BUK SAM system Thread

That's good but 300km away your ground radar can see only planes flying 15-20km in altitude. You need a very good IADS to really use such systems.

Very true but with airborne radar like the Ka-31 a Rusian frigate with Shtil-1 can hit sea skimming missiles at max missile range... on land a BUK battery with other platforms using radar can hit targets behind a line of hills or even mountains...

September 28, 04:01
Military operation in Ukraine
Russian Defense Ministry: Buk-M3s regularly shoot down American HIMARS missiles during a special operation

MOSCOW, 28 September. /TASS/. Crews of Buk-M3 anti-aircraft missile systems (SAM) during a special operation hit any aircraft, including missiles fired by American HIMARS multiple launch rocket systems (MLRS). This was reported in the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation on Wednesday.
"The crews of the anti-aircraft missile brigade, armed with the latest Buk-M3 systems, regularly shoot down shells from the HIMARS multiple launch rocket system. During combat duty, air defense crews detect, escort and destroy various aircraft around the clock, providing reliable air cover for the positions of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation, as well as the most important administrative and industrial facilities.

On Wednesday, the Russian Defense Ministry showed footage of the combat work of the Buk-M3 crews of the air defense units of the Central Military District (TsVO) in the special operation zone. The air defense system is equipped with improved electronics and new anti-aircraft missiles, the number of which has increased to six.
"[During work it is necessary] constant attention, in no case to relax, to watch the indicators, and then everything will be successful. It all depends on the target's movement parameter and on where the target is. The complex itself sees far enough, and if the target is in the zone, then it is literally to take on escort, report, identify and launch. About two or three seconds - the missile left, "said the battery commander with the call sign "Brodyaga" in the released video.

M142 HIMARS (High Mobility Artillery Rocket System) is a highly mobile MLRS developed by the American company Lockheed Martin. More than 20 types of ammunition have been created for installation, the firing range of which, depending on the type, can range from 30-80 (in the MLRS mode) to 300 km or more (as an operational-tactical missile system).


https://tass.ru/armiya-i-opk/15889687

Good old Buk-M1 in action
https://tvzvezda.ru/news/202315166-vnXLz.html

Why does this happen, if russians IADS is competent and c an easily detect himars and large drones?

limb wrote:Why does this happen, if russians IADS is competent and c an easily detect himars and large drones?

Well it's a previously-unknown vulnerability being exploited perhaps by a new model of UAV designed for the task

As good a guess as any, and probably something you could figure out for yourself w/o the obligatory dooming post

Indeed. But even the old buk systems are well respected around the world as very effective. The issue is every major nation and company in their MIC are burning the midnight oil trying to figure out ways to cheaply and effectively take out drones. They are dangers even to the best Russian, American, European, east Asian or Israeli systems out there. Billions have been spent around the world for the development of sensor hardware and software to reliably detect drones at a safe distance. Russia is in a tough position as their equipment is being tested in real time. When you take the propaganda glasses off it is quite clear that Russian military equipment and thr soldiers trained on it are doing a fine job and are quickly adapting to new threats and when underperformance or faults are found they are worked on quite quickly. You saw it with himars and then the cruise missiles. Software updates and new tactics were developed in order to start reliably taking out these missiles.

The problem is that it makes no sense using machine guns against drones either... any more than using BUKs against drones or even artillery rockets.

Smaller lighter cheaper missiles used in large numbers makes sense for artillery rockets, while airburst shells makes sense for drones of all sizes.

A drone can be huge or tiny, but the tiny ones are hard to engage with machine guns and everyone in a unit spraying all round their position with automatic rifle fire just puts nearby civilians and friendly units in danger.

A vehicle like that BTR with the two 23mm cannons with radar and optics and laser rangefinder technology makes more sense in finding and aiming at and engaging targets with the airburst round spreading fragments around the point of interception to allow for any manouvers the target might have changed between the round being fired and its arrival on target.

Three or four 23mm calibre airburst shells might cost more than a couple of belts of 5.45mm ammo or 7.62mm ammo but exploding at the distance the target is means dangerous fragments are restricted to the close proximity of the target which, carrying a HE warhead is already dangerous.

30mm airburst cannon rounds and 57mm cannon airburst rounds are also going to add to the weapon options and indeed laser weapons and EW weapons can also assist with the job, but new EW aircraft that can locate and track the EM emissions from drones and from the stations that control those drones leading to the operators being targeted directly is an important development moving forward.

It is amusing that drones are more effective than their much more expensive systems and weapons... just a shame that even their drones are probably going to be very expensive now and their own vulnerability to such systems will be enormous.

A problem for Russia and China is probably the death of HATO and US forces around the world... how will they defend themselves from such systems?

It´s the same story as with cruise missiles or ballistic missiles.
There is one side that can defeat 90 to 95% of the incoming targets, sometimes up to 100%, occasionaly only 85%.
So there will be some damage from time to time but nothing catastrophic or "gamechanging".
On the other hand there is NATO and her proxy that can manage a rate of 10% at best,
which leads to nearly desastrous losses any time the Russians attack them with something.

After the SMO the Russian Armed Forces will receive additional SHORAD systems.
So the gaps will be smaller or even closed.
Maybe Rosgvardija receives some AD systems to protect civilian infrastructure.
Or larger military installations will get their own AD units.

Actually I would expect a new breed of air defence vehicle optimised for drones that will be widely deployed and suitably equipped.

Before this conflict such a vehicle would be a Tigr or Typhoon light wheeled vehicle with a couple of Igla-S missiles or Verba, but now I would think some sort of external weapon mount turret with 23mm cannon with airburst shells and perhaps optical and radar sensors but also Lidar sensors and dazzlers as well as EM jammers and perhaps even a laser weapon.

Another weapon option that would be interesting would be a 40mm grenade launcher with command detonated grenades which of course would be useful against air and ground targets.

The Americans are developing a combined 12 gauge shotgun that can fire light grenades with a calibre of about 17.5mm... the Russians have the advantage of having KS-17 shotguns that use cut up 23mm cannon barrels (rejected ones) that use an 8 gauge shotgun calibre.

23mm is a good calibre for a grenade launcher that can also fire shotgun shells of a range of different types that would be relatively portable with an AK based Saiga type shotgun with a 25 round drum would be a potent anti drone weapon for last line of defence use too with a mix of birdshot rounds (light pellets but lots of them resulting in multiple hits) and buckshot with fewer pellets that are much heavier and hit harder... to damage structure and engines on a drone.

If they could fit the command detonation stuff into a 23mm cannon shell then a 23mm grenade from a shotgun might be possible too... the lower muzzle velocity means thinner shell walls and more HE.

The point is that everyone from the front line to the last rear line and deep inside your own territory drones are going to be an issue to be aware of.

People don't seem to comprehend how easy it is for drones to penetrate one's airspace and how an extremely good job Russian air defense have been for more than a year and a half.

I'm not gonna mention the US or the Saudi's, but Israel for example that is touted to have some of the best Air defense in the ME can't even detect let alone shoot down a copy of an Iranian drone operated by Hamas launched from the Gaza strip, another such case with Hezbollah flying a drone and filming two Israeli bases, Russia has been at it for almost 2 years while Israeli Air defense assets were exhausted in just one month during couple of the one sided wars they launched on Gaza before drones were mainstream or widespread.

Funny part is I'm sure people here know how small the Gaza strip is, 365 square kilometers which is laughably small and equates to the size of Donetsk city, where Israel has absolute superiority and where every inch is monitored some individuals on here expect Russia to be able to shoot down every threat from a 1000+ Kilometer front not accounting for NATO states which is unrealistic and idiotic to think about.

Not just drones that fly around... Ukraine has soldiers trained and operating behind enemy lines... how hard would it be to set up a drone mine type weapon where drones are places in specific locations and then the team leaves and after a predetermined time the drone launches itself and flys to the target nearby and tries to hit it autonomously.

The first warning will be a tiny drone taking off and flying a short distance to a group of targets.

This means all Russian military and civilian targets need 360 degree awareness of drones that might have little or no RCS or IR signature till possibly the last second as a small drone dives on a trench or vehicle or position.

A laser radar that is operating 24/7 would detect such a threat at max range without broadcasting to sensors kms away a radar signal that could be detected and located... Russian drones are already equipped with LIDAR for accurate 3D mapping of the terrain it is flying over, used for all sorts of purposes including detecting wires and other obstacles that don't often show on normal radar.

Detection needs lots of different sensors and defence needs lots of different mechanisms from jamming and electronic destruction with directed beams of energy. through the kinetic with shells and bullets and missiles to nets and screens and simply camouflaging the target so the drones don't realise you are there.

Of course smoke is another option too as well as decoys and deception.. but also doing the same to the enemy so they are not safe either.

Not sure if this is news but assume it is the 9М317МЭ version.

Filippo Neri
@FilippoNer97498
.
19h
The new battle in Ukraine will be ATACMS against the Buk-M3 system.





Naval version



VestnikRUS
@vestnik_russia
The Buk-M3 also nicknamed Viking, medium-range surface-to-air missile system is a modernized version of the Buk-M2 system, features advanced electronic components and a deadly new missile, and could be regarded as a completely new system. The system is designed, developed, and manufactured by the Russian Defense Company Almaz-Antey.

The Buk-M3 system boasts a new digital computer, high-speed data exchange system and a tele-thermal imaging target designator instead of the tele-optical trackers used in previous models. A battery of Buk-M3 missiles can track and engage up to 36 targets simultaneously, while its advanced 9R31M missile is capable of knocking down all existing flying objects, including highly maneuverable ones, even during active electronic jamming. The Buk-M3 can also engage sea and land targets, due to its vertical launch capability.

VestnikRUS
@vestnik_russia
On May 4, 2024, the Russian Ministry of Defense reported a significant interception of American-made ATACMS (Army Tactical Missile System) missiles. According to the Ministry's announcement today, Russian air defense units successfully destroyed 15 ATACMS missiles, with four being intercepted over the Crimea Peninsula on May 4, 2024.

These interceptions were made possible by the latest version of Russia's Buk air defense missile system, the Buk-M3. The Buk-M3, renowned for its capability to engage multiple aerial targets under severe electronic warfare conditions, proved its effectiveness against the ATACMS, a longer-range missile system recently supplied by the United States to Ukraine.

The ATACMS delivery to Ukraine was disclosed at the end of April 2024, with over 100 units reportedly provided to enhance Ukrainian strike capabilities. This disclosure came from The New York Times, which cited unidentified U.S. officials noting the secretive delivery of these advanced tactical missiles.

Zin Note: As with SCALP, Storm Shadow, Himars, etc... Every new weapons system provided to the Ukraine is effective for a short time and then eventually loses effectiveness as the RF air defense learns how to better intercept them.

It has some capabilities against BM but what they really need is S-300VM which is designed to counter such missiles.

A big plus would be the Abakan variant with newer radars and can be used for city protection with a wheeled chassis.

9М317МE is not a new missile. Was always a part of Shtil-1

Isos wrote:It has some capabilities against BM but what they really need is S-300VM which is designed to counter such missiles.

A big plus would be the Abakan variant with newer radars and can be used for city protection with a wheeled chassis.

Effective, but against ATACMS, a highly costly option.

The niche for BUK is ATACMS and Storm Shadow type missiles... S-300V/M is really for Honest John 2 type missiles or Pershing 2 missile types.

GarryB wrote:The niche for BUK is ATACMS and Storm Shadow type missiles... S-300V/M is really for Honest John 2 type missiles or Pershing 2 missile types.

It seems the 9М317МE being deployed on the BUK 3 is an upgraded version. Not much information is available about the type of upgrade. I'll wager longer range is one of them.

In the top graphic of Johns post it says the range is 70km, which is up from probably about 45km range of BUK, but the altitude performance is astounding... from 15m altitude to 35km altitude. The original (the orcs used to shoot down that airliner) could only reach about 22km and the improved model the Russians use could reach about 24-25km altitude, so 35km is a step up...

The fact that it can intercept targets moving up to 3km per second suggests it is getting borderline able to intercept targets like Zircon... and being a smaller missile than S-300VM it is likely rather more affordable.

The whole purpose of making them smaller is so more could be carried to limit the ability of a unit being overwhelmed by enemy numbers.

The fact that they are carried in launch tubes means drones with tiny HE packages are less likely to set them on fire too.

Does anyone know how 9sH38-3 electro optical tracker for BUK would cue SARH 9m317?

Would it be the same as ATGM - where the system goes into semi automatic command to line of sight?

By what mechanism would that be? We know ATGM could communicate in older models with bulb, and then evolved into laser or radio command

Would 9m317 have a backup radio command guidance that would allow such a seeker to look at a target and then cue 9m317 that way???

I have doubts about it being used to guide missiles. More likely they find the target with optics and turn the radar in its direction which negates jamming. This way they don't use search radars but guidance radar is still used.

Once illumination happens in the direction of the target, missiles will naturalery find the target.