Talk:9K33 Osa

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.

Start

This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.

Additional information and associated task forces:

	This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: criterion met Grammar: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met
Associated task forces (general topics):
	Military technology and engineering task force
	Weaponry task force
Associated task forces (nations and regions):
	Russian and Soviet military history task force

Russia Portal

This page is within the scope of WikiProject Russia. If you would like to participate, please join the project and help with our open tasks.

???

This article has not yet received a rating on the assessment scale.

???

This article has not yet received an importance rating on the assessment scale.

It looks like this article has been copied from http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/encyclopedia/s/sa/sa-8_gecko1.htm

oops, my bad. The article actually has copied its contents from wikipedia. no need to write a new article.

it was a while ago, I don't write Wikipedia articles any more, but I'm pretty sure I wrote this one from scratch. Some of the Russian air defence systems already had articles when I started writing these - such as SA-1, SA-2, SA-7, SA-14, SA-16 and SA-18.. and I think a stub for SA-10.. but I believe I started pretty much all the rest. So yeah, if this article is elsewhere I think they copied it from here. 220.233.81.49 11:58, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

OK, I had a look at the history. Check out the first few revisions. I did write this one from scratch. 220.233.81.49 12:03, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Also, the article says that Gecko uses radar SACLOS guidance as it primary means of targeting. This is not the case: SA-8 targetcing system uses radar and the missile is beam riding, thus being a Semi-active_radar_homing beam-riding missile. For a missile to have SACLOS guidange, it has to be 1) beam riding (be it radar, laser or just an imaginary line) and 2) manually controlled.

I read the description of the guidance mechanism and decided that SACLOS was the correct name for it, but I didn't realize that SACLOS implied manual control. Thanks for fixing it. 220.233.81.49 11:58, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Name

Why should Russian weapons be known primarily by NATO designation? They have official designations. Manufacturer's designation for this weapon is 9K33 Osa, hence the article should be moved to official name. Cmapm 15:12, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

The soviet/russian inventory system is extremely confusing, has multiple alternative names for design bureau, factory, procurement bureau and military registers. This was done to make imperialist espionage more difficult. Sometimes even experts have trouble following the cryptic relation of russian codes. The NATO naming system is a handy simplification for an encyclopaedia mostly read by layman. 82.131.210.162 12:34, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Confusion with SA-6

> The SA-8 fulfils the same role as the SA-6 `Gainful', but does not replace it, as they were procured almost simultaneously. <

This is not true. The SA-6 has much larger and heavier missiles, up to 35 km erange and are mounted on tracked chassis. The SA-8 is not much ahead of small infrared missiles like the french Mistral. 82.131.210.162 12:31, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

I can't remember if this claim is something I wrote as part of the original article. (Sorry, too lazy to check the history). It may well be. If so, then the reason I said this is that I remember there being a site which explained that the Soviet air defence system tended to have three layers, each of which had a higher level of control and defended a larger air space. I believe that SA-6 and SA-8 were both part of the inner-most (battalion-level or similar?) ring of air defence. Thus the statement that they have the same role. This does not mean that they are functionally identical. So, perhaps the statement was confusing and should be clarified, but hopefully you see where I was coming from. 220.233.81.49 11:58, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

OK, looking back at the history, I didn't write that line, as far as I can tell, so I don't know where it came from. 220.233.81.49 12:03, 10 August 2007 (UTC)