[Official] Armata Discussion thread #4

GarryB wrote:

The use of Tor missiles in Armata (Kurganets, Bumerang and BMD-4M) platforms is a lot less likely since they have lower range and performance. The Tor missiles likely are not modern enough for the new platforms, despite to be a very capable system today is unlikely to remain 50 years from now (the approximate life of the new units of the new platforms). The SA-15 Tor systems will very likely remain in the units with T-90, BMP-3 and older platform weapons.

The new TOR missiles are smaller and are carried in larger numbers on the original platfom (16 instead of . Range is also increased to about 15km.

The TOR missiles use sophisticated electronics and sensors on the platform but are cheap simple command guided missiles of very high accuracy.

Using fixed phased array antennas for search and tracking a large platform like Armata could carry large numbers of missiles which don't need to be pointed in the direction of the target before launch... one vehicle could cover 360 degrees continuously and rapidly launch missiles to defeat all sorts of targets.

The TOR is intended to engage incoming munitions as well as enemy aircraft so its range is not an issue at all... larger SAMs can engage enemy aircraft before they launch, while TOR can deal with any munitions that have been launched very very effectively.

The second option most likely to be mounted in the Armata, Kurganets, Bumerang and BMD-4M platforms would be the S-350. It would make a good combination with the Pantsir mounted on the same platforms.

S-350 is an Air Force/Navy/air defence force system. the Russian Army has BUK-M3 with 6 heavy long range missiles per vehicle and S-300V4 above that.

eehnie wrote:The second option most likely to be mounted in the Armata, Kurganets, Bumerang and BMD-4M platforms would be the S-350. It would make a good combination with the Pantsir mounted on the same platforms..

eehnie wrote:This is only a label. The S-350 is the natural successor of the SA-11/17 Buk missile system. Standardization is positive for Russia. Only need to be adapted to the new land platformsand this very likely will be done, taking into account that the size of the missile seems to allow it..

Azi wrote:

eehnie wrote:The second option most likely to be mounted in the Armata, Kurganets, Bumerang and BMD-4M platforms would be the S-350. It would make a good combination with the Pantsir mounted on the same platforms..

Combining an armoured platform and S-350??? No!

eehnie wrote:This is only a label. The S-350 is the natural successor of the SA-11/17 Buk missile system. Standardization is positive for Russia. Only need to be adapted to the new land platformsand this very likely will be done, taking into account that the size of the missile seems to allow it..

NO! No and no! S-350 replace not the Buk system! It should replace in future the S-300. Because S-400 and S-500 are optimized for long range, so the S-350 close the gap to medium and short range not interfering with S systems above.

eehnie wrote:
Did you check the ranges of the S-300 and the S-350? There is like 0 probability that a system with lower range replaces other with higher range at production level.

This is only a label. The S-350 is the natural successor of the SA-11/17 Buk missile system. Standardization is positive for Russia. Only need to be adapted to the new land platforms and this very likely will be done, taking into account that the size of the missile seems to allow it.

Did you check the ranges of the S-300 and the S-350? There is like 0 probability that a system with lower range replaces other with higher range at production level.

Forgeting labels, because in the future air defense missiles are to be unified for the entire Russian Armed Forces and adapted to the needed mobile platforms, this is the current range breakdown (taking maximum ranges) from higher to lower range:

9M100 of 40 Km of maximum range (so the S-350 has the right ammunition to shut-down adversaries ate 25 Km)
9M96E of 60 Km of maximum range
9M96E2 of 120 Km of maximum range

This is a mix of ammunition in good position to replace the Buk, which ammunition goes from 25 to 70 Km of maximum ranges. But is not enough to replace all the S-300 variants.

Also very important. the S-350 missiles are smaller than the Buk missiles.

GarryB wrote:If the S-350 is replacing the Buk, then why does there exist the Buk-M3... why continue to develop a system that is going to be replaced?

that would be a serious waste of money and time.

If the T-14 is replacing the T-72, then why does there exist the T-72B3M... why continue to develop a system that is going to be replaced?

that would be a serious waste of money and time.

GarryB wrote:The fact is that there are enormous numbers of S-300s that were in service.... they started building them in the late 1970s and made a lot of them.

They are not going to be able to make enough S-400s to replace every S-300 missile for missile.

The S-350 uses the smaller lighter "numbers" missile developed for the S400 system but it is going to be deployed as a separate system with something like 12 launch tubes per TEL.

This means they can produce the S-350 to replace the old model S-300s at a rate of 3-4 to one, so for every old S-300 missile they will have 3-4 new S-350s to replace them.

They are continuing to develop and produce the BUK because the Russian Army still wants it... it fits in with the other BUK batteries they already have in service, and the transport vehicle has the level of mobility they require to allow it to operate with armour.

this is the current range breakdown (taking maximum ranges) from higher to lower range:

Over 1000 Km
A-235

500 to 1000  Km
SA-?? S-500

200 to 500 Km
SA-21 S-400
A-135 (silo based)
SA-5 S-200 (towed)
SA-10/12/20/23 S-300

50 to 200 Km
SA-?? S-350
SA-11-17 Buk

Manpad maximum range to 50 Km
SA-4 Krug
SA-2 S-75 (towed)
SA-3 S-125 (towed)
SA-6 Kub
SA-22 Pantsir
SA-15 Tor
SA-8 Osa
SA-19 2S6 Tunguska

Manpads range
SA-13
SA-9

The S-350, like the 125mm weapon, is likely to be introduced in the new platforms, but older platforms will remain, and need upgrades. Said it, is also safe enough to say that you will not see systems of the XX century mounted in the new platforms.

Russia has the number of S-300 that considered necessary to have, not only at the time of the Soviet Union, also now. Do you think Russia has too much S-300? Russia does not think it, neither of other systems, taking into account that there almost 0 reserve of mobile air defense systems. This is not a realistic model for the air defense replacement in Russia.

First is necessary to note that the S-400 has been introduced until now without retirement of S-300, and this can continue years still, even decades.

The S-400 and the rest of new systems will be produced in important numbers. Be sure of that. If the US plays the card of the Air Force, Russia plays the card of the Air Defense. And this will not change.

At this point we only can talk about the S-400 as replacement of the S-300 at production level or more exactly at procurement level (because some system can remain in production to export).

The same with the other new systems: Pantsir, S-350, S-500 and A-235.

eehnie wrote:I expect both the Pantsir and the S-350 to be relevant for this topic, as I expect both to be mounted in the Armata platform.

Others (you concretely GarryB) introduced in the discussion systems defined as long range air defense (like the S-300). Others said that systems defined like long range air defense systems (like the S-300) will be replaced by systems defined as medium range air defense (like the S-350).

About the retirement of the S-300 I only will say that the current fleet of SA-10/12/20/23 in the Russian Armed Forces is a 97.18% of the fleet of the Soviet Union in 1991 (of which some units go to Belarus and Ukraine). It has not been a reduction despite the introduction of the S-400.

Azi wrote:
Ok...wait, wait, wait! I Have a great idea! Why not putting a Nudol missile on a Armata??? So you have the best tank in world combined with the ability to intercept ICBM. !

Azi wrote:

eehnie wrote:I expect both the Pantsir and the S-350 to be relevant for this topic, as I expect both to be mounted in the Armata platform.

Others (you concretely GarryB) introduced in the discussion systems defined as long range air defense (like the S-300). Others said that systems defined like long range air defense systems (like the S-300) will be replaced by systems defined as medium range air defense (like the S-350).

About the retirement of the S-300 I only will say that the current fleet of SA-10/12/20/23 in the Russian Armed Forces is a 97.18% of the fleet of the Soviet Union in 1991 (of which some units go to Belarus and Ukraine). It has not been a reduction despite the introduction of the S-400.

Ok...wait, wait, wait! I Have a great idea! Why not putting a Nudol missile on a Armata??? So you have the best tank in world combined with the ability to intercept ICBM.

Armata is a heavy frontline platform! Armata based AD system would only make sense for a replacement of Tor, Shilka etc. The Buk platform is NOT heavy armoured!!! For a AD system like Buk mobility is more important than armour!

eehnie wrote:I expect both the Pantsir and the S-350 to be relevant for this topic, as I expect both to be mounted in the Armata platform.

Others (you concretely GarryB) introduced in the discussion systems defined as long range air defense (like the S-300). Others said that systems defined like long range air defense systems (like the S-300) will be replaced by systems defined as medium range air defense (like the S-350).

About the retirement of the S-300 I only will say that the current fleet of SA-10/12/20/23 in the Russian Armed Forces is a 97.18% of the fleet of the Soviet Union in 1991 (of which some units go to Belarus and Ukraine). It has not been a reduction despite the introduction of the S-400.

PapaDragon wrote:
Photos of Armata factory under construction from 6 months ago. It's almost completed now.