Military Review

Impenetrable "shell"

48
Despite some shortcomings, many armies of the world want to receive the Tula air defense missile system.


October 2012 of the year was a landmark month for the anti-aircraft missile and cannon complex (ZRPK) 96K6 “Armor-С1” developed by the Tula Instrument Design Bureau (KBP). For the first time, these complexes fired publicly, hitting a real cruise missile launched from a Tu-95 strategic bomber.

Previously, all tests of these air defense systems were carried out exclusively behind closed doors, the results were not made public. In the "breakthrough", although still in question, the Russian-Iraqi package armory contracts included delivery of 42 Pantsir air defense missile systems. At the same time, this is the most criticized Russian air defense system, the refinement of which is still ongoing, despite the fact that it has long been supplied abroad and to the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation.

Started with the program "Roman"

Itself история The creation of the complex is in many ways phenomenal. The Main Directorate of Arms of the Air Defense Forces ordered the KBP to develop the Pantsir-С1 air defense missile system in 1990. Initially, the short-range complex (the “Roman” program) was intended to cover the long-range anti-aircraft missile systems C-300 and the country's air defense radar systems. Subsequently, receiving interspecific status, the complex was also proposed to the Ground Forces to cover the motorized rifle units on the march, to destroy infantry and light armored vehicles. Ordered and ship version. The complex was created on the basis of a proven and very successful anti-aircraft missile and artillery complex 2K22 "Tunguska".

The first version of the complex on the automobile chassis ("Ural-5323.4") with two 30-mm 2А72 cannons and anti-aircraft guided missiles (SAM) 9М335 (defeat range - 12 km, height-8 km) was presented to the inter-departmental commission in 1995 year. Radar 1Л36 "Roman" (development of "Phazotron-NIIR") worked extremely unsatisfactory, the complex could not destroy targets outside 12 kilometers, was unable to fire in active movement. This was followed by a radical reduction in the military budget of the country, and the Russian army was not long for the Roman program.

Emirati miracle

The situation was saved by a unique contract with the United Arab Emirates, who decided to buy in fact the “Münchhausen” complex, which was still to be created. With the total value of the 2000 contract of million dollars signed in May 734 (50% was paid by the Ministry of Finance of the Russian Federation to repay the state debt of Russia to the United Arab Emirates) for 50 complexes an advance on research and development work amounted to 100 million dollars. Thus, the development of the complex, called “Pantsir-С1”, was carried out at the expense of the customer - an unprecedented case for the Russian defense industry.

The upgraded system received new anti-aircraft guns 2А38М, anti-aircraft guided missiles (missiles) 57-6-E (controlled flight range - up to 20 km). Due to the failures of Phazotron, the timeframe for creating a new multi-functional radar for fire control of the KBP had to create a station on its own with the assistance of OAO Ratep. As a result, the time of supply constantly shifted with the permission of the incredibly patient Emirati side.

According to the agreement, the development work was to be completed by 2003 year, and by the end of 2005 all 50 complexes (24 - on a wheeled chassis, 26 - on caterpillar) were planned to be transferred in three batches (12, 24 and 14). But only in 2007, the UAE received the first cars, the implementation of the contract was delayed to this day. According to official figures, it should be completed before the end of this year. All ZRPKs are mounted on a wheeled platform of a German MAN truck. Plus, 1,5 has been supplied to thousands of 9М311 missiles.

Other foreign contracts

In 2006, Russia and Syria signed a contract to buy 36 anti-aircraft missile-cannon systems Pantsir-S1 and 850 9М311 missiles worth about 730 million dollars. Deliveries were made from 2008 to 2011 year. In 2006, Algeria entered into a contract (price - 500 million dollars) with Rosoboronexport for the purchase of 38 combat vehicles of the modified Pantsir-S1 ZRPK on the KAMAZ-6560 and 900 9XXUMUM missiles. The first deliveries of combat vehicles to Algeria were apparently made at the beginning of 311. The Western press claims that at least two “Pantsirka” are in service with the air defense forces of Slovenia. In addition, according to Western data, Syria re-exported to Iran 2012 complexes "Armor-C10". Damascus and Tehran refute this information with enviable persistence.


Morocco, Jordan, and Oman have announced a possible purchase of the Shell-C1 air defense missile system. In February 2008, during a visit to Saudi Arabia’s Foreign Minister, Saud al-Faisal, a large (about $ 400 billion) package of possible Riyadh military orders was discussed. Along with the S-2500 Triumph and Antei-300 long-range anti-aircraft missile systems (air defense systems) (export deeply modernized version of the S-3V air defense systems), BMP-XNUMX infantry fighting vehicles, tanks T-90S, military helicopters Mi-17, Mi-35 and Mi-26 were also considered the purchase of complexes "Shell-C1." Triumph, Antei-2500, and Pantsir would together provide the Saudis with a guaranteed unified system of integrated non-strategic missile and air defense. As the author was told by a representative of the Russian military-industrial complex, who is well acquainted with the situation, although a large Saudi package of defense contracts no longer exists for a number of objective reasons, negotiations on its individual segments are still ongoing, including on the Shells, and nevertheless, there is some hope that they will end with a positive result.

Forty percent of Saudi Arabian military imports come from US weapons, and the United States is working hard to prevent Russia from entering this richest arms market. Roughly the same situation happened with the large Iraqi contract concluded in October 2012 (cost - 4,2 billion dollars), which included the supply of 30 attack helicopters Mi-28Н Night Hunter and 42 air defense system “Shell-S1” (2,2 billion dollars).

The Iraqi leadership, after signing the preliminary agreement, unexpectedly decided to reconsider the terms of the deal, motivating it with the need to avoid possible corruption moments during its implementation. The background of the precedent is certainly political. The Shiite government of the country, trying to conduct an independent policy, including in the field of military-technical cooperation (MTC), is nevertheless forced to correlate all its decisions with the US opinion, which persistently push Ukraine into the Iraqi arms market as a priority MTC partner from countries of the former Soviet Union. However, firstly, Ukraine does not produce such high-tech air defense systems. Secondly, the confidence of world arms importers in the Ukrainian defense industry has been completely undermined by the failure to meet the contract signed in 2009 for supplying 420 to BTR-4 armored personnel carriers in Iraq for a total of 457,5 million dollars, funded by the USA. Deliveries began in March of 2011, but so far the Iraqi side has received only 88 machines from Ukrainians.

the main objective

The main feature of the Pantsir-C1 anti-aircraft missile system is the combination of a wide-channel system for capturing and tracking targets with mounted weapons. The area of ​​interception of targets at a height of five meters - 15 kilometers, distance 200 meters - 20 kilometers. The complex is created according to the modular principle and can be installed on wheeled and tracked chassis, on stationary platforms. On a digital network, a battery of six complexes can operate in automatic mode.

The combat module of one ZRPK (30 tons) consists of two blocks with six 57-6-E anti-aircraft missiles and two twin-barreled X-guns 2-X38-M. Phased radar detection stations, a radar target tracking system and missiles and an optical-electronic fire control channel were installed. The complex is capable of “capturing” four air objects simultaneously - cruise missiles, combat helicopters, unmanned aerial vehicles. But in fact, the main objective of the Pantyreys is the US Navy's Tomahawk Block 4 American cruise missiles. Upgraded Tomahawk Block 4 taken into service in the 2004 year and have the ability to reprogramming while driving to a goal, which makes it extremely difficult to detect. Developed a new Tomahawk - Cruise Missile XR weighing tons 2,2 (warhead weighs a ton) and a range of two thousand kilometers. The design uses technology "stealth".

In the minute interval, "Shell" can "capture" up to ten goals. The team of the complex is a commander and two operators. Deployment time is five minutes. The response time to the threat is five seconds. Ammunition - 12 anti-aircraft guided missiles and 1,4 thousands of gun ammunition (firing rate - five thousand rounds per minute). Detection range - 36 kilometers. Guidance missiles radio command. The estimated cost of the Pantsir-С1 complex is 13 – 15 million dollars (the last figure for export samples).

At the service of the Fatherland

The Armed Forces of Russia have received so far only 10 complexes "Shell-C1." All of them are distributed among anti-aircraft missile brigades of aerospace defense (EKO) to cover strategic air defense systems (S-400). Now the Russian army has four S-400 regiments, of which two are deployed in the suburbs, one on the Baltic navy and one in the Far East (Nakhodka). The fifth regimental set should be handed over to the Armed Forces by the end of 2012 and deployed in the Southern Military District.

In a stripped-down form (and probably already permanently staffed), the C-400 anti-aircraft missile regiment is now a two-divisional, strictly speaking, consists of two C-400 complexes. To protect one battalion in the nearest approaches, a short-range air defense complex - “Pantsir-С1” is necessary. Thus, while the needs of the army in this complex are temporarily satisfied. Five regiments - ten complexes. However, the deployment of C-400 regiments will continue, they are the basis of the country's air defense missile defense umbrella. And on the way the latest C-500 complexes. The leadership of the PCU states that the Air Force of the Russian Federation ordered the Pantyreus 100.

This year, according to the former First Deputy Minister of Defense Alexander Sukhorukov, 28 ZRPK Pantsir-S1 should have been sent to the troops. Officially, these shipments have not been confirmed. According to the representative of the Russian military-industrial complex, the Pantsir, according to military estimates, in its current state does not meet the requirements stated in the tactical and technical requirements. However, it is a strong and symbolic system capable of progressive development. It is necessary to work closely with her. Moreover, her potential is huge. And this is well felt by prospective customers.

In the summer of 2011, the head of the design department of the KBP, Alexander Zhukov, said that in the near future, the Navy will receive a new anti-aircraft missile and artillery complex under the conventional name "Pantsir-M" (maritime). “Pantsir-M” should replace the “Dirk” complexes. But, according to him, the fleet will receive this complex no sooner than in three years.

There are claims

The opinions of the military are generally reflected in the report “Assessment of the general characteristics of the Pantsir-C1 anti-aircraft missile-cannon complex” (its theses confirmed to the author at least three officers one way or another connected with the Pantsir-C1 test program).

In the mid-flight stage of the bicalyber rocket of the complex there is no engine, which leads to an increase in its pointing errors at an actively maneuvering target with a course parameter of more than three kilometers. In general, tests have shown that the Pantsir-С1 is unable to hit targets flying at speeds of more than 400 meters per second, although the speed is given in the tactical and technical characteristics of the complex, equal to 1000 meters per second.

The defeat of the target is guaranteed only by direct movement of the air object on the "Armor" as when aiming an anti-aircraft guided missile using the "three-point" method, and at half-flattening. Thus, the goal can only be hit "in ideal conditions." Any actions of the enemy - jamming, maneuvering during the attack, the use of low-flying targets and UAVs will remain unanswered. In addition, the target detection range will be seriously reduced by the influence of meteorological conditions - rain and fog.
Author:
48 comments
Ad

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, regularly additional information about the special operation in Ukraine, a large amount of information, videos, something that does not fall on the site: https://t.me/topwar_official

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Ross
    Ross 22 November 2012 08: 57
    +5
    This is not the first article criticizing the shell. Makes me think. Need a specialist comment.
    1. Brother Sarych
      Brother Sarych 22 November 2012 13: 15
      +3
      I would very much like to know the opinion of a specialist, and not bought either by the creators or competitors ...
      It’s somehow not calm at heart - the claims are too serious ...
      1. nersmail
        nersmail 11 June 2013 19: 01
        0
        Unfortunately, there were already a lot of unflattering reviews, and from very different sources. Apparently the car is really raw yet. So we use Tunguska for now
    2. Bykov.
      Bykov. 22 November 2012 13: 31
      +1
      Quote: Ross

      This is not the first article criticizing the shell. Makes me think.

      That there are so many who want to buy (this often criticized "PANTSIR"). It looks like that saying about the caravan and dogs.
      1. smprofi
        smprofi 22 November 2012 19: 26
        0
        Quote: Bulls.
        about the caravan and dogs

        possibly. only there is a different experience: the louder zhurnalyugs shout about "uniqueness" and "perfection", the shittier it is in reality.
        however, buying is wonderful. who is against it?
        only now, if you do not listen to the magazine, but look at the performance characteristics ... personally, I am not impressed. (if anything, then VUS: head of SNR SAM "Krug")
    3. Marine One
      Marine One 22 November 2012 16: 57
      0
      I can only speak on his REO. There, almost 80% of the trace element base is imported (France, Germany, Belgium). Dependent complex. And from experts directly on the air defense system I heard one indicative comment: "If the KBP would invest in fine-tuning the complex to the mind as much effort and money as it poured into PR, all claims to the shells would have been removed long ago."
      1. Tourist Breakfast
        Tourist Breakfast 22 November 2012 17: 37
        0
        Almost 80% of the microelement base there is imported (France, Germany, Belgium).

        And what are now the manufacturers of RF microcircuits in Europe? As far as I know, Americans have long bought everything.
        1. Marine One
          Marine One 22 November 2012 18: 15
          0
          The Americans are more likely to expand there themselves, or buy out some of the most promising units. AMD, the same in Germany, was built a few years ago. And the microelectronic business is generally transnational in nature. The same Taiwanese from TSMC are actively climbing into Europe. Philips, Siemens, ST, however, no one has yet canceled.
          1. Tourist Breakfast
            Tourist Breakfast 22 November 2012 19: 16
            0
            In Europe, there is one large manufacturer company - Infineon. TSMC is foundry.
            If for RF electronics, which is used in radars, then all this is produced in the states mainly by local firms.
            Guys like:
            Analog Devices, Avago, Hittie, M / A-COM, RFMD, Triquint, Skyworks, Hittite, Freescale,
            Microsemi, Minicircuits ....
            In Europe, development may have remained in some places, only under the same Amer’s signs.
  2. Skiff
    Skiff 22 November 2012 09: 07
    +4
    Tar spoons in a barrel of honey recourse

    1) real results of firing tests showed a low possibility of a complex for firing targets that maneuver and fly with a heading parameter of more than 2-3 km
    2) the possibility of firing at targets flying at speeds greater than 400 m / s has not been confirmed, although a speed equal to 1000 m / s is given in the technical characteristics of the complex
    3) the maximum firing range of 20 km is provided for aerial targets flying at a speed of no more than 80 m / s (on the E-95 target), since the available overloads of SAMs at this range do not exceed 5 units.
    4) the main disadvantage of a bicaliber missile ***** is the lack of an engine in the march stage of the SAM, as a result of which, within the declared damage range, the rocket will move with negative acceleration of the order of 50-30 m / s 2, which leads to the appearance of such non-linearities in the input signal missile control loop, which lead to an increase in errors of its guidance on actively maneuvering target
    5) the capabilities of the complex to defeat the TBR, OTR and their warheads when using a hypersonic missile with a warhead weighing 4 kg have not been confirmed
    6) the presence of only two methods of pointing missiles ***** (according to the three-point method; according to the half-straightening method) limits the capabilities of the complex to defeat various types of air-defense systems with difficult environmental conditions (maneuver, interference, NLC, a hovering helicopter, UAV, etc. d.).
    7) The system for controlling the detonation of the warhead of a hypersonic SAM, functioning according to the signal from the SAM system in accordance with the established range difference between the target and the missile, can be effective only when the SAM is guided ****** by the full straightening method, and when the SAM is guided by the "three points ”and half straightening only works when the target moves directly to the firing combat vehicle ZPRK

    8) in the aforementioned last case, the effectiveness of hitting a target may turn out to be low due to the phenomenon of ricocheting of the striking elements of the combat chat, since in this case their velocity vector will be directed at a small angle to the target’s surface
    9), effective coordination of missile defense missile equipment (the area of ​​operation of the non-contact target sensor, NDC and the area of ​​the strike of striking elements of warheads), as well as the prevention of the operation of NDC SAM missiles from the underlying surface when firing at the NLC, is not ensured
    10) the influence of weather conditions (rain, fog, hydrometeors) on the decrease in target detection range for the millimeter wave range developed by the RLSSSR in the 10-50 times is stronger than on the version of an air defense system with a centimeter wave radar, and this drawback cannot be compensated for by the presence of Patsir-S1 "optoelectronic kaal for supporting the CC, due to the negative dependence of the latter on weather conditions
    11) the large overall dimensions of BM ZRPK on a wheelbase, especially in height (in combat position 5,65 m), as well as the lack of armor protection of the fire set, equipment compartment (SOTs, SSSR, SUO) do not allow the use of air defense systems at the leading edge in combat and pre-battle formation covered forces
    1. Skiff
      Skiff 22 November 2012 09: 09
      +2
      12) the dimensions of the BM ZPRK in the stowed position on the wheelbase (4, 374 m) do not allow transporting it by rail, since the permissible loading height (1T) is 3,8 m, while dismantling the equipment compartment and loading it onto the platform for transportation with the help of a special crane it takes 3 hours for one BM, and also requires the presence of a special crane and equipment.
      Unloading and installation of the equipment compartment during railway transportation require the same labor costs (3 hours) and the presence of a special crane.
      13) BM dimensions increase labor costs for the engineering equipment of the launching position in comparison with other air defense systems (air defense systems) of military air defense
      14) the time of transferring the complex from traveling to combat when using the "OES Mode" (with thermal imager) exceeds the stated 5 minutes (actually 8-9 minutes)
      15) the loading time of the full ammunition with the help of TZM is quite large and is 25-30 minutes.
      1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
        Andrei from Chelyabinsk 22 November 2012 10: 58
        +4
        M-dja ... it looks like - not our choice. And this is not a fly in the ointment in barrels of honey, but rather a barrel of tar ...
      2. Flooding
        Flooding 22 November 2012 12: 56
        +1
        Quote: Skiff
        the dimensions of the BM ZPRK in the stowed position on the wheelbase (4, 374 m) do not allow transporting it by rail, since the permissible loading height (1T) is 3,8 m, while dismantling the equipment compartment and loading it onto the transportation platform with the help of a special crane it takes 3 hours for one BM, and also requires the presence of a special screen and equipment.

        The oversize issue is solved with the use of the GM352M1E tracked chassis. For the wheeled version, you can probably consider the Belarusian MZKT-6922, which is used in the Osa-1T and Tor-M2E complexes.
        Much more perplexing are the combat capabilities of the Shell.
      3. Botanologist
        Botanologist 23 November 2012 17: 48
        0
        As I understand it, the claims are mainly to the rocket.
        In general, our latest air defense systems are rather weak in terms of missiles. The "Redoubt" missile does not capture the target during testing, the "Pantsir" does not maneuver ... The problems are serious.
        And as for the complex itself - IMHO, it is promising and rationally assembled. Scolding the whole system is the same as scolding a Kalashnikov assault rifle due to the fact that the cartridges are crooked and shoot every other time.
        I really hope (forgive me for being naive) that the missiles will be finalized and the complex will show itself as it should.
  3. omsbon
    omsbon 22 November 2012 09: 20
    +2
    The leadership of Iraq, after signing the preliminary agreement, unexpectedly decided to revise the terms of the deal,

    It's a shame that the deal almost broke, but Iraq, although the vanquished side, is still trying to play its game. Maybe it will.
    Any weapon has disadvantages, the main thing is to detect and eliminate them in time. I think that we will hear more than once about the combat effectiveness of the Pantsir-C1.
    1. Bykov.
      Bykov. 22 November 2012 13: 40
      0
      Quote: omsbon
      It's a shame that the deal almost fell through

      It seemed to be "infa" that Iraq's refusal to purchase, allegedly due to a corruption scheme, is a complete bullshit.
      . The French "free press" wrote, and the Iraqi minister denied all this chatter.
  4. Maximus69
    Maximus69 22 November 2012 10: 30
    +2
    Dear readers! As I see on this site, a sufficient number of people close to the subject of missile defense / air defense. I have been interested in the question for a long time, but somehow my hands didn’t reach and ask what are the analogues of our Shell in the world?
    But based on the recent events in the Middle East, I had an extremely disturbing question: Everyone saw how the Israeli Iron Dome "works". Can our Shell do that? or are these two big differences?

    Thanks a lot for the constructive answers!
    1. Tourist Breakfast
      Tourist Breakfast 22 November 2012 12: 56
      0
      These two complexes have different tasks.
      1. Maximus69
        Maximus69 22 November 2012 13: 57
        0
        "Protection from hostile flying objects in the close range?"
        So I wonder so far we do not have our own "Iron Dome" (in extreme cases, I have not heard of this. The ABM / Air Defense ring around the capital is not considered, these are definitely other tasks) whether we can use the Armor divisions for about the same tasks?
        1. Tourist Breakfast
          Tourist Breakfast 22 November 2012 14: 09
          0
          Well, if you really want to, here above was about the shortcomings of the "Shell":

          2) the possibility of firing at targets flying at speeds greater than 400 m / s has not been confirmed, although a speed equal to 1000 m / s is given in the technical characteristics of the complex


          If this is true, then the "Shell" will not be able to shoot down the "Grad" and its modifications, since they accelerate to a speed of 700 m / s.
          1. Maximus69
            Maximus69 22 November 2012 14: 21
            0
            Not good!
            And what then is flying slower than 400 m / s? Besides the UAV? Why then shoot down the "Shell"?
            1. Tourist Breakfast
              Tourist Breakfast 22 November 2012 15: 36
              0
              Actually 400 m / s is Mach 1.18. Not so little. The speed of the same "Tomahawk" is Mach 0.75.
        2. Botanologist
          Botanologist 23 November 2012 17: 50
          0
          So I'm wondering until we have our own "Iron Dome"
          system "Morpheus" and Antey 2500.
    2. Bykov.
      Bykov. 22 November 2012 13: 45
      +1
      Quote: Maximus69
      Everyone saw how the Israeli Iron Dome "works". Can our Shell do that? or are these two big differences?

      It would be necessary to put a couple of pieces in Palestine, let them compare.
      1. Maximus69
        Maximus69 22 November 2012 13: 53
        0
        Well, like Israel does not use "Grads". It uses cruise missiles + guided aerial bombs, which in my opinion is a more difficult task for short-range missile defense / air defense.
  5. smprofi
    smprofi 22 November 2012 11: 59
    +1
    for covering motorized rifle units on the march - This Shell cannot do it. he cannot shoot on the move - look carefully at the photo: there are telescopic supports and they are put forward for firing.
    there is a version of the Shell on the crawler chassis (1 copy) - this version may be able to shoot on the go.
    1. Nazrug
      Nazrug 22 November 2012 12: 29
      0
      And how can retractable supports prevent them from firing on the go? Or with the supports removed, the rocket will not fly out of the container? I think that the supports serve as an additional plus when shooting not in motion.
      1. Tourist Breakfast
        Tourist Breakfast 22 November 2012 12: 55
        +1
        IMHO support needed for accurate firing of guns. Otherwise, recoil will interfere with aiming.
      2. smprofi
        smprofi 22 November 2012 19: 01
        +1
        Quote: Nazrug
        retractable legs may interfere with firing on the go

        Of all that I saw (photo from the tests) - the carapace is on the supports. can you provide other information? I will only be glad to read it.
        There were conversations in the internet that the Shell was finalized and it can shoot on the go. perhaps the way it is. only recently there have been trials in the Arctic



        BUT! so as not to indicate at what second what looks like, look at the photo



        The shell is quietly standing on the supports. what for?
  6. Yankuz
    Yankuz 22 November 2012 14: 29
    0
    This vaunted Carapace should be sent to Israel and tested on the border with the Gaza Strip to intercept Hamas motley missiles - then we’ll see what it is capable of.
    1. smprofi
      smprofi 22 November 2012 18: 40
      0
      Quote: Yankuz
      test on the border with the Gaza Strip on the interception of motley missiles

      maybe you don’t have to be dishonored?
      The shell shot down a Turkish F-4 Fantom:



      these are his goals. and on rockets manufactured by Sam & Pal of a small size (caliber), it will not work
      1. Tourist Breakfast
        Tourist Breakfast 22 November 2012 19: 20
        0
        The shell shot down a Turkish F-4 Fantom:


        How do you understand this from this video?
        1. smprofi
          smprofi 22 November 2012 20: 59
          0
          specifically from it The video shows that the receiver is working. and it should be noted that they shoot competently, without hysteria.
          This video was first seen on militaryphotos.net. and the laid out person claimed that this works exactly on the Shell.
          is there any other evidence?
          1. lesnik.
            lesnik. 22 November 2012 22: 16
            0
            Quote: smprofi
            specifically from this video you can see that the receiver is working

            specifically from this video you can hear that this is not the Shell
          2. Tourist Breakfast
            Tourist Breakfast 22 November 2012 23: 49
            0
            To begin with, I did not notice the Phantom there. And you?
      2. Yarbay
        Yarbay 22 November 2012 19: 26
        0
        Quote: smprofi
        The shell shot down a Turkish F-4 Fantom:

        Turkey officially stated that the plane crashed due to technical problems !!
        1. smprofi
          smprofi 22 November 2012 21: 02
          0
          Quote: Yarbay
          Turkey officially announced

          Well, of course. Erdagan frowned and threatened with everything he could against Syria. then they probably explained to him in NAT that there was no need to twitch too much. So he worked towards technical problems.
          I don’t remember that the Syrians somehow strongly denied that they didn’t bring down
          1. bart74
            bart74 23 November 2012 00: 50
            +1
            Regarding official statements, Turkey is getting ridiculous. If for those reasons, then what about Syria?
          2. Yarbay
            Yarbay 23 November 2012 14: 34
            0
            Quote: smprofi
            Well, of course. Erdagan frowned and threatened with everything he could against Syria.
            Do not smack nonsense !!
            From the first day, all high-ranking officials in Turkey, including Erdogan, called for calm and promised to take appropriate measures after the investigation of the incident !!
            From the very beginning they provided a flight map and claimed that the plane did not violate Syrian airspace and expressed doubts that the plane could be shot down at such a distance by an anti-aircraft gun!
      3. Cossack
        Cossack April 5 2013 11: 08
        +1
        Commentary on the video is complete nonsense. At one time I was the commander of the Tunguska and I know perfectly well how this machine works both "to taste" and "to sound." The shell sounds the same. There are practically no queues less than 40-60 shells (this is about 0.5- 0.7 sec.) In this case, the sound of firing some small arms is heard, most likely a machine gun, not even a ZU-23-2 (which I also licked from head to toe in Karabakh) smile
        And about "competent shooting without hysterics" ... smile Shooting like this on an Aerial target will never bring anyone down ... unless a balloon with tourists or an airship ... laughing
        The statement about the work of the Shell is a complete lie.
  7. IRBIS
    IRBIS 22 November 2012 14: 32
    +1
    I am not a specialist in air defense forces, but an infantryman anymore, and even that is in reserve. Here are just a list of flaws in the complex that upset me anyway. They are significant and there are a lot of them for one small complex. I want to believe that this is surmountable. Otherwise, why do we need only the appearance of security from an air enemy?
  8. gregor6549
    gregor6549 22 November 2012 15: 56
    +1
    The fact that the Shell's PU is combined with a surveillance radar and guidance radar makes the Shell a good target for anti-radar missiles of the enemy.
    In addition, the Shell can be easily detected by enemy radar and r / l homing cruise and other missiles due to its slender dimensions (especially in the vertical plane) and the characteristic modulation of the reflected radar signal that occurs when turning the turret and rocket-gun armament of the Shell. Those. detecting and recognizing such a target as the Carapace for a potential adversary will not be difficult. And consequently, classify it as worthy of attention and allocate a sufficiently effective outfit of forces and means for its destruction. Whether the Carapace will be able to fight off everyone is a big question. Most likely not. On the other hand, in local conflicts between countries that still have limited potential to counter such complexes (India, Pakistan, etc.), the Shell can be a very effective tool to deal with many classes of targets, including air and ground.
  9. Locksmith
    Locksmith 22 November 2012 16: 07
    +2
    Quote: Tourist's Breakfast
    If this is true, then the "Shell" will not be able to shoot down the "Grad" and its modifications, since they accelerate to a speed of 700 m / s.

    The speed of the rocket is measured after launch, when it reaches the speed it will be much lower. Secondly, no one will be able to work on the "hail" for one simple reason - there can be 30 of them in a volley ... in this square smile As for the shell, this is the same Tunguska, on a modern element base, mainly cannon, and her rackets against helicopters, again an old story-they order one thing, but they demand the exact opposite. There are also more advanced systems, our air defense has always been distinguished by "multi-storey", so to speak, and it is pointless to consider individual pieces without knowing the task.
    1. gregor6549
      gregor6549 22 November 2012 16: 19
      +3
      The Israeli system "Iron Dome", which was created primarily to combat "hail" -type targets after the 2nd Lebanon War, is already working with respect to "grads" and is quite successful.
      Of course, there was no 100% efficiency, there is not and cannot be by definition, but today it is the most effective air defense / missile defense system in its class and, most importantly, it has actually proven its combat effectiveness not in field tests, but in real a combat situation with the massive use of small missiles, including Grad-type projectiles. Moreover, the system hits only targets that pose a real danger. Doesn't shoot at "dummies"
    2. Tourist Breakfast
      Tourist Breakfast 22 November 2012 16: 36
      +1
      The speed of the rocket is measured after launch, when it reaches a speed that will be much lower.

      On the contrary, the rocket is constantly accelerating. Speed ​​during start-up 50 m / s.

      Secondly, no one will be able to work on the "hail" for one simple reason - there can be 30 of them in a volley ... in this square


      Three "Iron Domes" will be able to reflect a volley of 30 "hail".
  10. Locksmith
    Locksmith 22 November 2012 16: 58
    +1
    Quote: gregor6549
    In addition, the Shell can be easily detected by enemy radar and r / l homing cruise and other missiles

    As soon as something tries to turn on its radar, the capture from the C400 will follow, you don’t have to interfere with everything until it reaches the shell, everything will end. It works on low-flying and low-speed targets, which can maneuver to a limited extent at such a height along the front (read a helicopter), and learned to rebuild from SRAM at the beginning of the 70s, especially since the shell also has passive guidance tools (optical-thermal imaging channel)

    Quote: Tourist's Breakfast
    Three "Iron Domes" will be able to reflect a volley of 30 "hail"

    If they can't, the missiles will start to explode at their relatives, the city shoots very tightly at the square, and then they usually don't drive one at a time, and the city division will make a flat empty place called "iron dome memorial"

    Quote: Tourist's Breakfast
    On the contrary, the rocket is constantly accelerating. Speed ​​during start-up 50 m / s

    Quite right, but the rocket accelerates for several seconds, and then flies by inertia, and a few seconds is several kilometers from the launch, i.e. almost nearby, then they beat for 20 km. smile
    1. Tourist Breakfast
      Tourist Breakfast 22 November 2012 18: 01
      +1
      If they can't, the missiles will start to explode at their relatives, the city shoots very tightly at the square, and then they usually don't drive one at a time, and the city division will make a flat empty place called "iron dome memorial"

      Well, so all the "grads" will be destroyed. There is also a proximity fuse.

      Quite right, but the rocket accelerates for several seconds, and then flies by inertia, and a few seconds is several kilometers from the launch, i.e. almost nearby, then they beat for 20 km

      Well, it accelerates to 700 m / s. And she flies only 30 seconds.
    2. gregor6549
      gregor6549 23 November 2012 06: 34
      0
      Locksmith, As soon as something tries to turn on its radar, the capture from C400 will follow, you don’t have to interfere with everything until it reaches the shell, everything will end. It works on low-flying and low-speed targets that can maneuver to a limited extent at such a height along the front (read a helicopter), and learned to rebuild from SRAM at the beginning of the 70, especially since the shell also has passive guidance means (optical-thermal imaging channel)

      Again, like Bender's: "Abroad will help us."
      Who said that the Shell will always be covered by the C400 and vice versa?
      And what about "building up from CPAMs" sounds more than optimistic.
      The current generation ORSs differ from the 70s ORSs day and night.
      In addition, R / L radiation homing equipment can now be placed on almost any class of guided missiles and shells, including Tomahawk-type missiles, and can be combined with guidance and homing equipment operating on other principles (the so-called multi-sensor homing heads). And it will be more than problematic to find a high-speed, low-flying target, a rocket or a projectile going to the Shell in the forehead. Carapace radars are not yet optimized for such purposes. And optimizing them is not easy, even if desired. A serious modification is needed here, including equipping the Shell with hydraulics or something similar capable of raising radar antennas at least meters to 10 15 and providing the ability to change their tilt in the elevation plane. About the completion of missiles and software. provision and do not mention
  11. Varies
    Varies 22 November 2012 20: 40
    0
    Quote: Tourist's Breakfast
    Three "Iron Domes" will be able to reflect a volley of 30 "hail".

    but it is written as if they would reflect a volley of 30 degrees, i.e. 1200 shells, which is basically impossible.
    1. Tourist Breakfast
      Tourist Breakfast 22 November 2012 23: 47
      0
      I answered the following statement:

      Secondly, no one will be able to work on the "hail" for one simple reason - there can be 30 of them in a volley ... in this square


      What do you call the rocket itself?
  12. sxn278619
    sxn278619 23 November 2012 00: 43
    0
    How many Grad rockets can a complex shoot down?
    12 missiles accurately and an unknown number of guns.
    (if they fly at intervals of 20 s - the flight time of the rocket is 20 km.)
  13. yacht
    yacht 23 November 2012 16: 39
    0
    According to my estimates, during the recent conflict between Gaza and Israel, the effectiveness of the Iron Dome complex was approximately at the level of 30% of the missiles fired (I repeat, on average, for various types of missiles).
    However, the shelling from the Gaza side was not intense, counting on a volley. But it is necessary to make an amendment to the fact that the "iron dome" is able to shoot down only those missiles that have a potential danger, and therefore it simply ignores some of the missiles fired past the target. So I admit that the calculation is not entirely correct.
  14. Locksmith
    Locksmith 24 November 2012 00: 44
    0
    Quote: gregor6549
    The current generation ORSs differ from the 70s ORSs day and night.

    day and night were always different wink
    Quote: gregor6549
    Who said that the Shell will always be covered by the C400 and vice versa?

    It was created to cover the s400.
    Quote: gregor6549
    And it will be more than problematic to find a high-speed, low-flying target, a rocket or a projectile going to the Shell in the forehead.

    As doctrine shows, a far-fetched problem
    Quote: gregor6549
    including equipping the Shell with hydraulics

    for this there are guidance stations.
    No offense, but I have a feeling that you specifically troll, knowing what and how, or just looking for the right info am
    1. gregor6549
      gregor6549 24 November 2012 04: 17
      0
      God save me from trolling. It’s just that for a long time I had a direct relationship with military air defense and I understand a little the essence of the issue, including the weaknesses and strengths of a particular weapon system intended for use in this air defense. As in the highly overestimated expectations that the entire military air defense will work as a single system. All this looks beautiful on paper and ostentatious exercises. In real life and with a strong opponent, everything is different.
      And the shortcomings of the Shell that I mentioned are visible to the naked eye. There is no additional information needed.
  15. Algerd
    Algerd 25 November 2012 00: 45
    0
    maybe they produce armor for different countries is different? as the Chinese people junk - for one mill more qualitatively, the other is waste.
  16. EW
    EW 30 November 2012 04: 31
    0
    We are waiting for modifications and upgrades.