Military Review

LAW C-75 in the XXI century

98



December 11 1957 By a decree of the Central Committee of the CPSU and USSR Council, the CA-75 “Dvina” anti-aircraft missile system with the 1D (B-750) missile was adopted by the USSR Central Committee and Soviet SM and the USSR Air Defense Forces (for more details: The first Soviet mass ZRK C-75 ).

The S-75 family of air defense systems for a long time formed the basis of the Soviet anti-aircraft missile forces and, after the appearance of the low-altitude C-125 and the long-range C-200, served in mixed brigades. The first Dvina complexes at the end of the 50s were deployed on the western borders of the USSR. At the personal request of Mao Zedong, several missile battalions, together with Soviet specialists, were sent to the PRC. Later they were deployed in the rear areas of the USSR around the administrative and industrial centers, the SA-75 "Dvina" covered Soviet troops in Cuba and in the Warsaw Pact countries.

LAW C-75 in the XXI century


7 of October 1959 of the year opened its battle score “seventy heels” by shooting down a high-altitude reconnaissance aircraft of the American production RB-57D in the vicinity of Beijing. Then, 1may 1960, under Sverdlovsk, they "landed" U-2 Gary Powers, and in 1962, over Cuba, their victim was U-2, Major Rudolph Anderson. Subsequently, C-75 of various modifications took part in numerous armed conflicts, having a great influence on the course and nature of the hostilities, becoming the most belligerent air defense missile system in the world (see details here: Combat use of C-75 anti-aircraft missile system).


The moment of defeat of ZUR B-750 SA-N SA-75 “Dvina” of the American fighter-bomber F-105


According to the results of the hostilities in Vietnam and the Middle East, in order to improve the operational and service and combat characteristics of the C-75 air defense system were repeatedly upgraded. The hardware of the complex was upgraded, new modifications of missiles were adopted, which made it possible to increase the noise immunity and expand the affected area. In order to increase the effectiveness of firing at low-flying maneuvering and high-speed small-sized targets, the 75Я2 rocket was introduced into the C – 5М23 (MH) complexes, which became the most effective missile defense system for the air defense system of this family.


C – 75М, C – 75М2, С – 75М3 attack zones when firing at B – 755, 5Я23


According to foreign estimates, in the first half of the 80's in the Soviet Union, about 4500 launchers of C-75 type complexes were deployed. As of the 1991 year in the USSR, in combat units and in “storage”, there were about 400 S-CN-75 air defense missile systems of various modifications. Production of missiles for these complexes continued until the mid 80-ies.

The issue of introducing solid-fuel or direct-flow rockets into the C-75 was repeatedly considered. Based on the experience of combat use, the military wanted to get a mobile multi-channel anti-aircraft complex with high fire performance and the possibility of firing at targets from any direction regardless of the position of the launcher. As a result, work on a major improvement in the C-75 led to the creation of the C-1978PT mobile air defense system in 300. The 5B55K (B-500K) SAM system with the radio command guidance system ensured the destruction of targets at a distance of up to 47 km. Although the launch range of the first C-300PT missiles was comparable to the latest C-75 variants, the three-hundred-thousand solid-propellant missiles did not require dangerous and complex refueling with liquid fuel and oxidizer. All C-300PT elements were placed on the mobile chassis, the time of combat deployment and coagulation of the complex was reduced many times, which ultimately had an impact on survival. The new complex, which came to replace the C-75, has become multichannel in purpose, its fire performance and noise immunity have significantly increased.

The operation of the C-75 SAMs of all modifications in Russia was completed in the 1996 year. Of course, by that time these complexes in many ways did not meet modern requirements, and a significant part of them had developed a resource. But those who have undergone refurbishment and modernization of the C – 75М2, C – 75М3 and relatively fresh C – 75М4, equipped with a television-optical viewfinder with a duplicate channel of the target and equipment “Doubler” with remote simulators of the CHP, could still, at least, 10 years guard on secondary directions or complement more advanced systems. Probably the longest on duty at the southwestern tip of the Novaya Zemlya archipelago, at least on satellite images of a decade ago, missile launchers for positions in the area can be observed. It is possible that the leadership of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation decided that leaving the complexes in positions is less expensive compared to their export to the "mainland".

From the second half of the 80-ies, the C-75 air defense system began to be transferred en masse to “storage” and “be utilized”. After 1991, this process in Russia took a precipitous character. Most of the transferred "for storage" complexes were dismantled, barbarically stolen electronic components containing non-ferrous and precious metals, however, this applied not only to C-75, but also to other military equipment left without proper care and protection. By the beginning of 2000-x most of the complexes C-75, located on the bases of storage, was rendered unsuitable for further use and was divided into scrap metal. A part of the anti-aircraft missiles that carried service in the USSR Air Defense Forces, the fate turned out to be happier, they were converted into target missiles: RM-75, Kite and Sinitsa-23. Re-equipment of combat missiles on a target that simulate enemy cruise and ballistic missiles has reduced costs during training and control shooting of air defense calculations and increased the level of realism during exercises.

In the interests of potential foreign customers at the end of 1990-x - the beginning of 2000-s, Russian developers proposed a number of modernization options that were supposed to increase the combat potential and increase the service life of the C-75 anti-aircraft systems remaining in service. The most advanced version of the Volga-75А C-2-2 modernization was based on the use of unified digital hardware, made using technical solutions implemented in the C-300PMU 1 export ZRS. According to the developer of the Volga C-75 air defense system, Almaz Scientific and Production Association, this modernization is most appropriate according to the “cost-effectiveness” criterion.

During Soviet times, around 800 C-75 of various modifications were supplied abroad. In addition to the direct supply of anti-aircraft complexes and missiles, the Soviet enterprises and mobile teams of specialists carried out medium and major overhaul of equipment and modernization in order to extend the resource and improve combat performance.


Launch of the romanian S-75М3 “Volkhov” missile at the Black Sea Corby range in 2007


The last deliveries of the C-75М3 Volga in 1987 were in Angola, Vietnam, South Yemen, Cuba and Syria. After 1987, only one Volkhov C-75М3 complex was supplied to Romania in 1988. Apparently, the complexes put for export in 1987-1988 are capitally repaired air defense systems, which were previously in service in the Soviet Union. Production of C-75 in our country ended in 1985 after the completion of Syrian and Libyan export orders. Some of these complexes, produced in 80-s, are still in use. So the Romanian C-75М3 “Volkhov” remained the only active air defense systems of this type in Europe. Three anti-aircraft missile battalions (sdn) are still deployed around Bucharest.


Satellite image of Google earth: the position of the C-75 SAM system in the vicinity of Bucharest


The С-75 complexes, which were available in the countries of Eastern Europe after their entry into NATO and in order to “integrate” into a single defense space, were scrapped. Some of those who are more fortunate have taken an honorable place in the exhibition displays of museums.


SAM missiles S-75 at the National Museum aviation and US cosmonautics


Surviving to the XXI century, "seventy-five" were exploited in the Middle East and North Africa. From Asian countries, they remained in the DPRK and in Vietnam (they are currently being replaced by S-300P and Israeli Spider air defense systems). In Cuba, some of the combat elements of the complex, such as the CHP-75 and PU, were transferred to the chassis tanks T-55. However, it raises doubts about the possibility of long-term transportation of rockets in rough form over rough terrain with significant vibration loads. The guidance station on the tracked chassis looks especially comical.


Cuban version of the modernization of the C-75


American aggression in Iraq and a series of internal armed conflicts in Arab countries have significantly reduced the fleet of capable C-75 systems. In 2003, in the course of Operation Iraqi Freedom, due to poor technical condition of the main Iraqi air defense missile system, the destruction of surveillance radars and the destruction of the command and control system, the C-75 anti-aircraft complexes of the coalition aircraft did not launch the aircraft. It was noted that several unguided missiles were launched in the direction of the advancing American troops. Most of the Iraqi air defense weapons were destroyed in the first days after the outbreak of hostilities during the preventive air strikes of American and British aircraft.



In the period from 1974 to 1986, Iraq received 46 C-75M and C-75М3, as well as 1336 B-755 and 680 B-759 missiles to them. According to US intelligence in the 2003, the 12 divisions were operational, and as a result, because of the passivity of the Iraqi command, they all turned into scrap metal.

During 10 years from 1975 to 1985 years from the Soviet Union 39 СРК 75М and С-75М3 and 1374 ЗРК В-755 and В-759 were delivered to Libya for them. From the second half of the 90-x, the Libyan leadership did not pay enough attention to the state of their own armed forces, and the entire air defense system built on Soviet patterns began to decline. In 2010, due to poor technical condition, the combat duty was carried no more than 10 complexes. After the start of the civil war in the 2011 year and the subsequent intervention of Western countries in it, the entire Libyan air defense system was first disorganized and then completely destroyed, failing to provide any noticeable resistance to the means of NATO air attack.


Satellite image of Google earth: the position of the destroyed Libyan ZRK C-75 in the vicinity of Tripoli


The Libyan anti-aircraft missile systems were either destroyed during air strikes and artillery and mortar attacks, or captured by the rebels. Part of the C-125 and Kvadrat solid-propellant missiles was redone for firing at ground targets, but rather cumbersome, requiring refueling with liquid fuel and oxidizer, the C-75 missiles are largely unsuitable for use. It was reported that the powerful 190 kg combat units of the C-75M Volga anti-aircraft missiles, giving more than 3500 debris, were used by the Islamists as land mines.

Syria was another major Middle Eastern C-75 operator. The number of air defense systems delivered to this country from the USSR is unprecedented. The C-75M and C-75М3 ADMS alone from 1974 to 1987 were transferred to 52 units. Also 1918 missiles B-755 / B-759 are supplied to these complexes.

Thanks to the presence of well-trained personnel in the country and the maintenance and repair base established with the help of the USSR, the Syrian air defense missile systems were maintained at a fairly high degree of combat readiness. The hardware of the complexes regularly underwent a refurbishment and a “small modernization”, and the missiles were sent to THAT in specially created arsenals. Before the start of the civil war in SAR, they were on combat duty around 30 S-75M / M3.


Satellite image of Google earth: the position of the Syrian ZRK C-75 in Tartus


Some of them still continue to serve in areas controlled by government forces. Most of the Syrian anti-aircraft systems were either evacuated to bases and airfields controlled by the government army, or destroyed during shelling. Their contribution to the destruction of the Syrian air defense system continues to make the Israeli Air Force, regularly striking at positions of the air defense system and radar in the border areas.

Before the cessation of military-technical cooperation with the Soviet Union, the following were delivered to Egypt: 2 SA-N-SA-75M Dvina, 32-ZRK C-75-Desna, 47 ZRK-75-M-D-NN and 8 Z-K-NNXX-Volga as well as about 75 rockets to them. These complexes have been used for a long time by the Egyptian air defense forces, most of them deployed along the Suez Canal. For the placement of elements of the complexes and combat calculations in Egypt, fortified concrete protective structures were built, capable of withstanding close breaks of large-caliber bombs.


Satellite image of Google earth: the position of the Egyptian air defense system C-75 on the Suez Canal


However, in view of the relations with the Soviet Union that were spoiled, in Egypt, as the air defense complexes developed their resources at the beginning of the 80s, the problem of their maintenance, repair and modernization was acute, which prompted the Egyptians to begin independent work in this direction. The main purpose of the work was the extension of the service life and modernization of the 600D missiles that were outdated at that time, and which had served the warranty periods, at 13. Specialists from the French company "Tomson-CSF" also connected to this topic. The modernized version of the Egyptian C-75 was called, in an oriental way, poeticly - "Thayr Al-Sabah" ("Morning Bird"). At present, approximately 25 upgraded “seventy-fiveyears” are deployed in positions in Egypt. In exchange for samples of Soviet missile and aviation equipment supplied to the People's Republic of China, the Chinese helped launch the production of missiles to Egypt for the existing C-75 air defense systems, which, along with the repair and modernization of the complexes, is the reason for their enviable longevity.

In the second half of January, 2016, a video appeared on the network, which allegedly captured the process of destroying the American drone by Yemeni air defense missile systems C-75. It is not clear where and when the low-quality shots were taken that captured the combat work of the air defense system P-18 radar, as well as the night launch of the missile and debris of unknown origin, issued for the downed UAV.



From 1980 to 1987, the year South and North Yemen (now it is a single state) received the 18 Volga C-75М3 air defense missile system, as well as more 600 missiles to them. Prior to that, 4 CA-75М Dvina and 136 B-750 missiles were delivered to South Yemen, but at the moment these complexes and the Zour are certainly not operational. As of 2010, the year in Yemen in working condition was no more than 10 C-75 ADMS.

Since 2006, fighting in Yemen has been unleashed between armed militants from the Shiite insurgent Ansar Alla movement (aka the Houthis) on the one hand and the pro-government armed forces and Saudi Arabia on the other. During the armed clashes, the Hussites managed to seize a number of key regions of the country and large military bases and seriously press the armed forces of a pro-American government. After a real prospect emerged that the Shiites would establish control over the entire territory of the country under the leadership of Saudi Arabia, an Arab coalition was formed, which launched 25 March 2015 of the year to launch air strikes against targets in Yemen. First of all, the Hussite-controlled air base in Sana and air defense facilities were bombed.


Satellite image of Google earth: destroyed as a result of an air strike Yemen s-radar C-75


Judging by the reports of news agencies and 2015 satellite images of the year, as a result of air strikes in the combat zone, not only the stationary positions of the C-75 and C-125 SAMs, but also the Kvadrat mobile military complexes were destroyed. In the conditions of the desert terrain and full control of the airspace of Saudi aviation, the outdated anti-aircraft complex has little chance of survival. C-75 air defense systems require long-term deployment with the installation of antenna posts and cable docking. Filling and loading missiles for launchers are quite complex and unsafe operations that require stable skills achieved during training. The characteristics of mobility, noise immunity and secrecy of the C-75 air defense system no longer correspond to modern realities. To date, Saudi fighter-bombers F-15SA are the most advanced in the F-15 family, they are equipped with additional weapon systems and EW. In addition, the C-75 air defense system cannot act on its own. For their successful combat work, the necessary means of reconnaissance of the air situation. Naturally, there can be no long-term radar network on the territory that is fighting for 10 years of Yemen. Surveillance radars P-18, delivered in 80-s together with the Soviet anti-aircraft complexes, also outdated and exhausted their resources. Radio intelligence assets available to the United States and the Arab coalition aviation are capable of easily locating such stations with their subsequent destruction.

As it is not sad, but the century of all modifications of the C-75 air defense system built in the USSR ends. Produced over 30 years ago, the complexes are at the limit of their technical resource. Even the newest B – 755 and 5Я23 missiles have many expired storage periods. As you know, after more than 10 years of service of the rocket, fueled by liquid fuel and oxidizer, began to flow and pose a serious danger to the initial calculations, to fix this problem requires repair and maintenance in the factory or arsenals. It is extremely doubtful that the third world countries, where there are still C-75 air defense systems, will find the means for the meaningless modernization of hopelessly outdated complexes, the resources of which have been exhausted. It seems much more expedient to spend money on modern mobile multichannel complexes, the maintenance of which will be much cheaper. It is no secret that the reason for the decommissioning of C-75 and C-200 air defense systems with liquid-propellant rockets in many countries was the high cost of operation, complexity and increased danger when handling toxic fuel and aggressive oxidizer.



Special mention deserve the Chinese version of the C-75 - HQ-2 (details here: Chinese anti-aircraft missile complex HQ-2). The Chinese clone C-75 for a long time was the basis of the PLA air defense troops, and its mass production continued until the end of 80's. According to its characteristics, the Chinese complex as a whole corresponded to the Soviet models with the 10-15 summer delay.



In the People's Republic of China, 100 HQ-2 air defense systems of various modifications and 5000 missiles were built. More than 30 divisions were exported to Albania, Iran and the DPRK, Pakistan and Sudan. Chinese-made HQ-2 air defense systems took part in hostilities during the Sino-Vietnamese conflicts in the 1979 and 1984 years, and were actively used by Iran during the Iran-Iraq war. Albania was the only NATO country where Chinese anti-aircraft complexes with Soviet roots served until 2014.

In China, the NQ-2 SAM system is gradually being replaced by more modern models. Complexes of this type mainly cover objects in the interior regions of the People's Republic of China and on secondary directions. The long service life of the Chinese HQ-2 is due to the modernization measures carried out in the second half of the 90-s, but in any case, this complex, as well as all modifications of the Soviet C-75, is currently outdated. The NQ-2 air defense system can be relatively effective in a local conflict against the aviation of countries that do not have modern means of RTR and EW. The Chinese NQ-2 air defense system is capable of complementing more modern anti-aircraft systems in the conditions of a developed, centralized air defense system, which we actually observe in the PRC.


Google Earth snapshot: passenger airliner flies over the position of the Chinese HQ-2 air defense system in the vicinity of Urumqi

On the basis of HQ-2 in Iran, at the end of 90-s, their own complex was created, which received the designation "Sayyad-1". In the spring of 2001, it was presented at an exhibition in Abu Dhabi. The next version of the Sayyad-2 SAM, created in the 2000, already had a combined radio command and infrared homing system. According to Iranian engineers and the military, this should increase the immunity and flexibility of the anti-aircraft complex.


Iranian anti-aircraft missile "Sayyad-1"


On the basis of C-75 missiles in different countries, work was carried out to create operational-tactical missile systems. Most likely, the Chinese were the first to implement such a project. At the end of the 70-x, the PLA’s DF-7 (M-7) entered into service with the PLA. In the second half of the 80-x began to replace it with more efficient complexes, and Chinese missiles were sold to Iran. Rocket DF-7 had an inertial control system that is resistant to external influences, and warhead weight 190 kg. Currently in Iran there are up to 30 mobile launchers for launching missiles of this type. The Iranian version of the rocket was called the Tondar, it has a firing range of up to 150 km and a warhead increased in comparison with the Chinese prototype.

The creation of similar systems was also carried out in North Korea, but the North Koreans needed a complex capable of delivering a nuclear warhead to a distance of more than 300 km and creating a ballistic missile based on the C-75 SAM missile system, concentrating on upgrading the Soviet 9K72 missiles. Elbrus "with a liquid rocket R-17.

The Indians turned out to be more original, they used the Z-V-750 propulsion system to create a mobile Prithvi-1 mobile missile with a launch range of up to 150 km and a 1000 kg warhead, radically reworking the rocket body, increasing engine thrust and increasing capacity fuel tanks. The next version of the Prithvi-2 with an even more forced engine and a half lightened warhead has a launch range of up to 250 km. These ballistic missiles, created using the technical solutions of 50’s Soviet anti-aircraft missiles, became the first Indian means of delivering nuclear weapons. weaponsnot vulnerable to air defense systems available to Pakistan.

In conclusion, I would like to note that the Soviet air defense systems of the C-75 family, the first samples of which appeared almost 60 years ago, had a great influence on the development of aviation and the course of military operations in the 20th century. The characteristics and modernization potential laid down in 50 by Soviet designers allowed the C-75 air defense system to remain in service with the air defense forces for many decades, as well as to be in demand on the world arms market. However, its time is running out, rockets on liquid fuel are everywhere being replaced by solid-fuel, new anti-aircraft complexes have high mobility, noise immunity and multiple channels on the target. In this regard, after 10 years we will be able to see the honored veteran C-75 only in the museum.

Based on:
http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-S-75-Volkhov.html
http://pro75555.myqip.ru/?1-17-0-00000011-000-0-0
http://bmpd.livejournal.com/257111.html
Author:
98 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. gispanec
    gispanec 8 February 2016 08: 39
    11
    dear seventy-five heels .... I remember that out of 10 attempts to keep within the minimization of the complex (standard) they could only once ((..... LVVPU PVO named after SE Andropov 88-89
    1. Amurets
      Amurets 8 February 2016 09: 02
      +6
      Quote: gispanec
      dear seventy-five heels .... I remember that out of 10 attempts to keep within the minimization of the complex (standard) they could only once ((..... LVVPU PVO named after SE Andropov 88-89

      Not you alone! In reality, it is impossible to meet the standard, since in our position he was almost stationary. On the surface there were only launchers, cabin "P" and SRTs
      1. gispanec
        gispanec 8 February 2016 09: 17
        +4
        Quote: Amurets
        It’s impossible to really meet the norm

        Do you remember the norm itself, ?? .... how much time is needed, ..))
        1. Amurets
          Amurets 8 February 2016 10: 12
          +8
          In my time, 2 hours or 120 minutes. Then they say from the experience of Vietnam they tightened it to 45 minutes. The norm of 1969. Moreover, this is a fighting position where all cables are hidden in the cable channels, closed and masked.
          1. gispanec
            gispanec 8 February 2016 10: 55
            +6
            )) exactly two hours and we did it 1 time thanks to the occasion)), but in fact, it’s better to shoot exactly on target and bring down until you cover .. the cost has paid for itself even in Vietnam ... well, now I think all the more ... By the way, where else are they on the database? are there such countries?
            1. Amurets
              Amurets 8 February 2016 11: 09
              0
              Quote: gispanec
              By the way, where else are they on the database? are there such countries?

              This year, a message flashed like a drone in Yemen S-75 failed.
              1. Bongo
                8 February 2016 12: 58
                +4
                Quote: Amurets
                This year, a message flashed like a drone in Yemen S-75 failed.

                Nikolay, this is most likely a fake! No. And in my opinion, the publication says in detail why. In addition, if you carefully watched a video with the alleged military launch of a Yemeni air defense system on an American ASL, you should have paid attention to the second at which the missile defense missile system was detonated. Knowing the flight time of the rocket, you can calculate at what altitude this happened and compare with the working altitude of the flight of American middle-class UAVs.
                1. twviewer
                  twviewer 8 February 2016 21: 53
                  0
                  Quote: Bongo
                  carefully watched the video with the alleged military launch of a Yemeni air defense system on an American anti-aircraft UAV, then I had to pay attention to what second there was an undermining of an anti-aircraft missile system. Knowing the flight time of the rocket, you can calculate at what altitude this happened

                  since when is the path traveled by an object in time t moving at a speed V in three-dimensional space equal to HEIGHT?
                  Nevertheless, your article was liked despite the frequent grammatical errors that sometimes change the essence of the sentence.
                  1. Bongo
                    9 February 2016 00: 29
                    +2
                    Quote: twviewer
                    since when is the path traveled by an object in time t moving at a speed V in three-dimensional space equal to HEIGHT?

                    Knowing the angle of launch of the missile launcher (in the video), the flight time and the speed of the rocket, you can accurately determine at what height the target was hit.
                    1. twviewer
                      twviewer 9 February 2016 04: 46
                      0
                      Quote: Bongo
                      Knowing the angle of launch of the missile launcher (in the video), the flight time and the speed of the rocket, you can accurately determine at what height the target was hit.

                      if you prove it to you nobel laughing for the movement is not on the plane and indirectly, moreover, the object to which it strives also moves indirectly and not on the plane, for example from SAM
                      So you drop this primitivism, compose unnecessarily
                      1. Bongo
                        9 February 2016 05: 17
                        +3
                        Quote: twviewer
                        if you prove this to you, the Nobel shines because the movement is not on the plane and is not linear, in addition, the object to which it tends, also moves indirectly and not on the plane, for example from SAM

                        Excuse me, did you watch the video carefully? SAM missed there almost no maneuver and approximately determine the height of the undermining of warheads is not particularly difficult.
                        Quote: twviewer
                        So you drop this primitivism, compose unnecessarily

                        But forgive me this is too much negative Do not tell others what they need to do and you will never know where you should go. hi
                      2. twviewer
                        twviewer 9 February 2016 06: 03
                        -5
                        Quote: Bongo
                        what they need to do and you will never know where you should go. hi

                        calculations in the studio talkative you are my laughing
                      3. Bongo
                        9 February 2016 06: 07
                        +3
                        Quote: twviewer
                        calculations in the studio talkative you are my

                        Thank god not yours fool
                        The rocket was launched at an angle of more than 45 degrees, while flying almost straightforwardly. Knowing the speed of its flight in the active section (about 3M), it is not difficult to calculate the height at which the warhead was detonated. Or is it difficult for you?
                      4. twviewer
                        twviewer 9 February 2016 06: 12
                        0
                        Quote: Bongo
                        Thank god not your fool

                        paper, sir, paper, I can assume the error order, but it seems you haven’t, and nobody canceled the laws of physics.
                        Well, how will the evidence be? Or do we still compose ?!
                      5. Bongo
                        9 February 2016 06: 23
                        +2
                        Quote: twviewer
                        Well, how will the evidence be? Or do we still compose ?!

                        Problem for the third class, are not able to? fool
                      6. twviewer
                        twviewer 9 February 2016 06: 26
                        -4
                        Quote: Bongo
                        Problem for the third class, are not able to? fool

                        well, decide intellect laughing
                      7. twviewer
                        twviewer 9 February 2016 06: 45
                        -2
                        Quote: twviewer
                        well, so decide, flashing intellect

                        all this is even funnier, because asserting that this is not a UAV, you already have these calculations have were to do.
                      8. Bongo
                        9 February 2016 12: 33
                        +4
                        Quote: twviewer
                        all this is even more amusing, since asserting that it is not a UAV, you should already have done these calculations.

                        Why did you dear decide that I owe someone something, except for the parents and my children of course fool Well, since this task is insurmountable for you, especially out of respect for you as a visitor to the VO website, I will give elementary formulas from the course of elementary school.

                        Given that the SAM in the video moved almost in a straight line and, according to my estimates, it was launched at an angle of 40 to 60 degrees, at least this problem can be solved in three ways:
                        1. to determine the height of the defeat of the target, you can apply the following formula:


                        2. You can also apply the Pythagorean theorem:
                        [Center]

                        3. Graphically (this is yourself)
                        At the same time, from the moment the rocket was launched at an angle of 60 degrees, to the undermining of the warhead missiles, approximately 15 seconds passed, during which time the rocket moving almost in a straight line flew about 11000 meters and exploded at an altitude of more than 9000 meters. As you know, middle-class American UAVs at this altitude usually do not fly. hi
                      9. twviewer
                        twviewer 9 February 2016 13: 17
                        -7
                        Quote: Bongo
                        At the same time, from the moment the rocket was launched at an angle of 60 degrees, to the undermining of the warhead missiles, approximately 15 seconds passed, during which time the rocket moving almost in a straight line flew about 11000 meters and exploded at an altitude of more than 9000 meters. As you know, middle-class American UAVs at this altitude usually do not fly. hi

                        you are a funny person, neither a mathematician, nor an engineer, you basically distinguish a plane from 3D, you didn’t see anything about the laws of resistance and attraction, either about the principles of automatic control - but the rocket flew in a straight line :) do not tell anyone else - they will laugh
                      10. Bongo
                        9 February 2016 14: 25
                        +5
                        Quote: twviewer
                        but the rocket flew in a straight line :) do not tell anyone else - they will laugh

                        Have you watched a video in a publication? Or is your intuition so developed?
                      11. twviewer
                        twviewer 9 February 2016 15: 46
                        -4
                        Quote: Bongo
                        Have you watched a video in a publication? Or is your intuition so developed?

                        Of course I looked, and my intuition has nothing to do with it - rockets do not move in space in a straight line, and even along the coordinate axis, then you are able to understand: put a plane out of paper and let it go around the room, maybe this will wake your mind
                      12. opus
                        opus 9 February 2016 17: 35
                        +7
                        Quote: twviewer
                        missiles do not move in space in a straight line, and even along the coordinate axis, then you are able to understand:

                        It depends on which coordinate system to take.
                        It (SAM) can generally "stand" if you bind To to the CM, and combine one of the axes with the SAM speed vector.
                        In the video (from the angle that the shooting was carried out) it "seems" (because it is generally dark) that the flight is straightforward. I would like to have an angle from a point perpendicular to the Target-SNR plane
                        Quote: Bongo
                        knowing the speed of its flight in the active section (about 3M), calculate the height at which the warhead was detonated

                        in principle, it should be considered as follows (with a straight flight of missiles):
                        H = sinA (ang.viz. On Ts) xS
                        S = V1xT1 + V2xT2
                        T1- operating time of the GHL-58, T2 marshavik
                        V1 = A1xT1, A1- acceleration PRD-58
                        V2 = A2xT2, A2 - marshavik acceleration
                        I can send charts A1 (2) from time to time, you can take the average
                        ===========================
                        I’m happy to go with both of you
                        wink
                        , i.e. I will argue.
                        Just explain what the "salt" is?
                        By sight (by video) my opinion is self-liquidation, time does not converge (60 + 3 sec), conclusion: video slicing-fake
                        How it actually flies SAM (no matter what) from the S-75 can be seen here:

                      13. opus
                        opus 9 February 2016 17: 39
                        +5
                        And so "to refresh" the memory:
                        For S-75, a new method was developed for pointing missiles at a target (under the leadership of Yu.V. Afonin and V.G. Tsepilov) - the so-called half straightening method.
                        The flight path of the missile was calculated based on the flight parameters (speed, range, altitude, direction of flight) determined with the help of radar means SNR and was directed to an intermediate calculated point located between the current target position or the calculated meeting point.


                        The three-point method is the guidance method, according to which the rocket should be on a straight line during the entire flight to the targetconnecting the control point to the target.
                        PS is a "subspecies" of the TT method.




                      14. twviewer
                        twviewer 9 February 2016 20: 54
                        0
                        Quote: opus
                        I’m happy to go with both of you
                        wink

                        laughing not well, it’s impossible, only I slept well, and you took the opponent the whole truth and dumped the uterus. Still explain about self-liquidation, I counted 30 seconds.
                        And the argument was actually about the control method with the correction and influence of the trajectory of the target on the trajectory of the rocket space.
                        Welcome. Although what a dispute is now.
                        Judging by the video, the half-straightening method is very similar. THX.
                        It's generally below the waist - laughing
                        Quote: opus
                        It depends on which coordinate system to take.
                        It (SAM) can generally "stand" if you bind To to the CM, and combine one of the axes with the SAM speed vector.
                      15. opus
                        opus 9 February 2016 22: 00
                        +6
                        Quote: twviewer
                        the whole uterus was thrown out.

                        Ivan Ivanovich ...
                        the whole truth would be like this:


                        But I didn't risk it, I would be "praised" again

                        belay
                        (Yes, and no one would understand anything)

                        Quote: twviewer
                        , I counted 30 seconds.

                        Well, yes, I am the same (I also have 1: 05-0: 37 (or 0:47 I forgot))
                        Self-liquidation 11D (13D) 60sec + 3sec (RV "Bumblebee")
                        It would seem to me that this is video slicing (well, let's stick it together in Aimersoft Video Editor)
                        Here, according to the flight profile (although what kind of profile is there, we only see the torch) and such a "kind of detonation" (no detonation of the aircraft TC, target fragments, burning of fragments - well, I don't see) it looks like a demonstration: start-up, self-destruction.
                        IT IS NOT IN Vain that there is no light on the CHP indicators! (for some reason they don’t show it to us).
                        It would be clearly visible: self-destruction, or hit.
                        Quote: twviewer
                        And the argument was about the management method

                        Well, if so, then I'm in pieces of the presentation and answered
                        Quote: twviewer
                        It's generally below the waist -

                        Come on ... This is "new" sechas (Dzhevanshirov Pavel Fikretovich, the leading engineer of the non-existent OJSC "GSKB ..., intensely the topic" method of controlling missiles using information about accelerating targets relative to missiles"promotes)

                        Give me "freedom" I would: intercept an aerodynamic target with a rocket depicted:

                        wink:
                        this "below ..." would be, yes
                        ------------
                        Quote: twviewer
                        there is now an argument.

                        All right, otherwise you were already limited by each other with limited nuclear weapons.
                      16. twviewer
                        twviewer 9 February 2016 22: 55
                        0
                        Quote: opus
                        you are already limited to each other nuclear weapons were ready to inflict

                        this is unlikely, the sense of the demarche was to convey why the rocket, under the influence of external forces, is obliged to make a correction, and therefore to change the trajectory, and even from changing the parameters of the target’s movement, even more so, but somehow it didn’t ...
                        those to make reason, not to parrot
                        Quote: opus
                        (Yes, and no one would understand anything)

                        Nonsense, etozh Soviet training manual for the military, and therefore simple and understandable laughing
                        Quote: opus
                        Come on ... This is "new" sechas (Dzhevanshirov Pavel Fikretovich intensively promotes the topic "method of controlling missiles using information about target acceleration relative to missiles")

                        and if the missiles have two and two targets whose trajectories intersect? what then?
                      17. twviewer
                        twviewer 9 February 2016 23: 28
                        0
                        Quote: opus
                        wink:
                        this "below ..." would be, yes

                        Composite graphs are inconvenient for perception, it is more convenient to use acceleration, proximity, etc. coefficients on the main
                      18. opus
                        opus 9 February 2016 23: 32
                        +6
                        Quote: twviewer
                        and if the missiles have two and two targets whose trajectories intersect? what then?

                        1. It is unlikely that there will be a simultaneous launch, and even in one sector.
                        2. If intersect, then in space,but NOT IN TIME?

                        3. and whose trajectories "intersect": missiles or targets?

                        need to ask.

                        While MATLAB / Simulink is hard at work: SAM-Target "sliding" mode methods split up.
                        Actually, works and publications on MCP (even in the textile industry) say that we are ready for the same hit-to-kill
                      19. twviewer
                        twviewer 9 February 2016 23: 45
                        0
                        speech about goals
                        intersect in space and time, the delta is small
                      20. opus
                        opus 10 February 2016 00: 36
                        +6
                        Quote: twviewer
                        intersect in space and time, the delta is small

                        If stopped at the coordinates at some point in time T = Tc1 = Tc2


                        SAM is no longer needed.
                        Disruption of Ace, SAM on self-destruction.
                      21. twviewer
                        twviewer 10 February 2016 00: 54
                        0
                        Quote: opus
                        SAM is no longer needed.

                        maneuver throwing false targets
                      22. opus
                        opus 10 February 2016 01: 59
                        +5
                        Quote: twviewer
                        maneuver throwing false targets

                        АРGOS is not an IR GOS, its "butts" will not drive "crazy"

                        Simulate a large EPR with small sized false targets?
                        1. Corner reflectors should have a relatively large size, and their use on small-sized false targets (LC) impossible.
                        LC for simulating objects with large EPR, for example, ships, can be used a device that is structurally a flying synthetic bottle from Mylar filled with light gas, on the surface of which dipole reflectors are uniformly located by the type of Van Atta antenna array. They are made in the form of printed circuits and are connected by communication cables ...
                        2. A remotely piloted carrier vehicle (ДПЛАН) of several false radar targets, with beveled planes that provide its longitudinal rotation around the axis to change the ESR in flight?
                        not every aircraft will fit
                        I heard that there is a passive LC in the form of a rocket that moves at the speed of a bomber. It simulates: yaw, rotation, linear longitudinal dimensions of a simulated bomber.
                        But its mass-dimensional characteristics are comparable with AQM-34 H, YMQNJ-105 or on hk with MSM-107 ...


                        The amplitudes of the reflected signals from the aircraft are characterized by large fluctuations at different heading angles.

                        For a very complex purpose - even very small changes in the heading angle lead to significant changes in the amplitude of the reflected signal. In the same way, minor changes in the frequency or polarization of the emitted signal produce significant fluctuations in the amplitude of the reflected signal.

                        Decision:
                        The recording of signals reflected from the target and received by the GOS during the flight time in the EPROM of the ARGSN BK (or ZUR BK) makes it possible to track the dynamics of the target heading angle and can serve as a means of identifying it against the LC background using this "saved" standard.

                        NOTE: almost all LCs are low-speed ...
      2. twviewer
        twviewer 12 February 2016 01: 45
        -2
        strange minusers from those that have geometry in 3m :) class passed
        they cannot distinguish an angle of 60 from 30, 15 seconds from 30, a straight line from a spiral, a plane from space, and there, snotty theories to build
        look what is a differential, kapitsa
  2. gladcu2
    gladcu2 12 February 2016 15: 06
    -2
    Bongo
    On approaching the target, 75 cannot maneuver. They simply break from overload.

    Started at 75 was. So we were told.
  • Bongo
    8 February 2016 12: 54
    +8
    Quote: gispanec
    Well, now I think all the more ... by the way, where else are they on the database? are there such countries?

    Guys, with all due respect belay Have you read this publication at all? request For whom did I try, or is it not clearly articulated there? request
    1. Lt. Air Force stock
      Lt. Air Force stock 8 February 2016 12: 59
      +1
      The downside is that the S-75 is stationary. A quick change of position after repelling an air threat will fail.
      1. Amurets
        Amurets 8 February 2016 14: 10
        +5
        Sergei! I read carefully, did not duplicate about Bucharest. About the drone just did not analyze.
        Quote: Lt. air force reserve
        The downside is that the S-75 is stationary. A quick change of position after repelling an air threat will fail.

        With liquid fuel and the dimensions of the S-75 air defense missile system, it is better to stand in the hospital. In our division there was a case when the rocket broke between the tanks when they looked at the clutch of the lock of the semi-trailer. It is good that there were no serious consequences besides the fracture.
        1. Bongo
          8 February 2016 14: 18
          +6
          Quote: Amurets
          Sergei! I read carefully, did not duplicate about Bucharest. About the drone just did not analyze.

          Nikolay, in the publication all the countries in which the S-75 survived to the 21st century are listed.
          Quote: Amurets
          With liquid fuel and the dimensions of the S-75 air defense missile system, it is better to stand in a hospital.

          You can’t argue with that yes
          Quote: Amurets
          In our division there was a case when a rocket broke between the tanks when they looked at the clutch of the lock of the semi-trailer. It is good that there were no serious consequences except the fracture.

          Yes, it is hard to imagine how severe the consequences could have been if the fuel had mixed with the oxidizing agent. belay
          By the way, you didn’t answer my question, well, or I didn’t understand you request How toxic was the S-75 and S-200 rocket fuel?
          I witnessed fuel pouring in the winter, and they cleaned it along with snow in gas masks and protective suits.
          1. Amurets
            Amurets 8 February 2016 15: 01
            +7
            Quote: Bongo
            By the way, you did not answer my question, well, or I didn’t understand you request. How toxic was the S-75 and S-200 rocket fuel?
            I witnessed fuel pouring in the winter, and they cleaned it along with snow in gas masks and protective suits.

            Sergey! Thank you for writing about this. When I answered, you had already left the Internet and someone's provider did not save mail. Now for fuel. TG-02 "Samin" fuel was used for the air defense missile system. Here is a link to the composition of the fuel. yes, work in chemical protection, in Vietnam, as the war veterans write, when refueling, they managed only with gas masks. Moderately dangerous. MPC in air is 3 mg / per cubic meter. Look in the wiki there is TG-02 fuel. There are all varieties and degrees of danger. calmly not like an oxidizer. Well, you know how you treated an oxidizer, with respect.
            1. Bongo
              8 February 2016 15: 06
              +4
              Quote: Amurets
              .Now on fuel. The SAM used fuel TG-02 "Samin". Here is a link to the composition of the fuel. The requirements for safety and work in chemical protection, in Vietnam, as the war veterans write, when refueling, they managed only with gas masks. Moderately dangerous. MPC in the air 3mg / per cubic meter. Look in the wiki there is TG-02 fuel. There are all varieties and degrees of danger. They treated it calmly, not like an oxidizer. Well, you know how they treated an oxidizer, with respect.

              Well, I assumed yes You and I already discussed TG-02 once, in some publication where it was about R-17 missiles.
            2. Amurets
              Amurets 8 February 2016 15: 19
              +2
              Quote: Bongo
              Well, I thought so yes. You and I already discussed TG-02 somehow, in some publication where it was about R-17 missiles.

              Yes! Basically, it is dangerous at high concentrations. For our happiness, the army didn’t get the fuel with the Pentaboran-9 additive. It’s still bad. It was used on experimental rocket engines to increase traction.
          2. Bongo
            8 February 2016 15: 29
            +3
            Quote: Amurets
            When I answered, you have already left the Internet and someone has not saved your mail.

            I sent you a letter there, with some details regarding my education, but this is so, not for the "general public", I think you understand.
          3. Amurets
            Amurets 8 February 2016 15: 46
            +3
            Sergei! There is also the answer.
          4. Bongo
            9 February 2016 00: 27
            +2
            Quote: Amurets
            Sergei! There is also the answer.

            Nikolay, again I haven’t received anything from you! request
        2. gladcu2
          gladcu2 12 February 2016 15: 19
          +3
          Bongo

          There is no doubt in your education. That coupling with the interlocutor regarding the Pythagorean theorem is nonsense. There are types that cling to the little things.
    2. sso-xnumx
      sso-xnumx 8 February 2016 15: 11
      +1
      Quote: Bongo
      How toxic was the S-75 and S-200 rocket fuel?

      Asymmetric dimethylhydrazine (UDMH, heptyl [2], 1,1-dimethylhydrazine) (English Unsymmetrical dimethylhydrazine, UDMH) is a component of high-boiling (having a boiling point above 0 ° C) rocket fuel. Nitrogen tetraoxide (AT), pure or mixed with nitric acid, is often used as an oxidizing agent in conjunction with UDMH; cases of the use of pure acid and liquid oxygen are known. To improve properties, it can be used in a mixture with hydrazine, known as aerosin. [3]
      It has a strong toxic and mutagenic effect (for example, it is four times more toxic than hydrocyanic acid). Effect on the human body: irritation of the mucous membranes of the eyes, respiratory tract and lungs; strong excitement of the central nervous system; upset gastrointestinal tract (nausea, vomiting), in high concentrations, loss of consciousness may occur.
      1. Bongo
        8 February 2016 15: 14
        +2
        Quote: sso-250659
        Asymmetric dimethylhydrazine (UDMH, heptyl [2], 1,1-dimethylhydrazine)

        Thanks of course ... hi But "heptyl" was not used in our serial liquid missiles of the C-75 and C-200 complexes No. I asked specifically about the TG-02.
    3. dakty
      dakty 8 February 2016 17: 23
      +3
      According to an acquaintance who served at a similar facility: around the warehouse where fuel was stored within a radius of 200m, even grass did not grow ... For what "I bought", for that "I sold". But I am inclined to believe him, knowing the wild toxicity of heptyl.
      In general, I want to say thank you for another very interesting article !!!
      1. opus
        opus 8 February 2016 21: 03
        +3
        Quote: dakty
        around the warehouse where fuel was stored in a radius of 200m, even the grass did not grow ..


        WHERE TO GO?
        This is the technology (I don’t remember the alkali for fire fighting or flushing ..):

        Yes, and shed a lot ..
        as well as transported by DOP.
    4. opus
      opus 9 February 2016 18: 28
      +4
      Quote: Bongo
      How toxic was the S-75 and S-200 rocket fuel?

      S-75 "is resting compared to S-200

      Quote: Bongo
      I witnessed fuel pouring in the winter, and they cleaned it along with snow in gas masks and protective suits.

      What spilled O or G?
      O (73% HNO3, 17,5-22,5% N2O4, 0,5-0,75% HF, 1,0-1,3% H3PO4, 2,1% H2O with crystalline iodine): fresh water (marine prohibited), or some water with soap


      T (Tonka-250): pour lime, pour kerosene, gasoline. or set fire


      Threat and then where did you divide the snow? wink
      1. Bongo
        10 February 2016 09: 46
        +3
        Quote: opus
        What spilled O or G?

        Fuel of course, the oxidizing agent itself would have evaporated.
        Quote: opus
        Threat and then where did you divide the snow?

        They drove away and poured into a ravine, in the spring this snow melted, and meltwater slid into the sea.
  • gladcu2
    gladcu2 12 February 2016 15: 13
    +2
    Lt.

    75 has already fulfilled its role.

    Modern methods of war will not give a chance even for the first shot. So the Romanian 75 is nonsense.

    Here even the mobile Ukrainian Buk were discovered, which means they were conditionally amazed.
  • opus
    opus 8 February 2016 19: 48
    +5
    Quote: Bongo
    For whom did I try, or is it not clearly articulated there?

    For us.Who needs.
    Thanks. Read.
    Thanks to you, I updated my knowledge of nuclear weapons, now you are restoring your "native" hi

    already warmed up in my soul, as I remembered:

    =======================
    From myself "dokin" a pebble (SAM S-75 in the XXI century) on M5 (sorry for the S-300 ate M5 just like that)





    PS:
    Report."Guidance accuracy and the probability of hitting targets F-4, SR-71, B-52, KRM and targets of the MIG-17 type by anti-aircraft missiles V-755SU and B-759". (Implementation of the Commission's comments on the GI SAM S-75M4).Mlyn sowed somewhere.

    And on M4: SAM S-300P with "command" missile "K" were inferior to S-75M4.
    For example, the S-300’s long range of defeat is 45 km, the S-75M4’s -56 km, the S-300’s upper limit is 25 km, and the S-75M4’s 35 km, but in the end, the S-300P was adopted and the S-75M4 took place, although it passed the state tests in full.
  • Amurets
    Amurets 9 February 2016 05: 41
    +5
    Quote: Bongo
    Guys, with all due respect belay Have you ever read this publication? request For whom did I try, or is it not clearly articulated there? request

    Sergey! You just don’t understand what kind of business you are doing. This is our story, this is our life. Yes, damn shoot with this drone, they didn’t knock down, the soul warms, it’s like the legacy of our youth is alive. Anton is a thousand times right
    Quote: opus

    For us. Who needs.
    Thanks. Read.
    Thanks to you, I updated my knowledge of nuclear weapons, now you are restoring your "native" hi

    already warmed up in my soul, as I remembered:

    Do you think I have different feelings? These are the same. As they served with half-battery calculations, the second was building a new position, as they slept in arms with carbines at military posts, because Damansky had already died out, and the conflict in Kazakhstan on August 13 was still ahead and at least this is far from the Far East, but they were waiting for another one in the Far East, and 667A missile carriers were urgently built on the slipway stockpiles because the Pacific Fleet needed them to keep the PRC from war. Few people now remember how it was and what it could lead to. Thank you for reminding us of our youth and how we are uzhili. I replied to the letter. Look in the mail.
    1. Bongo
      9 February 2016 05: 47
      +2
      Quote: Amurets
      Sergey! You just don’t understand what kind of business you are doing. This is our story, this is our life.

      I understand perfectly, Nikolay! drinks
      Quote: Amurets
      This is our story, this is our life. To hell with this drone, they didn’t bring down the gun, it warms the soul, it’s like the legacy of our youth is alive. Anton is a thousand times right

      Anton is definitely right! yes But please answer me, can you determine the altitude of the warhead warhead at what altitude the night shots of the rocket launch on which the drone allegedly shot down? Or I'm wrong? what
      Quote: Amurets
      Do you think I have different feelings? These are the same. As they served with half-battery calculations, the second was building a new position, as they slept in arms with carbines at military posts, because Damansky had already died out, and the conflict in Kazakhstan on August 13 was still ahead and at least this is far from the Far East, but they were waiting for another one in the Far East, and 667A missile carriers were urgently built on the slipway stockpiles because the Pacific Fleet needed them to keep the PRC from war. Few people now remember how it was and what it could lead to. Thank you for reminding us of our youth and how we are uzhili.

      good
      Quote: Amurets
      Look in the mail.

      Sorry, I haven’t received anything from you request
    2. opus
      opus 9 February 2016 17: 53
      +6
      Quote: Amurets
      Do you think I have other feelings?

      I now want the kids (mine in any case), the same had "the right feeling"
      My younger one came from school and solves my father’s task:

      What kind of pepelats is this (how's the angle?)?
      and this one:

      / I didn’t give hints, I determined it by TPK No. 1, and then I’m tormented, the angle is such a test, I don’t know at all about No. 2)

      (I need to take him to air defense systems ... where else can you see rockets among residential buildings?)

      ----------------------------------
      Quote: Bongo
      But please answer me, can you determine the altitude of the warhead warhead at what altitude the night shots of the rocket launch on which the drone allegedly shot down?

      I wrote to you. Theoretically (on my knee, it's pretty good) you can, but at night, no trace is visible.
      Slicing it, 99% sure
  • opus
    opus 8 February 2016 19: 34
    +5
    Quote: Amurets
    This is a fighting position where all cables are hidden in cable channels, closed and masked.

    it all depends on the soil ...
    look here

    see:

    !
    If the soil is wet then:


    Quote: Amurets
    In my time, 2 hours or 120 minutes. Then they say from the experience of Vietnam tightened to 45 minutes.

    I don’t remember the norm word Chess. But it’s dreary.
    and the cable layer will not help.

    checked. Kilometers ...
    1. Amurets
      Amurets 9 February 2016 00: 33
      +5
      Quote: opus

      it all depends on the soil ...
      look here

      This book is familiar, but it’s a field deployment. With us, in the first and second positions, the equipment was in reinforced concrete ramps and the cable routing through the walls required careful removal of the cable network, otherwise the cable could be damaged, especially coaxial. You are right there you can’t let it go, but in principle, the UAZ of the cable layers was used as the 2nd transport vehicle. In winter, we had to change the control cable to the launch cable and at those temperatures that were in our position, the cable was heated for 20 hours on the DCT. I don’t remember exactly how for some reason, but I remember for sure that it was possible to shoot 20DS and 1970DP rockets. That was in February-March XNUMX.
      Quote: opus
      From myself "dokin" a pebble (SAM S-75 in the XXI century) on M5 (sorry for the S-300 ate M5 just like that)

      Thanks for the addition. I saw the M-5 in the photo, but I saw the test report for the first time, although the conclusion with the recommendation for adoption was on the Internet.
      1. opus
        opus 9 February 2016 01: 22
        +4
        Quote: Amurets
        We have that in the first, in the second position the equipment was in reinforced concrete ramps and the cable routing through the walls required careful removal of the cable network, otherwise the cable could be damaged, especially coaxial

        Compared to our C-200V ... everyone is "resting" request
        retro papers





        Shl ... I'll go to my wife to check how she copes with the "standards" or again it is necessary to train
        Quote: Amurets
        but the test report saw n

        I can send, but there LLC is very small. 3 files (good) are damaged, cannot be restored.
        1. Amurets
          Amurets 9 February 2016 02: 03
          +4
          Quote: opus
          Compared to our C-200V ... everyone is "resting"

          In 1970, our regiment was shooting off a new S-200A, so the guys who were there said it took them a week to deploy and collapse the 3-channel S-200A air defense system, but the packaging and masking of the platforms were true. They brought it across the country to Komsomolsk . It seems that it was the first S-200 installed in the Far East.
  • opus
    opus 9 February 2016 01: 51
    +6
    Quote: Amurets
    In my time, 2 hours or 120 minutes. Then, according to the experience of Vietnam, they tightened it to 45 minutes. The 1969 standard.


    After 1971 work to reduce the time r / s not carried out.

    and it all "crawled" and crawled
  • Amurets
    Amurets 8 February 2016 08: 53
    +5
    Sergei! Hello! I’ll write something that didn’t come up in the draft comments. The Arabs and Israelis delivered the most terrible blow to the S-75. Here in this book I saw for the first time a mention of the capture of the SA-75 by the Israelis.
    http://royallib.com/book/arkangelic_mario/radioelektronnaya_voyna_ot_tsusimi_do_

    livana_i_folklendskih_ostrovov.html
    Perhaps this is a fake, but the fact that by 1973 the Americans in Vietnam and the Israelis in the Sinai began to use aiming active interference suggests that they got the algorithms of the SNR. The capture by the Israelis of the SRTs P-12 does not mean anything. The SRC and SRC are different frequency. What is it for? And to the fact that Operation "Desert Storm" and other wars in the BV and North Africa, NATO had a full set of electronic countermeasures. This is what the link to which I gave in the book is written about. Well, the C-75 is a relic, the first air defense missile system that has the largest number of real destroyed targets. And I am pleased that I had to serve on the C-75M-1 Volkhov air defense system. And there was also an experienced M-2 air defense system, which underwent trial operation on the Black Sea Fleet cruiser Dzerzhinsky but did not satisfy the sailors with its massive dimensions. For this air defense system, the B-757 rocket was created, which differed in the way it was located on the launcher. The description of the complex is in Shirokorad's book "The cruisers that Khrushchev destroyed."
    1. Bongo
      8 February 2016 13: 03
      +2
      Quote: Amurets
      Sergei! Hello! I’ll write something that didn’t come up in the draft comments. The most terrible blow to the S-75 was inflicted by Arabs and Israelis.

      Nikolay, I unfortunately did not receive your comments on the draft request
      Quote: Amurets
      Perhaps this is a fake, but the fact that by 1973 the Americans in Vietnam and the Israelis in the Sinai began to use aiming active interference suggests that they got the algorithms of the SNR. The capture by the Israelis of the SRTs P-12 does not mean anything. The SRC and SRC are different frequency. What is it for? And to the fact that Operation "Desert Storm" and other wars in the BV and North Africa, NATO had a full set of electronic countermeasures. This is what the link to which I gave in the book is written about. Well, the C-75 is a relic, the first air defense missile system that has the largest number of real destroyed targets. And I am pleased that I had to serve on the C-75M-1 Volkhov air defense system. And there was also an experienced M-2 air defense system, which underwent trial operation on the Black Sea Fleet cruiser Dzerzhinsky but did not satisfy the sailors with its massive dimensions. For this air defense system, the B-757 rocket was created, which differed in the way it was located on the launcher. The description of the complex is in Shirokorad's book "The cruisers that Khrushchev destroyed."

      I know all this yes In my opinion, Soviet designers could not help but realize that the characteristics of the complex after being delivered to the Arabs would be quickly revealed by a potential adversary. And this would happen even if the Israelis were not able to capture elements of the complex. Do not forget that after cooling relations with the USSR, the Egyptians shared Soviet equipment with everyone.
      1. Amurets
        Amurets 8 February 2016 14: 26
        +2
        Quote: Bongo
        All this I know. Yes. In my opinion, Soviet designers could not help but realize that the characteristics of the complex after being delivered to the Arabs would be quickly revealed by a potential adversary. And this would happen even if the Israelis were not able to capture elements of the complex. Do not forget that after cooling relations with the USSR, the Egyptians shared Soviet equipment with everyone.

        I understand that you know this, but for some it will probably be news to you that the S-75 (M-2) was also a marine version, but it unsettled the sailors with its dimensions and liquid fuel.
        Now, about Egypt! The Egyptians therefore began to sell air defense systems to anyone that the Egyptian version came to the United States. Yes, I answered the fuel question by mail yesterday, it was too late whether I received it or not. There’s already a concrete answer on the interceptor and C- 75.
        1. Bongo
          8 February 2016 14: 29
          +3
          Quote: Amurets
          Yes, I answered a question on fuel yesterday by mail, it was too late whether I received it or not. There is already a specific answer on the interceptor and S-75.

          Sorry, but I only got a link to the e-library where about the "Fakel" missile defense system request
          1. Amurets
            Amurets 8 February 2016 15: 07
            +2
            Quote: Bongo
            Sorry, but I only got a link to the e-library where about the "Fakel" missiles

            I sent both a link and a response to the composition of the fuel.
        2. opus
          opus 9 February 2016 01: 42
          +6
          Quote: Amurets
          that S-75 (M-2) was also a marine version,

          M-2 "Volkhov-M" (SAM V-753)
          M-2bis (SAM V-755)

          for project 70E (and 71)

          ammunition for 22 missiles in 2 launchers SM-64 or SM-64-1 (M-2bis) and SU "Corvette"
          ?

          1973 October 5-24 - the Dzerzhinsky cruiser was in the war zone, carrying out a combat mission to provide assistance to the Egyptian armed forces.

          Quote: Amurets
          but unsettled the sailors with its dimensions and liquid fuel.

          1. SAM “Terrier” (RIM-2) had a length of 8,23 ​​m and a weight of about 1,5 tons, while Talos (RIM-8) had 9,2 m and 2,9 tons, respectively, M-2 10,4 meters vs 2,3 tons
          SAM Talos and Seaslug also had liquid fuel in the second stage.

          2.In the army, for the S-75M complex, they developed the V-757 (17D) and V-758 solid-propellant missiles (KPRO S-225 "Azov")
          1. Amurets
            Amurets 9 February 2016 06: 20
            +3
            Quote: opus

            1. SAM “Terrier” (RIM-2) had a length of 8,23 ​​m and a weight of about 1,5 tons, while Talos (RIM-8) had 9,2 m and 2,9 tons, respectively, M-2 10,4 meters vs 2,3 tons
            SAM Talos and Seaslug also had liquid fuel in the second stage.

            2.In the army, for the S-75M complex, they developed the V-757 (17D) and V-758 solid-propellant missiles (KPRO S-225 "Azov")

            Theilos (Theseus) had a second-stage direct-flow engine, and she did not need an aggressive oxidizing agent.
            About C slug: it is not widespread.
            The 17D missile in the troops was waiting for it, the sailors were waiting for it. Why didn’t it go into service? I don’t know?
            1. opus
              opus 9 February 2016 18: 03
              +4
              Quote: Amurets
              and she didn’t need an aggressive oxidizing agent.

              Well yes..
              but according to the M-2 reports it was kerosene that flowed (it’s such a fluid infection, they also checked the caissons in my youth)
              Quote: Amurets
              Why didn’t she go into service? I don’t know?

              I do not know OKB-2 carried out such work ....






              V-750 (1 D) - the first B-range missile (10 cm) to enter service;
              B-750P - experimental missile with a rotary wing;
              V-750IR - version with a pulsed radio fuse;
              V-750V (11D) - high-altitude B-range missile;
              V-750N - "H" range missile (6 cm);
              V-750VN (13D) - "H" range missile with increased altitude;
              B-751 - experimental rocket KM with a ramjet engine based on "025" MM Bondaryuk;
              B-752 - missile variant in a batch scheme (with lateral accelerators);
              B-753 - a variant of the missile for the ship complex M-2;
              V-754 - a variant of a missile with a semi-active radar seeker developed by NII-648 PARG-6-3V;
              V-755 (20D) - deep modernization of the V-750VN;
              V-755S - a variant of the rocket intended for use as part of a model of the Saturn-M system;
              V-756 - a variant of the missile for the ship complex M-2bis;
              B-757 (17D) - two-stage rocket with ramjet on the march stage;
              V-757KR (3M10) - a variant of the V-757 rocket for the Krug ground forces complex;
              B-758 (22D) - three-stage rocket with ramjet in the second stage;
              V-759 (5Y23) - modernization of the V-755 missile;
              V-760 (15D) - a variant of the V-755 missile with a special charge;
              V-760V (5V29) - A variant of the V-759 missile with a special charge.
              1. Amurets
                Amurets 10 February 2016 06: 44
                +2
                Quote: opus
                Well yes..
                but according to the M-2 reports it was kerosene that flowed (it’s such a fluid infection, they also checked the caissons in my youth)

                In my profession, kerosene was used for troubleshooting parts and welds. You are right, kerosene will be found at any time.
  • gregor6549
    gregor6549 8 February 2016 08: 53
    +5
    The C75 performed well at the beginning of the Vietnam War, but if at the beginning of the war the average missile consumption for one air target was 2 missiles, then after the US implementation of the program for the accelerated development and implementation of active jamming stations, the flow increased to 8 missiles. In any case, the use of С77 forced American planes to fly low-level anti-ballistic maneuvers, and there they were waiting for heavy gunfire from the Vietnamese anti-aircraft guns. The 75 and Shrike anti-radar missiles brought a lot of trouble.
    1. gladcu2
      gladcu2 12 February 2016 15: 26
      +2
      Gregor
      The consumption of two missiles per target is the estimated rate. They were always allowed in pairs.
  • GELEZNII_KAPUT
    GELEZNII_KAPUT 8 February 2016 09: 58
    +8
    The descendants will also scratch their turnips, what kind of strange drawings are scattered around the Earth! bully
    1. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA 8 February 2016 10: 46
      +7
      Mystical drawings in the Nazca desert turned out to be the remnants of the positions of the ancient air defense systems at the test site. smile

      In fact, everything grows pretty quickly. In the Leningrad region, near Roshchino, near Pukhtolovaya Gora there was a field position S-75: six embankments in a circle, each with a concrete base with a steel plate with bolts, and one embankment in the center (in Soviet times, rested in those parts in a pioneer camp - there were many hypotheses about these shafts). In early space photographs, this position is still clearly visible, but now it has practically merged with the forest.
    2. Bongo
      8 February 2016 13: 55
      +4
      Quote: GELEZNII_KAPUT
      The descendants will also scratch their turnips, what kind of strange drawings are scattered around the Earth!

      S-200 air defense positions are much more cyclopean structures (pictured)

      Partially, the positions of the old complexes are used to place the S-300P and S-400 (in the picture S-300P at the former S-200 positions in the Kaliningrad region), but this is rather an exception.
      1. Alexey RA
        Alexey RA 8 February 2016 15: 53
        +5
        Quote: Bongo
        S-200 air defense positions are much more cyclopic structures

        The most cyclopean structure is the "Christmas tree" of the C-25 positions.

        It is noteworthy that a similar S-300 takes only 2-3 branches of the "Christmas tree".

        Some positions of the “Moscow rings” have now become settlements: there are roads, there is an exit to the highway - what else is needed?
  • bbss
    bbss 8 February 2016 11: 30
    +4
    I served the years 1970-72. Kulyab and further the Frunze Guards Brigade. Head of calculation of the SRC P-12.
    Also had a couple of times to go through collapse-deployment. Once lucky to get to the shooting in Kapustin Yar. Real combat work in August of the 72nd year (we were preparing for launches by ADA) ... but it didn’t come to launches. ADA carried by.
    Found the positions of his division (Kant village near Frunze / Bishkek). There is devastation. Only swollen tracks. But even rockets with special warheads stood ...
    1. Amurets
      Amurets 8 February 2016 12: 36
      +4
      Quote: bbss
      There is devastation. Only swollen tracks. But even rockets with special warheads stood ...

      Although my regiment exists, there are also ruins from the position of our division. But in 1970, after the training ground, we put the equipment in the hospital in a new position. Then, in 1970, the order came to put the equipment in concrete. Stroybatovtsy built a new residential town, but They were not allowed to build the position. Only the hp division was built and the engineering battalion equipment of our corps was involved, and this is limited, since at the same time the position of the S-200 air defense system was built in our regiment, in a 3-channel variant. So in 1971 two new ones appeared in our regiment oennyh town, our 5 th Division and a large town on the C-200.Byli positions and storage on the 15th rocket, first by two missiles, and then all spare missiles were removed in underground storage facilities but that was after us.
    2. gladcu2
      gladcu2 12 February 2016 15: 41
      +3
      bbss

      You have successfully noticed that it was difficult to get to the deployment and folding of the complex.

      I also had a chance once. A soldier.

      The impression is ambiguous. From a platoon of conscript soldiers only 5 people knew what to do with confidence. The rest thought out on the go. As a result, these 5 did their coagulation work. Since the folding procedure is more complicated.

      Thus, one group of soldiers managed to bend the lifting jack of the gas reflector, with a diameter of 100 centimeters. The weight of the gas reflector is 3 tons.

      There was also a serious problem with nuts on the wheels of the launchers. They shot back, came off. Apparently they were overtightened.

      But training soldiers to control the launchers was conducted regularly. This is undeniable.
  • GEV67
    GEV67 8 February 2016 11: 55
    +1
    Excellent complex, served on this. Traveled to divisions for verification ....
  • bionik
    bionik 8 February 2016 13: 17
    +2
    S-75-On the chassis of the BTR type 77. was produced in China under the names Hongqi-1 (HQ-1) and Hongqi-2 (HQ-2).
    1. Bongo
      8 February 2016 13: 48
      +3
      Quote: bionik
      S-75-On the chassis of the BTR type 77. was produced in China under the names Hongqi-1 (HQ-1) and Hongqi-2 (HQ-2).

      Why are you doing this? what After all, the publication says this.
      1. bionik
        bionik 8 February 2016 14: 08
        +1
        For clarity, Kubinsky was shown on the basis of the t-55 (in the article), but not Chinese.
        1. Bongo
          8 February 2016 14: 12
          +3
          Quote: bionik
          For clarity.

          Duc in the publication "for clarity" there is a specially active link, about the Chinese air defense systems created on the basis of the S-75, including with this photowhat
          By the way, this scheme of placement of PU did not receive much distribution.
  • Alexez
    Alexez 8 February 2016 13: 36
    +1
    In this regard, after 10 years we will be able to see the honored veteran S-75 only in the museum.

    But you can expect orders for export options S-300 !!!
    1. Bongo
      8 February 2016 13: 47
      +3
      Quote: Alexez
      But you can expect orders for export options S-300 !!!

      What kind of modification are you talking about? As far as I know, military S-300V300s are being mass-built (partially modernized from earlier versions). But it’s rather a missile defense system designed to protect against OTR. They were built about 4 times less than the S-10P air defense system. Of course, it can fight the S-300V aerodynamic targets, but not as effectively as the S-300P. Production of the S-300P family in our country has been completed; at the moment, the S-300 air defense system has replaced them at the production facilities.
  • Vega
    Vega 8 February 2016 16: 42
    +1
    Handsome !!! Although he served at 300.
  • engineer
    engineer 8 February 2016 18: 05
    +7
    The main disadvantage is liquid fuel. 125 solid-fuel rockets and there are fewer problems. although folding and deployment was also a problem for us (I served on the S-125), it is difficult to quickly transfer the cable.
    1. padded jacket
      padded jacket 8 February 2016 21: 20
      +4
      Quote: article
      On the basis of HQ-2 in Iran at the end of the 90s, its own complex was created, which received the designation "Sayyad-1".

      HQ-2J air defense missile defense system near Tehran

      Missile for "Sayyad-1" produced by the Iranian industry.

      The Sayyad-1A missile is also produced in Iran.

      High-explosive warhead
      Weight 195 kg.
      Maximum speed 1200 m / s
      According to official data, Sayyad-1A has an infrared homing system.
      By the way, only missiles were produced, and apparently various spare parts - PU and radar were not produced.
      I think now with the entry into service of the S-300 air defense system and the Mersad air defense system, all air defense systems based on the S-75 will be decommissioned.
      1. Bongo
        9 February 2016 05: 21
        +3
        Quote: quilted jacket
        According to official data, Sayyad-1A has an infrared homing system.

        Rather, combined, with radio correction in the middle section of the trajectory.
        1. padded jacket
          padded jacket 9 February 2016 12: 57
          +2
          Quote: Bongo
          Rather, combined, with radio correction in the middle section of the trajectory.

          Most likely, the whole point is that the trouble of such countries as the DPRK Syria Iran, etc. this is extremely closed data on their weapons and military-industrial complex, so you are doing a very big job digging tons of information to give us ready-made and digestible material about various equipment.
          Iraqi militia missile "Kataib Hezbollah" with C-75 engine? Or just similar?

          1. Bongo
            9 February 2016 14: 28
            +4
            Quote: quilted jacket
            Iraqi militia missile "Kataib Hezbollah" with C-75 engine? Or just similar?

            Interesting photo! good It is very likely that the first solid fuel stage from the S-75 complex missiles was used in this product.
            1. padded jacket
              padded jacket 9 February 2016 16: 08
              +3
              Quote: Bongo
              Interesting photo! good It is very likely that the first solid fuel stage from the S-75 complex missiles was used in this product.

              The rocket eventually flew away, but I don’t know whether they got where they wanted to.

              But I wonder where they got the working engine, because according to the idea, all the S-75s from Iraq were supposed to "rot" or they can be stored for a long time?
    2. gladcu2
      gladcu2 12 February 2016 15: 51
      +2
      engineer

      125 has a range of 25 km. At 75, 47 active flight. Up to 53 km passive. Still, almost 2 times. Close 100 km of airspace.
  • cat hippopotamus
    cat hippopotamus 8 February 2016 23: 53
    0
    My good friend was an old man in Vietnam, where he did not have to fight for 75 years. He told interesting stories with a glass of tea, they didn’t fill up one plane, but sometimes it wasn’t sweet either. He already taught at the Kharkov Missile Academy and now has a solid retirement allowance as a participant.
  • 5234
    5234 9 February 2016 01: 35
    -3
    Greetings to the author!)
    Well, Sergey: a great article! Not a hitch, as they say, not a hitch) all on the shelves, all modifications are listed, the composition of the fuel, the country and the war) ...
    Solid pluses in the comments)))
    ** respected editor! Maybe better about the reactor? About your favorite moon tractor? ... **
    And no analytics: all from open sources, the mosquito of the nose will not undermine. Here is your horse!
    And this is very good!!!
    Deeper and not necessary, otherwise you will have to answer in the comments.
    With emphasis on over-awareness)))
  • gladcu2
    gladcu2 12 February 2016 15: 59
    0
    The commander of my company in the training of air defense was in the rank of captain. He was in Syria during the Arabs of the Israeli wars. The only officer I remember for the whole army. Caring for the soldiers, but also a requirement for training. We were the only 5 people from 25 national teams from all the batteries of the composition who knew how to handle launchers. I remember his last name, I do not want to announce it.

    In general chats should not be personal.
  • Ale.xey
    Ale.xey 8 March 2016 07: 55
    0
    Quote: Amurets
    Quote: bbss
    There is devastation. Only swollen tracks. But even rockets with special warheads stood ...

    Although my regiment exists, there are also ruins from the position of our division. But in 1970, after the training ground, we put the equipment in the hospital in a new position. Then, in 1970, the order came to put the equipment in concrete. Stroybatovtsy built a new residential town, but They were not allowed to build the position. Only the hp division was built and the engineering battalion equipment of our corps was involved, and this is limited, since at the same time the position of the S-200 air defense system was built in our regiment, in a 3-channel variant. So in 1971 two new ones appeared in our regiment oennyh town, our 5 th Division and a large town on the C-200.Byli positions and storage on the 15th rocket, first by two missiles, and then all spare missiles were removed in underground storage facilities but that was after us.

    The most concreted air defense system stood in Pripyat before the Chernobyl accident. He was then relocated to Borispol. An unreal amount of concrete for the construction of a nuclear power plant fell into the division. There, even the parade ground was made of concrete.