The improvement of the "Tor" air defense system is going on continuously

The General Director of Kupola noted that “work on improving our main products continues continuously. This work is aimed at improving all the tactical and technical characteristics of our air defense systems, in particular, expanding the target engagement zone, increasing the ability to intercept small-sized, low-flying and high-speed air attack weapons, increasing noise immunity, further automation and robotization of combat work, and increasing all fire and reconnaissance capabilities. ... Work is underway to modernize both the complex as a whole and its key components and devices. More advanced phased array antennas, passive detectors, calculators, etc. are being developed. A large block of work is aimed at transitioning to a modern element base, this is generally a constant, continuous process. The carrier base is being diversified, in particular, products on a wheeled floating chassis will appear in the SAM model range. We also strive to make the Tor-M2 air defense system interspecific: we are working on the creation of a ship-based complex. We are systematically moving forward in all these areas. "

Earlier, the Chief of the Air Defense of the Ground Forces, Lieutenant General A.P. Leonov, reported:

“To carry out the necessary R&D and create the necessary scientific groundwork, JSC IEMZ Kupol has 2 design bureaus: a special design bureau (SKB) with 60 people and a Special design bureau with 300 people. After the formation of the SKB in 2013, its number has already increased 4 times and, taking into account the scale of the tasks facing the IEMZ Kupol, it is predicted for further growth. Concentration of scientific potential under unified management allows to significantly reduce the development time of prototypes, accelerate the implementation of circuit design solutions to improve serial products, create the necessary scientific groundwork for the future and ensure a high level of scientific and technical potential. "

Efforts aimed at improving the "Kupolsk" short-range air defense systems regularly bear fruit. In particular, in 2020, the upgraded set of communications equipment (KSS) of the BM SAM "Tor-M2" was successfully tested. The new KSS significantly expands the combat and reconnaissance capabilities of the complex. The BM SAM "Tor-M2" now has the ability to control the combat operation of air defense systems of lower levels - ZPRK, ZAK, MANPADS, etc. When working in the "mixed link" mode, BM SAM "Tor" acts for them as a command vehicle. Thanks to the integration into a single link of BM of different classes, it became possible to use the powerful Tor-M2 air defense missile system to detect air defense systems, and to destroy them, according to target designation from the command vehicle, inexpensive air defense weapons of lower links. In fact, an adequate method has been found for countering massive modern air attack weapons (such as UAVs).

As a result of regular upgrades, the Tor family air defense systems retain their leading positions in the short-range air defense system class, and the troops receive more and more advanced products over and over again. It is to be expected that the Tor-M2 SAM system of the 2021 model will have improved performance characteristics compared to those previously released.

Comments

[Vladimir_2U]

Thanks to the integration into a single link of BM of different classes, it became possible to use the powerful Tor-M2 air defense missile system to detect air defense systems, and to destroy them, according to target designation from the command vehicle, inexpensive air defense weapons of lower links.

The network structure is also capable of resisting massive raids of the Kyrgyz Republic and other air attack weapons!

[Emil mamedoff]

Got-baş eləmişik sizi

[sivuch]

exactly . This is what the article says - what needs to be done so that there is no such situevina - a bunch of ASPs, and heterogeneous ones, against a lonely BM.
By the way, the article does not say a word about the creation of new small-sized missiles - analogs of Nails for the Shell

[voyaka uh]

"To the dead - a poultice."
Missiles without an active seeker.
An electronic warfare module is now being inserted into any gliding bomb or drone-kamikadze.
The missiles will miss the target without noticing it. Because, will lose purpose
ground radar.

[sivuch]

Slikha, do you even understand what you are writing? That is, do they cram electronic warfare equipment into any SDB or Sky Striker? Is there a place and a source of electricity there? Well, okay, let's say they sniffed it.
So the rocket seeker and the size of the antenna and the power output are incomparably less than that of the SSTs. If the seeker of an explosive missile is compensated for by the difference in the range to the target (where is the rocket and where is the carrier plane), then for Thor with his short ranges, there is no point in the active radar head. It's another matter if you meant IR or TPV head - but, on the contrary, they are passive.

[1Alexey]

Quote: voyaka uh

Missiles without an active seeker.
An electronic warfare module is now being inserted into any gliding bomb or drone-kamikadze.

Why do you think that electronic warfare will not affect the missile's active seeker?

[voyaka uh]

Which rocket? Which is attacking Thor himself?
How can electronic warfare interfere with the scanning video camera in the head of a rocket
aim a rocket at Thor?
The radio wave cannot interfere with the optics in any way.
Electronic warfare confuses only radars:
1) or radars in the GOS SAM (such as S-300/400 missiles) or a long-range explosive missile
and / or
2) ground radar (Pantsir, Thor), if there is no radar in the rocket head.

[1Alexey]

Then you need to correctly place accents. Thus, you do not mean the transition to an active missile seeker, which (seeker) can also be based on radar, but the replacement of the radar with optics.

To do this, it is not necessary to switch to the active seeker of the rocket; this method can also be used by a ground guidance system (for example, in the Sosna air defense missile system).

But systems based on optics (laser or video) have their own problems with interference.

You can, of course, combine several methods at once and sometimes this is done (for example, radar and thermal). But such approaches do not always work.

It is easier to resist interference from more powerful ground systems. Although there are problems here (anti-location missiles and visibility of the radio horizon)

[voyaka uh]

Ground-based optics cannot replace radar.
Optics - "narrow". And the distances are not the same.
Optimal: ground AFAR + IR optics in the rocket head.
It is even better when there are missiles and radar and optics in the head. But many times more expensive.

[1Alexey]

I already wrote about this when correcting my comment. It's just that your answer came when I was typing the correction just about this.

All this is true, but it must be borne in mind that there are methods of countering various types of interference. Pro-interference systems are more logical to place on the ground, because:
firstly, more powerful systems can be located on the ground;
secondly, on the ground, such systems will be reusable, and on a rocket - only once (the rocket will become "golden").

Regarding the replacement of the radar with optics, this is exactly what was done in "Pine" and earlier in "Wasp".

[Angry]

The complex is certainly excellent, but it also needs to do something to increase the ammunition load. If each NATO fighter can now carry twenty small-sized UABs ... it is clear that there is no possibility of increasing the ammo rack on the chassis, it is probably necessary that it be towed, with the same 16 missiles. And if the towing launcher is not rotary, and will allow all angle fire, then the zur can be even larger.

[yehat2]

Quote: Angry

And if the towing launcher is not rotary, and will allow all angle fire, then the zur can be even larger.

there only vertical launch is provided. So non-reversible without if.

[sivuch]

Actually, I have already written about one of the options - small-sized rockets, similar to "nails".
And not in existing containers

[svoit]

Quote: Angry

PU will not be rotary, and will allow you to conduct all angle fire

In general, of course, the meaning of a rotary launcher is not very clear, besides, you can make a launcher no more than 4, but a revolving type

[1Alexey]

Quote: svoit

In general, of course, the meaning in the rotary PU is not very clear

The point of the rotary launcher is to use the launch booster to fly the rocket to the target along the shortest path.
The disadvantage of this approach may be the loss of time to turn the PU. Therefore, this method is good when the approximate direction of approach of the target is known in advance (for example, in border divisions).
In some of our air defense systems, it continues to be used, for example, in the BUK families (including the latest BUK-M3).

[sivuch]

https://bmpd.livejournal.com/4249520.html Программы НИОКР ГосМКБ «Вымпел» имени И.И. Торопова
Significant work has been done and an engineering project has been prepared defining the design of a new short-range anti-aircraft guided missile of small dimensions in general and its components for the modernization of the Tor-M2 air defense system.

[svoit]

Quote: 1Alexey

The disadvantage of this approach may be the loss of time to turn the PU.

Then what about the channel? After all, the air defense system will be attacked from different directions and it will not even be possible to determine the most dangerous target, not to mention the fact that there would be enough time to turn. The rotary launcher can still be tolerated for single targets, but there will be group and multi-angle targets everywhere.