Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 10/15/2004 6:28:23 AM EST
story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=540&ncid=736&e=2&u=/ap/20041014/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq_syria

October 14, 2004
Shells From Syria Fired at Troops in Iraq
AP: Shells From Syria Fired at Troops in Iraq

American troops stationed along Iraq’s border with Syria are coming under increasing mortar attack from shells fired from Syrian territory, but it’s unclear who’s responsible, U.S. officers said Thursday.
The 82 mm mortar rounds have been fired at U.S. and Iraqi positions in and around Husaybah in the far west of Iraq’s Anbar province, said Lt. Col. Chris Woodbridge, commander of the 1st Battalion, 7th Marine Regiment.

“Who exactly is firing these mortars, we do not know. But what we do know is that the point of origin of these rounds is on the Syrian side of the border,” said Woodbridge, 39, of Brooklyn.

There has been no evidence linking the Syrian military to the attacks, he said. However, the Syrian military has the capability to determine who is launching the mortars and act against them, Woodbridge said.

“Syrian authorities should be the ones to go after them, no question about it,” he said.

Link Posted: 10/15/2004 6:31:18 AM EST
Time to open up another front in the War on Terror
Link Posted: 10/15/2004 6:31:22 AM EST

Originally Posted By ArmdLbrl:
“Syrian authorities should be the ones to go after them, no question about it,” he said.


I'll be able to sing "Stairway to Heaven" out of my asshole while girgling with Listerine before that happens.
Link Posted: 10/15/2004 6:32:04 AM EST
Link Posted: 10/15/2004 6:32:21 AM EST
[Last Edit: 10/15/2004 6:32:59 AM EST by Aim4MyHead]

I'll be able to sing "Stairway to Heaven" out of my asshole while girgling with Listerine before that happens.






J
Link Posted: 10/15/2004 6:32:28 AM EST

Originally Posted By Wobblin-Goblin:

Originally Posted By ArmdLbrl:
“Syrian authorities should be the ones to go after them, no question about it,” he said.


I'll be able to sing "Stairway to Heaven" out of my asshole while girgling with Listerine before that happens.



Link Posted: 10/15/2004 6:34:02 AM EST

Originally Posted By Paul:
No counter battery radar available?



I just read yesterday that the counter battery radar sucks on mortars, that they can only detect 1 in 5 rounds incoming.

Sounds to me though that they should have some MLRS's move up and give a nice counterbattery lesson, taking out a gridsquare at a time.
Link Posted: 10/15/2004 6:34:36 AM EST

Originally Posted By Paul:
No counter battery radar available?



How do you think they know where the fire is coming from.

No authorization-yet- for counter battery FIRE
Link Posted: 10/15/2004 6:35:32 AM EST

Originally Posted By sydney7629:

Time to open up another front in the War on Terror




+1
Link Posted: 10/15/2004 6:35:38 AM EST
SHOOT BACK!!!
Link Posted: 10/15/2004 6:35:41 AM EST
How far can an 82 travel?
Link Posted: 10/15/2004 6:36:37 AM EST
Link Posted: 10/15/2004 6:37:09 AM EST

Originally Posted By BayEagle:
www.dussault.ws/David/images/Bush%20Whoop-Ass.jpg


LOL.
Link Posted: 10/15/2004 6:38:46 AM EST

Originally Posted By eodtech2000:

Originally Posted By Paul:
No counter battery radar available?



I just read yesterday that the counter battery radar sucks on mortars, that they can only detect 1 in 5 rounds incoming.

Sounds to me though that they should have some MLRS's move up and give a nice counterbattery lesson, taking out a gridsquare at a time.



I like the way you think.

Link Posted: 10/15/2004 6:39:03 AM EST

Originally Posted By TWIRE:
How far can an 82 travel?



I think just a little more than 4km. Only 2/3rds of the M252/L16 and about the same as the M224/Soltam C6
Link Posted: 10/15/2004 6:40:56 AM EST

Originally Posted By TWIRE:
How far can an 82 travel?



Can't find info on a an 82mm but our 81mm M889 HE with maximum charge can shoot roughly 5900 meters max with the M252 mortar.
Link Posted: 10/15/2004 6:45:15 AM EST

Originally Posted By eodtech2000:

Originally Posted By TWIRE:
How far can an 82 travel?



Can't find info on a an 82mm but our 81mm M889 HE with maximum charge can shoot roughly 5900 meters max with the M252 mortar.



Why do the UK and Canadian mortars get 500m more? ITs the same mortar?
Link Posted: 10/15/2004 6:50:28 AM EST

Originally Posted By ArmdLbrl:

Originally Posted By eodtech2000:

Originally Posted By TWIRE:
How far can an 82 travel?



Can't find info on a an 82mm but our 81mm M889 HE with maximum charge can shoot roughly 5900 meters max with the M252 mortar.



Why do the UK and Canadian mortars get 500m more? ITs the same mortar?



The US Army in its infinite wisdom shortened the tube.
Link Posted: 10/15/2004 6:57:05 AM EST

Originally Posted By Paul:
No counter battery radar available?



That's what I'm wondering. A counter battery radar and a battery of 155's will stop that $H!T in a heartbeat.
Link Posted: 10/15/2004 7:04:53 AM EST

Originally Posted By eodtech2000:

Originally Posted By Paul:
No counter battery radar available?



I just read yesterday that the counter battery radar sucks on mortars, that they can only detect 1 in 5 rounds incoming.

Sounds to me though that they should have some MLRS's move up and give a nice counterbattery lesson, taking out a gridsquare at a time.



So, 10 years ago they used old tech to do the "Billy Dixon" test and were able to track a 45-110 bullet in flight. But today, with all the newer widgets and gadgets, they can't lock in on a 82mm mortar bomb? Sounds like someone was making up excuses in that article.

+1 on the gridsquare redecorating.
Link Posted: 10/15/2004 7:05:47 AM EST
I think we should assume they are coming from Damascus, and flatten it first. If the mortars keep coming, go to the next possible source. A city for an eye.
Link Posted: 10/15/2004 7:12:32 AM EST

Originally Posted By ArmdLbrl:
No authorization-yet- for counter battery FIRE




WHY THE FUCK NOT?????? Is Kerry already in charge?
Link Posted: 10/15/2004 7:23:04 AM EST

Originally Posted By Dracster:

Originally Posted By eodtech2000:

Originally Posted By Paul:
No counter battery radar available?



I just read yesterday that the counter battery radar sucks on mortars, that they can only detect 1 in 5 rounds incoming.

Sounds to me though that they should have some MLRS's move up and give a nice counterbattery lesson, taking out a gridsquare at a time.



So, 10 years ago they used old tech to do the "Billy Dixon" test and were able to track a 45-110 bullet in flight. But today, with all the newer widgets and gadgets, they can't lock in on a 82mm mortar bomb? Sounds like someone was making up excuses in that article.

+1 on the gridsquare redecorating.



Here is the article I read outlineing the problems with the counter-battery radar. This is off the DoD earlybird news.


Firefinder Falls Short Against Mortars In Iraq

By Megan Scully

Before the U.S. Army deployed its 20-year-old AN/TPQ-37 Firefinder Weapon Locating System to Iraq, the service developed new software to bring the system up to date. But at least one operational unit said the upgraded system failed to do what it was intended to do: detect mortar rounds.

For members of the 1st Squadron, 3rd Armored Cavalry Regiment, the TPQ-37 was more of a problem than an asset. The unit came under mortar fire 40 times in Iraq, but the system only detected rounds three times. The squadron suffered between 10 and 15 injuries from mortars.

"We stopped, we moved the radar around, the technical guys around worked the [software] programming," said Lt. Col. Gregory Reilly, squadron leader. "We tried everything humanly possible."

The unit even fired its own mortars at the system in an attempt to work out the bugs. Even under the best circumstances, the radar detected only one out of five rounds.

"I just don’t think there was fidelity in the system," Reilly said. "I don’t think that it worked."

Thales Raytheon System’s Q-37 Firefinder radar, which can be transported on a 2.5-ton truck, was first fielded in the 1980s to detect rounds from long-range Soviet artillery up to 50 kilometers away. Medium-range mortars and artillery were typically handled by Thales Raytheon’s AN/TPQ-36 radar.

Army program officials, who say they track the performance of the upgraded Q-37 daily, rate its effectiveness at roughly 90 percent — when it is used correctly by troops who have been trained extensively.

The radars are "performing exceptionally well for a system originally designed and developed 20 years ago for a different type of warfare," Lt. Col. Al Visconti, Firefinder product manager, wrote in a response to questions.

But several factors have complicated their use in theater. For one, soldiers were trained only briefly on the new software before going to Iraq.

"We did training with soldiers on the ground [on the new software], but they didn’t get the full course of instruction, the months and years of peacetime training," Col. Michael Bowman, Army program manager for night vision, reconnaissance, surveillance and target acquisition, said.

The enemy also has adapted their tactics to defeat the radars, using "nontraditional trajectories and nonstandard launchers," Bowman said. Further details on the enemy’s tactics are operationally sensitive, he said.

"If we have any training issues at all and a smart and innovative enemy, the performance of the radar has been less than" 90 percent effective, Bowman said.

Moreover, the Q-37 was built to protect division-size units. Five apiece would cover an entire front line. But in Iraq, the friendly units are smaller and the enemies more mobile. The Firefinders have been parceled out to brigades, typically one each. Offering only 90-degree coverage, the Q-37 leaves part of the battlefield uncovered, Bowman said.

The Army has sent teams of Firefinder experts to the field to work on tactics and training, the colonel said. Meanwhile, officials at Thales Raytheon are working independent of the Army to upgrade the Q-37’s performance, reliability and maintainability, said John Ryan, the company’s deputy for battlefield radar.

The Army’s teams also are working on software problems with the TPQ-36, which has been picking up too much "clutter," or interference. The Army has released to industry a request for information to improve the TPQ-36’s radar processor, but has not selected a contractor.

Thales Raytheon has responded to the request with a solution officials believe they could field in less than a year, Ryan said. The Army hasn’t made a decision.

Future Programs

The use of the Q-36 and Q-37 systems in Iraq has prompted the Army to re-evaluate its future mortar detection systems. The TPQ-47, originally expected in the field several years ago, is still in development and could get canceled in favor of a short-range system that offers 360-degree coverage.

The Q-47 model, developed by Thales Raytheon, can detect artillery as far away as 400 kilometers, but offers only 90-degree coverage. It has run over cost and schedule and is having technical difficulties meeting tough size and operational requirements, Bowman said.

"I can’t tell you today that we’re about to terminate it, stop work," Bowman said. "We’re re-evaluating it."

Thales Raytheon is "disappointed" that the fate of the Q-47 is unclear because recent tests have been "very encouraging," said Clark Van Derwood, Thales Raytheon TPQ-47 program manager.

"The results indicate that we have turned the corner technically and would meet the key performance parameters," Van Derwood said in a statement. "Although costs and schedule are challenging issues, we believe we have a plan to address them."

Aside from the Firefinder systems, the service recently has fielded limited numbers of the Lightweight Counter Mortar Radar and expects to upgrade the program’s range and accuracy during the next several years. Currently, the system can detect mortars in 360 degrees out to a range of 6 kilometers.

The service also plans to push the Multi-Mission Radar into demonstration in 2006. Currently a science and technology program, the radar will perform 360-degree air traffic control, air defense and air defense fire control, as well as 90-degree mortar detection at ranges of 50 kilometers.

Link Posted: 10/15/2004 7:29:16 AM EST

Originally Posted By gus:
I think we should assume they are coming from Damascus, and flatten it first. If the mortars keep coming, go to the next possible source. A city for an eye.



Or at the very least politely inform Damascus that if it Syrian forces don't put a fucking stop to it ASAP and deliver us the corpses of the culprits, we'll have no choice but to assume the Syrian government is involved and consider it an act of war against the US for which there WILL be heavy retaliation. (feel lucky, punk?)
Link Posted: 10/15/2004 7:31:02 AM EST
If you can't use Radara (and there are times RADAR has issues). There is a seismic system that can find the motars. Problem is it's not as precise and you need to have the sensors spread out.
Link Posted: 10/15/2004 7:36:18 AM EST

Originally Posted By shaggy:

Originally Posted By gus:
I think we should assume they are coming from Damascus, and flatten it first. If the mortars keep coming, go to the next possible source. A city for an eye.



Or at the very least politely inform Damascus that if it Syrian forces don't put a fucking stop to it ASAP and deliver us the corpses of the culprits, we'll have no choice but to assume the Syrian government is involved and consider it an act of war against the US for which there WILL be heavy retaliation. (feel lucky, punk?)



Bingo!

Call up the Syrian monkeys and tell them:

"Look, we are being fire upon from your side of the border. Either you put a stop to it right now or we will. If we have to do it, we are going to put a stop to EVERYTHING that even slightly resembles a threat. (i.e. the entire damn country) Is that clear enough?"

Or we could always use one of my mother's famous quotes

"Don't make me come over there."
Link Posted: 10/15/2004 7:36:49 AM EST
The US forces are probably afraid to return fire because that the rags are firing from:

A) A Mosque

B) A Hospital

C) From behind Women and children

D) All of the above
Link Posted: 10/15/2004 8:13:05 AM EST
[Last Edit: 10/15/2004 10:30:29 AM EST by LWilde]
I work for a university radar research lab. My branch is involved in land and sea-based surface radars. Three of my colleagues once worked on the original Fire Finder ground radar system. The TPQ-136 Fire Finder is ground based radar specifically designed to locate, identify and track various ground-launched projectiles. It can track virtually all ballistic projectiles, from large artillery down to .50cal MG rounds. After detecting a target, the radar fire control system solves for point of origin and point of impact. If the system is connected to a fire-direction center...we now have an exact geographic aimpoint for counterfire.

The radar works like this: This is a track while scan...meaning it can track up to say...ten individual targets (rounds) at a time while continuing to search for and acquire new targets. As the targets pass through the threat analysis queue and are stored in memory for counterfire, the radar solves for the next threat. The radar conducts a high data rate search from the horizon to several degrees above the horizon. As the enemy rounds pass through the radar beams on their ballistic flight path, they are located, identified and tracked and a point of origin and point of impact solution is derived. From that point on it is a simple task to call in fire and brimstone on the enemy.

There is NO reason for the radar to "skip" or "miss" any rounds. In fact, it will solve solutions for several enemy batteries in divergent directions all at the same time.

My counterfire weapon of choice would be either an MLRS, or a BIG arty piece...say a 155mm or larger. How about an 8" SPG

Bottom line, IF we had a system up there near the border within say...25 clicks of the Syrian location, we would know from whence the fire was coming and might be able to deal with it, given the right ROE.

Here is the radar:
Link Posted: 10/15/2004 10:05:09 AM EST
Top Top