Military Review
Sign In Register

The Ministry of Defense is planning a large-scale re-equipment of air defense of the Ground Forces

71
In the Armed Forces, starting with 2022, the mass replacement of obsolete air defense systems of the Ground Forces (SV) will begin, News.




The Ministry of Defense has already ordered a research project (R & D), which received the code "Standard". New anti-aircraft systems should be as unified and standardized as possible.

The cost of research was 422 million rubles. The final draft is expected to appear in the 2022 year.

In the course of the modernization program, it is necessary to modernize and merge all air defense systems of the air defense system into a single circuit. That is, the air defense of the troops will be carried out by the totality of all the complexes integrated into one whole.

New air defense systems should receive a single radio-electronic complex, compatible missiles will come into service with the air defense system.

The number of names of anti-aircraft systems in the troops will be significantly reduced. So, Shilka, Tunguska and Thor complexes will be dismissed. The same fate awaits the first modifications of the Buk air defense missile system (up to the Buk-М2, inclusive) and С-300.

The software said ex-chief of the Zenith Missile Forces Alexander Gorkov, the unification of systems is a timely decision that will greatly facilitate the production and operation of rocket weapons, as well as increase the potential of the Ground Forces.
Photos used:
http://www.globallookpress.com
Military Reviewin Yandex News
Military Reviewin Yandex Zen
71 comment
Ad

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, regularly additional information about the special operation in Ukraine, a large amount of information, videos, something that does not fall on the site: https://t.me/topwar_official

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. vvs1978
    vvs1978 3 July 2018 13: 14
    +5
    In my opinion, nonsense
    1. conservative
      conservative 3 July 2018 13: 24
      +10
      In the course of the modernization program, it is necessary to modernize and merge all air defense systems of the air defense system into a single circuit. That is, the air defense of the troops will be carried out by the totality of all the complexes integrated into one whole.


      Tse dream of all the country’s pvoshnikov and not nonsense
      1. MPN
        MPN 3 July 2018 15: 29
        +4
        Quote: conservative
        Tse dream of all the country’s pvoshnikov and not nonsense

        I agree. Already in the airborne airborne centralized control system, all means are combined at their own level and above, without modernization (I believe modernization at the level of control and interaction systems) and bringing to a single air defense system means a deterioration in all its qualities.
    2. Andrey K
      Andrey K 3 July 2018 13: 25
      +19
      Quote: vvs1978
      ... In my opinion, nonsense ...

      And in my opinion an absolutely adequate solution.
      Many systems duplicate each other.
      Why contain such a large range of air defense systems?
      There is a need for long-range air defense systems (more than 100 km.), Medium-range (from 20 to 100 km.), Short-range (10 to 20 km.) And short-range (up to 10 km.) - please, provide.
      And we have three or four analogs in each class of air defense systems.
      1. Alexey RA
        Alexey RA 3 July 2018 13: 47
        +3
        Quote: Andrey K
        There is a need for long-range air defense systems (more than 100 km.), Medium-range (from 20 to 100 km.), Short-range (10 to 20 km.) And short-range (up to 10 km.) - please, provide.

        The range from 50 to 300 km, in principle, can cover one SAM - with different types of missiles.
        1. Sheridan
          Sheridan 3 July 2018 19: 28
          0
          Universal soldiers?
      2. 210ox
        210ox 3 July 2018 13: 53
        +3
        But “Thor” I think you can’t be dismissed.
        Quote: Andrey K
        Quote: vvs1978
        ... In my opinion, nonsense ...

        And in my opinion an absolutely adequate solution.
        Many systems duplicate each other.
        Why contain such a large range of air defense systems?
        There is a need for long-range air defense systems (more than 100 km.), Medium-range (from 20 to 100 km.), Short-range (10 to 20 km.) And short-range (up to 10 km.) - please, provide.
        And we have three or four analogs in each class of air defense systems.
        1. Romario_Argo
          Romario_Argo 3 July 2018 13: 58
          +1
          namely, Tor-M2 with 16 missiles, generally fresh, but in range it already loses the ZRAK Pantsir-SM - missile range 40 km, radar range 75 km.
          1. Sailor
            Sailor 3 July 2018 15: 21
            0
            I read that it was Thor who could fire on the go, but the Shell rests on God on the KAMAZ chassis.
            1. Alexey RA
              Alexey RA 3 July 2018 22: 26
              +1
              Because the "shell" was originally made not for army air defense, but for the country's air defense. And there the main way of working is from pre-prepared positions.
              CSKA, by the way, is likely to require a caterpillar chassis for their "shells".
        2. Sandor Clegane
          Sandor Clegane 3 July 2018 14: 02
          +7
          Quote: 210ox
          But “Thor” I think you can’t be dismissed.

          I mean the first versions of the Tori, the latter will be delivered to the troops, their task is to cover the march and there is no replacement for them yet
          1. Parsec
            Parsec 3 July 2018 14: 44
            0
            Your ideas on air defense tactics are extremely limited.
            1. Sandor Clegane
              Sandor Clegane 3 July 2018 15: 06
              +4
              Quote: Parsec
              Your ideas on air defense tactics are extremely limited.

              Well, expert, enlighten the dark? or just blah blah blah? lol just do not forget that we are talking about military air defense, although this does not matter to you
              1. Parsec
                Parsec 3 July 2018 15: 27
                +1
                To me, like others here, turn to "you."

                Consecrate this to churchmen; with your enlightenment, I think, already late.

                Ask why the military air defense was actually created and how it differs from the object, now VKS.

                To make it easier for you - the cover object and its variability during the hostilities (object geometry, mobility, number of units), the outfit of aviation forces and weapons to destroy the covered object, the effect of the terrain on the radar detection range, the dependence of the destruction range on the target’s flight height, the capabilities of electronic warfare and anti-radar aircraft of the enemy to suppress a single radar and a dispersed group of radar.

                After you answer these questions yourself, come in if the questions remain.
                1. The comment was deleted.
                  1. Parsec
                    Parsec 3 July 2018 17: 36
                    +2
                    Shooting control operator? There is no such thing and never has been. Maybe they served at the regimental pigsty?
                    No, we will not return. For it is said - do not mark the beads.
                    You didn’t answer your questions.
                    1. Kasym
                      Kasym 3 July 2018 18: 01
                      +1
                      Maybe we are talking about the S-350 Vityaz?
                      "The complex will be armed with two modern missiles: 9M100 short-range and 9M96 medium-range. Both missiles are equipped with infrared. GOS and an" intellectual "warhead."
                      "It is worth noting that the missiles of the complex will be super-maneuverable, unlike the S-300 missiles, which will increase the accuracy of hitting the target."
                      But there’s something news on this air defense system. And the complex cannot work on the go. hi
                    2. Sandor Clegane
                      Sandor Clegane 3 July 2018 22: 25
                      +1
                      Quote: Parsec
                      Shooting control operator? There is no such and never was

                      yes you are ARIES !!! it's hard to find another word fool Well, I served and the record in the war record is appropriate, maybe you are too young and not in the subject? exactly the Pepsi generation in the army
                      1. Parsec
                        Parsec 3 July 2018 22: 30
                        0
                        Quote the entry on the military ID.
                  2. Sheridan
                    Sheridan 3 July 2018 19: 34
                    +1
                    The very name of Cabin A (hardware) determines that in the calculation there cannot be a shooting control operator. On the systems RNS, ICS, RPK and moronic SDTs there are operators of these systems and chiefs of calculations (officers). Although this is the story of the country's Air Defense Forces.
                  3. Cossack 471
                    Cossack 471 3 July 2018 19: 49
                    +1
                    S-75 shooting is controlled by a shooter (for example, a division commander or chief of staff) from the "U" cockpit. The personnel of the cockpit “A” do not participate in combat work when firing a target and learns about the results of the battle according to the GHS
                2. PVOSV
                  PVOSV 3 July 2018 20: 32
                  -1
                  sorry you can’t throw minuses on the top of sofa tactics
      3. venik
        venik 3 July 2018 14: 37
        +6
        Quote: Andrey K
        And in my opinion an absolutely adequate solution. Many systems duplicate each other.

        =======
        In my opinion - ALSO !!!! drinks Only if you act LITERALLY !!!! Part to be sold (including and free of charge - to "allies") - albeit at "dumping prices!"
        Part (where large reserves of missiles) - hold .....
        And to the proceeds of “bablosy” - to produce - WHAT IS NECESSARY !!!
        What would you leave?
        - In the segment of "close combat" - "Needles" and "Willow" ..("Needles" before modifications) and "Arrows" - FOR EXPORT !!!!)
        - In the "Small radius" segment - "Thor-M2"and" Carapace "! (To copy off" Thor "- I consider it stupid !!!)
        - In the segment of "military air defense" - "Buk-M3"! (The rest is to “friends” !!! (After the “export modernization” - to Belarus, Kazakhstan, Syria !!!). It is clear - “Father’s” - he will certainly twist his mustache, and he will demand “the most modern”! But, to refuse "freebies", and not just from "freebies", but from VERY and very EFFECTIVE "freebies" - you need to be a "clinical imbalance" ... But "But father" - Nothing "pulls" for this role !!! (He knows very well that "for free" - and mustard - HONEY !!!) [Comrades of Belarusians - please do not be offended !!! You yourself MUCH cool doing things !!!]
        - For "long-range interception" "Antei - 2500", S-300-PMU (1,2); C-400, C-500 !!!
        Well - "somewhere like that !!!" hi
        ------
        This is a personal opinion - whoever wants to - CRET !!!
    3. Mar.Tirah
      Mar.Tirah 3 July 2018 13: 31
      +2
      In the concept of modern wars, in my opinion, it’s the best time, if not belated. The main thing is that the arrival of new equipment for decommissioning is obsolete. Will you shoot at F-16, or F-22 from SHILKA?. And other military equipment is a foreign time for this time we are not threatened by the king of peas / And integration into a single whole is generally necessary. not only between the air defense of the air forces, but also between other branches of the army, air force, and air defense of the country.
    4. Piramidon
      Piramidon 3 July 2018 13: 41
      +3
      Quote: vvs1978
      In my opinion, nonsense

      What, specifically, do you consider "delirium"? Explain.request
      1. cost
        cost 3 July 2018 13: 50
        0
        The number of anti-aircraft systems in the troops is noticeably reduced. So, the Shilka, Tunguska and Tor complexes will be dismissed. The same fate awaits the first modifications of the Buk air defense system (up to and including Buk-M2) and the S-300.

        Apparently this.
        1. Piramidon
          Piramidon 3 July 2018 13: 57
          +1
          Quote: Rich
          Apparently this.

          Yeah, he believes that tomorrow everything will be handed over to the scrap metal, without waiting for new arrivals. Dima, I always trudge from the local all-crawler. hi
          1. spektr9
            spektr9 3 July 2018 16: 02
            +1
            Tomorrow all of the above will be deposited, and there the rain and wind will turn it all into scrap metal, but there will not be enough money for a new one, well, as usual ....
      2. vvs1978
        vvs1978 3 July 2018 21: 53
        0
        an order for TORA until 2025, plowing in three shifts, why remove them, this is the best car in its class, more or less tested without children's flaws (with the exception of the new M2)
  2. Tusv
    Tusv 3 July 2018 13: 19
    +3
    Thor. The same fate awaits the first modifications of the Buk air defense system (up to and including Buk-M2) and the S-300.

    Just adopted the Arctic Thor and retired? Is the C300 B4 too? Wiseacres fool Air defense expensive toy
    1. bouncyhunter
      bouncyhunter 3 July 2018 13: 24
      +2
      So I have the same questions ... Or they don’t finish something with us, or ... what
      1. Tusv
        Tusv 3 July 2018 13: 39
        +1
        Quote: bouncyhunter
        Or they don’t finish something to us, or ...

        They will let them steal, they will shoot and they will take everything away. It’s better to shoot right away
      2. Piramidon
        Piramidon 3 July 2018 14: 03
        +1
        Quote: bouncyhunter
        Or they don’t finish something to us, or ...

        No other conspiracy against VO users lol
    2. conservative
      conservative 3 July 2018 13: 24
      0
      yes there is modernization - a couple of new blocks and antennas on the old chassis
    3. Vladimir 5
      Vladimir 5 3 July 2018 13: 24
      +2
      The task of change is to bring all the air defense systems into a single network-centric control, which has long been necessary to accomplish. Outdated means will still serve, but as they are replaced, with connection to the “single air defense field”.
      1. Tusv
        Tusv 3 July 2018 13: 36
        +2
        Quote: Vladimir 5
        The task of change is to reduce all air defense systems into a single network-centric control, which has long been necessary to accomplish.

        And before, what, through Alpha Centaurs, was everything?
        1. Vladimir 5
          Vladimir 5 3 July 2018 13: 50
          +1
          Well, yes, on the radio / phone reports, orders ..
          1. Tusv
            Tusv 3 July 2018 14: 04
            0
            Quote: Vladimir 5
            Well, yes, on the radio / phone reports, orders ..

            Alas, mankind has not yet grown to quantum communication. Everything else cables yes radio hi
    4. Piramidon
      Piramidon 3 July 2018 13: 44
      0
      Quote: Tusv
      Just adopted the Arctic Thor and retired? Is the C300 B4 too?

      Yeah, still say - "in the trash." IN DEVELOPMENT!
      1. Sandor Clegane
        Sandor Clegane 3 July 2018 14: 07
        +2
        Quote: Piramidon
        Yeah, still say - "in the trash"

        people for this and wrote that it’s a sin to write off such a technique! love or is it hard for you to understand?
        Quote: Piramidon
        IN DEVELOPMENT!

        belay what revision ?? the technique works well and there’s nothing to modify there !! no one is going to write it off !!! negative
        1. Piramidon
          Piramidon 3 July 2018 14: 13
          0
          Quote: Sandor Clegane
          Quote: Piramidon
          Yeah, still say - "in the trash"

          people for this and wrote that it’s a sin to write off such a technique! love or is it hard for you to understand?
          Quote: Piramidon
          IN DEVELOPMENT!

          belay what revision ?? the technique works well and there’s nothing to modify there !! no one is going to write it off !!! negative

          If the technique works clearly, this does not mean that it cannot and should not be modified. And at the expense of cancellation, this is the same "people" suggested, not me.
    5. Rakti-kali
      Rakti-kali 3 July 2018 13: 47
      0
      Quote: Tusv
      Just adopted the Arctic Thor and retired? Is the C300 B4 too? Wise guys air defense an expensive toy


      The same fate awaits first modifications SAM Buk (up to Buk-M2 inclusive) and S-300.

      For alarmists highlighted the main thing.
      1. Tusv
        Tusv 3 July 2018 13: 59
        0
        Quote: Rakti-Kali
        For alarmists highlighted the main thing.

        And you did not carefully read my post. S300V4 is a military analogue of S400. Its scrap? Let’s free some, so they’ll slaughter all the air defense, because it’s tired hi
        1. Piramidon
          Piramidon 3 July 2018 14: 22
          +1
          Quote: Tusv
          Its scrap? Let’s free some, so they’ll slaughter all the air defense, because it’s tired


          Where is it said that it’s scrapped? REPLACEMENT and MODERNIZATION, Mr. alarmist.
          1. Tusv
            Tusv 3 July 2018 14: 39
            +2
            Quote: Piramidon
            Where is it said that it’s scrapped? REPLACEMENT and MODERNIZATION, Mr. alarmist.

            Black and white
            So, the Shilka, Tunguska and Tor complexes will be dismissed. The same fate awaits the first modifications of the Buk air defense system (up to and including Buk-M2) and the S-300.

            About Shilka, Tunguska and Buk to M3. I agree. And what about the latest modifications of Tor and C300? And yes. 422 million rubles. You and air defense will not get. This is the cost of a summer house in the outskirts of Rublevka for the poor official who proposed this shnyaga hi
            1. Rakti-kali
              Rakti-kali 3 July 2018 19: 19
              +1
              Quote: Tusv
              А latest modifications Thor and C300 for what?

              Do you have problems with the perception of objective reality or with an understanding of the Russian language?
              The article is written in black in Russian
              fate awaits first modifications SAM

              What is incomprehensible?
      2. Romario_Argo
        Romario_Argo 3 July 2018 14: 02
        +2
        most likely they will leave only these air defense systems: Buk-M3, S-300V4, Shell-SM, Tor-M2, Pine
    6. Sandor Clegane
      Sandor Clegane 3 July 2018 14: 05
      +3
      Quote: Tusv
      Just adopted the Arctic Thor and retired? Is the C300 B4 too?

      only old versions will be removed, new (modern) will continue to serve
    7. scientist
      scientist 3 July 2018 15: 11
      +2
      Quote: Tusv
      Just adopted the Arctic Thor and retired?
      The cost of research
      amounted to 422 million rubles. The final version of the project is expected to appear in 2022.
      After 5 years, they will only finish research. Another 5 years will be spent on OCD testing and refinement. After 2, 3 years of military tests, modernization will be required as usual. Only then can the Torahs be decommissioned, and even then if the promising air defense system has higher characteristics.
      Unification is a great idea in terms of improving the operational qualities of weapons. But you still need to think well that a uniform radar field and typical guidance systems do not make life easier for the enemy when creating electronic warfare systems.
      1. rocket757
        rocket757 3 July 2018 15: 51
        +1
        Unification is a dream of Zampotech, and finally any supplier in peacetime even more so!
        In a special time, any commander who dreams Schaub had a lot of things and different things, for all occasions!
        An article, an assumption or a projection of someone's Wishlist! How will it be? And FIG knows!
  3. reality
    reality 3 July 2018 13: 21
    +3
    The stated goals are good and not negotiable. But the funds chosen are strange. To clean Buk and Thor - isn't it too early? How long does the industry manage to rivet the same amount of s-500? And the S-300 seems to be generally relevant. The fact that Shilka will be replaced by shells is correct, but, again, at a price, how is it?
    Who understands - explain what they change for, and how much will it all cost?
    1. Tusv
      Tusv 3 July 2018 13: 26
      0
      Quote: reality
      Who understands - explain what they change for, and how much will it all cost?

      The entire budget of our lintrophs: Poland, Ukraine, the Baltics and Poland combined with all their debts and investments to the fifth degree
      1. Sanichsan
        Sanichsan 3 July 2018 13: 54
        +1
        Quote: Tusv
        The entire budget of our lintrophs: Poland, Ukraine, the Baltic and Poland

        And - in the world there are a lot of lousy things - politicians, journalists, terrorists, politicians ...
        B - you have already called politicians.
        And - they’re just the most lousy!
        laughing
    2. Piramidon
      Piramidon 3 July 2018 13: 52
      +2
      Quote: reality
      To clean Buk and Thor - isn't it too early?

      You are like a small child. No need to sow panic and assume that right tomorrow all the old complexes, without waiting for new ones, will be in the landfill. First time you hear about modernization? Everything is done by the ROTATION method. New arrives - old write off (or upgrade)
    3. Piramidon
      Piramidon 4 July 2018 08: 28
      +1
      Quote: reality
      To clean Buk and Thor - isn't it too early?

      Why are you tearing your hair ahead of time? What will they start writing off tomorrow? Read carefully:
      starting in 2022, a massive replacement outdated air defense systems

      Pay attention to the word REPLACEMENT. That is, until a new one arrives, the old will not be written off. And further:
      The final version of the project is expected to appear in 2022.

      A PROJECT OPTION (not a final project) will appear (possibly) in 4 years and until it comes to its implementation, OUTDATED systems by themselves will work out all the terms of operation.
  4. Andryukha G
    Andryukha G 3 July 2018 13: 34
    0
    There is nothing impossible to make a single complex - to protect troops on the march and stationary to protect the borders, all this of course is now, but the standardization of these two systems will save and not serve a bunch of different systems.
    1. 9PA
      9PA 3 July 2018 13: 41
      0
      And if you automate the tunguska to the level of a drone? + Integration + Advanced target designation and algorithms (maybe with artificial intelligence). Excellent weapon against low-speed low-flying objects, drones there, axes, helicopters
    2. Tusv
      Tusv 3 July 2018 13: 45
      0
      Quote: Andryukha G
      but standardizing these two systems will save and not serve a bunch of different systems.

      Yeah, like a Yankee. Very cheap Standard Missile to sink ships, shoot down satellites, ballistic and cruise missiles, planes and small drones. The states have money to fig. We do not have
  5. Semurg
    Semurg 3 July 2018 13: 40
    +1
    Hurray and decommissioned complexes will be poked and driven to us.
    1. spektr9
      spektr9 3 July 2018 16: 04
      0
      Customize - yes, podshamanit - this is for you
  6. K-50
    K-50 3 July 2018 13: 42
    +1
    the Shilka, Tunguska and Tor complexes will be dismissed. The same fate awaits the first modifications of the Buk air defense system (up to and including Buk-M2) and the S-300.

    Maybe for sale? what
    Someone doesn’t even have one, they’ll tear it off “with hands”.
    1. spektr9
      spektr9 3 July 2018 16: 05
      0
      What they can certainly sell, is how to give a drink
  7. APASUS
    APASUS 3 July 2018 18: 55
    0
    It’s strange for us that it’s not modernization that’s sending to retirement. I understand when Tunguska, Tor and Shilka will be replaced by another complex, more modern. What is not news is like delirium
    1. Cossack 471
      Cossack 471 3 July 2018 19: 56
      0
      Nothing can be written off or destroyed. to coat with solid oil and on HH (long-term storage) In the war, everything will come in handy and the "partisans" are for this purpose
      1. APASUS
        APASUS 3 July 2018 20: 02
        0
        Whoever is against this technology also has export potential. They will take it to a country like Syria
  8. The comment was deleted.
  9. Dagon
    Dagon 3 July 2018 22: 11
    0
    About a month ago, on the same portal, there was an article that “Dome” was already doing this research in full swing, so where is the truth? R&D already performed or not?
    1. Dart2027
      Dart2027 3 July 2018 22: 31
      0
      Quote: Dagon
      R&D already performed or not?

      The article says
      Ministry of Defence already ordered research work (NIR), received the code "Standard". New anti-aircraft systems should be as unified and standardized as possible.
  10. nikoliski
    nikoliski 3 July 2018 22: 24
    -1
    Is the arrow-arrow (not to be confused with MANPADS of the same name) and the wasp finally replaced with shells?
  11. egsp
    egsp 3 July 2018 22: 33
    +1
    Everything will be fine. And Tor-M2, and Buk-M3, and S-300V4 will be.
  12. Hiller
    Hiller 3 July 2018 23: 06
    0
    A good idea. Unification: Reduce reaction time. Personalization of responsibility. Strengthening interaction. To prevent the second rust on Red Square and not overslept in difficult times ... Well, ease technical issues with logistics))))
  13. nemo778
    nemo778 3 July 2018 23: 22
    0
    Quote: 9PA
    And if you automate the tunguska to the level of a drone? + Integration + Advanced target designation and algorithms (maybe with artificial intelligence). Excellent weapon against low-speed low-flying objects, drones there, axes, helicopters

    The idea ..... Good ...! And why .... If they are replaced, “PantsirS1, C2”, “Tor-M2, Buk-M3” The “Pantsir” has excellent cannon armament, just for small rubbish ......! A rocket ... expensive ...! Here is the chassis, for the "Shell" change ...... This is .......... YES !!!!!! And no one is going to write off the above complexes !!! But only their old versions! And “Shilke” “Tunguske”, it’s high time to retire ... to Syria! Although ... about the "Tunguska", I got excited .. !!!! hi
  14. Olegovi4
    Olegovi4 4 July 2018 12: 53
    0
    Shilki and tunkuski passion how well guns on the earth work