Military Review

The defenselessness of "Thors" and "Pantsiray" before the "blow to the crown" is preserved! Important "signals" exercises of the Air Force of South Korea

104



In recent years, an incredibly large number of video reports from the exercises of the military air defense of the Russian Ground Forces have been posted in the media, where you can get acquainted in detail with the highest combat qualities of the self-propelled anti-aircraft missile systems Tunguska-M, Tor-M1 and Pantsir- C1 ", designed to cover motorized rifle brigades and tank units from tactical aviation the enemy on the march and directly during a collision with enemy enemy units of the NE, as well as the closure of the 3-5-kilometer dead zone of the S-300PS / PM1, S-300V4 and S-400 Triumf long-range and ultra-long-range anti-aircraft missile systems erupted high-precision means of aerospace attack. Meanwhile, in practice, everything is much more complicated than on TV screens.

The first modifications of self-propelled air defense systems "Tor" and "Tunguska-M", at the time of their active adoption by the USSR / Russia in 80-90-s, were already able to work on quite complex air objects, including low-profile cruise missiles , as well as ballistic targets and PRLR with speeds from 500 to 700 m / s. In the same turn, the target canal of their radar guidance devices (1 and 2 simultaneously fired at the target, respectively) soon ceased to correspond to the new operational and tactical realities of the theater of the 21st century. In particular, by the end of 90's. The rocket armament of the AH-64D Apache Longbow attack helicopter already included a promising anti-tank guided missile AGM-114L Hellfire-Longbow designed to work in a system linking with the AN / APG-78 over-the-barrel radar.

This rocket opened a new milestone in stories weatherproof precision weapons air-to-ground class for helicopter attack aircraft. First, equipped with millimeter ARGSN, AGM-114L allowed attacking ground targets in the most difficult meteorological conditions of poor visibility, where the Hellfire versions with semi-active laser homing systems had extremely low combat qualities. Secondly, the “let-forget” mode was implemented, which no longer required the target to be illuminated with a laser designator beam. Due to this, the time of Apache's stay on the line of sight by the enemy's optical-electronic and radar means of ZRSK was reduced to a few seconds required for the weapon operator to detect and capture the target with AN / APG-78 radar, and then make a single or salvo launch AGM-114L, which on 4-x suspension nodes can accommodate up to 16 units. Even though the Hellfire ATGM family is relatively slow (about 1500 km / h), for the single-channel version of the Thor or even the two-channel Tor-M1, a volley of 8 - 10 ATGM can be deadly, since missiles have a small EPR within 0,05 m2. The frontiers of interception of similar objects for the "Torah" begin with 3 - 5 km. At "Tunguska-M" with the interception of similar missiles, everything was more complicated. These circumstances pointed to the need for the earliest possible start of the modernization program of the Tor-M1 family, with which the specialists of Concern EKR Almaz-Antey JSC coped perfectly well.

Its result was the emergence of a whole series of Tor-M2 self-propelled anti-aircraft missile systems, unified by the 9А331МК / -1 advanced autonomous combat module (АБМ), but radically different in chassis type. This decision was caused by the need to adapt a unique complex to various conventional theaters of military operations, which were “drawn” at the borders of the Russian Federation over the past decade, against the background of a tightening geostrategic “game”. In particular, modifications such as Tor-M2K and Tor-M2DT were developed. The first ZRSK is an ABM 9А331МК located on the MZKT-6922 three-axle chassis. This chassis is unique in its kind. Its main advantage is 8-cylinder 420-strong diesel engine with turbocharging YMZ-7513.10, which has 1765 torque N * m. It allows you to realize the full potential of the 2-speed transfer box and the GMP-400 hydromechanical transmission. As a result, we have a maximum travel speed on the highway of the order of 85 km / h, which allows the Tor-M2K to move into the alert area 1,3 times faster than the Torah does on a tracked chassis (Tor-M1, Tor- M2U "); during high-intensity hostilities, this indicator can be attributed to the so-called “critical list” of parameters. MZKT-6922 has a fairly good maneuverability due to the hydropneumatic independent suspension, assembled in the walls of the Minsk Wheel Tractor Plant. Thanks to a reasonably economical engine with a minimum specific fuel consumption of about 195 g / kWh, the range with a total fuel supply of 730 liters can reach 1 thousand km, which is almost 2 times more than most tracked vehicles.

As for the modification of Tor-M2DT, it is intended exclusively for the Arctic theater of operations in the framework of the growing “Arctic race” between Russia, the USA, Canada, the United Kingdom, Norway and Denmark for controlling the largest hydrocarbon fields in the Arctic shelf, whose share is about 25% of the world (exactly like Saudi Arabia). This air defense system is also represented by an autonomous combat module 9А331МК-1, installed on the slave link of the two-link all-terrain vehicle DT-30 "Vityaz", serially produced by the Ishimbay transport engineering plant. As you already understood, the emphasis in this modification of the complex is not on speed indicators, but on permeability. The specific pressure on the ground with a minimum load is about 0,29 - 0,32 kg / cm2, which allows you to quickly and successfully overcome the snow mounds and is safer to pass the areas with a thin envelope of ice. Moreover, the transport-charging vehicle for the Arctic version will be able to overcome the openings and streams by using floating modifications of the Vityaz (4-5 km / h due to rewinding the tracks and 15 km / h using the propeller).

Despite the average range of fuel in 500 km and speed on a flat surface in 37 km / h, 780-strong 12-cylinder tank diesel B-46-5, along with a hydromechanical semi-automatic gearbox and torsion suspension, allows Vityaz storm the most difficult snow obstacles in the arctic zone. At the same time, he can do it with a multi-ton autonomous combat module on the driven link. The Tor-M2DT ZRSK divisions, integrated into the common “Arctic air defense system” by means of the Ranzhir-M 9C737М Ranzhir-M or the Polyana-D4М1 automated missile control system, will be able to perfectly cover the strategic facilities of the Russian Armed Forces and Russia, as well as Russia, as well. of the fuel and energy complex from possible attacks by NATO’s DFSS.

Information about the tactical air situation (with target designation data) will initially be sent to the Polyana automated control system from such advanced radar information sources as interspecific 55ЖХNNXXМ Nebo-M radar, passive radio-electronic reconnaissance radar, multipurpose centimeter radar Radar, multipurpose centimeter radar reconnaissance radar, multi-purpose centimeter radar Radar, multipurpose centimeter radar reconnaissance radar, multi-purpose centimeter radar Radar, multipurpose centimeter radar reconnaissance radar, multi-purpose centimeter radar Radar, multipurpose centimeter radar reconnaissance radar, multipurpose centimeter radar Radar, multipurpose centimeter radar reconnaissance radar, multipurpose centimeter radar Radar, multipurpose centimeter radar reconnaissance radar, passive radio-electronic radar reconnaissance, multipurpose centimeter radar "Chammameme". ”, Distributed, and then transferred to each combat vehicle of the division in accordance with its location and location of the object. Also sources of information will be airplanes DRLOUA A-6U and A-1 “Premier” X-ray radar detectors 50H100E of C-91 complexes. In the Arctic region, exactly as in the south, the “Torahs” will be aggregated into advanced layered network-centric missile defense with C-6B400 and C-300, because no one cancels the blows of the hundreds or hundreds of strategic Tomahawk Block IV UGM-4E CRs placed on multi-purpose submarines "Virginia", "Los Angeles" or shock options "Ohio". These submarines can suddenly appear on any Arctic divorce and perform a deadly volley "Tomahawk".

The next, most flexible in use version of the Tor-M2 SAM is Tor-M2KM. The 9M331MKM complex has a fully modular design and is designed to be placed on completely different platforms, from stationary ground structures to military and cargo surface ships. This product will also have a significant impact on the formation of promising air defense / missile defense in the Arctic zone, since the stand-alone 9A331MK-1 combat module can also be deployed on ice class ships. Tor-M2KM was developed in 2013 on the basis of the Tor-M2E complex and is mass-produced by the capacities of Izhevsk Electromechanical Plant Kupol JSC. Beginning in October 2016, tests of the 9A331MK-1 combat module from the deck of the lead patrol ship (frigate) Project 11356 Admiral Grigorovich, which is in service with the Black Sea fleet The Russian Navy.

Tor-М2КМ, fixed on the frigate’s helipad, demonstrated new features previously unavailable for the Tor-М1 line. In particular, we are talking about firing at small airborne objects in motion at speed in 8 nodes. One of them was the training Saman 9F841 target missile, developed on the basis of the Osa-AK 9FM33М2 anti-aircraft missile 9K33М2 anti-aircraft missile complex. It was successfully intercepted not only when Admiral Grigorovich was moving at a speed of 15 km / h, but also in conditions of an 2-ball sea swell. Successfully passed full-scale tests opened the "Toru-M2KM" way to the Russian Navy, where such modular modifications, like the Tor-M, will later replace the ship’s self-defense air defense system, the Dagger. With the 3 quick-release brackets, the new complex can be installed not only on the deck of the ship, but also on railway and car platforms.


Loading of loading system 9М334 with the transport and launch container 9Я281


It should be noted that various basing concepts were also provided for the Tor-М1 air defense system. Thus, the "Tor-M1TA" could be installed on the wheelbase of the semi-trailer ChMZAP-8335 (combat module) and the truck "Ural-5323" (hardware cabin); "Tor-M1TS" was intended for stationary placement. But the essence did not change: the antenna post with PFAR, located on the 9А331 combat module, could simultaneously handle no more than two air targets even when using an electron-optical sighting device operating in the television channel of sight. This disadvantage is observed in view of the less productive computing facilities Tor-M1, which are responsible for the precise auto-tracking of air objects, as well as for the simultaneous targeting of 9МXNNXX anti-aircraft missiles on them.

Now let's take a look directly at the parameters of the standalone BM 9А331МК-1. For its fire performance, the same coherent-impulse radar of the SVR / SPK guidance, represented by a low-element passive HEADLIGHT and operating in a centimeter X-wave band, is responsible. Due to this, the width of the scanning beam does not exceed 1 °, which ensures a minimum slip of a few meters, and hence the highest probability of successful interception. Despite the standard for the Tor-M1 family of ZRSKs, the radar of detection in 48 of simultaneously monitored target paths, the number of target guidance simultaneously fired by radar has increased to 4 units thanks to the complex fire control four-channel effect. Tor-M2E ”,“ Tor-MU ”,“ Tor-M2KM ”and other versions with improved ABM of 9-331МК / -1 type. It is also known that in the review mode the SOC can detect up to 144 air objects at a distance of 9 km (targets with EPR 0,1 м2) and 27-32 km (objects with EPR in 3 - 5 м2). This mode is implemented for 3 SOC turnover, given that the latter is no longer represented by the old coherent-impulse AR, but by a more advanced SCHAR.

Let us turn to the rocket part. The upgraded complexes of the Tor-M2 family use short-range anti-aircraft missiles 9М331Д, which are analogous to the early 9М331 for the Tor-M1 FRMS. Compared with the first 9М330 SAM systems (9K330 “Thor” complex), the new product has: on 25% a longer range (12 versus 15 km, respectively), 2 times the available overload (16 versus 30 - 35 units, respectively) and increased from 6000 to 10000 m ceiling of intercepted target. The maximum flight speed of the 9М331Д remained at the same level in 3060 km / h, as was the speed of the targeted target in 700 m / s, but the new computational base allowed achieving a minimum reaction time in 5 s, which is almost 1,5 times better than Torr M1. With such parameters, even one autonomous combat module 9А331МК-1 is quite capable of repelling group raids of anti-radar or heavy anti-tank missiles of the type AGM-114L, which have speeds up to 2600 km / h (they are not adapted to high interception speeds of the Torov control system are not adapted).

Later, another noticeable problem appeared, expressed in the scarcity of the 9М331Д missile ammunition. In each autonomous combat module 9А331МК / -1 there is an anti-aircraft missile module 9М334 on 8 of the above-mentioned interceptor missiles. The module is represented by 2YX9 quadruple transport and launch containers, in which all cells are separated by a special protective diaphragm. In the face of the massive use of supersonic elements of high-precision weapons by the enemy, 281 8М9Д anti-missiles are absolutely not enough to repel an impact. And this problem was eliminated by the specialists of Almaz-Antey. The key to the solution is the advanced anti-aircraft missile 331М9. Compared to the 338M9D, the new product is much more compact, and, unlike the old rocket (with a square cross-section transport and launching cup in 331 mm), uses a small tubular TPK with a diameter of 540 mm. As a result, the Torah missile arsenal will increase by 240 times and reach 2 16М9 missiles, also known as Р338В-МD.

The flight-technical and accuracy qualities of the new anti-aircraft missile are very impressive. The maximum flight speed at the time of operation of the solid-propellant rocket engine reaches 3600 km / h, which allows the updated “Toram” to intercept more high-speed targets in pursuit; The altitude of interception has not changed and reaches 10 km. The aerodynamic design of the "duck" was changed to a "bearing case" layout with a tail block of front stabilizers and rear aerodynamic control surfaces. The ballistic braking of the rocket was reduced, due to which the range increased by another 1000 m and reached 16 km. As we see, along the radius of action, the new ZUR R3B-MD puts the Tor-M2KM almost one step ahead of the Pantsir-C1 anti-aircraft missile and artillery complex. But not everything is as wonderful as we would like ...


Installation of a tactical long-range cruise missile KEPD-350K "TAURUS" on the wing assembly of the F-15K air force of the Republic of Korea Air Force


On 20 September 2017, the Asian and Western media circulated extremely interesting photographs taken during the exercises of the Republic of Korea Air Force, which were held to demonstrate to Pyongyang the strength and capabilities of the South Korean army to deliver massive pinpoint strikes at a distance of several hundreds of kilometers. The Swedish-German tactical long-range KEPD-350K "Taurus" was used as a strike unit, the carrier of which was the "strategic asset" of the South Korean air force - the heavy tactical fighter F-15K "Slam Eagle". Launch of "Taurus" was carried out in the airspace over the Yellow Sea, 400 km from the coastal target. Having overcome this distance, KEPD-350K fell into a square farm with a circular probable deviation in the 1 meter. Stunning accuracy was demonstrated. It is unlikely that this brought great fear to the command of the Korean People’s Army and North Korean leader Kim Jong-un, but once again made me think about the security of our Tor-M2KM from blows of precision weapons. The photos clearly show how the “Taurus” swoops on the target farm at an angle of about 85 °. Why it should be alerted?

We return to the consideration of the Tor-M2KM / U radar architecture. Improving the channel of the complex to 4 simultaneously intercepted targets causes respect, but the parameters of the radiation pattern of the radar guidance (SVR), as well as its sector turning in the elevation plane remained at the same level, exactly like the spatial characteristics of the review and target designation of the station SOC. The usable scanning range in the "lower beam" mode is 32 degrees, in the "upper beam" mode - 64 degrees. This suggests that during the combat operation of the Tor-M2 FRMS, a huge “funnel of the dead zone” with an unseen sector in 52 degrees gapes over it (even in the mode of maximum elevation of the beam).

Now let's imagine for a moment that during the fighting in the same European theater of operations, a tactical "link X" of the British Air Force, consisting of 4 "Typhoon" of the last "tranche", launches a swarm of 8 missiles towards the Tori division KEPD-350. At the same time, the rockets are suitable at an altitude of 30 m in the rounding mode of the terrain from the side of any elevation. As is well known, the rectangular composite case of these products causes an effective reflective surface (EOC) in 0,08 - 0,1 м2. The detection station of the “first oncoming” SOC “Sora” will detect such a target from a distance of no more than 7 km (taking into account the peculiarities of the relief, it is less!). Adding here the response time of the Tor-M2 OMS in 5 seconds, during which the Taurus will fly 1000 - 1100 m, we have a "cheerful" result: no more 4 - 4,5 km of the missile's flight path remains for interception. One "Torah" is clearly not enough here; and considering that KEPD-16 makes the 350-degree maneuver "slide" with an elevation of 85 - 1 km, some of the missiles can in any case fall into the "dead zone" above the complex, which will lead to defeat.

An even more unpleasant situation developed with the British “smart” anti-radar missile ALARM, which was put into service in the 1991 year. This PRLR has become a much more insidious means of suppressing air defense than the American AGM-88HARM. First, the flight task is loaded onto the storage of the inertial navigation system at the airfield or in the air, in accordance with the received tactical tactical information about the location of the enemy's radar equipment. Also, the guidance can be carried out directly in the radius of the radiation of the enemy's radar; in this case, target designation may come from the antennas of the radiation warning system. Then, a start is made from the distance to 95 km (with a high altitude) and 45 km (in low-altitude start mode). The rocket climbs, rises into the lower stratosphere (12 - 16) and follows the location of the enemy anti-aircraft missile division or radar at speeds from 2600 km / h with gradual ballistic braking.


Information from the British media referring to the country's defense department about the decommissioning of the most dangerous and sophisticated ALARM anti-radar missiles with unique action configuration continues to raise a number of serious questions.


For all modifications of the Top-M1 / 2 anti-aircraft missile system, such an approach can be fatal even in the case of a single strike by one ALARM rocket, since the latter’s entry into the “dead zone funnel” will be outside the high-altitude boundaries of the 9X338 missiles (Р3В-МD ). When ALARM turns out to be over the "Thor", the only way to avoid defeat is to completely shut off all the radio-emitting facilities of the complex, which include SOC, SVR, and even the radio station-terminal of the telecode operational-command communication. Otherwise, PRLR ALARM, being above the ZRSK “Tor-М1 / 2” duty station, opens the parachute and launches a quick 2 - 3 - minute descent into that same unseen “funnel”. At this moment, the passive downlink radar homing, will detect radiating radar detection and a Torah tactical information exchange, after which the parachute will be dropped and the combat mode engine will be launched. ALARM rushes to the target almost at right angles.

A similar situation is observed with the Pantsir-C1 anti-aircraft missile and artillery complex. AFAR-radar tracking and target capture 1PC2 / 1PC2-1E “Helmet” has a large 0 - 45 ° viewing sector, which makes the “funnel of the dead zone” reach an even larger sector in 90 degrees. The disadvantage is partially compensated by the presence of the 10EC1 / 10ES1-Е stand-alone optical post, whose elevation angle reaches 82 °, it is able to view the entire upper hemisphere, the unseen “funnel” has an 16-degree sector. Meanwhile, it is absolutely not necessary to assume that the Pantsir-С1 is free from this drawback, because in a difficult meteorological situation the 10EC1-E optic-electronic sighting system will be inactive, and the entire range of tasks will be assigned to the “Helmet” radar with insufficient parameters work on the corner of the place. The situation could be improved by introducing advanced AFAR-RPN with an additional device for mechanical adjustment of the antenna web in the radar image of the Tor-M2 and Pantreyrei-M1 combat vehicles with an additional device for mechanical adjustment of the antenna web in the direction of the upper hemisphere. An additional expedient option could also be the development of specialized missiles 9М338 with active radar seeker which could be an excellent alternative (or addition) to the standard 9М331Д radio command missiles that will become useless in case of failure of the radar control stations installed on anti-aircraft rocket complexes.

Information sources:
http://rbase.new-factoria.ru/missile/wobb/kepd-350/kepd-350.shtml
http://forum.militaryparitet.com/viewtopic.php?id=18277
http://rbase.new-factoria.ru/missile/wobb/tor-m2km/tor-m2km.shtml
http://rbase.new-factoria.ru/missile/wobb/tor-m2/tor-m2.shtml
http://rbase.new-factoria.ru/missile/wobb/torm/torm.shtml
Author:
104 comments
Ad

The editorial board of Voenniy Obozreniye urgently needs a proofreader. Requirements: impeccable knowledge of the Russian language, diligence, discipline. Contact: [email protected]

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. corporal
    corporal 25 September 2017 07: 03 New
    13
    Vulnerability from above has long been discussed. As a way out of the situation, there is a duty of several complexes overlapping each other, the only question is where to get them in such quantity. recourse
    1. jjj
      jjj 25 September 2017 10: 45 New
      +9
      Is she falling out of space vertically? In fact of the matter
      1. Inok10
        Inok10 25 September 2017 12: 32 New
        27
        Quote: jjj
        Is she falling out of space vertically?

        ... this one is just "star wars" performed by the author ...
        For all modifications of the Tor-M1 / 2 self-propelled anti-aircraft missile system, such an approach can become fatal even in the event of a single strike with one ALARM missile, since the latter will enter the “dead zone funnel” outside the high-altitude reach of 9M338 (R3V-MD )
        ... so it won’t be like that ... because the minimum tactical unit of air defense is a battery, that is, 3 BMs dispersed in positions with a distance of up to 500 m. ... then turn on the geometry and understand that each BM covers the most funnel over another BM, BM shelling zone "Tor" 360 gr. ... and, given that the zrbt itself does not exist, but as part of the division, it, in turn, is part of the SMR or at the moment the ISBR, with a responsibility of 10-15 km. along the front and up to 10 km. in depth ... then you need to be aware that in this square there will be at least zrdn and znd and this is only the air defense forces, consisting of:
        - 36 MANPADS "Igla" / "Willow"
        - 6 ZPRK "Tunguska"
        - 6 SAM "Arrow 10"
        - 12 BM SAM "Tor"
        ... each battery has its own control point, for example PU-12M7 ...
        ... there will be no lonely duel, there will be a massive raid, which will be reflected by the air defense group ... hi
        1. Isstvan
          Isstvan 25 September 2017 14: 14 New
          +1
          And the talker is a godsend for the spy!
          1. Hog
            Hog 25 September 2017 19: 21 New
            +4
            You then go to Wikipedia, there probably are only spies sitting)))
        2. sivuch
          sivuch 25 September 2017 17: 50 New
          +2
          Only after all, PU-12M7 or Barnaul? As far as I understand, the PU-12 is not included in the Barnaul brigade kit. Maybe the M7 just replaces the older versions of the PU-12
          1. Inok10
            Inok10 25 September 2017 19: 53 New
            +2
            Quote: sivuch
            Only after all, PU-12M7 or Barnaul?

            ... it depends on where ... MSBR or MSP or TBR or TP ... as far as I remember, Barnaul-T replaced the PPRU-1 "Gadfly", therefore it is redundant for the air defense level of motorized riflemen and tankers, unless to be the KP of the battery "Tor" in the air defense system, its level is from the KP division to the KP air defense of the MSBR, MSP, TBR, etc. personal opinion ... hi
            Quote: sivuch
            As I understand it, the PU-12 is not included in the Barnaul brigade kit.

            ... I don’t quite understand what it is about? ... which brigade kit? ... which brigade, air defense, motorized rifle, tank? ...
            Quote: sivuch
            Maybe M7 just replaces the older versions of the PU-12

            ... rather, it really is ... The Gadfly to Barnaul, and the lower link of the PU-12M7 ... anyway, this is logical ... hi
    2. NordUral
      NordUral 3 October 2017 18: 15 New
      +3
      Yes, only massive protection, no matter how expensive. If they attack, then only in packs. And more of such sensible articles, so that those who are supposed to think. And then all urya-urya.
      1. Alex777
        Alex777 11 October 2017 14: 01 New
        +1
        Firstly, this problem is quite present in the "partners".
        And secondly, Morpheus with a specific PAR - a convex antenna was supposed to close it. And 9M100 missiles with IKGSN. But today nothing is heard about Morpheus himself and nothing decent about the 9M100 missile. What has recently been passed off as her is not typical. Neither in diameter (it should have been 125 mm, now 200 mm), not in the GOS (IK is not visible at point blank range, only the radio command), nor in appearance (there are no trellised rudders), and so on. It remains to be noted that instead of the correct 9M100, they slipped us a modification of 9M338 IMHO.
  2. zulusuluz
    zulusuluz 25 September 2017 07: 14 New
    +8
    That is why they should be applied at least in pairs. And the ammunition is higher, and mutual security. There is safety in numbers.
    1. marder7
      marder7 25 September 2017 13: 35 New
      11
      and they are used not in pairs, but on the battery! (minimum 3 PU) so everything that is written in the article is nonsense!
  3. Kenxnumx
    Kenxnumx 25 September 2017 07: 40 New
    +1
    And what is the fundamental problem to fasten the radar, so to speak, to view the potentially dead zone. You can even relatively narrowly targeted.
    1. corporal
      corporal 25 September 2017 10: 05 New
      +1
      By the way - a good question.
      We will wait for specialists to comment when they appear.
      1. Kenxnumx
        Kenxnumx 25 September 2017 11: 24 New
        +2
        And to the heap there are still some self-defense rockets with primitive short-range guidance cheap and vertical take-off. Or shot traps.
      2. bodzu
        bodzu 25 September 2017 15: 36 New
        0
        EW systems have not been canceled. Yes, and EM pulse generators will also put a big point. The more complicated the electronics, the more it is sensitive to interference.
    2. zarya
      zarya 25 September 2017 12: 02 New
      +1
      Quote: Ken71
      And what is the fundamental problem to fasten the radar, so to speak, to view the potentially dead zone. You can even relatively narrowly targeted.


      ... or say, set up separate cars with radars having different angles of inclination (that is, in this picture, both are on duty, and at the same time keep their angle of inclination).
  4. Monarchist
    Monarchist 25 September 2017 07: 41 New
    +1
    Quote: zulusuluz
    That is why they should be applied at least in pairs. And the ammunition is higher, and mutual security. There is safety in numbers.

    There is no arguing with this statement.
    1. Kenxnumx
      Kenxnumx 25 September 2017 07: 54 New
      +4
      Argue and easy. It is enough to draw on paper if there is not enough spatial imagination. At what distance should the complexes be in order to block the funnel. And taking into account the objective function of the cover, in general, even though the battery of nearby complexes will be destroyed equally.
      1. alstr
        alstr 25 September 2017 11: 32 New
        +7
        Why draw here. Simple math. We need a height of 1,5 km. If we count from the first car, then with a beam of 64 g - we get about 750 meters. In reality, the meters are 600-650. If we have an angle of 32 degrees, then it will be about 2,34 km.
        And if you consider that usually the distance between the cars is about 1,5 km and the presence of gearboxes, then it’s quite possible to intercept such targets
        1. Kenxnumx
          Kenxnumx 25 September 2017 21: 51 New
          0
          And you draw. Feel better.
        2. Vlad.by
          Vlad.by 2 January 2018 01: 19 New
          0
          Excuse me, a hill of 1,5 km - and how painful is it with such a hill, even vertical, even at its full 2600 km / h it will manage to go into the “funnel” unshooted?
          I'm trying to remember the geometry - the top petal of the daylight looks at 64 g. even at the beginning of the slide 4,5-5 km from the position for entering the funnel, you must dial at least 5 km or so. Moreover, the rocket, even with a vertical lift without deceleration (we completely forget the force of gravity), will take more than 7 seconds. This is with a shelling cycle of 4-5 seconds. Someone is the mouth, as the famous character of the Doll program used to say.
          There is a problem with the shelling of long-range missiles flying along a ballistic profile. But on them there are "senior" air defense systems - the same Buk and B4.
          Or, again, the notorious spherical horse is considered in a vacuum - just Thor alone and against him are all the evil forces of NATO ???
  5. Snail N9
    Snail N9 25 September 2017 08: 20 New
    +5
    From above, absolutely everything is vulnerable, and our air defense systems and armored vehicles. By the way, Jews used all this in wars with Arabs. Really, so far, nothing has been done to destroy missiles and other ammunition attacking from above?
    1. Kenxnumx
      Kenxnumx 25 September 2017 08: 24 New
      +3
      What for. If the army is imprisoned for war with barmaley. And for the adversaries, nuclear weapons. He doesn't care which side.
  6. venik
    venik 25 September 2017 08: 50 New
    34
    The article as a whole is not bad, for which the author deserves respect (+). But .... there are a few points:
    1) - The problem of the "dead funnel" is inherent in the vast majority of modern air defense systems and not only Russian (in fact, among the most common - practically EVERYTHING).
    2) the author was "obsessed" with considering the problems of self-defense of the SINGLE (I emphasize once again the "solitary" !!) SDA. At the same time, air defense, like (in any case, Russian) - it is almost always - “SYSTEM” (as a rule - ECHELONED). Those. targets that the “Torahs” and “Carapace” “do not reach” (or “do not see”) are highly likely to be detected (and attacked) by OTHER MEANS!
    3) - SOU - practically NEVER work "alone" (well, or at least - very, very rarely!). The combat unit is a BATTERY posted on the ground. This makes it possible to block the "dead craters" of each other !!!
    4) - the complexes of "close cover" can (and often also include) complexes of MANPADS (wearable or on the chassis), which have almost no "dead craters"!
    Well, in conclusion - The issue raised is certainly relevant and complex! In fact, if not the only, then at least the most effective can be a self-propelled gun with a hemispherical AFAR guidance and target designation and vertical launch missiles. Such a complex has been under development in the Russian Federation for a long time (Morpheus), but recently something has “slowed down” there (either there is not enough money, or the problem turned out to be much more complicated than thought ...)
    1. corporal
      corporal 25 September 2017 09: 31 New
      +7
      Quote: venik
      4) - the complexes of "close cover" can (and often also include) complexes of MANPADS (wearable or on the chassis), which have almost no "dead craters"!

      what I pictured a fighter with Strela trying to shoot some Hellfire, or something cooler.
      1. Kenxnumx
        Kenxnumx 25 September 2017 09: 59 New
        +8
        Or shooting vertically up. So to say barbecue to myself.
      2. alstr
        alstr 25 September 2017 11: 16 New
        +1
        Easy if it is connected to a command post.
        1. Kenxnumx
          Kenxnumx 25 September 2017 11: 21 New
          +1
          Wildly sorry. What kind of command post. How. What for.
          1. alstr
            alstr 25 September 2017 11: 38 New
            +8
            "" M1 Ranking "provides control of combat operations with batteries of anti-aircraft missile and anti-aircraft artillery systems (SAM) of short range:
            - “Tor-M1 (M2E)” and their modifications;
            - “Osa-AK (AKM)” and their modifications (after modernization),
            - “Arrow-10M2 (10M3)” and their modifications,
            - “Tunguska-M1” and their modifications,
            - “Shilka” (after modernization),
            - MANPADS “Igla” through automated control,
            - ZRPU type "ZU-23" (after modernization). "

            As - most likely through anti-aircraft guns.
            Why - in order to be able to block the dead zones and so that each system fired only on its target.
            1. alstr
              alstr 25 September 2017 11: 40 New
              0
              You can also see the Igla on Wikipedia. There it is more interestingly described.
            2. corporal
              corporal 25 September 2017 12: 02 New
              0
              Quote: alstr
              As - most likely through anti-aircraft guns.

              And we have a lot of anti-aircraft guns for MANPADS with electric (hydro) drives, a control system and data reception-transmission?
            3. Kenxnumx
              Kenxnumx 25 September 2017 12: 43 New
              0
              The conversation was about fighters with MANPADS.
              1. alstr
                alstr 25 September 2017 13: 04 New
                0
                And the commander will transmit target designation to the fighter.
                Click here for more details.
                https://topwar.ru/46474-otechestvennye-pzrk-igly.
                html
                There is even a tablet shown.
                1. Kenxnumx
                  Kenxnumx 25 September 2017 13: 07 New
                  +5
                  A fighter with a MANPADS from a tablet is ordered to destroy a vertically diving device.
                  1. Vlad.by
                    Vlad.by 2 January 2018 15: 17 New
                    0
                    For a fighter with MANPADS, this will not be a target at its zenith, but a high-altitude target a little to the side. MANPADS will not be placed directly at the Thor position.
      3. sivuch
        sivuch 25 September 2017 11: 35 New
        +5
        In fact, Arrow is a very long time when Helfirov, especially with the AGSN, was not.
        As with Verba, it’s hard to say. If the sensitivity of the UV or optical head is sufficient and there is a preliminary DU, then why not. And the cover in anti-aircraft brigades, zrp and even in zenap-ah was always - ZU-23, the same MANPADS and even DShK.
      4. venik
        venik 25 September 2017 12: 58 New
        +8
        Quote: Corporal
        I pictured a fighter with Strela trying to shoot some Hellfire, or something cooler.

        ===========
        Well, firstly: "Strela MANPADS" - have already been withdrawn from service, as far as I know (They were replaced by "Needles" and "Willows").
        Secondly, the “Needle” and, moreover, the “Willow” - it is quite possible to shoot down “Hellfires” (well, at least in terms of performance characteristics)
        thirdly, with the Hellfires, the Torahs and Armor can only collide IN THE ONLY case - If they move in the second or third echelon of advancing mechanized columns !!
        Fourthly, such a "modern" goal as a "parachuting" ALARM - is "captured" and "knocked down" MUCH MORE EFFECTIVE than even a "hovering" helicopter !!! (Didn’t you bother to read the article ??? Immediately - a “professional” COMMENT ???
        1. corporal
          corporal 25 September 2017 16: 05 New
          0
          Quote: venik
          Fourthly, such a "modern" goal as a "parachuting" ALARM - is "captured" and "knocked down" MUCH MORE EFFECTIVE than even a "hovering" helicopter !!!

          A verboy? At night? During wet snow (fog, rain)?
          Do we have fighters like the Cameron Terminators?
          Or do you think that the attacks will take place on an exceptionally clear day?
          1. venik
            venik 25 September 2017 18: 56 New
            +3
            Quote: Corporal
            A verboy? At night? During wet snow (fog, rain)?

            =======
            Well, if you ATTENTIVELY read the article (well, or MORE, you asked about the ALARM system), then it would not be sick to UNDERSTAND (!) That this racket "parachutes in a very" warmed up "state (and even with corrective micromotors) - t. e. EXTREMELY "contrasting" in the infrared range !!! Moreover, "contrasting day and night and in" BAD "weather conditions !!!!
            So, that - "learn materiel", young man! And you will be happy !!!
            1. corporal
              corporal 25 September 2017 19: 47 New
              0
              You will see the 1st young man in the mirror
              2-parachutes shortly, then shoots back
              3-flight time of ALARMA and time of aiming, manufacturing for launch and launch of MANPADS
              Quote: venik
              "learn materiel", young man!
              1. Vard
                Vard 29 September 2017 04: 08 New
                0
                2-3 minutes it’s kind of like ... during this time you can dig a trench ... with proper motivation ...
            2. Kenxnumx
              Kenxnumx 25 September 2017 21: 50 New
              +1
              Young man and you were holding MANPADS. This is a long fool who aims up is not only unsafe but also simply impossible.
              1. Soho
                Soho 26 September 2017 09: 59 New
                +4
                aiming up is not only unsafe but simply impossible.

                why aim up? Or do you think that the fighter with MANPADS will defend the installation while standing on the roof of the SOC or SOU? It may well be located not nearby. And then put 70 gr. quite enough to hit a rocket on approach even in the UPU.
        2. Lesorub
          Lesorub 24 January 2018 12: 21 New
          +1
          Quote: venik
          Needle "and, moreover," Willow "- it is quite possible to shoot down" Hellfires "

          Laughter and sin, how do you imagine this?)
    2. rocket757
      rocket757 25 September 2017 10: 29 New
      +5
      Not everything is so "sour."
      A complete air defense system is a whole range of radio equipment in which a launcher is an important, but only part of a single whole.
      ... if you rummage around the Internet (if there is no specific military information, there is no access) you can find a lot of what was invented, created to counteract advanced attack systems!
      The question is urgent - WHO will manage / command ... soulless, but as it were accurate, executive comp ... competent, responsible staff.
      Errors can be both one and the other, the question is - how is it more reliable ???
    3. okko077
      okko077 25 September 2017 10: 44 New
      +9
      The author of the article is somewhat disingenuous.
      Firstly, he forgets that our funds must move, this is their purpose. And they also turn on for a certain time, ALARM gets into a working radar, or to the place where she stood when she worked ...
      Secondly, it was necessary to clarify that the coordinates in the KEPD-350K "Taurus" missiles under consideration were entered in advance. And the possibility of retargeting these missiles needs to be clarified ..
      In any case, the experience of Iraq and Yugoslavia showed that tactics should be applied with a change of position after each inclusion .... Moreover, these weapons allegedly move in combat formations of the shock units ... So that is the cover from Apache missiles and the like main occupation ...
      And yet, there are no tank columns in the first echelon in modern warfare ... or should not be ...
    4. alstr
      alstr 25 September 2017 11: 15 New
      10
      I would like to add.
      Firstly, the purpose of the complex is either covering the troops or covering the object with COMPOSITION of other means.
      Secondly, in any case, the battery is considered. And this is 1 command post and 4 control vehicles (actually the TOPs themselves) and vehicles with missiles. Accordingly, the arrangement of vehicles will not be in line (overlapping zones is the first air defense principle)
      And the command post itself can receive / transmit data from a higher command post.
      And also automatically distribute targets between the machines of the division.
      Plus, do not forget that the TOP can work in motion (shooting only from a stop).

      One more remark. If Hellfire is shot at the TOP, then ALARM is unlikely, because too expensive. These missiles are designed for larger complexes and radars.

      In general, we must understand that our complexes have ALWAYS been created as a PART of the system and this imposes limitations. But on the other hand, they do not need it, because there is a clear separation of goals
  7. Alexey-74
    Alexey-74 25 September 2017 10: 17 New
    +1
    Very detailed analysis, thanks to the author. I hope the RF Ministry of Defense knows all the pros and cons.
  8. voyaka uh
    voyaka uh 25 September 2017 10: 28 New
    +6
    These problems have long been known. And these vulnerabilities (and there are many, not only indicated)
    used to neutralize or destroy "integrated air defense".
    When several systems cover each other, just knock one
    a chain link, and the whole network becomes helpless.
    Therefore, you need to invest in active defense - in fighter interceptors,
    and not in dubious products, which must be placed a lot of different and all the same with a low result.
    1. sivuch
      sivuch 25 September 2017 11: 29 New
      +3
      And what, fighters will shoot down UAVs, Harpies or the same Taurus?
      1. voyaka uh
        voyaka uh 25 September 2017 11: 40 New
        0
        Including. This is easier than trying to knock them with SAMs in the last
        moment.
    2. venik
      venik 25 September 2017 13: 30 New
      13
      Quote: voyaka uh
      When several systems cover each other, just knock one
      a chain link, and the whole network becomes helpless. Therefore, you need to invest in active defense - in fighter interceptors,

      ==============
      Well - Again, "kindergarten" - "3rd grade, 2nd quarter" ..... Now you are likened to the "Yankees" who are "firmly convinced" that "What They HAVE" is THE BEST and ALL The rest - should (well, just OBLIGED !!! Copy THEM !!!)
      You are probably also convinced that "Israel-smarter than all ????
      So - Israel - This is a TINY State in the Eastern Mediterranean, where if in the year, at least the WEEK of “non-flying weather” - then this is “horror-horror-horror” ..... And this is the First !!!
      Second: A TRY to “knock out” at least 1 (One) “link” from the “network-centric system” chain !!! AHA - right now !!! LOSE SO MUCH, ANYTHING WOULD LIKE !!!
      In general, missile defense and air defense (Countries) - were originally created - as "Network-Centric Systems" (and long before the "Yankees" invented the concept of "network-centric wars" (in fact - I am SURE that this "term" (and before the "terms" are Yankees - hell of a hunt (!) - and appeared according to the analysis of the operation of THESE Systems !!!!!)))
      1. alexmach
        alexmach 25 September 2017 22: 35 New
        0
        .Now you are becoming like the Yankees, which

        And after all, it’s not casual ... .. :) If there is a “national mentality”, then this is precisely its peculiarity.
      2. Svateev
        Svateev 1 October 2017 19: 10 New
        0
        Quote: venik
        And TRY to "knock out" at least 1 (One) "link" from the chain of "network-centric system" !!! AHA - right now !!!

        I don’t know if our Jewish friend will answer this, but in the wars with the Arabs Israel destroyed the enemy’s air defense (our air defense) in this way: airplanes went into the crater of each air defense system at an unattainable height and dived into the air defense system. And so as not to shoot down a neighboring air defense system, his plane came at the same time ... Not all Arab anti-aircraft gunners were ready to cover your comrade when your death was diving ... Israel in two or three days suppressed enemy air defense.
        And now, pilots do not need to take any chances, you just need to synchronize the launch time of the PRLR so that they attack all the air defense systems of the battery at the same time. Since the probability of defeat in the SAM is not 1, then some kind of PRLR will find its purpose. And the system of overlapping zones of destruction in air defense is destroyed. Here it is already possible to knock out one “extreme” one - an open air defense system.
        1. Vlad.by
          Vlad.by 2 January 2018 15: 57 New
          0
          After all, did you go to the Arabs in advisers? Where does such a "combat experience" come from ???
          For the most curious, the upper boundary of the ZP S-75 early releases is 24 km. At S-125 - 18 km. Can you tell how exactly the Phantom F-4 "flew into the funnel" at an unattainable height?
          1. Svateev
            Svateev 8 January 2018 19: 58 New
            0
            Quote: Vlad.by
            After all, did you go to the Arabs in advisers?

            No, he served with officers. who were advisers there at one time.
            Quote: Vlad.by
            the upper boundary of the RFP

            Where did you get this data?
    3. bk0010
      bk0010 26 September 2017 01: 59 New
      +2
      At the beginning of World War II, this concept was of great blood: before the war it was believed that fighter aircraft would serve as military air defense. And at the beginning of the war they pokotsat order, and then the rest burned a resource, trying to cover the troops. As a result, our troops stormed without significant opposition. Yes, and riveting so much aviation to fight off the NATO Air Force is now extremely unlikely. So, we cannot do without ground-based air defense systems.
  9. Glory1974
    Glory1974 25 September 2017 10: 46 New
    +1
    The eternal debate about which is more effective: a shield or a sword.
    Article plus. I just didn’t understand how dozens of 2-3 missiles launched from helicopters are going to be shot down?
    1. venik
      venik 25 September 2017 19: 32 New
      +2
      Quote: glory1974
      I just didn’t understand how they are going to shoot down missiles launched from helicopters in the amount of 2-3 dozen?

      ========
      Have you ever seen (well, or heard) that at least 16 CONTROLLED ROCKETS SIMULTANEOUSLY be launched from helicopters ???? I personally - NO !!! The same "Apache Longbow" can launch MAXIMUM 4 - for 2 (two !!) goals !!!
      1. Glory1974
        Glory1974 25 September 2017 20: 13 New
        0
        I have not seen or heard, but the article says
        then made a single or volley launch of the AGM-114L missiles, which on the 4-x suspension nodes can accommodate up to 16 units. Even though the Hellfire ATGM family is relatively slow (about 1500 km / h), for the single-channel version of Tor or even the two-channel Tor-M1 salvo from 8 - 10 ATGM can be fatal
  10. maks007
    maks007 25 September 2017 10: 53 New
    +1
    Quote: Corporal
    Vulnerability from above has long been discussed. As a way out of the situation, there is a duty of several complexes overlapping each other, the only question is where to get them in such quantity. recourse

    The same is interesting in the article when it comes to the division

    launches a swarm of 8 KEPD-350 missiles towards the division of our Tori

    and also no about EW on our part, perhaps it should be considered in conjunction

    KEPD-350
    .
    The combined control system includes:
    - Inertial navigation system (ANN), integrated with the MIL-GPS satellite navigation system. ANN is made on the basis of laser gyroscopes, developed by Northrop Grumman LITEF;
    - a terrain reference navigation system using a high-precision radar altimeter;
    - electron-optical correlation subsystem IBN (Image Based Navigation) with correction according to the data of digital maps of previously captured areas along the flight route of the Kyrgyz Republic. The number of trajectory correction areas is up to 10;
    - thermal imaging homing head (TGSN).
    .
    The optimal distance to the target when undermining the cumulative warhead charge is determined using laser rangefinders installed in the nose of the rocket.
    .

    or other description

    KR TAURUS has a combined guidance system: consisting of three subsystems providing reliable autonomous navigation. It includes subsystems IBN (Image Based Navigation), TRN (Terrain Reference Navigation) and MIL-GPS (Global Positioning System). Using them allows the KEPD 350 to fly long distances without GPS support. High accuracy of guidance is ensured due to the fact that the ANN is periodically corrected in flight according to data from the radar of the millimeter wavelength range, which compares the landscape with the terrain maps on board. A few kilometers from the target, according to the inertial system, an infrared seeker is switched on, which provides guidance of the missile at the final section of the flight. Planning and preparation of the flight takes place on the ground, and then are loaded through the terminal into the rocket.


    https://youtu.be/xF4xwL9klyE
  11. wot
    wot 25 September 2017 10: 53 New
    0
    Quote: voyaka uh
    These problems have long been known. And these vulnerabilities (and there are many, not only indicated)
    used to neutralize or destroy "integrated air defense".
    When several systems cover each other, just knock one
    a chain link, and the whole network becomes helpless.
    Therefore, you need to invest in active defense - in fighter interceptors,
    and not in dubious products, which must be placed a lot of different and all the same with a low result.

    this means if Iran launches 30 missiles in Israel, well, 15 your Iron Dome will knock them down, well, some more heels, and 10 will fly all at once wink
    1. voyaka uh
      voyaka uh 25 September 2017 11: 27 New
      0
      Naturally - simple arithmetic - that if there are more attackers than interceptors, then
      attackers will break through. Defense (both anti-aircraft and anti-missile) is a partial solution to the problem.
      The complex is a package of fighter-bombers to destroy launchers.
      1. sivuch
        sivuch 25 September 2017 11: 40 New
        +4
        Once again - Harpy or something like that flies on your head. What are your actions?
        And, by the way, no air supremacy guarantees the complete absence of the enemy’s I-B.
        1. voyaka uh
          voyaka uh 25 September 2017 11: 42 New
          0
          If already on the head, then there is only a missile. But it is desirable that
          it was intercepted earlier by a fighter.
          1. sivuch
            sivuch 25 September 2017 11: 47 New
            +4
            With a large number of VC (primarily small and with small signatures) and a short flight time, this is unrealistic. And to destroy the PU before launch, the more unrealistic.
          2. venik
            venik 25 September 2017 14: 54 New
            0
            Quote: voyaka uh
            If already on the head, then there is only a missile. But it is desirable that
            it was intercepted earlier by a fighter.

            =======
            IT, of course, is "Desirable", BUT it is not a "FACT", which will be obtained !!!!!!
      2. venik
        venik 25 September 2017 14: 52 New
        0
        Quote: voyaka uh
        simple arithmetic - that if there are more attackers than interceptors, then
        attackers will break through.

        ==========
        Is not a fact!!! They can also “not break through” ..... Then WHO has the “system” EFFECTIVE !!!!!
      3. venik
        venik 25 September 2017 15: 01 New
        +1
        Quote: voyaka uh
        Naturally - simple arithmetic

        =======
        ALAS!!! If “wars” “were miscalculated by“ SIMPLE ARITHMETICS ......... (“If it were summer, if we had a Doberman pinscher, if only there was a“ glove of this lady ”, if if the Doberman "took the track" - then there would be NOTHING FOR SEARCH !!!! (the movie "17 Moments of Spring")
  12. BABA SHURA
    BABA SHURA 25 September 2017 10: 53 New
    +2
    There were attempts with the 42C6 Morpheus, people talked about a ring radar with a headlamp or AFAR with a dome lens (probably a hemispherical headlamp) and the installation of an infrared station.
  13. The comment was deleted.
  14. Darvin dv
    Darvin dv 25 September 2017 12: 17 New
    +3
    Strange debate ... How can a non-military person ask what prevents you from setting a bunch of false goals, cheap emitters copying the radiating image of an air defense element? Vaughn in Yugoslavia was rumored to be microwaved)))). Cheap rockets become unprofitable when they have to spend a lot. And so expensive ....
    1. marder7
      marder7 25 September 2017 13: 45 New
      +3
      nothing bothers wink ours do so laughing entire battalions are "sharpened" for this: - inflatable tanks, airplanes, air defense systems, CP, and even a submarine! laughing
      1. Vlad.by
        Vlad.by 2 January 2018 16: 13 New
        0
        Well, there are such concepts as mutual interference and electromagnetic compatibility. You couldn’t spoil yourself here.
        And the Doubler system was actually tested in Vietnam and was actively used in the Middle East.
  15. Anchonsha
    Anchonsha 25 September 2017 12: 27 New
    0
    The only way out is to create vertical monitoring and liquidation of the dead zone on the same TOR and radar station. But this is already a matter of specialists. Western aggressive bastards who are constantly living on the exploitation of other people's energy resources find it easier to share their weapons know-how. We have to start from scratch.
    1. marder7
      marder7 25 September 2017 13: 49 New
      0
      what for from scratch? we put a torus battery (3 PCs), cover a tungusok battery (3 more PCs.) and all this gop company in the S-300 cover zone (7 units = 1 complex) and that's it! not a single scum will fly by.
      1. Grach-25sm
        Grach-25sm 25 September 2017 14: 31 New
        +2
        That e so uncle, then e so! Actually, for what separation of air defense systems is provided.
  16. iouris
    iouris 25 September 2017 12: 57 New
    +2
    A hydrogen bomb eliminates all these shortcomings.
  17. Grach-25sm
    Grach-25sm 25 September 2017 14: 30 New
    +2
    But why short-range air defense systems to shoot down "Helfires"? Isn’t it easier to “fill up” Apache itself. And besides, air defense is being built layered
  18. Hog
    Hog 25 September 2017 19: 23 New
    +3
    The article is interesting, but delusional, where you will see the clash of single air defense missile systems / air defense missile systems and anti-tank missiles / missiles?
  19. Whaler
    Whaler 26 September 2017 11: 12 New
    +2
    It seems that the Torah will act exclusively apart and rely solely on the data of its locator ... why then do we need RTV? A-50? ESAU? ))) All Tornadoes should lie at the turn of 300 - 250)) as for Apache, the range of Helf, now the same as that of Cornet - D)) .... he shot Helf and forgot about him ... because he will be driven into the ground, if not the turn of the Shell - Tunguska, then some sort of military unit of Borisoglebsk - Infauna - Alurgita)))
  20. viktorch
    viktorch 26 September 2017 11: 41 New
    0
    the article does not take into account that the air defense is built by echelon and the tori and shells are not sitting alone,
    it also does not take into account that attacks on this very air defense are carried out not by single vehicles, but by combat groups by supersaturated anti-aircraft defense with their strike weapons, unless of course these same strike weapons, in principle, can be intercepted by anti-aircraft defense by self-defense.

    the author wrote about the version with the completion of individual machines of the defeated air defense by individual hunters, there is little informational content.
  21. TOR2
    TOR2 26 September 2017 16: 50 New
    +2
    The article is certainly interesting. The author considers both an attack on a convoy on a march and an attack on a vital center. With regard to the use of "ALARM" or "KEPD-350K", here we are talking about an attack on a stationary object. If this is a vital center with a high degree of probability, the Sky will detect them. In the horizontal plane, the station controls the airspace at an angle of 90 degrees from its axis, which makes it possible to detect targets of the “fighter” type at a distance of 1800 kilometers. The question is that there’s going to be a lot to cover and “Heaven” isn’t enough for everyone. It may happen that the “TORAMs” have to blow off on their own. So the problem of the "funnel" must be solved.
    Now about Hellfire and Co. The theme of the fight against small and ultra-small aircraft has already been raised repeatedly. Here just one installation you can nail a few "birds with one stone."
    Thanks to this, the Apache’s stay on the line of sight of the enemy’s optoelectronic and radar systems was reduced to a few seconds

    That is, at this moment, the AH-64D will be detected. And then it started. "TOP" transfers data to the "Satchel" installation. Even with those modest parameters with which the developers demonstrated this installation back in 2001. "Satchel" will deal with launched missiles at those distances that are indicated in the article.
  22. Sergey Minin
    Sergey Minin 27 September 2017 01: 04 New
    +3
    AGM-114L "Hellfire-Longbow" destroys targets up to 8 km as much as possible. In order to be guaranteed to hit a target it is better for them to fly up to a distance of 5-6 km. Often Damantsev skips either ignorance, or carelessness is not clear what. It is known that the air defense system does not act alone i.e. one machine. There will be no single duel, but even in it the helicopter has no chance. The range of even the oldest modification of the TOR air defense system allows you to prevent enemy helicopters at a distance of destruction. And they will be noticed much earlier. But those who have an idea of ​​the construction and tactics of front-line air defense on the march are simply sad to read this opus from the fact that the Military Review overlooks such raw, to put it mildly, material. I have great respect for Eugene, but this article is simply a disgrace and no respect for the reader. I think that he did not write it.
    1. Nikolaevich I
      Nikolaevich I April 3 2018 10: 39 New
      0
      Quote: Sergey Minin
      AGM-114L "Hellfire-Longbow", destroys targets up to 8 km as much as possible. A

      Is it not up to 11 km? belay
  23. Evgenii Xolod
    Evgenii Xolod 27 September 2017 16: 37 New
    0
    And there is also a vulnerability to flying, jumping, teleporting a barmaley with a sledgehammer. missile range, carrier detection range ????? 40 km from the shell of the AGM-114L Hellfire-Longbow for a range of up to 8 km (if there is no typo on Wikipedia) in a modified form of 12-16 km. Let the screw fly first to vulnerability.
  24. Andrey123
    Andrey123 27 September 2017 21: 37 New
    0
    The author does not know where 36 American tomahawks disappeared during the shelling of a Syrian military airfield? And I know. The electronic warfare system, Sky-M, together with other systems, carry out their duties at 5+, so that not a single enemy missile will slip, be sure.
    1. Svateev
      Svateev 1 October 2017 19: 32 New
      +1
      Quote: Andrey123
      The author does not know where the 36 American tomahawks disappeared during the shelling of the Syrian military airfield?

      Yes, it seems like they got into the Syrian airfield. There are about as many holes in caponiers and funnels as there are CRs.
      1. Vlad.by
        Vlad.by 2 January 2018 16: 22 New
        +1
        And how many CDs with cluster equipment participated in the raid? Sorry, but the number of bombings does not match the number of launched KR. there are not 59 of them. And not 24. Someone counted 65, some 45 ... But, there was an official statement of the Ministry of Defense. And they won’t just say that
        1. Svateev
          Svateev 8 January 2018 20: 04 New
          0
          Quote: Vlad.by
          MO official statement was. And they won’t just say that

          And they didn’t just say that. It was necessary either to admit that the most modern air defense is powerless against missiles traveling with an envelope of the terrain, or to "virtually bring down" most of the missiles. We chose the second ...
  25. Andrey123
    Andrey123 27 September 2017 21: 42 New
    0
    Quote: Andrey123
    The author does not know where 36 American tomahawks disappeared during the shelling of a Syrian military airfield? And I know. The electronic warfare system, Sky-M, together with other systems, carry out their duties at 5+, so that not a single enemy missile will slip, be sure.
  26. av58
    av58 29 September 2017 14: 03 New
    0
    There are problems, but it’s somehow somehow doubtful that the Americans and their allies will be able to work in the “shot-screw” style, so it will be like in a war: first there is someone to shoot and from which, and then the possibilities quickly decrease.
  27. Sergey Minin
    Sergey Minin 30 September 2017 22: 57 New
    0
    Automation of the complex "Shell-C1". All complexes are in constant interaction with each other and if several complexes form a battery, then one of them automatically becomes a command post. The command computer takes all decisions and passes directions to others. First of all, it is necessary for tracking and destroying targets. The command center distributes the targets between the complexes, or if the target alone orders the destruction to the complex, which is located in a more favorable position at the time of the enemy’s attack. The same is true for the missile system. This is just one of the blunders of the article. Listing all makes no sense. This article has been whipped up from many sources that present outdated characteristics of the complexes. The author, or most likely the collective, clearly did not analyze them. Although the information is even in previously published articles of the military review. Illiterate situations are presented, which can never be in combat operations. The whole article is based on a theoretical principle - he ran to a sleeping bear with saiga 410 and shot him in the ear. The author overlooked, for example, that the air defense system is a complex of the 3rd echelon of the Russian air defense. With all the ensuing consequences. Moreover, the main detailed characteristics of the complex are kept in the strictest secrecy, and the author has a little imagination.
    1. Svateev
      Svateev 1 October 2017 19: 20 New
      0
      Quote: Sergey Minin
      Illiterate situations are presented, which can never be in combat operations.

      And how then did Israel suppress Egypt's air defense system, for example? Also layered, "literate" ...
      Quote: Sergey Minin
      The author overlooked, for example, that the air defense system is a complex of the 3 echelon of the Russian air defense system, with all the ensuing consequences.

      This is an “excuse” for the designer of Thor: “We didn’t agree so! Why did he reach Thor, the infection? !! Where are the first two echelons of air defense ??!” And for the fighter who is being bombed, it does not matter how many echelons of air defense there did not work. Should Thor bring down the adversary? He must, for this and created. So let's talk about it!
  28. abc_alex
    abc_alex 1 October 2017 23: 48 New
    +1
    Quote: Svateev
    And how then did Israel suppress Egypt's air defense system, for example? Also layered, "literate" ...


    And you ask the Israelis themselves. They love to be proud of it. First, for a long time we watched the working radars, fixed the characteristics of the emitters and the range of the radars. Then they accustomed the Arabs to the "schedule" of flights. And on Day X, a massive jamming was used. For that time it was an advanced solution. Our systems delivered to Egypt for electronic countermeasures were not ready.

    Quote: Svateev
    This is an “excuse” for the designer of Thor: “We didn’t agree so! Why did he reach Thor, the infection? !! Where are the first two echelons of air defense ??!” And for the fighter who is being bombed, it does not matter how many echelons of air defense there did not work. Should Thor bring down the adversary? He must, for this and created. So let's talk about it!


    Exactly the same way, “a hundred airplanes flew from behind the hill, and how it smells from the zenith” is an excuse. This is such a loose assumption that gives an idiocy. We generally have such a category of “military analysts” who enthusiastically describe the situations of “one submarine Antei against the US Army AUG” or “one Tu-22M3 against a US Air Force deployed wing”, or “one T-90 tank against a NATO deployed infantry brigade "
    You were rightly pointed out that the described systems are not intended for the battle "air regiment on one." This is the third echelon of the air defense system, and the "Shell" is generally an object air defense system. And indeed, domestic systems of this class can be interconnected by communication lines. Even the ancient "Tunguska" were combined into a system to form a protective perimeter.
    The same shell has only one single use case and the following multiple system options:

    - performance of combat missions as part of the battery - one of the complexes works as BM and KP at the same time, the remaining complexes (3-5 units) are connected to it for target designation and production of targets for firing;
    - performance of combat missions as part of a battery with a standard CP - the complexes are connected to the CP, which is in charge of the control center for each complex. ZPRK DB "Pantsir-С1" fire at targets;
    - performance of combat missions as part of a battery with a full-time gearbox and early warning radar - the radar issues information to the gearbox, which processes it and issues the target control center to the complexes to carry out fire on targets;
    - performance of combat missions in the auto mode by external target designation as a separate combat unit or in a subunit consisting of several BM.
    The battery has 6 "Carapace".
    1. seacap
      seacap 8 November 2017 22: 49 New
      0
      I agree, we also need to add medium and long-range air defense systems with IA and radio-technical troops, air defense units.
  29. seacap
    seacap 8 November 2017 22: 39 New
    0
    Everything is fine and correct, only in the issue of combat work does the author have a complete gap, or rather no idea about the organization of air defense of military units and formations. Without exception, all air defense systems, especially outdated ones, had and have a near boundary of the destruction zone to disperse a missile, to make it control and guidance, if only so that it does not fall due to insufficient lifting force. All combat manuals and instructions take this into account. Even an artillery shell is cocked not by cutting a barrel pipe, but after 100-200 m. To directly protect the complex, overlapping of the affected areas is given, separation of various complexes and RTV, IA, etc., etc. is applied. For this, there is a head (commander and commander in chief) of air defense. The article is extremely unprofessional and raises a question that does not exist. and a vertical start is applied, plus the means of defeat must still get to this so-called crown somehow.
  30. BEECH 1972
    BEECH 1972 13 November 2017 00: 05 New
    +1
    "This suggests that during the combat operation of the Tor-M2 air defense missile system, a huge" dead-hole funnel "with an inconspicuous sector of 52 degrees gapes over it (even in the mode of maximum elevation of the beam)." - “One Thor will obviously not be enough here; and given that the KEPD-350 does an 85-degree hill maneuver with an elevation of 1 - 1,5 km, some missiles can in any case fall into the dead zone above the complex that will lead to defeat. "

    And what's the funniest thing about numbers in this novel. So this is the naive confidence of the author of this wasted article, which undoubtedly is a rather intelligent and educated person, that he is smarter than everyone. Smarter than the designers of such systems as Thor, Carapace or Tunguska, or the military who issued the terms of reference for their development, with the mandatory consideration of all the features of their further operation. As well as providing technical specifications for their subsequent modification, taking into account all the shortcomings identified during operation ... And what is completely not funny is that, being aware of the performance characteristics of these complexes, the author simply could not know about the specifics of them combat use. As well as the specifics of the operation of a deeply layered air defense system, one of the links of which are these systems. Which no one ever even intended to exploit alone ... Even while escorting military units on the march. And equipped with exclusively Thor missile weapons, they should always cover missile cannon Tungusks or their analogues. Moreover, the available performance characteristics are far from finite. Work on improving weapons did not stop for a single minute. It’s only from relatively recent times that “State Secret”, almost deposed by the frank enemies of our country, has returned. And what I can surely assure such a "grief of analysts" is that the Russian military-industrial complex has more than enough surprises. Although not for everyone they will turn out to be good and pleasant surprises.
    PySy.
    This begs the question by itself: - "What was the aim of the author of this opus and why did he breed the bodygirl for nearly 2700 words, outlining long-known facts and successfully solved problems"? wink
  31. Peregon zameuka
    Peregon zameuka 14 November 2017 09: 22 New
    0
    Well, you can also put the car in an inclined position, focusing on a missile-dangerous direction. And you can also deploy around the circumference tactical radar with a platoon of hand-held MANPADS and a quick-fire anti-aircraft machine gun. There’s a lot to come up with. For the most important thing is praemonitus praemunitus - whoever is warned is armed.
  32. polkovnik manuch
    polkovnik manuch 5 December 2017 18: 06 New
    0
    An interesting article, I understood almost everything, scary!
  33. olgsei2017
    olgsei2017 22 December 2017 14: 23 New
    0
    Well, you still have to get to the top of the head .....
  34. poquello
    poquello 23 December 2017 01: 29 New
    0
    , and there are no two antennas that overlap each other’s brain
  35. Vladimir Avakimov
    Vladimir Avakimov 9 January 2018 18: 00 New
    0
    EW will do everything without fire.
  36. kunstkammer
    kunstkammer 16 March 2018 01: 05 New
    -1
    Quote: Ken71
    What for. If the army is imprisoned for war with barmaley

    I would also add that for the war with the internal enemy. Well, "effective managers" are afraid that the people "will rise from sleep ... and on the wreckage of autocracy ..."
  37. TatarinSSSR
    TatarinSSSR 17 June 2020 23: 32 New
    +1
    And what I did not look at the author immediately before reading ... Damantsev. That's it, I’m gladly leaving for another article on VO from this nonsense.