"Pantsir-SM" and its capabilities

74
In the framework of the fifth international military-technical forum "Army-2019", the Russian and foreign public for the first time openly showed the new Russian Pantsir-SM anti-aircraft missile-gun complex, which is a modernized version of the Pantsir-С1 complex. The development of a deeply modernized version of the Pantsir-С1 complex, which was tested by the Russian military in real combat conditions in Syria, will be fully completed in 2021 year. Russian Minister of Defense Sergei Shoigu told this to 19 journalists on June 2019.


ZRPK "Shell-SM" at the forum "Army-2019", photo: Tula service News




“Pantsir-SM” among the novelties of the forum “Army-2019”


During the first two days of the fifth military-technical forum “Army”, which is traditionally held in the Moscow region, more than 50 thousands of representatives of Russian defense industry enterprises, government customers, scientists and experts have already participated in it. Also 120 delegations from other countries arrived at the forum. All of them were able to look both at the already well-known models and systems of armaments and military equipment, as well as at the novelties of the Russian defense industry, among which anti-aircraft missile systems always stand out.

One of the major innovations demonstrated on the first two days of the Army-2019 forum, which opened its doors on 25 June, was the modern V-GAZ and Pantsir-SM C-350 air defense systems. According to the Minister of Defense, work on the creation of a new anti-aircraft missile system C-350 "Vityaz" with increased fire capabilities, which should replace the C-300 complexes, will be completed in 2019 year. At the same time, the new Pantsir-SM air defense systems will be able to provide short-range defense of military and civilian targets, as well as to cover the promising Russian long-range air defense systems, which include Prometheus C-500 air defense systems.


ZRPK "Pantsir-С1" in action


"Pantsir-SM" and its combat capabilities


The first Pantsir-SM complexes were made back in 2017, then the first photos of the new Russian air defense system appeared on the network, which immediately became “viral”. Special attention of experts was attracted then to the chassis for the new combat vehicle, which was chosen as an armored multipurpose vehicle K-53958 "Tornado". In April of this year, it was reported that the Russian Aerospace Forces conducted the first tests of the new version of the Pantsir. About this in the broadcast of the radio station "Echo of Moscow" Russian journalists told Lieutenant-General Yuri Grekhov, who occupies the post of deputy commander of the Russian Aerospace Forces. According to the general, tests of the Pantsir-SM air defense system were conducted as part of military exercises, while the new development of Tula gunsmiths from the KBP (Instrument Design Bureau) proved its effectiveness even against ultra-small targets, which include modern unmanned aerial vehicles and small quadcopters . According to Yury Grekhov, the complex confirmed its high efficiency, hitting all small-sized air targets. This result deserves respect, since small modern UAVs are a very difficult goal for air defense systems.

According to RIA Novosti, the new Russian air defense missile system will receive a modern updated radar based on a phased array with an active emitter, Viktor Murakhovsky, editor-in-chief of Arsenal of the Fatherland magazine, told reporters about this. Compared with the previous version of the “Shell-S1”, the new complex will significantly increase its range of detection targets, as well as their selection and noise immunity parameters. In addition, the developers from Tula promised to equip the complex with a new anti-aircraft missile, which has greater flight speed and better tolerance of overload.


"Pantsir-SM"


Earlier in the press, information appeared that the new Russian ZRPK Pantsir-SM would receive a new anti-aircraft missile, which has twice the maximum maximum flight speed than the standard Pantsir-S1 munition of the 57-6 anti-aircraft missile - approximately 3000 m / s against 1300 m / s. At the same time, the maximum range of sighting of the complex increases to 40 kilometers, which brings it closer to combat capabilities to medium-range air defense missile systems, for example, to the Russian Buk air defense system. The radius of detection of air targets will increase from 36 to 75 kilometers. At the stand, which was presented at the Army-2019 forum, it was noted that the complex is able to hit targets at a distance of 40 kilometers, at an altitude of 15 kilometers. At the same time, the speed of the targets hit should not exceed 2000 m / s.

Perhaps the complex will be presented in two versions - fully missile and cannon-rocket. In the first case, Pantsir-SM will immediately receive 24 anti-aircraft missiles, in the second - 12 missiles. In addition, the developers are considering the possibility of creating small anti-aircraft guided missiles designed to hit small air targets - drones and commercial quadrocopters, which have recently been often used by terrorists, as well as mortar mines and MLRS shells. The use of small rockets will allow them to be installed in a pack of 4 in a launch cell. At the Army-2019 forum, a complex was presented in a standard missile-gun design - 12 missiles and two 30-mm rapid-fire automatic anti-aircraft guns. The 30-mm guns of the complex can be used to combat various air targets at a distance of up to 4000 meters, as well as to fire at ground targets, including lightly armored enemy vehicles - armored personnel carriers, armored personnel carriers, infantry fighting vehicles.

Chariot for "Pantsir-SM"


The chariot for the new Pantsir was again the chassis of the KamAZ truck, but this time a special multi-purpose chassis with an armored cab was chosen. The production of protected cars in Naberezhnye Chelny is carried out by the company JSC "Remdizel", specializing in the creation and production of automotive vehicles for special purposes. The K-53958 protected chassis from the Tornado car family with the wheel formula 8 x8 was chosen as the chassis for the Pantyr-SM.


Multi-purpose protected chassis K-53958 "Tornado"


The multipurpose chassis is designed to install and transport a variety of modern weapons systems and military equipment, as well as special equipment, towing trailers. The wheel formula, tire dimension, ground clearance in 395 mm and the power of the diesel engine (441 kW or 600 hp) allow Tornado-family cars to effectively manifest themselves on all types of roads and terrain. The design of the car from Naberezhnye Chelny makes it easy to transport loads weighing up to 20 tons, developing a maximum speed on the highway up to 100 km / h, while the power reserve is at least 1000 kilometers.

The chassis itself greatly expands the possibilities of using the Pantsir-SM ZRPK in various types of terrain. A car can easily cross the ford to a depth of 1,5 meters without prior preparation or to a 1,8 meter with preparation. The angle of climb is, according to the developers, not less than 30 degrees, the height of the vertical wall to be overcome is 0,6 meters. It will not stop the new Pantsir-SM based on the K-53958 multipurpose chassis and a moat less than 1,4 wide.


Multi-purpose protected chassis K-53958 "Tornado"


A distinctive feature of the K-53958 "Tornado" manufactured by Remdiesel is also an independent suspension with hydro-pneumatic supports, which provides the car with high mobility characteristics and good payload, which for the unarmored version comes to 25 tons. In this case, the total mass of the four-axle vehicle can reach 42 tons. The presence of an independent suspension with hydropneumatic supports allows the car to forcibly and automatically change the characteristics of the amount of ground clearance and suspension stiffness. Such a decision by engineers from Naberezhnye Chelny ensures that the car effectively damps vibrations from road irregularities and high smoothness, which is very important for the chassis used to install various weapon systems.

The advantages of this platform also include a fully armored and protected cabin with a bonnet layout, designed for three passengers. According to representatives of the Chelny enterprise, the reservation was made according to the GOST 6 class, that is, it provides all-round protection for the crew and equipment against 7,62-mm ammunition with an armor-piercing incendiary bullet B-32 of the SVD sniper rifle -7,62). In addition, the manufacturer guarantees the protection of the crew from the blast under the wheel on a mine or a land mine with a capacity of up to two kilograms of TNT.
74 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +1
    28 June 2019 05: 38
    Not quite clear addiction to guns. In a real combat situation, they didn’t bring down anything ...
    1. +3
      28 June 2019 05: 56
      They didn’t bring down - because it didn’t reach them.
      Now, with the advent of remotely detonated shells, their effectiveness will increase dramatically against UAVs and barrage of ammunition.
      1. +4
        28 June 2019 06: 45
        Quote: riwas
        Now, with the advent of remotely detonated shells

        And in this caliber (30 mm) is this opportunity already implemented? Didn't hear, maybe missed the news?
        1. +14
          28 June 2019 07: 19
          "In Russia, 30-mm projectiles with remote detonation on the trajectory were developed by the Moscow-based NPO Pribor. Unlike the inductive system used by Rheinmetall, Russian projectiles use a system for initiating remote detonation using a laser beam. Ammunition of this type will be tested in 2019. and in the future should be included in the ammunition of the latest combat vehicles of the Russian army. "
          https://topwar.ru/154649-zakat-jery-30-mm-avtomaticheskih-pushek-ili-novyj-jetap-razvitija.html

          "State tests of 30 mm guided detonation ammunition will begin in the second half of 2019. Vladimir Lepin, General Director of Tekhmash Concern, told reporters at the Army-2019 forum."
          https://news.rambler.ru/weapon/42392969-gosispytaniya-novyh-boepripasov-s-upravlyaemym-podryvom-nachnutsya-vo-vtoroy-polovine-2019-g/
          1. +1
            28 June 2019 09: 22
            Thank you, good news. good hi
        2. 0
          12 June 2020 11: 46
          in the west, there have long been shells with programmable detonation. the affected area is set by a range of 10-40 meters from the target, and the density of the affected area is determined by the mass and number of fragments (metal rods 1-3 grams). Such ammunition is the most effective means to destroy small-sized UAVs, missiles, and so on.
    2. +4
      28 June 2019 07: 25
      Why trawl as many as 8 axles if the total mass is 44 tons? There are 4 enough for the eyes.
      1. +1
        28 June 2019 11: 34
        standard trawl
        https://www.isk-msk.ru/images/gallery/perevozka-voennojj-tekhniki/perevozka-tekhniki_04.jpg
        1. -1
          29 June 2019 21: 12
          Horseradish se standard, 8 axes, I see that the brand of special trailer.
    3. +3
      28 June 2019 08: 04
      Quote: Sahalinets
      Not quite clear addiction to guns.
      Therefore, two options are proposed, missile-cannon and missile. Closer to the front line there is an opportunity to fight off the enemy, and to cover other air defense systems, a higher density of missile weapons is needed.
      1. +1
        28 June 2019 08: 29
        Quote: Vladimir61
        Therefore, two options are proposed, missile-cannon and missile. Closer to the front there the ability to fight off the enemy,

        hmm .. if the shell gets into a position requiring "fight back" with guns from the enemy, then consider the loss of one.
        so it’s possible to attach guns to the radar, infantry will do, and it will continue to work in salvo.
        1. +1
          29 June 2019 10: 30
          Quote: Maki Avellevich
          Quote: Vladimir61
          Therefore, two options are proposed, missile-cannon and missile. Closer to the front there the ability to fight off the enemy,

          hmm .. if the shell gets into a position requiring "fight back" with guns from the enemy, then consider the loss of one.
          so it’s possible to attach guns to the radar, infantry will do, and it will continue to work in salvo.

          at war, unfortunately, it can’t do without losses, but if there are guns there is a chance to fight back or at least sell your life for more
        2. 0
          18 July 2019 15: 25
          There in Syria, the barmalei let the UAV out of a piece of plywood with a load of kilo TNT. Here on them from the gun it is, the missile is clearly bust.
          1. 0
            29 July 2019 14: 13
            on the video, he didn’t try to shoot guns, it seems that he didn’t see goals at all
      2. +1
        28 June 2019 14: 29
        Quote: Vladimir61
        Closer to the front line

        These are not machines that are "closer to the front line"
        1. +1
          28 June 2019 18: 35
          Quote: Spade
          These are not machines that are "closer to the front line"

          It was meant that the conditions for using this type of weapon to cover various objects, for example, our bases in Syria and stationary objects somewhere near Penza, vary greatly.
          I respect your professional comments, but this does not mean that in this case, your opinion is categorically correct!
      3. +1
        29 June 2019 05: 23
        Quote: Vladimir61
        Closer to the front line there is an opportunity to fight off the enemy, and to cover other air defense systems, a higher density of missile weapons is needed.

        Without guns it’s somehow uncomfortable. It is as if the cartridges had run out to the machine gun, but the gun was not at hand.
    4. 0
      2 July 2019 12: 30
      Very interesting statement of the question. Something reminds. So they didn’t bring down anything, but tried and the efficiency was 0? Or was it not the task to shoot down precisely from the guns and used other weapons?
      Guns are very cheap. They have a wide variety of ammunition and many times more ammunition. They have their own capabilities.
    5. 0
      26 July 2020 19: 27
      This is not an addiction, but a necessity. If you do not understand the difference and purpose of the complexes zrk armor-cm and zrpk carapace-c1, with so many materials about them on the Internet, then there is no point in explaining.
  2. -1
    28 June 2019 07: 08
    "Pantsir-SM" and its capabilities

    Even aesthetically good.
    It is felt that the file over the Shell-S worked notably.
    As the saying goes - in a good way to you Shell-SM.
    1. +1
      29 June 2019 05: 25
      Quote: lucul
      "Pantsir-SM" and its capabilities

      Even aesthetically good.
      It is felt that the file over the Shell-S worked notably.
      As the saying goes - in a good way to you Shell-SM.

      On a tornado, the carapace looks brutal - you can see right away - a combat vehicle. On a simple KamAZ, it looked like a saddle on a cow.
      1. 0
        28 July 2019 23: 22
        Quote: Gritsa
        On a simple KamAZ, it looked like a saddle on a cow.

        Duc, the "simple" KamAZ at that time was almost the only chassis option for the "Pantsir", because the BAZ was then dying, and then - only "batskin devices" from MZKT. Well, for some time the issue was resolved, but now it's time to "change the horse" (this is not counting the main weapon upgrade).
        1. 0
          26 July 2020 19: 57
          KAMAZ-6560, GM352M1E, BAZ-6309 Voshchina-1, MAN-SX45, MZKT-7930, DT-30PM, KAMAZ-53958.
  3. +3
    28 June 2019 07: 30
    In my opinion, it is necessary to implement an armored cabin to control the Pantsir itself. Anti radar missiles with HE warhead. You need a booking comparable to the cab of the truck. And to give the opportunity to include in the battery the Carapace or 57mm gun or, conversely, something like "Sosna-U" with the control of the Carapace, tk. he has a radar. So you can pick up weapons from reality.
    1. 0
      29 June 2019 11: 24
      IMHO If Sosne-u does not have enough radar, then there is no need to produce it in this form. Put the same Shell on the tracked chassis.
      1. +1
        29 June 2019 12: 58
        Why? A passive system, a thermal imager found a target ... launched a rocket .... I think, on the contrary, you need to make Pine on a commercial chassis like Kamaz 6x6 ... and attach it to armor for amplification. And the Carapace as a command vehicle of the command center will issue.
        1. 0
          29 June 2019 13: 09
          And what is the plus of this separation of duties?
          After all, the shell also has an optical channel. Why then do we need Pine too?
          The cuirass is a universal machine that detects targets and shoots, and in addition it also has cannon weapons and mates with higher command posts ...
          About the 57 mm artillery, I still understand this, but the Pine in the company of the Shell, in my opinion, is completely superfluous.
          1. +1
            29 June 2019 13: 23
            I think if you look at the price of Carapace and pine, there will be a big difference ... And this is superfluous BK and PU. And extra "eyes"
            1. 0
              29 June 2019 13: 44
              I agree about the price.
              But the performance characteristics are different, including in terms of range and altitude. Another question is, can the Pantsir, in principle, issue target designation to external devices? After all, its radar and MSA are calculated for a certain number of targets and for its own ammunition. Will he be able to "count" for two?
              1. 0
                2 July 2019 12: 48
                But calculation is not required from him, just detection and tracking of the target, and Pine will conduct the calculation for his capabilities. Well, but in principle, nothing prevents the Shell from calculating data for the Pine. After all, it was written that it was possible to use different PUs and ammunition. So the calculation can be carried out for different types of missiles at the same time. As far as I understand. The only thing that will have to download data on the attached combat unit.
                And one moment. What we are talking about is generally irrelevant. If due to some reasons, and they are extremely doubtful, it is not possible to implement this now, then when setting the implementation task, this will be done as soon as possible and with minimal investment.
                I personally really like the idea of ​​Zaurbek. Now there are a very large number of different aircraft. And it is not always wise to spend an expensive rocket on a target many times less important than the one for which the rocket is intended. Or such a missile is not intended to hit any targets, or it’s worse. To have a cheaper medium in itself means to ensure its massiveness. And having ammunition cheaper and more suitable for other purposes is generally great.
                1. 0
                  2 July 2019 13: 22
                  And it is not always wise to spend an expensive rocket on a target many times less important than the one for which the rocket is intended.

                  But for this, you can simply put the rocket cheaper on the Shell ... 4 for example in the container. Why fence a garden with Pine and external target designation?
                  To have a cheaper medium in itself means to ensure its mass

                  And the dependence on external target designation .. Or the minimum reach in range and altitude without it.

                  But yes, I agree that the idea is certainly interesting. But as for me it’s not practical.
                  1. 0
                    2 July 2019 14: 02
                    As an option - of course, make the Shell more universal. But this will not always work. For example, the shell covers the sky, the near radius of the attack of fighters or cruise missiles. Arming it partially against drones is most likely not very logical, because even in its goals it can work out the entire BC. And there it will not be up to economy or universality, but to knock it out at all costs. A simpler technique can be used for simpler tasks, for more complex ones, in this case, it still does not fit.
                    With the destruction of a single-shell spirit we immediately lose all protection. Or we put the battery of the Shell. That translates into a lot of money and all the same accessibility. And as an option, the same 1-2 Shells and 6 Pines attached to them, which are incomparably cheaper.
                    Quote: alexmach
                    And the dependence on external target designation .. Or the minimum reach in range and altitude without it.

                    Yes, of course. But, roughly speaking, this is how many complexes work. Shore, S-300, S-400, where the control and / or detection system are located in separate blocks. I understand that this is not quite the same, but in general.
                    1. 0
                      2 July 2019 15: 57
                      With the destruction of a single-shell spirit we immediately lose all protection. Or we put the battery of the Shell.

                      Something seems to me that for a reliable cover of something, one or two shells will not be enough.
                      But, roughly speaking, this is how many complexes work. Shore, S-300, S-400, where the control and / or detection system is placed in separate blocks

                      And in quite the opposite way, from the Soviet times, military air defense of near radius was designed. Where the means of detection and guidance and fire destruction were located on the same chassis and each machine was a full-fledged functional combat unit, although it could also work under the control of a common command post. Like Buk, Tunguzka, the same Shell and Thor. Actually, my objections come from here - you are trying to bring an approach from a distant into the near radius. I'm not sure that this is justified.
                      1. 0
                        2 July 2019 16: 09
                        But such an approach is applied everywhere and the further the more. Network-centric communications. What used to be available only to expensive, large and complex complexes is now becoming available even many times smaller.
                        Of course, such funds should be full-fledged. The point is that in some situations, it would probably be nice if a more perfect tool could transfer goals and data to a slave tool, which would enhance its capabilities or expand them. Pine is just an example because of the similarity of tasks and lower prices.
                      2. 0
                        2 July 2019 16: 12
                        so that a more perfect means could transmit goals and data to the slave means,

                        And as a part of the Shell battery, by the way, there is such a tool. Only this is not the Shell itself, but its command vehicle.
                      3. 0
                        2 July 2019 16: 23
                        Unfortunately, I did not hear about this, I read that as part of the battery, one of the Shell complexes takes on the role of a command machine.
                      4. 0
                        2 July 2019 17: 12
                        Radar 1RL123
                        Oh .. and I, in turn, have not heard that the Shell could perform the functions of a battery command machine. Very interesting.
                      5. 0
                        2 July 2019 17: 45
                        Quote: alexmach
                        Radar 1RL123

                        This is a radar, not a command post.

                        "Up to 6 Pantsir-C1 machines can work together via a digital communication network in different modes.

                        Single combat operations: all actions, from detecting a target to its interception, are completely carried out by a single complex without involving other means.
                        Fighting as part of the battery: one "Shell-C1" works as a combat vehicle and at the same time as a command post. From 3 to 5 "Shell" can be connected to it and receive target designation for the subsequent execution of the task.
                        Combat operations with the command post: the command post sends target designations to the “Shell-C1” installations for the subsequent execution of the task.
                        Combat operations as part of a battery with a command post and an early warning radar (own early warning radar, highly mobile 1RL123): the command post receives the air situation from the early warning radar and sends target designations to the Pantsir-C1 installation for the subsequent task. "
                      6. +1
                        2 July 2019 17: 50
                        This is a radar, not a command post.

                        There is a command post and radar for detecting low-flying targets. Another question is whether there are batteries of this composition in the troops. The shells then basically cover the positions of the S-400 and are accordingly controlled from their command posts.

                        But yes, it turns out that my assumption of redundancy for the Shell of control of other anti-aircraft weapons was incorrect. He already turns out to be able to.
        2. 0
          2 July 2019 12: 52
          I have another question. Pine on a commercial chassis, why then is the shell not on it? It would be much cheaper than now. I will answer myself - because the Shell is nevertheless a fairly short-range system and anything is possible. But the Pine is even closer and with it everything else is possible. On its chassis, Pine can easily have such a reservation as needed and, accordingly, protect systems and crew. And if you use it ONLY to strengthen the same Shell, then the system itself must be made simpler and cheaper.
          1. 0
            2 July 2019 13: 28
            And what shell is on what chassis? Mustang8x8 ... aka Kamaz 8x8 ... there are 6x6 .. and Typhoon K is 8x8 and 6x6. (This is already a special chassis)
            1. 0
              2 July 2019 14: 03
              The SM shell is the one in the article on a special chassis.
              1. 0
                2 July 2019 14: 11
                And even this is a chassis on civilian units and with a normal resource. And you can leave without artillery and Mustang.
                1. 0
                  2 July 2019 16: 11
                  It’s possible as you wish, I’m just saying that the Pine caterpillar chassis is much simpler and cheaper to book under the necessary ones. And if you use it on an unarmored chassis, then the tasks should be appropriate.
                  1. 0
                    2 July 2019 16: 42
                    Yes, but the resource and the transfer of trawls .... One does not replace the other.
      2. 0
        29 June 2019 13: 10
        Quote: alexmach
        IMHO If Sosne-u does not have enough radar, then there is no need to produce it in this form. Put the same Shell on the tracked chassis.

        ======
        And this, what do you think ???


        Simply "Pine" - at times CHEAPER !!!
        1. 0
          29 June 2019 13: 14
          And this, what do you think ???

          The exhibition copy on the caterpillar chassis was not supplied to the troops.
          Simply "Pine" - at times CHEAPER !!!

          Cheaper - yes. In addition, it is much easier and easier to transport. This is clear. I do not dispute its need for existence, but in the same battery with the Shell, I don’t quite understand why it is needed.
          1. 0
            30 July 2019 18: 37
            In one battery, it will not stand with the Shell. Shell for object defense. That is, he came and sits, guards the airport / factory / headquarters. And the pines will cover the tanks and soldiers in the trenches. They were created for completely different purposes.
            Well, beech can issue target designation to pines, which were created to cover troops. Why drag in shells here as well?
            1. 0
              30 July 2019 21: 41
              In one battery, it will not stand with the Shell

              Well, comrade justifies that there is a sense in destroying.
              Well, beech can issue target designation to pines, which were created to cover troops.

              The same question about beeches - do they know how to indicate target designation?
              Shell for object defense

              Firstly, this division is purely volitional-voluntaristic. Secondly, what is good for military air defense should work in the facility ... what prevents it from saturating with its deshovymi means?
              1. 0
                31 July 2019 00: 35
                There are different requirements for object defense and for covering troops. Just look at the pieces of equipment. Air defense for covering troops is almost always done on a tracked chassis so that they can accompany tanks and infantry fighting vehicles on an off-road march. Where they will fight, there will be no whole roads (but in peacetime you will have to carry them on a trailer). At the same time, complexes for object defense are usually made on a wheeled chassis. For they will reach the goal along prepared roads.
                Military air defense has higher survivability requirements. For this reason, each beech launcher itself can locate and direct missiles. And at S-300V, each launcher is equipped with guidance radars.
                That is, if the objective defense is lower than the requirement, then why use more complex systems?
                The same shells could initially be made easier. Since they will most likely be used in conjunction with longer-range air defense systems that can detect targets, the shells could use a simplified radar only for guidance.
                1. 0
                  31 July 2019 11: 46
                  For object defense and for covering troops, different requirements

                  No, not always
                  tracked chassis and armor are just ergonomics. The same shell can be placed on the tracked chassis.
                  High requirements for survivability - Well, firstly, let's look at the same Shell - it is also able to work both independently and under the control of an external command center. And this idea is correct both for the Objective and for the military air defense, perhaps it really is used in the military air defense to a greater extent, but it will not be superfluous in the object. The use of separate means of guidance is not only survivability, but also channel in goals.
                  1. 0
                    31 July 2019 13: 05
                    What is the point of putting it on a tracked chassis if after each bump it will have to be turned over after falling on its side? With each shell also carry a crane for this purpose? There are no fools in the ground forces, they categorically abandoned the shell at the time.
                    All these tales about the fact that "you can put on a tracked chassis" - you don't have to believe all the marketing nonsense that is carried in order to sell your product. The same goes for the "incredible missile capabilities" credited by the Pantsir missile sellers. The rocket is 2 times smaller than the torus rocket. At the same time, it has the same warhead by weight. And at the same time, it miraculously strikes targets further :). In general, about Shell the most false information is on the net. If you read the data on the same Oka, then they honestly write that they shoot down the plane at a speed of 700 m / s in the near zone (up to 6 km), and at a short range only 300 m / s. And ordinary physics does not affect the missiles of the Shell. They have their own physics. Well, a rocket made according to the bicaliber scheme cannot shoot down anything at a distance of 20 km.
                2. 0
                  12 June 2020 11: 37
                  I would add from my belfry as a radio engineer. That military anti-aircraft missile defense systems are front-line systems against which electronic warfare equipment will be used without fail - that is, for a simple reason military systems are less sensitive but more noise-resistant. Object defense as a rule implies working in the absence of electronic warfare - especially near radius - because the task is largely missile defense, not air defense. Missiles, RS and bombs do not usually have on-board electronic warfare systems. That is, the Shell has more sensitivity and less noise immunity. That is, the complexes are even radio-technically built in different ways, and given that we like to do hardware (more precise and efficient) settings, and not software, it’s obvious that the transceiver filling itself is different.
                  For the operation of the Carapace in layered anti-aircraft missile defense or in the presence of an all-round radar armament that is already available, there are export options only with an OES guidance system - that is, a third-party radar gives out the target designation, and the complex is aimed at the target already through the OES.
                  It is also worth recalling that the air defense missile defense by default is layered (moreover, it is provided not only by ground-based air defense systems but also air-launched air-launched airborne warning systems and fighter aircraft), as a rule, object-based can only be carried out using short-range missile defense systems.
                  In simple terms, the protection of paramilitary units is always a priority over the protection of civilian infrastructure and civilian ones. It seems to be logical.
  4. 0
    28 June 2019 08: 41
    The article is great! Detailed analysis of the "shell".
  5. +1
    28 June 2019 09: 11
    Is the problem with blockage on its side solved or not?
    1. +1
      28 June 2019 15: 03
      Quote: Anton Yu
      Is the problem with blockage on its side solved or not?

      Outriggers (outriggers) on the SM are no longer


  6. +1
    28 June 2019 09: 42
    Very small targets, as I understand it, and also detects artillery shells? :-)
    1. 0
      12 June 2020 11: 39
      Of course RS, mines, etc. The armor RS was shot down while defending the Khmeimim base, at the very beginning of the VKS operation.
  7. +3
    28 June 2019 09: 48
    57E6E missiles - approximately 3000 m / s

    Something eye caught on this figure, maybe a mistake?
    The speed of sound is 343 m / s, i.e. this small rocket develops a hypersonic speed of 8,7 M - and at the same time, radio command guidance is still being carried out ...
    1. 0
      28 June 2019 10: 43
      it turns out that the old rocket had a maximum speed of 1300 m / s, about the new one they write "having twice the maximum flight speed", although if we take the average speed along the distance, then it is 2 times less
    2. 0
      30 July 2019 18: 38
      It also seems to me that this is complete nonsense. Most likely the next marketing move, which the creators of the Shell are known for (who praise their rather weak missiles, as if they could actually shoot something at a distance of 20 km). S-3000 missiles do not develop a speed of 300 m / s.
      I don’t understand why the Shell with a heavier missile is needed if the only advantage of the Shell against the same Thor is cheaper rockets. Why make them more expensive?
  8. +1
    28 June 2019 11: 19
    But will he be able to hit the target if it is, besides being super small and also fast, and interferes with the movement?
  9. 0
    28 June 2019 11: 20
    Put it to the Syrians and we will run it in the real conditions of the battle and not on the field.
    1. -1
      28 June 2019 19: 37
      Quote: Rabioso
      and we’ll run it in real battle conditions and not on the field

      Fager-75, which fly from Gaza to Tel Aviv, run in real conditions.
  10. +2
    28 June 2019 11: 38
    Quote: Megatron
    Why trawl as many as 8 axles if the total mass is 44 tons? There are 4 enough for the eyes.

    With this tire size? And how much do they withstand the load on the axle?
    1. 0
      28 June 2019 12: 40
      Ordinary tank trawl like. The mass is close to the tank, so they took a suitable one. Why multiply entities if there is a subtle one.
    2. 0
      12 June 2020 11: 41
      One bridge holds 9-10 tons. If the air suspension is independent, then maybe a little more
  11. +1
    28 June 2019 13: 22
    It would be necessary to develop a compact version (possible only with mini-missiles) in an autonomous container design, so that without any problems it would be disguised as a civilian truck.
  12. +1
    29 June 2019 11: 05
    This shell) A holistic impression, thanks
  13. 0
    2 July 2019 17: 48
    Quote: Zaurbek
    Yes, but the resource and the transfer of trawls .... One does not replace the other.

    At the expense of the resource I did not quite understand, but what kind of resource does MTLB have? And the transfer - yes, but how do you imagine the movement of the division under its own power? Easier to deliver.
  14. 0
    18 July 2019 12: 08
    than the standard ammunition “Shell-C1” of the 57E6E anti-aircraft guided missile - about 3000 m / s versus 1300 m / s. At the same time, the maximum range of targeted fire of the complex increases to 40 kilometers

    this is good news. most of the NATO helicopters will no longer be able to work with extreme speed with impunity, and the ability to shoot down shock UAVs before using weapons is growing rapidly.
  15. 0
    5 August 2019 12: 17
    Guns need to be changed to a laser. Clouds of UAVs to shoot down with a laser is the most.
  16. 0
    11 September 2019 12: 32
    Quote: alexmach
    IMHO If Sosne-u does not have enough radar, then there is no need to produce it in this form. Put the same Shell on the tracked chassis.

    Categorical opinions are a function of the lack of specialized knowledge.
    Pine - an ingenious machine, this can be seen from the open part of the TTX
  17. 0
    26 November 2019 19: 02
    More interestingly, how did some of the characteristics to be classified get into the media? what