roland radar around the Nellis ranges

[miso]

Hope this isn't a dupe, but I didn't see last nights post show up.
http://www.lazygranch.com/sa.htm

[Harry Andreas]

In article >,
(miso) wrote:

> Hope this isn't a dupe, but I didn't see last nights post show up.
> http://www.lazygranch.com/sa.htm

I wonder if this is one of the ones built by Hughes in the 80's.

I remember we got the engineering drawings from the French
and Germans, but they never sent us the engineering change
orders.
We ended up having to practically re-design the thing from
scratch. Cost a fortune. They had one of these in our parking
lot for show-and-tell for a couple of days.

--
Harry Andreas
Engineering raconteur

[miso]

fas.org goes into the roland history and discusses American versions
in the Reagan era. It would not surprise me if a bunch of oddball SA
equipmemt ended up at Red Flag, especially since it's operation would
not be mission-critical, no missiles would be required, and the stuff
was going to be scrapped anyway.

The truck driver mentioned that the truck shown was built in the
1950s. It is getting hard to get parts for it.

(Harry Andreas) wrote in message >...
> In article >,
> (miso) wrote:
>
> > Hope this isn't a dupe, but I didn't see last nights post show up.
> > http://www.lazygranch.com/sa.htm
>
> I wonder if this is one of the ones built by Hughes in the 80's.
>
> I remember we got the engineering drawings from the French
> and Germans, but they never sent us the engineering change
> orders.
> We ended up having to practically re-design the thing from
> scratch. Cost a fortune. They had one of these in our parking
> lot for show-and-tell for a couple of days.

[Les Matheson]

Those were US buys for airbase defense in Europe. They were mothballed at
Ft. Hood before they could be deployed.

Les

"miso" > wrote in message
om...
> fas.org goes into the roland history and discusses American versions
> in the Reagan era. It would not surprise me if a bunch of oddball SA
> equipmemt ended up at Red Flag, especially since it's operation would
> not be mission-critical, no missiles would be required, and the stuff
> was going to be scrapped anyway.
>
> The truck driver mentioned that the truck shown was built in the
> 1950s. It is getting hard to get parts for it.
>
> (Harry Andreas) wrote in message
>...
> > In article >,
> > (miso) wrote:
> >
> > > Hope this isn't a dupe, but I didn't see last nights post show up.
> > > http://www.lazygranch.com/sa.htm
> >
> > I wonder if this is one of the ones built by Hughes in the 80's.
> >
> > I remember we got the engineering drawings from the French
> > and Germans, but they never sent us the engineering change
> > orders.
> > We ended up having to practically re-design the thing from
> > scratch. Cost a fortune. They had one of these in our parking
> > lot for show-and-tell for a couple of days.

[moukari]

Les Matheson wrote:
> Those were US buys for airbase defense in Europe. They were mothballed at
> Ft. Hood before they could be deployed.
>
> Les

Roland was deployed by the New Mexico National Guard in the 80's.

[Paul Wilczynski]

Hi,

The US also have a homebuilt SA-15 "TOR".
It was sent to France for the Electronic Warfare exercice "Mace X" a
couple of years ago.

Actually the US (I don't know the name of the unit) have lots of
foreign equipments to play with. (I just have learnt today they even
bought a couple of Flankers to Bielorussia !)

Paul Wilczynski

On 12 Sep 2003 12:35:46 -0700, (miso) wrote:

>Hope this isn't a dupe, but I didn't see last nights post show up.
>http://www.lazygranch.com/sa.htm

[Guy Alcala]

miso wrote:

> fas.org goes into the roland history and discusses American versions
> in the Reagan era. It would not surprise me if a bunch of oddball SA
> equipmemt ended up at Red Flag, especially since it's operation would
> not be mission-critical, no missiles would be required, and the stuff
> was going to be scrapped anyway.

And perhaps more importantly, Iraq among others operated them. At least, they were operational and used during DS, although
how operational they'd remain after a decade of sanctions is arguable.

Guy

[Brian]

"Guy Alcala" > wrote in message
. ..
> And perhaps more importantly, Iraq among others operated them. At least,
they were operational and used during DS, although
> how operational they'd remain after a decade of sanctions is arguable.

We all know everyone would never violate trade sanctions......

[Guy Alcala]

Brian wrote:

> "Guy Alcala" > wrote in message
> . ..
> > And perhaps more importantly, Iraq among others operated them. At least,
> they were operational and used during DS, although
> > how operational they'd remain after a decade of sanctions is arguable.
>
> We all know everyone would never violate trade sanctions......

Sure, people/companies/countries cheat. No sanctions regime is 100% effective
and some a lot less than that, but it does tend to pit a crimp (of greater or
lesser extent) in procurement and support. I haven't seen any accounts so far
of what SAMs other than Manpads (and Patriot;-) ) we had to face this time
around, but don't recall any great number reportedly being used. I would
certainly think Iraq would have trouble keeping any Hawk batteries they got
from Kuwait in '90 in service, assuming any survived '91 and the intervening
years. They definitely used them in DS.

Guy

[TJ]

"Guy Alcala"

> And perhaps more importantly, Iraq among others operated them. At least,
they were operational and used during DS, although
> how operational they'd remain after a decade of sanctions is arguable.
>
> Guy

The Iraqi's still continued to fire Roland at Coalition manned and unmanned
aircraft operating in the NFZs. I've seen 2002 footage of a Roland launch
against a Predator in the SNFZ. Numerous Rolands and associated vehicles
have been found since the fall of Baghdad.

TJ

[miso]

I found this from US News and World Report:

The joystick war
Run from afar, Predators and other spy gear signal a new era of
remote-control warfare
By Richard J. Newman

Early in the Iraq war, an unmanned Predator surveillance plane
captured live video of an Iraqi Roland surface-to-air missile on the
ground north of Baghdad. Since the missile threatened U.S.
aircraft--and was mobile and easy to hide--air commanders called for a
quick airstrike. They directed a nearby A-10 warplane to ready its
laser-guided bombs, while the Predator itself prepared to guide those
bombs onto the target with its laser designator. Such "buddy lasing"
is a common targeting tactic. But this time there was one notable
difference: The pilot operating the Predator was sitting in a trailer
at an American air base, 7,000 miles away.

http://www.usnewsclassroom.com/issue/030519/usnews/19air.htm




"TJ" > wrote in message >...
> "Guy Alcala"
>
> > And perhaps more importantly, Iraq among others operated them. At least,
> they were operational and used during DS, although
> > how operational they'd remain after a decade of sanctions is arguable.
> >
> > Guy
>
> The Iraqi's still continued to fire Roland at Coalition manned and unmanned
> aircraft operating in the NFZs. I've seen 2002 footage of a Roland launch
> against a Predator in the SNFZ. Numerous Rolands and associated vehicles
> have been found since the fall of Baghdad.
>
> TJ

[Guy Alcala]

TJ wrote:

> "Guy Alcala"
>
> > And perhaps more importantly, Iraq among others operated them. At least,
> they were operational and used during DS, although
> > how operational they'd remain after a decade of sanctions is arguable.
> >
> > Guy
>
> The Iraqi's still continued to fire Roland at Coalition manned and unmanned
> aircraft operating in the NFZs. I've seen 2002 footage of a Roland launch
> against a Predator in the SNFZ. Numerous Rolands and associated vehicles
> have been found since the fall of Baghdad.

Thanks for the info. One wonders if the Roland is just fairly reliable, they
had lots of spares, they cannibalized a lot, and/or they were able to get
replacements around the sanctions. Anyone know what the "use-by" shelf life of
the Roland missile is?

Guy

[miso]

Do you think Iraq could substitute a missile of their own?

Guy Alcala > wrote in message >...
> TJ wrote:
>
> > "Guy Alcala"
> >
> > > And perhaps more importantly, Iraq among others operated them. At least,
> they were operational and used during DS, although
> > > how operational they'd remain after a decade of sanctions is arguable.
> > >
> > > Guy
> >
> > The Iraqi's still continued to fire Roland at Coalition manned and unmanned
> > aircraft operating in the NFZs. I've seen 2002 footage of a Roland launch
> > against a Predator in the SNFZ. Numerous Rolands and associated vehicles
> > have been found since the fall of Baghdad.
>
> Thanks for the info. One wonders if the Roland is just fairly reliable, they
> had lots of spares, they cannibalized a lot, and/or they were able to get
> replacements around the sanctions. Anyone know what the "use-by" shelf life of
> the Roland missile is?
>
> Guy

[Guy Alcala]

miso wrote:

> Do you think Iraq could substitute a missile of their own?

I doubt it, but I'm open to persuasion. Can anyone comment on the relative difficulty of solid versus liquid-fuel
production, and on whether the old missiles can be re-grained safely (safe by Iraq under Saddam standards, that is)?

Guy

[Tom Cooper]

"Guy Alcala" > wrote in message
. ..
> miso wrote:
>
> > Do you think Iraq could substitute a missile of their own?
>
> I doubt it, but I'm open to persuasion. Can anyone comment on the
relative difficulty of solid versus liquid-fuel
> production, and on whether the old missiles can be re-grained safely (safe
by Iraq under Saddam standards, that is)?
>
> Guy

Although I lack the full details, and the people in question do not want to
talk at all, I'm meanwhile sure that the French delivered all sorts of
support equipment and technical documentation for Rolands to Iraq and then
some. At the time of the system's introduction in Iraq (late 1980, early
1981), they were doing everything possible to support the deployment of the
system and also use every little success in combat (at some point
Aerospatiale even started publishing cards depicting all the possible
engagements and the ways Rolands scored): I mean, they were really hot about
making Roland in Iraq a success and gaining as much profit from this fact as
possible. So hot that initially even missiles and equipment directly from
NATO stocks were delivered.

Together with other of their suppliers (East Germans, Brazilians etc.) the
Iraqis became pretty proficient on the field of rocket motors and
propellants too, while purchasing also the licence for prouction of several
different - mainly French - radars. By 1990 they were really able of doing
things all by themselves.

Now, the shots of the Rolands captured by the US and British troops earlier
this year in Iraq do not show them in really a "top" condition (which is
interesting and contradictive, given that the ADC was getting far more
attention by the regime than the IrAF already since years, and most of the
IrAF figthers captured were actually in excellent condition), but they were
functional.

So, I'd say it's 2+2=4 here.

Tom Cooper
Co-Author:
Iran-Iraq War in the Air, 1980-1988:
http://www.acig.org/pg1/content.php
and,
Iranian F-4 Phantom II Units in Combat:
http://www.osprey-publishing.co.uk/title_detail.php/title=S6585

[Tom Cooper]

"Guy Alcala" > wrote in message
. ..
> miso wrote:
>
> > Do you think Iraq could substitute a missile of their own?
>
> I doubt it, but I'm open to persuasion. Can anyone comment on the
relative difficulty of solid versus liquid-fuel
> production, and on whether the old missiles can be re-grained safely (safe
by Iraq under Saddam standards, that is)?
>

I can't comment about the technical questions, but, AFAIK, the French were
hot to get the Roland into the gear in Iraq at the time (1980s), and have
delivered everything they could, including technical documentation, complete
support infra-structure, for the System. Their Aerospatiale went even so far
to publish cards depicting successful engagements against British (during
the Falklands War) and Iranian aircraft by the Rolands. The Iraqis have also
got the licence for production of numerous French-made radars.

On the other side, by the late 1980s the Iraqis have got a pretty capable
industry of rocket motors, foremost thanks to their cooperation with
Brazilians, Yugs, and East Germans.

The US troops captured quite a number of Rolands (of course, most of these
in their sealed containers), in March and April this year: most were not the
best looking, but almost all were functioning.

So, I'd say, it could be that in this case 2+2 is ineed 4.

Tom Cooper
Co-Author:
Iran-Iraq War in the Air, 1980-1988:
http://www.acig.org/pg1/content.php
and,
Iranian F-4 Phantom II Units in Combat:
http://www.osprey-publishing.co.uk/title_detail.php/title=S6585