Anti-aircraft missile "positive": the Navy began to shoot at real targets


Photo: YouTube / TV Channel Zvezda

26.05.2021/XNUMX/XNUMX, the official statement of the Ministry of Defense:

The crew of the frigate "Admiral Grigorovich" successfully fired the Shtil anti-aircraft missile system during a joint exercise with the Utyos and Bal anti-ship missile systems ... during which more than 10 missile launches were carried out from the ship and coastal complexes.
... the combat crews of coastal missile systems were tasked with searching and, after detecting, firing several Progress and Uranus missiles at a sea target. In turn, the frigate's crew discovered air targets, took them for escort and successfully hit them, ... using the Shtil anti-aircraft missile system.


Actually news this is very positive, and on a number of issues.

Photo: Russian Ministry of Defense

Previously, anti-aircraft firing of the Navy was conducted at relatively large-size target missiles of the RM-15 type, often at a deliberately high flight altitude (for example, recent shootings of the "Thundering" corvette), that is, absolutely inconsistent with real targets, or, in general, at parachute targets (tests and firing RTOs "Odintsovo").

The discrepancy between the real parameters of targets and target missiles for air defense systems was one of the most critical problems of the air defense of the Navy.

And now the situation has begun to change. Participation in the exercises of the coastal complex "Bal" indicates the use of a small-sized low-flying target PM24 (analogue of the most massive western anti-ship missile system "Harpoon").

A number of details on it were given in the presentation of the Tor-MF air defense system and tests from the Tor-M2KM autonomous combat module (ABM) on the Admiral Grigorovich frigate (in 2018) at the International Maritime Defense Show IMDS-2019.

Obviously, the RM-24 (created on the basis of the 3M24 Uranium anti-ship missile system and the ITs-35 target) is a full-fledged analogue of the Harpoon anti-ship missile system, while the Saman targets (based on the Osa air defense missile system ) can in no way be considered such an analogue (primarily due to the inability to fly at low altitude).

At the same time, it is worth recalling that in 2018, when the Navy first used the RM-24, they were afraid to shoot at it, having specially driven it into the water on the border of the SAM engagement zones. At the same time, it is worth noting that the "land" SAM "Tor-M2KM", which was not completely finalized for sea conditions, was then detected at a great distance and confidently accompanied the RM-24, ensuring the use of missiles on it (those who hit the target already "in the water") ...

In yesterday's firing of the Admiral Grigorovich, the Thor worked again. Despite the fact that there was no official information on his participation, all residents of Sevastopol could see him on the helipad of the frigate "Grigorovich" in recent days, and the official video of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation clearly shows the trace of the "Torovsk" rocket.

Photo: Vesti92 / Zvezda TV channel

According to updated information, during the recent hostilities in Karabakh, the complex proved to be very successful. However, in the naval version, the land-based Tor-M2KM, in particular, has significant rolling angles restrictions (for this and a number of other features of the Tor-M2KM, a tough and heated discussion took place at the above-mentioned IMMS-19 event).

And the most important question here is - where is the "ship Thor", which was supposed to be tested in 2017? What is the reason for such an unacceptable delay in deadlines on the acute topic of air defense?

It is a pity that the missile boat (RKA) "Shuya" from the Black Sea did not take part in these firing. fleet with the Pantsir-M complex, comparative rocket firing is what our fleet really needs.

And here there is another very problematic factor of the air defense of the Navy.

RM-24 is very good, but not enough. It is too expensive and small-scale. And with all its good characteristics, it is impossible to provide mass combat training with it.
In addition, having a heavy turbojet engine, the PM24 is, although much less, but a serious danger to ships (if accidentally hitting the side).

What is the hit of a target missile on a ship, our Navy knows too well (the catastrophe of the MRK "Monsoon" and a number of other ships of the USSR Navy). Accordingly, for safety reasons, when shooting, it is necessary to significantly increase the parameter, extremely strict restrictions are imposed on the organization of firing (it is very difficult to create complex tactical episodes and to practice repelling real strikes of enemy air weapons).

Officer (cap. 1st rank) from the Feodosiya training ground (at the Tsushima forum):

The most important condition for each firing ship was the parameter of the flight from the air defense missile system of the target missile (the minimum distance at which the RM approached the carrier ship of the air defense missile system). Much had to be taken into account, since the official documents provided for security measures only for BP without taking into account the special requirements for testing modern air defense systems. And the job had to be done. Deep knowledge of technology, ships and the practical experience of the testers helped. God had mercy, and there were no accidents during the shooting at the Polygon ... Somewhat violating the basic documents on the safety of joint shooting, sometimes it was possible to achieve a parameter of up to 1,5 km or less, the command of the 31 ITs strongly encouraged this, but within certain safe limits.

And here it is extremely useful to recall the foreign experience with mass and fairly light UAV targets, which provide both mass combat training (including those with a small parameter) and safety in the event of an accidental hit on a ship.

The photo on the right is the hit of an unmanned target BQM-74 Chukar on the American cruiser Chancellorsville. Without any major damage.

And our fleet really needs such a massive, cheap, lightweight and safe target.

An interesting episode on this issue is in the memoirs of an officer of the Missile and Artillery Armament Directorate (URAV) of the USSR Navy, Captain 1st Rank Pechatnikov:

Somehow in the 2000s, I received a serious reproach from the Deputy Head of URAV S.N. Pakhomov:

"Why didn't you worry about creating special targets during the development, because the maximum parameter is only 300 meters?"

It turned out that the Navy did not like to shoot with this complex. The commanders simply do not believe in its effectiveness, and therefore, in order not to create possible emergency situations, they do not fire. I have a video of one of the rare firing of the Kortik. Every 15–20 seconds, a panicky cry is heard:
"Parameter? ...Parameter?"

Naturally, I replied that you need to be sure of weapons, and just train personnel in the classroom. In any case, during the tests of targets based on cruise missiles, no less than 20 pieces were fired, but the crew was trained.

And in order to completely avoid any unpleasant moments, I suggested using UAVs, of which a great many have recently appeared. Even if missed, they will not do much harm. As they say - there would be a desire.

Nevertheless, despite all the above remarks, the shooting carried out on the Black Sea is an unconditional positive. And a serious step forward in ensuring effective air defense of the fleet.
Our news channels

Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest news and the most important events of the day.

Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +7
    29 May 2021
    This is how I sometimes read and marvel at how neglected everything is in our army.
    After all, any circle in the House of Pioneers in the USSR could blind "on the knee" UAVs (then they were called model aircraft),
    1. +4
      29 May 2021
      Quote: Jacket in stock
      This is how I sometimes read and marvel at how neglected everything is in our army.

      I used to sleep well because I knew they were protecting me. Then he joined the army. He began to sleep worse because he defended. Now I came from the army. I don’t sleep at all. I know how to protect

      The Harpoon has a minimum flight height 10 times lower, the RCS is 4 times less. Religion does not seem to allow making the target closer to the parameters or even lower (in the sense of better). And we like to play around with reflectors on targets, so it's not clear at what real height the target flew and with what EPR.
      According to updated information, in the course of the recent hostilities in Karabakh, the complex proved to be very successful. However, in the ship version, the land-based Tor-M2KM,

      There are diametrically opposite opinions. But on the whole, the failure of the joint air defense system of Armenia and Russia is obvious. No conclusions have been voiced, there is complete silence about this.

      Planned exercises of the joint air defense system of Russia and Armenia started in Armenia today. (23.07.2020)

      The main task: to study methods of countering reconnaissance and strike UAVs.
      Press Secretary of the Armenian Defense Ministry Shushan Stepanyan reported this on his Facebook page.
      1. +4
        29 May 2021
        Fiery cat - if you try to determine the height of the target hit from the video, it comes out tens of meters, at least fifty, I think so.
      2. +14
        29 May 2021
        Klimov: There were separate complexes in Karabakh during the war, but there was no system. TORs shot down quite a few there after some corrections were made among the Armenians in the organization. Feil was purely organizational in the beginning.

        Me: RM-24 flies just like the "Harpoon", in the part of the THZ it is a good target.

        Religion does not seem to allow making the target closer to the parameters or even lower (in the sense of better).

        For ZRV already done, there will be a naval version, but later.
        1. +5
          29 May 2021
          Quote: timokhin-aa
          Me: RM-24 flies just like the "Harpoon", in the part of the THZ it is a good target.

          Those. "Problems" with the Harpoons ... "solved", once the targets are clicked, it means that the Harpoons .. the pipe.
          But it remains, or to put it more correctly ... a natural question arises ... since the target is a practical analogue of the X-35, it means ........ the X-35 itself is like a rocket ... not in one place ... ???
          1. +6
            29 May 2021
            Ancient hi Sergey, it's just that it is possible to shoot down ANY missile, there is no ideal weapon, it is impossible!
          2. +4
            30 May 2021
            .sama X-35, like a rocket ... in any place .... ???

            But why? A simple, massive and cheap rocket, it can be used to saturate air defense at the expense of price and mass, its range is good, it provides high chances of the carrier's survival, etc.
            Plus there is an option for hitting ground targets, it seems.
        2. 0
          30 May 2021
          Good afternoon, Alexander! The question is not on the topic of discussion, of course, but I will be grateful if you answer!)
          Can't tell why the 3M54 anti-ship missiles with the UKSK Caliber supersonic stage have a low range than the 3M14T or 3M54 tactical cruise missiles, without a supersonic stage, but with a larger warhead?
    2. D16
      29 May 2021
      After all, any circle in the House of Pioneers in the USSR could blind a UAV on the knee

      So I think why the development of the Tu-143 UAV was given to the Tupolev Design Bureau, if there were so many palaces of pioneers in the Union? wassat
      1. +1
        29 May 2021
        Quote: D16
        Why was the development of the Tu-143 UAV given to the Tupolev Design Bureau, if there were so many palaces of pioneers in the Union?

        Thank you.
        And if on the subject, here on VO it was about the history of creating a target for ground-based air defense systems, which Lavochkin's design bureau did not worse than any circle from the house of pioneers - quickly and very cheaply.
        I understand why, for example, missiles from the Wasp or S-75 are used, there are a lot of them left, shoot at least every day, everything is better than just scrap metal. But when imitation of real goals is required, it can be done on purpose.
        1. D16
          29 May 2021
          It's easier to set a parameter than to write a new rocket.
      2. 0
        29 May 2021
        Don't worry, almost everything has been safely ditched.
    3. +3
      29 May 2021
      You are very much mistaken, the cutting and sewing circle and folk musical instruments could not have done this in any way, believe my 20-year experience as an aircraft model engineer and head of an aircraft modeling circle. laughing And not every aircraft modeling circle could create such a thing. There are many reasons for this, ranging from the price and quality of the equipment to the material base. hi
    4. -1
      29 May 2021
      Say what you want, but the launch of the rockets was done beautifully, and what is done beautifully works beautifully. IMHO
  2. +1
    29 May 2021
    So what did they work with?
    "Calm" or "Thor"?
    1. +25
      29 May 2021
      Quote: ignoto
      So what did they work with?
      "Calm" or "Thor"

      Apparently, both Calm and Thor.
      In yesterday's firing of "Admiral Grigorovich" "Thor" was working again ... on the official video of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation, the trace of the "Thor" missile is clearly visible

      While watching, I scratched my turnips - what was it with the stern shot? After all, the calm before the superstructure is installed. And then the author explained.
      1. +21
        29 May 2021
        Yes, at 27 seconds of the video, you can see the shadow of a working "Thor" on the helipad.
  3. +2
    29 May 2021
    the maximum parameter is only 300 meters? "

    It remains only to explain for the uninformed, what kind of term is this, this "parameter"?
    1. +24
      29 May 2021
      Quote: Peter is not the first
      what kind of term is this "parameter"?

      If in your own words ...
      The target rocket flies along a certain "line". The parameter is the distance from the ship to this "line"
  4. +2
    29 May 2021
    It would be nice that such shooting was not a one-time case, so to speak, for show. And indeed, creating a target is not a problem now. Apparently, they are waiting for a formidable shout from above, in order to stop itching, and start making the targets necessary according to the declared operation parameters.
    1. +6
      29 May 2021
      The "Adjutant" complex for the air defense missile system is made, in theory, it can be the base for the naval complex and it is obligatory with the air launch of targets
      1. +2
        29 May 2021
        Timokhin-Alexander hi you correctly pointed out "maybe:! We have a lot of good weapons, which are created" on the knee "with a minimum amount! How many such complexes are needed, and how much to give the fleet in the next couple of years? This problem, like ship gearboxes, can only be solved in an order order, and then only after they are unable to buy something similar, worse abilities, but cheaper!
    2. -1
      29 May 2021
      Neptune developers, looking at RM-24, are quietly sad in Ukraine.
      And we have no choice but to train properly. hi
  5. +4
    29 May 2021
    A heap of different systems created for one and the same task is in our country, it seems, forever.
  6. +7
    29 May 2021
    Quote: Scaffold
    A heap of different systems created for one and the same task is in our country, it seems, forever.

    There are pros and cons to having different systems.
    The disadvantages are clear, but the advantages include duplication with different principles and modes of operation.
    Optical or radio guidance, for example. Plus, different frequencies, wavelength ranges - IR and UV, missile speeds and sizes, range, noise immunity, launch price, etc.
    Active / passive radars, integrability into a single layered air defense system.
    Well, and the prescription of development and production with putting on alert. If the complex is 10 years old, and a new one is already ready? You will not send the previous one to the scrap, it will first work out its own. And you will not refuse the new one, because the old one has already been bought.

    If all the complexes are the same, then the effective suppression of one type of air defense system means incapacitating all! And so the task for the enemy is seriously complicated.
    Plus, complete unification will delay development. It will create conditions for our technology to lag behind, as threats evolve, and standards sometimes hold for decades.
    1. +1
      1 2021 June
      I'm afraid that this is not the reason.
  7. 0
    29 May 2021
    Better late than never
  8. +1
    30 May 2021
    And why are they interestingly testing Thor in the sea?
    The small rocket for the Redoubt never took off? And there are claims to the "Shell" sea?
    1. 0
      30 May 2021
      the possibility of building up the capabilities of the ship's air defense
  9. +1
    30 May 2021
    another thing is interesting ... namely, is it possible to modify the ships equipped with the Osa-M and place the Tora-Daggers there?

"Right Sector" (banned in Russia), "Ukrainian Insurgent Army" (UPA) (banned in Russia), ISIS (banned in Russia), "Jabhat Fatah al-Sham" formerly "Jabhat al-Nusra" (banned in Russia) , Taliban (banned in Russia), Al-Qaeda (banned in Russia), Anti-Corruption Foundation (banned in Russia), Navalny Headquarters (banned in Russia), Facebook (banned in Russia), Instagram (banned in Russia), Meta (banned in Russia), Misanthropic Division (banned in Russia), Azov (banned in Russia), Muslim Brotherhood (banned in Russia), Aum Shinrikyo (banned in Russia), AUE (banned in Russia), UNA-UNSO (banned in Russia), Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People (banned in Russia), Legion “Freedom of Russia” (armed formation, recognized as terrorist in the Russian Federation and banned)

“Non-profit organizations, unregistered public associations or individuals performing the functions of a foreign agent,” as well as media outlets performing the functions of a foreign agent: “Medusa”; "Voice of America"; "Realities"; "Present time"; "Radio Freedom"; Ponomarev; Savitskaya; Markelov; Kamalyagin; Apakhonchich; Makarevich; Dud; Gordon; Zhdanov; Medvedev; Fedorov; "Owl"; "Alliance of Doctors"; "RKK" "Levada Center"; "Memorial"; "Voice"; "Person and law"; "Rain"; "Mediazone"; "Deutsche Welle"; QMS "Caucasian Knot"; "Insider"; "New Newspaper"