >The first sign is the failure of all means of communication, the complete discharge of batteries in vehicles, tanks and other equipment, at the same time the discharge of batteries in mobile phones, in sights, in radio stations. Then there is a break in electrical circuits in all equipment - any. This is EMI. All engines are turned off, there is no way to start them. This is how the Khingan system works.

    >The second is the complete failure of all systems using liquid crystal monitors, the failure of all target designating devices of the air defense system - the radars are dying. The Altair system is in operation.

    >The third one is refusals when trying to use any type of guided weapon - from MANPADS to ATGMs. When you try to use the shells, they self-destruct immediately ... This is the "Mercury" system - now every Russian battalion has such a system.

    >Fourth, it is impossible to use unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs). They either fall, with the failure of the navigation systems and the engine, or sit down at the location of the Russians. The Krasukha-4 system disables the on-board equipment of airplanes and any other aircraft. The Avtobaza system intercepts control of drones.

    1/2

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      part 2/2 : artillery STRONK:

      >Not everyone will have time to see and understand the fifth sign. This is the phenomenal accuracy of artillery fire from a distance inaccessible to artillery in most countries of the world. Artillery reconnaissance and guidance stations of the Russian army operate via satellites and their own drones. The Russians have modernized the shells, they are now in Russia with a homing system, they have become longer and carry more explosives.

      >Dozens (hundreds, if necessary) of combat helicopters, riding all the roads, begin to hunt in the rear for armored vehicles, trains, and cars. The railway was paralyzed, arrows were broken, bridges were blown up.

      >Behind enemy lines, the lights go out completely and electricity is cut off - substations are broken. Civilian and military headquarters in the rear and individual leaders are liquidated at a time by infiltrated groups in advance.

      >And just then...

      >Thousands of fighters descend from the sky - assault battalions of the Airborne Forces and special forces of the GRU ... and the invasion begins.

      Funny how that turned out, huh?

  17. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >25km range
    >Acquires targets within 5 seconds despite seismic waves travelling at the speed of sound
    >Accurate within 1 mile
    >Functions on seismic waves
    So to translate it can detect shell.impacts within 25km, once it does it takes 5 seconds to figure out what it was and if its within 1km.of enemy artillery it knows where it is from
    Its another terminator

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >accurate within one mile
      what fucking good is this at all? or am i reading it wrong

  18. 2 weeks ago
    RC-135 Rivet Joint

    More NATO documents on passive acoustic sensor systems (again Idk if Russian shit even works)

    The Thermal thing is dual mode target discrimination you can compare the flash of artillery to the sound and start to exclude noises that don't have the IR flash pattern I'd wager.

  19. 2 weeks ago
    RC-135 Rivet Joint

    Vid of the western version of this system which as far as I know doesn't have IR sensor integration.

    Viable technology and concept.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      West doesn't need it, they have IR in space instead.
      You do realise we've been using a commercial sat technology used to detect wildfires on this board to detect artillery explosions ourselves right?

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >detect artillery explosions
        Uncontrolled forest fires, caused by many things, but commonly artillery. To within 1 km.

      • 2 weeks ago
        RC-135 Rivet Joint

        Space based IR sensors do not have the loiter time of a static hidden passive array on the front line but definitely allow for broad area Surveillance.

        Good thing sensor mast technology is was dialed in tight during the Wars in Iraq and Astan.

        • 2 weeks ago
          RC-135 Rivet Joint

          actually maybe they do have high loiter time but not resolution/target discrimination I forget which one it is

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Depends on where they are in space, and if they're LEO they need more than one sat.
            They absolutely can be high up yet have small aperture to accurately see close.
            Russian ones for detecting ICBM launches for instance are well past GEO, in a threefold orbit alongside two other sats, that is if they're actually real.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          You still can't see through trees, hills and the earth's curve anon.
          Also you forget there is such thing as IR noise, and false positives.

          • 2 weeks ago
            RC-135 Rivet Joint

            Oh it's very much line of sight hence the sensor mast. You park that thing ideally hidden with just the tip exposed with 360 view of the Horizon. I don't think its using heat to track objects or shells but direction and intensity of any muzzle flash which it can compare with it's sound profile. This is not a game changer it's more of system enhancer, and Russia is probably stretching it's abilities

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              Possibly a reason why popasna was so effective at pushing Ukraine back since it's on a large hill effectively overlooking a valley, but literally any dip or tree a gun is in or behind and they're not seeing anything.
              It has a possibility to catch a few flashes from an opposing hillside maybe.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >West doesn't need it, they have IR in space instead.
        those could one day be hit with missiles and taken out in a war, it would be a good idea to have acoustics those as a backup or supplement like France seems to, if all you have is sats you can end up shit creek with no paddle

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Lol, lmao even. The US can send up more, literally not an issue. An issue Vs China in the future maybe but Russia is a joke.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >The US can send up more, literally not an issue
            it is an issue if the missiles can be produced for less cost and at a faster rate than the satellites can, or if there is already a big enough prior stock of missiles able to bring them down, plus the longer that exchange goes on the more and more debris would accumulate, making it progressively harder both to navigate in space and also to get good imagery

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              Can they? Arguably the launch costs for the US are lower than rosscosmos launches, and ICBMs cost more not less.
              The sats are expensive only because of regulation and expertise. Once a war starts the costs of manufacturing a sat are not a problem.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >Arguably the launch costs for the US are lower than rosscosmos launches
                Rosscosmos actually moved the ISS out of the way of the debris of the recent Russian anti-sat missile test, but I believe the missile itself didn't require a space shuttle launch by rosscosmos and it was ground-launched like a regular icbm or ballistic missile, it's exorbitantly costly to launch satellites but it's cheap to target them up in space if this is true.

                >Russia's space agency Roscosmos used an uncrewed Progress 81 cargo ship docked at the International Space Station to move the orbiting lab clear of a piece of space debris from the Russian satellite Cosmos 1408, sharing video of the activity(opens in new tab) on the social media service Telegram. Russia destroyed the defunct Soviet-era satellite in a November 2021 anti-satellite missile test.
                https://www.space.com/space-station-dodges-russian-satellite-debris

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Yes but rosscosmos launches are expensive compared to a reusable elonmobile, and missiles produced to shoot down GEO or higher would probably cost more than a standardised rosscosmos.

                Any proper war with the US, Russia they'll have more problems than new recon sats to worry about.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >it's exorbitantly costly to launch satellites but it's cheap to target them up in space
                Fundamentally is correct.

                Getting into space is easy.
                Getting into orbit is hard.

                ASAT missile targeting LEO satellites only needs enough fuel to travel less than 500 km up, AND be precise enough to hit a target moving past it at 8 km/s.
                Targeting higher orbit satellites like GPS would take a bigger missile with more fuel but the orbital/relative velocities are lower the higher you go. Still far cheaper than orbital launches.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Pretty much all western MIC have acoustic detection in their militaries, it's gotten so commonplace they stick it on Humvee's to detect small arms.
          If Russia has something, the west usually has more, and better. They have like 7x the people and Russia collapsed in 91, it's just reality they can't compete

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Why haven't they given any to Ukraine instead of just things like big guns and anti-radar missiles?

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              Think they have? Just the large counterbattery systems not the small stuff and in VERY low quantities

  20. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Oh, it's "ShotSpotter". Useless, short range garbage. How many do the Russians have, and why has it taken almost a year to field, if it's even fielded?
    Wake me up when the Russians aren't shit at war.

  21. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >A few weeks ago the Russian military started a systematic counter artillery campaign which has since made great progress.
    >pointless waffling about
    >unimpressive, barely existent piece of tech gets fellated for a paragraph
    >overinflated numbers
    >This form of battle is causing huge losses on the Ukrainian side while the Russian forces incur just a minimum of casualties. (lol)

  22. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Why do you always come back trying to shill Russian weapons? Surely you want to sell them, but selling them makes it obvious you cannot use them in your war, so they are essentially ineffective.
    Your country is 4 times bigger than Ukraine, and your military budget is multiple times bigger. If your equipment was even on par with theirs, you would have won easily long ago. Everyone knows.

  23. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >acoustic artillery detection
    I love a good comeback story.

  24. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    geophysicist here (aka I earn my bread from studying seismic wave we generate to see where to drill).

    just thinking this in neutral terms (source - > detection - > raw data - > inverse processing - > result), I can see it work, theoritically, but theres lot of naaaahs in my head.

    For starters just one detector is insufficient as you can't do triangulation with it. If you had good, detailed info on whats the local geology around you, you could maybe draw up a circle, as in how far the source is, and using other assumptions (local terrain, knowing where the enemy is, etc) get a general picture. But a precise one? And so many things can fuck that up, hence why seismics studies are fucking expensive since we try to use as much detectors as possible, use multiple signal generators (ie, big fucking specialised trucks that buttfuck the ground, or explosives), and try to map out local geology as best we can beforehand.

    Next, all this assumes you know the source signals's strength and type, aka knowing what equipment did the shooty and on what ground. I guess by studying past data you can set up profiles and an experienced operator or AI could do smart guesstimations.

    Going on, the inverse processing is both computationally intensive and, as of now requires human oversight, unless Russia has built in AI to assist. I find the idea that this Russian wunderwaffe can pinpoint it in seconds quite perplexing when the fossil companies spend weeks and untold money on even basic surveys, let alone more complex ones taking months or years. Of course the inverse problem here is somewhat simpler than searching for natural gas 9km down under all kinds of layers and structural fuckery.

    The way this can work best is by being part of a wider array of detection systems where it provides additional data for target refinement. But on its own, especially a single unit, lol, rofl, lmao even. Not with that advertised speed and precision at least.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >Of course the inverse problem here is somewhat simpler than searching for natural gas 9km down under all kinds of layers and structural fuckery.
      Hardly. How big is a natural gas pocket? How big is the permitted margin of error? How big is an artillery unit? You're trying to triangulate the position of a large truck to an accuracy of less than 10m for your counter-battery fire to be effective

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >For starters just one detector is insufficient as you can't do triangulation with it
      Telecomms guy here, how far apart would the units have to be for practical triangulation?
      You can't exactly circle the enemy position so you're never getting a good triangulation setup. And I imagine terrain variation makes the error margins huge. Dealing with radio waves in the air is so much simpler, and even that has its challenges.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        That would be a good undergrad question hah. No idea on hand tbh, we don't do that kind of stuff. But just going by basic information theorems and geometry, I'd say ideally just as far as far the target is. Anything much more you get less and less overlap, anything less and they pick up too similar signals.

        >Of course the inverse problem here is somewhat simpler than searching for natural gas 9km down under all kinds of layers and structural fuckery.
        Hardly. How big is a natural gas pocket? How big is the permitted margin of error? How big is an artillery unit? You're trying to triangulate the position of a large truck to an accuracy of less than 10m for your counter-battery fire to be effective

        Forgot to add before, for very precise stuff near surface we usually use other methods (like trying to find where water is permeating through a dyke, or trying to find an underground cellar).

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      I should add a human is still needed along the AI even in seven sisters & co companies.

      There are experimental software relying entirely on AI to do the job - and it does it very well and much faster than humans, but for institutional reasons (ie we don't want to lose our well paying jobs lol), their adoption is slow. That said I'm actively training myself for machine learning to stay on lane.

      also, for proper lingo I should have said amplitude, not strength, sorry (am not anglo).

      Sound waves travel faster through rock and earth than they do through the air.

      refer to picture. we use Vs30 (speed at 30m depth) because direct waves (the wave on tops) peter out really fast (depending on how strong the source was ofc), - in fact, in seismic research we tend to ignore it altogether as it doesn't provides us info on subsurface.

      Now if I think about it, I have to correct mysself. I guess this wunderwaffe ignores reflected waves as that's irrevelant to it - which means previous concern about computation matter little, since calc'ing direct propagation is much simpler mathemativally. I'd have to dig into some charts to see how effective this can be, but yeah sure the stated 25km range is doable, on paper.

      Buuuuut that brings up another issue, noise. This kind of research is hella sensitive to other signals, ie people are not allowed to walk or drop things during active data sollection. Of course that's why noise filtering is big part of our work, but again, computation, time, expertise is needed.

      >Of course the inverse problem here is somewhat simpler than searching for natural gas 9km down under all kinds of layers and structural fuckery.
      Hardly. How big is a natural gas pocket? How big is the permitted margin of error? How big is an artillery unit? You're trying to triangulate the position of a large truck to an accuracy of less than 10m for your counter-battery fire to be effective

      We always aim to be as precise as possible as even research wells cost fucktons. But you are correct, these are different beasts.

  25. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    It doesn't matter how fast sound waves move in a medium, what matters is that distance (squared) is going to turn everything into statistical noise beyond a few km, if you're not blowing up a few kilotons.

  26. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >a systematic counter artillery campaign which has since made great progress
    >not a single actually proven coutnerbattery hit against ukrainian artillery in all that time

    LMAO, nice fanfic.

    Also
    >acoustic-thermal ranging
    >new

    ROFL, that shit was already used back in WWI.

    Also
    >Russian MoD claims

    Absolutely worthless, divide claimed Ukrainian losses by 10 and multiple Russian admitted ones by 10 and it will still be pro-Russian propaganda.

  27. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >It locates enemy fire within 5 seconds at a range of 25 km
    >with seismic and acoustic sensors
    Speed of sound is only 330m/s.

    • 2 weeks ago
      RC-135 Rivet Joint

      now Google sound through solids

      This sonar for the earth senpai.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *