Military Review

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

155
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 (aircraft, 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, which now exists. Recently, various targets have appeared - carriers of air attack means: airplanes, drones, hypersonic targets. (...) The main feature - 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.
155 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Kars
    Kars 10 June 2020 14: 27 New
    30
    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.
    1. Sky strike fighter
      Sky strike fighter 10 June 2020 14: 33 New
      29
      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.
      1. Alexey Sommer
        Alexey Sommer 10 June 2020 14: 47 New
        +5
        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.
        1. Sky strike fighter
          Sky strike fighter 10 June 2020 15: 01 New
          17
          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.
          1. Cyril G ...
            Cyril G ... 10 June 2020 16: 30 New
            +1
            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 ...
        2. bk316
          bk316 11 June 2020 13: 52 New
          +1
          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 ......
      2. Interlocutor
        Interlocutor 10 June 2020 14: 56 New
        22
        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.
        1. Ilya_Nsk
          Ilya_Nsk 11 June 2020 08: 57 New
          0
          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)
      3. edmed
        edmed 10 June 2020 15: 33 New
        +5
        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! lol What they don’t lose, they’ll break it.
      4. really
        really 10 June 2020 15: 54 New
        +6
        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 smile
      5. Black Colonel
        Black Colonel 10 June 2020 18: 25 New
        -1
        Arabs need to reflash their brains, then everything is in order with them.
    2. HAM
      HAM 10 June 2020 14: 37 New
      27
      You need to look at the price of the protected object, not the rocket ..
      1. syndicalist
        syndicalist 10 June 2020 15: 04 New
        12
        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.
        1. Doliva63
          Doliva63 10 June 2020 15: 46 New
          +3
          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? belay
        2. Grits
          Grits 11 June 2020 01: 51 New
          -2
          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!
          1. syndicalist
            syndicalist 11 June 2020 10: 38 New
            0
            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. smile
      2. really
        really 10 June 2020 15: 56 New
        +4
        Well, finally reading the correct message. wink
    3. Alexey Sommer
      Alexey Sommer 10 June 2020 14: 49 New
      +5
      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.
      1. +5
        +5 10 June 2020 16: 04 New
        -2
        eg?
        you only look at the size of the rackets of this Bayaktar ...
        1. Alexey Sommer
          Alexey Sommer 10 June 2020 16: 34 New
          11
          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?
          1. Grits
            Grits 11 June 2020 01: 53 New
            +1
            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.
    4. Souchastnik
      Souchastnik 10 June 2020 14: 49 New
      10
      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.
      1. bk316
        bk316 11 June 2020 13: 55 New
        0
        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
    5. bobba94
      bobba94 12 June 2020 13: 02 New
      0
      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
      1. Cyril G ...
        Cyril G ... 12 June 2020 13: 39 New
        0
        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.
  2. rocket757
    rocket757 10 June 2020 14: 41 New
    +7
    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.
    1. alexmach
      alexmach 10 June 2020 15: 04 New
      +3
      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.
      1. rocket757
        rocket757 10 June 2020 17: 16 New
        +1
        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!
    2. PSih2097
      PSih2097 10 June 2020 21: 38 New
      0
      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.
      1. rocket757
        rocket757 11 June 2020 06: 58 New
        0
        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.
  3. 013Azer
    013Azer 10 June 2020 14: 48 New
    -26
    Anka Able to Destroy C-350



    (that statement is no worse than what's on the topic title)
    1. Sky strike fighter
      Sky strike fighter 10 June 2020 15: 07 New
      19
      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.
    2. carstorm 11
      carstorm 11 10 June 2020 15: 12 New
      0
      and with 350 it’s capable of destroying the drone) as the next analytig appears, the big top begins.
    3. Thrifty
      Thrifty 10 June 2020 15: 21 New
      +4
      Sir from Azerbaijan, on your videos "Armor" is not even close, so an advertising clip for a deletant-miner!
      1. Nikanet
        Nikanet 10 June 2020 16: 57 New
        -9
        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.
        1. alexmach
          alexmach 11 June 2020 00: 04 New
          +3
          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?
      2. Ingenegr
        Ingenegr 10 June 2020 18: 05 New
        -4
        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.
    4. Nikanet
      Nikanet 10 June 2020 16: 46 New
      -14
      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.
      1. Sky strike fighter
        Sky strike fighter 10 June 2020 17: 02 New
        +8
        What is your statement based on? What facts?
        1. slipped
          slipped 11 June 2020 00: 43 New
          +6
          Quote: Sky Strike fighter
          What is your statement based on? What facts?


          there are no facts, he just blurted out laughing
    5. stone
      stone 10 June 2020 18: 17 New
      +4
      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 lol
  4. Demagogue
    Demagogue 10 June 2020 14: 51 New
    +5
    S-350 is our most advanced air defense system. The most noise-resistant and stable.
  5. KVU-NSVD
    KVU-NSVD 10 June 2020 14: 53 New
    20
    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.
  6. alexmach
    alexmach 10 June 2020 14: 53 New
    +6
    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.
    1. Sky strike fighter
      Sky strike fighter 10 June 2020 15: 12 New
      +1
      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
      1. alexmach
        alexmach 10 June 2020 15: 19 New
        +1
        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.
        1. Sky strike fighter
          Sky strike fighter 10 June 2020 15: 26 New
          +3
          But it brings down Bayraktara. What alternatives do you have for this complex?
          1. alexmach
            alexmach 10 June 2020 15: 28 New
            +2
            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.
            1. Sky strike fighter
              Sky strike fighter 10 June 2020 15: 48 New
              +1
              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. wink
            2. Elephant
              Elephant 10 June 2020 16: 02 New
              +1
              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.
          2. Cyril G ...
            Cyril G ... 10 June 2020 16: 36 New
            +2
            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.
            1. Sky strike fighter
              Sky strike fighter 10 June 2020 16: 46 New
              +1
              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
              1. alexmach
                alexmach 10 June 2020 22: 07 New
                +1
                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?
  7. Charik
    Charik 10 June 2020 15: 06 New
    +1
    The maximum number of simultaneously hit aerodynamic targets is 16, ballistic ones - 12. How to understand this?
    1. alexmach
      alexmach 10 June 2020 15: 20 New
      +7
      M ... literally? Ballistic goals are more complicated than aerodynamic ones.
    2. Avior
      Avior 10 June 2020 15: 22 New
      0
      What exactly is understood?
      Different types of goals.
    3. Sky strike fighter
      Sky strike fighter 10 June 2020 15: 23 New
      +1
      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
      1. Cyril G ...
        Cyril G ... 10 June 2020 16: 38 New
        +2
        . 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.
        1. Sky strike fighter
          Sky strike fighter 10 June 2020 16: 49 New
          0
          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.
          1. Cyril G ...
            Cyril G ... 10 June 2020 17: 11 New
            0
            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.
        2. Leon68
          Leon68 10 June 2020 18: 33 New
          0
          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.
          1. Cyril G ...
            Cyril G ... 11 June 2020 14: 37 New
            0
            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.
      2. Charik
        Charik 10 June 2020 21: 33 New
        0
        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
    4. really
      really 10 June 2020 16: 00 New
      +2
      Each machine has 12 rockets, then multiply and divide
  8. Thrifty
    Thrifty 10 June 2020 15: 18 New
    0
    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?
    1. +5
      +5 10 June 2020 16: 09 New
      +3
      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
      1. Cyril G ...
        Cyril G ... 10 June 2020 17: 12 New
        0
        If you are about Americans, then the AiM-9 of the latest modification of the purchase of 2019 is about 490 thousand bucks.
        1. Charik
          Charik 10 June 2020 21: 36 New
          0
          do not get up poollama greens for one hundred-kilogram blank- (start 50 cars)
    2. My doctor
      My doctor 10 June 2020 17: 06 New
      0
      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.
  9. Mikhail3
    Mikhail3 10 June 2020 15: 30 New
    +1
    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.
    1. Sky strike fighter
      Sky strike fighter 10 June 2020 15: 49 New
      -1
      You would also suggest using the S-500 for Bayraktara.
      1. Mikhail3
        Mikhail3 10 June 2020 15: 52 New
        +3
        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.
        1. Sky strike fighter
          Sky strike fighter 10 June 2020 15: 56 New
          +3
          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.
          1. Mikhail3
            Mikhail3 10 June 2020 16: 02 New
            +1
            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?
            1. Sky strike fighter
              Sky strike fighter 10 June 2020 16: 09 New
              -2
              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.
              1. Mikhail3
                Mikhail3 10 June 2020 16: 15 New
                -2
                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?
                1. Sky strike fighter
                  Sky strike fighter 10 June 2020 16: 31 New
                  0
                  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.
                  1. Mikhail3
                    Mikhail3 10 June 2020 17: 31 New
                    +3
                    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 ...
                    1. bk316
                      bk316 11 June 2020 14: 31 New
                      0
                      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.
                      1. Mikhail3
                        Mikhail3 11 June 2020 15: 17 New
                        +1
                        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 ...
                      2. bk316
                        bk316 11 June 2020 16: 02 New
                        0
                        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. laughing I read my comment and I really wrote a charade somehow.
                      3. Mikhail3
                        Mikhail3 14 June 2020 11: 11 New
                        +1
                        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.
                      4. bk316
                        bk316 14 June 2020 18: 24 New
                        +3
                        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 laughing
      2. alexmach
        alexmach 10 June 2020 22: 43 New
        0
        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.
        1. Mikhail3
          Mikhail3 11 June 2020 08: 41 New
          0
          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.
          1. alexmach
            alexmach 11 June 2020 09: 14 New
            0
            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?
            1. Mikhail3
              Mikhail3 11 June 2020 09: 18 New
              0
              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.
              1. alexmach
                alexmach 11 June 2020 09: 23 New
                +1
                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.
  10. Oquzyurd
    Oquzyurd 10 June 2020 16: 44 New
    +1
    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/
    1. Sky strike fighter
      Sky strike fighter 10 June 2020 16: 56 New
      -1
      Oh, faster than her to Libya and Syria. A good target! good 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.
      1. Oquzyurd
        Oquzyurd 10 June 2020 17: 04 New
        +1
        Write not serious things. I understand that you also understand that the "target" is not so harmless.
      2. Cyril G ...
        Cyril G ... 12 June 2020 13: 33 New
        0
        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 ...
    2. Mikhail3
      Mikhail3 10 June 2020 17: 35 New
      -1
      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.
      1. lucul
        lucul 10 June 2020 17: 48 New
        -2
        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 ....
        1. Mikhail3
          Mikhail3 10 June 2020 18: 00 New
          -5
          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 ...
        2. Oquzyurd
          Oquzyurd 10 June 2020 18: 19 New
          0
          "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.
          1. lucul
            lucul 10 June 2020 18: 42 New
            0
            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.
            1. Oquzyurd
              Oquzyurd 10 June 2020 19: 01 New
              0
              You cannot compare a birch with an apple tree. Different, completely different systems.
              1. lucul
                lucul 10 June 2020 19: 07 New
                0
                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.
                1. Oquzyurd
                  Oquzyurd 10 June 2020 19: 20 New
                  +1
                  "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
                2. lucul
                  lucul 10 June 2020 19: 24 New
                  -3
                  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.
                3. Oquzyurd
                  Oquzyurd 10 June 2020 19: 40 New
                  0
                  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
                4. lucul
                  lucul 11 June 2020 22: 42 New
                  -3
                  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 ...
                5. Oquzyurd
                  Oquzyurd 11 June 2020 23: 43 New
                  0
                  "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.
                6. lucul
                  lucul 12 June 2020 00: 14 New
                  -1
                  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.
          2. alexmach
            alexmach 10 June 2020 23: 00 New
            +1
            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.
    3. alexmach
      alexmach 10 June 2020 22: 58 New
      0
      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
    Cristall 10 June 2020 20: 55 New
    0
    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
    lucul 10 June 2020 17: 39 New
    +1
    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.
    1. Oquzyurd
      Oquzyurd 10 June 2020 18: 03 New
      0
      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/
      1. stone
        stone 10 June 2020 18: 31 New
        0
        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!
      2. lucul
        lucul 10 June 2020 18: 50 New
        0
        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.
        1. Oquzyurd
          Oquzyurd 10 June 2020 18: 58 New
          -1
          "And how will the UAV detect the Pantsir 60 km away?))))" For this there are small reconnaissance UAVs, ground reconnaissance, satellites ...
        2. alexmach
          alexmach 10 June 2020 23: 03 New
          +1
          But on the side of the UAV mobility.
    2. alexmach
      alexmach 10 June 2020 23: 01 New
      +1
      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
    alexmach 11 June 2020 00: 09 New
    +1
    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.
    1. Oquzyurd
      Oquzyurd 11 June 2020 00: 25 New
      -1
      That's why this UAV has air-to-air missiles, like, I’m also prickly).
      1. alexmach
        alexmach 11 June 2020 08: 52 New
        0
        "There are missiles - I'm prickly" and "will survive when meeting a fighter" are two completely different things.
        1. Oquzyurd
          Oquzyurd 11 June 2020 12: 28 New
          -1
          "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)
          1. alexmach
            alexmach 11 June 2020 12: 46 New
            0
            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
    Oquzyurd 10 June 2020 16: 33 New
    +3
    "but hardly CFRP." There are video footage of the assembly process, and it shows that the case is made of carbon fiber.
  • PSih2097
    PSih2097 10 June 2020 21: 44 New
    0
    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) ... wassat
  • Ryaruav
    Ryaruav 10 June 2020 15: 31 New
    +2
    just unlike the Arabs and other Sikhs, you need to have cool calculations and layered air defense
  • Pavel57
    Pavel57 10 June 2020 15: 42 New
    +3
    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
    Nikolaevich I 10 June 2020 15: 47 New
    +2
    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
    +5 10 June 2020 16: 02 New
    +4
    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
    013Azer 10 June 2020 16: 07 New
    -2
    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?))
    1. Sky strike fighter
      Sky strike fighter 10 June 2020 16: 23 New
      +3
      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?
    2. Cyril G ...
      Cyril G ... 10 June 2020 16: 43 New
      +3
      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)
    3. Albert1988
      Albert1988 10 June 2020 16: 46 New
      -1
      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" ...
    4. lekalpan
      lekalpan 10 June 2020 21: 52 New
      -1
      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.
    5. Cyril G ...
      Cyril G ... 12 June 2020 13: 45 New
      0
      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.
      1. Cyril G ...
        Cyril G ... 12 June 2020 15: 33 New
        0
        The analysis was copied from the forum, where I posted it earlier .....
  • Ros 56
    Ros 56 10 June 2020 17: 11 New
    0
    Whose armor suffered, so draw conclusions. Fools glass product for a while, but at least gold, or stolen or lost.
  • Moor_Zeek
    Moor_Zeek 10 June 2020 17: 14 New
    0
    It is interesting that a lot of Carapaces were "destroyed", and not some Buks laughing
    It is interesting that the Bayraktars did this, and not some Turkish artillery laughing

    Is it not true that after that you thought about acquiring Turkish
    drones and the cancellation of decisions on the acquisition of the Shell? bully
    1. Sky strike fighter
      Sky strike fighter 10 June 2020 18: 16 New
      +1
      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
      1. Cristall
        Cristall 10 June 2020 21: 00 New
        -1
        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.
    2. Cyril G ...
      Cyril G ... 13 June 2020 10: 50 New
      0
      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
    prior 10 June 2020 17: 33 New
    +5
    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
    Servisinzhener 10 June 2020 17: 36 New
    +5
    And the ZRPK "Pantsir" is capable of shooting down. If it is controlled by the right hands.
  • Viktor Sergeev
    Viktor Sergeev 10 June 2020 17: 42 New
    +5
    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
    Zaurbek 10 June 2020 18: 38 New
    0
    Air defense has specific standards for what and how to bring down. What are these speculations for?
  • Dikson
    Dikson 10 June 2020 18: 59 New
    0
    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
    A.TOR 10 June 2020 19: 03 New
    0
    number of simultaneously hit aerodynamic targets

    - usually written "simultaneously fired", but whether or not this is the second question
  • saylor1971
    saylor1971 10 June 2020 20: 33 New
    +3
    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.
    1. Cyril G ...
      Cyril G ... 13 June 2020 18: 20 New
      0
      Quote: saylor1971
      And Turkey HAS

      May I ask where you see IT there?
  • lekalpan
    lekalpan 10 June 2020 21: 26 New
    0
    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
    chingachguc 10 June 2020 22: 06 New
    0
    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
    ficus2003 11 June 2020 00: 39 New
    0
    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
    johnson-73 11 June 2020 14: 22 New
    0
    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
    013Azer 11 June 2020 15: 25 New
    0
    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)
    1. johnson-73
      johnson-73 11 June 2020 16: 52 New
      0
      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
    alaarsen 11 June 2020 21: 48 New
    0
    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
    Revolver 12 June 2020 05: 03 New
    0
    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 ...
    Cyril G ... 12 June 2020 13: 49 New
    0
    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.