In search of the Chinese “Shell”: a selection of options

70
In search of the Chinese “Shell”: a selection of options

Currently, the Russian Army is armed with anti-aircraft missile and artillery systems of the Tunguska and Pantsir families. All elements of these air defense missile systems are located on one combat vehicle. The autonomous self-propelled systems have their own means of detecting air targets, communication equipment through which it is possible to exchange information with other air defense systems and receive external target designation, as well as anti-aircraft missiles with radio command guidance and artillery weapons. The concept of using air defense missile systems assumes that when entering the affected area, the target is first fired upon with guided missiles, and if it is not hit, it is fired from 30-mm machine guns. Russian complexes are highly versatile, and, for example, UAVs can only be destroyed with artillery shells in order to save expensive missile defense systems.

It is quite natural that the Chinese military, closely monitoring the development of foreign means of armed warfare, expressed a desire to equip military and air defense units with combined systems that include artillery and anti-aircraft missiles.



Creation and improvement of air defense missile systems "Tunguska" and "Pantsir"


The Tunguska self-propelled anti-aircraft complex was supposed to replace the ZSU-23-4 Shilka in the military air defense. Calculations have shown that increasing the caliber of artillery machine guns to 30 mm while maintaining the same rate of fire will increase the probability of destruction by 1,5 times. In addition, a heavier projectile allows for greater reach in range and height. The military also wanted an anti-aircraft self-propelled gun equipped with its own surveillance radar with a range of at least 15 km, capable of reliably searching for air targets. It is no secret that the RPK-2 radio instrument complex installed on the Shilka has very limited search capabilities. Satisfactory effectiveness of the ZSU-23-4's actions was achieved only upon receipt of preliminary target designation from the battery command post, which, in turn, used data received from the control post of the division's air defense chief, who had at his disposal a low-altitude all-round radar of the P-15 or P type -19. As the experience of exercises and real combat operations has shown, if communication with control points disappeared, the crews of the ZSU-23-4, acting autonomously, detected no more than a third of air targets with their own radars in a circular search mode.

At a certain stage, the military believed that the effectiveness of the Shilka could be significantly improved by introducing an additional radar on a tracked chassis into the anti-aircraft battery and equipping the self-propelled installation with missiles with an infrared seeker. However, after analyzing the results of the use of AH-1 Cobra combat helicopters armed with anti-tank guided missiles in Vietnam, it was concluded that it was necessary to create a new self-propelled complex.

The military air defense systems available in the early 1970s were mainly focused on combating jet fighter-bombers, attack aircraft and front-line bombers and could not effectively counteract combat helicopters using short-term climb tactics (no more than 30-40 s) to launch ATGMs . In this case, the air defense systems of the regimental level were powerless. The operators of the Strela-1 air defense system and the Strela-2M MANPADS did not have the opportunity to detect and capture a target that hovered briefly at an altitude of 30-50 m at a distance of several kilometers. The ZSU-23-4 gunners did not have time to receive external target designation, and the effective firing range of 23-mm machine guns was much less than the launch range of anti-tank missiles. The Osa-AK divisional level anti-aircraft missile systems, located in the depths of their positions at a distance of up to 5-7 km from the attacking helicopters, based on the total reaction time of the complex and the flight of the missile defense system, could not hit the helicopter before it exited the attack.

In order to increase the firepower, probability and range of hitting air targets, it was decided to arm the new complex, which was put into service in 1982, in addition to 30-mm artillery machine guns with anti-aircraft missiles. In addition to a pair of double-barreled 30-mm 2A38 cannons, the air defense system included: a decimeter range all-round radar and a missile defense system with radio command guidance through an optical channel along the missile tracer. Fire from 30-mm cannons can be carried out on the move or from a place, and the missile defense system can be launched only after stopping. The radar-optical fire control system receives primary information from a surveillance radar with a target detection range of 18 km. There is also a target tracking radar with a range of 13 km.


The maximum range for hitting air targets with artillery machine guns is 4 km, in height - up to 3 km. Anti-aircraft missiles can fire at targets at a range from 2,5 to 8 km, and at a height of up to 3,5 km. Initially, the vehicle had 4 missiles, then their number was doubled. The probability of hitting a fighter-type target when fired from cannons is 0,6. For missile weapons - 0,65.

The tracked chassis of the GM-352 gun-missile system, with a combat vehicle mass of 34 tons, provides highway speeds of up to 65 km/h. The crew and internal equipment are covered with armor, providing protection from rifle-caliber bullets from a distance of 300 m.

It was assumed that the combat vehicles of the Tunguska complex in the regimental level would completely replace the ZSU-23-4 Shilka, but in reality this could not be achieved. Although serial production of air defense missile systems for the army began more than 35 years ago, artillery and missile systems have still not been able to completely displace the seemingly hopelessly outdated Shilkas, the production of which ceased in 1982. This was primarily due to the high cost and lack of reliability of the Tunguska. It was not possible to completely eliminate many of the “inherent problems” of the air defense system of the first modification, which used many fundamentally new technical solutions. Although the developers used the latest radio-electronic element base at that time, the reliability of the electronic units left much to be desired, and in order to maintain and repair the on-board equipment, the personnel had to be highly qualified. Operating and maintaining the Tunguska in working order requires costly and time-consuming operations.

Although the combat capabilities of the Tunguska had increased significantly compared to the Shilka, the troops demanded a simpler, more reliable and cheaper to operate gun-missile system capable of operating missiles in the dark and in poor visibility conditions. Taking into account the shortcomings identified during operation, from the second half of the 1980s, work was carried out to create a modernized version. First of all, it was about increasing the technical reliability of the hardware as a whole and improving combat controllability. Combat vehicles of the modernized Tunguska-M complex were interfaced with the Ranzhir unified battery command post, with the ability to transmit information via a telecode communication line. For this purpose, self-propelled units were equipped with appropriate equipment. In the case of controlling the actions of the Tunguska fire platoon from the battery command post, the analysis of the air situation and the selection of targets for firing by each complex were carried out at this command post.

However, even taking into account the increased reliability and command controllability of the Tunguska-M air defense missile system, such a serious drawback as the inability to fire missiles at night and with low atmospheric transparency was not eliminated. In this regard, despite problems with financing, in the 1990s, a modification was created that could use missile weapons regardless of the possibility of visual observation of the target. In 2003, the improved Tunguska-M1 air defense missile system formally entered service.


ZRPK "Tunguska-M1"

A new 9M311M missile defense system with improved characteristics has been introduced into the armament. In this missile, the laser non-contact target sensor is replaced by a radar one, which increased the likelihood of hitting small-sized high-speed targets. Instead of a tracer, a pulse lamp was installed, which, together with an increase in engine operating time, made it possible to increase the destruction range from 8000 m to 10 m. At the same time, the firing efficiency increased by 000-1,3 times. Thanks to the introduction of a new fire control system into the hardware of the complex and the use of a pulsed optical transponder, it was possible to significantly increase the noise immunity of the missile defense control channel and increase the likelihood of destroying air targets that operate under the cover of optical interference. The introduction of a new optoelectronic sight made it possible to significantly simplify the process of target tracking, while at the same time increasing the accuracy of tracking and reducing the dependence of the effectiveness of the combat use of the optical guidance channel on the professional level of training of the gunner. Improvement of the system for measuring pitch and heading angles made it possible to significantly reduce the disturbing influences on the gyroscopes and reduce errors in measuring pitch and heading angles, and increase the stability of the control loop for anti-aircraft guns. A number of sources say that the presence of thermal imaging and television channels on the installation with automatic target tracking guarantees the 1,5-hour use of existing missiles. However, whether this has been implemented on the complexes available in the Russian army is unclear.

Due to a lack of funding, the modernized Tunguska-M/M1 air defense systems were supplied mainly for export, and our armed forces received very few of them. According to reference data available in the public domain, as of December 2023, we had more than 300 anti-aircraft self-propelled guns of the Tunguska family of all modifications in our troops and in storage. Taking into account the fact that most of these air defense missile systems were built during the Soviet era, many of them needed restoration and could not be fully used in combat operations.

If you do not take into account the high cost and low reliability of the Tunguska, then it was a quite effective complex by the standards of the 1980-2000s. However, the air defense missile system on a tracked chassis, designed to move in the same combat formations with tanks and infantry fighting vehicle, was not optimal for escorting transport convoys and maintaining long-term duty at a prepared position.

In this regard, in the late 1980s, the military initiated the creation of an unarmored air defense missile system on a wheeled base under the tentative name “Tunguska-3”. The tactical and technical specifications specifically stipulated the possibility of XNUMX-hour use of all types of weapons and resistance to organized radio and thermal interference.

The first modification of the new complex, tested in 1996, was mounted on a Ural-5323.4 vehicle chassis, armed with two 30-mm 2A72 cannons (used as part of the BMP-3 armament) and 9M335 anti-aircraft guided missiles. However, this air defense missile system with a maximum firing range of 12 km and a reach height of 8 km was not recommended for adoption. The radio engineering part worked unreliably and could not confirm the declared characteristics. Fire could only be fired after stopping. 30-mm 2A72 cannons with a total rate of fire of 660 rounds/min did not provide an acceptable probability of hitting air targets.

In the 1990s, in the context of a massive reduction in defense spending and the presence in the troops of a large number of different anti-aircraft systems inherited from the USSR, the need to fine-tune the new air defense system did not seem obvious. Due to the unreliability of radar equipment, an option was being developed with a passive optoelectronic system and a thermal imaging channel for detecting air targets and guiding missiles, but in this case there was no particular advantage over the Tunguska-M1 air defense missile system.

The development of the new air defense missile system and its launch into mass production became possible thanks to a contract concluded with the United Arab Emirates in May 2000. The Russian side undertook to supply 50 complexes with a total cost of $734 million (50% was paid by the Ministry of Finance of the Russian Federation to pay off Russia’s debt to the UAE). At the same time, the foreign customer provided an advance of $100 million to finance R&D and testing.

The complex, called Pantsir-S1, was significantly different from the first prototype. The changes affected both weapons and hardware. The export version of the Pantsir-S1E was mounted on an eight-axle MAN-SX45 truck chassis. This modification used foreign-made equipment, 2A38 anti-aircraft guns and 9M311 missile defense systems - also used as part of the Tunguska air defense missile system.

In November 2012, the Pantsir-C1 ZRPK on the KamAZ-6560 chassis entered service with the Russian army. A machine weighing about 30 tons with an 8x8 wheel arrangement can develop speeds of up to 90 km / h on the highway. Cruising range - 500 km. The crew of the complex is 3 people. Deployment time is 5 minutes. The threat response time is 5 seconds.


The combat module is armed with two units with six 57E6 anti-aircraft guided missiles and two double-barreled 30-mm 2A38M cannons. The 57E6 anti-aircraft missile is similar in appearance and layout to the 9M311 missile defense system used as part of the Tunguska air defense missile system. The bi-caliber rocket is made according to the aerodynamic “canard” design. Radio command control is used to target the target. The engine is in the first separating stage. The length of the rocket is 3160 mm. The diameter of the 1st stage is 90 mm. Weight in the TPK is 94 kg. Weight without TPK - 75,7 kg. The mass of the rod warhead is 20 kg. The average flight speed of a missile defense system at a range of 18 km is 780 m/s. Firing range - from 1 to 18 km. The height of destruction is from 5 to 15 m. Detonation of the warhead in the event of a direct hit is ensured by a contact fuse, and in the event of a miss, by a non-contact fuse. The probability of hitting an air target is 000-0,7. It is possible to fire two missiles at one target.


Anti-aircraft missile 57E6 and 30-mm artillery machine gun 2A38M

Two 30-mm 2A38M artillery machine guns have a total rate of fire of up to 5000 rounds/min. The initial projectile speed is 960 m/s. Effective firing range – up to 4000 m. Height reach – up to 3000 m.

In addition to weapons, the combat module houses a detection radar station, a radar complex for tracking targets and missiles, as well as optoelectronic fire control equipment.

The all-round radar in the decimeter range is capable of detecting an air target with an ESR of 2 m² at a range of up to 40 km and tracking up to 20 targets simultaneously. The target tracking and missile guidance radar, operating in the millimeter and centimeter frequency ranges, ensures the detection and destruction of targets with an ESR of 0,1 square meters. m at a distance of up to 20 km. In addition to radar equipment, the fire control system also contains a passive optoelectronic complex with an infrared direction finder, which is capable of digital signal processing and automatic target tracking. The entire system can operate automatically. The optoelectronic complex is designed for 26-hour target detection, tracking and missile guidance. The tracking range in automatic mode for a fighter-type target can reach 15 km, the HARM anti-radar missile can be detected at a range of 4 km. The optoelectronic complex is also used when firing at sea and ground targets. Digital signal processing is carried out by a central computing complex, which provides simultaneous tracking of XNUMX targets with a radar and optical channel.

The Pantsir-S1 air defense missile system is capable of operating both as part of a battery and individually. The battery contains up to 6 combat vehicles. The effectiveness of the complex increases significantly when interacting with other combat vehicles and when receiving external target designation from the control center of the covered area.

It is worth recognizing that Pantsir-S1 turned out to be very successful and has balanced characteristics. But it also has its drawbacks. During operation, it turned out that the base chassis of the KamAZ-6560 does not have very good maneuverability and is prone to capsizing. In addition, the capabilities of the optoelectronic station in terms of target detection and missile tracking are very dependent on the transparency of the atmosphere. Since this air defense missile system was designed to destroy combat aircraft, subsonic cruise missiles and helicopters, its effectiveness when firing at maneuvering small targets such as drones-kamikaze, is not always satisfactory and requires more ammunition consumption.


Despite some shortcomings, the Pantsir-S1 air defense system is actively used in the Russian army. The complex’s baptism of fire took place in 2014, when it shot down several Ukrainian UAVs over Crimea.

In 2016, the improved Pantsir-S2 entered service with the troops. The updated air defense missile system differs from the previous version by a radar with improved characteristics and an expanded missile range. Several years ago it became known about the testing of the Pantsir-SM air defense missile system. The features of this complex are: a new multifunctional radar station with phased array, capable of seeing a target at a distance of up to 75 kilometers, a high-speed computing complex and longer-range anti-aircraft missiles. Thanks to these innovations, the Pantsir-SM’s firing range can reach 40 kilometers.

Chinese air defense missile systems


In the 21st century, China, thanks to rapid economic growth and access to Western and Russian technologies, has developed a scientific and industrial base that makes it possible to create modern-level air defense systems. Currently, three Chinese air defense missile systems are known, differing in design, concept of use and composition of weapons.

At the international air show Airshow China 2014, the FK-1000 (Sky Dragon 12) air defense system was demonstrated, which is declared as the Chinese analogue of the Pantsir.


Armament consists of two 25-mm cannons and 12 anti-aircraft missiles. Chinese bicaliber missiles are very similar in appearance to the Russian missiles used in the Tunguska and Pantsir complexes.


According to information announced at Airshow China 2014, the FK-1000 air defense missile system can simultaneously fire at four targets at a range from 2 to 12 km, at altitudes from 15 to 5000 m. The complex is equipped with an FW2 fire control system and an IBIS-80 detection radar.

Although 1000 years have passed since the public demonstration of the FK-10 air defense missile system, there is no information about the adoption of this complex into service by the PLA or about export deliveries. This may be due to the fact that the weight and dimensions of the FK-1000 are significantly greater than those of the Russian Pantsir, and the firing range and height reach are significantly less.

After the failure with the FK-1000 air defense missile system, Chinese designers began working on combined missile and artillery military systems on a wheelbase with light armor.

In May 2021, the new Type 12 (SWS2) air defense missile system, built on the ZBL-08 (Type 08) wheeled armored chassis, was shown on China Central Television (CCTV).


The weight of the machine is about 22 tons. ZBL-08 is equipped with a Deutz BF6M1015C diesel engine with a power of 440 hp, which provides highway speeds of up to 90 km/h and a range of 800 km.

The television report stated that the complex was armed with a 35-mm cannon capable of firing programmable remote-detonation munitions and TY-90 guided missiles.


The artillery weapon used is a 35-mm PG-99 gun, which is a Chinese copy of the Oerlikon KDA GDF-005. This automatic cannon has a rate of fire of 550 rounds/min. The maximum range against air targets reaches 4 km, the ceiling is 3 km.

The TY-90 guided missile was originally developed for arming combat helicopters and is currently actively used as part of Chinese short-range air defense systems. This missile defense system has a noise-proof IR seeker with a viewing angle of ±40°.


The launch weight of the rocket is about 20 kg. The firing range is from 0,5 to 6 km, the combat altitude is from 15 m to 4 km, the maximum overload is 20g. The rod warhead weighing 3 kg is equipped with contact and non-contact laser fuses and has a destruction radius of 4 m. The probability of hitting a target with one missile in the absence of interference is 0,8.

The Type 12 air defense missile system has an all-round radar. For a low-altitude fighter-type target, the detection range reaches 18 km, the automatic tracking range is 10 km. The maximum detection range of a fighter using an optoelectronic station is up to 12 km, but the performance of the OLS is highly dependent on weather conditions.

Apparently, the Type 12 is currently undergoing military tests, based on the results of which a decision will be made on the future fate of this complex.

In 2023, TV cameras captured Type 625E air defense systems involved in exercises of PLA military air defense units. It is reported that this complex is intended to equip anti-aircraft divisions of motorized rifle brigades.


The Type 625E air defense missile system is built on a lightly armored four-axle chassis, which, as a number of sources say, is based on the ZBL-08. The complex is equipped with a surveillance radar, OLS and a laser rangefinder, the characteristics of which are not disclosed.


To combat air targets, there are eight FN-16 missiles with an infrared seeker. The maximum range is 6000 m. Damage zone in height: 0,015-3,5 km. The mass of the rocket is 10,77 kg.


The six-barreled 25-mm cannon with a rotating barrel block has a rate of fire of over 3000 rounds/min and can destroy air targets at a range of up to 2500 m, at a flight altitude of 2000 m.

At the beginning of the 21st century, deliveries of the HQ-64 short-range air defense system with the LY-60 missile system began. This missile with a launch weight of 220 kg and a firing range of 15 km is designed on the basis of the Italian air-to-air missile Aspide Mk.1 with a semi-active radar guidance system, which, in turn, is a development of the American AIM-7 Sparrow.

In the HQ-6D air defense system, missiles are placed in transport and launch containers, which allows for faster loading and protects the missiles from external influences. In 2010, deliveries of improved HQ-6D air defense systems with missiles began, the flight speed of which was increased to 1350 m/s and the range to 18 km.


Around 2014, the HQ-6A air defense missile system entered service. At this complex, the illumination and guidance station was additionally armed with a turret with a seven-barreled 30-mm Tour 730 assault rifle, created on the basis of the Dutch Goalkeeper anti-aircraft artillery system.


The tower is equipped with a stabilization system and a radar capable of detecting and tracking air targets at a maximum range of 15 km.

Initially, the Toure 730 artillery mount was intended to arm warships, but was also adapted into the HQ-6A ground-based missile and artillery complex.


At a rate of fire of 5800 rounds/min, the effective range against air targets is 3500 m, at altitude - 2500 m. Ammunition - 1280 rounds.

The HQ-6A air defense missile system is mainly intended to cover stationary targets. Chinese sources write that this complex is capable of effectively combating a wide range of air targets, as well as intercepting mortar shells and rockets.

Thus, it can be stated that air defense systems for various purposes were designed in China. But Chinese developers have not yet managed to create a complex whose characteristics can be compared with the Russian Pantsir. Mobile Chinese air defense missile systems are armed with good artillery machine guns, but their missiles do not reach the level of the 57E6 missile defense system and have an infrared seeker, which imposes restrictions when firing missile defense systems in poor visibility conditions. The HQ-6A target air defense missile system is significantly superior to the Pantsir in terms of the firing range of the missile defense system and the rate of fire of the artillery unit. At the same time, the HQ-6A consists of several mobile launchers, a guidance station and a detection radar located on a separate chassis, and cannot accompany transport convoys.
70 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. -1
    3 June 2024 05: 50
    You read this article, or rather look at it, such an abundance of performance characteristics numbers, as if you were reading an instruction manual at the same time as an advertising brochure. And you immediately think that our sky is under reliable protection, but you read the news, but there is no reliable protection. Style of the TV channel "Zvezda"
    1. +5
      3 June 2024 06: 06
      Any protection is expressed as a percentage of probability!
      Anyone who promises absolute protection is at least lying!
      Although, they say that there is the best air defense protection, hinting at their tanks, at enemy airfields and they are right, it couldn’t be better!
    2. +13
      3 June 2024 07: 05
      Quote: Konnick
      You read this article, or rather look at it, such an abundance of performance characteristics numbers, as if you were reading an instruction manual at the same time as an advertising brochure.

      When talking about the ZRPK, I tried to make it as accessible as possible for the untrained reader, and in some places I even greatly simplified it. But how do you imagine describing the complex, at least without the main performance characteristics?
      Quote: Konnick
      And you immediately think that our sky is under reliable protection, but you read the news, but there is no reliable protection.

      Do you propose to install a Pantsir in every yard, and an S-400 in every city stadium? Are you willing to pay for this luxury out of your own pocket?
      Quote: Konnick
      Style of the TV channel "Zvezda"

      Cho really? wassat On the contrary, I am usually criticized for exaggerating. Moreover, this article talks about the shortcomings of the Tunguska and Pantsir, at least those mentioned in open sources. Or did this part of the publication pass you by?
      1. +1
        3 June 2024 09: 41
        Tell us about
        1) MANTIS air defense system - capable of shooting down artillery shells???
        2) Anti-aircraft complex “Derivation-PVO” - capable of shooting down artillery shells???
      2. +5
        3 June 2024 10: 24
        Do you propose to install a Pantsir in every yard, and an S-400 in every city stadium? Are you willing to pay for this luxury out of your own pocket?


        Oh how! If citizens are forced to pay for their own air defense PMCs, only because part of the state’s population adheres to the idea that ensuring their security is an unnecessary luxury, then how strong will such a state be?
      3. 0
        3 June 2024 17: 58
        Quote: Bongo
        Are you willing to pay for this luxury out of your own pocket?

        If the air defense does not detect the UAV, if they fly halfway across the country, what kind of protection can we talk about?
    3. +5
      3 June 2024 07: 37
      There is no 100% guarantee of protection in principle - any, even the most advanced equipment breaks down, any pro sooner or later makes mistakes...
    4. +3
      3 June 2024 08: 21
      This is because you understand air defense like a monkey knows grenades. Calculate how many complexes are needed to block the Russian-Ukrainian border against low-flying targets, and even with an overlap that provides a probability of destruction close to at least 90%. We take a modest 5000 km, this is 1 Shell per 5 km, or even more often, since when firing missiles they can hit 20-50 people at once. For Russia, we need 10-20 thousand complexes, if not more, taking into account the overlap of the most important facilities (refinery plants, military factories, airfields, etc.), no one can pull it off.
      Russia has the most powerful air defense in the world, but there is no omnipotent air defense, any one can break through, it all depends on the forces of the breakthrough.
      1. +1
        3 June 2024 10: 36
        Why can’t you take 2 thousand km? And make a focal defense.
        This is what is happening now, in general, not a scenario of war with NATO when the launches will be massive.
  2. +7
    3 June 2024 06: 27
    Sergey good afternoon!
    Traditional thanks, the article with coffee went down with a bang.
    Comrades have a fruitful day, success and prosperity, with respect to Kote!
  3. +6
    3 June 2024 06: 43
    . The export version of the Pantsir-S1E was placed on an eight-axle MAN-SX45 truck chassis

    Probably a 4-axle chassis?
    1. +8
      3 June 2024 07: 06
      Quote: Zufei
      Probably a 4-axle chassis?

      It happens, you think one thing, but write another. Eight-wheel...
  4. +3
    3 June 2024 06: 55
    The Chinese artillery unit looks preferable. And taking into account the programmable projectiles, even the worst characteristics of the missiles can be forgiven. Especially considering the progress in China.
    1. +6
      3 June 2024 07: 11
      Quote: Vladimir_2U
      The Chinese artillery unit looks preferable. And taking into account the programmable projectiles, even the worst characteristics of the missiles can be forgiven.

      So far, only Chinese serial air defense missile systems with 25 and 30 mm cannons are known, and there are no programmable shells for them. The Type 12 air defense missile system with a 35-mm machine gun is just undergoing military tests. In addition, in my opinion, to reliably hit a target, you need a twin artillery mount. A rate of fire of 550 rounds/min is not that much.
      1. 0
        3 June 2024 10: 19
        Quote: Bongo
        So far, only Chinese serial air defense missile systems with 25 and 30 mm cannons are known, and there are no programmable shells for them.

        I think it’s a matter of time, but even without a programmer, especially without a programmer (!) 1*6*25 or 1*7*30 are better than 2*2*30 spaced on the sides.
        1. +4
          3 June 2024 13: 20
          This is not due to the ability of the "programmers", but most likely because the Chinese believe that below 30mm caliber the use of programmable ammunition is impractical. The use of 25 mm anti-aircraft guns to destroy aircraft, interceptor missiles or ground fortifications, equipment and personnel can be achieved through the use of kinetic energy projectiles or contact bomb fuses, and the use of fragmentation destructive elements is too low-yield.
          1. -1
            3 June 2024 17: 57
            Quote from: wanna
            The use of 25 mm anti-aircraft guns to destroy aircraft, interceptor missiles or ground fortifications, equipment and personnel can be achieved through the use of kinetic energy projectiles or contact bomb fuses, and the use of fragmentation destructive elements is too low-yield.

            This is the third year of the Northern Military District, but there is still no news about drones...
          2. +2
            3 June 2024 17: 58
            Hurray, our Bath is back to normal!!!
            fellow
        2. +3
          3 June 2024 14: 08
          Quote: Vladimir_2U
          I think it’s a matter of time, but even without a programmer, especially without a programmer (!) 1*6*25 or 1*7*30 are better than 2*2*30 spaced on the sides.

          No one makes programmable ammunition in a caliber smaller than 30 mm. As for the Chinese 30 mm anti-aircraft guns, I don’t understand how you can use the programmer on a 30 mm machine gun with a rotating barrel block.
          Quote from: wanna
          The use of 25 mm anti-aircraft guns to destroy aircraft, interceptor missiles or ground fortifications, equipment and personnel can be achieved through the use of kinetic energy projectiles or contact bomb fuses, and the use of fragmentation destructive elements is too low-yield.

          Absolutely agree! Yes
          1. 0
            3 June 2024 17: 17
            Quote: Bongo
            Nobody makes programmable ammunition in calibers smaller than 30 mm

            Orbital ATK 25 mm.
            https://topwar.ru/152281-snarjad-s-programmiruemym-vzryvatelem-orbital-atk-northrop-grumman-mk-310-pabm-t-ssha.html
            Quote: Bongo
            As for the Chinese 30 mm anti-aircraft guns, I don’t understand how you can use the programmer on a 30 mm machine gun with a rotating barrel block.
            Programmer on the breech of the ammunition receiver.

            But the point is that such guns have greater accuracy against widely spaced twin machine guns. I'm talking about this.
            1. +1
              3 June 2024 18: 58
              Orbital ATK 25 mm.
              https://topwar.ru/152281-snarjad-s-programmiruemym-vzryvatelem-orbital-atk-northrop-grumman-mk-310-pabm-t-ssha.html


              Programmable 25mm ammunition only became valuable with the advent of small drones on the battlefield. And this is something new only on the Ukrainian battlefield. Before this, at distances of up to 5 meters, everything was within sight, and it was enough to shoot directly at the target.
      2. +3
        3 June 2024 21: 11
        It seems that the serial "Cheetah in Chinese" PGZ-09 optionally comes with 2-4 MANPADS and its 35-mm guns have AHEAD.
        And most articles about 35mm Chinese versions of Oerlikon write about AHEAD.


        https://youtu.be/1sv8DE0jjPM
    2. +4
      3 June 2024 13: 12
      then the worse characteristics of the missiles can be forgiven

      The very controversial issue of the advantages of the Tunguska and Pantsir bi-caliber missiles over the “ordinary” IR seeker was “fired and forgotten.”
      Particularly interesting is the 40 km range of the Pantsir missiles.
      1. +2
        3 June 2024 14: 06
        Quote: Wildcat
        then the worse characteristics of the missiles can be forgiven

        The very controversial issue of the advantages of the Tunguska and Pantsir bi-caliber missiles over the “ordinary” IR seeker was “fired and forgotten.”
        Particularly interesting is the 40 km range of the Pantsir missiles.

        Andrei, Good day!
        You don't understand a little how it works. A bicaliber missile defense actually acts like an artillery shell. After the launch stage accelerates, it separates and the radio command part of a smaller caliber flies further at high speed. Such a trick will not work with a missile equipped with an infrared seeker; moreover, for its stable guidance it requires good visibility, and it is susceptible to thermal and aerosol interference. In terms of homing, an active radar seeker is best, but such missiles are very expensive, and therefore the first versions of the Pantsir use relatively “cheap” radio command missiles. As for the option with a range of 40 km, I don’t know what kind of missiles it contains.
        1. +2
          3 June 2024 17: 56
          Good afternoon!
          Criticism of bicaliber missiles from here: ""However, the range of target destruction by the cannon canal in the “Tunguska” was 4 km, which did not allow the GP “Apache” to be hit at launch ranges of the ATGM. For this purpose, a more long-range missile channel was needed, which would hit the SPM at ranges up to 10 km. However, it turned out to be not all-weather, not all-the-daily, and not providing auto-tracking of the target. But these shortcomings are repairable. The rocket was applied bikalybernaya construction scheme with a passive mid-flight stage, borrowed from the ideology of building anti-tank guided missiles (ATGM). This predetermined its limited capabilities and, naturally, remained irreparable. Such a rocket in principle can not effectively "work" on maneuvering high-mobility small-sized air targets. It can be effective, especially taking into account the equipment of fragmentation-rod warhead, when fighting only with “flying” tanks (GPs “Apache”) or voluminous aerodynamic targets, but completely useless when fighting, say, with Harm anti-radar missiles. Replacing a rocket in the course of serial production of a laser proximity sensor for a radar target with visible radar of efficiency did not actually give.
          The defeat of the frozen helicopter with the help of the Tunguska missile defense system required extremely high professional skills of the operator, and the defeat of high-precision weapons and maneuvering means of air attack by a missile with a passive marching stage in a given zone was not provided. These findings were confirmed in the course of special exercises with live-fire "Defense-92", conducted under the leadership of the then State Secretary, First Deputy Minister of Defense Andrei Kokoshin. As a result of the exercises, the integrated combat effectiveness of the units armed with the Tunguska and Tunguska-M installations was only 0,42, while the units and units of the air defense armed with other types of complexes were no less than 0,9 – 0,93.
          When the Tunguska complex was put into service, all these shortcomings were indicated in the relevant documents, a plan was adopted to eliminate them before the start and during the deployment of mass production. However, the KBP from these works withdrew itself, concentrating its efforts on other areas, including Panzer, which was just conceived as an ideological continuation of the scientific and technical groundwork acquired by the KBP during the work on the Tunguska. In any case, this is a similar biklibernaya SAM with a passive sustainer stage, fragmentation core warhead, ineffective in dealing with small-sized high-speed and maneuvering precision weapons, the same method of targeting SAM (the classic "three-point") and the same non-recoverable problems. But contrary to common sense and physical abilities, most likely from short-term considerations, the range of the missile channel was called 20 km, and the number of target channels in the complex was 2.
          "https://nvo.ng.ru/armament/2012-09-21/1_two_fronts.html"

          But, IMHO, in practice, the disadvantages are outweighed by the advantages of price, development in production and new options, for example: " It was possible to increase the ammunition load from 12 to 24 missiles by removing two 30 mm automatic cannons. In addition, we had to abandon the air target detection station... four small-sized missiles fit into one standard Pantsir transport and launch container. At maximum load, the new Pantsir-SM will be able to fire a salvo of 96 missiles, repelling attacks from several “drone swarms”"." https://ria.ru/20220629/pantsir-1799015944.html
          1. 0
            3 June 2024 22: 51
            Quote: Wildcat
            Good afternoon!
            Criticism of bicaliber missiles from here:

            Have you looked at the date of the material? It’s September 21.09.2012, 2024. It’s already mid-12, almost 2 years have passed. And more than XNUMX years of SVO, where Pantsir is widely used.
            1. +3
              3 June 2024 23: 08
              And?
              By the way: “The text of your comment is too short and, in the opinion of the site administration, does not contain useful information.”
              1. 0
                3 June 2024 23: 13
                Quote: Wildcat
                And?

                What is the point of the material from 12 years ago, if in practice (SVO) the Shell works effectively for various real purposes: HIMARS, HARM, Storm, ...
                1. +3
                  3 June 2024 23: 17
                  As you say.
                  I completely agree with you - and physics has changed a little in 12 years, in our direction, of course - and all this is no longer so relevant: "....a similar bicaliber missile defense system with a passive sustainer stage, a fragmentation-rod warhead, ineffective against small-sized, high-speed and maneuverable precision weapons, the same method of targeting the missile defense system (classic “three-point”) and the same unremovable problems"
                  1. 0
                    3 June 2024 23: 22
                    Quote: Wildcat
                    ... and this is all no longer so relevant: ".... a similar bicaliber missile defense system with a passive sustainer stage, a fragmentation rod warhead, ineffective in the fight against small-sized high-speed and maneuvering precision weapons,

                    And this is simply not true, as the SVO clearly proves.
                    Quote: Wildcat
                    the same method of targeting missiles (classic “three-point”)

                    And this is not true. Even in the export version, in addition to three-point, there is also half straightening. And in the guidance system, when generating guidance commands, the dynamic properties of the passive stage of the missile defense system are taken into account.
    3. 0
      3 June 2024 22: 57
      Quote: Vladimir_2U
      The Chinese artillery unit looks preferable. And taking into account the programmable projectiles, even the worst characteristics of the missiles can be forgiven.

      Do you need an air defense missile system or an air defense missile system?
  5. +2
    3 June 2024 08: 03
    Quote: Bongo
    Do you propose to install a Pantsir in every yard, and an S-400 in every city stadium? Are you willing to pay for this luxury out of your own pocket?

    Do you think the Pantsir could have been installed at the Voronezh-​DM radar station near Armavir?
    1. +4
      3 June 2024 08: 11
      Do you think the Pantsir could have been installed at the Voronezh-​DM radar station near Armavir?

      Do you think they are not there? As far as I know, the information about possible damage to the Voronzh-DM radar has not been confirmed.
    2. +3
      3 June 2024 13: 56
      “Shells” are in great demand near the LBS; it is absolutely impossible to cover all important stationary objects with them. No.
    3. +3
      3 June 2024 16: 13
      Quote: Konnick
      Do you think the Pantsir could have been installed at the Voronezh-​DM radar station near Armavir?

      Coverage of such stations by air defense forces is standard. There are a lot of questions here, who overslept?
  6. +8
    3 June 2024 08: 05
    Quote: Konnick
    And you immediately think that our sky is under reliable protection, but you read the news, but there is no reliable protection.


    Our sky is too vast, not as small as that over Israel. But practice has shown that even the small Israeli sky cannot be covered 100%, even with the help of the senior hegemonic partner.
    1. -1
      3 June 2024 18: 02
      Quote: Illanatol
      But practice has shown that even the small Israeli sky cannot be covered 100%, even with the help of the senior hegemonic partner.

      The USSR would argue with you. There were more complexes and a continuous detection field
  7. -7
    3 June 2024 08: 18
    China is already adjusting its air defense development program. He is moving away from the vicious practice of assembling both guns and missiles on one chassis. The resulting systems are too cumbersome. And they don’t put their eggs in one basket, but here is a Swiss, and a priest, and a pipe player. Expensive...rich...but one hit is enough and all the air defense of the object ends, since in the same Pantsir there are radars, missiles, and guns
    1. -1
      3 June 2024 22: 59
      Quote: Konnick
      China is already adjusting its air defense development program. He is moving away from the vicious practice of assembling both guns and missiles on one chassis.

      This vicious practice allows you to fire at a target while moving.
      1. 0
        6 June 2024 12: 41
        Quote: Comet
        This vicious practice allows you to fire at a target while moving.

        I didn't understand how. Using the Pantsir cannons to fire at something in motion is a useless noise, as it seems to me.
        1. 0
          7 June 2024 00: 39
          Quote: DenVB
          I didn't understand how. Using the Pantsir cannons to fire at something in motion is a useless noise, as it seems to me.

          I answered a similar question in this thread on June 5, 2024 00:55.
  8. +2
    3 June 2024 08: 28
    Quote: Victor Sergeev
    This is because you understand air defense like a monkey knows grenades. Calculate how many complexes are needed to block the Russian-Ukrainian border against low-flying targets, and even with an overlap that provides a probability of destruction close to at least 90%. We take a modest 5000 km, this is 1 Shell per 5 km, or even more often, since when firing missiles they can hit 20-50 people at once. For Russia, we need 10-20 thousand complexes, if not more, taking into account the overlap of the most important facilities (refinery plants, military factories, airfields, etc.), no one can pull it off.

    This is why aviation and early warning systems exist. Only object-based air defense can be stationary, and the most effective air defense against long-range weapons is air cover and patrolling with the aim of instantly striking the launch site
    1. +5
      3 June 2024 08: 39
      Unfortunately, the USSR ended 30 years ago....
  9. +3
    3 June 2024 08: 54
    Excellent article, I read it with pleasure. But do we need to get to the bottom of something? winked So I will allow myself.
    . operating in the millimeter and centimeter frequency ranges, provides

    After all, the millimeter, centimeter and TD ranges are long ranges. And the frequencies are in hertz. Length and frequency are of course interrelated concepts, but still different. Just reading it scratched me like a signalman
    1. -1
      5 June 2024 07: 32
      Quote: KVU-NSVD
      After all, the millimeter, centimeter and TD ranges are long ranges. And the frequencies are in hertz. Length and frequency are of course interrelated concepts, but still different.

      Do not worry ! This is not the only "mistake"! There are others in the article! Yes
  10. +1
    3 June 2024 09: 06
    Considering that we are developing the first economy in the world, they will soon greatly overtake us in armaments. With our many years of testing and adoption, we will fall hopelessly behind. It’s good that everything is being implemented quickly now, how long will it last?
  11. 0
    3 June 2024 09: 59
    increasing the caliber of artillery machine guns to 30 mm

    We must not forget that at the same time as Shilka, Yenisei also participated in the competition with two 37-mm machine guns. For a number of reasons - it was not adopted for service then, although it showed itself quite well, but now - such a machine would be so useful...
    1. +3
      3 June 2024 13: 54
      Quote: paul3390
      We must not forget that at the same time as Shilka, Yenisei also participated in the competition with two 37-mm machine guns. For a number of reasons - it was not adopted for service then, although it showed itself quite well, but now - such a machine would be so useful...

      Do you know where the Shilkas went? Do you think "Amur" with a similar radio system and slower-firing 37-mm machine guns would have performed better? No.
  12. -3
    3 June 2024 11: 36
    The ZRPK concept is an absolute evil, especially for the Navy.
    This obscenity was brought to life by the lobbying efforts of Rostec.
    Only a complete cretin would promote 3-gauge bicaliber air defense pencils, and even on a rotating carriage.
    Initially, it was simply planned to create a simplified wheeled version of the Tunguska, but the result was the creation under discussion.
    There is no alternative to ejection vertical launch, especially in the navy.
    The best embodiment of this approach is the TOP for both the army and the navy.
    Regarding the ZRPK-Rostec lobbyist, this honorable office has brought and is bringing a huge amount of harm to the country.
    1. +2
      6 June 2024 01: 56
      Quote: Dozorny severa
      There is no alternative to ejection vertical launch, especially in the navy.

      Westerners don't think so:
  13. -1
    3 June 2024 11: 39
    Quote: Vadim S
    It’s good that everything is being implemented quickly now, how long will it last?

    What exactly was quickly implemented?
  14. +4
    3 June 2024 12: 55
    hi
    As always, an interesting article!

    https://youtu.be/gDkcV2Wyh1M?t=580

    It is interesting to trace the evolution from 25 mm to 35 mm AHEAD. Type 12 (SWS2) is practically Mantis, IMHO.

    It is not very clear whether Chinese technology has the ability to intercept mines, missiles, and shells (S-RAM).

    The video seems to mention something based on "76 mm OTO-Melara".
    1. +4
      3 June 2024 14: 20
      Quote: Wildcat
      It is not very clear whether Chinese technology has the ability to intercept mines, missiles, and shells (S-RAM).

      Based on the 30-mm AU Toure 730, a functional analogue of the Centurion C-RAM was created in China. But how effective the Chinese installation is is not known.
      1. +3
        3 June 2024 14: 46
        This is not the usual "smart" ammunition with coils in the muzzle, but a kind of short-range fuze that uses a distance calculated by counting the number of revolutions of the bullet. As can be clearly seen in the picture, the point of impact of the projectile is at least ten meters away from the drone, but it can effectively shoot down small drones. (Can't seem to load gifs)

        https://tv.cctv.com/2024/05/16/VIDELN1rXGyTycr9Za6zKkMf240516.shtml
      2. +2
        4 June 2024 08: 35
        Hello, Sergey! smile
        Thank you! Well done Chinese, it’s enviable.
        It’s possible without any fuss and changes. good
  15. +1
    3 June 2024 22: 39
    The all-round radar in the decimeter range is capable of detecting an air target with an ESR of 2 m² at a range of up to 40 km and tracking up to 20 targets simultaneously.

    More precisely, a range of 36 km was declared for Rob = 0.9 and Rlt = 10^(-6). Linear AFAR with electronic scanning in elevation and mechanical scanning in azimuth.
    The target tracking and missile guidance radar, operating in the millimeter and centimeter frequency ranges, ensures the detection and destruction of targets with an ESR of 0,1 square meters. m at a distance of up to 20 km.

    The target and missile tracking station (SSTSR) of the millimeter wave range had a target detection range with an EPR of 2 m² - 24 km. There is no centimeter wave range in the USSR phased array.
  16. -2
    3 June 2024 22: 41
    ...its effectiveness when firing at maneuvering small targets, such as kamikaze drones, is not always satisfactory and requires more ammunition consumption.

    Are there public statistics?
  17. 0
    3 June 2024 23: 38
    Quote: Comet
    This vicious practice allows you to fire at a target while moving.

    When were the guns stabilized on Pantsir???
    1. +1
      5 June 2024 00: 55
      Quote: Konnick
      Quote: Comet
      This vicious practice allows you to fire at a target while moving.

      When were the guns stabilized on Pantsir???

      The guns have nothing to do with shelling targets with missiles while the BM is moving. If you divide the BM into 2-3 different vehicles, then it will be impossible to fire at targets even from short stops.
  18. 0
    4 June 2024 09: 01
    Quote from Kartograph
    The USSR would argue with you. There were more complexes and a continuous detection field


    Don't confuse one with the other. Detection of an air target does not mean its destruction. By the way, can you remind me when the USSR faced a massive air raid or missile attack?
    It's not even about the level of technology. The most high-tech air defense/missile defense system can be overloaded using even less advanced means of attack. This is clearly demonstrated by Iran with its massive raid on Israel recently.

    In our time, no one has an impenetrable air defense system. And it didn't exist before.
    "There is no Hercules against many...".
    1. +1
      6 June 2024 02: 09
      Quote: Illanatol
      Don't confuse one with the other. Detection of an air target does not mean its destruction.

      However, without detection there is no need to talk about destruction at all. And now we have such an interesting situation when a loudly rattling sheaf-binder with a wingspan of ten meters flies into a facility in the depths of the country, and no one can even say where it even came from?! “Military experts” speak up and wonder whether it flew from Ukraine, or was launched from Kazakhstan... sad
  19. +1
    5 June 2024 01: 01
    Quote: Comet
    Quote: Konnick
    China is already adjusting its air defense development program. He is moving away from the vicious practice of assembling both guns and missiles on one chassis.

    This vicious practice allows you to fire at a target while moving.

    For objective air defense, this is not a necessary option.
    1. kaa
      -1
      5 June 2024 09: 54
      So these are not object installations, but air protection of motorized rifle units. The initial anti-helicopter orientation seems to hint.
      1. 0
        5 June 2024 19: 06
        We have had strong air protection for motorized rifle units in recent years. it didn't get any better.

        Shilka - modernization of the radar and installation of MANPADS was not carried out.
        Tunguska is expensive and unreliable, it is worth modernizing.
        Pine is at the level of exhibition exhibits.
        Osa 10 - instead of retirement, revival on a domestic base, which is justified in the conditions of the Drone War.
        Thors 1 and 2 are very effective against any target, but expensive against Drones.
    2. +2
      6 June 2024 00: 06
      Quote: Pavel57
      This vicious practice allows you to fire at a target while moving.
      For objective air defense, this is not a necessary option.

      The experience of the SVO contradicts your statement.
  20. -3
    6 June 2024 08: 09
    Quote: DenVB
    Quote: Dozorny severa
    There is no alternative to ejection vertical launch, especially in the navy.

    Westerners don't think so:

    1. I see an installation that uses standard small-caliber air defense systems originally developed for aircraft or man-portable systems.
    2. I don’t see 4 automatic weapons, guidance and detection stations for CCs mounted on one carriage.
    3. The air defense system is quite short in the photo (10:1) and is single-caliber.
    4. Copy idiots if they have their own developments, for example the TOR air defense system, Dagger-stupidity.
  21. -2
    6 June 2024 08: 27
    Quote: DenVB
    However, without detection there is no need to talk about destruction at all. And now we have such an interesting situation when a loudly rattling sheaf-binder with a wingspan of ten meters flies into a facility in the depths of the country, and no one can even say where it even came from?!


    Maybe no one can say, or maybe no one wants to say. We, ordinary people, are not given to know this.
    I generally doubt that such “rattlers” can fly so far into our territory. Well, in the border towns - it didn’t go anywhere. But when it flies to Tatarstan or St. Petersburg - excuse me. It is possible that some drones are launched from our territory by some shady types...
  22. 0
    6 June 2024 13: 07
    Comet:
    The experience of the SVO contradicts your statement.

    Can this be confirmed with specifics - what experience does it contradict and what does it contradict?
    1. 0
      7 June 2024 00: 37
      Quote: Pavel57
      Can this be confirmed with specifics - what experience does it contradict and what does it contradict?

      This is a response to your message dated June 5, 2024 01:01. The SVO used covering stationary objects with moving air defense systems. Covering the columns - of course.
      1. 0
        7 June 2024 23: 07
        Well, it was used, it means it was used. And Shilki Marines
        appeared on TV.