Military Review

Pantsir-S1M against attack drones

95

ZRPK "Pantsir-S1M". Photo by Rosoboronexport


Modern reconnaissance and strike unmanned aerial vehicles capable of carrying guided weapons pose a significant threat to the ground forces. To combat such threats, anti-aircraft weapons with high performance and special capabilities are required. The other day it was announced that the modernized Pantsir-S1M missile and cannon system could provide protection against drone attacks.

Latest news


The international military-technical exhibition EDEX-2021 is currently taking place in Cairo. The Russian industry is represented at this event by a number of organizations, incl. holding "High-precision complexes" and its parent state corporation "Rostec". In the form of full-scale samples and mock-ups, a number of modern weapons and equipment are demonstrated, incl. updated ZRPK "Pantsir-S1M".

According to TASS, during the Egyptian exhibition, Deputy Director General of High-Precision Complexes Sergei Mikhailov raised the topic of defense against UAVs and revealed the prospects of the modernized Pantsir in this context. The head recalled that countering drones is one of the main tasks for air defense. He also pointed out that now in our country two classes of anti-UAV weapons are being produced. These are soft-kill systems that use the principles of electronic suppression, and hard-kill anti-aircraft systems that destroy the target. The representative of the second class is the Pantsir-S1M air defense missile system.


"Pantsir-SM" for the Russian army. Photo by Rostec

Earlier this year, at IDEX-2021, the Russian industry had a project for a control network combining systems of both classes. The modernized Pantsir-S1M air defense missile system should enter such a network and become one of its main components.

S. Mikhailov also said that Pantsir-S1M is distinguished by high economic efficiency. When fighting a UAV, it shows the necessary fighting qualities, and the cost of spent ammunition remains at an acceptable level. In general, such an anti-aircraft missile system is the least expensive anti-drone countermeasure on the market.

Bekkhan Ozdoev, Industrial Director of the Armaments Cluster of the Rostec State Corporation, supplemented S. Mikhailov's statements. He noted that as a result of the modernization, the characteristics of the Pantsir-S1M complex against UAVs have significantly increased. In particular, it can now detect and strike all types of attack drones currently in service with different countries.

Features of modernization


According to known data, the Pantsir-S1M product is an export version of the Pantsir-SM air defense missile system, developed for the Russian armed forces. Both projects provide for the replacement of part of the radio and other equipment, and also offer an anti-aircraft missile with increased characteristics. At the same time, the capabilities of the export "Pantsir" are limited in comparison with the basic version of the "CM".


The commercial UAV DJI Phantom is one of the most popular models, incl. for military use. Photo Wikimedia Commons

Like the complexes of previous modifications, the new "Armor" can be mounted on different chassis or used in container design. The layout with a rotating combat module has been preserved, on which radar equipment and all weapons are located.

Earlier it was reported that the latest modernized versions of the missile and cannon systems receive new radar facilities. The improved radar is capable of detecting and tracking targets at ranges of up to 75 km, depending on their parameters. Preserved optoelectronic means for observing and tracking targets in the near zone. Other elements of the electronic complex have been modernized with an increase in all basic characteristics. Improved performance, improved noise immunity, etc.

In addition to the existing anti-aircraft guided missile, a new one has been created. The firing range of the new missile defense system has been increased from 20 to 30 km, the height of destruction - from 15 to 18 km. Due to the growth of flight characteristics, the volume of the affected area has been tripled. Radio command guidance is preserved, due to which the accuracy of shooting is determined by the improved characteristics of the airborne equipment of the ZRPK.

Another ammunition has been developed for the Pantsir-SM complex. This is a lightweight missile defense system of reduced dimensions with reduced power and limited flight characteristics. Such a missile is intended to combat small-sized targets for which the standard Pantsir missile defense systems are technically and economically redundant. Light rockets in transport and launch containers are placed on a quad-mount. The latter corresponds in diameter to the TPK of the main missiles, but noticeably shorter.


Heavy attack UAV Bayraktar Akıncı is a threat to the near future. Baykar Savunma Photos

The artillery unit on the Pantsir-S1M / SM remains the same. The defeat of targets at ranges up to 3-4 km and altitudes up to 2-3 km is provided by a pair of double-barreled 30-mm 2A38M assault rifles. Ammunition - 1400 rounds of various types.

Interception tasks


Interception of an unmanned aerial vehicle is a rather difficult task, and its solution faces various difficulties at almost all stages. Thus, a small-sized plastic UAV is difficult to spot and escort; it is no less difficult to aim weapons at him. At the same time, a missile defense system designed to defeat full-size air targets, in terms of characteristics and cost, can be excessive for an intercepted drone.

In the case of the latest versions of the Pantsir air defense missile system, the task of detecting the entire spectrum of air targets, from aircraft to light UAVs, is solved with the help of modern high-performance radars, created incl. for such a job. Objects with low ESR are detected and accompanied by optical means. Yielding radar in detection range, optics show the required accuracy and reliability of capture.

It should be borne in mind that medium and heavy UAVs capable of carrying strike weapons are distinguished by their large size and appropriate visibility for the radar. Accordingly, Pantsir-SM / S1M or another modern anti-aircraft system will be able to detect such a threat in a timely manner and respond to it.


Parade crew "Carapace". In the foreground is the latest version of the SM, equipped with new light rockets. Photo of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation

"Armor" of all modifications, including the latest "SM" and "S1M", can operate independently and as part of an echeloned air defense system. In the latter case, the air defense missile system can assume the role of a fire weapon, and transfer the detection tasks to other systems that have technical or other advantages.

The composition of a multicomponent defense system with separate radars, missile-cannon and other complexes, electronic warfare equipment, etc. can be determined in accordance with the current conditions and characteristics of the covered area. High-precision complexes believe that Pantsir-S1M is quite capable of becoming the leading element of such a system.

The creation of a new missile defense system with an increased range and altitude gives an obvious increase in combat qualities. In addition, improved radio equipment has a positive effect on such characteristics. In the near zone, the missiles are supplemented with cannons with a sufficiently high accuracy and power. Pantsir-SM also receives an additional light missile designed to engage complex small targets. However, as far as we know, it is not yet included in the set of the export Pantsir-S1M.

Sample for the market


Attention should be paid to the fact that statements about the new capabilities of the modernized air defense missile system were made at a foreign military-technical exhibition. At the same time, it was about the export modification "Pantsir-S1M". All this shows that our industry continues to promote its new development in the international market and is looking for customers. To attract future buyers, the heads of High-Precision Complexes and Rostec disclose all the most interesting facts about Pantsir in its new version.


"Pantsiri-SM" on Red Square, 2020 Photo of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation

It is highly likely that such "advertising" will be useful and influence the decision of potential buyers. Many countries are concerned about the development and proliferation of UAVs, and recent conflicts show the validity of such a reaction. At the same time, Russia is ready to offer modern air defense systems capable of dealing with both "traditional" air attack weapons and a new unmanned threat.

It should be recalled that Pantsir-S1M has ceased to be an exclusively exhibition model. In August this year, at the Army-2021 forum, the first contract was signed for the supply of such equipment to an unnamed foreign customer. In addition, we shouldn't forget the previous orders for the early versions of "Pantsir".

All this shows that Russian anti-aircraft missile-gun systems of the latest models are of real interest to foreign customers. At the same time, the achieved growth of characteristics and the emergence of new opportunities should attract additional attention. And it is quite possible that in the wake of the recent announcements and the results of the EDEX-2021 exhibition, new contracts will appear for the export version of the Pantsir.
Author:
95 comments
Ad

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, daily additional materials that do not get on the site: https://t.me/topwar_ru

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. OgnennyiKotik
    OgnennyiKotik 2 December 2021 18: 23
    +5
    In terms of price / quality ratio, it is a very interesting option. The new radar with AFAR significantly increases the capabilities. In fact, a new car under the old name.
    As for small-sized missiles, their development has just begun, it's too early to talk about them.
    There are serious claims to the guns, it is better to replace them with another missile block, as in the arctic one.
    1. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA 2 December 2021 18: 32
      +9
      Quote: OgnennyiKotik
      As for small-sized missiles, their development has just begun, it's too early to talk about them.

      Light missiles on "Shells" lit up at the 2020 parade.
      1. Nikolaevich I
        Nikolaevich I 2 December 2021 18: 43
        +4
        Quote: Alexey RA
        Light missiles on "Shells" lit up at the 2020 parade.

        Light missiles or models of light missiles lit up for another .........?
        1. venik
          venik 4 December 2021 01: 52
          +1
          Quote: Nikolaevich I
          Quote: Alexey RA
          Light missiles on "Shells" lit up at the 2020 parade.

          Light missiles or models of light missiles lit up for another .........?

          ========
          Namesake! Well straight, right now get angry. am ( lol ) And I will reveal a great secret ... THEY (such missiles) ALREADY exist ... ( yes ) Only ...: "Shhhhhhhh!" Not a word to anyone! repeat yes
          1. Nikolaevich I
            Nikolaevich I 4 December 2021 08: 41
            +1
            Duc, I do not reject the "physical existence of real rockets"! No. Although I assume they are still being tested ... what But I wildly doubt that at the 2020 parade, real zurs, and not models, were "lit up" ... recourse hi
            1. Bad thing
              Bad thing 10 December 2021 17: 56
              +1
              Let me tell you a terrible secret, they carry weight models at parades.
      2. Castro Ruiz
        Castro Ruiz 3 December 2021 14: 38
        0
        Alexey R.A.
        Sancti simplicitas.
    2. Thrifty
      Thrifty 2 December 2021 18: 42
      +8
      Fiery cat, guns, if ammunition with pragmatic detonation appears in the range of shots, will be very effective against small UAVs and kamikaze drones. From barreled artillery to hit such targets much faster and cheaper than missiles unequivocally.
      1. OgnennyiKotik
        OgnennyiKotik 2 December 2021 19: 21
        +10
        Is not a fact. Western / Japanese / South Korean ZSU are equipped with projectiles with controlled detonation starting from 35 mm. They are in no hurry to launch 30mm or less into a series, although everything has been tested and they are starting to equip BMPs with them. Probably 30mm power is not enough.

        In the military air defense, you need to replace the Tunguska. ZSU with 35-45 mm coaxial cannons and additional short-range missiles is very asking for. Something like the Yenisei.
        1. Boa kaa
          Boa kaa 2 December 2021 21: 50
          +9
          Quote: OgnennyiKotik
          Probably 30mm power is not enough.
          I think so too. A minimum of 37mm is needed to be able to install a radio fuse.
          ZSU with 35-45 mm twin cannons and additional short-range missiles is very much requested.
          Rather, the ZRPK / ZRAK with a rocket of greater power and a rod warhead with a directional explosive cone.
          And, in my opinion, it is imperative to include an anti-aircraft gunner with MANPADS in the calculation in order to exclude a repetition of the Syrian variant, when the "military" PANTSIR S-1, which shot its BC, was destroyed with impunity.
        2. Popandos
          Popandos 2 December 2021 22: 37
          -1
          Probably 30mm power is not enough.

          To destroy an aircraft, a cruise missile is enough, but not for a UAV?
          Not logical.
          1. Saxahorse
            Saxahorse 2 December 2021 23: 02
            +7
            Quote: Popandos
            To destroy an aircraft, a cruise missile is enough, but not for a UAV?
            Not logical.

            More than logical. There are few fragments at 30 mm, and a direct hit on the CD is rare, not to mention the much smaller UAVs and loitering ammunition.
            1. Popandos
              Popandos 2 December 2021 23: 28
              -1
              Why, then, were the guns in this caliber originally installed on such ZSUs? What targets should you shoot?
              Helicopters? For them, a larger caliber is also better.
              1. Sergey Aleksandrovich
                Sergey Aleksandrovich 3 December 2021 09: 18
                +2
                A helicopter capable of withstanding hits from a 30-mm cannon has not yet been born.
              2. Saxahorse
                Saxahorse 3 December 2021 21: 39
                +2
                Quote: Popandos
                Helicopters?

                Good question. The cannons were inherited from Tunguska by Armor. And there they are really against helicopters with ATGM, after all, Tunguska was focused on escorting armored vehicles. There is another side to the issue, the missiles have too large a dead zone. At Armor, as much as 1.5 km missiles are not fired. And the goals went now harmful, at an ultra-low altitude and hiding behind bumps at close range they can get close. Cannons are able to shoot through the near zone, they have at least 200 meters. There is a hope that the new small missiles will be able to work no worse at small targets in the near zone, but so far I have not seen their detailed performance characteristics.
              3. this
                this 5 January 2022 17: 47
                0
                In the Rode as on earth, the demands of the Arabs were.
            2. Vadim237
              Vadim237 3 December 2021 00: 10
              -5
              "A direct hit on the CD is rare." This is now an easily solvable problem. A computer sighting computer complex is needed.
              1. this
                this 5 January 2022 17: 49
                0
                Nope, there is a big physical expansion and you can't remove it in any way, if only you shoot singles.
        3. Roman Efremov
          Roman Efremov 5 December 2021 11: 49
          0
          Why should we mess with the 35 mm caliber, which we never had at all, as well as the 45 mm, which was in the navy, but for a very long time (I mean anti-aircraft guns for post-war battleships - are there any drawings left?), If we have finished proven caliber 57 mm?
          1. kytx
            kytx 9 December 2021 00: 59
            0
            57mm is too much in terms of the dimensions of both the cannon and the bk, and is more expensive.
            45mm what the doctor ordered.
            1. this
              this 5 January 2022 17: 51
              0
              Come on, something is doubtful that you can put it together with shell rockets, it already has a recoil 10 times more powerful for sure.
        4. Wildcat
          Wildcat 6 December 2021 16: 00
          +1
          IMHO, when a programmable undermining appears and the LMS is clear, then it will be possible to cosplay the German Millennium.
          In the meantime, there are no such miracles, it can be simpler, the American Centurion try to somehow "claw-scratch", for the role of the very last line of defense. And here IMHO asks to reduce the caliber to increase the number of shells. SAM, of course, must also be installed, even the Poles have adapted the SAM to Shilka.
          The same Koreans for the role of the ZSU air defense put another 30 mm on the BIHO, do not bother with 35 mm. Of course, integrating missiles on the latest versions.
      2. this
        this 5 January 2022 17: 46
        0
        Yes, hell knows about cheaper, electronics that can withstand huge overloads navryatli costs little.
    3. Lykases1
      Lykases1 2 December 2021 22: 50
      0
      Exactly. In all videos from polygons, he does not take drones with guns. Probably they are for something like a helicopter.
      1. Jacket in stock
        Jacket in stock 3 December 2021 10: 13
        +1
        Quote: Lykases1
        Exactly. In all videos from polygons, he does not take drones with guns. ...

        The other day there was a new video on "Military Acceptance" just about SM, where the drone went astray without problems. True at a very short range.
  2. Nikolaevich I
    Nikolaevich I 2 December 2021 19: 01
    +2
    In addition to the existing anti-aircraft guided missile, a new one has been created. The firing range of the new SAM has been increased from 20 to 30 km, the height of destruction - from 15 to 18 km This is how one rocket with a range of 30 km and an altitude reach of 18 km ... or two missiles: 1. a range of 30 km and an "altitude" of up to 18 km ... and 2. a range of 40 km and an "altitude" of up to 18 km. ..? request what
    1. alexmach
      alexmach 2 December 2021 19: 08
      0
      one apparently. It's just that over time, it seems, they overestimated its efficacy at long distances.
    2. Nikolaevich I
      Nikolaevich I 2 December 2021 20: 41
      +3
      Now I see that my comment received 3 minuses ... which causes confusion, requiring clarification ... My comment, in my opinion, is quite harmless! It's just a question ... a question that I expected to be answered! But instead of answering, meaningless "cons"! Senseless because I don't see any sense in them ... there are no answers in them! Where ... what is the meaning of these "minuses"? I hope that the minuses did not put the minuses ... or am I mistaken?
  3. Fisherman
    Fisherman 2 December 2021 19: 16
    -8
    It burns in our military-industrial complex! An efficient and affordable technique! Still, "tightening the belt" is sometimes useful for the state's military-industrial complex, and the efficiency of development is growing rapidly! And, of course, periodic participation in the database as an advertisement.
  4. rocket757
    rocket757 2 December 2021 19: 28
    +5
    Pantsir-S1M against attack drones
    ... PANZIR he is in Africa and in the Arctic, protection from everything that flies and buzzes!
    The only question is the "gasket" between the chair and the start button!
  5. Ross xnumx
    Ross xnumx 2 December 2021 19: 30
    +2
    Pantsir-S1M against attack drones
    I liked this presentation:
  6. Klingon
    Klingon 3 December 2021 04: 01
    +1
    Quote: Thrifty
    Fiery cat, guns, if ammunition with pragmatic detonation appears in the range of shots, will be very effective against small UAVs and kamikaze drones. From barreled artillery to hit such targets much faster and cheaper than missiles unequivocally.

    That's right, but the defense industry of the Russian Federation, unfortunately, cannot master the programmable 30mm ammunition in any way. For 57mm it seems like there is already, at least rumors about it have been running for a long time. There would be such a 30mm ammunition and instead of 4 barrels one would be enough
  7. riwas
    riwas 3 December 2021 06: 17
    +3
    The main problem of Pantsir-S1M is that they are used one at a time, separately, but should be in a single air defense system, with overlapping affected areas.
  8. senima56
    senima56 3 December 2021 08: 43
    +3
    The Turks showed real footage of the use of their Bayraktar UAVs in conflicts. They showed how to destroy various targets - now for these UAVs there is a queue of customers!
    Show real footage of the destruction of at least one UAV by "Pantsir" - and there will also be no end to the customers. Only real stories are needed, not an advertisement from "Military Acceptance"!
    1. The comment was deleted.
    2. Toorik
      Toorik 3 December 2021 09: 48
      0
      as? to mount cameras on rockets? or let the UAV into the line of sight?
      1. senima56
        senima56 3 December 2021 18: 58
        0
        May be so. At least the Israelis attached cameras to the missiles to show the destruction of the Shell. There would be a desire, but there is a way. hi
        1. Toorik
          Toorik 4 December 2021 14: 05
          0
          TV targeting is not suitable for anti-aircraft missiles ....
    3. Momento
      Momento 3 December 2021 20: 23
      +1
      it is necessary to modify the shell. But in fairness, at the moment, no one has a reliable way to defeat drones or kamikaze drones. the whole calculation of the destruction of the control station is not clear how.
      1. Outsider
        Outsider 4 December 2021 01: 16
        0
        - We already have it in Israel.
        1. Momento
          Momento 4 December 2021 06: 06
          0
          I hear it for the first time. tell me.
          1. Outsider
            Outsider 4 December 2021 11: 43
            +2
            - "Iron Dome":
            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_Dome

            "Iron Ray":
      2. stankow
        stankow 4 December 2021 13: 52
        0
        "It is not clear" how the banal KUNG is being destroyed? Run out of air-to-ground missiles? Nursi, cast iron?
  9. demiurg
    demiurg 3 December 2021 10: 45
    +3
    I wonder why instead of two 30mm assault rifles (each of which is, in fact, a double-barreled cannon firing a kmk according to the ghast scheme), put one 57mm? In 57 mm, you can saw in cheap ammunition with programmable detonation. Reach 7-9 km in height and 10 in range removes the need for small missiles.
    Of course, I am a broad-based sofa theorist, but IMHO efficiency should increase.
    1. sen
      sen 3 December 2021 11: 05
      0
      Reach 7-9 km in height and 10 in range

      Caliber - 57 mm
      Number of trunks - 1
      Art part index - C-60
      Projectile weight - 6,3 kg
      The initial velocity of the projectile - 1000 m / s
      Maximum firing range at anti-aircraft targets - 6000 m
      Maximum height of fire at anti-aircraft targets - 4000 m
      Maximum air target speed - 450 m / s
      Rate of fire - 120 rds / min
      Target detection range by sight - 7000 m
      The limits of the sight in terms of target speed - 250 m / s
      Combat weight of the gun - 4,8 t
      Calculation - 8 people
      Barrel length - 4850 mm
      The number of shells in the cassette - 5 shells
      1. demiurg
        demiurg 3 December 2021 11: 15
        +1
        Let's clarify, this is for what method of shooting? For a telescopic sight, semi-automatic or automatic firing, for what purpose and with what projectile to the heap. This is how I gently hint to you from the couch that you are wrong.
        The ballistics of the S-60 allows you to throw a projectile 10 km up and 12+ horizontally. If you do not have a programmable fuse. and even on a high-speed and maneuvering target, then yes, it is difficult to get above 5-6 km. And if you shoot at a conventional bayraktar, then from a cassette for 4-5 rounds with a programmable fuse, at least one will catch both at 7 and 9 kilometers.
        1. sen
          sen 3 December 2021 11: 31
          +2
          This is the official data, which is given everywhere. Maybe he can shoot further, but there is no point because of the dispersion of shells. In AK, the maximum firing range is also given, but this does not mean that they will shoot at this range.
    2. senima56
      senima56 3 December 2021 12: 28
      +2
      I also think so that one 57mm cannon is more effective than two 30mm cannons. If there is also a "remote detonation" in shells ... good hi
  10. sen
    sen 3 December 2021 11: 01
    -4
    Pantsir-S1M against attack drones

    Pantsir-S1M will not be able to provide protection against attack drones directly in battle formations. But if we modify the BMPT for this purpose, equipping it with Chrysanthemum missiles, which can also shoot down air targets.
    1. demiurg
      demiurg 3 December 2021 11: 17
      +4
      Exactly. Attach the Iskander launcher, the helipad and the Coalition's double-barreled turret to the BMPT.
  11. Castro Ruiz
    Castro Ruiz 3 December 2021 14: 36
    0
    There are not enough cannons to crawl from 30 mm cannons in the Shell.
    Their low efficiency needs to be hung up by projectiles with DP, but I see a lot of calories. 30 mm will already be not enough or will replace the 1 mm cannon itself with a subwoofer with DP.
  12. Outsider
    Outsider 3 December 2021 15: 21
    -1
    - The fact that he has a missile defense system with radio command guidance is "complete darkness" (for those who understand). This is not an air defense system - by today's standards, this is bullshit for the Papuans ...
    1. stankow
      stankow 4 December 2021 14: 01
      -1
      Radio command control against drones, whose voltage with radio countermeasures on board is just that. There is no need for an expensive GS on every rocket, and besides, the drone signatures are weak.
      1. Outsider
        Outsider 4 December 2021 14: 02
        +1
        - The problem with missiles with such guidance is the probability of defeat. It is "below the plinth" ... SAM simply passes the target at a distance at which neither the detonator nor the normal cloud of destructive elements is formed ...
        1. Grohuf
          Grohuf 7 December 2021 20: 02
          0
          The Thor-2M has a probability of being hit by one missile somewhere in the region of 99%. Radio command guidance is optimal for complexes with a range of up to 20 km, if it is possible to sacrifice the disclosure of the position of the complex. For covert work, you can use a flight in a laser beam, but there the rocket flies along a much less optimal trajectory and the capabilities of the complex in terms of the speed of the intercepted target fall sharply.
          Well, how are you going to get somewhere there with the GOS - this is a good question.
          1. Outsider
            Outsider 8 December 2021 14: 03
            0
            The Thor-2M has a probability of being hit by one missile somewhere in the region of 99%.

            - This is a fairy tale - and wildly stupid.
            Radio command guidance is optimal for complexes with a range of up to 20 km

            - Of course no. See SAM "Iron Dome", "SPYDER". Radio command guidance - from primitiveness, from poverty and from technological lag... To talk about its advantages until the very defeat of the target is just propaganda nonsense.
            if it is possible to sacrifice the disclosure of the position of the complex

            - "Bayraktaram" this radiation was "on a drum". There, the search for the target was through optics (with the use of the infrared channel) and the bombs were with electro-optical guidance.
            ... For covert work, you can use a flight in a laser beam, but there the rocket flies along a much less optimal trajectory

            - And this is nonsense: "Bayraktars hit their targets from heights of 5-6 km and a range of up to 8 km. Is the Torah energy really not enough for 8 km ?! laughing lol The range of destruction is up to 12 km, the altitude range is up to 10 km.
            and the capabilities of the complex for the speed of the intercepted target fall sharply.

            - It is necessary to use the seeker, then the speed of the target will not be an obstacle.
            Well, how are you going to get somewhere there with the GOS - this is a good question.

            - Only with the seeker and get ...
            1. Grohuf
              Grohuf 8 December 2021 15: 48
              0
              The Iron Dome air defense system is not a case that can only shoot down Grad-type missiles flying along a constant ballistic trajectory with a speed of a little more than a swing and have never been used against more or less real targets? At least against a standard target based on Osa missiles?
              Or is it some other Iron Dome that would shoot down high speed maneuvering targets?
              If you were thinking with something like a head, and not with another part of the body, you would know that means of destruction have such a thing as cost. An effective destruction system such as the AMRAAM missile has a cost in excess of a million dollars. When Israel spent nearly all of its iron domes' stocks of rockets, they asked the US for one BILLION dollars to replenish stocks, gently hinting that iron dome rockets are expensive too. Do you propose to shoot down what with golden rockets? Other means of aircraft destruction? This can only be offered from a dull mind. Expensive means of destruction must be shot down with cheaper ones. This means that if the F-35 launches a TV-guided missile from 100 km, then it must be shot down with a much cheaper missile. This is what radio command-guided missiles are for.
              This applies to missiles with a good active radar missile system. If you use a cheap seeker, then such a rocket will not really shoot down anything. If you use an infrared seeker, then such a missile will be useless against a huge number of targets, such as drones or planning bombs.

              - This is a fairy tale - and wildly stupid.
              - it is confirmed by tests. And your words are not supported by anything.

              - "Bayraktaram" this radiation was "on a drum". There, the search for the target was through optics (with the use of the infrared channel) and the bombs were with electro-optical guidance.

              Oh, how scary. The reality is a little different. If something emits in the radio range, then the target is very quickly taken and the location becomes known. In the infrared range, the easily disguised targets do not know how to take direction finding.

              - And this is nonsense: "Bayraktars hit their targets from heights of 5-6 km and a range of up to 8 km. Is the Torah energy really not enough for 8 km ?! laughing lol The range of destruction is up to 12 km, the altitude range is up to 10 km.

              You just didn't have enough brains to understand the meaning of what was said.

              - It is necessary to use the seeker, then the speed of the target will not be an obstacle.

              Again, zero understanding of what the three-point targeting method is and why it is bad.
        2. Comet
          Comet 9 December 2021 22: 52
          0
          Quote: Outsider
          - The problem with missiles with such guidance is the probability of defeat. It is "below the plinth" ... SAM simply passes the target at a distance at which neither the detonator nor the normal cloud of destructive elements is formed ...

          Where did they get this nonsense? Guidance radars Thor and Pantsir ensure the accuracy of targeting missiles within 4-5 km, no worse (and in Sosna - within 10 km) than homing missiles. At a distance of up to 8-10 km, the accuracy is sufficient to hit any target with practically no reduction in the probability of hitting. Further down - there, yes, with an increase in the range of more than 10 km, in order to maintain the probability of defeat, an increase in the geometric dimensions of the target is required. So this is a short-range complex.
    2. Comet
      Comet 9 December 2021 22: 40
      0
      Quote: Outsider
      - The fact that he has a missile defense system with radio command guidance is "complete darkness" (for those who understand). This is not an air defense system - by today's standards, this is bullshit for the Papuans ...

      What nonsense ?! This is a short-range air defense missile system, capable of working on multiple targets and on the move. Everything is mounted on one chassis: SOTS, SSTSR, OES, SAM, guns. Another SAM Thor is in the same class. And that's all.
      1. Yarhann
        Yarhann 1 January 2022 23: 39
        0
        that's the beauty of the Shell, that in such a size, it is also mobile with such capabilities, it is unique
  13. drags33
    drags33 3 December 2021 22: 57
    +1
    Maybe someone will say that I find fault with trifles, but I'm really tired of seeing how the Russian language is distorted. It's about this phrase in the article - "light SAM of reduced dimensions with reduced power"So, according to the current rules of the Russian language, the word" power "means" great strength, influence, power "and is applied to such phrases as" powerful ruler "," powerful oligarch ", etc. For technical systems there is a well-known the term "power", which carries a specific physical meaning. Therefore, to write "powerful engine", "powerful rocket" is to distort the Russian language and mislead readers. Maybe I would not write about it, but on the site I constantly see this ridiculous the use of the word “power.” Do we forget the Russian language?
    1. Outsider
      Outsider 4 December 2021 01: 18
      -1
      Do we forget Russian?

      - How shitty when "you don’t know, but you’ll also forget!" laughing lol
  14. kosmos84
    kosmos84 4 December 2021 12: 47
    -2
    Soviet cannons of the 40-50s, return the shells to them, they fired into the sky for 20 km
  15. Cyop_TyMyc
    Cyop_TyMyc 6 December 2021 10: 03
    0
    SHORAD looks better.
    Since it is universal. It can also knock out armored vehicles, helicopters and UAVs.
    And the Carapace is only aerial targets.
  16. Outsider
    Outsider 8 December 2021 16: 36
    0
    Quote: Grohuf
    The Iron Dome air defense system is not a case that can only shoot down Grad-type missiles flying along a constant ballistic trajectory with a speed of a little more than a swing and have never been used against more or less real targets? At least against a standard target based on Osa missiles?
    Or is it some other Iron Dome that would shoot down high speed maneuvering targets?

    - Learn materiel, pioneer.
    If you were thinking with something like a head, and not with another part of the body, you would know that means of destruction have such a thing as cost.

    - Cool, cool economist! laughing
    An effective destruction system such as the AMRAAM missile has a cost in excess of a million dollars.

    - Indeed, Unit cost US $1,090,000 (AIM-120D FY 2019). But her polygon hitting probability is 0.97. And the world's highest noise immunity ARGSN. The cost of the enemy fighter is at least 30 times higher. And even at 50-80. So it makes sense to produce such missiles ?! Or should we continue to carry the P-27, where Pp = 0.68 and any electronic warfare station turns it Pp into ZERO? But they are cheap!
    When Israel spent nearly all of its stocks of rockets on its iron domes, they asked the US for one BILLION dollars to replenish their supplies.

    - Because enemy missiles of all stripes kill PEOPLE.
    which gently hints that rockets to the iron dome are also expensive.

    - One Tamir rocket costs 30-40 thousand dollars. By criterion efficiency / cost they have no analogues in the world, speaking in Russian propaganda language.
    Do you propose to shoot down what with golden rockets? Other means of aircraft destruction? This can only be offered from a dull mind.

    - Oh, these stupid Jews, compared to the brilliant Russians! lol
    Expensive means of destruction must be shot down with cheaper ones.

    - Canesna-canesna! And Hamas' Katyushas, ​​made from scraps of water pipes, must be shot down with a slingshot, not with Tamir rockets at $ 40 apiece!
    This means that if the F-35 launches a TV-guided missile from 100 km, then it must be shot down with a much cheaper missile. This is what radio command-guided missiles are for.

    - The only question is, what about the "shooting down of Israeli missiles and bombs of the Syrian (Russian) air defense" - it is fuflogonia by 98%... All Israel laughs at these tales, looking at the pictures of the hit targets BEFORE the strike and AFTER the strike. I would also recommend you to join this fascinating spectacle - it perfectly cleans your brains from a zombie box.
    This applies to missiles with a good active radar missile system. If you use a cheap seeker, then such a missile will not really shoot down anything.

    - Nothing knocks down systems with only one command guidance. Children know this.
    If you use an infrared seeker, then such a missile will be useless against a huge number of targets, such as drones or planning bombs.

    - Israel has long since switched from IR-GOS to thermal imaging seeker, - operate in two ranges - optical and IR (Python-5 and STUNNER rockets). Shoots down both bombs and UAVs.
    - This is a fairy tale - and wildly stupid.

    - it is confirmed by tests. And your words are not supported by anything.

    - Do not tell fables, the rating of the world air defense systems is known, and those air defense systems that use only team guidance - their rating is below the baseboard. Command guidance is excellent on a significant part of the trajectory, but at the end - only the GOS! Desirable combined like that of "Stanner" ("David's Sling), or ARGSN millimeter range (ZUK" Derby "SAM" Spider "and SAM" Tamir "ZhK), or thermal imaging seeker - SAM" Python-5 "SAM Spider
    - "Bayraktaram" this radiation was "on a drum". There, the search for the target was through optics (with the use of the infrared channel) and the bombs were with electro-optical guidance.

    Oh, how scary. The reality is a little different.

    - For the tenth time to show this terrible (for the Russian air defense) reality?

    If something emits in the radio range, then the target is very quickly taken and the location becomes known. In the infrared range, the easily disguised targets do not know how to take direction finding.

    - See the video - ALL these targets were found and destroyed without the use of RTR means!
    - And this is nonsense: "Bayraktars hit their targets from heights of 5-6 km and a range of up to 8 km. Is the Torah energy really not enough for 8 km ?! laughing lol The range of destruction is up to 12 km, the altitude range is up to 10 km.

    You just didn't have enough brains to understand the meaning of what was said.

    - Burst out laughing, layman! laughing lol
    - It is necessary to use the seeker, then the speed of the target will not be an obstacle.

    Again, zero understanding of what the three-point targeting method is and why it is bad.

    - See the video - to the fullest enlightenment! Why "Bayraktars" stuffed Russian equipment (of all ranks and stripes) for one and a half billion dollars, why Armenia lost the war to Azerbaijan, why is this a model of a future war between the Russian army and the NATO army.
    1. Comet
      Comet 9 December 2021 23: 19
      0
      Quote: Outsider
      Quote: Grohuf
      The Iron Dome air defense system is not a case that can only shoot down Grad-type missiles flying along a constant ballistic trajectory with a speed of a little more than a swing and have never been used against more or less real targets? At least against a standard target based on Osa missiles?
      Or is it some other Iron Dome that would shoot down high speed maneuvering targets?

      - Learn materiel, pioneer.
      If you were thinking with something like a head, and not with another part of the body, you would know that means of destruction have such a thing as cost.

      - Cool, cool economist! laughing
      An effective destruction system such as the AMRAAM missile has a cost in excess of a million dollars.

      - Indeed, Unit cost US $1,090,000 (AIM-120D FY 2019). But her polygon hitting probability is 0.97. And the world's highest noise immunity ARGSN. The cost of the enemy fighter is at least 30 times higher. And even at 50-80. So it makes sense to produce such missiles ?! Or should we continue to carry the P-27, where Pp = 0.68 and any electronic warfare station turns it Pp into ZERO? But they are cheap!
      When Israel spent nearly all of its stocks of rockets on its iron domes, they asked the US for one BILLION dollars to replenish their supplies.

      - Because enemy missiles of all stripes kill PEOPLE.
      which gently hints that rockets to the iron dome are also expensive.

      - One Tamir rocket costs 30-40 thousand dollars. By criterion efficiency / cost they have no analogues in the world, speaking in Russian propaganda language.
      Do you propose to shoot down what with golden rockets? Other means of aircraft destruction? This can only be offered from a dull mind.

      - Oh, these stupid Jews, compared to the brilliant Russians! lol
      Expensive means of destruction must be shot down with cheaper ones.

      - Canesna-canesna! And Hamas' Katyushas, ​​made from scraps of water pipes, must be shot down with a slingshot, not with Tamir rockets at $ 40 apiece!
      This means that if the F-35 launches a TV-guided missile from 100 km, then it must be shot down with a much cheaper missile. This is what radio command-guided missiles are for.

      - The only question is, what about the "shooting down of Israeli missiles and bombs of the Syrian (Russian) air defense" - it is fuflogonia by 98%... All Israel laughs at these tales, looking at the pictures of the hit targets BEFORE the strike and AFTER the strike. I would also recommend you to join this fascinating spectacle - it perfectly cleans your brains from a zombie box.
      This applies to missiles with a good active radar missile system. If you use a cheap seeker, then such a missile will not really shoot down anything.

      - Nothing knocks down systems with only one command guidance. Children know this.
      If you use an infrared seeker, then such a missile will be useless against a huge number of targets, such as drones or planning bombs.

      - Israel has long since switched from IR-GOS to thermal imaging seeker, - operate in two ranges - optical and IR (Python-5 and STUNNER rockets). Shoots down both bombs and UAVs.
      - This is a fairy tale - and wildly stupid.

      - it is confirmed by tests. And your words are not supported by anything.

      - Do not tell fables, the rating of the world air defense systems is known, and those air defense systems that use only team guidance - their rating is below the baseboard. Command guidance is excellent on a significant part of the trajectory, but at the end - only the GOS! Desirable combined like that of "Stanner" ("David's Sling), or ARGSN millimeter range (ZUK" Derby "SAM" Spider "and SAM" Tamir "ZhK), or thermal imaging seeker - SAM" Python-5 "SAM Spider
      - "Bayraktaram" this radiation was "on a drum". There, the search for the target was through optics (with the use of the infrared channel) and the bombs were with electro-optical guidance.

      Oh, how scary. The reality is a little different.

      - For the tenth time to show this terrible (for the Russian air defense) reality?

      If something emits in the radio range, then the target is very quickly taken and the location becomes known. In the infrared range, the easily disguised targets do not know how to take direction finding.

      - See the video - ALL these targets were found and destroyed without the use of RTR means!
      - And this is nonsense: "Bayraktars hit their targets from heights of 5-6 km and a range of up to 8 km. Is the Torah energy really not enough for 8 km ?! laughing lol The range of destruction is up to 12 km, the altitude range is up to 10 km.

      You just didn't have enough brains to understand the meaning of what was said.

      - Burst out laughing, layman! laughing lol
      - It is necessary to use the seeker, then the speed of the target will not be an obstacle.

      Again, zero understanding of what the three-point targeting method is and why it is bad.

      - See the video - to the fullest enlightenment! Why "Bayraktars" stuffed Russian equipment (of all ranks and stripes) for one and a half billion dollars, why Armenia lost the war to Azerbaijan, why is this a model of a future war between the Russian army and the NATO army.

      Outsider, you have a jumble of different missiles, air defense systems ... You will decide what you are talking about. If you are talking about the Dome and the Sling of David, then they correspond to the C-350, in which they are both. And if about the Shell, then neither the Dome nor the Sling of David is here.
      By the way, there are two target sensors in Stanner - "optical" (in different ranges) and radar. Since the warhead of the missile defense system is small, high targeting accuracy is needed to defeat the ballistic missile, for which it is necessary to know the angular and linear coordinates of the target and their derivatives (and, if possible, also evaluate the second derivative of the linear coordinate) - the criminal speed of the target line of sight and the angle of sight target (angle - not critical), target radial speed and target range. Usually, in such missiles, this is done with one target sensor - ARGSN. But, for the considered class of missiles (warhead is weak), the ARGSN requires a large available overload and a short reaction time of the missile defense system to select the final miss. And the Stanner design at high altitudes does not provide this. Compare the Stanner design with the mass-dimensional analogs of a similar purpose, the fundamental difference is immediately obvious. Therefore, Stanner must compensate for this by increasing the accuracy, first of all, of the angular target sensor, which is done by installing an "optical" sensor, which is much more accurate at the corners than the radar sensor. But the "optical" sensor measures only angular coordinates, it cannot measure linear coordinates. Therefore, a radar sensor is also installed to measure the linear coordinates of the target and their derivatives.
  17. Outsider
    Outsider 8 December 2021 17: 29
    +1
    - Here, for example, the new English air defense system:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CAMM_(missile_family)
    It is only natural that there:
    Active RF seeker that means there is no need for complex and high-cost fire control / illumination radars
    Active radar coordinator, which means there is no need for complex and expensive radar fire control / target illumination.
    1. Comet
      Comet 9 December 2021 23: 28
      0
      Quote: Outsider
      - Here, for example, the new English air defense system:
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CAMM_(missile_family)
      It is only natural that there:
      Active RF seeker that means there is no need for complex and high-cost fire control / illumination radars
      Active radar coordinator, which means there is no need for complex and expensive radar fire control / target illumination.

      PARs are relatively simple and inexpensive here. But the British, like the French, did not make a phased array for aiming several missiles at several targets for Rapier, Roland, Crotal. They do not have technologies in the required range. Therefore, the British chose an option from existing proven technologies. The composition of this English air defense system corresponds to the C-350. But in terms of capabilities, the Briton is very far from the S-350.
      1. Outsider
        Outsider 10 December 2021 08: 57
        0
        But in terms of capabilities, the British is very far from the S-350.

        - It seems so to you - due to a misunderstanding. Although comparing the long-range air defense system - and the medium-range air defense system - it’s still a joke! laughing lol Then compare the S-350 with the last made of the Patriot from the Americans, or with the SAM "David's sling" ("STUNNER)" in Israel:
        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David%27s_Sling
        The C-350 was next to this air defense missile system and did not lie close ... lol These are different technological eras ...
  18. kytx
    kytx 9 December 2021 01: 29
    +1
    Quote: drags33
    Maybe someone will say that I find fault with trifles, but I'm really tired of seeing how the Russian language is distorted. It's about this phrase in the article - "light SAM of reduced dimensions with reduced power"So, according to the current rules of the Russian language, the word" power "means" great strength, influence, power "and is applied to such phrases as" powerful ruler "," powerful oligarch ", etc. For technical systems there is a well-known the term "power", which carries a specific physical meaning. Therefore, to write "powerful engine", "powerful rocket" is to distort the Russian language and mislead readers. Maybe I would not write about it, but on the site I constantly see this ridiculous the use of the word “power.” Do we forget the Russian language?


    The power of ammunition is quite an official term in military affairs. Just in case.
  19. Outsider
    Outsider 9 December 2021 23: 18
    0
    Quote: Comet
    Quote: Outsider
    - The problem with missiles with such guidance is the probability of defeat. It is "below the plinth" ... SAM simply passes the target at a distance at which neither the detonator nor the normal cloud of destructive elements is formed ...

    Where did they get this nonsense? Guidance radars Thor and Pantsir ensure the accuracy of targeting missiles within 4-5 km, no worse (and for Sosna - within 10 km) than homing missiles.

    - About "not worse" - who told you ?!
    At a distance of up to 8-10 km, the accuracy is sufficient to hit any target with practically no reduction in the probability of hitting.

    - I repeat: this is phuflogonia. Terry.
    Further down - there, yes, with an increase in the range of more than 10 km, in order to maintain the probability of defeat, an increase in the geometric dimensions of the target is required. So this is a short-range complex.

    - Once again: command guidance is from poverty, from technological lagging behind and from the fact that really Russian short-range air defense systems have never fought anywhere and never before Karabakh. The war in Nagorno-Karabakh demonstrated the complete inconsistency of those principles of missile defense control, on which they were designed half a century ago. On the modern battlefield, this no longer works..
    And to talk about the accuracy "not worse" with radio command guidance is just ignorant stupidity. In Israel, there is no short-range air defense system using only this antediluvian guidance principle. At the final stage of the trajectory, either thermal imaging guidance or an active radar seeker is mandatory.
    1. Comet
      Comet 9 December 2021 23: 54
      0
      Quote: Outsider
      Quote: Comet
      Quote: Outsider
      - The problem with missiles with such guidance is the probability of defeat. It is "below the plinth" ... SAM simply passes the target at a distance at which neither the detonator nor the normal cloud of destructive elements is formed ...

      Where did they get this nonsense? Guidance radars Thor and Pantsir ensure the accuracy of targeting missiles within 4-5 km, no worse (and for Sosna - within 10 km) than homing missiles.

      - About "not worse" - who told you ?!
      At a distance of up to 8-10 km, the accuracy is sufficient to hit any target with practically no reduction in the probability of hitting.

      - I repeat: this is phuflogonia. Terry.
      Further down - there, yes, with an increase in the range of more than 10 km, in order to maintain the probability of defeat, an increase in the geometric dimensions of the target is required. So this is a short-range complex.

      - Once again: command guidance is from poverty, from technological lagging behind and from the fact that really Russian short-range air defense systems have never fought anywhere and never before Karabakh. The war in Nagorno-Karabakh demonstrated the complete inconsistency of those principles of missile defense control, on which they were designed half a century ago. On the modern battlefield, this no longer works..
      And to talk about the accuracy "not worse" with radio command guidance is just ignorant stupidity. In Israel, there is no short-range air defense system using only this antediluvian guidance principle. At the final stage of the trajectory, either thermal imaging guidance or an active radar seeker is mandatory.

      1. Outsider, well, what kind of kindergarten about "who told you"? There is on the Internet the accuracy of the SSTSR Pantsir, everything can be counted and checked. C1M has higher accuracy. For Pine - the known calculation results are confirmed by tests.
      2. In Karabakh, there were only Torahs, to which the Armenian air defense officers have no complaints, except for their number in Armenia.
      4. Command guidance to several targets of several missiles requires the presence of the appropriate range of HEADLIGHTS. Their technologies were developed in the USSR / Russia and the USA. That's it, they are nowhere else, except for the Chinese copy for Thor. And ARGSN is used on other air defense systems that are not shared on the same machine. And there is no air defense system in Israel or anywhere else on the same machine capable of hitting air targets in motion at such ranges.
      5. SAM, when attacking a low-altitude target or a distant medium-altitude target, attacks from above. That is, the target is in the background of the earth. How, in this case, ARGSN distinguishes the target from the background of the earth?
  20. Outsider
    Outsider 10 December 2021 00: 19
    0
    https://www.army-technology.com/features/sky-sabre-inside-uks-missile-defence-system/
    ... The rocket also has a number of other impressive characteristics, including active radar seeker with excellent jamming capabilities, allowing you to successfully intercept even such complex threats as cruise missiles and guided munitions in all weather conditions ...

    MIC4AD: battle management, command, communications, computers and reconnaissance
    Raphael's C4I Modular Integrated Air and Missile Defense System (MIC4AD) was chosen to provide the Sky Saber battle control, command, communications, computers and reconnaissance (BMC4I) control, as well as to link the Giraffes with Land Ceptor launchers. Developed for Rafael Advanced Defense Systems by Mprest, 50% owned by Raphael, this is the same technology used in Israel's own successful Iron Dome missile defense shield.
    ........................
    Sky Saber is a relative of LCD ... laughing lol
  21. Outsider
    Outsider 10 December 2021 08: 49
    0
    Quote: Comet

    1. Outsider, well, what kind of kindergarten about "who told you"? There is on the Internet the accuracy of the SSTSR Pantsir, everything can be counted and checked. C1M has higher accuracy. For Pine - the known calculation results are confirmed by tests.
    2. In Karabakh, there were only Torahs, to which the Armenian air defense officers have no complaints, except for their number in Armenia.

    - If there are "no complaints" - how do you explain this? There are HUNDREDS of targets hit, including the Torahs and the S-300, here is WAR WINNING:
    https://youtu.be/YwdUREgSlwQ
    And you stubbornly talk: "there is accuracy on the Internet, everything can be checked"... And in life, in a real war, there is nothing.
    4. Command guidance to several targets of several missiles requires the presence of the appropriate range of HEADLIGHTS. Their technologies were developed in the USSR / Russia and the USA. That's it, they are nowhere else, except for the Chinese copy for Thor.

    - In Israel, there are a lot of radar stations with AFAR, of all kinds and stripes. The most popular for the air defense system:
    https://www.iai.co.il/p/elm-2084-ms-mmr
    https://www.iai.co.il/p/elm-2084-mmr
    And ARGSN on other air defense systems is used, which are not assembled on one machine. And there is no air defense system in Israel or anywhere else on the same machine capable of hitting air targets in motion at such ranges.

    - There are also on cars, right here the Americans are sent a mobile version of the "Iron Dome", in the form of "humanitarian aid":

    5. SAM, when attacking a low-altitude target or a distant medium-altitude target, attacks from above. That is, the target is in the background of the earth. How, in this case, ARGSN distinguishes the target from the background of the earth?

    - A ridiculous question: in the same way that targets are distinguished against the background of the ground by the airborne radar of an aircraft - by means of Doppler selection. But in order to place such a miniature ARGSN in the nose of a rocket with a diameter of 16-18 centimeters, a very high level of technology is required. They are in the west and in Israel.
    Here is the "last squeak", the English air defense system:
    https://bmpd.livejournal.com/4444133.html
    1. agond
      agond 11 December 2021 15: 05
      0
      At the beginning, the military concentrated missiles, cannons, radars, control in one large machine, and then wondered how it would be with a simultaneous attack of missiles (many more than one) plus drones, without any options, the target is too tasty, ash tree stump, that the enemy will not spare efforts and resources to suppress it,. There is only one way out to disassemble it - to take it apart - to disperse the complex into components, so that in the place of its combat duty there is not one target (a large basket with tightly packed golden eggs), but several small ones, for example, two small containers with missiles, two small platforms with guns ,, and so on, then it will be impossible to completely disable the complex with one missile. and even if the enemy knows the coordinates of the complex, this will not help him much
      1. Outsider
        Outsider 11 December 2021 15: 50
        0
        - Everything is much simpler and more prosaic: in order for the "Bayratar" to turn to zero over the battlefield, the air defense system covering a certain area of ​​the territory must detect this "Bayratar" at a distance much a greater range of use of their bombs at the covered objects, i.e. > 15 km:
        https://www.roketsan.com.tr/en/products/mam-l-smart-micro-munition
        And the missile of this air defense missile system should be able to target and hit the Bayraktar at a much greater range than 15 km.
        If this is not the case, then the defeat is akin to the Karabakh one and the loss in the military campaign.
        And the guns have nothing to do with it - are they there, are they not ...
        1. Outsider
          Outsider 11 December 2021 16: 47
          0
          - The Ukrainian comrade tells the whole truth:

          1. Comet
            Comet 11 December 2021 21: 32
            0
            ARGSN for R-27 was made by Agat in the last century.
        2. The comment was deleted.
        3. Comet
          Comet 11 December 2021 21: 42
          0
          Quote: Outsider
          - Everything is much simpler and more prosaic: in order for the "Bayratar" to turn to zero over the battlefield, the air defense system covering a certain area of ​​the territory must detect this "Bayratar" at a distance much a greater range of use of their bombs at the covered objects, i.e. > 15 km:
          https://www.roketsan.com.tr/en/products/mam-l-smart-micro-munition
          And the missile of this air defense missile system should be able to target and hit the Bayraktar at a much greater range than 15 km.
          If this is not the case, then the defeat is akin to the Karabakh one and the loss in the military campaign.
          And the guns have nothing to do with it - are they there, are they not ...

          Bayraktar with pendants - from 1 m ^ 2. But you should draw less conclusions based on YouTube. Neither OTR nor MLRS can post videos on YouTube.
      2. The comment was deleted.
      3. Comet
        Comet 11 December 2021 21: 39
        0
        Quote: agond
        At the beginning, the military concentrated missiles, cannons, radars, control in one large machine, and then wondered how it would be with a simultaneous attack of missiles (many more than one) plus drones, without any options, the target is too tasty, ash tree stump, that the enemy will not spare efforts and resources to suppress it,. There is only one way out to disassemble it - to take it apart - to disperse the complex into components, so that in the place of its combat duty there is not one target (a large basket with tightly packed golden eggs), but several small ones, for example, two small containers with missiles, two small platforms with guns ,, and so on, then it will be impossible to completely disable the complex with one missile. and even if the enemy knows the coordinates of the complex, this will not help him much

        What nonsense! Any air defense system has one target - a radar. If the radar station is destroyed, all other components of the complex, "for example, two small containers with missiles, two small platforms with guns, and so on ..." become completely useless. When installing "all on one", instead of one radar and two small containers with missiles, two small platforms with guns, you can put five full-fledged air defense systems.
    2. Comet
      Comet 11 December 2021 21: 22
      0
      [quote = Outsider] [quote = Comet]
      1. Outsider, well, what kind of kindergarten about "who told you"? There is on the Internet the accuracy of the SSTSR Pantsir, everything can be counted and checked. C1M has higher accuracy. For Pine - the known calculation results are confirmed by tests.
      2. In Karabakh, there were only Torahs, to which the Armenian air defense personnel have no complaints, except for their number in Armenia. [/ Quote]
      - If there are "no complaints" - how do you explain this? There are HUNDREDS of targets hit, including the Torahs and the S-300, here is WAR WINNING:
      https://youtu.be/YwdUREgSlwQ
      And you stubbornly talk: "there is accuracy on the Internet, everything can be checked"... And in life, in a real war, there is nothing.
      [/ Quote]
      1. It is strange that it is necessary to repeat, but it will be necessary: ​​Armenians have no claims to the Torahs, except for their number in Armenia.
      2. There were no S-300s in Armenia, they are not available anywhere at all. SAM (SAM) S-300 never existed. The S-300 is only a project of an interspecific air defense system. Armenia has S-300PS, which did not participate in hostilities, and there were practically no targets for the S-300PS. The location of the Armenian S-300PS was transferred to the Azerbaijanis by the Armenian military personnel. But three stars / snowflakes appeared on the RPN of the Azerbaijani Favorite.
      3. "How do you explain this?" - so everything is known. In the area of ​​hostilities, Armenia's air defense forces and assets did not provide protection against OTR, did not provide constant and complete radar control of the airspace, did not possess the required number of modern means of fire destruction of air attack weapons. Pashinyan bought the Osa air defense system in Jordan before the war! Here - what the fuck? Even the Azerbaijanis joked about this purchase.

      [quote = Outsider] [quote = Comet] 4. Command guidance on several targets of several missiles requires the presence of the appropriate range of HEADLIGHTS. Their technologies were developed in the USSR / Russia and the USA. That's it, they are nowhere else, except for the Chinese copy for the Torah. [/ Quote]
      - In Israel, there are a lot of radar stations with AFAR, of all kinds and stripes. The most popular for the air defense system:
      https://www.iai.co.il/p/elm-2084-ms-mmr
      https://www.iai.co.il/p/elm-2084-mmr
      [/ Quote]
      Yes, at least ten heaps, types and colors. Among them there is not a single one suitable for use in command guidance of missiles in air defense systems such as Thor, Pantsir, Roland, Crotal, Rapier. These radars will not even fit on the vehicle of these air defense systems, and these radars will not be able to provide the accuracy of command guidance for such small missiles (warhead missiles). For command guidance, the S-125 missile defense system may be suitable. But in modern air defense systems of the S-125 type, command guidance is not used.

      [quote = Outsider] [quote = Comet] [quote] And ARGSN on other air defense systems is used, which are not compiled on one machine. And there is no air defense system in Israel or anywhere else on one machine capable of hitting air targets in motion at such ranges. [/ Quote]
      - There are also on cars, right here the Americans are sent a mobile version of the "Iron Dome", in the form of "humanitarian aid":

      [/ Quote]
      No-eee, we are talking about an air defense system on one machine. By your link on machines, but not one. Three different cars stand out well there. And, by the way, it is not clear, what does the Dome have to do with it? The dome corresponds to the S-350, in the corresponding configuration, and not the Thor / Armor. The S-350 concept - the end of the 90s of the last century. The fact that he walked for so long was by no means a design and technological problem.
      "In the form of" humanitarian aid "- this is your megalomania. The US Army tried to shove the dome since the beginning of the last decade, but the US Army desperately threw itself away from it. A dome in the combat training (exercises, etc.) of the American army to determine the possible area of ​​its application in it. Where, after the decision of the Congress to go to the American army? Guam, or as military aid to Ukraine.

      [quote = Outsider] [quote = Comet] [quote] 5. The missile defense system attacks from above when attacking a low-altitude target or a distant medium-altitude target. That is, the target is in the background of the earth. How, in this case, ARGSN distinguishes the target against the background of the earth? [/ Quote]
      - A ridiculous question: in the same way that targets are distinguished against the background of the ground by the airborne radar of an aircraft - by means of Doppler selection.
      [/ Quote]
      That's right, Doppler selection. But there will be an unfunny answer to a "funny question". At the radial speed of the target, that way (with a margin, actually more), 25 m / s, ARGSN will not see the target against the background of the earth / water.

      [quote = Outsider] But in order to place such a miniature ARGSN in the nose of a rocket with a diameter of 16-18 centimeters, a very high level of technology is required. They are in the west and in Israel.
      Here is the "last squeak", the English air defense system:
      https://bmpd.livejournal.com/4444133.html[/quote]
      [/ Quote]
      In Russia, Agat has an ARGSN of the millimeter range with a diameter of 150 mm. The millimeter range does not work well in high humidity conditions, therefore, for missiles in Russia and France, the ARGSN adopted a different range (English "originally" from the French, in the same range), the American ERINT is focused on intercepting ballistic missiles, the Israeli Tamir is focused on intercepting MLRS ammunition. By the way, a thermal imaging seeker in high humidity conditions works even worse than a millimeter one. And with the same operating frequency, the antenna pattern is better for ARGSN with a larger antenna diameter.
  22. Outsider
    Outsider 12 December 2021 01: 43
    0
    Quote: Comet
    ARGSN for R-27 was made by Agat in the last century.

    - Again flooded the "artistic whistle". They did it in the last century, but they forgot to set up mass production and put it in the troops ... laughing
  23. The comment was deleted.
  24. Outsider
    Outsider 12 December 2021 02: 41
    0
    Quote: Comet
    2. In Karabakh, there were only Torahs, to which the Armenian air defense officers have no complaints, except for their number in Armenia.

    - If there are "no complaints" - how do you explain this? There are HUNDREDS of targets hit, including the Torahs and the S-300, here is WAR WINNING:
    https://youtu.be/YwdUREgSlwQ
    And you stubbornly talk: "there is accuracy on the Internet, everything can be checked"... And in life, in a real war, there is nothing.

    1. It is strange that it is necessary to repeat, but it will be necessary: ​​Armenians have no claims to the Torahs, except for their number in Armenia.

    - Once again, for demagogues: how can there be "no complaints" when were several hundred Armenian targets destroyed by Bayraktars? And these goals were just supposed to cover the "Torah".
    2. There were no S-300s in Armenia, they are not available anywhere at all. SAM (SAM) S-300 never existed. The S-300 is only a project of an interspecific air defense system. Armenia has S-300PS, which did not participate in hostilities, and there were practically no targets for the S-300PS.

    - There is a video where "Bayraktar" destroys the Armenian S-300... And with what index it is - the tenth thing.
    The location of the Armenian S-300PS was transferred to the Azerbaijanis by the Armenian military personnel. But three stars / snowflakes appeared on the RPN of the Azerbaijani Favorite.

    - Where is the evidence of these heroic victories? One chatter.
    3. "How do you explain this?" - so everything is known. In the area of ​​hostilities, the composition of the air defense forces and means that Armenia did not have: did not provide protection against OTR, did not provide constant and complete radar control of the airspace, did not possess the required number of modern means of fire destruction of air attack weapons. Pashinyan bought the Osa air defense system in Jordan before the war! Here - what the fuck? Even the Azerbaijanis joked about this purchase.

    And what is there to joke about?
    https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9E%D1%81%D0%B0_(%D0%B7%D0%B5%D0%BD%D0%B8%D1%82%D0%BD%D1%8B%D0%B9_%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%BA%D0%B5%D1%82%D0%BD%D1%8B%D0%B9_%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%BC%D0%BF%D0%BB%D0%B5%D0%BA%D1%81)#%D0%97%D0%A3%D0%A0_9%D0%9C33
    The main armament of the air defense missile system is the 9M33 solid-propellant missile defense system, made according to the "duck" scheme. Equipped with radio command targeting system, a fragmentation warhead, a proximity fuse with a firing radius of 5 m and tracers in the tail section to be accompanied by a television-optical sight.
    Quote: Outsider
    Quote: Comet
    4. Command guidance to several targets of several missiles requires the presence of the appropriate range of HEADLIGHTS. Their technologies were developed in the USSR / Russia and the USA. That's it, they are nowhere else, except for the Chinese copy for Thor.

    - In Israel, there are a lot of radar stations with AFAR, of all kinds and stripes. The most popular for the air defense system:
    https://www.iai.co.il/p/elm-2084-ms-mmr
    https://www.iai.co.il/p/elm-2084-mmr

    Yes, at least ten heaps, types and colors. Among them there is not a single one suitable for use in command guidance of missiles in air defense systems such as Thor, Pantsir, Roland, Crotal, Rapier. These radars will not even fit on the car of these air defense systems.

    - "Laughing out loud"! laughing lol American radar with AFAR: APG-77, APG-81, APG-79, APG-80, APG-82 - they fit into the nose of the aircraft, their antenna diameter is 80-90 centimeters !! And the maximum target detection range with RCS = 1 m² is 225 km !! laughing
    IN RUSSIA SIMPLY DOESN'T EXIST LIKE ANY radar for airplanes, NOR A radar for air defense systems. They do not exist, because they do not exist at all. They were not created, they were not created. This is called - Technological lag.
    and these radars will not be able to provide the accuracy of command guidance for such small missiles (warhead missiles).

    - Naturally, they cannot provide anything because RUSSIA DOESN'T EXIST THEM. "Out of stock and out of stock."
    For command guidance, the S-125 missile defense system may be suitable. But in modern air defense systems of the S-125 type, command guidance is not used.

    - There is also a variant of radio command guidance of the 1961 model (60 years ago). Museums all over the world cry for him!
    https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A1-125
    No-eee, we are talking about an air defense system on one machine. By your link on machines, but not one. Three different cars stand out well there.

    - Would there be no room for three cars in Nagorno-Karabakh? The area is too small ?! lol
    "In the form of" humanitarian aid "- this is your megalomania. The US armies tried to shove the dome since the beginning of the last decade, but the US army desperately" kicked back "from it.
    Finally, with Trump's undertaking, a decision was passed through the US Congress obliging the US Army to use the Dome in combat training (exercises, etc.) of the US Army to determine its possible field of application in it. Where will the American army go after the decision of the Congress?

    - Stop smacking stupid propaganda nonsense, layman, - Americans will never take for themselves what they themselves do not need... Namely, they had an acute need for an LCD-type air defense system, in the light of all the recent developments in the emergence of small and ultra-small UAVs and multicopter drones. This niche was open for them.... Therefore, LCD was required.
  25. Outsider
    Outsider 12 December 2021 02: 43
    0
    The most extreme thing I met was the army's thoughts about where to send him: either to Guam, or as military aid to Ukraine.

    - Right next to you, they thought: either to Guam, or to send to Ukraine (which Israel would never have sanctioned - due to the special relationship with Russia in Syria)? You suck all sorts of unbelievability out of your finger - not only that which does not exist, but even that which cannot be! Have you seen Israeli weapons in Ukraine today ?! am
    Quote: Outsider
    Quote: Comet
    5. SAM, when attacking a low-altitude target or a distant medium-altitude target, attacks from above. That is, the target is in the background of the earth. How, in this case, ARGSN distinguishes the target from the background of the earth?

    - A ridiculous question: in the same way that targets are distinguished against the background of the ground by the airborne radar of an aircraft - by means of Doppler selection.

    That's right, Doppler selection.

    - So why ask stupid questions?
    But there will be an unfunny answer to a "funny question". At the radial speed of the target, that way (with a margin, actually more), 25 m / s, ARGSN will not see the target against the background of the earth / water.

    - For a long time already less than 10 m / s for decent ones. If the radial speed of the target is low - this means that the missile is not going to the target. fool If the missile hits the target, the radial component is maximum!
    In Russia, Agat has an ARGSN of the millimeter range with a diameter of 150 mm. The millimeter range does not work well in high humidity conditions, therefore, for missiles in Russia and France, the ARGSN adopted a different range (English "originally" from the French, in the same range), the American ERINT is focused on intercepting ballistic missiles, the Israeli Tamir is focused on intercepting MLRS ammunition.

    - Both ERINT, and "Tamir", and "David's Sling" - their ARGSN operate in the millimeter range, - because the centimeter range with a small antenna diameter does not provide the required accuracy.
    By the way, a thermal imaging seeker in high humidity conditions works even worse than a millimeter one.

    - What does "humidity" have to do with it ?? fool In the clouds, thermal imaging really does not work, like IR, but they do not care deeply about humidity. laughing
    And with the same operating frequency, the antenna pattern is better for ARGSN with a larger antenna diameter.

    - But the diameter of the rocket is small and it is not too possible and desirable to increase it. It is limited. Therefore, the entire normal world uses the millimeter wavelength range..
  26. Outsider
    Outsider 12 December 2021 02: 54
    0
    Quote: Comet
    Any air defense system has one target - a radar. If the radar is destroyed, all other components of the complex, "for example, two small containers with missiles, two small platforms with guns, and so on ..." become completely useless. When installing "all in one", instead of one radar and two small containers with missiles, two small platforms with guns, you can put five full-fledged air defense systems.

    - The only question is, who will destroy whom first: "Bayraktar" - "Tor", or vice versa. As a result of the war in Nagorno-Karabakh, we see that the "Bayraktars" catastrophically dominated the "Torahs", crushing them "in the tail and in the mane":



    The annoying chatter that, they say, "Thors" were few ", - it remains such idle chatter: ANYWHERE AND NEVER A SAM IS SO MUCH POSSIBLE AIR TARGETS: AIRCRAFT, UAV, BOMB, ... fool
    1. agond
      agond 12 December 2021 12: 47
      +1
      Quote: Comet
      What nonsense! Any air defense system has one target - a radar. If the radar is destroyed, all other components of the complex, "for example, two small containers with missiles, two small platforms with guns, and so on ..." become completely useless. When installing "all in one", instead of one radar and two small containers with missiles, two small platforms with guns, you can put five full-fledged air defense systems.

      It would be logical to take off everything that the Pantsir carries on himself upon arrival at the place of combat duty and somehow distribute it, because all the equipment that is on it is not armored and he is big, and how not to hide it , and the radar antenna can be raised using an unmanned electric helicopter powered by a ground generator, the antenna signal processing should also be carried out on the ground, by the way, the AFAR itself is not great, it is not difficult to raise and hold it in the air, and it will be seen much further, and it will be more difficult to hit it with an anti-radar missile, and in general it, together with an unmanned helicopter, should be a consumable.
  27. QBasicRun
    QBasicRun 5 January 2022 09: 38
    0
    For Pantsir, a divisional early warning radar is needed, which will give target designation to UAVs while they are 50 km or more to the approach.