Expensive "pleasure": C-350 is capable of shooting down Turkish Bayraktar UAVs

Appeared the other day news that the Ministry of Defense concluded contracts with the Almaz-Antey concern for the supply of four sets of the Vityaz S-350 anti-aircraft missile system aroused considerable interest, especially on the Web. The users were interested in, first of all, not the number of vehicles in one set, but the ability of the anti-aircraft complex to hit a drone. Probably, such a desire arose after a series of publications about the "superiority" of Turkish Bayraktar UAVs over the Pantsir-C1 air defense missile system

Before giving the expert’s opinion, we recall that the S-350 Vityaz air defense system is positioned by the developer as a medium-range complex used to organize air defense against attacks by various air attack weapons. SAM can hit manned Aviation (airplanes, helicopters) drones, as well as cruise and ballistic missiles. In addition, it is able to prevent impacts from low-flying objects.

The maximum number of aerodynamic targets simultaneously hit is 16, the ballistic ones - 12. The maximum range of damage is 60 km, altitude - 30 km. The complex can work in automatic mode after deployment by calculation.

The Ministry of Defense reported that the S-350 troops will replace the S-300PS and Buk-M1-2.

According to the commercial director of Arsenal of the Fatherland magazine, military expert Alexei Leonkov, Vityaz is designed to protect modern and promising air attack weapons from massive strikes. The system can simultaneously reflect the impacts of various air attack weapons in the ranges from extremely small to high altitudes.

This is a complex created taking into account new requirements and a new library of goals that now exists. Recently, various targets have appeared - carriers of air attack means: aircraft, Drones, hypersonic targets. (...) The main feature is that the effectiveness of this complex is close to unity, that is, one missile - one target

he said on Radio Sputnik.

Thus, it can be stated that the S-350 complex is capable of hitting drones, even at extremely low altitude. However, another question arises, why spend a rather expensive missile on a drone, let the same Bayraktar TB2, if there is another type of anti-aircraft systems for this, for example, "Shell-C1". Of course, there are situations when the delay in death is similar to a drone and you’ll not only spend the Vityaz’s missile, but also launch the Triumph’s missile, but it’s too expensive to use the S-350 to constantly fight drones. Expensive "pleasure", of course.

But it’s better to train the calculations of the Pantsir-C1 air defense missile defense system — this would be both cheaper and more efficient. And then articles with headings like "Turkish drones staged genocide against Russian complexes" will cease to appear, and the number of "mundane" Bayraktar TB2 will grow steadily.

Comments

[Kars]

The price of a rocket with 350 and a bayraktara must be watched. And so it is necessary to shoot down in any case. What happens, so shoot down.

[Sky strike fighter]

Carapace-S and Buk-M2E quite cope with Bayraktara. Until the next run of the Arabs, at least. As they often do. Naturally, panic and chaos in the death war are similar. In a panic, not a single air defense will help.

[Alexey Sommer]

Quote: Sky Strike fighter

Carapace-S and Buk-M2E quite cope with Bayraktara.

Judging by the general news, not everything is so simple. It’s not just that the MIGs flew there.

[Sky strike fighter]

Quote: Alexey Sommer

Quote: Sky Strike fighter

Carapace-S and Buk-M2E quite cope with Bayraktara.

Judging by the general news, not everything is so simple. It’s not just that the MIGs flew there.

So with the Arabs, in principle, everything is not so simple. Especially in the war. Erdogan simply decided to push the number of mercenaries from Syria and brought in a large number of Turkish army, naturally, the alignment of forces changed. When the mercenaries fought with the mercenaries, then Haftar won. only Erdogan decided to go to the bank, the alignment of forces changed. Armor had to be transferred from one point to another on tractors, which the Turks did not use. So you have to look at everything in the complex.

[Cyril G ...]

But what for on tractors, it’s also wheeled and would have arrived. I’ve seen several times in our region Pantsyri on the roads themselves ride ...

[bk316]

It’s not just that the MIGs flew there.

And I think this is just about the panic of the MIG, that when the UAV is destroyed, nothing threatens ......

[Interlocutor]

Carapace-S and Buk-M2E quite cope with Bayraktara.

I agree completely. The carapace is already the workhorse of wars. They will destroy him, he will bring everything down, to which he reaches. In good hands will be a super weapon, in stupid - stupid. Yes, like any other weapon. They are already afraid of him so that they chase after them in the first place.

[Ilya_Nsk]

he can’t shoot a drone out of a cannon, exercises in the steppes showed that the fire of 4 (Four) installations didn’t harm a light drone - they never hit .. And here is the proof https://www.youtube.com/watch? v = H4TGyxubHM4 (1.5 min)

[edmed]

Quote: Sky Strike fighter

. In a panic, not a single air defense will help. It is necessary to take into account the Arab specificity, psychology.

Yes! What they don’t lose, they’ll break it.

[really]

That is, it is necessary to include the crew commands to the software in the software. Take your hands off the remote control, go for a walk, do not interfere with work. It's time to bring down

[Black Colonel]

Arabs need to reflash their brains, then everything is in order with them.

[HAM]

You need to look at the price of the protected object, not the rocket ..

[syndicalist]

Quote: HAM

You need to look at the price of the protected object, not the rocket ..

It turns out that in the current theaters of war the most expensive objects are military equipment. Nothing of value from the civil was left.

[Doliva63]

Quote: syndicalist

Quote: HAM

You need to look at the price of the protected object, not the rocket ..

It turns out that in the current theaters of war the most expensive objects are military equipment. Nothing of value from the civil was left.

But how are people?

[Grits]

Quote: syndicalist

Nothing of value from the civil was left.

How can you think so? But what about oil rigs and gas pipelines? This is our EVERYTHING!

[syndicalist]

Quote: Gritsa

But what about oil rigs and gas pipelines? This is our EVERYTHING!

With current oil prices and prospects, this no longer represents any value, but rather, only a problem. In the same Syria-Libya, we will still see battles for trying to yield onerous assets to the enemy.

[really]

Well, finally reading the correct message.

[Alexey Sommer]

Quote: Kars

And so it is necessary to shoot down in any case. What happens, so shoot down.

That's right. Because targets hit with a bayraktara can be much more expensive than himself.

[5-9]

eg?
you only look at the size of the rackets of this Bayaktar ...

[Alexey Sommer]

Quote: 5-9

you only look at the size of the rackets of this Bayaktar.

He not only launches racquets himself, he also induces other racquets. Is it clear now?

[Grits]

Quote: Alexey Sommer

He not only launches rackets himself, he also brings other rackets.

In Syria, he was still aiming well at barrel artillery. Which with impunity pounded from abroad from its territory.

[Souchastnik]

The price of a rocket with 350 and a bayraktara must be watched.

It is necessary to compare not the cost of the object and the rocket, but the potential damage that the object can cause (prevented damage) and the cost of the rocket. then everything will look different.

[bk316]

It is necessary to compare not the cost of the object and the rocket, but the potential damage that the object can cause (prevented damage) and the cost of the rocket.

The basic rule of building air defense

[bobba94]

Last year, Ukraine bought 6 UAV Bayraktar TV2 from Turkey for $ 66 million from Turkey. It turns out that the cost of 1 UAV Bayraktar TV2 is approximately 11 million dollars. I haven’t found anywhere about the cost of missiles for the S-350, it can be approximately compared with the Patriot SAM, and for this SAM, the cost of launching one missile is about $ 3 million

[Cyril G ...]

I'll throw you info last year, the Air Force and the US Navy bought large batches of AiM-9 and AiM-120 at a price of 490 thousand bucks and 1 million 200 thousand, respectively. The armor rocket is about 150-200 thousand bucks for export .. For the treasury, it is probably less.

[rocket757]

Expensive "pleasure", to be sure.
But it is better to train the calculations of the Pantsir-S1 air defense missile system - it would be both cheaper and more efficient

Act on the situation. Moreover, the missiles of such a complex can be different in functionality and price. The main thing is a mass production. Then the rockets get better and the price is acceptable. Everything is as always, no one is going to waste money.
By the way, the Pantsir air defense system is also developing, modernizing, and to say that it does not work well is rash ... you just need to remember what kind of gasket was in those damaged machines, between the chair and the controls.

[alexmach]

In addition, missiles in such a complex can be different in functionality and price

And the cheapest of them is more expensive than the "Shell".
But I agree, the complex looks great, especially considering the fact that, thanks to a wide range of missiles, it is able to operate both at short and medium range and potentially have a "long arm" for 100+ kilometers.
The same multifunctionality must be implemented in the complexes of the near zone.

[rocket757]

If you carry out a calculation, a cheap missile + an object that it did not protect, then it may come out that the expensive rocket will not appear as such!

[PSih2097]

Quote: rocket757

you just need to remember what was the gasket in those damaged cars, between the seat and the controls.

It’s not a fact that there was a drone in the workplace at the time of the attack, maybe he was praying / he was helping / he was smoking / dumb smoked / booze / spoiled girls / etc. etc.

[rocket757]

Quote: PSih2097

not the fact that was in the presence of the workplace at the time

It was, it wasn’t what it was, for scribes it’s not important anymore ... they will raise a layman as they want \ as they ordered.
One thing is true. SPECIALISTS, BUYERS, all know this and pf-e on them ... although, sometimes, your taxpayer has to speak and explain the truth.

[013Azer]

Anka Able to Destroy C-350

(that statement is no worse than what's on the topic title)

[Sky strike fighter]

The S-350 has a radius of destruction of 150 km. A radar survey of 360 degrees. And the radius of destruction of missiles from Anki-S and 10 km do not reach. So do not write nonsense. Anka just does not fly to the S-350 for the radius of launch of its missiles. earlier they will knock down. Buk-M2E and Carapace-S are felled by Turkish drones in industrial quantities. And you hang noodles on your ears in these commercials, and you are happy to cheat yourself.

[carstorm 11]

and with 350 it’s capable of destroying the drone) as the next analytig appears, the big top begins.

[Thrifty]

Sir from Azerbaijan, on your videos "Armor" is not even close, so an advertising clip for a deletant-miner!

[Nikanet]

Why so sarcastically emphasize the location of sir? What does it matter? We are not writing here sir from Russia, or sir from Greece, or Armenia ... here from all countries there may be sir. You are essentially if you want to write something, then please. And this is not his video. There are a lot of such videos on the network. You will not deny that Turkish UAVs quite effectively cope with the Shells in Syria and Libya ?! Well, even if you argue, the fact remains. Bayraktars opposed the Shells, against the S-350, S-400 the Anki, Akındzhy, Aksungury and, well, the barrage supplies from the corresponding line will resist. The Turkish defense industry is developing rapidly now, and most importantly, people see the results, and not as with the S-400 or S-300, which so far have no documented result. So give up this dislike. Communicate essentially.

[alexmach]

You will not deny that Turkish UAVs quite effectively cope with the Shells in both Syria and Libya?

So effectively managed that the Turks had to retreat and the SAR entrenched in its occupied positions?

[Ingenegr]

I want to note that the "sir from Azerbaijan" in his, albeit short, text did not make a single spelling or grammatical mistake. But his opponent from Russia, alas, does not know the correct spelling of the word "dilettante". And this cannot be attributed either to T9 or to "letters nearby."
Sadly at the expert level. Not at all sad.

[Nikanet]

ANKA, AKSUNGUR, AKINCI..they are all capable of destroying the entire line of Russian air defense and missile defense.
Improvements are underway, skills are being honed. They are not in vain tested in Syria and Libya.

[Sky strike fighter]

What is your statement based on? What facts?

[slipped]

Quote: Sky Strike fighter

What is your statement based on? What facts?

there are no facts, he just blurted out

[stone]

I agree. What is what this statement is at the kindergarten level. So in my childhood, kids argued who would defeat whom, tank or submarine

[Demagogue]

S-350 is our most advanced air defense system. The most noise-resistant and stable.

[KVU-NSVD]

On the approaches to Khmeimim, the Carapace had already planted fields with dropped drones and rockets, and as soon as the Arabs fell in love with a couple of complexes on their own gouging, manure rushed to the fan.

[alexmach]

Only Davich discussed that the shell in its current layout is an object-based air defense system, and military air defense will have to fight with light drones in the first place.

[Sky strike fighter]

It depends on which side to show. Video from the link below.

On social networks, they are studying with interest the video from Libya, in which the Pantsir-C1 anti-aircraft missile and gun system destroys a Turkish attack drone live.

It should be noted that these are generally the first such shots from the territory of Libya, where, starting in 2014, the second civil war has been going on after the 2011 coup.

The footage shows how the calculation of the Libyan national army of Field Marshal Khalifa Haftar successfully destroys the Turkish-made tactical medium-altitude UAV Bayraktar TB2, which supported the troops of the Government of National Accord. At the same time, it is clearly noticeable that the actions of the Arab personnel indicated by the Zanpomir “Shell-C1” of Russian production are clear and well-functioning.

The indicator of the circular view of the air defense system sends a signal about the approach of the object. After that, the operator captures the target through the visor, and after some time launches an anti-aircraft guided missile. SAM successfully destroys the target.

https://www.yaplakal.com/forum3/topic2126713.html

[alexmach]

It depends on which side to show. Video from the link below.

With what do not look, the fact that nothing whiter than suitable and effective against light UAVs is not yet available, and using it does not mean that the complex is well suited for this.

[Sky strike fighter]

But it brings down Bayraktara. What alternatives do you have for this complex?

[alexmach]

Mention some promising Pine-Ledum and Derivation of air defense.
Thor.
There are also old Arrow, Wasp and Tunguska.
They used to talk about the Shell on a crawler chassis - but it looks like it's already become history.

[Sky strike fighter]

Then it is better that the Shell-SM (which will be shown at the Parade on June 24) or Tor-M2, again, Buk-M2E proved to be quite good in practice in Syria and Libya.

[Elephant]

Quote: alexmach

They used to talk about the Shell on a crawler chassis - but it looks like it's already become history.

Where he is now the best wheels. And in the black earth in the mud - it can be on a caterpillar track.

[Cyril G ...]

SAM Tor of course. Do not forget the same Tor military air defense, Armor still VKS - object air defense and cover air defense systems SD and DB.

[Sky strike fighter]

So what? It doesn’t matter what color the cat is, if only to catch mice.

On June 9, 2020, a user supporting the Libyan National Army of Libya (LNA) under the command of Field Marshal Khalifa Haftar posted on Twitter a video footage of the Pantsir air defense missile system on the Turkish Bayraktar drone.

It is worth noting that the modification of the "Shell" presented in the video has been around for ten years. These ZRPK are in service with the United Arab Emirates, which put these complexes of the Haftar army. As you can see, even outdated weapons without any problems destroy the "high-tech", as Turkey positions them, the Bayraktar UAV.

According to the LNA, since the beginning of 2020, 54 Turkish drones have been destroyed with the help of the Pantsir complexes. Thus, Turkey lost $ 270 million in Bayraktar UAVs alone to Libya.

https://m.politnavigator.net/obnarodovano-video-unichtozheniya-pancirem-tureckogo-bpla-bayraktar-v-livii.html

[alexmach]

So what? It doesn’t matter what color the cat is, if only to catch mice.

Is it important if the cat is without legs? and if you can only catch from an ambush and can’t chase a mouse?

[Charik]

The maximum number of simultaneously hit aerodynamic targets is 16, ballistic ones - 12. How to understand this?

[alexmach]

M ... literally? Ballistic goals are more complicated than aerodynamic ones.

[Avior]

What exactly is understood?
Different types of goals.

[Sky strike fighter]

So understand. How many can hit targets at the same time.

The system accompanies up to 48 targets, provides target designation simultaneously for 8 aerodynamic and 6 ballistic objects. The S-300 PT / PS has up to 12 tracking targets, and up to 6 fired targets. The S-350 can be integrated into a single combat control system and receive target designations from the more powerful S-400 radar.

The active phased antenna array of the Vityaz radar station provides reliable capture of targets at a distance of up to 250 km, even in conditions of electronic countermeasures. The installation is equipped with two types of missiles: 9M96 designed to destroy any aerodynamic and ballistic objects at a distance of 120 km at a height of 30 km. Aiming at the target is carried out using an inertial correction system, as well as radio correction with radar homing (GOS) at the final point of flight. 9M100 can intercept targets at a distance of 15 km. The 9M100s are equipped with an infrared homing warhead, which allows you to capture the target immediately after the launch of the rocket, that is, implement the principle of "shot-forgot."

The system is designed to combat low-flying cruise missiles, manned aircraft (both planes and helicopters), unmanned aerial vehicles of medium and heavy class, tactical ballistic missiles.

http://nvo.ng.ru/armament/2020-06-05/4_1095_armament.html

[Cyril G ...]

. 9M100 can intercept targets at a distance of 15 km. The 9M100s are equipped with an infrared homing warhead, which allows you to capture the target immediately after the launch of the rocket, that is, implement the principle of "shot-forgot."

They say the same on 9M100 - ARGSN.
Find signs in the photo that the missile is equipped with IKGSN.

Let it be a layout.

[Sky strike fighter]

Well, what does this prove? The designers decided which GOS is better to put on the rocket, and as a result they chose the option with the IKGSN for the series.

[Cyril G ...]

Not an extreme fact that I heard just a month ago the same ARGSN. Moreover, what is characteristic of the introduction of the IKGSN requires capturing the target on the trajectory.

[Leon68]

Look at the index. They are with different indices, different guidance systems and at different distances of destruction. Somehow I came across a comparative table of 9M100 rockets by rocket indices.

[Cyril G ...]

I’ve even delved into it, this is an exhibit for examination by potential buyers. E is Export. This designation is not the first time to be found on missiles.

[Charik]

about that and the question — is the complex — what's in the composition — the radar-KP — how many launchers (pcs) —move to launcher 12 rocket

[really]

Each machine has 12 rockets, then multiply and divide

[Thrifty]

Isn't it cheaper to start mass production of "drone killers" by creating an inexpensive drone, the purpose of which is to fight drone attack with the help of light air-to-air missiles or rapid-fire cannons?

[5-9]

Do you know that an airborne missile defense system with an infrared seeker costs 300-400 thousand bucks, and an SD with an ARLGSN is 1,2 bucks?
And their carrier will be more expensive than the mentioned Bayaktar

[Cyril G ...]

If you are about Americans, then the AiM-9 of the latest modification of the purchase of 2019 is about 490 thousand bucks.

[Charik]

do not get up poollama greens for one hundred-kilogram blank- (start 50 cars)

[My doctor]

Quote: Thrifty

Isn't it cheaper to start mass production of "drone killers" by creating an inexpensive drone, the purpose of which is to war with attack drones with the help of light air-to-air missiles, or rapid-fire cannons?

Cheaper? Several pieces of these drones must be in the air all the time, patrol and be ready to intercept the enemy UAV. So, they will develop their resource before they knock down the enemy. And with constant operation there should be serious ground maintenance.
You can’t stuff a normal radar into them for many reasons. And therefore, target designation, most likely, should be external.
So it’s hardly possible to organize this.

[Mikhail3]

This drone is a light-engine aircraft, wings 12m, Rotax aircraft engine, plastic body. but hardly carbon fiber. In general, not expensive and not cheap. Rocket C 350 - a serial rocket engine, a light alloy body, automation. In general, their real cost is comparable, so changing one to the other clearly makes sense. Well, if your economy is capable of releasing the number of missiles necessary to suppress the enemy’s activity with these UAVs and not break.
But in general, anti-aircraft weapons should be cheaper than attacking air.

[Sky strike fighter]

You would also suggest using the S-500 for Bayraktara.

[Mikhail3]

I didn’t offer anything, did you notice? I figured, plus or minus halflapt, the comparative value of the target and the anti-aircraft weapon. That's all. But you are clearly ready to offer something. I beg!
What do we have that can bring down a light-engine (almost invisible on the radar) airplane with a ceiling of 8500? Curious.

[Sky strike fighter]

Shell-S1E, Buk-M2E in practice have repeatedly shot down Bayraktars and Anki-S in Syria and Libya. There is also Tor-M2, the new Shell-SM with an increased radius of destruction of 40 km and 15-20 km in height. Buk-M2 Buk-M3.

[Mikhail3]

I know. The question is not how you can bring down an airplane. More than that, of course. The question is what SHOULD they shoot down! It is easy to see that air defense can be completely ineffective, like the Saudis, for example, when the Patriots were powerless to defend their object, and it seems to be effective, but against single targets. And in the case of massive attacks, it may turn out that it doesn’t even matter if the target is hit or not, because the economic damage caused by the number of missiles fired is still fatal. Yes, and the third option is the place to be - reliably knock down a couple of dozen UAVs, that's just a thousand of them ...
That is the question - what exactly to fight back, given the complex of problems generated by the presence of UAVs? Does anyone have an answer?

[Sky strike fighter]

EW or something that can completely knock out electronics at least a thousand small drones, for example a powerful electromagnetic pulse triggered by an explosion.
Something like the Germans came up with. Something like that.
TAURUS M - carries a multiple-charge warhead to defeat distributed small-sized targets, such as positions of air defense systems, launchers, command posts, etc. Little is known about the submunitions offered for this type of missile, but according to EADS / LFK they are capable of hitting targets effectively , accurately and inexpensively.
TAURUS HPM (English High Power Microwave - high-power microwave radiation) - an option designed to temporarily disable the information systems of the enemy and his energy sources. A non-lethal warhead is installed on the TAURUS HPM, causing this effect in electronic systems.

[Mikhail3]

The specific impulse received from the explosion of a special charge can strongly impact its electronic devices. In general, the idea is true, but you can’t bet on it. UAV designers will simply modify their devices, increasing their protection against EMR, this is not so difficult, airplanes from lightning discharges are well protected, why not copy?
In general, this is the question now - no one is in a hurry to start thinking. UAVs are being produced with might and main, and no one really cares about protecting against them. Is that for the destruction (or scare away) of civilians, like flying bugs, presented "EMP-rifles."
How many "military institutes" and military scientists "are we currently paying with our taxes and minerals? Where are the answers?

[Sky strike fighter]

How many "military institutes" and military scientists "are we currently paying with our taxes and minerals? Where are the answers?

This is what? Don’t say that it’s better to give this money to pensioners. I’ll think over time that they’ll come up with something to counter the many small UAVs.

[Mikhail3]

What, damn it, pensioners?
To business. How long have UAVs snooping around? Already not one dozen years. And where is a good idea, how to deal with them? EMR is definitely not an option, if you do not want to burn your electronics too. All of these formidable systems that you are writing about are in fact only crushed by Wi-Fi) or so.
Instead of real methods of struggle, loot is cut around - there is no suitable solution, but expensive complexes are molded, which in a real fight will be useless as a handshake poor. Charges run out and hello. And in the article there was some kind of nonsense - it was possible to bring down a slow, slow, slightly armed plane of the Cessna class. Well, just an epic achievement, to register with happiness ...

[bk316]

no suitable solution

Well, there's really nothing you can imagine.
Laser or swarm of comicadze fighter drones. Actually Stanislav Lem - Invincible.

A swarm is preferable. We'll have to protect the drone UAVs to make them faster tighter and more inconspicuous maneuverability. And this will lead to a rise in price and will return everything in a new round to the SAM-PLANE (only already in fully automatic mode)
A laser with a compact reactor is also a solution.

[Mikhail3]

You read "Invincible", but you get it strangely. The swarm is not strong at all by the increased armor of each individual. And I'm talking about defense against UAVs, not about effective attack. To understand the thoughts of the great Lem, which he put into this book, one must think very powerfully ...

[bk316]

Roy is strong at all by not reinforcing the reservation of each individual.

Yes, this is understandable, a swarm of Lem just needed to fight with armored monsters.
And I'm also about protection, but active.
I guess I wrote poorly.
Let's try again.

Impact UAVs are now cheaper and easier to manufacture than SAM.
Therefore, they can be economically exchanged for air defense systems.
Increasing the capabilities of an air defense system is not the best way, because it will make an air defense system even more expensive, but it will not eliminate fundamental shortcomings (limited ammunition, limited rate of fire)
Therefore, it would be good to protect the air defense system with a swarm of kamikaze drones. Such a swarm will be even cheaper and easier to manufacture than a drummer. After all, the drummer is just a slow light-engine aircraft. Shoot down is easy.
The drummers will not be able to respond symmetrically (that is, become a swarm by themselves), the shock swarm is a good thing, but in the foreseeable future unsolvable (why the topic is separate).
This means they will follow the path of "booking", than will make the task of swarm air defense even easier because "booking" is a rise in price.

An alternative is to build a ZK on new principles that were initially spared from these shortcomings.


Something like that. Sorry Michael, here some of me are so annoying that I can not clearly state the first time. I read my comment and I really wrote a charade somehow.

[Mikhail3]

Well, now I understand) You have jumped very sharply from air defense systems to UAV swarms. Not a bad idea. But I already contributed here to one military technology, and I did not like the result. It would be better to do without such progress, and I didn’t get the copyright)
In general, let people think in this direction. The question is asked, let them finally begin to search for the answer.

[bk316]

Yes, and I did not get the copyright)

Ah Michael, if you recall which copyright I received less .....
the last honest ones were still under the USSR
But in general, I’m not offended - it’s customary for our programmers
Little known in wide circles VK proposed and realized the office of Kaspersky Nuraliev or Novikov. Well, what am I supposed to be silent at the parties with the aforementioned or something .... At least everyone called to himself and thanks for that

[alexmach]

That is the question - what exactly to fight back, given the complex of problems generated by the presence of UAVs? Does anyone have an answer?

We need a universal short-range complex capable of fighting all types of threats in the near zone. At the same time, it must have both cheap but effective missiles, at least against drones, and be able to deal with more technological threats. In theory, the same Carapace without an artillery unit or Thor. With "nails" for close range and large ammunition, with standard missiles and with "reinforced" with IR-seeker. We should also take a look towards Derivevatsi-Air Defense.

Yes, and the complex should be military, mobile because it needs to cover the troops directly in positions.

[Mikhail3]

This is already something. That is, the complex must be supplemented with a line for the destruction of unmanned aerial vehicles. Specifically, drones, and with "sharpening" for certain types and methods of attack, characteristic of this particular class of aircraft. But so far there is nothing like that.

[alexmach]

Specifically, drones, and with "sharpening" for certain types and methods of attack, characteristic of this particular class of aircraft

And what are their special types and methods of attack?
Hang-barazhivanie slow-moving UAV in the target area? So this is only in the hands of air defense, here the first question arises of detection, and of the price of defeat.
Dive on target? - And how does this differ from repulsing a strike by any other controlled means of destruction?

[Mikhail3]

First, UAVs are ten times less noticeable than any aircraft, no matter what "generation" you take. Secondly, the apparatus is capable of performing figures that cannot be performed with the pilot in the cockpit. Thirdly, the construction of UAV groups is fundamentally different from any construction of manned vehicles. Fourthly, flying at ultra-low altitudes - the ultra-low altitude of a UAV is not at all the same as the ultra-low altitude for an aircraft. You can go on and on, but time is a pity. Try using your own head, if you have one.

[alexmach]

Firstly, UAVs are ten times less noticeable than any aircraft, no matter what "generation" you take

I agree, I repeat the task of detection arises.

Secondly, the device is able to perform figures that cannot be performed with the pilot in the cockpit

Come on, turboprop UAV? No, not capable. In principle, he does not maneuver with overloads that increase the capabilities of a person. You are already looking into the 6th generation unmanned aircraft.

Thirdly, the construction of UAV groups is fundamentally different from any construction of manned vehicles

Once again, "oh well."

Fourth, flying at very low altitudes - the ultra-low altitude of a UAV is not at all the same as the ultra-low altitude for an airplane

In my opinion, it is also limited by speed and terrain.

[Oquzyurd]

The other day they will adopt the Bayincar Akinci, which is much more formidable in terms of armament and flight altitude.
Technical characteristics of the unmanned aerial vehicle AKINCI:

In the air: 24 hours
Altitude: 40000 feet
Payload: 1,350 kg (900 kg outside - 450 kg inside)
Take-off weight: 4,5 tons
Wingspan: 20 m
Motor: 2 × 450 hp turboprop (option 750 hp + 240 hp)
Data Network: LOS \ SATCOM
Radar: Milli AESA (Weather / South Africa)
Electronic warfare: electronic support unit
Weapons: MAM-L, MAM-C, Javelin, L-UMTAS, UMTAS, Bozok, MK-81, MK-82, MK-83, Precision Guidance Kit (HGK), Wing Guidance Kit (KGK) -MK-82, Teber-82, Gokdogan rocket, Bozdogan rocket, COM-A,
By the way, the Gyokdogan and Bozdogan rockets are of the air-to-air class.
Particularly dangerous from weapons is COM-A, a cruise missile flying up to 250 km, with an accuracy of up to 1 m.
It is very difficult to deal with such an apparatus. http://www.millisavunma.com/akinci-taarruzi-iha/

[Sky strike fighter]

Oh, faster than her to Libya and Syria. A good target! And what would we do without the Turks? So much money was saved on targets. Besides, the Arabs control the Shells. It’s also safe.

[Oquzyurd]

Write not serious things. I understand that you also understand that the "target" is not so harmless.

[Cyril G ...]

Right By the way. Here are the losses of the Armor from the Lost Armor in Libya. A brief analysis, mine.
https://lostarmour.info/libya/
I consider 2 applications reliable.

Application Pantsir S1E An Nuqat al Khams 2020-05-18, shot in a hangar, the machine does not bear visible signs of combat damage. Yes smoked. With rocket firing it happens. Captured.
The question arose of why the diaphragms not in the shot TPK were broken.
Application Pantsir S1E Al Marqab 2020-05-20, removed the defeat of the ASP hangar. Then the Pantsyr damaged in a hangar is removed. Clearly, the pictures could have been taken in different places. However, it doesn’t matter - the photo shows a damaged Armor, covered in a hangar ....

Under a very big question ....
Minus application from Pantsir S1E Tripoli 2020-02-28, why the same TPs as you decided that the Armor was hit is not clear. But the photo target is not recognizable from the word at all. + two blots on a microscope slide .. Photos of debris not confirmed.
Minus application from Pantsir S1E An Nuqat al Khams 2020-05-18 - 3 fragment photos taken at point blank of a strange, unclotted structure.
Minus Application Pantsir S1E Misratah 2020-05-20. Nothing. For what they fired, it is not clear that there is no reliable identification and there is no 9K96 defeat. Photos of the wreckage are not confirmed.
Minus Application Pantsir S1E Al Marqab 2020-05-20. The photographs taken relate to two different places. In the first photo, 9K96 is clearly identified. For the rest of the years. There are no signs of hitting the target. Photos of the wreckage are not confirmed.
Minus application Pantsir S1E 2020-05-21. The target in the photo is not recognized from the word at all. There are no signs of hitting the target. What they shot at is not clear. Debris photos not confirmed
Minus Pantsir S1E 2020-05-21 The target in the photo is not recognized from the word at all. There are no signs of hitting the target. What they shot at is not clear. Debris photos not confirmed


The question is whether it should be attributed to the loss of Kamaz on the trailer, that is, whether it is captured after shooting.

Total Hufftar troops reliably lost 2 Armor of the UAE, under the question Armor on KamAZ. There is no confirmation of the defeat and incapacitation of the remaining 6 Armor. That is the result. This is the result.
Also, there is no reliable confirmation of the fact of the defeat of the combat vehicle which was in a combat-ready state ....

The Turks, however, reliably with debris confirmation lost at least 17-18 Bayraktar in Libya ...

[Mikhail3]

The other day will be adopted Bayraktar Akinci

In-in! That's right! More of these pieces, more! Urra !!
If the Turks follow this path, they can be easily deleted from their opponents, burdocks.

[lucul]

In-in! That's right! More of these pieces, more! Urra !!
If the Turks follow this path, they can be easily deleted from their opponents, burdocks.

And what is our cant? Yes, just an old disease - the wildest lack of variety of internal combustion engines. Could produce tanks of tens of thousands - but the development of new engines - no, no, no way, a taboo. And any equipment is built around the engine. Therefore, we simply do not have our own engines for UAVs, plus a lag in composites ....

[Mikhail3]

The lack is in our brains. And while it is not overcome, even if you start a hundred engines, you will not go anywhere, you will stink with exhaust ...

[Oquzyurd]

"lagging in composites ..." The main lag in software and self-learning blocks of local production in the control of UAVs. A delivery with a catch, and not what is needed. there will be 11.

[lucul]

Main lag in software and self-learning local production units in UAV control

I beg you - it’s no more complicated than air defense algorithms, and no one has made them better than us.

[Oquzyurd]

You cannot compare a birch with an apple tree. Different, completely different systems.

[lucul]

You cannot compare a birch with an apple tree. Different, completely different systems.

Well, the Turks, however, do not possess electronic warfare of the Russian level and do not know its capabilities, which is why they are investing in UAV R&D with might and main.
We have something to compare with, therefore, there is a leisurely development.

[Oquzyurd]

"Well, the Turks do not have electronic warfare of the level of Russia and do not know its capabilities" Have, and quite worthy REB Koral. They are developing this topic quickly, soon Aselsan will exhibit a new version. https://topwar.ru/87224-tureckiy-korall-protiv-rossiyskogo-triumfa-sistemy-reb-u-granic-sirii.html

[lucul]

They have, and quite worthy of Koral Reb. They are developing this topic quickly, soon Aselsan will post a new version.

Then they should understand the weak point of any unmanned systems - a stable communication channel. If the connection is broken, the value of the UAV drops sharply.

[Oquzyurd]

Malomaisky developed countries understand everything perfectly well in this topic, and when they create “actions”, they are sure to prepare for “counteraction.” In recent years, “actions” have begun to outstrip “counteractions” in these technologies. and so on allows you to perform tasks without a stable communication channel. If about the Turks, they are now experiencing all these delights on kamikaze drones, developing their "brain". https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-HZHRTEYTVg

[lucul]

The autonomy of the devices themselves, self-learning programs, the most accurate maps of global positioning, etc. allow you to perform tasks without a stable communication channel. If about the Turks, then they are now experiencing all these delights on kamikaze drones, developing their "brain".

Firstly, the Carapace itself can use drones, for better detection - it raised the quadrocopter 100m above itself - and it’s already easier to live.
About Kamikaze drones - here you need to look at the price and range, which is more profitable. For example, the Belarusian MLRS Polonaise hits 300km ...

[Oquzyurd]

"Firstly, the Shell can use drones by itself" "100m above itself" Suitable for a beautiful photo shoot and a commercial. What is the use of a drone at an altitude of 100 meters if the drone is 7-8 kilometers away? When mass produced, kamikaze drones are cheap, and if you consider what they can do, then it's a dime.

[lucul]

What is the use of a drone at a height of 100 meters if the drone is 7-8 kilometers away?

I'm talking about the radio horizon for the Shell)))
And in the case of his drone, for the Carapace, the detection of UAVs immediately moves away for 30-50 km.

[alexmach]

Then they should understand the weak point of any unmanned systems - a stable communication channel

All modern devices are subject to the requirements of autonomy. They should work without communication.

[alexmach]

You cannot compare a birch with an apple tree. Different, completely different systems.

Not at all, even the mathematical approaches are about the same.

[Cristall]

Quote: lucul

Yes, just an old disease - the wildest lack of variety of internal combustion engines

So on the UAV Bayraktar Akıncı are Ukrainian AI-450C turboprop engines (Ivchenko Progress). Which began under the USSR in 1988 ...
It would not be such a complex product. Moreover, MS has produced almost 15 years for the Russian Federation various modifications. Order what you want and build a UAV.
Maybe the problem is not in the engines?
Until 2014, you could choose what you want. Up to localization.

[lucul]

Radar: Milli AESA (Weather / South Africa)

Thanks to the included radar, it will glow like a Christmas tree. And due to its size (wingspan -20m) it will be visible from afar in the optical channel.
And if the radar does not turn on and will go along the OLS, then it is enough to mask the Shell, so that in the optical channel, against the background of the earth, it would be impossible to discern the Shell.
Arabs do not use disguise on it at all.

[Oquzyurd]

Not so simple. For example, the smart bomb (KGK) -MK-82 and MK-83, which will be one of the main weapons of the new drone. Approximately from a height of 9-10 km (flight altitude over 12 km at the Akındzha UAV), these bombs wings fly at a distance of 60 km. That is, air defense, how will it deal with such distances? http://www.millisavunma.com/tubitak-sage-kgk-kanatli-gudum-kiti/

[stone]

In order for bombs to fly 60 km, they must be dropped from the fighter at the appropriate speed. To hang then you hung a lot on him. But this is how the big question will work!

[lucul]

Not so simple. For example, the smart bomb (KGK) -MK-82 and MK-83, which will be one of the main weapons of the new drone. Approximately from a height of 9-10 km (a flight altitude of more than 12 km at the Akındzha UAV), these bombs with wings strike 60 km.

And how will the UAV detect the Carapace over 60 km? ))))
You understand a simple truth - the aircraft is always the loser - it initially has a weight and size limit. The ground-based air defense complex has no such stringent restrictions. You can put a larger generator on it, and a more powerful radar, and even an optical lens at least 1 meter, and it has a lot more missiles. And to guarantee the destruction of air defense, UAVs, you need to have superior technology, preferably for a generation.

[Oquzyurd]

"And how will the UAV detect the Pantsir 60 km away?))))" For this there are small reconnaissance UAVs, ground reconnaissance, satellites ...

[alexmach]

But on the side of the UAV mobility.

[alexmach]

And if the radar does not turn on and goes along the OLS, then it is enough to disguise the Shell

But will the shell itself shine using the radar?

[alexmach]

It is very difficult to deal with such an apparatus. http://www.millisavunma.com/akinci-taarruzi-iha/

A beautiful "bird".
Why is fighting difficult then? For the sake of such a handsome man and with such a nomenclature of weapons, it is not a pity to raise a fighter into the air.

[Oquzyurd]

That's why this UAV has air-to-air missiles, like, I’m also prickly).

[alexmach]

"There are missiles - I'm prickly" and "will survive when meeting a fighter" are two completely different things.

[Oquzyurd]

"will survive when meeting a fighter" First of all, air-to-air missiles are designed against enemy UAVs, but with early detection (radars in them will be from the f-16 of the latest modification), an enemy helicopter or aircraft can fire (BOZDOĞAN up to 25 km, GÖKDOĞAN up to 65 km , which are listed in the armament of this TBPL), although he himself will navryatli get away from the impact at such a speed and maneuverability. (they say that the speed of the drone is up to 550 km / h)

[alexmach]

Well, I'll just repeat myself - with such characteristics and the corresponding cost, such a drone is quite a candidate for defeat by "adult" air defense systems on a par with manned aircraft.

[Oquzyurd]

"but hardly CFRP." There are video footage of the assembly process, and it shows that the case is made of carbon fiber.

[PSih2097]

Quote: Mikhail3

But in general, anti-aircraft weapons should be cheaper than attacking air.

a tactical missile with a special head in 20Kt to the manufacturer’s factory (the difference in price tag will be simply unimaginable, unlike SAM / UAV) ...

[Ryaruav]

just unlike the Arabs and other Sikhs, you need to have cool calculations and layered air defense

[Pavel57]

Strange question, which is better. If the carapace allows you to withstand - Bayraktar with shock missiles, then it is better, does not allow, then you need to look at the complexes of the next level. Under the conditions of layered air defense, the automated control system will assess the degree of threat and select an outfit of funds from the available ones.
Bayraktar costs about 5 million. dollars, but the cost of the goal is one side, the second is the price of losses from the Bayraktar pass to the range of destruction of the protected object.
Of course, it’s expensive to shoot down the C400 cruise missile, but if the missile carries a nuclear warhead, or poses a threat to a critical object, the game immediately becomes different.

[Nikolaevich I]

So what is this post about? About S-350 or "Shell"? Well, let's say ... we agree with the author that shooting down UAVs with 9M96 missiles is a little expensive! And what to do? How to reduce the cost of shooting down drones with the S-350? The author is silent, like Marusya Klimova! But he proposes to open a vocational school for training Arab pvoshniks "Pantsiru"! And what does the S-350 have to do with it? And how can they be trained if, over the years of the "Pantsir" existence, they have not got out of the C-2 and the Losers? Well, suggest, the author, a method that other military experts have not thought of until now! But, as before, the author is silent, like Mazai to the question of the environmental inspector: "where are the hares?" ....! So, you, what is this murzilka about? Maybe the author hopes that the readers on VO will write 1 articles themselves: 350. On the reduction in the cost of S-2 ammunition; 100. About XNUMX% automation of "Pantsir" ... (so that "Pantsir" would shoot, but the Arab pvoshnik would not be near!) ...?

[5-9]

Turkish UAV Bayraktar

worse than a cat there is no beast ... I’ll tell you more, even an BTR-80 from KPVT is quite capable of shooting down Turkish Bayrak UAVs
but at a price for it of 10-12 lyam greens, even 9M96 is not a pity to spend on it ...

[013Azer]

Quote: Sky Strike fighter

The S-350 has a radius of destruction of 150 km. A radar survey of 360 degrees. And the radius of destruction of missiles from Anki-S and 10 km do not reach. So do not write nonsense. Anka just does not fly to the S-350 for the radius of launch of its missiles. earlier they will knock down. Buk-M2E and Carapace-S are felled by Turkish drones in industrial quantities. And you hang noodles on your ears in these commercials, and you are happy to cheat yourself.

The Pantsir also has a range of 20 km, the height is all the more many times higher than the ceiling of the tiny Bayraktar's flight, So what did these "performance characteristics on paper" allow the bayraktars at a distance of 7-10 km, from which the working shells were destroyed in combat and rotating radar state ?? Moreover, on paper, they shoot down targets flying at speeds up to 1000m / s.)))))
Who is now hanged Noodles, and who "deceive themselves", do not tell me?) On paper, that yours, that the Chinese radar - the Gods of detection, but in fact are destroyed by drones.
Stop cheating yourself.)
I repeat again, the TTX of the shells, which on paper, also allowed to be destroyed, but for some reason they were often missed and destroyed. So any air defense system can miss, as well as the S-350. What is the dispute then?))

[Sky strike fighter]

your "performance characteristics on paper" let the bayraktars at a distance of 7-10 km, from which the working shells were destroyed in a combat and rotating radar state ??

The question is to those who controlled the Shell in this case. And the old woman is a slammer.

And on paper they shoot down targets flying at speeds up to 1000m / s.)))))

Do you doubt tth?

On paper, what are yours, that Chinese radars are gods of detection, but in reality they are destroyed by drones.
Stop cheating yourself.)
I repeat again, the TTX of the shells, which on paper, also allowed to be destroyed, but for some reason they were often missed and destroyed. So any air defense system can miss, as well as the S-350. What is the dispute then?))

All the world’s air defense for life? Long live drones? What are you silent about the number of downed Turkish drones in Syria and Libya?

[Cyril G ...]

Quote: 013Azer

So any air defense system can miss, as well as the S-350. What is the dispute then?))

Sheep came up with tactics for combat use ??? ZRPK in a single order should not act.

Quote: 013Azer

So what did these "performance characteristics on paper" allow the bayraktars to reach a distance of 7-10 km, from which the working shells were destroyed in a combat and rotating radar state ??

In Libya, I do not even remember the confirmed defeats of the working air defense missile system. It can be assumed with a high degree of certainty of getting into the SAM system on a trailer, in a hangar, etc.

Libya
Turkish TB2S losses in Libya as of 06 Jun20
Total LNA Claim: 78 (w / o; Shutdown)
Confirmed Losts (99%): 19
Probable Losts (90%): 3
Likely Losts (75%): 4
Possible Losts: (50%): 7
Unconfirmed Claims (Probably not realized) (1% -49%): 36
Fake Claims-Neglected- (0%): 9 (46.2% claims)

[Albert1988]

Quote: 013Azer

So what did these "performance characteristics on paper" allow the bayraktars to reach a distance of 7-10 km, from which the working shells were destroyed in a combat and rotating radar state ??))

Respected. if you find out how many Turkish drones have been destroyed by these same shells - go to write an article "shells staged genocide against Turkish drones" ...

[lekalpan]

Arateous, what and who is stopping you from buying or begging (in your style for the sake of Hazrat Abbas) from your older brother-boys of bayraktars and applying them in some places? especially since your opponents do not have Shell.

[Cyril G ...]

By the way. Here are the losses of the Armor from the Lost Armor in Libya. A brief analysis, mine.
https://lostarmour.info/libya/
I believe that exactly 2 applications are reliable.

Application Pantsir S1E An Nuqat al Khams 2020-05-18, filmed in a hangar, the machine does not bear visible signs of combat damage. Yes smoked. With rocket firing it happens. Captured.
The question arose of why the diaphragms not in the shot TPK were broken.
Application Pantsir S1E Al Marqab 2020-05-20, the defeat of the ASP hangar was withdrawn. Then the Pantsyr damaged in a hangar is removed. Clearly, the pictures could have been taken in different places. However, it doesn’t matter - the photo shows a damaged Armor, covered in a hangar ....

Under a very big question ....
The minus is the application from Pantsir S1E Tripoli 2020-02-28, why the same TPs as you decided that the Armor was knocked out is not clear. But the photo target is not recognizable from the word at all. + two blots on a microscope slide .. Photos of debris not confirmed.
Minus application from Pantsir S1E An Nuqat al Khams 2020-05-18 - 3 fragment photos taken at point-blank of a strange, unclotted structure.
Minus Application Pantsir S1E Misratah 2020-05-20. Nothing. For what they fired, it is not clear that there is no reliable identification and there is no 9K96 defeat. Photos of the wreckage are not confirmed.
Minus Application Pantsir S1E Al Marqab 2020-05-20. The photographs taken relate to two different places. In the first photo, 9K96 is clearly identified. For the rest of the years. There are no signs of hitting the target. Photos of the wreckage are not confirmed.
Minus application Pantsir S1E 2020-05-21. The target in the photo is not recognized from the word at all. There are no signs of hitting the target. What they shot at is not clear. Debris photos not confirmed
Minus Pantsir S1E 2020-05-21 The goal in the photo is not recognized from the word at all. There are no signs of hitting the target. What they shot at is not clear. Debris photos not confirmed


The question is also whether it is necessary to attribute Kamaz to the losses on the Trailer, that is, is it captured after the shooting.

In total, the Hufftar forces reliably lost 2 UAE Armor, questioned Armor in Kamaz. There is no confirmation of the defeat and incapacitation of the remaining 6 Armor. That is the result. This is the result.
Also, there is no reliable confirmation of the fact of the defeat of the combat vehicle which was in a combat-ready state ....

The Turks, however, reliably confirming with debris, see at Aviation Network Network lost at least 17-18 Bayraktarov in Libya ... These are the facts. The rest is propaganda.

[Cyril G ...]

The analysis was copied from the forum, where I posted it earlier .....

[Ros 56]

Whose armor suffered, so draw conclusions. Fools glass product for a while, but at least gold, or stolen or lost.

[Moor_Zeek]

It is interesting that a lot of Carapaces were "destroyed", and not some Buks
It is interesting that the Bayraktars did this, and not some Turkish artillery

Is it not true that after that you thought about acquiring Turkish
drones and the cancellation of decisions on the acquisition of the Shell?

[Sky strike fighter]

With a sense of humor, everything is fine as I see it.

Since the beginning of this year, according to open sources, 54 shock UAVs have been destroyed on the one hand and about nine Armor complexes on the other. Many UAVs were destroyed by the "Shells", and the "Shells", in turn, were destroyed by drone strikes.

Confirmation of such losses on both sides is far from in all cases, and in some cases videos of the destruction of air defense systems that look like computer graphics were provided by the Turkish resource Clash Report, which was caught on the example of the Syrian case in the editing and falsification of facts.

Confrontation price, in US dollars
The above indicators indicate that success from the use of the above systems takes place on each side, but who ultimately suffers large financial losses and reputation risks?

Immediately we make a reservation, we will consider, based on the current prices of systems at the end of 2019, the beginning of 2020. We also take the net cost of one machine, without ammunition, without control stations (in relation to UAVs) and without training the operators of these systems.

Financial expenses:

- the cost of one export ZRPK “Shell-C1” is about 14 million US dollars;

- UAV Bayraktar TB2 has a cost of 5 million US dollars (high minds have calculated this cost per unit from the contract for the supply of these systems to Ukraine).

Total: LNA allies lost 84 million dollars and the Turkish military lost 270 million dollars. When calculating the maximum losses (54 units

https://riafan.ru/1279195-protivostoyanie-v-livii-rossiiskii-zrpk-pancir-s1-vs-tureckii-bla-bayraktar-tb2

[Cristall]

Quote: Sky Strike fighter

- UAV Bayraktar TB2 has a cost of 5 million US dollars (high minds have calculated this cost per unit from the contract for the supply of these systems to Ukraine).

price to a foreign customer, which includes both the UAV itself and the control unit, weapons, training, etc. .. By the way, they cost Ukraine even cheaper.
But for themselves, the Turks sell and cheaper even cheaper.
What we see in modern warfare is the usual confrontation between a sword and a shield.
Supporters of the sword advocate UAV
Supporters of the shield for the manufacturer advocate for the shield.
The only thing that can be added is the main thing is who is holding one or the other.
Nevertheless, the sword will always be one step ahead. Because the attacker is always ahead. Does not always win but has the initiative.

[Cyril G ...]

Reliably according to Pantsyryov, the photo was confirmed - 1 was captured, one was hit in the hangar, 1 was probably thrown at Kamaz, however, since it has not yet surfaced, we are counting in losses. The claimed photo-toads from the Turks, for other 6 ZRPKs, are not confirmed by the presence of debris, the photos and videos themselves are infinitely muddy. And Lost Armor has recently been updated with cartoons and fantasies.

[prior]

Many authors made a system error in the comments.
Fight should be not so much with drones and other aerodynamic targets as with decision centers on the launch of drones.
It is much more cost effective .....

[Servisinzhener]

And the ZRPK "Pantsir" is capable of shooting down. If it is controlled by the right hands.

[Viktor Sergeev]

The carapace is good when used correctly. If the Syrians have crooked hands, this is their problem. By the way, the shell is not scanty and is not immortal, like any equipment.

[Zaurbek]

Air defense has specific standards for what and how to bring down. What are these speculations for?

[Dikson]

The headline is simply brilliant in its factual component .. Another would add: .. "Or maybe not shoot down .." .. S-300 won can also shoot down Israeli F-16 .. But they do not shoot down ..))

[A.TOR]

number of simultaneously hit aerodynamic targets

- usually written "simultaneously fired", but whether or not this is the second question

[saylor1971]

Ground-based air defense will always lose to aviation. Aviation is an attack. An attack is always an initiative. Aviation chooses a place, time and method of strike. Before this, comprehensive intelligence is being conducted. There are so many proven ways to overcome any air defense. At least Aegis (Arly Burke with Tikendroga) - using the TU-22M3, at least the S-300 (S-400) in Syria (Israel). Air defense is only defense. And defense will never win a war. It should be understood that the hostilities are not separate systems (F-16C / D against S-300/400) or types of military equipment, but systems !!!. Read how the Israeli air strike on Arab countries was prepared in the past. There are comprehensive intelligence and control (assessment of the situation, planning, decision making, decision making, monitoring and assistance to subordinates during its implementation), electronic warfare, various types of striking means, both ground and air), logistics (comprehensive support of both military equipment and military personnel , and one of the most important factors is the training of personnel from an ordinary to a general, for example, in order to compensate for the insufficient number of aircraft, measures were taken to reduce the preparation time for departure (the German experience was rethought and revised).
A very important role is played by the coordination of the actions of all branches and types of armed forces (the place, time of the strike, who strikes. In addition, for this to work, the political will of the leadership is necessary for the comprehensive training of the entire state in advance, not just the armed forces. Generals must live war, and not think about how to cut the budget or, at best, how to provide your soldiers and equipment (construction, work, knocking out fuel and lubricants, etc.) Science should work - writing guidelines based on the experience of the ongoing wars. and training.With the advent of shock UAVs, the situation has become even worse: aviation can simply calculate the number of target channels and oversaturated them with the simultaneous action of electronic warfare and special operations forces.
Unfortunately, all this in the RF Armed Forces, and other republics of the former USSR do not. And Turkey HAS Libya, NO Syria. Therefore, we see the outcome in Syria and in Libya.

[Cyril G ...]

Quote: saylor1971

And Turkey HAS

May I ask where you see IT there?

[lekalpan]

The best method against Turkish drones is a regular turboprop fighter with cannon-machine gun weapons. The main thing is to find on time and aim the plane. It is cheaply reliable and practical.

[chingachguc]

any weapon is just an element of air defense. If the system works, the qualities of the means of destruction are not so important. They will be leveled by other means, and above all, by competent management. So far, the "Shells" are fighting as gladiators against the Israeli army, the Turkish army.

[ficus2003]

Quote: Kars

this complex is close to unity, that is, one rocket - one target

A year later, the Shell-SM starts to arrive, it fixed all the flaws with an eye on drones.

[johnson-73]

Pretty old video from January 20th of this year.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=27&v=dPOb9CO3aWI
Of the specialists, anyone can comment?

[013Azer]

Quote: johnson-73

Pretty old video from January 20th of this year.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=27&v=dPOb9CO3aWI
Of the specialists, anyone can comment?

Good morning)

[johnson-73]

Quote: 013Azer

Quote: johnson-73

Pretty old video from January 20th of this year.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=27&v=dPOb9CO3aWI
Of the specialists, anyone can comment?

Good morning)

Good evening to you.))
And can you say anything in essence? Or give a link to the material?

[alaarsen]

1989, GSVG ... At the exercises on the Baltic Sea I watched how Tunguska works .. Itself detects the target, it determines by its parameters how to fire - guns, rockets - at the moment when the target crosses the X line. the guns instantly turned around and began to hammer so that I almost ... ate my ear .. The crew sits, smokes bamboo. About the Arab crews of the Shell .. have I missed something for more than 30 years (!)? Then they also said that one Tunguska replaces almost the entire SAM, in which I served - with a command post, Arrows-10 and Shilki ..

[Revolver]

In fact, it is not arithmetic, but almost higher mathematics. If you look at the rocket and do not bring down this Bayraktar, then it can destroy the entire SAM position. And if an air defense system covers an object that is even more expensive than the air defense system itself, then finally the price comparison is not comparable.

[Cyril G ...]

Quote: Cristall

Turks sell and cheapen even cheaper.

Come on. The value of the Ukrainian contract is 69 million bucks. The delivery set includes 6 UAVs, a control complex, 200 TSA and personnel training. For export, less than 9-11 million bucks does not go. For themselves, the Turks supply albeit at a lower price but not by much. Maybe 10-20 percent at best.