Military Review

The air defense system "Thor" will be turned into a fully robotic system

106
In the future, the Tor system will become fully robotized and will be able to “work” on targets without human participation, it reports TASS a message from the deputy general director of Izhevsk Electromechanical Plant Kupol JSC (part of Almaz-Antey) to Joseph Drize.


The air defense system "Thor" will be turned into a fully robotic system


According to him, the complex "can now work without human participation, but in some cases the operator is necessary in conditions of strong interference."

“Work in perspective implies expanding the capabilities of artificial intelligence so that the complex can perform combat missions without operator participation,” he explained.

In addition, "the company is engaged in increasing the capabilities of the Torah to destroy cruise missiles created using stealth technology," said Drize.

“We are working to ensure reliable detection and destruction of targets with a low reflective surface,” he added.

Help Agency: “Thor” is a family of short-range anti-aircraft missile systems designed for the destruction of airplanes, helicopters, UAVs and missiles at medium, low and ultra low altitudes. According to open sources, the first member of the Tor family entered service in 1986 year. A modern modification of the Tor-M2 is capable of destroying targets flying at speeds up to 700 meters per second, at a distance of up to 12 km and altitudes up to 10 km. "
Photos used:
Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation
106 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Lt. Air Force stock
    Lt. Air Force stock 8 June 2016 19: 07
    +16
    Well, he put the conscript in the place of the driver’s mechanic, he reaches the combat duty area, then he clicks the toggle switch from off to on and nothing more is needed, no special training is needed.
    1. Dam
      Dam 8 June 2016 19: 33
      0
      Yeah, and you multi-million complex belonging to you, would you entrust the conscript?
      1. Lt. Air Force stock
        Lt. Air Force stock 8 June 2016 20: 08
        +1
        Quote: Damm
        Yeah, and you multi-million complex belonging to you, would you entrust the conscript?

        They trust the tank, and it costs several million dollars.
    2. Armored optimist
      Armored optimist 8 June 2016 20: 08
      +3
      Already "three hundred" was actually robotized. With central control from the command post of the regiment, a division can fight in a machine gun, the 400th and 500th even more so. So there is no problem to automate short-range complexes. But the calculations will still be in the cabins. Pull out the faulty module and insert a replacement from the spare parts, while there are no robots yet, as well as drag cables, refuel and wipe contacts.
      Automation is the right direction. A machine is always faster and more accurate than a person decides and acts.
      1. jjj
        jjj 8 June 2016 20: 52
        +2
        Quote: armored optimist
        Already "three hundred" was actually robotized

        In "PMU" the automatics worked quite accurately and efficiently. But all the same, the calculations worked out the manual mode. And he was considered the main one, since anything can happen in battle, and a person was considered more reliable
  2. oleg-gr
    oleg-gr 8 June 2016 19: 08
    +2
    The right thing. They will make a piece of iron quickly enough, but specialists need to be taught for a long time.
    1. svp67
      svp67 8 June 2016 19: 48
      +1
      Quote: oleg-gr
      The right thing. They will make a piece of iron quickly enough, but specialists need to be taught for a long time.

      It’s just that the man’s reaction is no longer keeping pace with changes in the situation. There was an automatic function earlier, but each time it required confirmation of actions from a person. I know that our anti-aircraft gunners simply closed this button so as not to interfere with the machine firing. Really, a person simply does not have time to react.
  3. bad
    bad 8 June 2016 19: 09
    +9
    “Work in perspective implies expanding the capabilities of artificial intelligence so that the complex can perform combat missions without operator participation,” he explained.
    .. the operator will be different .. sometimes it’s necessary to wipe contacts with alcohol .. laughing
  4. seti
    seti 8 June 2016 19: 09
    +1
    But this is awesome. Apparently in this regard, very large developments once about robotic systems are spoken so often.
    1. Alex777
      Alex777 8 June 2016 23: 49
      -1
      Quote: seti
      But this is awesome. Apparently in this regard, very large developments once about robotic systems are spoken so often.


      TOR-M2 is an option with 16 9M338 missiles by car.
      And TOR-M2U, -M1-2, etc., are all with 8 old missiles.
      In 2013 reported that 9M338 flew and silence.
      As far as I understand, it has not yet been possible to bring the GOS.
      Therefore, the marine TOP (Dagger) only by 2018. promise.
      It was smooth on paper, but forgot about the ravines. hi
      Let at least bring the rocket to mind, automation - then.

      When the KBP will finish the hypersonic ZURka to the Shell, then the TOP will only have the ability to bomb planes with a special fragment in the warhead. And that’s all. The shell is also already 4-channel, and the range of the new missile is 40 km, at 20 km in height. This is the right machine for the Tomahawks and others like them. Therefore, they are already serving in the North. And thank God. hi
  5. Rostislav
    Rostislav 8 June 2016 19: 13
    +3
    Such opportunities are encouraging. But you can use the complex in this mode only in war.
    And when protecting facilities in peacetime, only the operator has the right to decide on work to kill.
    1. poquello
      poquello 8 June 2016 19: 27
      0
      Quote: Rostislav
      Such opportunities are encouraging. But you can use the complex in this mode only in war.
      And when protecting facilities in peacetime, only the operator has the right to decide on work to kill.

      on torus xs and on shells wrote about the command machine
  6. marshes
    marshes 8 June 2016 19: 14
    0
    It is high time that a person was not there.
    A year ago, on this site, he expressed his idea that the TOR blocks themselves would be destroyed when approaching. Destroyed ...
    People will not be able to, this is something from the Terminator. laughing
    1. just exp
      just exp 8 June 2016 19: 19
      +3
      Blocks with nuclear weapons are only on ICBMs. there are such speeds that the Torah did not even dream of.
      Thor is military air defense and missile defense.
      1. marshes
        marshes 8 June 2016 19: 27
        +2
        Quote: just explo
        Blocks with nuclear weapons are only on ICBMs. there are such speeds that the Torah did not even dream of.
        Thor is military air defense and missile defense.

        Maybe he works for ballistic purposes. Already studied. Where in KARAGANDA, well nearby ... smile
      2. opus
        opus 9 June 2016 00: 33
        +1
        Quote: just explo
        blocks with nuclear weapons are only on ICBMs

        Have AGM-86B ALCM been retired? their 1142 pieces were

        on it by the way W80-1
        have similar "partners" in the east

        did the RGM / UGM-109A TLAM-N with the W-80-0 or the new W-84 warhead cut the same?

        and do not flatter yourself with tactical RGM / UGM-109E Tac Tom Block 4
    2. Nord2015
      Nord2015 8 June 2016 22: 52
      0
      Quote: marshes
      A year ago, on this site, he expressed his idea that the TOR blocks themselves would be destroyed when approaching. Destroyed ...

      The nuclear warhead has a sensor that just responds to an attempt to bring them down. An attempt to bring down a warhead will lead to a nuclear explosion, it just happens a few kilometers from the intended target.
      1. marshes
        marshes 8 June 2016 23: 06
        0
        Quote: Nord2015
        The nuclear warhead has a sensor that just responds to an attempt to bring them down. An attempt to bring down a warhead will lead to a nuclear explosion, it just happens a few kilometers from the intended target.

        I can take as much as I want to carry, those blocks of the probable enemy that have switched over to a ballistic trajectory, fall. Air density still exists. You can destroy it even at a height, but the infection of the area is possible but it is not a nuclear explosion, with the ensuing consequences. It will simply be stupid to infect the area .
        Further, it makes no sense to tell what and how. In the NZ and Australia, as well as in countries south of the equator, you can survive. We have a house in NZ and a brother, the former former Strategic Rocket Forcesman. So hello !.
        1. sa-ag
          sa-ag 9 June 2016 06: 52
          0
          Quote: marshes
          brother elder former RVSNshchik

          I have such a work colleague here, he told me that they had an aiming point - Italy, I couldn’t understand what was in Italy and needed to be bombed, says the NATO country and that’s all
      2. opus
        opus 9 June 2016 12: 50
        +1
        Quote: Nord2015
        The nuclear warhead has a sensor that just responds to an attempt to bring them down.

        what kind of "sensor"?
        Radar belay
        or "shock sensor"? belay belay
        more?
        where is he? specifically poke your finger



        and how it works:
        Radar station under ablation at T on terminations under 2000K
        a "shock sensor" at a meeting speed of up to 10 km / s request
        Quote: Nord2015
        An attempt to bring down a warhead will lead to a nuclear explosion, it just happens a few kilometers from the intended target.

        will lead to the destruction of the BGI, its violation from the trajectory (unlikely), or a miss.
        Shl these ideas about sensors Swetlana, Svetlana1 (or №2,3,4, etc.) "sang"?
  7. svp67
    svp67 8 June 2016 19: 20
    +4
    Yes, the "terminators" are entering the battlefield. The main thing is that at some point they do not consider themselves more important than us, and we do not ask a question
    1. marshes
      marshes 8 June 2016 19: 32
      +2
      Cinema of my childhood, such a school could only be in the west, Belarus or the Baltic states.
      I trudge from Guests from the future.
      1. marshes
        marshes 8 June 2016 21: 16
        +3
        The Adventures of Elektornik is a little over the 80s, Bratanovskaya theme.
        Uri. laughing or like him.
        1. samoletil18
          samoletil18 8 June 2016 21: 23
          +2
          We are like that. They have a terminator, and we have an electronic.
        2. marshes
          marshes 8 June 2016 21: 24
          0
          And I’ll add, maybe someone Laskovy remembers Minaev.
          the worst thing is to listen when in a guard and next to a residential building. laughing
          1. marshes
            marshes 9 June 2016 00: 31
            0
            So who else laughing Somna learned to understand.
            Hi!
  8. chunga-changa
    chunga-changa 8 June 2016 19: 35
    0
    This is great news. The next step is the automatic interaction of several complexes, for example, as part of a battery, or division.
    1. Parsec
      Parsec 8 June 2016 22: 05
      0
      Quote: chunga-changa
      The next step is the automatic interaction of several complexes, for example, as part of a battery, or division.


      And this step has long been taken.
  9. avg-mgn
    avg-mgn 8 June 2016 19: 38
    +5
    We will wait, but for now:
  10. Alexander 3
    Alexander 3 8 June 2016 19: 44
    +4
    Hat-making is inappropriate here. There are electronic warfare means that stop our air defense systems. You don’t have to think about the enemy as he is a sucker in this business. They thought so too, now they are surprised. We can trade places.
    with such an approach. We must rush forward.
    1. jjj
      jjj 8 June 2016 20: 57
      +1
      The analyzed experience of Yugoslavia showed that the TOR will be able to withstand the American anti-aircraft defense system. The Americans generally do not like our Ground Defense
      1. Kent0001
        Kent0001 8 June 2016 21: 50
        0
        Americans do not like all our air defense. They really fear him.
        1. sa-ag
          sa-ag 9 June 2016 06: 54
          0
          Quote: Kent0001
          Americans do not like all our air defense

          And which of the enemy air defense flyers loves, there are thirteen such heroes per dozen in the cemetery? :-)
    2. Parsec
      Parsec 8 June 2016 21: 06
      +1
      ADMS Tor is the most protected from interference ADMS.
  11. APASUS
    APASUS 8 June 2016 19: 48
    +2
    I think working in automatic mode is certainly good, but it is logical to develop a system for controlling, tracking and destroying targets with complexes (for example, C-300 + Tor air defense systems), summing the same signals from the locator where the Tor air defense system could hit targets using signals from others SAM, airborne reconnaissance systems.
    1. aksakal
      aksakal 8 June 2016 20: 16
      +1
      Quote: APASUS
      , summing the same signals from the locator where the Tor air defense system could hit targets using signals from other air defense systems, airspace reconnaissance systems.

      - this is just that newfangled "network-centric", when information available to one person becomes known to all his associates. What one soldier sees is seen by all his colleagues, and he, in turn, can, if necessary, see what any of his colleagues sees. In mathematical parlance, this is called "increasing system connectivity." You have used the word "summation" incorrectly here, targets cannot be added or subtracted))))), perhaps you meant receiving additional signals about these targets from other locators? Or did you mean the integration of data from all radars in a given theater of operations into a single network available to everyone who fires?
      1. Parsec
        Parsec 8 June 2016 21: 55
        0
        Intuitively, a person feels the need for something so generalizing, however, he is not familiar with the concepts of identifying goals and setting ties in the system. This is how the targets are processed in the automated control system of the radio-technical forces and in the air defense / aviation control gear. The idea was implemented fifty years ago, since then the implementation has been improved.
    2. Thunderbolt
      Thunderbolt 8 June 2016 20: 21
      +2
      As a rule, this is not required, "Thor" can operate in the air defense mode of a division, but the point is that it can operate completely autonomously (being in battle formations of a relatively small group of forces or when higher hierarchies are destroyed or damaged). range and missions on the battlefield are enough. Anti-aircraft systems can be matched with honey.
      Another thing is that the logic of the development of military affairs makes us seriously think about combining all the information systems on the battlefield into a single system. So that Vasya Pupkin could in real time sit down at the bottom of the trencher and see the tactical situation near his position obtained by collecting all the intelligence gathered in this square (starting from the grouping of space reconnaissance and ending with neighbors in the trench) and its transmission to any subscriber.
      But before that, still walk and walk all ...
      1. Parsec
        Parsec 8 June 2016 22: 02
        0
        Quote: Thunderbolt
        So that Vasya Pupkin could in real time sit down at the bottom of the trencher and see the tactical situation near his position obtained by collecting all the extracted intelligence in this square (starting from the space reconnaissance group and ending with the trenches neighbors) and transmitting it to any subscriber.


        You seem to be confusing the game with war.

        If Vasya Pupkin is the commander of a division, of a brigade or a battalion group, then perhaps he needs such a system.
        The rest of the rank of Vasya Pupkin will take a lot of effort to filter out the unnecessary and to make sure that there is no necessary. If a hypothetical Vasya will find out via satellite who is there in his comfrey neighbors, does he really need him?

        To collect, summarize and issue with an acceptable time delay is not a very big problem. To give the right people to the needy - this is the question, both technical and organizational.
    3. jjj
      jjj 8 June 2016 21: 00
      +2
      Quote: APASUS
      I think working in automatic mode is certainly good, but it is logical to develop a system for controlling, tracking and destroying targets with complexes (for example, C-300 + Tor air defense systems), summing the same signals from the locator where the Tor air defense system could hit targets using signals from others SAM, airborne reconnaissance systems.

      Yes, they worked like that and now work with C-300 / 400 - Beech - TOP - Carapace
    4. Parsec
      Parsec 8 June 2016 21: 50
      +1
      SAM Tor - complex command guidance; cannot be used for tracking and destruction of signals of other complexes; the control parameter for it is the difference in the angles of sight from the combat vehicle to the target and to the rocket.

      Yes, he didn’t need anything. SAM is conceived as autonomous, and this autonomy is valuable. Alert for the transfer to the highest levels of combat readiness is issued by other systems, and the process has been completed.
  12. masiya
    masiya 8 June 2016 20: 15
    +1
    Definitely great news, the main thing is that everything new should be put into operation faster, so this complex should merge with the same machines around the perimeter ... blocking the affected area, and preferably in two three echelons, for fidelity, then without human control, you can’t leave - at least the observers with the control function (partially) should not be a draftee, but experienced operators to determine either the priority of the target or the retargeting of the complexes in case of defeat by their adversary, the machine itself can do this, but with You mean strong opposition to creating interference.
  13. atamankko
    atamankko 8 June 2016 20: 54
    +2
    All this is good, but a person is needed, it will just be easier to work.
    1. masiya
      masiya 8 June 2016 21: 21
      +1
      It is correctly indicated that without people we will become like in a TERMINATOR ...
  14. Mestny
    Mestny 8 June 2016 21: 20
    -1
    Quote: svp67
    There was an automatic function earlier, but each time it required confirmation of actions from a person.

    Perhaps when and be, with the development of technology in general they will make very small devices. Dumped or unloaded where necessary, and forgot. Ideally, in general - one missile to itself, and target detection, and guidance, and defeat.
  15. egsp
    egsp 8 June 2016 22: 37
    0
    And all of you: "Shell, Shell ...". That's what the troops need, I'm tired of talking.
    1. Alex777
      Alex777 9 June 2016 00: 01
      0
      And what about the Top with the 9M338 rocket?
      Did you finish it?
  16. Vadim237
    Vadim237 8 June 2016 23: 23
    0
    Where did the previous article go?
  17. TOR2
    TOR2 8 June 2016 23: 55
    +3
    With a high degree of probability, the enemy will subject vital centers to massive attacks. To what extent will the existing versions of TOP be able to withstand a massive attack? Probably many have seen the recharging process. There is a danger that at a certain moment the transport-loading vehicle simply will not have time to reach the complex. In what haste people will work when a dozen "axes" fly up to the object. In such a situation, there is a risk of erroneous actions.
    Now the marine version of the TOP is also being created, where transport and launch containers are fed from the bottom and the automation is preparing for work. Why not use these developments on land. One way out is to try to put the launcher on the rails. It is clear that the presence of a number of different objects will prevent the complex from working independently. But at a critical moment when soil relatives will be without ammunition, such complexes will be most welcome. We launch missiles from the ZhDPU, and soil complexes lead the missile to the target. It is also impossible to turn such a version of TOR into a pure launcher. If the location of the objects allows, such a complex should be able to work independently (anything can happen in a war).
    Judging by the number of "axes" on the mattress vessels, the emphasis will be on emasculating the ammunition ready for use. Emptying ammunition from such a version will be very problematic.
    1. VP
      VP 9 June 2016 06: 06
      0
      Quote: TOR2
      How much can the existing versions of TOR resist a massive attack?

      I do not think that a massive attack will be used against a target that will cover only one crew.
      If the goal is important, then the TORs will be just the last line of defense, in front of them will be S-ki and Buki. And the TOPs will not be alone.
      If one means the goal is unimportant and a hundred axes will not be launched on it.
      1. TOR2
        TOR2 9 June 2016 12: 55
        0
        With a massive attack, the load will be on all lines of air defense. Unfortunately, Cs and BUKs also cannot quickly recharge, and it is extremely undesirable to lose a critical infrastructure object. So the last line of defense must be stood - because there is no other.
  18. vano
    vano 9 June 2016 01: 43
    0
    Well, without people, it won’t work. He personally raked up such trash on the doorstep, not even audible, just weak air beats, if they did something more powerful. then yes.
  19. gregor6549
    gregor6549 9 June 2016 03: 24
    -1
    "SAM" Tor "will be turned into a fully robotic system." Nonsense. There is no problem in creating a fully automatic air defense system and these problems were successfully solved back in the 70s and 80s. The problem is that in air defense / missile defense systems, decision-making on all the main cycles of the interception of air attack assets (detection, identification, tracking and destruction) should be carried out and carried out by a person, regardless of the type and purpose of the air defense / missile defense system and the level of development of relevant technologies ...
    1. gregor6549
      gregor6549 9 June 2016 09: 07
      0
      Interestingly, the one who put the minus understood what I wrote. After all, I didn’t come up with human decision-making in air defense systems. It was invented a long time ago and is an axiom. In civilian air traffic control systems, automation decisions make decisions on detecting and tracking aircraft.
  20. Wolka
    Wolka 9 June 2016 05: 42
    0
    good help to motorized infantry on the offensive ...
  21. VP
    VP 9 June 2016 06: 00
    +1
    In order to bring down cruise missiles, it is necessary that the installation can detect them at considerable distances, so that there is a margin of time for the operator’s reaction and the complex is brought to a state of target capture and firing.
    The altitude of the flight of the Kyrgyz Republic is 10-15 meters, the flight is in the folds of the terrain, the detection zone is reduced, especially if the NATO troops begin to produce Ramans with low radar signature. Not all of their lives they will sit on the Tomahawks, for sure something will appear fresher.
    If the CD is found at a distance of 10-15 kilometers, that's it, the missile will hit the target, the TOP crew will not have time to "digest" what it is that flashed on the screen and make a decision to destroy it, and the complex will not have time to capture the target and work on it.
    The complex should be able to work in a common information space, use data from "adult" complexes with powerful radars, so that the target that jumped out at it would not be a shocking surprise.
    But what about this is unknown. Maybe this is already implemented, maybe not. If not, then urgently modify.
    1. gregor6549
      gregor6549 9 June 2016 09: 05
      +1
      The work of the Tori in the network was laid even at the design stage of both the Torah itself and the automated control systems for air defense units and subunits of dry forces, in particular the "Maneuver" automated control system, i.e. in the 70s.
      Therefore, the notification of the Torahs and target designation by them can be carried out from the KP / PU ACS for air defense long before the air targets enter the detection zones of their own radar means of the Torah. Moreover, the radar fleet used in modern ASM air defense systems allows, in principle, to minimize the operating time of the Torov radar in order to reduce the risk of their destruction by anti-radar missiles and shells.
      1. VP
        VP 9 June 2016 09: 48
        0
        Since the maneuver was not a working system, it seemed to be put in just one division where it quietly peacefully and rusted.
        And in terms of air defense it is not intended to transmit accurate target designation by which a missile can be aimed, but to inform about the situation.
        But, I think that, most likely, it was then doped to the normal system, taking Maneuver as the basis
        1. sivuch
          sivuch 9 June 2016 10: 09
          0
          You have very inaccurate information about the Maneuver
        2. gregor6549
          gregor6549 9 June 2016 10: 40
          0
          "Maneuver" was primarily supplied to the GSVG. In addition, the "Maneuver" was developed and produced in stages. Some elements were already mass-produced and entered service, while others were just beginning to be developed. It should also be borne in mind that many command and control systems that are part of modern air defense systems for air defense and produced by the Russian defense industry are nothing more than slightly modernized elements of the same "Maneuver" and they are produced by the same enterprises, but under different designations. So much of what was done for the ACCU Maneuver worked and continues to work.
          In terms of the interaction of the automated control system with active air defense systems, not everything is as simple as you write about it, but this is not here. And they "finished" the system for many reasons, and first of all because after the collapse of the Soviet Union they forgot about it for a long time, and when they remembered, it turned out that many enterprises previously involved in the creation of the Maneuver were outside Russia, the element base was outdated and had to be changed to more modern and the old money for this business was gone. So they finished it, or rather cut it down to the minimum required volumes. And therefore the need to pass off as a virtue is not a greyhound.
  22. sivuch
    sivuch 9 June 2016 11: 27
    0
    Gregor
    You do not communicate with Vyacheslav Belov?
    If you remember, he wrote that the weak point of the Maneuver was communication (it was about the ACS in general, not specifically about the air defense component). This can be believed, but after all the standard stations were used, as in the other parts of SA.Then, in theory This is not a Maneuver problem.
    And then, as I understand it, it is in the air defense that there are much more formalized commands, it is easier to use the telecode
    As far as I remember, several (6-8) MSDs and TDs were managed to receive the Maneuver not only in the groups of forces, but also in the Belorussian Military District, 1 German TDs and 1 MSD in Czechoslovakia
    1. gregor6549
      gregor6549 9 June 2016 14: 50
      0
      You are basically right. The connection was used standard and that she could, she could. That's who in the Union managed to get the elements of the Maneuver. I do not know
  23. Ros 56
    Ros 56 9 June 2016 11: 36
    0
    I look everyone knows everything, and the performance characteristics, and the tactics and strategy of application, and that the secrecy modes have already been canceled and no subscriptions are valid. It seems to me that as soon as something gets on the public display it means only one thing, that ours have already fixed something about which the general public, and therefore our "partners" are not supposed to know. Do not present yourself as know-it-alls who work in the interests of foreign countries. Western specura and all our media are viewed without fail, including VO. Of course, you cannot hide all the secrets, and there is no such need, almost everyone just knows, but this unknown is almost the very mystery on which the final result will depend.
    1. gregor6549
      gregor6549 9 June 2016 14: 48
      +2
      What secrecy are you talking about, our vigilant, if all the secrets of the ASUV Maneuver were sold during the perestroika by those who should be the most vigilant. I will not forget how in the General Staff and not only there they organized a show of this technique to representatives of the Pentagon. And something, for example, two sets of the most secret then SAMX300 PMU, were simply sold to the Americans. Therefore, the entire exchange of views is now nothing more than old-fashioned hunting stories. Well, knowledge has not yet bothered anyone, even the elderly. It is bad that in this forum, knowledge is often replaced by illusions, shouts of urry and throwing bonnets up. Unimportant substitution comes out.
      But the excessive talkativeness of the forum participants about what is happening with military equipment and weapons of the Russian Armed Forces is currently really harmful. And I already wrote a lot about this in my comments, urging not to leave the boys from the CIA without work. There is tension with work
  24. Parsec
    Parsec 10 June 2016 01: 08
    +1
    In comments
    Parsec Today, 13:57 PM

    I, responding to the user opus, wrote "You and the S-400 are helpless at ranges less than 50 km ..."
    Phrase
    Quote: NEXUS
    -S-400 is capable of intercepting a target at a distance of 50 km to 400 km, that is, if an attack UAV or a missile is closer than 50 km from the complex, it will be defenseless

    issued by the user NEXUS.

    An error occurred due to my fault. The opus user did not speak about the helplessness of the S-400 at ranges less than 50 km.

    My apologies to opus.
    1. opus
      opus 10 June 2016 20: 20
      +1
      Quote: Parsec
      My apologies to opus.

      Received drinks
      Although I was not very "offended".
      But ...
      the opus user would like to hear:
      Quote: Parsec
      There is also a RVV booster.

      otherwise user opus asked
      Quote: opus
      come on come on
      ... but did not receive an answer.
      I will bring SAUR! okay?

      and isho how "M" can be measured in m / s
      Quote: Parsec
      And I M averaged, not 340 and not 290 m / s decreel.

      and the user NEXUS can’t do it anyway. Although he specifically forgot about 9M96 (E) and, of course, 9M96M

  25. cedar
    cedar 10 June 2016 06: 36
    +2
    “... Why not use these developments on land. One way to try to put the launcher on the rails ... "

    TOP2 gave an interesting thought. TORA in the railway version. As part of the BZHRK such TORvagoni will be very helpful. Antennas fold, disguise as ref. section or pulman special problems will not cause. The base of the car is three times longer than the base of the TOP, and this is not 8, but 24 missiles, ready for simultaneous launch. In my opinion, the TOR railway is a good option for covering Barguzin and not only ...