ZRPK "Pantsir-SM" will take part in the Special Operation

99
ZRPK "Pantsir-SM" will take part in the Special Operation
Experienced Parntsir-SM at the exhibition in 2019. Photo by Rostec


The Russian troops involved in the Special Operation for the Defense of Donbass are equipped with a variety of air defense equipment. A significant role in the protection of troops and civilians is played by the Pantsir-S1 anti-aircraft missile and gun systems. Recently it became known that in the near future they will be joined by the upgraded Pantsir-SM air defense missile system, which will have to be tested in real combat conditions.



Strengthening and testing


On the future deployment of a new modification of the "Shell" in the zone of the Special Operation on January 28, RIA reported News. Information about this was obtained from an anonymous informed source from unnamed circles. According to the source, the promising "Pantsir-SM" will appear in the troops in the near future - without specifying the exact date.

In these tests, a new version of the air defense missile system with standard weapons will be involved. He will have to supplement the existing air defense system of the Russian army deployed in the area. The complex will be responsible for detecting and destroying enemy unmanned aerial vehicles and rockets. At the same time, the source indicated that Pantsir-SM would be able to fight such targets at a greater range.

Then the second stage of testing will take place in the combat zone. In it, Pantsir-SM will have to test new small-sized anti-aircraft guided missiles designed specifically to combat UAVs. A new type of combat vehicle can carry up to 48 such ammunition.

RIA Novosti and an unnamed source do not provide other information about the strengthening of air defense. The appearance of "Pantsir-SM" in the combat zone has not yet been reported either. It is alleged that the dispatch of such an air defense missile system to the Donbass is scheduled for the near future, and it can be expected that information about its deployment will not have to wait long either. Following it, information about the combat use and, possibly, even photos and videos of firing will probably appear.

Complex family


The basic version of the Pantsir-S1 ZRPK was developed by the Tula Instrument Design Bureau in the XNUMXs. By the end of the decade, its operation in the Russian armed forces began. Almost simultaneously with this, the KBP began to create various modifications of the complex. The new projects retained the original architecture and weapons, but the chassis was replaced and new electronic equipment was used.


"Shell" at the parade, 2020. In the foreground - the modernized "SM", behind - the basic version of the "C1". Photo by the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation

Another version of the modernization of the "Shell" with the letters "SM" was created in the second half of the tenth years. In 2019, KBP and Rostec for the first time presented a prototype of such an air defense missile system at one of the domestic exhibitions. As reported, the equipment was soon brought to the test to demonstrate and confirm the characteristics. In June 2020, several combat vehicles of this type took part for the first time in a military parade on Red Square.

In recent years, it has been repeatedly reported that the experienced Pantsiri-SM are being tested and fine-tuned. Based on the results of these processes, in the coming years, the ZRPK will be able to enter service. In parallel, the so-called. transport and combat vehicle "Pantsir-SM-TBM" with a different set of equipment. The layout of this product was first shown last summer. It also takes several years to fully implement this project.

Differences and advantages


The latest ZRPK "Pantsir-SM" has retained the architecture and main features of its predecessors. As before, the basis of the complex is a container of standard sizes with the necessary equipment, on which a rotating combat module with radar equipment and weapons is installed. The container can be mounted on various vehicle chassis. It is also possible that installation on a case chassis with the placement of equipment inside the standard case is provided.

The design of the combat module as a whole has not changed. In its front part there is an antenna for a target tracking radar station (STS), above it is an optical-electronic station, and in the stern is a target detection station (SOC). On the sides are still placed two 2A38 guns of 30 mm caliber and launchers for 6 missiles each.

As reported, a new detection radar with active phased array was developed for the Pantsir-SM air defense missile system. With its help, the viewing range increased to 75 km and other characteristics increased. The target tracking station has also been upgraded to increase the main parameters. A new ECO has been introduced. The characteristics of the tracking radar and the OES increased in accordance with the growth of other parameters of the complex.

The basic one weapons ZRPK was originally ZUR 57E6E. This is a supersonic two-stage solid-propellant bicaliber rocket. Guidance is carried out on commands from the ground. The firing range is limited to 20 km, altitude - 15 km. EFFECT: destruction of air targets with a speed of up to 1000 m/s and maneuvering with high overload is provided. A 20-kg high-explosive fragmentation warhead is delivered to the target.


Parade formation "Shell", 2020. Photo by the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation

As part of the Pantsir-SM project, the standard missile defense system has been upgraded. While maintaining the same dimensions and other parameters, the launch range was increased to 40 km.

Also, for the SM version of the ZRPK, a new small-sized 19Y6 missile was developed, with the help of which it is proposed to fight small-sized UAVs. Such missiles are much shorter than 57E6E and have a reduced diameter. For these missiles, a special four-seater TPK has been developed in the diameter of a regular one. The exact performance characteristics of such a missile have not yet been disclosed.

The 72V6MT transport and combat vehicle under development is generally similar to the basic Pantsir-SM. Instead of an equipment container, it uses a lower platform. Only the SSC and OES are installed on the combat module, while the MTR and artillery are absent. At the same time, additional rows of TPKs were added to the launchers - the ammunition load was brought up to 24 "large" missiles.

It is assumed that the 72V6MT vehicles will operate as part of batteries based on full-fledged Pantsir-SM complexes. ZRPK with a full set of equipment will monitor the air situation, detect targets and distribute them between launchers. In this case, the transport-combat vehicle will work according to the commands of the combat vehicle and independently guide the missile to the target.

Expected Results


ZRPK "Pantsir-S1" of the original version is able to deal with various air targets, from tactical aircraft aviation and weapons to small-sized UAVs. Similar capabilities of the complex are regularly demonstrated in the zone of the Special Operation. As reported, the modernized Pantsir-SM will soon join the demilitarization of Ukraine - and will also show its potential.

The new version of the "Shell" is characterized by increased performance and has a number of obvious advantages. First of all, it is an increased range. Due to the new radar, the detection range of all main targets has almost doubled. At the same time, it remains possible to work according to data from third-party radars with an even greater range or other location.


Model of a transport-combat vehicle for "Pantsir-SM". A frame from the reportage of the TV channel "Zvezda"

Significantly improved firing capabilities and flexibility of use. The upgraded version of the 57E6E SAM is capable of hitting targets at ranges up to 40 km, and both old and new missiles can be used in a 20 km radius zone. This ensures the defeat of a wide range of main targets.

Preserved and improved fire capabilities in the near zone. To destroy UAVs or high-precision weapons within a radius of several kilometers, Pantsir-SM will use small 12Ya6 missiles. 30 mm cannons are retained as the last line of defense.

In what composition the complex will be sent for military trials is unknown. Probably, only the Pantsir-SM combat vehicle will pass the test, and it will be able to show high efficiency. Similar checks of the new transport-combat vehicle, apparently, are not worth the wait. At the same time, the joint work of the two types of equipment could significantly improve the overall results.

Practice check


Thus, another sample of Russian military equipment has passed through the development stage, coped with field tests and is now preparing for testing as part of a full-fledged military operation. Pantsir-SM will arrive in the combat zone in the near future and will probably be able to quickly show its capabilities with all standard weapons.

It is obvious that the success of such tests will bring the Pantsir-SM air defense missile system closer to being put into service and to launch mass production. All these measures will take some time, and serial products may get into combat units after the completion of the Special Operation. However, even after the elimination of the Ukrainian military threat, the modernized "Shell" will find its place in the troops and give them new combat capabilities.
99 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. -10
    31 January 2023 05: 13
    Recently it became known that in the near future they will be joined by the upgraded Pantsir-SM air defense missile system, which will have to be tested in real combat conditions.
    and the recent video, where a full package of 12 "CHIMERS", "SM" knocks down a fake or something?
    1. +13
      31 January 2023 05: 35
      Where did you get that it was Pantsir-SM? Everywhere it says Pantsir-S1. In addition, the video is old, archival refers to the summer period.
      1. -6
        31 January 2023 06: 41
        Quote: YOUR
        Where did you get that it was Pantsir-SM? Everywhere it says Pantsir-S1. In addition, the video is old, archival refers to the summer period.

        perhaps, I do not argue, how should I know when and where. wrote that SM.
        1. +4
          31 January 2023 07: 01
          But you relied on something in your comment, you took this Pantsir-SM from somewhere
          1. +1
            31 January 2023 08: 25
            A good complex, but in Lebanon they complained about something ... probably the matter is in the training of the crew.
      2. 0
        1 February 2023 10: 13
        The video may be old. But in reality, the first installations have already arrived in the operation zone. It was on the news about a week ago.
    2. +9
      31 January 2023 06: 10


      Here is the video. Everywhere is either just Shell or Shell C1.
      1. +5
        3 February 2023 15: 08
        In this video, it is not clear what the shell supposedly shoots at.
        After the alleged shooting down of 12 rockets from the Hymars, none exploded in the air and did not explode when falling. These missiles are fired by Hymars warheads under 100 kg.
        All the "conclusions" that 12 rockets from Hymars were shot down by twelve missiles are made from the words of those guys who shot the video.
        No rocket debris, nothing.
        1. +2
          5 February 2023 16: 07
          This is another video in which it is not at all clear what is happening, there is no evidence that this is a shell, otherwise it is a highmars. request
    3. +7
      31 January 2023 06: 12
      Addendum. A full package of Hymars 6 missiles, 2 vehicles fired back. Although it could have been the German Mars-2, there are 12
      1. KCA
        +4
        31 January 2023 06: 23
        So Mars is a copy of the US MLRS M270, also 12, and on the French LRU 12, all these MLRS were delivered to 404
    4. 0
      31 January 2023 08: 42
      Quote: Dead Day
      and the recent video, where a full package of 12 "CHIMERS", "SM" knocks down a fake or something?

      A strange video that raises questions not only for me. In the video, the sound from the launch of 6 Pantsir missiles, they “shot down” 12 missiles. Explosions of shells are visible, it seems that the commentator on the video takes a hit for them.
      On the video, the interception and destruction of 2 rockets from (estimated) 6. And definitely not HIMARS, since neither the sound (during the passage of the projectile), nor the cloud (when it is shot down), nor the time interval and distance (between the shells) that HIMARS does distinct from the Soviet/Russian/Ukrainian systems – does not match what is shown.

      The number of bursts of cannon shots is not the number of shot down rockets. Traces of expansion during detonation and the sound of falling fragments of a 227mm projectile are also not visible, whoever watched the explosions above himself will, in principle, understand.

      ps: if there are air defense workers, I will be glad to have a discussion in the comments, whether it is or not, I say, as an observer of the multiple work of our Shell and precisely on HIMARS

      https://t.me/grey_zone/16852
    5. -3
      31 January 2023 12: 18
      Quote: Dead Day
      and the recent video, where a full package of 12 "CHIMERS", "SM" knocks down a fake or something?

      Of course. It is impossible to bring down a package of 12 PCs.
      1. +2
        1 February 2023 09: 41
        There were 2 packs of 6. Usually they are mixed with the Uragan MLRS package.
        1. -1
          1 February 2023 11: 04
          Quote: Zaurbek
          There were 2 packs of 6

          Is it in the video caption?
          1. +2
            1 February 2023 15: 38
            This is generally the use of Himars when there is air defense.
            1. +3
              2 February 2023 08: 40
              Quote: Zaurbek
              This is generally the use of Himars

              The range of the Hurricane is 2+ times less than that of the Hymars. But yes, of course, if the target is close enough, then rolling at least a Grad and using it to overload any air defense is always a good solution, regardless of the real effectiveness of this air defense system.

              However, by linking to this video, one of the users allegedly proved the shooting down of two packages of Hymars.
    6. 0
      7 February 2023 14: 35
      why did you decide that this is sm? why did you decide that all the goals were shot down? it's impossible to understand anything
  2. -3
    31 January 2023 07: 46
    For some reason they have been messing with the "Shell SM" for a long time, given the current situation, they could have accelerated, after all, it is very needed in the NVO zone, and not tomorrow, but yesterday.
    1. +2
      1 February 2023 01: 58
      And what does it mean to "accelerate" in such a matter as design? :) ... This is not for you to modernize a sledgehammer. Yes, and there are few good specialists: now everyone goes to study as economists-lawyers, and bloggers are served. They don’t want to be engineers - they need to work with their heads ...
      1. +3
        1 February 2023 20: 58
        Where they pay, they go there ... The question is paramount, but apparently they don’t want to solve it.
        1. +1
          3 February 2023 15: 17
          He needs to remove the guns first.
          They can't hit anything flying.
        2. +2
          4 February 2023 07: 55
          So this is the whole point that we do not have an adequate, not normal bias in those professions that are urgently needed, and those where, by inertia, unreasonably, they still pay more, we practically do not have a regulatory mechanism in this area, if we urgently need engineers, designers, technologists and other techies, then put these specialties at the forefront of prestige and high pay, we no longer need so many lawyers, economists and managers of all stripes, but we stubbornly continue to produce them in huge quantities It's time to think about it and change priorities.
          1. 0
            10 February 2023 09: 35
            What's your job?
            High wages will immediately increase the cost of production, and we are proud that our weapons are cheaper than American ones. In all reviews and comparisons, the advantage of our weapons is the price. And if you can’t save on materials, then the salary is easy.
  3. +2
    31 January 2023 09: 33
    1. Why "immediately and only" "Pantsir-SM"? After all, there should also be "Pantsir-S1M"! And a new rocket
    available for him! Why is it dumb? Have you gone to hell? request 2. There is no "modernized version of the 57E6E SAM" especially for Pantsir-SM! For this complex there is a rocket with a "own" name! (It seems that the author simply does not know this!) ... By the way, the author calls the "main" feature of both air defense systems and missiles an increased range ... (well, maybe also "anti-aircraft nails" ...) But not a word about the fact that the latest SM missiles are reportedly referred to as hypersonic missiles!
    (PS Although about "hypersound" ... we'll wait and see! Once upon a time, both 57E6E and 9M340 were called "hypersonic" in the media, although it turned out that this was far from the case! But I had to see some performance characteristics of the SM missile. ..really, a specific speed was indicated there, which is hypersonic!)
    1. +1
      31 January 2023 10: 38
      There must be a new rocket in a larger caliber and (or) 4 small ones in its place. But he can also use old rockets.
      1. +1
        31 January 2023 11: 23
        The "caliber" remains the same for now ... (170 mm> 1st stage ...). The so-called "anti-aircraft nails" (19Y6) are made in caliber 57-60 mm (I think 57 mm ...)!
        1. +5
          31 January 2023 14: 54
          Quote: Nikolaevich I
          The "caliber" remains the same for now ... (170 mm> 1st stage ...). The so-called "anti-aircraft nails" (19Y6) are made in caliber 57-60 mm (I think 57 mm ...)!

          three types of anti-aircraft missiles used in ZRPK Pantsir-S and Pantsir-SM - 95Ya6, 95Ya6SM and




          1. +6
            31 January 2023 14: 57

            [/ Center]
            Quote: Nikolaevich I
            caliber "remains the same for now ... (170 mm> 1st stage ...). The so-called "anti-aircraft nails" (19Y6) are made in caliber 57-60 mm (I think 57 mm ...)!

        2. 0
          2 February 2023 02: 24
          Didn't they make the second stage in the rocket itself?
          I read, for a long time, what I wanted. For reliability...
    2. +2
      31 January 2023 14: 08
      Quote: Nikolaevich I
      (PS Although about "hypersound" ... we'll wait and see! Once upon a time, both 57E6E and 9M340 were called "hypersonic" in the media, although it turned out that this was far from the case! But I had to see some performance characteristics of the SM missile. ..really, a specific speed was indicated there, which is hypersonic!)

      The destruction of targets is carried out using the 9М340 Sosna-R anti-aircraft missile. This 30 kg product is made according to a bicalyber scheme and can reach speeds of up to 900 m / s, as well as maneuver with overloads up to 40. Destruction of targets at distances up to 10 km and altitudes up to 5 km. Used two combat units - armor-piercing and fragmentation. Guidance of missiles is provided by automatic ground-based air defense systems with control using a laser beam.
    3. +1
      1 February 2023 05: 56
      You can declare in TTX everything that is profitable! But the reality is a convincing fact! Riding at parades and exhibitions is one thing - but war is another matter!
  4. +6
    31 January 2023 10: 36
    In terms of commercial success, I think that Shell has bright prospects for soma. And in the place of our Ministry of Industry and Trade, I would build a large plant. This is one of the "umbrellas" guaranteed against Himars, Drones and strike UAVs .. not a panacea, but showing some real downings and protection.
    1. +2
      31 January 2023 11: 28
      For "Shells" and "Thors" you need to develop zura with GOS! Let there be "old" "remote-controlled" Zurs! But for greater functionality of use and export "attractiveness" it is necessary to develop "homing" missiles!
      1. -4
        31 January 2023 15: 03
        Quote: Nikolaevich I
        For "Shells" and "Thors" you need to develop zura with GOS! Let there be "old" "remote-controlled" Zurs! But for greater functionality of use and export "attractiveness" it is necessary to develop "homing" missiles!

        Yes, you can just take and attach the Rocket from the willow MANPADS instead of the second stage, here you have homing
      2. +1
        2 February 2023 02: 28
        Quote: Nikolaevich I
        For "Shells" and "Thors" you need to develop zura with GOS!

        Academician Shipunov considered the main advantage of the Shell to be cheap missiles. Therefore, the GOS is not there.
    2. -15
      31 January 2023 12: 04
      The shell has so far failed in all the wars where it participates. Very bad results. We need new missiles. I hope the SM radar version is better.
      Beech, on the contrary, shows itself brilliantly. All air defense successes are associated with it.
      1. +3
        31 January 2023 12: 57
        Where did he fail? What does "bad results" mean? It is necessary to gain experience in the application and eliminate shortcomings.
        1. -9
          31 January 2023 14: 56
          Quote: Arigin
          Where did he fail?

          where it was used. Middle East, Libya, Ukraine crossed out new regions of the Russian Federation.
          Quote: Arigin
          What does "bad results" mean?

          Does not protect against modern threats
          Quote: Zaurbek
          against Himars, Drones and strike UAVs

          It can help mainly from helicopters and Su-24s - but by today's standards, this is not very interesting.
          1. +10
            31 January 2023 16: 17
            "Does not protect against modern threats." An extremely controversial statement, which can be confirmed or refuted only having on hand the results of work on different types of goals. Do you have them? Write an article on the site, otherwise Ryabov is already sickening to even scroll through. Evaluate the air defense system according to your assumptions, sorry, unconvincing.
            1. -10
              31 January 2023 16: 50
              Quote: Arigin
              An extremely controversial statement, which can be confirmed or refuted only by having the results of work on different types of goals in hand. Do you have them? Write an article for the site

              What for?

              The UAE has these results.
              1. The comment was deleted.
                1. The comment was deleted.
              2. +1
                2 February 2023 02: 31
                Quote: Negro
                The UAE has these results.

                Compare the version for the UAE and at least C1. Heaven and earth.
          2. +4
            31 January 2023 16: 20
            Quote: Negro
            where it was used. Middle East, Libya

            Not an indicator. BW is the same damn place ©.
            A good example is Iraq. They managed to consistently fail on both domestic and Western technology.

            As for air defense, it is a strong system. And if you put a naked "shell" in an open field, without providing it with early detection, target designation, cover from neighbors and without coordinating reloading with neighbors, then the technique is powerless.
            1. -7
              31 January 2023 16: 40
              Quote: Alexey RA
              They managed to consistently fail on both domestic and Western technology.

              It's about the story with Khmeimim.
              Quote: Alexey RA
              As for air defense, it is strong with a system

              That is, instead of NATO standards, where everything is stuck to everything, it is proposed to take the Soviet standard, where one system may not stick into itself.
              1. +2
                1 February 2023 10: 21
                Quote: Negro
                That is, instead of NATO standards, where everything is stuck to everything, it is proposed to take the Soviet standard, where one system may not stick into itself.

                Nope. The NATO standard is when everything is stuck to everything, if it all complies with the standard of the NATO system. The Soviet air defense system is exactly the same - without compatibility with the system, the complex will not be accepted into service.
                So here the problem is - what to take as a base system. Or in money - to pay extra for the completion of the complexes to be compatible with another system. And the main problem is personnel. Because the technique in the hands of an illiterate user is a pile of iron. What is the use of automated control systems when people don’t really understand that air defense should have redundancy and mutual overlap - so that during the reloading of one complex it is covered by another?
                1. 0
                  1 February 2023 11: 02
                  Quote: Alexey RA
                  The Soviet air defense system is exactly the same - without compatibility with the system, the complex will not be accepted into service.

                  Emm

                  It's not as easy as you know. The work of the S-400-Buk-Tor-Pantsir in the system of echeloned defense on the example of Syria ...

                  Quote: Alexey RA
                  So the problem here is what to take as the base system

                  That is, we came to the old dilemma of Soviet clients (i.e. Chinese) or American clients (i.e. NATO + Israel + Korea).

                  What are the commercial prospects for the Russian Federation to discuss here in general?
      2. +9
        31 January 2023 15: 19
        "The shell has so far failed in all the wars where it participates. Very bad results."
        Sorry, your forelock sticks out. Or another sofa balabol.
        Something I did not notice the poor work of the Shells, either in the Kherson or Zaporizhia regions. No, maybe it's more visible from the couch ..
        1. The comment was deleted.
        2. The comment was deleted.
      3. The comment was deleted.
      4. 0
        5 February 2023 16: 24
        This is because they decided to save money. We could have delivered missiles with a seeker, but no, again we justify everything at a price, such as a lot and cheap is better than a little and expensive, but no one thinks how this will affect the quality of work, so the same time-tested beech copes with the task of air defense better. Carapaces are another ceremonial technique with dubious combat capabilities. negative
    3. -12
      31 January 2023 12: 21
      Quote: Zaurbek
      In terms of commercial success, I think that Shell has bright prospects for soma.

      Russian weapons have no prospects at all, for obvious reasons.
      Quote: Zaurbek
      This is one of the "umbrellas" guaranteed against Himars, Drones and strike UAVs

      Just his uselessness in the role of SHORAD Shell showed many times.
      1. +3
        31 January 2023 12: 58
        You usually have fairly balanced comments. But not at this time.
        1. +10
          31 January 2023 14: 08
          These are spammer bots .... The shell showed itself perfectly where it was used competently and where there was normal radar coverage. All destroyed Shells were either on the road or with an empty BC.
          A missile without a seeker has its advantages - it is "stupid" and "Cheap" and hits at the same time.
          1. 0
            5 February 2023 16: 32
            What evidence do you have that a "stupid" and "cheap" missile hits? In reality, there are no videos or anything like that that clearly shows this is a highmars, but this is a shell and this is an interception.hi
            PS Missiles without seeker in the 21st century are somehow nothing ... negative
            1. 0
              6 February 2023 23: 47
              Quote: Ivan_91
              What evidence do you have that a "stupid" and "cheap" missile hits? ...

              If it didn't, it wouldn't be there.

              Quote: Ivan_91
              PS Missiles without seeker in the 21st century are somehow nothing ... negative

              Short-range air defense systems do not require GOS in missiles. Command control at a distance of up to 10-12 km is not inferior to homing in accuracy. During the development of the Tor-M2, three out of five Samans were shot down at a distance of 4-5 km by a direct hit. In the ZUR 95Ya6M SAM Pantsir-SM / S1M, in practice, the kinetic destruction of the target by a relatively small circular field of PE is used. For command guidance, radars are needed with the required accuracy in the required dimensions, which not everyone has.
        2. -6
          31 January 2023 14: 50
          Quote: Nefarious skeptic
          You usually have fairly balanced comments. But not at this time.

          And with what can one argue?
          1. Sanctions on the military commissar will not be lifted. Do you hear a lot about North Korea's commercial success with Iran?
          2. Big and expensive Carapace with a special rocket is NOT what you need for CIWS. Ryabov could raise his "little, late, useless" cycle to figure out what a modern short-range system is. The shell is a greeting from the 70s, Crotal with Roland.
          1. +1
            31 January 2023 16: 07
            Quote: Negro
            Quote: Nefarious skeptic
            You usually have fairly balanced comments. But not at this time.

            And with what can one argue?
            1. Sanctions on the military commissar will not be lifted. Do you hear a lot about North Korea's commercial success with Iran?
            2. Big and expensive Carapace with a special rocket is NOT what you need for CIWS. Ryabov could raise his "little, late, useless" cycle to figure out what a modern short-range system is. The shell is a greeting from the 70s, Crotal with Roland.


            1) The fact that they are not heard is not an indicator that they are bad
            2) more about the modern complex and with examples
            1. -8
              31 January 2023 16: 34
              Quote: Ruslan_3
              Just because you can't hear them doesn't mean they're bad.

              The only one whose opinion about the Shell may be of interest is the UAE. Arabs are now switching to Korean.
              Quote: Ruslan_3
              more about the modern complex and with examples

              First, what class is this system? What is she for?
          2. +5
            31 January 2023 16: 30
            Quote: Negro
            2. Big and expensive Carapace with a special rocket is NOT what you need for CIWS.

            It depends what you mean by CIWS.
            Yes, for work on crafts of all sorts of zusuls in dimensions of 107-122-mm RS, a complex based on a "phalanx" is quite enough. But for 227-300 mm RS - already a question. And the point is not even that it will shoot down, it won’t shoot down, but that a heavy RS, after being hit at a distance of artillery fire, can still bring a decent amount of debris to the target, or even a whole warhead. Let me remind you that in order to eliminate collateral damage, land-based CIWS lost crowbars (only OS with a self-destructor), which means that detonation of the target warhead is not guaranteed.
            In the Navy, it is generally believed that it is useless to work on missiles closer than 2 km - the missile and the wreckage will not have time to turn away. smile Hence all sorts of ZRAK - in order to carry the far border of the affected area as far as possible.
            1. -6
              31 January 2023 18: 52
              Quote: Alexey RA
              Yes, for work on crafts of all sorts of zusuls in dimensions of 107-122 mm RS

              Yes. And shahid mopeds, including the Lancet.
              Quote: Alexey RA
              In the Navy, it is generally believed that it is useless to work on missiles closer than 2 km

              Not quite. In the Navy, all sorts of goalkeepers work as armor-piercing sub-caliber - no matter how counterintuitive it seems. To accurately destroy the warhead.
              Quote: Alexey RA
              But for 227-300 mm RS - already a question

              Yes. And now, returning to the Shell, we see the usual air blast and radio command guidance - what is needed against high-speed, durable, small targets. The result of the use of these systems by the Hymars is known to everyone except the patriots.
              1. +3
                1 February 2023 10: 36
                Quote: Negro
                Not quite. In the Navy, all sorts of goalkeepers work as armor-piercing sub-caliber - no matter how counterintuitive it seems. To accurately destroy the warhead.

                So I am writing about this - at a range of effective fire of a ZAK caliber of less than 40 mm, missiles can be hit without significant damage to the covered target only with crowbars due to the detonation of warheads. It is useless to work with fragmentation shells (OS) - no matter how much you make holes in the hull and planes, aerodynamics will not have time to win back their ballistics and warheads can fly purely on kinetics.
                But the crowbars were taken away from the land CIWS. They only had OSs that were ineffective for typical targets in the ZAK effective fire zone. And you can’t return the crowbars - otherwise, when firing, CIWS will arrange a “tungsten rain” within a radius of 5-7 km from ZAK.
                So the ground forces either need to increase the caliber of the ZAK in order to expand the affected area and increase the power of the projectile, or use the same missiles for the same.
                Quote: Negro
                Yes. And now, returning to the Shell, we see the usual air blast and radio command guidance - what is needed against high-speed, durable, small targets.

                The question is the range of destruction. If you hit at 8-10 km, then aerodynamics will have time to play its role, and the rocket will lead away from the target. Another question is that in order to finish off the missiles that have retained the trajectory, a guided crowbar is needed (in order to hit accurately without sowing the surroundings).
                1. -4
                  1 February 2023 10: 55
                  Quote: Alexey RA
                  OS, ineffective for typical targets in the zone of effective fire ZAK

                  There, the mortar of the world is a typical object. Quad lately.
                  Quote: Alexey RA
                  So the ground forces either need to increase the caliber of the ZAK in order to expand the affected area and increase the power of the projectile, or use the same missiles for the same.

                  No need. Machine gun including 7,62, 40mm grenade launcher, maximum 30mm cannon.

                  Again, there is NO PURPOSE to bring down the Hymars. It's impossible. And the divisional volley of hail cannot be brought down. And an artillery shell.
                  Quote: Alexey RA
                  The question is the range of destruction. If you hit 8-10 km, then aerodynamics will have time to play a role,

                  For what purpose? Let me remind you that the shell is radio command, the target must be in line of sight.
          3. 0
            31 January 2023 17: 25
            Sanctions on the military commissar will not be lifted. Do you hear a lot about North Korea's commercial success with Iran?

            And they were before imposition?
            what is a modern short range system.

            Would appreciate an example of what you consider to be a proper short range system. And also for explaining why you classified the short-range system (SHORAD) as a short-range system (VSHORAD).
            1. -5
              31 January 2023 18: 48
              Quote: Nefarious skeptic
              And they were before imposition?

              These? It has never been much. Here, Russia can only help.
              Quote: Nefarious skeptic
              And also for explaining why you classified the short-range system (SHORAD) as a short-range system (VSHORAD).

              Actually this is the question. In the remark I replied to, the Shell is presented as CIWS. If it is SHORAD, then you need to compare it, for example, with NASAMS. If this is VSHORAD, then such things are now being released in the form of modules, put on ordinary MCIs or a pickup truck. An example is the same L3Harris Vampire.
              1. +1
                31 January 2023 22: 22
                Actually this is the question. In the reply to which I replied

                In response to which you doubted its effectiveness against ">200 mm caliber missiles and UAVs"? Efficiency. Not easy, not cheap. Efficiency. And from this point of view, do you bet on L3Harris Vampire? OK.
                1. -3
                  1 February 2023 08: 22
                  Quote: Nefarious skeptic
                  And from this point of view, do you bet on L3Harris Vampire?

                  From the point of view of the anti-drone system? Yes. Unlike a shell, a vampire can be very plentiful and as cheap as possible. Therefore, by the way, I like it more than MANPADS-based systems (although they are also made more reasonably than Pantsir). From the point of view of the fight against management packages - no, air defense systems cannot solve such problems. None can.
                  1. -3
                    1 February 2023 15: 54
                    Quote: Negro
                    From the point of view of the fight against management packages - no, air defense systems cannot solve such problems. None can.

                    Of course they can. LCD has demonstrated this more than once. Naturally, this requires an integrated airborne and ground-based radar system with the latest generation of AFAR, advanced fully automated control systems with quasi-AI, missiles with AGSN.
                    That's just the price tag will be all this horse. And it is more efficient to spend money on shelters, means of reconnaissance and destruction. It’s just that Israel cannot be allowed to fall missiles on its peaceful cities, it’s easier for the Americans to rebuild the base to hide the main personnel in the bunkers. Naturally then destroy the attackers.
                    1. +1
                      2 February 2023 08: 47
                      Quote from cold wind
                      Of course they can. LCD has demonstrated this more than once.

                      Of course they can't. The LCD shows this. ZhK is engaged in numerous, but unsystematic launches. And the Israeli Air Force is engaged in divisional launches of MLRS - therefore, there are simply no such launches.
                      Quote from cold wind
                      missiles with AGSN

                      There is an AGSN on Tamir, but this is not such an easy question.
                      Quote from cold wind
                      That's just the price tag will be all this horse

                      This is a separate issue.
  5. 0
    31 January 2023 11: 45
    It's a good news. Maybe the new Shell will improve the ability of our army against Himars missiles, otherwise they bring a lot of harm.
    And, something disappeared, the Torahs, and they, in theory, should chop down enemy missiles on the go. Yes, and yet
    the caterpillar chassis will suit the Shell better, otherwise you won’t get out of the mud on wheels. Anyway, good luck to SM.
    1. +4
      31 January 2023 14: 11
      For this, even now it is necessary to cover each object with air defense. And the Hymers hit on ordinary targets in range. This is not Iskander, but MLRS with corr missiles ..... and targets up to the dugout, battery, accumulation of equipment ...... like a corr projectile 155mm (flies up to 70km)
  6. 0
    31 January 2023 12: 16
    Shrapnel - rod !!! correct me. The new long-range missile has a kinetic one. (((
  7. -1
    31 January 2023 15: 32
    They would still have a vertical start. In general, there would be no price.
    1. +1
      31 January 2023 16: 34
      Quote: Ua3qhp
      They would still have a vertical start. In general, there would be no price.

      And "Thor" then where to go? smile
    2. +2
      31 January 2023 20: 42
      Why does the Shell need a vertical start ??
  8. -1
    31 January 2023 16: 41
    As before, the basis of the complex is a container of standard sizes

    I do not pretend to be an expert, but what is the point of installing a container of the same dimensions on a heavier chassis. What did not please the old Kamaz?
    1. +3
      31 January 2023 20: 50
      Booking. In the Typhoon version, the module is armored.
    2. +2
      1 February 2023 10: 40
      Quote: Adrian28
      I do not pretend to be an expert, but what is the point of installing a container of the same dimensions on a heavier chassis. What did not please the old Kamaz?

      The fact that the old "Shell" was a complex of air defense forces. That is, it was designed to work in the rear on equipped terrain (the same "air defense rings" with their roads).
      And now the "shell" has essentially become military air defense. With all the consequences - such as requirements for cross-country ability and protection.
  9. +1
    31 January 2023 17: 18
    How much is a gun in demand in combat conditions?
    1. +1
      31 January 2023 20: 51
      There are shot down aircraft of the Armed Forces of Ukraine. And it works well against small UAVs in the near zone.
      1. +1
        1 February 2023 00: 14
        There are also downed APU helicopters, and even more than planes.
    2. +1
      1 February 2023 09: 45
      The Chinese put 25mm Gatling on the analogue. Americans use their Phalanx 20mm
  10. 0
    31 January 2023 19: 39
    More air defense systems - good and different! We must already prepare for the confrontation with the F-16.
    1. 0
      31 January 2023 21: 25
      Good luck. Our complexes must be the best and show themselves in full glory.
  11. +3
    31 January 2023 21: 12
    1. When solving the same tasks as Thor in NWO, the consumption of missiles by the Shell is somewhat higher, and the cost of the spent missiles is much less.
    2. With the new hypersonic SAM, Pantsir-SM reduces the firing cycle and increases the probability of hitting all types of targets. True, most likely, the vulnerability of the B-52 target for this missile will decrease, but this is now uncritical.
    3. The new hypersonic SAM does not have a target sensor and the command to detonate (delay) is transmitted to the SAM from the BM.
  12. +2
    1 February 2023 02: 03
    They wrote that the "Shell" was created, in fact, according to the technical specifications of one of the Arab countries. You have to admit, they are not stupid. Somewhere else I met that the Arabs asked for an option with the possibility of duplicating control. So that during work not to be in the machine itself, but, for example, in a shelter.
    1. +1
      1 February 2023 10: 43
      It was created at the end of the USSR ... even the car in iron was on the Ural chassis with a Kamaz cab. And then, brought to mind already by order of the UAE and for their money.
  13. -1
    1 February 2023 12: 58
    Will the special operation end soon? According to my assumptions, it will go on for decades.
    1. +1
      1 February 2023 14: 52
      Mobilization resource 404 - (whole with LDNR) 2,7-3,7 million people. 150 people/year killed and 200 thousand maimed/year = 350 thousand people/year. 350000 x 10 years = 3,5 million people. But the territory and population decreased due to the LDNR. Therefore, 350000 x 5 years = 1750000 people. Somewhere like that.
      1. 0
        2 February 2023 02: 44
        They forgot Crimea and> 10 who left abroad.
  14. 0
    1 February 2023 13: 58
    For the sake of interest, they tried to shoot down 3 Deshman copters using the usual Chinese salute - the result is positive, provided that the buzzing nonsense is not higher than 45 meters and not lower than 25. There was a direct hit on one copter, one was saved, and the last one lost its blades from the salute subcharge . Perhaps it can be used as an alternative to expensive rockets?
    1. +2
      1 February 2023 15: 43
      Murza had a long video of work on the Ukrainian group with mortars with adjustments from the UAV. All attempts to shoot down the UAV from the riflemen did not lead to anything - the operator took the car higher, and then returned it when the Armed Forces calmed down or they were not up to the UAV.
  15. 0
    4 February 2023 07: 56
    Only SSC and ECO are installed on the combat module, while MTR and artillery

    I did not find in the article the decoding of the abbreviations ECO and MTR. Tell me how to decrypt?
    1. 0
      4 February 2023 21: 07
      I did not find in the article the decoding of the abbreviations ECO and MTR. Tell me how to decrypt?

      ECO - optoelectronic station
      MTR - I don’t know for sure, I’m curious myself.
    2. +1
      6 February 2023 23: 28
      There's an error. Not SSO, but SOC - a target detection station.
  16. +1
    4 February 2023 12: 26
    In parallel, the so-called. transport and combat vehicle "Pantsir-SM-TBM" with a different set of equipment. The layout of this product was first shown last summer. It also takes several years to fully implement this project.


    The transport-combat vehicle should be an order of magnitude simpler than the Pantsir-SM itself, it is not clear why it takes a few more years?
    To make a car with twice the number of launchers without a radar and a control center ???
    Moreover, TBM has been developed for several years in parallel with PANTSIR-SM .....
    1. 0
      5 February 2023 23: 10
      I would venture to suggest - in order to work out the interface between the TBM and the control center.
      It looks like a rejection of the concept of "everything you need on one chassis." Let's see.
    2. +1
      6 February 2023 23: 33
      TBM is at the request of the customer. There is a TZM on which there are 2 rounds of ammunition for missiles and artillery rounds. But TZM cannot solve the problem of hitting a target. A TBM was made, which, having 2 rounds of missiles for missiles (no artillery rounds), is capable of solving the problem of hitting a target by targeting with BM. In what ratio to take TZM and TBM is the decision of the "buyer".
  17. -1
    6 February 2023 23: 20
    Quote from Andy_nsk
    I did not find in the article the decoding of the abbreviations ECO and MTR. Tell me how to decrypt?

    MTR - I don’t know for sure, I’m curious myself.

    System .......... fire.
  18. Eug
    -1
    April 7 2023 19: 49
    The range of missiles is 20 km. should be located a maximum of 15 km in front of the front line. It will be very quickly detected by the enemy’s KBB radar and destroyed .... maybe, for air defense systems and short-range air defense systems, a passive target detection system is still preferable (Pine, Strela, they recently wrote about Turkish)? ... it is clear that the launch is also fast pinned down, but still...
  19. -1
    April 7 2023 20: 00
    Why spend missiles on drones, why not include reb systems in the armor? Several guns are aimed at the drone and it falls. Any tool can fall and rockets are not needed here
    1. -1
      April 7 2023 20: 17
      Quote from Alexwar
      A few guns aimed at the drone and it falls...

      ... from fear belay