Pantsir-S1 News Thread:

Just looking at the three images above I would say the side door behind the truck cabin is only on one side and is wrong in the drawing, but I still get the impression that the area behind the cabin for electronics and crew is slightly larger in the new vehicle.

Actually Pantsir have doors on both sides for crew, that they could be quicker inside or outside.

Of course they are currently putting the new naval version into service... perhaps this is testing of that system?

I also think this could be a testbed for a new radar, because this radar was never seen before. I doubt this radar could be serial one for foreign customer. It will be interesting to see if this radar will be part of new Pantsir modification or it is for a new SAM system and this Pantsir is only testing platform. It will be also interesting to see if this radar is in any correlation with new naval version.

It should have much better performance against low flying and small RCS targets and its continuous 360 degree coverage will make it much harder to sneak up on or hit.

I think here could be the answer, why there could be on top left and bottom right of main radar antenna RWR detectors. Maybe those RWR detectors could detect AESA radar on longer distance than radar could detect stealth plane. Radar could also compare datas from both sensors and if there is a bee using AESA radar, than this could be F-22 or F-35.



It seems on the photo, that there are at least two more Pantsirs around this one, but we could not see, what type of search radar they have.

A very valid point... the fact that the system has other antennas and sensors suggests it is more capable of detecting a wider range of threats than the old radar or the newer radar that just looks like a big box.

A careful look at the antenna mount itself suggests to me a large angled flat antenna as a search radar and a wide rectangular panel across the bottom of each radar face.

I understand in the S-300 system they use a similar arrangement for search radars with the lower panel being a data link to other vehicles to share data.

This suggests to me that it is a land based prototype because a ship based system would obviously use more secure and high data rate fibre optic cables to connect to main radars and systems in the command module.

Certainly zooming in close it retains the guns as you can see the shell ejection system to throw empty shells clear of the turret during firing.

AESA radars are expensive and, while capable, putting them on every vehicle would be a little redundant and expensive.
Fitting the command vehicle with this radar, if it is an AESA radar would make sense with the other vehicles in the regiment fitted with the box radar antenna.

I think here could be the answer, why there could be on top left and bottom right of main radar antenna RWR detectors. Maybe those RWR detectors could detect AESA radar on longer distance than radar could detect stealth plane. Radar could also compare datas from both sensors and if there is a bee using AESA radar, than this could be F-22 or F-35.

RWR are always useful because they warn of the presence of a threat so other sensors can be used... remember this radar antenna/structure is not a tracking radar... it just needs to detect a threat and hand over target data to the tracking system... the tracking system might be mmw radar or cm wave radar or thermal sensors or the combined data from a dozen passive sources all combined to give real time 4 dimensional data.

Another point... this system is clearly designed for 8 ready to fire missiles and guns so perhaps this is the Tunguska replacement on a truck chassis? Is this the Tunguska for the light brigades (wheeled air defence vehicle?).

There seems to be an optical pod on the turret roof too.

Also those four large holes in the lower sides of the antenna seem strange. Cooling air intakes with vents along the top of the radar to allow hot air to rise in a natural circulation system of cooling?

Interesting.

Another point... this system is clearly designed for 8 ready to fire missiles and guns so perhaps this is the Tunguska replacement on a truck chassis? Is this the Tunguska for the light brigades (wheeled air defence vehicle?).

There seems to be an optical pod on the turret roof too.

Also those four large holes in the lower sides of the antenna seem strange. Cooling air intakes with vents along the top of the radar to allow hot air to rise in a natural circulation system of cooling?

For me it look normal Pantsir turret with standard guns, 12 missiles launchers, EO system and tracking radar, only search radar is replaced with new one.

Considering that there is more antennas in one place, than additional cooling is necessary.

This suggests to me that it is a land based prototype because a ship based system would obviously use more secure and high data rate fibre optic cables to connect to main radars and systems in the command module.

I agree here with you. Ship version is for sure that in another photo with 4 AESA radars placed in a type of pyramid, because ship have enough power supply. Land based system doesn't have enough power from its generator to supply 4 search radars, 1 tracking radar, EO system, computers and other components, so this could be a compromise with rotating Janus faced radar antenna.

AESA radars are expensive and, while capable, putting them on every vehicle would be a little redundant and expensive.
Fitting the command vehicle with this radar, if it is an AESA radar would make sense with the other vehicles in the regiment fitted with the box radar antenna.

I agree here. But usually command vehicle is battery command post which have battery search radar and it is not missile launcher. Pantsir have that kind of command post although there is no pictures of it. Also command post could have pyramid type of search radar with 4 AESA antennas, because it have enough power supply for it comparing to missile launcher.

This radar is placed on missile launcher. I wonder if they also replace tracking radar with newer one, which could make sense to get capabilities against new types of targets. In other way I don't see a sense to replace existing PESA radar, which is good enough for targets, for which Pantsir is build.

Ship version is for sure that in another photo with 4 AESA radars placed in a type of pyramid, because ship have enough power supply.

That four panel AESA radar with the optical ball I suspect would also be mast mounted because for small corvettes the positioning of the CIWS means that they rarely have full 360 degree views. For example a system mounted at the front of the ship in front of the main deck but behind the main forward gun will have excellent forward arcs of fire but the main deck right behind it will block the rear facing radar antenna. A system mounted on the side of a ship will have forward and aft and the whole side between but the ship behind it will block its view of the other side of the ship.

Probably the best solution for a naval system is to use an external radar system like the ships main radar or a couple of mast mounted setups like the system shown above with only a tracking radar and optics on the weapon mount itself.

I agree here. But usually command vehicle is battery command post which have battery search radar and it is not missile launcher. Pantsir have that kind of command post although there is no pictures of it. Also command post could have pyramid type of search radar with 4 AESA antennas, because it have enough power supply for it comparing to missile launcher.

You mean like the PPRU-1M-2?
http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-Rus-ADCP-CP.html#mozTocId714630

The box shaped radar on the PPRU-1M-2 looks like the search radar on the later model Pantsir-S1 vehicles (before the new Janus model).

You mean like the PPRU-1M-2?
http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-Rus-ADCP-CP.html#mozTocId714630

The box shaped radar on the PPRU-1M-2 looks like the search radar on the later model Pantsir-S1 vehicles (before the new Janus model).

Yes, like PPRU-1M-2 for tracked version or placed on truck for wheeled version like FGR for Roland. I think Pantsir have this battery CP with larger PESA radar placed on the same Kamaz truck. Unfortunately I don't have any picture of it.

For the light brigades and medium brigades and heavy brigades I rather expect the air defence vehicle will be the Pantsir-S1 system mounted on each of the families of vehicles respectively.

Likely the only truck based systems will be for the Air force and Air and Space defence forces.

Absolutely, Pantsir placed on Kamaz trucks is for Air and Space defense. Army units will receive Pantsirs on tracked or wheeled armored vehicles. I only wonder of wheeled armored vehicle will be the same as for Tor-M2.

I suspect the point of creating families based on the vehicle types of Kangaroo, Kurganets-25 and Armata is that the air defence vehicle for each type of brigade (light, medium, and heavy) will use the respective weight class family vehicle.

This suggests to me that the wheeled version will use the 25 ton Kangaroo wheeled chassis... and if they keep TOR then it will use the same chassis too.

It is true, that there is for sometime no news about Tor-M2, although it was reported, that army will receive them this year. Tor-M2 and Pantsir-S1 are similar in their caracteristics and both have one advantage comparing to the other. Pantsir have guns, Tor have cold vertical launch. It only depend which caracteristic you need more in given environment.

I suspect a Pantsir-S1 system will mainly use its guns when reloading missiles as most of the time it will want to hit targets at max range and with being able to guide missiles to 4 targets at once I don't think even 12 missiles will last for too long.

In units with BMP-3M vehicles with good thermal sights and auto target trackers I would think TORs would be fine as the late model TOR has a missile range of 20km and 12-16 missiles ready to launch.

True, Tor-M2 and Pantsir-S1 are in the same class by their capabilities. It is interesting for me, that Tor-M2 was not offered to Air force and airspace defense units, only for army units, while Pantsir is also meant to be in army units, not only in airspace defense.

AFAIK the TOR system is linked to the S-300 and S-400 in the shorad role because of its anti guided weapon capability in regard to anti radiation missiles and cruise missile defence capabilities.

The TOR is a very expensive system and has a sophisticated 3D search radar and phased array tracking radar that is very capable and very expensive. Even a nontracked model will not be cheap... though obviously over the life time of the vehicle the savings will be significant.

http://www.tvzvezda.ru/news/forces/content/201109211830-g86w.htm

Video from TVzvezda about S-400 and Pantsir in military exercise Center-2011. It's nice to see first pictures of Pantsirs with black Russian army licence plates. They also show 91N6 radar for S-400.







Some pictures of Pantsirs from exercise "Ščit Sojuza 2011". Looks like they are not the same as the ones in May 2011 parade in Moscow, because they have shorter "grills" for crew to load it with missiles and rounds, that the first series.

http://militaryrussia.ru/blog/topic-558.html

Interesting article about development and versions of Pantsir.

More I learn about the Pantsir-S1, the more I like it...

Thanks Medo.

More I learn about the Pantsir-S1, the more I like it... Very Happy

Thanks Medo.

Thanks Garry, I like it too.

The only thing I miss is a picture of battery command post (I'm sure it also have battery radar), which article claim, that Russian military receive it in 2010. At least they show transport vehicle with additional missiles for reloading.

Can Pantsyr-S1 intercept a Low and Fast Supersonic Missile like Brahmos ?

What is the maximum speed of a target that Pantsyr-S1 is capable of defending against ?

How about Pantsyr-S1 ability to detect small RCS but slow cruise missile like Kh-101 whose RCS is stated at 0.001 m2 ?

From Medo speed atleast i got answer to one question the maximum speed of the target that Pantsyr-S1 missile can defeat is 1000 m/sec translates to Mach 2.9

Also it says a Mig-29 was detected at 35 Km by its MMW radar and Mig-29 is 5m2 target how much would a 0.001 m2 target will will detected at ?

Austin wrote:
Also it says a Mig-29 was detected at 35 Km by its MMW radar and Mig-29 is 5m2 target how much would a 0.001 m2 target will will detected at ?

the basic 4th Rules of RADAR detection range will give figure of 4,16 km .

Stealthflanker wrote:

Austin wrote:
Also it says a Mig-29 was detected at 35 Km by its MMW radar and Mig-29 is 5m2 target how much would a 0.001 m2 target will will detected at ?

the basic 4th Rules of RADAR detection range will give figure of 4,16 km .

Assuming your calculation is right , Thanks for that. its really not bad for a quick reaction missile. They can still beat a subsonic low rcs target comfortably.

Assuming its a fast Mach 3 target with 0,001 RCS then it would just give it 4 secs from detection to launch .....too fast the missile will beat Pantsyr-S1

Austin wrote:

Assuming its a fast Mach 3 target with 0,001 RCS then it would just give it 4 secs from detection to launch .....too fast the missile will beat Pantsyr-S1

well, the missile can still be detected farther through means of Infra red imagers .. doing mach 3 at typical low flight altitude for cruise missile.. will surely heat it up .

how far is the detection range.. depends on the Pantsyr's IR sensor properties as well as athmosphere..like how big is the aperture and Specific detectivity or "D*" (dee-star).

Pantsirs radar is designed to detect 3 to 5 cm2 RCS what is 0,0003 to 0,0005 m2, so I don't think it will have problems with cruise missiles.

You have to keep in mind that MMW radars are very high frequency, and in the case of the radars fitted to the Pantsir-S1 are not designed for very long range detection and engagement.

In fact that is the reason the Kamov and Mil attack helos have two radars... MMW for close range against ground targets, and CM wave radar for use against aerial targets.

The CM wave radar is more vulnerable to jamming and even ARMs, but offers better range performance against a wide range of targets at the expense of a lower resolution view of the target.

The MMW radar has the resolution to determine whether a ground target has a turret or if it is tracked and how many wheels it has etc etc.

The combination of thermals and radars on the vehicles themselves, supported by the battery radar and of course the other radar and EO assets in the local AD network means there will not be much the Pantsir-S1 cannot deal with... on paper of course.

In the real world crew can use bad tactics, make a mistake, have a very unfortunate mechanical breakdown etc.

i just wonder since Pantsir-S1 is such a capable system , why do they need to waste money building Morfei system , just upgrade the Pantsir-1 Missiles and Guns and make it usable for all 3 service.

I think both, Pantsir-S1 and Tor-M2, are same capable and could do the job of Morphei with longer range missiles. OK, Tor-M2 is for ground forces, so they are not concurrence here. Maybe Pantsir and Morphei will have different roles in air and space defense, where Pansir as mobile system, which could fire on the move will work with S-400 and Vityaz and protect them on the move, while Morphei will work more stationary (VLS) and will have to protect important point targets like radar stations, CPs, airfields, bridges, etc. Morphei will have to hit any bomb or missile, which fly to protected object.