A snapshot of three types of Pantsir complexes appeared on the web in one system

The image that appeared on the Web after one of the trainings in preparation for the Victory Parade aroused interest among users. We are talking about a frame where, during the passage of a mechanized column, three types of “Pantsir” anti-aircraft missile-gun systems were recorded at once.

What kind of “Armor” will we see at the parade, which will be held today on Red Square in Moscow.

As previously reported by the Ministry of Defense, three types of air defense missile systems will be presented in a mechanized convoy: the Arctic "Shell", currently in service with the "Shell-C1" and the promising, specially created for the Russian army new "Shell-SM".

I must say that we’ll introduce a completely new car that hasn’t been shown anywhere - the “Shell-SM”. We will have three types of "Shell": "Shell-SM", normal and "Arctic"

- said Army Commander-in-Chief Oleg Salyukov on this occasion.

Thus, it can be stated that two complexes of the "Shell" - the Arctic and standing in service - have already been demonstrated at previous parades. Interest is the new complex "Shell-SM".

According to available information, the new ZRPK was created specifically for the Russian army, it will not be exported. The anti-aircraft complex is located on the Tornado-K wheeled chassis. To fight drones Pantsir-SM has smaller missiles than standard ones. It was also reported about the installation of a new multifunctional sighting station with a phased antenna array, which allows you to "see" targets at a distance of up to 75 km. The effective firing range of the new complex has been increased to 40 km. The complex is capable of recognizing and hitting all types of unmanned aerial vehicles.

The receipt of new air defense missiles in the Russian army is possible as early as 2021.

Comments

[Doccor18]

We are waiting in the troops of SM!

[V.I.P.]

I wonder why they do not use the BAZ chassis? According to the results of the application in Syria and Libya, they increased the channel of the radar? Have you improved your ability to work with counteracting electronic warfare? ... They haven’t abandoned the guns yet (which of them can be shot down nowadays .. against small drones they set small rockets, they are useless against helicopters and airplanes. Were they going to shoot at ground targets)?

[Cyril G ...]

The guns must be removed, or at least changed to GSh-23L. In general, in mind, leave one gun and a laser to destroy small UAVs

[businessv]

Quote: Cyril G ...

In general, in mind, leave one gun and a laser to destroy small UAVs

There was material about the battery of the Shell on firing, all four missed the cannons at a standard, linearly flying target! At least add a couple more!

[Cyril G ...]

There was a very high speed of angular displacement ... But this is certainly not an explanation.

My opinion is a fly separately, cutlets should be separate. The near-defense division should consist of a battery of anti-aircraft missile launchers, (4 combat vehicles), and an artillery platoon (2 anti-aircraft artillery systems)

[businessv]

Quote: Cyril G ...

My opinion is a fly separately, cutlets should be separate.

That’s true, but it’s both means and additional goals, colleague!

[Cyril G ...]

NIFIGA! 8 MINUSES !!! And silent. Lord minusers, would you at least explain what you so eagerly disagree with? Suddenly, I agree with your arguments!

[mvg]

Suddenly, I agree with your arguments!

And next to carry a small power station. Kilowatts at least 300 .. for a laser. 800 million ® per Shell + three-dimensional laser, a very tasty target is obtained. Most importantly, against 10-15 kamikaze UAVs, $ 10 thousand is defenseless

[Kolka Semenov]

I put a plus for you, the rest were minus. GSH-23 it sewed on soap. If you remove the guns, then remove completely and replace with a large number of missiles. At the same time, putting a laser and holding missiles will not work - the installation will be like a T-35 tank. Or a laser, or rockets. Together will not take off.

[Cyril G ...]

I then proposed on the same chassis platform to have in the composition of the air defense division and guns and launchers

[Kolka Semenov]

But is the installation too complicated? Maybe it’s better to buy additional Su-35s and not to bathe? :)

[Kasym]

Nikolay, in my opinion, it will be more expensive. The number of NATO aircraft will be hard to beat. And keeping fighters constantly in the air is an expensive task.
The guns can be used not only in the form of air defense (I think that they are mainly against turntables - in Syria the barmalei do not have them), but also for ground targets (lightly armored targets or infantry).

[Kolka Semenov]

It is expensive, inexpensive, and the Su-35 in combination with the ZGRLS Container has one indisputable advantage - they can shoot down carriers. On the territory of the Russian Federation there are hundreds of military and thousands of civilian objects of strategic importance, from airfields, weapons depots and GOS, to substations, power plants, factories, reservoirs, etc. You cannot attach armor to all important objects, and it can bring down carriers only with dementia among the attacking side pilots. The carapace was good precisely as a cheap cover for the last frontier, whose mass-produced missiles would be no more expensive than shells for MLRS. All these lasers, shells with programmable detonation and missiles with GOS (homing heads) are profanation of the very idea of ​​a cheap air defense system of the last frontier. With the help of the deaf air defense of the enemy can not be defeated.

[Cyril G ...]

and the Su-35 in combination with the ZGRLS Container has one indisputable advantage - they can shoot down carriers.

I agree. The problem is different after the catastrophe of the initial period of the Second World War, the authorities remembered the "effectiveness" of our aviation very well and therefore invested huge sums of money in the air defense troops and at the beginning this was confirmed in Vietnam. However, the wars in the Middle East made people think that one should be very good at air defense. There are no palliatives. Wanting to have an effective army is expensive. And the army is primarily a way of protecting its power and position. And it has already begun to reach some people in Moscow. But sabotage is enough, however, and erroneous decisions too.

Quote: Kolka Semyonov

All these lasers, shells with programmable detonation and missiles with GOS (homing heads) are profanation of the very idea of ​​a cheap air defense system of the last frontier.

Programmable undermining shells or missiles with ARGSN are really profanity in terms of near-boundary systems. But for some reason, the Jews claim that their SAM with ARGSN for the LCD costs exactly 30 times cheaper than, for example, the RVV AiM-120 purchase in 2019. They lie for sure.

[Kolka Semenov]

Quote: Cyril G ...

Programmable undermining shells or missiles with ARGSN are really profanity in terms of near-boundary systems. But for some reason, the Jews claim that their SAM with ARGSN for the LCD costs exactly 30 times cheaper than, for example, the RVV AiM-120 purchase in 2019. They lie for sure.

Yes they lie, of course. ARLGSN will never be cheap, and even if you manage to bring down the price for it, then in any case it will not be massive - production is too complicated. Their niche is air-to-air missiles where they are needed as air (pun intended), or some 40N6 against AWACS, strategic drones, or PP. The near, and even average, air defense should be cheap and it should not be the basis of defense.

As for aviation during the Second World War, this is clearly offtopic for this news. But there are no grounds to consider the Su-35 or Su-57 weak. These are the best fighters in their class and not just in Russia but throughout the world. In combination with ZGRLS, ed. 180 + R-37, they can do such things that it can cost a likely adversary a defeat.

[mvg]

But there are no grounds to consider the Su-35 or Su-57 weak. These are the best fighters in their class and not just in Russia but throughout the world.

"Do not pour Saturn anymore" ®

[il-z]

For computer shooting, such a modification is just right, the presence of a working laser in the seat / dvuhdyushka (CD / RW - DVD / RW) does not mean that it can be put on any chassis and bullet wherever you want and at what distance you want. In principle, you can put it, and even use it to cut parts from wood, plastic and thin metal, or to damage vision at a short distance, well, purely from the principle (so that the goat was with a button accordion). So I think, therefore, the cons, did not appreciate the people of your subtle humor ....

[Nikolaevich I]

Quote: V.I.P.

... The guns have not been abandoned yet

Duc, there is also a variant, “gunless”, ... ,, pure, rocket!

[Grazdanin]

Quote: V.I.P.

I wonder why they do not use the BAZ chassis?

It turns out too high on KAMAZ, it doesn’t climb under bridges.

[rocket757]

Under the bridges, yeah! In our village, they collected all the air lines, which are not very clever smart computer scientists who didn’t hang up on Feng Shui!

[Piramidon]

Quote: Grazdanin

Quote: V.I.P.

I wonder why they do not use the BAZ chassis?

It turns out too high on KAMAZ, it doesn’t climb under bridges.

Have you already tried to put this system on the BAZ chassis, test it, drive it under the bridges and compare it in height, cross-country ability and other parameters, or just tryndet?

[Piramidon]

Quote: V.I.P.

I wonder why they do not use the BAZ chassis?

Why does KAMAZ not suit you? Or are you one of those for whom everything is bad and just to poke? Belarusian chassis are bad for you, mine too.

[V.I.P.]

Belarusian chassis are good. No wonder they tried to buy the MZKT by hook or by crook. But Lukashenko did not sell .... Kamaz somersault ....

[_M_]

Verbal diarrhea overpowered?

[Mountain shooter]

AFAR - this is not bad ... all the same, we mastered our mass production of modules ... You can’t buy it in China, you need it yourself. Range and accuracy have grown. The guns were left - as the last frontier of defense. Certainly took into account the experience of fighting with Turkish UAVs. In all senses.

[loki565]

Instead of guns, it is better to add a package of missiles, as in the Arctic version.

[Alex777]

In the Arctic Shell - 18 missiles, in the TZM of Shell-SM - 24 missiles.

[loki565]

In the Arctic Shell - 18 missiles, in the TZM of Shell-SM - 24 missiles.

There is no all-round radar on it

[Alex777]

This photo on the previous branch I posted.
In response, I received a question - where is the operator’s cabin?
He answered in detail about external target designation.

Alex777 (Alexander) June 20, 2020 14:57

Transport-loading vehicle "Shell" will be able to fire missiles at target designation from the complex locator. Ammunition of such a machine can have 24 missiles instead of 12 of the usual "Shell", said in an interview with TASS Valery Slugin - chief designer for air defense systems of the Design Bureau of Instrument Engineering named after Shipunova (part of the "High-precision complexes" of the state corporation "Rostec"). “We plan to develop a support tool that will have even more ammunition,” said Slugin. He clarified that “it is possible to make a transport-loading vehicle transport-combat: put it in a simplified control system, target designation from the main vehicle, but enable this transport-combat vehicle to fire itself.”

Source: http://bastion-opk.ru/pantsir-sm/ OVT “WEAPONS OF THE FATHERLANDS” AVKarpenko

[loki565]

Yes, they talked about this last year, we are talking a little about something else. At a full-fledged complex, replace cannon weapons with an additional package of missiles, as it is in real life ineffective.

[Alex777]

On ships, I myself am a supporter of a pure rocket launcher. On 16 - 18 missiles. I would put ZAK separately.
On earth, the combination of ZRAK and SAM, proposed in the Shell-SM, is perhaps more universal.

[Cyril G ...]

Quote: Alex777

On ships, I myself am a supporter of a pure rocket launcher. On 16 - 18 missiles. I would put ZAK separately.

And here you are absolutely right.

Quote: Alex777

On earth, the combination of ZRAK and SAM, proposed in the Shell-SM, is perhaps more universal.

I do not think so. It is better to have specialized missile and artillery vehicles within the division / battery. For example, you can have a KP, 4 SAMs and 2 ZAKs in the division, all must be installed on a standard chassis within the division.

[Cyril G ...]

Is that what you think?

[loki565]

Is that what you think?

This is the Arctic complex Pantsir-SA, and it was about TZM, it has 24 missiles, but there is no all-round radar.

[knn54]

New challenges, new solutions.

[businessv]

a promising new "Pantsir-SM" created especially for the Russian army.

Great news! We are waiting for the news about deliveries to the troops!

[rocket757]

Raznosortitsa, it is always difficult, for MTO and in service. But, there are many tasks, it is necessary to comply, and even better to preempt!

[Igoresha]

we saw such in Libya-Syria, not impressed

[Volodin]

What "such", let me ask you, have you "seen" in Syria and Libya?

[Uncle Izya]

We live in the era of the Internet, I probably meant it

[Igoresha]

We live in the era of the Internet, I probably meant it

quite right, they saw the burned ones so that they would bring down someone - alas

[Prahlad]

So "SM" has not yet been seen, this is a completely new car, only the name is similar. There is nothing from the old shell. The c-1 carapace cannot be upgraded to the "SM" level. "A completely different car.

[mitroha]

Don’t feed you the troll, his body will be smashed by a queue, the head will still not be hit, not hit

[Cyril G ...]

And they saw a lot of burned ?? generally in the Internet there is a photo of 24 Turkish UAVs smashed to smithereens (Enok and Bayraktorov and the attention of 1 captured PNS Emirati Armor and one Armor broken in the hangar, one Armor on Kamaz abandoned by the Haftarovtsy on the Highway and about 6 more cartoons
about the adventures of amoebas. For Jews, the director of special effects is much better - the Turks should turn. Of the cartoons I have seen, only in two cases can a possible defeat of targets be remotely resembling Armor.
Result - 1 The armor is captured, 1 is struck in the hangar, 2 MAYBE amazed judging by the so-called flash reports, 5 complete mockery of common sense, in short is unlikely. Cartoons are designed for believers. The Syrians, however, admitted the damage to the two Armors of Idlib.

[Sether]

Chassis need Maz 543 it is more stable as on Iskander

[Cyril G ...]

Quote: mvg

Suddenly, I agree with your arguments!

And next to carry a small power station. Kilowatts at least 300 .. for a laser. 800 million ® per Shell + three-dimensional laser, a very tasty target is obtained. Most importantly, against 10-15 kamikaze UAVs, $ 10 thousand is defenseless

is it better that all Kamikaze hit the targets? Well, for example, the S-400 complex fire control radar and a hardware container?
My thought expressed, extremely raw, however,

In the summer of 2019, such a machine was calculated to be in Libya, where the forces of the Libyan National Army Khalifa Haftar successfully attacked the forces of the Government of National Accord. On August 4, 2019, a Wing Loong II UAV belonging to the Haftar army was shot down with a laser gun.

[agond]

The carapace is too vulnerable complex, a long tall machine, visible from afar, prone to tipping over (center of gravity high) and very expensive since they placed a detection system and missiles with guns on one chassis, that is, they put all their eggs in one basket, so it’s impossible when even a minor malfunction can disable the entire complex; instead of creating one machine, you should create as a minimum two, one with missiles and the other with guns and let them work in tandem