Military Review

"Tunguska-M" and its marine counterpart "Dirk"

Operation in the military, as well as the combat use of the ZSU-23-4 Shilka proved that this complex is able to wage an effective fight not only with low-flying air targets (especially in a difficult jamming environment), but also against a ground enemy. Despite this, “Shilka” had a small effective zone of destruction of targets, as well as a low damaging effect of ammunition. Also, this complex did not provide timely shelling of air targets, especially when conducting reconnaissance in autonomous mode. As a result, the military demanded that the industry develop a new anti-aircraft self-propelled unit, which was the Tunguska.

They decided to fix the low damaging effect of ammunition and a small effective zone of destruction by increasing the caliber of automatic cannons to 30 mm. We stopped at this option, since a further increase in the caliber of shells did not provide technical capabilities to maintain a high rate of fire. Complex "Tunguska" is designed to provide air defense units tank and motorized rifle troops from attacks by army and tactical aviation, fire support helicopters, UAVs, as well as for the destruction of ground lightly armored targets and manpower of the enemy.

The combat capabilities of the complex make it possible to solve the tasks of directly covering the troops and individual objects in a defensive and offensive battle, during a march and when positioned on the spot from the strikes of enemy air attack systems from extremely small, small, and partially medium heights. The complex is able to confidently solve combat missions in any climatic conditions. The structure of the air defense system "Tunguska-M" includes a combat vehicle - 2С6, a charging vehicle, an automated test and testing station, as well as maintenance and repair facilities.

"Tunguska-M" and its marine counterpart "Dirk"

The GM-352 tracked chassis, unified with the Tor system, was chosen as a self-propelled base for the new complex. This chassis has an adjustable ground clearance and provides maximum speed on the highway - 65 km / h. The use of a hydropneumatic suspension and a hydromechanical transmission provides the Tunguska with good maneuverability, high throughput and, most importantly, smoothness.

The Tunguska anti-aircraft gun and missile system (ZPRK) has become the 1-m in the world a unique multi-purpose dual-purpose anti-aircraft complex. It was created on 8 years before the foreign multipurpose complex “Adats”. Compared to other short-range air defense complexes (both foreign and domestic production), it most meets the “cost-effectiveness” criterion.

The basic one weapons complex is the rocket 9М311. This bikalibernaya two-stage solid propellant rocket is made according to the aerodynamic configuration "duck". The missile is equipped with a fragmentation-rod warhead and contact and non-contact fuses. Zour has a very high maneuverability (withstands overload up to 18g), which allows you to destroy maneuverable and speed targets. Aiming anti-aircraft missiles at the target - radio command. The rocket is delivered to the troops in a special transport and launch container (TLC) in the equipped state and does not require any maintenance during 10 years. The ammunition of missiles is replenished with the help of a transport-loading vehicle. TPK has a low weight - up to 55 kg, which allows you to charge the missiles on PU manually.

The Tungusk-M ZPRK tower installation houses information optoelectronic and radar facilities, a digital computing system, control panels for members of the crew, and communication facilities. To protect the crew, the Tunguska is equipped with special means of protection against weapons of mass destruction and the creation of normal environmental conditions inside the installation.

The artillery armament of the complex is represented by two double-barreled anti-aircraft guns 2А38М working in conjunction with the SLA. The double-barreled automatic weapon scheme allows firing in intensive mode with a rate of fire of up to 5000 rounds / min. Power guns - tape. Cartridge tape guns equipped with 30-mm standardized ammunition with a special padded machine.

By the middle of the 1990-ies ZPRK "Tunguska" was upgraded, the new complex received the designation "Tunguska-M". The main change was the introduction into the complex of new radio stations and a receiver for communication with the battery commander center "Ranzhir" and the commander point PPRU-1М. In addition, the gas turbine engine was replaced on the machine, the new engine received an increased service life (right 2 times - from 300 to 600 hours).

The following modification of the complex received the designation "Tunguska-M1", and was put into service in the 2003 year. In this modification, the processes of targeting anti-aircraft missiles and exchanging information with the rangir battery commander's station were automated. In the 9М311М rocket itself, the laser proximity sensor of the target gave way to the radar one, which increased the likelihood of the destruction of the ALCM type missiles. Instead of a tracer a flash lamp was mounted. The range of destruction Zour increased to 10 km. In general, the level of combat effectiveness of the Tunguska-M1 RMS in the conditions of interference increased 1,3-1,5 times as compared with its predecessor.

Tactical and technical characteristics of the "Tunguska-M1"
The zone of destruction of targets Zour / guns, km:
range 2,5-10 / 0,2-4
height 0,015-3,5 / 0-3
The maximum speed of the targeted targets is up to 500 m / s.
The reaction time of the complex is up to 10.
Ammunition, missiles / shells - 8 / 1904
2А38М guns rate of fire - up to 5000 shots / min.
The initial velocity of the projectile - 960 m / s.
Weight Zour / with container - 42 / 55 kg.
The mass of the warhead - 9 kg.
Vertical angle of fire from guns -10 - + 87 degrees
Mass ZPRK in a combat position - 34 t.
The deployment time of the complex is up to 5 min.
Maximum speed on the highway - up to 65 km / h.

ZRAK "Dirk"

The Dagger 3М87 (“Chestnut” export designation) is a universal all-weather shipborne short-range anti-aircraft missile and artillery complex, the main purpose of which is self-defense of surface ships and auxiliary ships from strikes of various air targets from small and extremely small heights. According to the presence of artillery and missile weapons, united by a common fire control system, this complex has no world analogues. The complex was created on the basis of the land development "Tunguska-M".


A feature of this complex is the use of 2-x types of weapons, which provide consistent firing of air targets with rockets, as well as artillery fire at a distance of 8000-1500 meters and 1500-500 meters from the ship, respectively. The total combat potential of this complex in 2-4 times exceeds the usual anti-aircraft artillery complex. With the advent of new promising goals, this difference will only grow.

The modular construction of this complex allows it to be mounted on ships of different displacements (from small rocket boats to aircraft carriers), as well as ground targets. In conjunction with the use of an integrated control system, PSRA guarantees high combat survivability. DIRECT "Dirk" can equally well be used to defeat air, surface and ground targets. The rocket-cannon armament used on the complex is distinguished by high accuracy, which is due to its compact location in a single tower installation, as well as the presence of a modern SLA, television-optical and radar guidance channels with high accuracy characteristics.

Joint processing of signals from target tracking channels and missiles, as well as automatic selection of the optimum combat mode of operation, provide the SIGNATURE very high noise immunity in the conditions of the use of various kinds of radio-electronic interference by the enemy. The complex possesses full automation of combat work, which allows it to fire simultaneously at 6 targets per minute and provides the ship with a high degree of protection against attacks of high-precision weapons (anti-ship missiles, controlled bombs, etc.), as well as low-flying small-sized targets. In terms of its combat effectiveness, the Dirk "Dirk" in 1,5-2 times exceeds the foreign complex "Crotal-Naval" and in 2,5-4 times the "Goalkeeper".

Structure of the complex

The Dirk "Dirk" consists of combat and command modules, 30-mm shots, missiles with storage and reloading systems, coastal maintenance tools, as well as training and training facilities. The SARK command module, equipped with a three-coordinate radar and an information processing system, is used to detect various kinds of targets, as well as their distribution, with the output of target designation data to combat modules.

Combat module 3М87 (includes 2 six-barreled 30-mm anti-aircraft guns, as well as SAM 9М311-1 in transport-launch containers, FCS with television optical and radar channels). The artifacts of the complex provide the rate of fire up to 10 000 shots per minute. One such module can simultaneously fire up to 3-4 targets and provide protection to a small ship against enemy air attacks with a low density of air attack weapons in a raid. On ships of large displacement, 2 and more modules of Dirk Dirk can be installed to repel high-intensity strikes from each side. Their number, along with the displacement of the vessel, is also determined by the capabilities of the control system and can reach up to 6 units (on the Peter the Great TARKR, the 6 MORTG “Dirk” is used). The combat module, at the request of the customer, can only be performed in an artillery version.

The fire control system provides the complex with the acquisition of target designation data by the combat module, the generation of data for aiming the weapon at the fired targets, and automatic tracking of targets. The radar channel of the complex operates in the millimeter wavelength range, and also has a narrow radiation pattern, which ensures a sufficiently high accuracy (2-3 m) of targeting missiles to low-flying anti-ship missiles without restrictions on their flight height. When using a television-optical channel with a correlation-contrast method of signal processing and with an automatic target tracking device, it is possible to target anti-aircraft missiles at a target with an accuracy of an 1 meter at any target altitude.

The complex uses Zur 9М311. This is a solid two-stage rocket, which is designed according to a bicalyber scheme with a detachable engine. The rocket is designed to destroy helicopters, airplanes and cruise missiles in terms of their optical visibility in the spatial sector 350 meters wide (right and left) from the combat module at a distance of kilometers to 8-10. In flight, the rocket is controlled by a radio command guidance system in semi-automatic mode with automatic launch of the rocket to the line of sight or with manual tracking of the target. The average speed of the missiles reaches 650 m / s, while the anti-aircraft missile can maneuver with overloads up to 18g.

At present, the 9М311 rocket is the only Russian development that is equipped with a fragmentation warhead, non-contact (laser) and contact fuses. Non-contact fuse cocked at a distance of 1 km. from the target and provides a reliable undermining of the warhead warhead during its flight at a distance of up to 5 meters from the target. When firing at surface or ground targets, the proximity fuse switches off. To increase the effectiveness of air targets, rods (up to 600 mm in length and 4-9 mm in diameter) are covered with a special “shirt” on top, which contains ready-made attack elements made in the form of cubes (2-3 gr. Each). At the time of the detonation of a missile defense unit of fragments and rods, a kind of ring with a radius of up to 5 meters is formed in a plane that is perpendicular to the rocket axis. At a distance of more than 5 meters, their action is ineffective.

The missiles of the Kortik complex are placed in the TPC, which is unified with the missile defense system of the Tunguska-M air defense complex. The rockets are assembled in the 2 block of 4 missiles in each. They are mounted on the turning part of the combat module of the complex. The ammunition of each module consists of 8 missiles. At the same time, the reloading and storage system provides storage of 32 missiles in containers, their storage in the cellar, as well as lifting of the missiles and loading the launcher.

Information sources:
-http: //
-http: //
-http: //
-http: //
-http: //
31 comment
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Canep
    Canep 20 May 2013 08: 31 New
    Dirk looks like a terminator (transformer).
  2. Bongo
    Bongo 20 May 2013 09: 19 New
    Is Tunguska able to "work" at night and in poor visibility?
    1. olegff68
      olegff68 20 May 2013 10: 27 New
      Quote: Bongo
      Is Tunguska able to "work" at night and in poor visibility?

      Actually, she’s on the drum what kind of person’s visibility there is (and time of day). good
    2. Argon
      Argon 20 May 2013 10: 44 New
      Unfortunately, only the artillery component of the complex is all-weather, moreover, it can only fire missiles while standing, and given the state of the Soviet-made samples and the initial quality of those released in Russia, it is generally not combat-ready. The only thing is that the chassis and the guns work reliably. I hope that the "Pantsir" will be brought to mind, but the use of such a complex of KAMAZ platforms as a chassis is perplexing (it is clear that it is cheaper, but why go to extremes). I think that the need to cover tank brigades in the offensive, on the march, cannot be provided with a mobile ZRAK on a vehicle chassis.
      1. yanus
        yanus 20 May 2013 15: 28 New
        Quote: Argon
        the need to cover tank brigades in the offensive, on the march

        I see, do you all dream before the English Channel to rush a boar? 2013 in the yard ...
    3. viktorR
      viktorR 20 May 2013 11: 15 New
      And what is stopping her? She also has not only an optical, but also a radar channel.
      1. Bongo
        Bongo 20 May 2013 13: 44 New
        Accompanying the target when firing rockets is conducted on the optical channel, with a sight on the rocket tracer.
  3. Wolland
    Wolland 20 May 2013 09: 33 New
    At one time, Shilka and its modifications were a threat to any aircraft, and with the advent of such things as these you can bring down not only enemies but also flies.
    1. Argon
      Argon 20 May 2013 14: 43 New
      My dear Wolland here "Chapayav" is generally enough, let's speak constructively on the case.
  4. Windbreak
    Windbreak 20 May 2013 10: 16 New
    In the 4th photo, Shell-M, not Dirk
  5. Armavir
    Armavir 20 May 2013 10: 17 New
    Well, weapons should be not only formidable, but also beautiful - this is just such a case.
  6. Iraclius
    Iraclius 20 May 2013 11: 30 New
    The car is wonderful! But, alas, the reserve for modernization is almost exhausted on the M1 modification.
    But, as always, the rearmament on the Shell-S1 is delayed.
    1. Conepatus
      Conepatus 20 May 2013 11: 44 New
      Nothing has been exhausted on modernization. Change electronics from time to time and everything else is on the level.
      The "Shell" will not replace the "Tunguska", these are different vehicles. The "Tunguska" can (and was created for this) operate in battle formations, that is, cover tanks directly in battle. The "Shell" cannot do this, it is imprisoned to protect airfields, long-range air defense systems and other similar objects.
      1. Aleks tv
        Aleks tv 20 May 2013 12: 58 New
        Quote: Conepatus
        these are different machines.

        Good comment, Alexander. A plus.

        The enemy of the tank in the city is the spirit with the "seven".
        The enemy of the tank in a full-scale war is artillery. And the biggest enemy is a helicopter.

        The biggest friend of the tank, protecting from a helicopter - Tunguska.

        Only she is able to effectively protect the tank column in motion.
        There are big doubts in this regard in relation to the Shell, and not for this it was created, its destiny is the covering of strategic objects in the form of the last echelon and the protection of long-range air defense systems at the time of their firing.

        In Tunguska, the possibilities of Shilka and Thor are harmoniously combined.
        In some sort of mess, to me, as a tanker, it’s more comfortable to have a Tungusok attached platoon - shooting in motion, here is her skate.
        To upgrade according to the existing backlogs and keep in the army, here is the wish for this unique machine.

        If something is not so clear on the tactics of application, Air defense, correct, pliz.
        1. Argon
          Argon 20 May 2013 16: 14 New
          In general, the views at the level of the early 80s, did not want to offend.
      2. Iraclius
        Iraclius 20 May 2013 13: 18 New
        Who told you that?
        Electronics - electronics. This has already been done at M1. But what about missile-cannon weapons? Look at the characteristics of that of the Shell and everything will become clear. Alas, nothing lasts forever under the moon.
        Yes, the purpose of the Shell is somewhat different. But what prevents it from being used for the same purposes as Tunguska. Why keep two types in service if one of them is obviously more modern and powerful? As for the chassis - by default, wheeled are cheaper to operate. Apparently, we proceeded from this. Personally, I do not like this version of the Shell.
        1. Conepatus
          Conepatus 20 May 2013 14: 01 New
          What is wrong with the missile and cannon armament? Why is it bad? In the photograph of the "Pantsir" shown below on a tracked base, there are the same 30mm assault rifles as on the "Tunguska". The missiles of "Pantsyr" are better? They are transcendental, like the whole complex as a whole. By dimensions, a walking target. At a price-3 "Tunguska"
          Does he take a hovering goal?
          1. Argon
            Argon 20 May 2013 16: 09 New
            The Tunguska problem is akin to the MiG-31 problem, the element base is outdated, it was produced in cooperation, the whole union and there is no way to restore these ties. And where does the claim that the Pantsir's purpose is different comes from? It is intended to replace Shilka, Tunguska and Arrows "solving their tasks are an order of magnitude more effective, plus the destruction of some ASPs. The issue of covering the troops on the march was discussed in the task separately. And about the Tunguska's weapons, my dear Conepatus, let us fly and soup separately. The machines themselves are good. However, the hydraulic platform on which each stands of these, the subject of a smut, after walks in nature for a month. In modern warfare, missiles with a range of 10 km (and for a highly maneuverable target of 8,5 practically) are not more than A-10 means; fog, smoke, dust suspension all this significantly reduces the speed of the OLS. Now about the chassis. The provision of a tactical air defense zone is far from "beating up babies" but a command confrontation with such suppression forces. And the conditions are such that the ZRAK crew must (after receiving a certain signal) turn off all the emitters and actively setting up various interference, it will move away from the place (change the trajectory of the vehicle), and the time for all this is 10-15 seconds. seconds are needed only to remove the stops, and you still need to get under way? And as for the price of the issue, I do not think that it is more than the difference in the cost of the F-16 and that "drone" that recently took off from an aircraft carrier, and freedom is more expensive, although the topic is different price markups in the current military-industrial complex are a topic for another conversation. yes
        2. Aleks tv
          Aleks tv 20 May 2013 15: 03 New
          Quote: Iraclius
          Who told you that?

          Immediately wrote that I am not special in these matters ... request , but I intuitively favor Tunguska in terms of firing reliability on the move, although I understand that Shell is a newer development of gunsmiths.

          Nevertheless, I would like to hear the views of the air defense specialist on the pros and cons of the Tunguska and the Shell, at least in general terms, as well: are these the same class of vehicles or have different purposes?
          1. Iraclius
            Iraclius 21 May 2013 18: 58 New
            Pantsir-C1 has the main and fundamental difference - completely new electronics and completely new operating algorithms. Tunguska can only fire on one target at a time. Carapace - up to four. The station can track up to 20 targets. At the same time, it is possible to simultaneously target two missiles at two targets within the sector 90x90 degrees, or at one target. Of the foreign air defense missile systems, only "Krotal" is capable of firing at two targets, but only in an extremely narrow sector - 1x1 deg. Unlike the Tunguska complex, the Pantsir-S is capable of not only firing cannon fire on the move, but also launching missiles. Plus, he has a larger stock of anti-aircraft missiles. Unlike the Tunguska, which was created primarily as a means of fighting enemy combat helicopters, the Pantsir-S1 was developed on the basis of other tasks - cover from the impact of high-precision weapons of air defense systems, including the positions of radar and air defense systems of medium and long range, especially important "point" objects (with a radius of up to 1,5-3 km), complementing the field of destruction to a continuous one on possible flight routes of low-flying targets such as modern cruise missiles over terrain with difficult terrain. Those. structurally, it includes a wider range of tasks.
  7. Myasnov
    Myasnov 20 May 2013 13: 14 New
    Very beautiful fluff.
  8. Iraclius
    Iraclius 20 May 2013 13: 15 New
    My wife works at a factory for their production. The engineer is a constructor. I somehow believe her more. wink
    Well, the chassis. What is the chassis? There is such an option:
    1. Orchestrarant
      Orchestrarant 20 May 2013 13: 25 New
      Beautiful car. And why does everything beautiful kill? smile
      1. The comment was deleted.
    2. Hoist
      Hoist 21 May 2013 22: 23 New
      Tunguska is a formidable beauty.
      The carapace is a caterpillar disintegrator :)
  9. Bongo
    Bongo 20 May 2013 13: 48 New
    Unlike Shilka, the Tunguska did not take part in actual combat, except for the death of several vehicles as part of the notorious Maikop Brigade, when storming Grozny.
  10. viruskvartirus
    viruskvartirus 20 May 2013 16: 05 New
    What an interesting discussion ... and the characteristics declared by Pantsyr and Tunguska when compared? The Pantsyr missiles have a range of 18 km, altitudes up to 15 km and a maximum target speed of 1000 m / s, this is so to a minimum. So it turns out that Tunguska is half more modest. And about the chassis they say that when installing on a caterpillar, you have to cut it possible, so something like that. Who cares to delve into the forum airbase there it is described.
  11. fight
    fight 20 May 2013 16: 24 New
    the Tunguska-raw complex. M1 is better, but in the units. The missile is generally unsuccessful-shooting - the control principle is analogous to the ATGM, but in operator control it is even worse. and that’s all under the condition of the target’s immobility. I don’t understand how to shoot at high-speed in reality, although I heard a rumor that in the Emirates UMP breeders shot in this mode. 1904 30mm shots are very time-consuming to load, and with its high rate of fire it’s not enough for a long time. with long bursts, skew is possible, the tape breaks - the feed system from the boxes is not perfect. For personnel, a sufficiently low level of comfort - only mechanics warms the OV-65. there is air conditioning, but for some reason it never works)))))))) On Shilka, heat knobs with a spiral inside were provided. The radar complex consists of a target tracking station and a detection station. There are flaws in the SSC, and the computer deserves attention - a large number of failures. The best thing about the chassis complex. GM352 - mild running, maneuverability, reliability (if serviced in a timely manner), a sufficiently high-torque engine + a gas turbine engine is present. multi-fuel car- personally traveled on 76m gasoline. Conclusion: Bongo  Today, 13:48 New

    Unlike Shilka, Tunguska did not participate in real hostilities, except for the death of several cars in the infamous Maykop brigade during the storming of Grozny
    - I agree with the comment + its release was in the 90s, so because of the = small number of issues the crude car, but with great potential. I love her)))))))))
  12. egsp
    egsp 20 May 2013 18: 37 New
    I agree with you, luta, according to the stories of comrades who graduated from "LATUZA" - Tunguska is a good complex, but damp. A lot of things could be improved, altered, brought to mind.
  13. egsp
    egsp 20 May 2013 18: 49 New
    If you change Tunguska to Shell, then Shell should be on a caterpillar base.
  14. bublic82009
    bublic82009 20 May 2013 22: 40 New
    but have experience in its combat use?
  15. Conepatus
    Conepatus 20 May 2013 23: 07 New
    This combat experience was given to you. And what is the experience of Western samples large? As far as I remember, from the short-range complexes, only the Vulkan ZAK (USA) and the Naval-Crotal air defense system (France) have experience in using them.
    And all sorts of there "Cheetahs", "Rolands", "Rapiers" and

    other advertised dregs, they have no experience of fighting. But for some reason no one has any doubts that this is a good technique, although it will be older than "Tunguska".
    Only Soviet air defense systems have real combat experience, and positive and worthily appreciated by the enemy. "Shilka" is still afraid and, unless absolutely necessary, is not recommended to fly at heights, which "Shilka" can get, because it will be well. generation of aircraft, at least 5. You run into "Shilka" -zh about p a.
  16. old man54
    old man54 21 May 2013 18: 49 New
    I liked the article, it’s not true to comment on the case, because not such a great specialist in air defense matters, the more general air defense! And so ... to the author for his review and analysis, not a trivial one, "+".
  17. The comment was deleted.
  18. The comment was deleted.
  19. gregor6549
    gregor6549 22 May 2013 15: 33 New
    I don’t know who makes the chassis for Tunguska M now, but in Tunguska the chassis of the Minsk Tractor Plant was used. After the collapse of the Union, Minskers refused the product in vain, i.e. The Minsk Tractor, in cooperation with the NPO Agat, developed for this chassis a computer-based control system for all self-propelled units that could also exchange data with the weapons control system and, if necessary, take control of it. From this level of reservation, no one in Tunguska M would be ill.
    Now about Tunguska itself. She shoots impressively, he himself observed this shooting at the Donguz range in the Orenburg region. But there is one "but". The main instruments for target detection and weapon guidance at Tungusok are radars. This means that the entire Tunguska is a good beacon for PRS guided by radio emission. And the crew in a real combat situation will naturally have an idea: whether to turn off the radars and disrupt the process of intercepting the target but stay alive, or let them work and burn it all with fire. Of course, everyone will decide this issue for themselves, but it is difficult to say what the decision will be.
    It should also be taken into account that Tunguska will be able to detect from the carrier a PRS or supporting aircraft much sooner than she can detect them by radio emission. Moreover, the ability of Tunguska herself to detect PRSs going to her forehead and defeat him at safe distances for Tunguska is very, very limited.
    By the way, discussions about the expediency of combining radars with weapons "in one bottle" began during the Vietnam War with the appearance of "Shrikes" and these discussions continue to this day. But there is already a very clear tendency to the separation of these components in space and to the centralized issuance of such "shooters" of data "from the outside", i.e. with the air defense ACS, in order to minimize the radar radiation time on the shooters themselves. This is also a very dubious trend. All this centralized control and data exchange looks beautiful until the first real interference, EMP, PRS and other nasty things, which quickly turns a single information field of the ACS into torn rags and the PU and KShM of these ACS into a heap of rubbish.
  20. No_more
    No_more 23 May 2013 22: 56 New
    Eh, about the rockets I worry all the time. They are standing - Mama Do not Cry, of course cheaper than an airplane, but an unmanned vehicle, another missile are already commensurate in price. What am I leading to - is it worth it to finally create some kind of railgun, which, due to the flight speed of the projectile, will not need any guidance systems, because it’s just that nothing can maneuver, it’s necessary to calculate the maximum, and even the cost of a volley will be much less and it will not work out to deceive it as a missile guidance system.
  21. Cossack
    Cossack 8 June 2013 23: 11 New
    As a former commander of the "Tunguska" I will say: "The car is excellent!" Machine guns tear everything to pieces. Long bursts? Are you out of your mind? Half a second is enough to cut a 9-story building or something like that. I did not shoot combat missiles (very expensive) , but on a simulator (very natural) I shot down any targets at speeds up to 500 m / s (although at this speed it is already hard) and with any target maneuver. Controlling a rocket is elementary. The main experience.
    The radar station. It’s not hell to constantly keep the SOC in the emitting mode. A timely warning of a possible attack is the task of other units. If the enemy launched a PRR, then this is visible on the screen. One click on the button and the radiation operation stops. And then we’ll dump the gas to the floor from this place. Just let them first try to find the ZSU standing in ambush. When covering a column on a march or tanks on the battlefield, the car also works perfectly. Its task is the closest zone. Tunguska is the last frontier and the last defense of tankers. And for 20-50km other complexes should work with other charms. The main and most delicious goal for 2C6 is a spinner. And it copes with this task for 5+.
  22. OpForSoldier
    OpForSoldier 16 December 2013 18: 53 New
    In general, according to the performance characteristics and various data, we have before us a multifunctional machine. Powerful guns allow you to destroy helicopters, light vehicles and infantry (and if it’s impractical, then piston airplanes, ha). Missiles allow you to destroy planes.
    The main enemy is armored vehicles, the crew of which, however, is unlikely to withstand the drum roll of a long line of armor, entrenched infantry with ATGMs, and air defense systems.