I see you used my video of a bad missile upload . I also had another video of a good missile upload you should have used so it didn't look like a bunch of stooges doing it . It is also on my channel - Woodaddy3 .
What was your MOS? I am currently a 14p (former 38b) in ansbach Germany 5-4 Ada. Before, 14p all were 14s (avenger operator). The difference between 14p and 14s is 14p know c ram / phalanx systems in addition to stinger MANPADS and avenger. I am aware 14m were MANPADS only, 14r were linebacker operators. So I was wondering what chaparral operators were.
@vaccinatedanti-vaxxer 16 Papa was Chaparral. I was a 16P from 1990 to 92. At the time, a 16S was a Stinger crewman, before the Avenger. 16J was the FAAR radar operator. 16T was Patriot. I 'think' 16H was Hawk missle, but that was on its way out. When the 14 series starting coming online, I became a 14R on a BSFV, not Linebacker. They didn't exist at that time. The 16S transitioned to 14S, 16J became 14J with a new radar. I served as a 16R Vulcan gunner from 1993 to 1994, until Fort Riley got BSFVs. I didn't see an actual Linebacker until 2002, when I got to Fort Hood. Most 14R guys were only on BSFVs. A lot of us became 19D around January 2005. 11:26
Well it's kind of assumed that the nation with TWO of the largest air forces in the world would be able to rely on its aircraft for air defense instead of SAMs. It might be fallacious thinking to assume that you have enough men, aircraft, facilities, and fuel to maintain constant air combat patrols for the entirely of a ground war, but if anyone afford such thoughts, its the US.
you would be correct. US operations work by first ensuring air superiority before normal operation by "kicking in the door" Destroying Radar instilations, SAMs, and enemy air feilds. the state of enemy air forces is assumed to be crippled to the point where normal ACPs and interceptions of other enemy aircraft would work well and outmode the need for intermediate SAM.
well you guy gona need them soon , china gona over take you in economy and they army gona get shitload of fund soon if anyone that can out field weapon it the chinese and truth me better prepare then wait for war then develop weapon ( PS i hate china but let face the true , the chinese gona out take america soon and they gona bully the shit out of everyone live near them :( either we have to united and counter them or gona get fuk by them soon )
inoue jerry If a war with China erupts the US will shift from peacetime production to wartime production mode and start employing our unemployed citizens as a rapid workforce. We would also embargo Chinese goods and prohibit business with them and both countries would get into an economic war where the US would try to pressure NATO/EU to also block trade and China would do the same with BRICS. A conflict with China would be very one sided as their military would have no way to reliably strike the US Mainland (outside of a nuke strike which would be game over for everyone) while the US carrier groups and bases could strike the Chinese mainland until they were destroyed. A conflict with china would basically be naval battles in the western Pacific and negotiations with other countries to get involved.
@@jmferr2011 The new Rolling Frame missile.... Hits fast, far and self contained..... If it will bolt down to the deck of a boat, it should bolt down to the back of a track as well...... And it's already designed to launch from the ground to air envelope as a close point defense weapon system.....
When I served with the U.S. Army 4th Infantry Division (1983-1986) I remember seeing the Chaparral and the Vulcan on maneuvers with us while down range for training.
We should mount modernized versions of these on the Bradley’s, replace the 20mm with the Vulcan and the TOW launchers with SAMs. Call the Pentagon I came up with their latest interim!
I was drafted and my job was a 27F 20 which meant I was the electronic repair man on the Vulcan and the chaparral, the first missiles used gave off a Very dense white plume of smoke affectively targeting the launcher, they use these missiles for training, an aircraft could see exactly where the missile was launched from the air and that was quickly corrected, also a slightly larger motor was installed to give it the extra boost needed from being launched from the ground. I heard that larger motor was adopted for all used in aircraft as well, giving it a longer range for air to air.
Greetings. I was Chap mechanic, also FAAR repair qualified. I respectfully take exception to, at least, one of your statements in this vid. First, I appreciate your effort. Even though, technically, the system has been decommissioned from US service, there is certain obligation, on me. So, minding my Oath, there are certain things I cannot speak. I listened several times to make sure I was not mis-hearing you. At 5min-08/09 seconds you, the narrator, state that the updated golf round had a range of 30k. That statement/claim is patently incorrect. You claim/mention, the bird is solid fueled. That is correct. However, there are two solid propellant fuel stages. The first just gives her a kick, off the rail. Once clear, a second fuel boosts her into chasing flight. I felt compelled to speak up on this. Under nobody's mystery would the thing do 30,000. It, simply, did/does not have space within for a solid or liquid fuel to propel it anywhere near such distance. Cheers.
Interesting to see the US Chaparral which was the equivelant of the UK Rapier. Having these systems on tracks was a vast improvement in setup time compared with trailer mounted versions which couldn't prepare to fire as quickly. After Stinger Post came along, they began phasing out these heavy and complicated solutions. BTW, the NATO countries with HAWK went straight on to Stinger Post and never fielded a tracked system like Chaparral. Keep up the good work eh.
They had a lot of transmission and power unit problems , operation tazvall fort Hunter Liggett 1979 , we had 4 and those guys would blow a transmission every Friday, I had to stay and fix it to maintain readiness.
At first I was like: That's a good idea, getting the operators away from what will be a highly-attacked target. But then I was all: Oh, they're just getting away from the poor doomed bastard that has to sit right in the middle of the bullseye.
I wonder why they changed to the smaller manpad seeker over the original Sidewinder one? They have done the same with the RAM, which uses a Stinger seeker on the Sidewinder sized missile.
im starting to think the cold war woulda been bad but also pretty funny. both sides had a ton of high tech weapons that had huge problems or didnt work at all really.
I served just under 21 years in the US Army and all of it was ADA. The "Chap" as we called was my first job that lasted nearly 10 years. I can say that the Army royally screwed up when they got rid of the Chap and later the MANPADS Stinger (my second job). That left critical sites undefended except for HIMAD systems like Hawk and Patriot. The FAAR system you mention was indeed a piece of crap and if the Army brought back the Chap and paired it with the current Sentinel radar, they would have a winning combination. Yes the Chap was fired in anger once during Desert Shield/Storm when a MRCA Tornado was shot down because it did not have the correct IFF codes. Eventhough the Chap was a very good system, nothing is more dangerous on the battlefield that two teenagers and a Hummer load of Stinger missiles. They can hide nearly anywhere and cause great damage to an enemy. Hiding is something the Chap could not do. Trust me, we tried.
MOS 16-P Chaparral/RedEye. I started out on the Chaparral and felt it would have been suicide in combat only being able to shoot after the target has passed. That big plexiglass canopy reflects the sun really well giving away your position . I switched over to RedEye feeling I could hid under a rock and be damn near invisible from the air . I ETS before Stingers arrived .
heard of F15 shot at, but missed during Desert Storm, but I was in Korea at the time. yes the Chap if harder to hide even camoed up the mount sticks out like a becon. 16P F Btry 5/5 ADA 90'-91' B Btry 3/2 ADA 91'-93' First to fire
Wow...I remember seeing this as a fine scale model kit from AFV club M730A1 at 1/35 scale.....old school cool and unique air defense. Max..please do a review on the Canadian ADATS system or even the proposed SHORAD Stryker armed with stingers or AI3s on one side and longbow hellfire missiles on the other side of the turret.
Dr Bendover You have a good point and I consider to use land base modified version of the AIM-120 and add the Chaparral the capability to launch ANY kind of AA missile in the inventory.
Just for comparison the RBS 70 which is a three men portable system had a range of 5 km with 3 km in altitude when it came and the latest missile (Bolide) has a range of 8 km and 5 km in height. That system has always been all aspect though and served concurrently with the Redye in the Swedish Army.
You are wrong about the Avenger. The Avenger was the only shoot on the move Air Defense ever to be deployed with US Arny. All other systems had to emplace to able to engage a target. You might ask yourself how does he know this? I was a gunner on the Chaparral and a team chief on the Avenger Weapon system.
They really aren't comparable, esp. with the M48 being a much older system. The US has never really invested much in the way of mobile air defense systems, unlike the Russians. We tend to rely on air superiority/supremacy and assume that we'll always have it so we rely on more basic systems when compared to the Russians. Personally, I feel that this is a mistake and we need to invest more in mobile air defense systems just in case we can't achieve air superiority/supremacy or at the very least to cover us until we do control the air since a near peer opponent might not be so kind as to just let us control the skies.
Its no secret the US Air Defense is lacking in short-mid range protection because of our reliance on complete Air Superiority (which honestly has worked so far). From everything I'm hearing right now from my weapon procurement friends, the US military wants to wait until they have laser weapons perfected that allow for multiple systems to target at different ranges from one chassis to allow for better accuracy and negate the countermeasures of targets. The problem right now is miniaturization and a power supply to allow a medium size chassis to carry it. They are also testing energy manpaads but that is probably going to take a long time to get right due to how grunts treat equipment in the field and how finicky lasers are. I also know the US military is currently trying to upgrade/buy some Strykers for SAM duty as a limited stop gap until the laser platform is ready.
Laughing so hard when i see those guys knocking the nose covers off and putting them back on, reminds me a few years ago in the USAF i would deliver AIM-9M's to the A-10's on the flight line and you would be looking in you're rear view mirror and in the street you see one of you're missle's nose covers just bouncing around in the street behind you as you are driving away like: God damn it!!! lol
right at the start of the video - did that missile engage stealth mode? I swear I saw it go so far and then just totally disappear. it was either cloaking technology or one fuck of a boost motor.
The Squad performing the Crew Drill in the Video was from the 3rd Platoon, B Btry/ 3-44 ADA, stationed at Ramstein AB, FRG around 1989. I was Platoon Leader of 4th Platoon, later Battery XO. We were practicing from our annual crew drill competition and live fire exercise, held on the island of Crete. The Chap was a decent weapon system, only hampered by its prime mover. Most were Vietnam era weapons carriers, underpowered for such a heavy launcher. The max road speed we ever got from our tracks was about 15 to 19mph. The FLIR improved target acquisition greatly, but the lack of a battery level Tactical radar limited its full potential. There were a number of plans to upgrade Chap, putting the launcher on the MLRS chassis and making the turret remote operated.
That was my footage from Ramstein . I was in 3rd Platoon and I have another video on my channel of a good missile upload and an emplacement drill . My channel is Woodaddy3 , you should go on it and subscribe . Is this Lt. Darby ? I was Specialist Leviner with Ssgt James squad . This was Ssgt Stillwell squad and they came in dead last . We came in 2nd that year in Crete and I got to fire . I also have a group on Facebook called , U.S. Army Air Defense - Chaparral / Vulcan / Stinger with lots of pictures and some videos .
I was born in a Chap battery, 3rd Battalion, 61st ADA. 3rd AD, Budingen Germany. 76 to 79. A little known fact is that Chap crews were also trained on Redeye Shoulder fired SAMs, the predecessor to Stinger. Each Battery had a basic load of Redeye. I fired a Redeye in Todendorf and a Chap in Crete. Great memories. For those that were there, do you remember the unannounced alerts at 2 in the morning during the winter months, riding in the cab in a snow storm with no windshield, top or heater? Fun stuff. LOL
I served 2 years on the Chaparral. B 2/2 31st Brigade1990 to 1992. We had the latest version where the gunner had a tv screen that would let the gunner pick a target the weapon would automatically track. Loading those missiles was a back breaker.
You're talking about the FLIR "Forward Looking Infrared Radar" system. It was deployed to line units while I was stationed in Germany, A Battery 2/60th ADA in '85. The FLIR was a passive radar system that gave the Chapparal all weather and nighttime capability. It was so sensitive that when I was receiving training on the maintenance of it at Ramstein Air Base, we were tracking aircraft landing and takinf off, It was able to show the aircraft's wing markings on the screen in the gunner's compartment.
@@johnconaway129 I was stationed with B Btry 2/60 ADA at Ramstein 85 to 89 as a Chap . The video of the crew drill was shot by me and the full video is on my channel , Woodaddy3 . I also have one of an emplacement drill and a good crew drill , this was a bad crew drill . I got to fire my last year in Crete 1989 , came in 2nd . I also have a group on Facebook called U.S. Army Air Defense - Chaparral / Vulcan / Stinger with lots of pictures and some videos . You could probably find some of your buddies from A Battery . Also , don't forget to checkout my You Tube channel and subscribe .
oH GOODY ANOTHER GAVIN variant...dood gavin variants are so weird...I think they also built like a...pseudo STUG/arty variant of the M113 with a fixed 105mm gun with like rly high gun elevation
Regarding other nations still using the Chaparral system, I'm not sure that it's so much because of capability as much as cost and availability. Most likely, many of the nations that still use this system do so because they can't afford any better and/or were given to them or sold to them for dirt cheap.
This was a weapons system developed in the late 60s during thw Vietnam War. Although the launch platform was plagued with shortcomings, the missile itself was highly effective and lethal.
Agreed (John Conaway), the Chapparal was a highly effective missile at the end of it's U.S. service life. They NM Army Guard operated the last ones until 1997 where they were given/sold to the South Koreans. In practice, the latest missiles had about an 85-90% hit effectiveness rate while shooting practice targets and drones at White Sands Missle Range (assuming the missiles were fired within their proper engagement parameters). The vehicle chassis is what rendered them obsolete for the most part. The chassis were relatively fragile and they no longer had spare parts. The Avenger is similar in concept and the turrent is very similar in design. There were no plans to upgrade the platform to the M-1 Abrams chassis and the Linebacker was being fielded at the time. If used in a stationary defense role, they would probably still be pretty formidable even today. The U.S. stopped innovating in Air Defense because there hasn't really been a conflict where an adversary has posed a significant air threat. If I remember correctly, the following were the effectiveness against aircraft in 1997: 1. Patriot Missile Pac II variant ~90%, 2. Chapparal G variant ~85-90%, 3. Stinger missile ~75-83%, 4. Hawk missile 3rd gen. ~73%, 5. Roland missile ~60-70%, 6. Redeye missile ~35-50%.
@@TB0321 I worked the ADATS program that would have replaced both Vulcan and Chap. I was an instructor at Bliss and a tester of all the systems from the west that wanted to participate in the evaluations, Rapier, Liberty Roland, ADATS and a few others. Sgt York was cancelled just a few years before.
Hmm.... well I think the only viable solution is an integrated system where the subunits get a shout out from - say an AWACS - and get the message through within a 5 minute warning - and disperse to some sort of cover, concealment. The real value of these air defence systems is that they "lift" the attacking aircraft up to a higher altitude where real missiles can get at them. The americans have always depended upon attacking from a safe distance with some sort of guided weapons - which then becomes the main problem. The problem should then be converted into a pricing issue. Guided weapons are more expensive than the vehicle it is supposed to destroy. This might, however, not be the case with a retro-fit GPS gear. Retrofitted to a rather large stock of old "iron-bombs". Another part of the solution is mobility with wheeled vehicles that move with road speeds of say 80 km/hour so NOBODY know where they are - at the moment in question. There is a perspective far out the realm of difficulties field officers wrestle with: The question of movement of formations across boarders in Europe. Don't think the considerations are not being taken seriously. Fortunately the general secretary of Nato Jens Stoltenberg and Vice-commissioner of the EU Frederica Mogherini are very much on speaking terms. It is idiotic that f.i. a Spanish BTN should be hindered at a German boarder by red tape. One thing we have to realise is that most of the movements will occur under peacetime condition with wheeled ICV using the Autobahns of Europe so the reinforcements are there BEFORE the Russian mongs get their act together - and their tanks moving. Simply to persuade the Russians that they were "under the influence" when they concieved their dastardly plans. Fortunately the Russians are so perfideous that they are so richly hated, that no politician will survive going against common sense. What we have seen is the mere sending a batch of Javelins to the Ukrainians seem to persuade the Russians that sending their best tanks to the front is not a very good idea - and something that will only engender humiliation. The other way you can do something about the ground attack threat is making composite units where f.i. an expeditionary brigade is coupled with a squadron of fighter aircraft. That means there will be fighters to kill of hostile ground attackers BEFORE they get to their intended target. As such - and I think that is the important lesson: There is no ONE answer. A combination will however give the opponent a planning problem.
Exactly! same say i said on another thread, US have one of the most powerfull airforce in world, but airforce is US weakpoint too, you need powerfull long ranged SAM Sites, bcz defending your soast with jets will be not enough, hopefully that will be never necessary thoug.
Philco-Ford was always a subcontractor from the start of the Sidewinder program. They also got to develop the Air Force line of sidewinders the E/J/P variants
This Chaparral Anti Aircraft missiles or anti aircraft gun is effective in circumstances of low altitude flying attacking warplanes The various range anti aircraft missiles become ineffective in circumstances of low altitude flying attacking warplanes , under such circumstances this Chaparral Anti Aircraft air defense is very effective .
I literally was watching this same promotional video yesterday. And you're last up load you shadowed me too. You're stalking me, man. what's up? a O..O XD
Hey Mat, im an amateur military historian so i know a few things mainly Cold War and Modern military vehicles and weapons systems, if you need to talk or discuss something im a member of your discord
I see you used my video of a bad missile upload . I also had another video of a good missile upload you should have used so it didn't look like a bunch of stooges doing it . It is also on my channel - Woodaddy3 .
woodaddy3 you don’t look like a bunch of stooges lol. But I have subbed and pinned your comment so people can visit
@@_Matsimus_ that wasn't my squad , my squad video is this one : ruclips.net/video/lHmKDKpsLlk/видео.html
I was a Chaparral missile crewman in 1970-72 stationed in Spangdahlem, Germany. This brings back a lot of memories.
I worked on the system a 24 / Nov /.20 , I was in Korea in 74 / 75 the damn things were accurate when you could get them to work
What was your MOS? I am currently a 14p (former 38b) in ansbach Germany 5-4 Ada. Before, 14p all were 14s (avenger operator). The difference between 14p and 14s is 14p know c ram / phalanx systems in addition to stinger MANPADS and avenger. I am aware 14m were MANPADS only, 14r were linebacker operators. So I was wondering what chaparral operators were.
I was a missile crewman from 81 to 84@ Ft. Polk, La. (Black Diamonds)
@vaccinatedanti-vaxxer
16 Papa was Chaparral. I was a 16P from 1990 to 92. At the time, a 16S was a Stinger crewman, before the Avenger. 16J was the FAAR radar operator. 16T was Patriot. I 'think' 16H was Hawk missle, but that was on its way out. When the 14 series starting coming online, I became a 14R on a BSFV, not Linebacker. They didn't exist at that time. The 16S transitioned to 14S, 16J became 14J with a new radar. I served as a 16R Vulcan gunner from 1993 to 1994, until Fort Riley got BSFVs. I didn't see an actual Linebacker until 2002, when I got to Fort Hood. Most 14R guys were only on BSFVs. A lot of us became 19D around January 2005. 11:26
We seriously need a new intermediate range SAM.
MEADS + SkyCeptor
Well it's kind of assumed that the nation with TWO of the largest air forces in the world would be able to rely on its aircraft for air defense instead of SAMs. It might be fallacious thinking to assume that you have enough men, aircraft, facilities, and fuel to maintain constant air combat patrols for the entirely of a ground war, but if anyone afford such thoughts, its the US.
you would be correct. US operations work by first ensuring air superiority before normal operation by "kicking in the door" Destroying Radar instilations, SAMs, and enemy air feilds. the state of enemy air forces is assumed to be crippled to the point where normal ACPs and interceptions of other enemy aircraft would work well and outmode the need for intermediate SAM.
well you guy gona need them soon , china gona over take you in economy and they army gona get shitload of fund soon if anyone that can out field weapon it the chinese and truth me better prepare then wait for war then develop weapon ( PS i hate china but let face the true , the chinese gona out take america soon and they gona bully the shit out of everyone live near them :( either we have to united and counter them or gona get fuk by them soon )
inoue jerry If a war with China erupts the US will shift from peacetime production to wartime production mode and start employing our unemployed citizens as a rapid workforce. We would also embargo Chinese goods and prohibit business with them and both countries would get into an economic war where the US would try to pressure NATO/EU to also block trade and China would do the same with BRICS.
A conflict with China would be very one sided as their military would have no way to reliably strike the US Mainland (outside of a nuke strike which would be game over for everyone) while the US carrier groups and bases could strike the Chinese mainland until they were destroyed. A conflict with china would basically be naval battles in the western Pacific and negotiations with other countries to get involved.
Imagine how deadly an upgraded version with a SAM version if the AIM-9X would be.
Or an AMRAAM.
+jmferr2011+ dunno if you can fit those on the existing launch rails.
jmferr2011 It's called NASAMS 2 cuz they use AMRAAM-C series
@@jmferr2011
The new Rolling Frame missile....
Hits fast, far and self contained.....
If it will bolt down to the deck of a boat, it should bolt down to the back of a track as well......
And it's already designed to launch from the ground to air envelope as a close point defense weapon system.....
@@jmferr2011 NASAMS will make your wish true... Imagine 5 AMRAAM mounted on a Humvee or a truck....
When I served with the U.S. Army 4th Infantry Division (1983-1986) I remember seeing the Chaparral and the Vulcan on maneuvers with us while down range for training.
Please do S-300/S-400 russian!!!😀😀😀
C'mon Mr.Matsimus please do S-300/S-400 russian!!!!!👍
C'mon mate!!!!!👍👍
might as well add whats known about the S-500 Prometey
Include the videos where they fail to ignite properly.
Failer95 we r talking about s400 not tomahawks
We should mount modernized versions of these on the Bradley’s, replace the 20mm with the Vulcan and the TOW launchers with SAMs. Call the Pentagon I came up with their latest interim!
0:01
My ears.
I was drafted and my job was a 27F 20 which meant I was the electronic repair man on the Vulcan and the chaparral, the first missiles used gave off a Very dense white plume of smoke affectively targeting the launcher, they use these missiles for training, an aircraft could see exactly where the missile was launched from the air and that was quickly corrected, also a slightly larger motor was installed to give it the extra boost needed from being launched from the ground. I heard that larger motor was adopted for all used in aircraft as well, giving it a longer range for air to air.
The Aim-7 Sparrow also is pretty versatile and used on Ships. It even has a limited surface to surface capability.
There is a land based version of the sparrow too, made in Italy.
Exercício relâmpago caralho!!! que frio que estava nessa noite .
Ahhhhh
The good old days of world in conflict
You know it actually seems pretty good knowing that large conflicts will hopefully not be known to the kids of today
Won’t be known as in not happening during their lifetime
Greetings. I was Chap mechanic, also FAAR repair qualified. I respectfully take exception to, at least, one of your statements in this vid. First, I appreciate your effort. Even though, technically, the system has been decommissioned from US service, there is certain obligation, on me. So, minding my Oath, there are certain things I cannot speak. I listened several times to make sure I was not mis-hearing you. At 5min-08/09 seconds you, the narrator, state that the updated golf round had a range of 30k. That statement/claim is patently incorrect. You claim/mention, the bird is solid fueled. That is correct. However, there are two solid propellant fuel stages. The first just gives her a kick, off the rail. Once clear, a second fuel boosts her into chasing flight. I felt compelled to speak up on this. Under nobody's mystery would the thing do 30,000. It, simply, did/does not have space within for a solid or liquid fuel to propel it anywhere near such distance. Cheers.
Interesting to see the US Chaparral which was the equivelant of the UK Rapier. Having these systems on tracks was a vast improvement in setup time compared with trailer mounted versions which couldn't prepare to fire as quickly. After Stinger Post came along, they began phasing out these heavy and complicated solutions. BTW, the NATO countries with HAWK went straight on to Stinger Post and never fielded a tracked system like Chaparral. Keep up the good work eh.
As a former Chap' crew member, this video brought back some fond, and some not so fond memories... thanks for sharing...
They had a lot of transmission and power unit problems , operation tazvall fort Hunter Liggett 1979 , we had 4 and those guys would blow a transmission every Friday, I had to stay and fix it to maintain readiness.
At first I was like: That's a good idea, getting the operators away from what will be a highly-attacked target.
But then I was all: Oh, they're just getting away from the poor doomed bastard that has to sit right in the middle of the bullseye.
I was a 16 Poppa chaparral missile crewman/ red eye gunner 4/61st Ada battalion 4th infantry division Vietnam era
I wonder why they changed to the smaller manpad seeker over the original Sidewinder one? They have done the same with the RAM, which uses a Stinger seeker on the Sidewinder sized missile.
Too bad we don't use this anymore. If the missiles were upgraded to aim -9x tech it would probably be deadly.
im starting to think the cold war woulda been bad but also pretty funny.
both sides had a ton of high tech weapons that had huge problems or didnt work at all really.
The M48 Chaparral anti-aircraft system can't be fired on the move it will damage the erect retract system.
I participated in scraping sgt.york and one of last 16Papa mos soldiers Ft.bliss
We can send a man to the moon but we still haven't figured out how to have a system reload missiles without human help.
I served just under 21 years in the US Army and all of it was ADA. The "Chap" as we called was my first job that lasted nearly 10 years. I can say that the Army royally screwed up when they got rid of the Chap and later the MANPADS Stinger (my second job). That left critical sites undefended except for HIMAD systems like Hawk and Patriot. The FAAR system you mention was indeed a piece of crap and if the Army brought back the Chap and paired it with the current Sentinel radar, they would have a winning combination. Yes the Chap was fired in anger once during Desert Shield/Storm when a MRCA Tornado was shot down because it did not have the correct IFF codes. Eventhough the Chap was a very good system, nothing is more dangerous on the battlefield that two teenagers and a Hummer load of Stinger missiles. They can hide nearly anywhere and cause great damage to an enemy. Hiding is something the Chap could not do. Trust me, we tried.
MOS 16-P Chaparral/RedEye. I started out on the Chaparral and felt it would have been suicide in combat only being able to shoot after the target has passed. That big plexiglass canopy reflects the sun really well giving away your position . I switched over to RedEye feeling I could hid under a rock and be damn near invisible from the air . I ETS before Stingers arrived .
heard of F15 shot at, but missed during Desert Storm, but I was in Korea at the time. yes the Chap if harder to hide even camoed up the mount sticks out like a becon. 16P F Btry 5/5 ADA 90'-91' B Btry 3/2 ADA 91'-93' First to fire
Wow...I remember seeing this as a fine scale model kit from AFV club M730A1 at 1/35 scale.....old school cool and unique air defense.
Max..please do a review on the Canadian ADATS system or even the proposed SHORAD Stryker armed with stingers or AI3s on one side and longbow hellfire missiles on the other side of the turret.
that Chaparral and the one firing outside of the video shot are Portuguese ones
It was also available in a towed and stationary variant.
I was a Chaparral crewman in the mid 1970s.
(Watches this on toilet)
Grab a meme on the go yup
If I´m not mistaken it´s the annual tests performed by the Portuguese Army in Leiria region.
Sim. Exercício ''Neptuno'' 2013. Um grande tiro do Sold Ivo Pereira da BtrAAA
ok for shooting down choppers I guess.
Dr Bendover fuck dr bendover aym CROACIA AYM FUCK USA HAAAAA
Backa Palanka An example of a Filthy Peasant who don't know how the grammars work.
Caboose Fuck of Aym CROACIA fuck USA kill usa
Backa Palanka lol
Dr Bendover
You have a good point and I consider to use land base modified version of the AIM-120 and add the Chaparral the capability to launch ANY kind of AA missile in the inventory.
Chicken wing chicken wing chicken wing turkey wing turkey wing turkey wing inside joke
chicken wing good!
Just for comparison the RBS 70 which is a three men portable system had a range of 5 km with 3 km in altitude when it came and the latest missile (Bolide) has a range of 8 km and 5 km in height.
That system has always been all aspect though and served concurrently with the Redye in the Swedish Army.
I worked on the communication system. C Btry 2/60 ADA K-Town Germany 1986-1989. We had Vulcans and early Stingers in the battery also.
3:32 *_"directly derivatived"_* 😂😂
Thats Royal Marine level word fuckery Matsimus mate 😂😂
Outstanding - keep up the good work Matt :)
Because these use passive homing they can be a nasty surprise.
Was a 24N, Chap maint. 4/61 ADA 4th division, Ft. Carson. 82-85. was a great system.
I was a crew chief (sgt-E5 ) on a vulcan, super impressive weapon system in '69-70😁😁😁
You are wrong about the Avenger. The Avenger was the only shoot on the move Air Defense ever to be deployed with US Arny. All other systems had to emplace to able to engage a target. You might ask yourself how does he know this? I was a gunner on the Chaparral and a team chief on the Avenger Weapon system.
I wish i could go back and join the military.
I am reading the Jack Reacher book "Night School" which features this machine and found your video showing it in action, Brilliant!
Would be ideal weapon for Ukraine to nutralize Iranian drones. AIM-9’s are cheap and plentyful.
I was a chap mechanic in the late 80's and early 90's. They were being phased out and replaced with the avenger.
Mmmmmmmm......M548.....what a PIG she was.....so glad we transitioned to the M992
*Laughts in Tunguska M1*
Hawk 6.2.0.1 You mean "Laughs while sitting in front of your computer/phone"
Caboose Someone is being smart ehh ;)
They really aren't comparable, esp. with the M48 being a much older system. The US has never really invested much in the way of mobile air defense systems, unlike the Russians. We tend to rely on air superiority/supremacy and assume that we'll always have it so we rely on more basic systems when compared to the Russians. Personally, I feel that this is a mistake and we need to invest more in mobile air defense systems just in case we can't achieve air superiority/supremacy or at the very least to cover us until we do control the air since a near peer opponent might not be so kind as to just let us control the skies.
Bringing back Toy Soldiers: Cold War vibes with this one
Its no secret the US Air Defense is lacking in short-mid range protection because of our reliance on complete Air Superiority (which honestly has worked so far). From everything I'm hearing right now from my weapon procurement friends, the US military wants to wait until they have laser weapons perfected that allow for multiple systems to target at different ranges from one chassis to allow for better accuracy and negate the countermeasures of targets. The problem right now is miniaturization and a power supply to allow a medium size chassis to carry it. They are also testing energy manpaads but that is probably going to take a long time to get right due to how grunts treat equipment in the field and how finicky lasers are.
I also know the US military is currently trying to upgrade/buy some Strykers for SAM duty as a limited stop gap until the laser platform is ready.
Laughing so hard when i see those guys knocking the nose covers off and putting them back on, reminds me a few years ago in the USAF i would deliver AIM-9M's to the A-10's on the flight line and you would be looking in you're rear view mirror and in the street you see one of you're missle's nose covers just bouncing around in the street behind you as you are driving away like: God damn it!!! lol
Flash back at 5:28 x'D
Got to love cloud punchers
right at the start of the video - did that missile engage stealth mode? I swear I saw it go so far and then just totally disappear. it was either cloaking technology or one fuck of a boost motor.
It had killed 1 syrian mig-17 in 1974 over northern isreal.
The Squad performing the Crew Drill in the Video was from the 3rd Platoon, B Btry/ 3-44 ADA, stationed at Ramstein AB, FRG around 1989. I was Platoon Leader of 4th Platoon, later Battery XO. We were practicing from our annual crew drill competition and live fire exercise, held on the island of Crete.
The Chap was a decent weapon system, only hampered by its prime mover. Most were Vietnam era weapons carriers, underpowered for such a heavy launcher. The max road speed we ever got from our tracks was about 15 to 19mph. The FLIR improved target acquisition greatly, but the lack of a battery level Tactical radar limited its full potential.
There were a number of plans to upgrade Chap, putting the launcher on the MLRS chassis and making the turret remote operated.
That was my footage from Ramstein . I was in 3rd Platoon and I have another video on my channel of a good missile upload and an emplacement drill . My channel is Woodaddy3 , you should go on it and subscribe . Is this Lt. Darby ? I was Specialist Leviner with Ssgt James squad . This was Ssgt Stillwell squad and they came in dead last . We came in 2nd that year in Crete and I got to fire . I also have a group on Facebook called , U.S. Army Air Defense - Chaparral / Vulcan / Stinger with lots of pictures and some videos .
We had the A2's had mine up to 50 mph took awhile, down hill but yes under powered
a syrian jet was downed and may've been sent ot ukraine.
Have a look at the ADATS system since your in the Canadian Army now.
I was born in a Chap battery, 3rd Battalion, 61st ADA. 3rd AD, Budingen Germany. 76 to 79. A little known fact is that Chap crews were also trained on Redeye Shoulder fired SAMs, the predecessor to Stinger. Each Battery had a basic load of Redeye. I fired a Redeye in Todendorf and a Chap in Crete. Great memories. For those that were there, do you remember the unannounced alerts at 2 in the morning during the winter months, riding in the cab in a snow storm with no windshield, top or heater? Fun stuff. LOL
I still cant get warm 5/5 ADA 2nd Inf. camp Stanley Korea 90'-91' Winters were brutal
Chaparral has been added to War Thunder in this recent update
Could you maybe do a video about MRSI artillery?
I served 2 years on the Chaparral. B 2/2 31st Brigade1990 to 1992. We had the latest version where the gunner had a tv screen that would let the gunner pick a target the weapon would automatically track. Loading those missiles was a back breaker.
You're talking about the FLIR "Forward Looking Infrared Radar" system. It was deployed to line units while I was stationed in Germany, A Battery 2/60th ADA in '85. The FLIR was a passive radar system that gave the Chapparal all weather and nighttime capability. It was so sensitive that when I was receiving training on the maintenance of it at Ramstein Air Base, we were tracking aircraft landing and takinf off, It was able to show the aircraft's wing markings on the screen in the gunner's compartment.
@@johnconaway129 Good times I served in C Btry 1/59 Wackhiem ' 85 - 86, went to the Ramstein Air Show in November ? ?
@@johnconaway129 I was stationed with B Btry 2/60 ADA at Ramstein 85 to 89 as a Chap . The video of the crew drill was shot by me and the full video is on my channel , Woodaddy3 . I also have one of an emplacement drill and a good crew drill , this was a bad crew drill . I got to fire my last year in Crete 1989 , came in 2nd . I also have a group on Facebook called U.S. Army Air Defense - Chaparral / Vulcan / Stinger with lots of pictures and some videos . You could probably find some of your buddies from A Battery . Also , don't forget to checkout my You Tube channel and subscribe .
I was in A battery 2/2 31 st at the same time frame.😅
I served in 2/2 HQ Battery until being sent to C Battery from 1988-1990
Love this channel, keep up the good work!
Another brilliant video Mat!
SLAMRAAM :)
ruclips.net/video/JQZMvAU8PCs/видео.html
Wonder if it could be used in Ukraine.
What ever happen to Skink?!
Loves spamming infrared missles
Does the US even use these anymore?
I buy if can shoot f22 raptor
هل يوجد مدفع نووي او دبابه نوويه
You put a picture of 3rd LAAD Bn in the video...whoa, I didn't know anyone knew we existed.
oH GOODY ANOTHER GAVIN variant...dood gavin variants are so weird...I think they also built like a...pseudo STUG/arty variant of the M113 with a fixed 105mm gun with like rly high gun elevation
Regarding other nations still using the Chaparral system, I'm not sure that it's so much because of capability as much as cost and availability. Most likely, many of the nations that still use this system do so because they can't afford any better and/or were given to them or sold to them for dirt cheap.
This was a weapons system developed in the late 60s during thw Vietnam War. Although the launch platform was plagued with shortcomings, the missile itself was highly effective and lethal.
Agreed (John Conaway), the Chapparal was a highly effective missile at the end of it's U.S. service life. They NM Army Guard operated the last ones until 1997 where they were given/sold to the South Koreans. In practice, the latest missiles had about an 85-90% hit effectiveness rate while shooting practice targets and drones at White Sands Missle Range (assuming the missiles were fired within their proper engagement parameters).
The vehicle chassis is what rendered them obsolete for the most part. The chassis were relatively fragile and they no longer had spare parts. The Avenger is similar in concept and the turrent is very similar in design. There were no plans to upgrade the platform to the M-1 Abrams chassis and the Linebacker was being fielded at the time.
If used in a stationary defense role, they would probably still be pretty formidable even today. The U.S. stopped innovating in Air Defense because there hasn't really been a conflict where an adversary has posed a significant air threat.
If I remember correctly, the following were the effectiveness against aircraft in 1997: 1. Patriot Missile Pac II variant ~90%, 2. Chapparal G variant ~85-90%, 3. Stinger missile ~75-83%, 4. Hawk missile 3rd gen. ~73%, 5. Roland missile ~60-70%, 6. Redeye missile ~35-50%.
@@TB0321 I worked the ADATS program that would have replaced both Vulcan and Chap. I was an instructor at Bliss and a tester of all the systems from the west that wanted to participate in the evaluations, Rapier, Liberty Roland, ADATS and a few others. Sgt York was cancelled just a few years before.
Next time the Roland AA
M48
Mobile Ground t Air defence
Description: ARGHhhhhh ITS UGLY, GO BACK AAAAA!!!!
My favorite is the Nike Hercules ADA weapon system. "They're like a government employee: they don't work and you can't fire them."
Hmm.... well I think the only viable solution is an integrated system where the subunits get a shout out from - say an AWACS - and get the message through within a 5 minute warning - and disperse to some sort of cover, concealment. The real value of these air defence systems is that they "lift" the attacking aircraft up to a higher altitude where real missiles can get at them.
The americans have always depended upon attacking from a safe distance with some sort of guided weapons - which then becomes the main problem. The problem should then be converted into a pricing issue. Guided weapons are more expensive than the vehicle it is supposed to destroy. This might, however, not be the case with a retro-fit GPS gear. Retrofitted to a rather large stock of old "iron-bombs".
Another part of the solution is mobility with wheeled vehicles that move with road speeds of say 80 km/hour so NOBODY know where they are - at the moment in question.
There is a perspective far out the realm of difficulties field officers wrestle with: The question of movement of formations across boarders in Europe. Don't think the considerations are not being taken seriously. Fortunately the general secretary of Nato Jens Stoltenberg and Vice-commissioner of the EU Frederica Mogherini are very much on speaking terms. It is idiotic that f.i. a Spanish BTN should be hindered at a German boarder by red tape.
One thing we have to realise is that most of the movements will occur under peacetime condition with wheeled ICV using the Autobahns of Europe so the reinforcements are there BEFORE the Russian mongs get their act together - and their tanks moving.
Simply to persuade the Russians that they were "under the influence" when they concieved their dastardly plans.
Fortunately the Russians are so perfideous that they are so richly hated, that no politician will survive going against common sense. What we have seen is the mere sending a batch of Javelins to the Ukrainians seem to persuade the Russians that sending their best tanks to the front is not a very good idea - and something that will only engender humiliation.
The other way you can do something about the ground attack threat is making composite units where f.i. an expeditionary brigade is coupled with a squadron of fighter aircraft. That means there will be fighters to kill of hostile ground attackers BEFORE they get to their intended target.
As such - and I think that is the important lesson: There is no ONE answer. A combination will however give the opponent a planning problem.
Exactly! same say i said on another thread, US have one of the most powerfull airforce in world, but airforce is US weakpoint too, you need powerfull long ranged SAM Sites, bcz defending your soast with jets will be not enough, hopefully that will be never necessary thoug.
Philco-Ford was always a subcontractor from the start of the Sidewinder program. They also got to develop the Air Force line of sidewinders the E/J/P variants
Great presentation
This Chaparral Anti Aircraft missiles or anti aircraft gun is effective in circumstances of low altitude flying attacking warplanes
The various range anti aircraft missiles become ineffective in circumstances of low altitude flying attacking warplanes , under such circumstances this Chaparral Anti Aircraft air defense is very effective .
Not suprised the aim 9 could be launched from the ground its a brilliantly simple and self contained package
I literally was watching this same promotional video yesterday. And you're last up load you shadowed me too. You're stalking me, man. what's up? a O..O XD
Can you do a video on the Type-99A2 or the DF-26 or DF-21D anti aircraft carrier missiles?
A little surprised to see three crewmen loading the missile. Minimum was 4 on the ground and squad leader on the launching station.
Hey Mat, im an amateur military historian so i know a few things mainly Cold War and Modern military vehicles and weapons systems, if you need to talk or discuss something im a member of your discord
Or Canadian ADATS ? anti tank/aircraft ... what could be more cool than that :D
I worked on FAAR that was attached to chaps and vulcans or were they attached to us? can you do a FAAR vid.
blasting those migs right out of the sky.
Military equipment is expensive. Your tax money at work.
What is US army's low-to-medium air defense solution these days ?
Was watching this Sidewinder derivative on yt his year self. And i knew this system years now.
7:20 that wonderful Baaaaaaarrrrrrrt ! sound effect when much dakka goes down range . Gork and Mork would be pleased.
like the disclaimer Matsimus, Have the trolls been attacking you ?
do a talk on the t-72 gear box and differential! tank transmissions!
“Any facts in this video are my opinion” haha.. points to you for being honest about it
I didn't even know this was an american design. This thing looks like a soviet design more than a american design.
U.S.A. all the way, fired the sidewinder missile, and maned by American army soldiers. Retired around 1998.
Had many US service personel ask what the **** is that as we were training or moving about
nice
My 3rd video today after waking up.
And I love it!
im waiting for its Brother, the Hawk and NASAMS
bandkanon