Pantsir-S1M against attack drones

ZRPK "Pantsir-S1M". Photo "Rosoboronexport"

Modern reconnaissance and strike unmanned aerial vehicles capable of carrying guided weapons pose a significant danger to the ground forces. Anti-aircraft weapons with high performance and special capabilities are required to combat such threats. The other day it was announced that the upgraded Pantsir-S1M missile and gun system could provide protection against attack UAVs.

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, the deputy general director of High-Precision Systems, Sergei Mikhailov, raised the topic of protection against UAVs and revealed the prospects of the modernized Pantsir in this context. The leader recalled that opposition drones is one of the main tasks for air defense. He also pointed out that two classes of means of combating UAVs are now being produced in our country. 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 ZRPK Pantsir-S1M.

"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 strike UAV Bayraktar Akıncı is a threat to the near future. Baykar Savunma Photos

The artillery unit on the Pantsir-S1M/SM remains the same. Destruction 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 shells 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 noted that medium and heavy UAVs capable of carrying strike weapons are large in size and have adequate 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

"Shells" of all modifications, including the latest "SM" and "S1M", can operate independently and as part of a layered air defense system. In the latter case, the ZRPK can take on the role of a fire weapon, and transfer detection tasks to other systems that have technical or other advantages.

The composition of a multi-component defense system with separate radars, missile-gun and other systems, electronic warfare equipment, etc. may be determined in accordance with the current conditions and characteristics of the covered area. In "High-precision complexes" they 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 upgraded ZRPK were made at a foreign military-technical exhibition. At the same time, it was about the export modification of the Pantsir-S1M. All this shows that our industry continues to promote its new development on the international market and is looking for customers. To attract future buyers, the leaders of High-Precision Complexes and Rostec reveal 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 must be recalled that Pantsir-S1M has already 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 should not forget the previous orders for early versions of the "Shell".

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.

Comments

[OgnennyiKotik]

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 is 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.

[Alexey RA]

Quote: OgnennyiKotik

As for small-sized missiles, their development has just begun, it is too early to talk about them.

Light missiles on "Shells" lit up at the 2020 parade.

[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 .........?

[venik]

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 right now get angry... ( ) And I will reveal a great secret ... THEY (such missiles) ALREADY exist ... ( ) Only ...: "Shhhhhhhh!" Not a word to anyone!

[Nikolaevich I]

Duc, I do not reject the "physical existence of real rockets"! Although I assume they are still being tested... But I wildly doubt that at the 2020 parade, real zurs, and not mock-ups, "lit up" ...

[Bad thing]

I’ll reveal a terrible secret, they carry weight and size mock-ups at parades.

[Castro Ruiz]

Alexey R.A.
Sancti simplicitas.

[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.

[OgnennyiKotik]

Is not a fact. Western/Japanese/South Korean SPAAGs are equipped with projectiles with controlled detonation starting from 35 mm. They are not in a hurry to launch a series of 30mm or less, although everything has been tested and infantry fighting vehicles are beginning to be equipped with them. Probably the power of 30mm 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.

[Boa kaa]

Quote: OgnennyiKotik

Probably the power of 30mm is not enough.

I think so too. A minimum of 37mm is needed so that a radio fuse can be placed.

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 necessary to include an anti-aircraft gunner with MANPADS in the calculation in order to exclude a repetition of the Syrian version, when the "military" SHELL S-1, which shot its own BC, was destroyed with impunity.

[Popandos]

Probably the power of 30mm is not enough.

To destroy an aircraft, a cruise missile is enough, but not for an UAV?
Not logical.

[Saxahorse]

Quote: Popandos

To destroy an aircraft, a cruise missile is enough, but not for an 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.

[Popandos]

Why, then, were the guns in this caliber originally installed on such ZSUs? What targets should you shoot?
Helicopters? A larger caliber is also better for them.

[Sergey Aleksandrovich]

A helicopter capable of withstanding hits from a 30-mm cannon has not yet been born.

[Saxahorse]

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.

[this]

It seems like on the ground, the requirements of the Arabs were.

[Vadim237]

"A direct hit on the CD is rare." This is now an easily solvable problem. A computer sighting computer complex is needed.

[this]

Nope, there is a big physical expansion and you can't remove it in any way, if only you shoot singles.

[Roman Efremov]

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?

[kytx]

57mm is too much in terms of the dimensions of both the gun and the ammo, and more expensive.
45mm is just what the doctor ordered.

[this]

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.

[ailcat]

Instead of one projectile caliber 57 mm (shot weight 4,2 kg) can be loaded three projectile 45 mm (shot weight 1,9 kg). Is the controversial increase in projectile power worth a threefold reduction in ammunition? Obviously not.
PS
And 30-mm shells (shot weight 0,386 kg) could be taken 5 times more than 45-mm (and almost 11 times more than 57-mm). But here the transition to a larger caliber can at least be justified by the impossibility of installing a remote fuse in a small caliber ...

[Wildcat]

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 to try somehow "tac-scratch", for the role of the very last line of defense. And here, IMHO, a decrease in caliber is requested to increase the number of shells. SAMs, of course, also need to be installed, even the Poles adapted SAMs 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.

[this]

Yes, hell knows about cheaper, electronics that can withstand huge overloads cost little.

[Lykases1]

Exactly. In all videos from polygons, he does not take drones with guns. Probably they are for something like a helicopter.

[Jacket in stock]

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.

[Nikolaevich I]

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. ..?

[alexmach]

one apparently. It’s just that over time, they overestimated its efficiency over long distances.

[Nikolaevich I]

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?

[Fisherman]

Burns in our military-industrial complex! Efficient and affordable technique! Nevertheless, "belt tightening" for the military-industrial complex of the state is sometimes useful, the efficiency of development is growing rapidly! And, of course, periodic participation in the database as advertising.

[rocket757]

Pantsir-S1M against attack drones

. SHELL it is both 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!

[Ross xnumx]

Pantsir-S1M against attack drones
I liked this presentation:

[Klingon]

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

[riwas]

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.

[senima56]

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 the Pantsir, and there will also be no end to customers. Only real stories are needed, and not advertising from "Military Acceptance"!

[Toorik]

How? attach cameras to rockets? or let the UAV into the line of sight?

[senima56]

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.

[Toorik]

Television guidance is not suitable for anti-aircraft missiles ....

[Momento]

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.

[outsider]

- Israel already has it.

[Momento]

first time I hear. tell me.

[outsider]

- "Iron Dome":
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_Dome

"Iron Ray":

[stankow]

"It is not clear" how the banal KUNG is being destroyed? Run out of air-to-ground missiles? Nursi, cast iron?

[demiurg]

I wonder why, instead of two 30mm machine guns (each of which is, in fact, a double-barreled gun firing kmk according to the gast scheme), put one 57mm? In 57 mm, you can cut cheap ammunition with a programmable detonation. A reach of 7-9 km in height and 10 in range removes the need for small rockets.
Of course, I am a generalist couch theorist, but IMHO the efficiency should increase.

[sen]

Reach 7-9 km in height and 10 in range

Caliber - 57 mm
Number of barrels - 1
Art part index - C-60
Projectile weight - 6,3 kg
The initial velocity of the projectile - 1000 m / s
The maximum firing range for 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 on the speed of the target - 250 m / s
The combat weight of the gun is 4,8 tons
Calculation - 8 people
Barrel length - 4850 mm
The number of shells in the cassette - 5 shells

[demiurg]

Let's clarify, what kind of shooting method is this for? For an optical sight, semi-automatic or automatic shooting, for what purpose and with what projectile to the heap. This is me gently hinting 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.

[sen]

This is the official data that is given everywhere. It can and can shoot further, but it makes no sense because of the scattering of shells. The AK also gives the maximum firing range, but this does not mean that they will shoot at this range.

[senima56]

I also think so that one 57mm cannon is more effective than two 30mm cannons. If there is also a "remote detonation" in shells ...

[sen]

Pantsir-S1M against attack drones

Pantsir-S1M will not be able to provide protection against attack drones directly in combat formations. But if we refine the BMPT for this purpose, equipping it with Chrysanthemum missiles, which can also shoot down air targets.

[demiurg]

Exactly. Attach the Iskander launcher, the helipad and the Coalition's double-barreled turret to the BMPT.

[Castro Ruiz]

From 30 mm guns in the Shell crawl a little.
Their low effectiveness needs to be hung with DP shells, but I see a stock. 30 mm will already be not enough or will be replaced by 1 57 mm cannon by itself with a DP.

[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 ...

[stankow]

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.

[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 fuse fires nor a normal cloud of submunitions is formed ...

[Grohuf]

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.

[outsider]

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 systems 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. Talking 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 ?! The range of destruction is up to 12 km, the altitude range is up to 10 km.

and the capabilities of the complex in terms of the speed of the intercepted target drop sharply.

- It is necessary to use homing heads, then the speed of the target will not be a hindrance.

Well, how are you going to get somewhere there with the GOS - this is a good question.

- Only with the seeker and get ...

[Grohuf]

The Iron Dome air defense system is by no means the system that can only shoot down hail-type missiles flying along a constant ballistic trajectory at a speed a little more than mach and have never been used against more or less real targets? At least against a standard Wasp missile target?
Or is it some other Iron Dome that shot 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 is with regard to missiles, with a good active RLGSN. If you use a cheap seeker, then such a missile will not really bring 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 glide bombs.

- This is a fairy tale - and wildly stupid.

- It is confirmed by tests. And your words are not confirmed 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 homing heads, then the speed of the target will not be a hindrance.

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

[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 fuse fires nor a normal cloud of submunitions 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.

[Comet]

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 kind of stupidity?! This is a short-range air defense missile system capable of working on several targets and on the move. Everything is mounted on one chassis: SOC, SSCR, ECO, missiles, guns. Another SAM Tor in the same class. And that's all.

[Yarhann]

that's the beauty of the Shell, that in such a size, it is also mobile with such capabilities, it is unique

[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?

[outsider]

Do we forget Russian?

- How shitty when "You don't know, and you'll forget too!"

[kosmos84]

Soviet cannons of the 40-50s, return the shells to them, they fired into the sky for 20 km

[Cyop_TyMyc]

SHORAD looks better.
Because it's universal. It can also knock out armored vehicles, helicopters and UAVs.
And the Carapace is only aerial targets.

[outsider]

Quote from Grohuf

The Iron Dome air defense system is by no means the system that can only shoot down hail-type missiles flying along a constant ballistic trajectory at a speed a little more than mach and have never been used against more or less real targets? At least against a standard Wasp missile target?
Or is it some other Iron Dome that shot 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!

An effective kill system like the AMRAAM missile costs more than 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 not cheap.

- One rocket "Tamir" 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!

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" - this is 98% bullshit. All of Israel laughs at these stories, looking at pictures of hit targets BEFORE and AFTER the strike. I recommend that you also join this fascinating spectacle - it perfectly clears the brains from the zombie.

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 command guidance alone. 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 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 confirmed 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 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. Reality is a little different.

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

If something radiates in the radio range, then the target is very quickly taken direction and the location becomes known. In the IR range, targets so easily disguised cannot take direction finding.

- See video - ALL of these targets were found and destroyed without the use of RTR tools!

- 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.

- Laughed, prof!

- It is necessary to use homing heads, then the speed of the target will not be a hindrance.

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

- Watch the video - until complete 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.

[Comet]

Quote: Outsider

Quote from Grohuf

The Iron Dome air defense system is by no means the system that can only shoot down hail-type missiles flying along a constant ballistic trajectory at a speed a little more than mach and have never been used against more or less real targets? At least against a standard Wasp missile target?
Or is it some other Iron Dome that shot 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!

An effective kill system like the AMRAAM missile costs more than 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 not cheap.

- One rocket "Tamir" 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!

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" - this is 98% bullshit. All of Israel laughs at these stories, looking at pictures of hit targets BEFORE and AFTER the strike. I recommend that you also join this fascinating spectacle - it perfectly clears the brains from the zombie.

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 command guidance alone. 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 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 confirmed 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 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. Reality is a little different.

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

If something radiates in the radio range, then the target is very quickly taken direction and the location becomes known. In the IR range, targets so easily disguised cannot take direction finding.

- See video - ALL of these targets were found and destroyed without the use of RTR tools!

- 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.

- Laughed, prof!

- It is necessary to use homing heads, then the speed of the target will not be a hindrance.

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

- Watch the video - until complete 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 hodgepodge of different missiles, air defense systems ... You decide what you are talking about. If you are talking about the Dome and the Sling of David, then they correspond to the S-350, in which they are both. And if about the Shell, then neither the Dome nor the Sling of David has anything to do with it.
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.

[outsider]

- Here, for example, the new English air defense system:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CAMM_(missile_family)
It is quite 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.

[Comet]

Quote: Outsider

- Here, for example, the new English air defense system:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CAMM_(missile_family)
It is quite 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.

[outsider]

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! 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 system and didn’t lie close ... These are different technological eras ...

[kytx]

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.

[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 fuse fires nor a normal cloud of submunitions is formed ...

Where did you get this nonsense from? The guidance radars of the Thor and Pantsir ensure the accuracy of guidance of missiles within 4-5 km is no worse (and for Sosna - within 10 km) than the homing of 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 bullshit. 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.

[Comet]

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 fuse fires nor a normal cloud of submunitions is formed ...

Where did you get this nonsense from? The guidance radars of the Thor and Pantsir ensure the accuracy of guidance of missiles within 4-5 km is no worse (and for Sosna - within 10 km) than the homing of 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 bullshit. 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?

[outsider]

https://www.army-technology.com/features/sky-sabre-inside-uks-missile-defence-system/
... The missile also has a number of other impressive features, 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: combat management, command and control, communications, computers and intelligence
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...

[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 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 is used on other air defense systems that are not assembled 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.

- 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?

- Ridiculous question: in the same way as targets are distinguished against the background of the ground by the radar of an aircraft - through Doppler selection. But in order to place such a miniature ARGSN in the nose of rockets with a diameter of 16-18 centimeters, a very high level of technology is required. In the West and in Israel they are.
Here is the "last squeak", the English air defense system:
https://bmpd.livejournal.com/4444133.html

[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

[outsider]

- Everything is much simpler and more prosaic: in order for the "Bayraktar" to turn to zero over the battlefield, the air defense system covering a certain area of ​​\uXNUMXb\uXNUMXbthe territory must detect this "Bayratar" at a distance much a greater range of use of their bombs on 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 at all - are they there, are they not ...

[outsider]

- The Ukrainian comrade tells the whole truth:

[Comet]

ARGSN for R-27 was made by Agat in the last century.

[Comet]

Quote: Outsider

- Everything is much simpler and more prosaic: in order for the "Bayraktar" to turn to zero over the battlefield, the air defense system covering a certain area of ​​\uXNUMXb\uXNUMXbthe territory must detect this "Bayratar" at a distance much a greater range of use of their bombs on 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 at all - 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.

[Comet]

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.

[Comet]

[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 a phased array of the appropriate ranges. Their technologies were developed in the USSR/Russia and the USA. Everything, they are nowhere else, except for the Chinese copy for Thor. [/ 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 is used on other air defense systems that are not assembled 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 to a "funny question" there will be an unfunny answer. With a radial target speed, that way (with a margin, actually more), 25 m / s, ARGSN will not see the target against the background of land / water.

[quote = Outsider] But in order to place such a miniature ARGSN in the nose of rockets with a diameter of 16-18 centimeters, a very high level of technology is required. In the West and in Israel they are.
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.

[outsider]

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 ...

[outsider]

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 (ZRS) S-300 never existed. S-300 is only an interspecific air defense system project. Armenia has S-300PS, which did not participate in hostilities, and there were practically no targets for 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 chat.

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 Tor, Pantsir, Roland, Krotal, Rapier. These radars will not even fit on the car of these air defense systems.

- "Laughing out loud"! 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 !!
IN RUSSIA THERE IS SIMPLY NO SIMILAR NEITHER ABRAS FOR AIRCRAFT, NOR A RADAR FOR SAM. They don't exist because they don't 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.

- And there would be no place for three cars in Nagorno-Karabakh? Is the area too small?

"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, under Trump, 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 in order to determine the possible scope of its application in it. Where will the American army go after the decision of 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 they had open. That's why the LCD was required.

[outsider]

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 (what Israel would never sanction - due to special relations 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 ?!

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 to a "funny question" there will be an unfunny answer. With a radial target speed, that way (with a margin, actually more), 25 m / s, ARGSN will not see the target against the background of land / 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 rocket does not go to the target. If the missile goes to 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.

- And 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 is "humidity"? In the clouds, thermal imaging really does not work, like IR, but they do not care deeply about humidity.

And with the same operating frequency, the antenna pattern is better for ARGSN with a larger antenna diameter.

- That's just 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..

[outsider]

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, ...

[agond]

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.

[QBasicRun]

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.