Military Review
Sign in Sign up

Ground Forces will receive their own version of the "Ptitselov" air defense system

54
Ground Forces will receive their own version of the "Ptitselov" air defense system

The ground forces will receive their own version of the new anti-aircraft missile system "Ptitselov", developed for the Airborne Forces. Reported by "News" with reference to the Ministry of Defense.


The Ministry of Defense has made a decision in principle to modify the Ptitselov anti-aircraft complex, which is being created for the Airborne Forces, for operation in the Ground Forces. Unlike the landing version, created on the basis of the BMD-4M, the "land" version will be created on the basis of the BMP-3. According to available data, in the ground version, the complex can receive more long-range missiles than in the landing one.

The new air defense system for the Airborne Forces should be tested in two years. According to the schedule of test stages, it is also planned to complete the R&D work on the development of the land-based Ptitselov and its tests by the end of 2022. Development is being carried out in parallel.

It is planned that the new air defense system will replace obsolete Soviet-developed complexes in the troops. The main purpose of the "Ptitselov" air defense system is to protect equipment and personnel on the march from drones of all types and high-precision weapons.

As previously reported, the complex will be equipped with a round-the-clock all-weather optical-location station with a circular view. Unlike Strela, which uses the same detection method, Birds will direct anti-aircraft missiles using a laser control channel. Variants of the simplified BM "Pantsir" or the SAM "Sosna" were previously considered as a combat module for the new air defense system, there is no exact information on this.

The Ministry of Defense plans that the Ptitselov air defense system should first of all replace the outdated Strela-10 air defense system and its modifications used both in the Airborne Forces and in the Ground Forces.
54 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Herman 4223
    Herman 4223 31 August 2020 14: 56 New
    +5
    The most important thing about radiation is not to find such a contraption. She would still have a low-visibility hull, it would immediately become a nightmare for aircraft at low altitudes.
    1. svp67
      svp67 31 August 2020 15: 06 New
      +1
      Quote: Herman 4223
      She would still have a low-visibility hull, it would immediately become a nightmare for aircraft at low altitudes.

      Well, the aircraft of this air defense system will have to work when everything else cannot cope with its task. But at the expense of the chassis, here I would rather suggest not BMP-3, but BT-3 and better in modification "F"
      1. Herman 4223
        Herman 4223 31 August 2020 15: 34 New
        +5
        Isn't the BT-3 based on the BMP-3?
        They have the same chassis.
        1. svp67
          svp67 31 August 2020 15: 53 New
          0
          Quote: Herman 4223
          Isn't the BT-3 based on the BMP-3?
          They have the same chassis.

          A lot was taken, but the BT-3 has its own body
          1. Boris Chernikov
            Boris Chernikov 31 August 2020 16: 25 New
            +1
            whether the car will turn out too high? And it is doubtful that the army will be interested ... now we need maximum unification and a series this year, and not again in 2 years maybe ..
          2. PSih2097
            PSih2097 31 August 2020 16: 36 New
            +3
            As for me, the case of the matalyga will be more comfortable ... although she (MT-LB) has not yet come up with a sane modern analogue.
            1. K-36
              K-36 31 August 2020 16: 48 New
              +2
              Quote: PSih2097
              Until now, a sane modern analogue has not been invented.

              It only says that you are not very scrupulous about the new products presented at the Army 2020 yes Here's the updated bike:
              https://rg.ru/2020/08/31/izdelie-7-modernizirovannuiu-motolygu-predstavili-na-armii-2020.html
              hi
              1. PSih2097
                PSih2097 31 August 2020 17: 12 New
                0
                I'm talking about a modern analogue of a matalyga type like Armata tank / Boomerang BTR / Kurganets BTR, and not about its deep modernization ...
                from your link ...
                At the International Military-Technical Forum "Army-2020" a sample of the updated machine, which received the designation "Product 7".
                1. K-36
                  K-36 31 August 2020 17: 39 New
                  +2
                  Quote: PSih2097
                  I'm talking about a modern analogue of matalyga

                  I dare to note that they are actively working with MT-LB. Two samples were presented at Army 2020: 1) MGTT-LB; 2) MGSH - LBU.
                  https://vpk.name/news/415441_na_armii-2020_pokazhut_modernizirovannye_gusenichnye_tyagachi_mgtt-lb_i_mgsh-lbu.html
                  Please do not think that I am trying to criticize you in any way. love It is not.
                  My posts (albeit addressed to you) are addressed to increase the horizons of the rest of the readers of this topic. And so with respect drinks
                  1. PSih2097
                    PSih2097 31 August 2020 17: 46 New
                    +3
                    Here's an option, about which I know that work on this topic was carried out ...
    2. 210ox
      210ox 31 August 2020 15: 22 New
      +2
      Aircraft at the range of destruction and will not go. This catcher is dangerous primarily for helicopters.
      1. svp67
        svp67 31 August 2020 15: 54 New
        +3
        Quote: 210ox
        Aircraft at the range of destruction and will not go.

        A-10 and Su-25 can reach the range of destruction
      2. PSih2097
        PSih2097 31 August 2020 17: 21 New
        0
        Quote: 210ox
        Aircraft at the range of destruction and will not go. This catcher is dangerous primarily for helicopters.

        the turntables are now working from behind the hill (they got up - the radar was processed - the hellfire was launched), it will not work to work out the air defense, and the work on drones is also questionable.
  2. Magic archer
    Magic archer 31 August 2020 15: 12 New
    0
    It is more than strange to aim a rocket at a laser beam. How could not it be easier to use the mlm range homing head? Or has our lag in electronics become so critical ?!
    1. Cyril G ...
      Cyril G ... 31 August 2020 15: 21 New
      +4
      Quote: Magic Archer
      How could not it be easier to use the mlm range homing head?


      No, it’s not easier, it’s very expensive.
      1. Lopatov
        Lopatov 31 August 2020 15: 49 New
        +4
        Quote: Cyril G ...
        No, it’s not easier, it’s very expensive.

        The interference immunity is much higher. Therefore, you can put up with a lower fire performance.
        1. Cyril G ...
          Cyril G ... 31 August 2020 15: 50 New
          +2
          Quote: Spade
          The interference immunity is much higher.


          Who has the higher noise immunity?
          1. Lopatov
            Lopatov 31 August 2020 15: 51 New
            +4
            Have a laser beam.
            Perhaps, you can even call a record holder on this basis.
            1. Cyril G ...
              Cyril G ... 31 August 2020 15: 54 New
              +4
              Then I agree.
            2. KCA
              KCA 31 August 2020 15: 57 New
              0
              At what intensity of interference? Say, the explosion of an ordinary noise-light grenade will not have any effect on the seeker by a laser beam? And why "Curtain" is being fenced in here?
              1. Boris Chernikov
                Boris Chernikov 31 August 2020 16: 28 New
                +2
                but where to put interference? here, in fact, the principle of the ATGM-missile flies in the beam, the lasers-receiver is located behind, so here the option is only to try to blind the aiming system of the air defense missile system itself ... and this is expensive at the moment, it's easier to launch a rocket at it, well, if you identify
                1. KCA
                  KCA 31 August 2020 16: 34 New
                  0
                  But the beam receiver of the rocket is not perpendicular to the laser source, which means the view of the entire rear hemisphere, and a strong light source may well illuminate it
                  1. Boris Chernikov
                    Boris Chernikov 31 August 2020 16: 41 New
                    +1
                    and who will be bothered with the development of a system that, in theory, can protect against one threat ... yes, and it's hard for me to imagine such a source that can knock down guidance, not to mention the device of the receiver that complicates its illumination
                  2. Lopatov
                    Lopatov 31 August 2020 18: 32 New
                    +1
                    Quote: KCA
                    and a strong light source may well illuminate it

                    Can not.
                    There are no such strong sources of IR study between the missile and the launcher.
              2. Vlad.by
                Vlad.by 31 August 2020 16: 32 New
                +1
                So after all, it is difficult to screw the Curtain onto a helicopter or UAV, or rather practically useless. Only if for the hover mode, and then, with hemorrhoids and perversions.
                What's the point? The operation of the Curtain for the helicopter in hovering mode, even if the cloud is not blown away by the stream, such a good beacon - here I am, shoot me with everything that is!
                It, of course, if you choose - a rocket in the forehead or a Shtora, then Shtora is better, but ... no matter how it gets worse later. A deaf-blind-mute helicopter with an illuminated location ... a tidbit.
              3. Grazdanin
                Grazdanin 31 August 2020 16: 34 New
                +3
                Does it bother you that we are talking about air defense? What grenades on a cruise missile? Or do they put a curtain on the UAV?
              4. Lopatov
                Lopatov 31 August 2020 18: 26 New
                +1
                Quote: KCA
                Say, the explosion of an ordinary noise-light grenade will not have any effect on the seeker by a laser beam?

                There is no GOS
              5. alexmach
                alexmach 1 September 2020 12: 20 New
                +1
                Say, the explosion of an ordinary noise-light grenade will not have any effect on the seeker by a laser beam?

                It will not, since there is no GOS at all.
    2. Lopatov
      Lopatov 31 August 2020 15: 47 New
      +1
      Quote: Magic Archer
      It is more than strange to aim a rocket at a laser beam.

      https://missilery.info/search?r=458d65814a19fd9a154e23f1118dedfc
    3. svp67
      svp67 31 August 2020 15: 55 New
      +4
      Quote: Magic Archer
      It is more than strange to aim a rocket at a laser beam.

      Normal, CHEAP and PRACTICAL. The plane, until the last moment, does not receive information that it is under fire ...
      1. Lopatov
        Lopatov 31 August 2020 18: 42 New
        +3
        Quote: svp67
        Normal, CHEAP and PRACTICAL. The plane, until the last moment, does not receive information that it is under fire ...

        Receives.
        Firstly, there are still sensors for warning about laser irradiation on the aircraft.
        Second, the "torch" of the rocket.

        It's just that the crew is severely limited in retaliation. Just shy away.
    4. qQQQ
      qQQQ 31 August 2020 16: 27 New
      +4
      Quote: Magic Archer
      It is more than strange to aim a rocket at a laser beam. How could not it be easier to use the mlm range homing head? Or has our lag in electronics become so critical ?!

      Laser guidance on a short section is the most accurate, almost 100%, everything else is taken away by interference, regardless of the range.
  3. Al_lexx
    Al_lexx 31 August 2020 15: 18 New
    -6
    Laser guidance .. For air defense, IMHO complete crap. Irradiation is detected once or twice. The target went into the clouds and dosvidos escort.
    1. evgen1221
      evgen1221 31 August 2020 15: 19 New
      +1
      Forgot the rain, the same result.
      1. Lopatov
        Lopatov 31 August 2020 15: 56 New
        +3
        Quote: evgen1221
        Forgot the rain, the same result.

        They say that thermal imagers still work in the rain ...
        1. evgen1221
          evgen1221 31 August 2020 16: 51 New
          0
          I mean aiming along the lazar beam.
          1. Lopatov
            Lopatov 31 August 2020 18: 34 New
            +2
            Quote: evgen1221
            I mean aiming along the lazar beam.

            Well...
            The IR laser beam is definitely more powerful than the "beams" that the thermal imager receives from the target.
    2. svp67
      svp67 31 August 2020 15: 58 New
      +2
      Quote: Al_lexx
      Irradiation is detected once or twice.

      This is if the target is highlighted, and if the laser beam is used as a command beam and guides the missile away from the direct route and only close to the target the equipment gives the command to change the trajectory to defeat ...
    3. qQQQ
      qQQQ 31 August 2020 16: 28 New
      0
      Quote: Al_lexx
      Laser guidance .. For air defense, IMHO complete crap. Irradiation is detected once or twice. The target went into the clouds and dosvidos escort.

      You have not seen how all these Arrows, that 1, that 10, go to the side at the slightest cloud, not to mention organized interference.
      1. sivuch
        sivuch 1 September 2020 10: 29 New
        +1
        Strange, they lie, it means that the 9M37M is quite capable of selecting optical interference.
        It turns out that when Arrows-10 shot down A-10 and Mirazhi F1, there were no clouds at all.
        1. qQQQ
          qQQQ 1 September 2020 14: 46 New
          0
          Quote: sivuch
          Strange, they lie, it means that the 9M37M is quite capable of selecting optical interference.
          It turns out that when Arrows-10 shot down A-10 and Mirazhi F1, there were no clouds at all.

          I attended the Strela-2 and Strela-10 launches many times, there were hits, but there were no fewer sideways, and these are ideal conditions. Read the statistics of Arrow launches on, it seems, SU-25, in Georgia, somewhere I read that a fair amount was fired one at a time and especially to no avail. If a self-guided missile launch is noticed, then jamming is not a problem. But if the rocket goes along the laser path, then, again, in my opinion, only the aerosol cloud will save, but given the speed of the aircraft, it will jump out of it earlier.
    4. Boris Chernikov
      Boris Chernikov 31 August 2020 16: 28 New
      -1
      and hello to SAM S-300, Buki and Pantsiri with Torah ...
    5. Cyril G ...
      Cyril G ... 31 August 2020 16: 40 New
      0
      From the moment the target that entered the zone of destruction of the air defense missile system will be irradiated with a laser until it hits, it will take about 10-15 seconds offhand
    6. Hey
      Hey 31 August 2020 18: 13 New
      +1
      The target went into the clouds

      And this is a disruption of a combat mission by an aircraft. And in the clouds, something more abruptly, with a big-eyed and longer-range is already waiting for him.
  4. Cyril G ...
    Cyril G ... 31 August 2020 15: 20 New
    +4
    I didn't understand humor, they said Arrow-10 will be replaced by Pine
    1. Lopatov
      Lopatov 31 August 2020 15: 52 New
      +6
      Apparently, "Birdies" is "Pine", but on a different base.
      1. garri-lin
        garri-lin 31 August 2020 17: 04 New
        +1
        It was believed that Pine was for ordinary troops. Birds for the Airborne Forces. Modification on a different chassis. But this article refutes. Or the author writes without understanding.
  5. Free wind
    Free wind 31 August 2020 15: 22 New
    -3
    How can you say that everything will be ready in 2 years. I'm not planning ahead for a week. Laser guidance, will he have time to fire at least one missile?
  6. Husit
    Husit 31 August 2020 15: 32 New
    -1
    "Birdies" will come up with our names .. !!!! In the last year, almost every day there were articles about new developments. Well done!
  7. rruvim
    rruvim 31 August 2020 16: 15 New
    0
    The photo shows the P-15 radar and the Strela air defense missile system ... It is not even clear why they are nearby. The Strela operator has no "connection" with the P-15 indicator. Only in words if ...
    1. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA 31 August 2020 17: 29 New
      +1
      Quote: rruvim
      The photo shows the P-15 radar and the Strela air defense missile system ... It is not even clear why they are nearby. The Strela operator has no "connection" with the P-15 indicator. Only in words if ...

      Judging by the concrete buildings, it is very likely that these are stationary positions of the RTV from the VKS-ovskaya air defense. And the military "arrows" simply represent a cover.
      1. rruvim
        rruvim 31 August 2020 17: 44 New
        0
        Too close to the radar, they themselves can fall under the "fragments" of the AARGM-in (Advanced Anti-Radiation Guided Missile).
        1. rruvim
          rruvim 31 August 2020 17: 48 New
          0
          And SAM "Strela-10M" (rocket) is not able to shoot down AGRM-ku on approach, different speeds and method of guidance. Arrow has only "warmth".
    2. sivuch
      sivuch 1 September 2020 10: 32 New
      0
      The photo shows the P-15 radar and the Strela air defense system.
      And where did you see the butterfly there? I'm just a rake, and it's not clear - P-12 or P-18.