Military Review

The troops are waiting for the upgraded air defense system "Shell SM". What are the innovations?

102
The new upgraded Pantsir SAM will receive a super-powered antenna and a new generation of missiles, Interfax reported, citing an informed source.


The troops are waiting for the upgraded air defense system "Shell SM". What are the innovations?


Modernization work is underway, all of this will be implemented in the new version of the "Pantsir SM". First of all, we are talking about a super-power antenna for it.
- Said the source agency.

According to him, the new antenna allows you to quickly pinpoint the target, respond faster and work better at full speed.

Work is also being completed on the creation of a new generation of rockets for the Pantyr
- said the source.

Earlier, a source in the military-industrial complex reported that the range of the Pantsir anti-aircraft missile system could be increased to 60 km due to the use of hypersonic missiles. Currently, the range of the complex is about 20 km.

According to the military, the upgraded complex "Pantsir SM" will go to the troops this year.
Photos used:
Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation
102 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Greg Miller
    Greg Miller 17 May 2018 11: 23
    +5
    He also needs to ensure combat use on the march ....
    1. KVU-NSVD
      KVU-NSVD 17 May 2018 11: 26
      +23
      Actually, the Shell can be used on the go ...
      Quote: Greg Miller
      He also needs to ensure combat use on the march ....
      1. MPN
        MPN 17 May 2018 11: 50
        +12
        Quote: KVU-NSVD
        Actually, the Shell can be used on the go ...
        However here
        can grow up to 60 km thanks to the use of hypersonic missiles. Currently, the range of the complex is about 20 km.
        To increase the range by three times ..., I’ll tell you the missiles in dimension closer to Buk will be, where will the containers stick, and even on the march? ...
        1. Aristarkh Lyudvigovich
          Aristarkh Lyudvigovich 17 May 2018 12: 32
          +5
          Quote: MPN
          where to stick containers, and even on the march? ...


          Most likely on the KAMAZ-6560M chassis
        2. NEXUS
          NEXUS 17 May 2018 12: 33
          +12
          Earlier, a source in the defense industry complex reported that the range of the Pantsir anti-aircraft missile and cannon system could increase to 60 km through the use of hypersonic missiles.

          What kind of fantasies? It is about increasing the range to 40 km and tracking targets to 75 km. Where did 60 km come from? It was reported that the new missiles could be used without major modernization of the complex on the Shells of earlier versions.
          1. hrych
            hrych 17 May 2018 21: 52
            +4
            Quote: NEXUS
            It was reported that the new missiles could be used without major modernization of the complex on the Shells of earlier versions.

            Combat experience can not be compared with anything. That's taking into account the Syrian battle, and advanced American, English, French, Israeli, and a swarm of drones. Of course you need to adjust. good
          2. VO3A
            VO3A 18 May 2018 00: 52
            +1
            Nexus, and where did 40 km come from, can you explain? I can, and I can even say why I would like 60 km ... the "Shell" is not a super weapon ... and to meet with new enemy planes, their new capabilities and advanced technologies, which
            already implemented, it is no longer ready ... although it may be enough of the old ones, but with a new tactic based on network-centric approaches ... We still only have integration, although this is already good! And with network-centric approaches we don’t even "smell" ....
            1. Nikolaevich I
              Nikolaevich I 18 May 2018 04: 36
              +5
              Quote: VO3A
              network-centric approaches, we do not even "smell" ....

              The Russian Aerospace Forces first tested the automated control system (ACS) of air defense systems with elements of artificial intelligence. The ASU-PVO allows combining the S-300 and S-400 anti-aircraft missile systems (SAM), the Pantsir anti-aircraft missile-gun systems (SAM) and modern radar systems into a single fist. The complex automatically analyzes the air situation and issues recommendations for the use of weapons. According to experts, this will significantly increase the response rate of air defense units and compounds.

              ACS "Baikal-1ME" is intended for automated control of the combat operations of the anti-aircraft missile brigade (anti-aircraft missile regiment), and can also be used to control the connection (grouping) of air defense.
              During the modernization of the KSA "Baikal-1E", the hardware of the complex was transferred to a new element base, and the software was transferred to the environment of basic secure information technologies with the expansion of combat capabilities.
              Moreover, the development of new software was carried out using a single automated system for archiving a software product and a compilation system for specific software complexes.
              ACS "Baikal-1ME" provides the solution to the following tasks:
              -coordination of hostilities of subordinate anti-aircraft missile systems and systems, aviation and electronic warfare equipment, taking into account the general air situation, condition and available ammunition;
              -reception, processing, display and documentation of information on the status and military operations of subordinate assets;
              -receiving, processing, displaying and documenting information about the air, ground, chemical, meteorological conditions from subordinate sources of radar information, automated target designation systems for subordinate anti-aircraft missile systems, superior and neighboring airborne control and radar systems;
              - Distribution of aerodynamic and ballistic targets in real time between subordinate anti-aircraft missile systems (air defense systems, air defense systems) and the issuance of target designations for them according to goals, taking into account their type and importance;
              -automatic allocation of active assets responsibility sectors at the initial stage of work and changes in their distribution in the process of repulsing an STS strike;
              -interaction with command posts of neighboring air defense groups, CP anti-aircraft missile compounds (parts), CP fighter aviation regiments (air bases) and aviation guidance points;
              -conducting autonomous and comprehensive (in conjunction with other means of air defense) combat training exercises;
              -Interaction with KSA air traffic control.

              The Baikal-1ME automated control system provides simultaneous automated control of anti-aircraft missile brigades (regiments), the control gears of which are equipped with the Baikal-1ME, Vector-2VE automated control systems,

              What else ....... "jade rod" you need?
              1. VO3A
                VO3A 18 May 2018 17: 03
                0
                only integration

                allows you to combine into a single shock fist

                Your complete information and my conclusion completely coincide ... There are no contradictions, and indeed rods do not !!! But network-centric approaches allow you to receive information without contact with the enemy and allow operators to be taken out of a possible blow .... This is the next stage of development and it is difficult to achieve it even with competent combination, although, say, there are some very characteristic features for air defense that mask new network-centric approaches ..... They disguise if they exist, but do not create them .... It may be too streamlined, but this is a separate issue and not within the framework of comments ....
                1. Nikolaevich I
                  Nikolaevich I 18 May 2018 18: 20
                  +3
                  Sorry for the bad joke! Sometimes it "brings" ... I do not declare that in Russia with "network-centrism" it is a "complete abdomen", even in one "sphere" (air defense), but ...... is there a "smell"? wink As for the "network-centric concept" as a whole, no one has a complete picture ... even the "pioneers of buchi" (USA), and therefore there are no ready-made technical solutions in a single organization (system) .. All in stages of "becoming"! The “question” only is that for some this process is going “better”, while for others it is “worse”!, For others, “the horse did not roll”!
                  1. VO3A
                    VO3A 18 May 2018 19: 00
                    +3
                    We have the third ..... So I brazenly declare that we do not have a single subsystem into which the signal from the UAV comes directly, in real time to the guidance system ... Target coordinates are sent only to the UAV control panel and that's it .... This is a little exaggerated, but enough for flogging .... Moreover, I argue that the Russian General Staff does not even have the concept of such systems, even the lowest level .... And based on this, we can conclude that the situation with simple weapons, as in 41 .... And the losses will be even greater, and precisely because of the global lag in the Combat Systems based on new information technologies .... And the lag is neither in the technology, nor in the UAV, and the lag in the head "wise" generals, and first of all, claims to the General Staff ...
                    1. Vlad.by
                      Vlad.by 24 May 2018 11: 46
                      0
                      And it’s not at all a fact that the direct transfer of information from an UAV to an actuator is such a blessing!
                      Not only does this lead to a multiple complication of communication protocols and a rise in the cost of the entire system many times, but it also drastically reduces the security of the system from external influences. Direct contacts should be possible in principle, but only established by command of the control center. This will be provided
                      1. "prudent" distribution of communication channels (nevertheless, on each specific UAV or carrier there is only a limited number of receivers and transmitters). Trite, such a network-centric system with restrictions is more reliable and cheaper. Yes, and delays in the transmission of information will only be until the creation of a pair or group of direct transmission.
                      2. Correct target distribution (with direct contact of any reconnaissance source with any firearm, some targets will be required to be fired repeatedly, and some will not be fired at all)
                      3. The command post will be aware of the entire informational picture on the battlefield, which can only be achieved with "ideal" network-centrism by enormous software and hardware costs (each communicates with each, but also sends copies and reports to the center)
                      4. No “left” drone, for example, possessing an access code to the system, but not being “their own”, will not be able to wedge into the system with desa.
                      In an "ideal" network-centrism, the presence of an access code implies complete trust in the information. In the "center-authorized" network-centrism, all "their" are at odds and controlled. The appearance of a "stranger", even having a data transfer protocol but not existing in the system, will not cause a system crash, since the center additionally checks the reliability of the new source and excludes those that are not in the system.
                      1. VO3A
                        VO3A 24 May 2018 12: 04
                        0
                        It’s probably hard to find rational ideas offhand ... In fact, everything is easier and more practical ... But that's why no one thinks about this, but there’s no hint to make it .. Our military, instead of the information component, practices automation of troop control and also unsuccessfully ... Such mediocre systems adopted for service as ESU TK "Sozvezdie-M" and "Andromeda" are an example ...
        3. Alex777
          Alex777 17 May 2018 15: 32
          +4
          They will not be like Buk in any way. hi
          Range will increase due to the marching engine.
          1. MPN
            MPN 17 May 2018 15: 41
            +5
            Quote: Alex777
            They will not be like Buk in any way. hi
            Range will increase due to the marching engine.

            I said by dimension closer Buk will have 3 times the range ..., they have enough for 20km that is, I still need to add, but how much exactly do I know, but somehow the destruction range is positioned like that of Buk M2, the only warhead power is not indicated ...
            1. Alex777
              Alex777 18 May 2018 12: 27
              +2
              Do not be lazy - find yourself. There are already pictures of the Shell-SM with 24 missiles on the launcher without guns. With guns - only the radar antenna is different.
              1. MPN
                MPN 18 May 2018 12: 46
                +6
                Quote: Alex777
                Do not be lazy - find yourself. There are already pictures of the Shell-SM with 24 missiles on the launcher without guns. With guns - only the radar antenna is different.

                I’ll find it ... Only what kind of ZRPK is without guns, this is a completely different song and to the shell it somehow didn’t stand next ..., in its tasks, etc. hi
          2. figwam
            figwam 17 May 2018 16: 49
            +4
            Quote: Alex777
            They will not be like Buk in any way.

            So far, only like that.
        4. Yarhann
          Yarhann 18 May 2018 09: 18
          -1
          the missile will be no larger than the ATGM hermes complex. most likely it will simply be a two-stage - the first stage fulfills giving acceleration and speed, and the second small (light) stage is separated by inertia. What could save - put a lighter on-board computer and GOS on the rocket, possibly less warheads.
          1. Alex777
            Alex777 18 May 2018 12: 30
            0
            The second (marching) stage will be launched after the capture of the target of the GOS,
    2. rotmistr60
      rotmistr60 17 May 2018 11: 27
      +4
      What are you talking about? TTX allow you to fire on the go. Or do you mean something else.
      1. ultra
        ultra 17 May 2018 11: 48
        +6
        TTX allow, the chassis does not allow.
        1. figwam
          figwam 17 May 2018 12: 28
          +4
          Quote: ultra
          TTX allow, the chassis does not allow.

          And what is wrong with the chassis of the SM?
          1. vik669
            vik669 17 May 2018 14: 22
            +2
            Moscow put the “Shell” not on the Belarusian wheels and lost -
            https://www.nv-online.info/2018/05/09/moskva-post
            avila-pantsir-ne-na-belorusskie-kolesa-i-progadal
            a.html
            1. Anton Yu
              Anton Yu 18 May 2018 09: 48
              +1
              propaganda.
    3. Tiksi-3
      Tiksi-3 17 May 2018 11: 32
      +6
      Quote: Greg Miller
      He also needs to ensure combat use on the march ....

      belay what is it all of a sudden? .. provide? he knows how but bad ..... is he that military air defense? belay ... for these purposes there is a family of Thor ....
      1. Alex777
        Alex777 17 May 2018 15: 33
        +1
        Thor from the Shell studied on the move to shoot.
        1. Tiksi-3
          Tiksi-3 17 May 2018 18: 14
          0
          Quote: Alex777
          Thor from the Shell studied on the move to shoot.

          and what? ... the shell of the military air defense ??? ... why should he shoot in movement ?????
          1. Wolka
            Wolka 17 May 2018 19: 28
            +2
            in fact, troops have the ability to maneuver and make appropriate marches, including considerable ones in length, and it is necessary to ensure their escort-cover ...
            1. Tiksi-3
              Tiksi-3 18 May 2018 16: 24
              +1
              Quote: Volka
              in fact, troops have the ability to maneuver

              belay fool the carapace does not accompany the military columns, for this there is a torus !!!
              Quote: Alex777
              Essno is not military, but it will cover the S-400 column when relocating to another position.

              No, s400 will not be relocated ..... just will not have time !!!
          2. Alex777
            Alex777 18 May 2018 12: 22
            0
            Essno is not military, but it will cover the S-400 column when relocating to another position. It is obvious? hi
    4. Elk
      Elk 17 May 2018 19: 02
      +1
      He should be able to see, aim and attack the target above 82 degrees vertically, so that he could protect himself from attacking from above missiles.
      1. Alex777
        Alex777 18 May 2018 12: 24
        0
        Quote: Elk
        He should be able to see, aim and attack the target above 82 degrees vertically, so that he could protect himself from attacking from above missiles.

        These attacking rockets up there, for the attack, still have to fly horizontally for some time. There they are met. Well, EW again ... hi
  2. Hire
    Hire 17 May 2018 11: 23
    +12
    According to him, the new antenna will allow you to quickly detect the target, respond faster and work better in full swing[b] [/ b].

    This passage is wonderful in this news.
    1. Greg Miller
      Greg Miller 17 May 2018 11: 28
      +6
      Yes, he can’t shoot on the march yet ....
      1. Hire
        Hire 17 May 2018 11: 33
        +10
        Quote: Greg Miller
        Yes, he can’t shoot on the march yet ....

        Physically can. If the new antenna provides sufficient selectivity and stable target capture at "full speed", then combat use is possible.
    2. Romka47
      Romka47 17 May 2018 12: 03
      +6
      Well, it means that earlier he could work on the go, but worse than from a standstill, but now he’ll be kind of like that anyway.
  3. The comment was deleted.
    1. Muvka
      Muvka 17 May 2018 11: 28
      +9
      Even now they are not very scary if the crew is normal.
      1. Tiksi-3
        Tiksi-3 17 May 2018 12: 02
        0
        Quote: Muvka
        They are not very scary even now.

        belay wassat to whom?
        Quote: Muvka
        if the crew is normal.

        dEbilam the way is ordered, so the crew (if any) is normal !!
    2. Chertt
      Chertt 17 May 2018 11: 33
      +3
      Quote: taiga2018
      then rockets of Jewish fascists will not be scary

      And sabers underwater armor-drilled will be scary. Why are you learning bad
  4. Abram
    Abram 17 May 2018 11: 28
    +3
    book a cabin and cut the fly. just in case smile
  5. rocket757
    rocket757 17 May 2018 11: 29
    +2
    It will be done, will go to the troops or somewhere else, we will see!
    Impression - comrades, designers are on the right track. Do not stop, invent something new and then all our enemies will be "sour"!
    1. novel66
      novel66 17 May 2018 11: 37
      +3
      healthy hi there is a faint smell of information that the "shell" will do on the basis of the tank
      1. rocket757
        rocket757 17 May 2018 12: 34
        +3
        Hello Roman soldier
        They showed on a TV plot, there people from the manufacturer claimed that the complex was built on a modular basis and can be installed on any suitable platform!
        On caterpillars, the mabud will become lower (now it is very high, it collects all the wires low, it collects along the route, I saw it myself!) And the cross is better .... it’s a caterpillar is a caterpillar, crawls there. where the wheels bark at once.
        The demand for such equipment will be ... there are few places in the world, where only a slider, on wheels in any way.
        1. novel66
          novel66 17 May 2018 12: 37
          +2
          and, Victor, do not forget - the armor! take a regular horseradish
          1. rocket757
            rocket757 17 May 2018 13: 58
            +4
            My experience is of course ancient, but as I understand it, it is not possible to protect an anti-aircraft gun from everything and everything. A reasonable compromise, in the end, anti-aircraft guns do not send an enemy defense breakthrough ... perhaps something like a barrel shilka! Navy, something stationary, is possible, but the antenna equipment is not fully protected, however, the specifics.
    2. NEXUS
      NEXUS 17 May 2018 12: 47
      +3
      Quote: rocket757
      It will be done, will go to the troops or somewhere else, we will see!

      In Hmeimim is already Shell-C2 ... it is clear that this is not SM Shell, but still it is more advanced than version C1. It seems that the radar is more powerful and newer, and there is an opinion that new missiles are also being tested.
      1. rocket757
        rocket757 17 May 2018 14: 03
        +4
        In Syria, a real check is underway. They receive special ratings - they discovered, no: destroyed, no: survived, no ... specifically, such an obvious answer to all the questions!
        1. Captain Pushkin
          Captain Pushkin 17 May 2018 18: 30
          +3
          Quote: rocket757
          In Syria, a real check is underway. They receive special ratings - they discovered, no: destroyed, no: survived, no ... specifically, such an obvious answer to all the questions!

          The complex shot off the entire ammunition, the crew left the car (and did it right) in anticipation of reloading. Here, if there are problems, then either with the organization of combat use, or with an insufficient number of complexes.
          1. rocket757
            rocket757 17 May 2018 19: 20
            +4
            Read. With an assessment of the situation, it is clear that there are not enough resources, possibly a poor organization of the combat process. In war, as in war, not everything goes smoothly.
  6. Alexey-74
    Alexey-74 17 May 2018 11: 42
    0
    The "shell" has proven itself to improve after the modernization of the technical characteristics of the battlefield, the more so there is experience in combat use. So everything is fine.
  7. Old military officer
    Old military officer 17 May 2018 11: 45
    0
    Whatever is done is for the best. Forward and only forward. Let our "friends" scratch their turnips, their entire international.
  8. keeper03
    keeper03 17 May 2018 11: 48
    +6
    The destruction of our shell judahs showed that at the last "gasp" when the ammunition ended, it would be nice to provide it The last frontier of protection! For example, throw a steel net on a kamikaze drone or shoot heat-smoke traps, flip EMP or buckshot towards the approach of an enemy blank!
    1. The Siberian barber
      The Siberian barber 17 May 2018 11: 55
      +6
      ... and also, give up the practice of smoke breaks calculation) or, since you really want to smoke, then leave the car, at least in automatic mode))
      1. Mik13
        Mik13 17 May 2018 12: 11
        +9
        Quote: Siberian barber
        ... and also, give up the practice of smoke breaks calculation) or, since you really want to smoke, then leave the car, at least in automatic mode))

        Chewed truck, but stop raving, in the end.
        The operation time of the air defense complex is determined by the command. If the complex was turned off during the attack, then that was the order. Turning on the complex without an order is the same violation as turning it off without an order.
        In addition, not a single air defense system can operate continuously. In a good way, they should generally be included only for the duration of the combat work. And other means should determine this time.
        So the calculation is certainly not to blame for anything.
        1. The Siberian barber
          The Siberian barber 17 May 2018 12: 44
          +1
          You know better, probably ... I, to air defense, have the same attitude as "warm to green"))
          Wrote his comment., Based on the opinions of visitors to the VO, discussing the destruction of the "Shell"
          I can only say with confidence that smoking is harmful, in any case))
        2. Doliva63
          Doliva63 17 May 2018 17: 38
          +6
          Quote: Mik13
          Quote: Siberian barber
          ... and also, give up the practice of smoke breaks calculation) or, since you really want to smoke, then leave the car, at least in automatic mode))

          Chewed truck, but stop raving, in the end.
          The operation time of the air defense complex is determined by the command. If the complex was turned off during the attack, then that was the order. Turning on the complex without an order is the same violation as turning it off without an order.
          In addition, not a single air defense system can operate continuously. In a good way, they should generally be included only for the duration of the combat work. And other means should determine this time.
          So the calculation is certainly not to blame for anything.

          If air defense, explain why the car was in the "bare field" like a scarecrow? Why no disguise? Why is not hidden? Why didn’t they use simulators? Or does it not practice air defense?
          1. Mik13
            Mik13 17 May 2018 19: 42
            +2
            Quote: Doliva63
            If air defense, explain why the car was in the "bare field" like a scarecrow? Why no disguise? Why is not hidden? Why didn’t they use simulators? Or does it not practice air defense?

            1. I’m not a Pvoshnik, but any common arms man knows these things.
            2. The reasons why the car was in such a situation may be many. Could get out of the position to meet with the refueling tanker and / or TZM. Could wait in this place the rest of the machine to form a column. Could wait for the conductor to move to another position ...
            3. In combat conditions it is impossible to constantly be ready for absolutely everything. No one will dig equipment shelters at every halt. Equipment must be serviced. People need to rest. People sometimes make mistakes, technology breaks down ... Anything can happen.
            4. What happened to the Shell is an ONE case. In a particular place at a given time, one of the elements of an air defense system was vulnerable to a completely atypical threat. With the same success, a howitzer shell could fly into it.
            5. Accordingly, it is not necessary to make a tragedy of universal scale out of an isolated case. This sometimes happens. And this does not happen. For example, in the book Tanker in a Foreign Car, a case of the downing of a German attack aircraft from a Sherman tank gun is described. As far as I know, the case is unique. On this basis, to draw some conclusions regarding the vulnerability of aircraft to tanks, which is typical, no one tried.
            1. Doliva63
              Doliva63 17 May 2018 20: 26
              +5
              From the point of view of the common arms, I already understand everything, thanks! hi
              Thought, airman, wanted to get to the bottom laughing drinks
              1. Vlad.by
                Vlad.by 24 May 2018 12: 26
                0
                I am an air defense :-)
                I can add only a couple of banal reasons - on the march there was a problem with the motor or the banal solarium ended. Or a simple Arab gouging - they shot back, KP ordered to wait, that's all ... I didn’t order about the camouflage mask.
            2. gaudin
              gaudin 18 May 2018 11: 44
              0
              the case of the downing of a German attack aircraft from the Sherman tank gun is described. As far as I know, the case is unique.

              Not unique, the Germans from tigers fired on IL-2 with blanks. This was written by one of the pilots of the downed attack aircraft. I read it in childhood, I can’t remember the book.
    2. NEXUS
      NEXUS 17 May 2018 12: 49
      +4
      Quote: keeper03
      The destruction of our carapace by the Jews showed that at the last "gasp" when the ammunition ended, it would be nice to provide it with the last line of defense!

      The destruction of our Shell showed that in addition to covering it when reloading it, it was necessary to disguise it humanly or to shoot the BC not completely, so that he could protect himself.
    3. Servisinzhener
      Servisinzhener 17 May 2018 13: 37
      +1
      And do not leave in the open, chatting for life on the sidelines.
    4. Captain Pushkin
      Captain Pushkin 17 May 2018 18: 33
      +1
      Quote: keeper03
      The destruction of our shell judahs showed that at the last "gasp" when the ammunition ended, it would be nice to provide it The last frontier of protection! For example, throw a steel net on a kamikaze drone or shoot heat-smoke traps, flip EMP or buckshot towards the approach of an enemy blank!

      That's all, I agreed. Come there, they will meet and give out a double-barreled gun - you will disperse the bursting adversaries with buckshot. Teach the Syrians to fight properly.
    5. Elk
      Elk 17 May 2018 19: 05
      0
      If the carapace was empty, then it worked for the goals and very likely shot down one or more.
  9. q75agent
    q75agent 17 May 2018 12: 02
    +1
    Quote: Chertt
    And sabers underwater armor-drilled will be scary. Why are you learning bad

    expect + from your Jewish friends wink aleshenka, and your last name is not anal lol
  10. NordUral
    NordUral 17 May 2018 12: 04
    0
    Well, even more of these complexes. God forbid, the mattress covers go crazy, then they have enough work.
  11. tchoni
    tchoni 17 May 2018 12: 12
    +2
    Again they increase the range .... Damn .. as it is "higher", "faster", "further" .... tired. "Shell" ZRPK NEAR BOUNDARY! He needs to grow 1) resolution, 2) reaction speed, 3 probability of detection, 4) channel use of weapons ... 5) fire performance .... And they make two of them “BUK” double ... hi
    1. gaudin
      gaudin 18 May 2018 11: 46
      0
      I’ll add on my own - to increase the ammunition 2 times.
  12. net0103net
    net0103net 17 May 2018 12: 13
    0
    This is probably good news.
  13. Guru
    Guru 17 May 2018 12: 24
    +1
    An automatic recharge would have him.
    1. Captain Pushkin
      Captain Pushkin 17 May 2018 18: 35
      +1
      Quote: Guru
      An automatic recharge would have him.

      There is the best machine gun, these are four soldiers.
  14. Hey
    Hey 17 May 2018 15: 06
    0
    For stationary, do not forget about camouflage, and the installation of traps for anti-radar missiles.
  15. Chicha squad
    Chicha squad 17 May 2018 15: 22
    0
    He still EW would not hurt
  16. Mikhail Anokhin_2
    Mikhail Anokhin_2 17 May 2018 18: 21
    +1
    For the defense of money is not a pity!
    The bad thing is that we are driving the money into US debt securities instead of using it in the Russian Federation!
    1. Ratmir_Ryazan
      Ratmir_Ryazan 17 May 2018 21: 21
      +1
      What is wrong with the fact that the USA pays us $ 3 billion annually on its bonds ?! In rubles, this is almost 200 billion, enough for another bridge to the Crimea ANNUALLY !!!
      1. vvv-73
        vvv-73 18 May 2018 09: 24
        0
        The bad thing is that this money can freeze at any time. The bad news is that threatening this may require political concessions. The bad thing is that the money there is at 2%, while our business takes loans at 20%.
      2. seos
        seos 19 May 2018 09: 34
        0
        the problem is that in the USA this money lies at minuscule interest ... and Russia issues its debt securities at a very high interest .... that is, we give money on credit at 3% and borrow from other countries at 10% - any the bank would have gone bankrupt from such a business ...
  17. Ratmir_Ryazan
    Ratmir_Ryazan 17 May 2018 21: 20
    +1
    I think you need to make a Carapace with 57-mm cannons with a programmable projectile, like Derivations ... Use missiles to work on large targets for planes, tactical missiles, and to hit 57-mm on cheap drones ...
    1. rocket757
      rocket757 17 May 2018 21: 36
      +3
      The PRICE - EFFICIENCY ratio is in the red so far.
  18. Nikolaevich I
    Nikolaevich I 18 May 2018 05: 55
    +3
    In fact, the Pantsir air defense system turned into a local missile defense system ... I am suspicious of the laudatory characteristics of this complex as an anti-aircraft anti-aircraft defense, but it proved to be good as an anti-missile "interceptor." reinforce "! An important step in this direction has already been taken:" light "zuras have been developed," accented "against light drones, nurses and" medium-sized "guided missiles such as RVZ, RZZ .... now it would be faster to establish the production of such zuras! Against "large" missiles RVZ and RZZ go into battle exist 57EX6 ... The announced modernization of radar equipment is very useful. This will again strengthen the anti-missile properties of the Shell come in handy how and why ... then it’s for! And if the experts say it’s reasoned that the 40E60 missiles are enough, then ......... "why pay twice?" If the Pantsir air defense missile system will be " imprisoned "under a local, object-based missile defense, then the Tor-M air defense system will take over ii short-range air defense missile systems, and "Beech" -means .... "accented" a defense!
    1. Yarhann
      Yarhann 18 May 2018 09: 24
      -1
      the increase in radar capabilities is just the same for the search and detection of aircraft, because it is the main danger to the Carapace. The aircraft can detect the complex without entering the zone of its defeat and launch a missile of the Maverick type - as a result, the complex will be destroyed. And a distance of about 40-50 km on which the complex will be able to work on aircraft will protect it from most threats from the air.
      With a more powerful radar, the complex will be in great demand on the foreign arms market - because building an echeloned air defense system is expensive, but this is an economical option. Although the c300 he as a means of early detection and destruction of aircraft, he still will not replace.
      1. Nikolaevich I
        Nikolaevich I 18 May 2018 16: 08
        +2
        Quote: Yarhann
        for search and detection of aircraft, because it is the aircraft that is the main danger to the Shell. The aircraft can detect the complex without entering the zone of its defeat and launch a missile of the Maverick type - as a result, the complex will be destroyed. And the distance of the order 40-50km on which the complex will be able to work on aircraft will protect it from most air threats

        But do not you confuse large with sweet? Moreover, you, as it were, contradict yourself. "An aircraft can detect an air defense system and launch a missile from 20 km ... We need a missile for an air defense system with a range of 40-60 km!" Well, sho? Then this damned aircraft will detect and produce missile launch from a distance of 50-70 km! But if the anti-aircraft missile system will be super focused on the interception and destruction of aircraft missiles, then he nevermind will be: from what distance missiles are launched! And zuras with a range and 20 km will be enough! Understand, finally! No matter how far, direction missiles are launched, all of them must arrive at point A (target being hit ...)!
        1. Yarhann
          Yarhann 20 May 2018 14: 38
          0
          Do you think that the air defense system is capable of guaranteed destroying missiles like the AGM-88 HARM or our analogue type h25mp, or the same missiles of the hermes complex or maverick. these goals are small. very fast and fly along a random trajectory due to the fact that they have on board the GOS.
          and from 50-70 km the aircraft itself will not detect anything, no matter how much the rocket will be - the most advanced western radar installed on the raptor of the west tank can see from 50 km and this is not in the mapping mode but in the narrow beam of the AFAR, while it unmasks itself and air defense will be shot down - exchanging a tank for an airplane is a little expensive. Therefore, when searching for a ground, the optoelectronic onboard system is more effective - and its range is limited to just 50 km - it’s clear that from 50 km it will not see the tank but from a smaller distance the tank will be detected while the aircraft will fly in passive mode without emitting anything - sent a missile such as maverick and TP analogues with a television or other passive seeker is launched.
          It’s just that you need to understand the main thing that an airplane is not just an armament carrier, it is an armament complex capable of independently conducting reconnaissance measures, selecting targets and defeating them - that’s why it is necessary to destroy an airplane and not what it launches - in any war, the cost of weapons is always the main thing - and when we are shooting down a relatively inexpensive rocket of the Shell complex of the Kyrgyz Republic such as Tomahawk and etc. - this is an economic benefit. And when we shoot down a target commensurate in value with the same missile - this is already an economic loss. Why doesn’t they create a missile defense system from a RS such as the Grad complex - yes because it is economically unprofitable - it is necessary to detect and destroy the carrier, that is, BM Grad.
          Anti-aircraft missiles are advantageous only if they protect the aircraft and other equipment, an expensive type of equipment, which is precisely why the Americans are developing now very short-range super-maneuverable missiles to protect their AWACS and anti-aircraft missiles from long-range air defense systems.
          1. Nikolaevich I
            Nikolaevich I 20 May 2018 17: 53
            +3
            It seems that you inattentively read my commentary, where I spoke about the "specialized" (!) Air defense systems (anti-ballistic and anti-aircraft ...), about the "symbiosis" of both in a multi-level air defense organization ...
            If the Pantsir air defense missile system will be imprisoned for a local, object-based missile defense, the Tor-M air defense system (accented for air defense!) Will take on the functions of short-range air defense systems, and the Buk air defense system (accented for air defense!) -mean ....!
            1. Yarhann
              Yarhann 20 May 2018 23: 49
              -1
              Tor and Buk are the air defense systems of the ground forces - these troops made up the missile defense for the complex - the main task is to combat aircraft - because for technology the main enemy is aviation and helicopters with the WTO. The carapace is a near-air defense complex of the near zone, the customer, as I understand it, is a VKS - the task is object defense like that of the same s300-s400 complex.
              By the way, that’s why the c300-s400 and the carapace on wheels are unlike army defense systems that are all tracked.
              But do not forget the main thing that no matter how cool the shell complex is, it is meat without the possibility of destroying the WTO carrier - that is, planes and helicopters in the far zone, which is why object defense is made up of complexes with 300-400 and shell. But the increase in the range of detection of the shell and the flight range of the ZR - a little bit will make the complex self-sufficient - it will be able to independently fight with carriers of the WTO. how, for me, an increase in the range of the shell’s work was done just to improve its ability to work in an autonomous version without building an echeloned air defense (s300 + shell), as you may have noticed, it’s relevant in local sluggish conflicts - so to speak, cheap and cheerful compared to long-range complexes like s300-s400
  19. Valery Saitov
    Valery Saitov 18 May 2018 13: 28
    +1
    Shell-SM with 24 missiles on launchers without guns.
    1. Nikolaevich I
      Nikolaevich I 18 May 2018 16: 13
      +2
      It's time ... get rid of the guns! For such a "category" of air defense systems, anachronism guns!
      1. Yarhann
        Yarhann 20 May 2018 14: 43
        -1
        and how to destroy small targets like UAV-kamikaze and other UAVs - there is no more effective means than a gun - although those guns that are on the shell are not particularly effective. We need a single-barrel 50-60mm caliber gun for firing shells with remote detonation - this is by far the most cheap and effective means of destroying UAVs, apart from laser weapons.
        Do not forget that the missiles in the complex are not very cheap and destroying their cheap targets can be a swarm of them infinitely expensive. A gun is needed in modern realities when very small UAVs are often used.
        1. Nikolaevich I
          Nikolaevich I 20 May 2018 18: 09
          +2
          I don’t propose to completely “lime” the air defense system’s guns! Some kind of percentage can be left .. but you shouldn’t leave them on the air defense systems "sharpened" for missile defense! You are right in one thing: the guns are only suitable for shooting down " low-speed "low-altitude drones, and even programmable fuses are desirable ... The presence, along with the 57E6 zuras, promised hypersonic zuras, of cheap small-sized (72-80 mm .... and even 57-mm ...) missiles (" anti-aircraft nails ") will not sadden too much about the guns ...
          1. Yarhann
            Yarhann 20 May 2018 23: 15
            -1
            programmable fuses are remote-detonated shells, although I heard that we made a correctable munition for the same 57mm caliber - for the very purpose that I said - the destruction of reconnaissance UAVs and other small-sized airborne targets. This is a derivation-air defense machine. Perhaps distributing anti-aircraft artillery and missiles into different vehicles will be the most optimal option - after all, the task of an anti-aircraft automatic gun is not only protection against an air threat - it is protecting the system from the ground (infantry, light armored vehicles, etc.).
            And rockets like it or not, it’s still worth the money, even small ones and small missiles are actually better to replace with adjustable shells or with remote detonation.
            1. Nikolaevich I
              Nikolaevich I 21 May 2018 00: 28
              +2
              Quote: Yarhann
              it’s really better to replace small missiles with adjustable shells or with remote detonation.

              Not better ! Projectiles with "remote detonation" are inferior to missiles in the probability of hitting the target with the first shot (especially maneuvering ...) An adjusted projectile tends to cost more than missiles ... the "smaller", the more expensive .. and with the characteristics "not super"!
              1. Yarhann
                Yarhann 21 May 2018 19: 28
                -1
                The corrected projectile will be several times cheaper than the smallest missile; and the control equipment there will be identical to what is on board the machine, what is on the PC or the projectile. Well, the velocity of the projectile is likely to be twice as high - that is, the probability of defeat is higher.
                Well, a remote fuse projectile is an ideal tool for destroying UAVs and other small-sized targets - even though there are no maneuvering ones, but the capabilities for destroying targets are usually described in the technical specifications and the same derivation has targets up to 500ms - and the airborne maneuvers and their forecast should cope the calculator - however, as with SAM. That's just the rocket is several times more expensive and the probability of interception is not much higher (if at all higher). And no one will shoot missiles at small UAVs.
                1. Nikolaevich I
                  Nikolaevich I 22 May 2018 01: 24
                  +2
                  Quote: Yarhann
                  Adjustable shell will be several times cheaper than the smallest missile

                  I doubt it! And there are reasons for this ...

                  Quote: Yarhann
                  in TTX and the same derivation

                  You overestimate Derivation, as well as many others .... while it is not worth it ...
                  1. Yarhann
                    Yarhann 22 May 2018 23: 33
                    -1
                    I do not overestimate - derivation is a modern technique that is developed for the same purposes in the advanced armies of the world. Namely, a large-caliber automatic cannon with a high initial velocity of the projectile and remote detonation is the task of such a system, not only air defense but also the fight against ballistic targets such as mines, RSs and bombs. Now in the world, many WTOs are being used remotely controlled - like the same Kyrgyz Republic (UAV-kamikaze) that destroyed the Shell in Syria. It is such a weapon that will be used everywhere in the coming decades - this is facilitated by the miniaturization of the electronic base and the accessibility of technology. Therefore, it was Automatic guns that were and will be the main means of combating UAVs, planning bombs of the Kyrgyz Republic, etc. and so on. The cost of guaranteed delivery of ammunition is now greatly reduced - and not just to the coordinate (like a salvo from self-propelled guns) and at the same time conducting reconnaissance activities - kamikaze drones.
                    And so far, so far, on ships to protect against an air raid, automatic guns and main-caliber guns with remote detonation are used as the last barrier - if we are talking about protecting a specific object.
            2. kan123
              kan123 22 May 2018 11: 32
              0
              They made nonsense, and called it the same - "Deflocation." The gun is 120 mm, and not automatic, but computerized, where it itself rotates and shoots, according to the program - instant response to targets. No one in such a tank will even know what knocked out. There is no need for a crew there - an automatic brutal robot destroys all life. And our engineers, it seems, removed the 57 mm gun from the ship, and screwed it onto an armored personnel carrier. Fuck geniuses!
  20. seos
    seos 19 May 2018 08: 58
    0
    A source with its hypersonic rockets for the Shell, over to send for cleaning sort ...
    One blurted out ... the herd supported ...
  21. Rock616
    Rock616 19 May 2018 12: 13
    0
    Great news ! good It seems to me that it is precisely on them that the main work will fall very soon ... angry
  22. kutuz
    kutuz 19 May 2018 14: 56
    -1
    You are sure to tell Israel.
    1. Mayor
      Mayor 20 May 2018 18: 18
      0
      We all hear .. Friends of reason.
  23. kan123
    kan123 22 May 2018 11: 25
    0
    As, thanks to the Jews, life has shown, the "shells" are vulnerable. The obvious solution is something like active armor, so that they could not be, just destroy it. The first attack is carried out by means of air defense, moreover, according to the American system, there are no planes sparing no pilots there — mass exodus of suicides — this has not changed in the US Air Force since World War II. They will clear all the air defense, and then the bombers will fly in and will come off as if in a shooting gallery.
  24. Bypassed
    Bypassed 23 May 2018 10: 00
    0
    Already wrote on this occasion. in short - if you want to increase combat effectiveness - put the complex on the present, the right chassis - increase stability and patency, effective work on the enemy on the move, on the march.