Pantsir-S1 News Thread:

The Pantsir-SA seems to be fitted with the same weapon station as the Pantsir-S1 which consists of twelve 57E6 surface-to-air guided missiles and two 2A38M30-millimetre automatic guns developed from the two-barreled 30mm GSh-30 gun.

I'm presuming they wrote that before the pics without the cover came out because its got 18 missiles, the S2 radar & the turret section seems to be notably lower volume than either S1 or S2.

I'm wondering if there is less volume due to no guns/ammo &/or newer better electrics or just relocated into the front section?

I'm wondering if there is less volume due to no guns/ammo &/or newer better electrics or just relocated into the front section?

2,000 30mm cannon shells do take up quite a bit of space, plus the servo equipment for pointing and stabilising the guns would take up a bit more, but I suspect their electronics has gotten rather smaller too.

Certainly if modern rifle mounted thermal sights are anything to go by the new models are tiny compared with the older models and also are much more capable... and cheaper.

wel well wellllll , looks like new 40 km missile has appeared. looks kinda anemic (larger booster- smaller warhead)







from the left - pantsir , hermes , new missile.

That new missile looks like SOSNA-R.

A 10km range beam riding missile designed for very high speed flight over fairly short distances that is rather cheap but accurate enough for hitting small targets rapidly.

looks like but its not. its hypersonic needle

Pantsir on Typhoon-K MRAP, sweet!!!

robognus wrote:

What is that quad tubed thing? Does that replace a single missile tube on the Pantsir?

A good way to increase the amount of missiles per tube on the platform.

robognus wrote:

Translation, courtesy of Reddit (I think):

Number | Date | Launch Position | Dist. (km) | Alt. (km) | Speed(km) |Type of Target | Missiles launched
1 | 03.23| Masyaf | 5 | 2 | 360 | Rocket gas cylinder | 1
2 | 03.27 | Hmeymim | 4 | 2 | 1080 | Rocket artillery shell | 1
3 | 03.27 | Hmeymim | 3 | 1.5 | 980 | Rocket artillery shell | 1
4 | 03.29 | Hmeymim | 5 | 4 | 1320 | rocket artilley shell | 1
5 | 04.09 | Tartus | 13.7 | 6.4 | 120 | Heron UAV | 1
6 | 05.04 | Masyaf | 3.5 | 1.5 | 60 | Mini-UAV | 1
7 | 05.11 | Tartus | 3.2 | 2.5 | 110 | Bayraktar mini-UAV | 1
8 | 05.20 | Tartus | 8.8 | 7.3 | 147 | Heron UAV | 1
9 | 05.27 | Tartus | 5 | 9.1 | 110 | RQ-21A UAV | 3
10 | 06.17 | Hmeymim | 15.1 | 11.7 | 90 | Aerostat | 2 
11 | 06.21 | Tartus | 19 | 7.3 | 100 | Small-scale air balloon | 1
12 | 07.06 | Masyaf | 16.1 | 4.1 | 75 | Heron UAV | 1[

robognus wrote:


Yes, four small missiles to destroy drones in one tube.

Their boosters are so much smaller, any idea what the range is like? Does it have enough energy to intercept PGMs?

Hmm I didn't realize Russia had shot down so many Israeli drones. I wonder if the Israelis and the Russians are having an electronic war.

Modified anti-aircraft missile and gun system "Pantsir-SM"

During the International Military Technical Forum "Army-2017" for the first time the photos of the new anti-aircraft missile and gun system "Pantsir-SM" developed by JSC "Design Bureau of Instrument Engineering" (KBP, Tula) were publicly presented. The combat module ZRPK "Pantsir-SM" is installed on the new chassis "Tornado" K-53958 developed by JSC "Remdizel" (Naberezhnye Chelny).

Also mock-ups of perspective small-sized anti-aircraft missiles for the new ZRPK were also presented. It is interesting to note that the development of the Tornado project is conducted in an initial order jointly with the KBP, but under the control of the Russian Ministry of Defense ..



http://bmpd.livejournal.com/2805758.html

AmbiOpinion wrote:

robognus wrote:


Yes, four small missiles to destroy drones in one tube.

Their boosters are so much smaller, any idea what the range is like? Does it have enough energy to intercept PGMs?

Hmm I didn't realize Russia had shot down so many Israeli drones. I wonder if the Israelis and the Russians are having an electronic war.

Wonder? There is no doubt. These fuckers have been aiding opposition groups inside Syria, including the radical ones with intelligence and funds. The Mossad is everywhere in the M.E. As such, their efforts will, in the sum of its parts, hurt the Russian mission in Syria in one way or another aka, Israel is a foe, not friendly. Sending a few drones here or there is childs play...and those reported downed are the ones caught....extrapolate to the ones not caught. You can expect a lot of intelligence gathering by the Israeli's in the form of suveillence, air, land, sea, tapping of comms etc, coupled with assets on the ground, mainly the mossad and perhaps a black-ops here or there... To resume, standard ops in a proxy war.

Their insolence is allowed for a number of reasons: 1: they got nukes. 2: they have a strong air force that can project power in a regional theater. Thus, they're accommodated to a degree to avoid a full fledged confrontation. They're, in essence an extension of the U.S in the Middle East and treated pretty much like so - thanks to American tax payer dollars of course, or these days - debt.

------------------
Has Iran acquired Pantsirs? and if so how many?

Probably Turkish Herons that far North rather than Israeli.

Pretty interesting list of interceptions, wide range of speed/height/distances.
Terminal phase Grads, hits out close to the claimed 20k max.
Seems to relatively struggle a bit with targets up about 10k high but I'm pretty impressed with the number of single missile hits claimed.

four small missiles to destroy drones in one tube.

Seems like a good idea

I wonder if they'll do a similar list for the S-400 including that Global Hawk that officially crashed in California

Edit: other sources say 10k is the claimed max height -> makes sense to struggle with targets up there.

hoom wrote:

I wonder if they'll do a similar list for the S-400 including that Global Hawk that officially crashed in California

Do you really think the S-400 shot down an aircraft in California? Wasn't it flying from one US air base to another inside the US?

No, there is a claim the S-400 in Syria shot down a Globalhawk off Latakia that was doing the rounds about a day before the report of one crashing in California -> assumed the 'crash' is cover for the loss.
Not saying I necessarily believe it but the timing is very interesting

hoom wrote:No, there is a claim the S-400 in Syria shot down a Globalhawk off Latakia that was doing the rounds about a day before the report of one crashing in California -> assumed the 'crash' is cover for the loss.
Not saying I necessarily believe it but the timing is very interesting  

Russia would claim the shoot down proudly if that happened I guess

hoom wrote:No, there is a claim the S-400 in Syria shot down a Globalhawk off Latakia that was doing the rounds about a day before the report of one crashing in California -> assumed the 'crash' is cover for the loss.
Not saying I necessarily believe it but the timing is very interesting  

The US wouldn't let a $200+ million asset be destroyed without raising a hellstorm in the media. Unless they were overflying Syrian territory I can't imagine the Russians would strike at US aircraft, though perhaps the fact that it was unmanned played into the decision. I just don't believe they would do something so ballsy, and I also don't believe it could be covered up.

More powerful firecontrol radar?!

AESA radar with quite an antenna on it. Interesting.

Can't be an AESA if its got that horn out the front.

But it is. Pantsir S2 has AESA radar 2 faced AESA radar. This has already been proven.

Look more carefully at the pic with the cover in Robognus post, it's the fire control/director radar not the search radar.
Whatever it is if it has a separate horn its not AESA.

If I recall this version of Pantsir is supposed to engage out to 40km so with the missiles being command guided the extra range is going to require a much stronger fire control.

hoom wrote:Look more carefully at the pic with the cover in Robognus post, it's the fire control/director radar not the search radar.
Whatever it is if it has a separate horn its not AESA.

If I recall this version of Pantsir is supposed to engage out to 40km so with the missiles being command guided the extra range is going to require a much stronger fire control.

As well, take a look at all other Pantsir systems.  Even S1.  Do you see an Antenna like that?  Although I was never sure if the fire control radar was ESA or what.  All I know is that its search/tracking one is and I assumed they made the fire control radar into AESA too but I guess they didn't.

Edit: Now I think about it, the search/tracking radar being AESA and the fire control radar being ESA is probably ideal.  Although, the Pantsir has another fire control function through its EO system as well, secondary of course and shorter range. Was always curious how the automation process worked that made the two work in tandem.

AFAIK the target tracking radar tracked the target and the outgoing missiles and sent flight commands to the outgoing missile to make it manouver to hit the target.

Having optically guidance means an auto target tracker, like the latest model Kornet... they have no way of tracking the target in terms of range but manouver the missile using a laser beam to control it and make it fly into the target.

The late model Pantsir does not have laser beam riding guidance it uses a simple command guidance, so instead of directing a laser beam to send course corrections the radar of the Pantsir must be able to track up to three actual air targets and also guide four missiles... the fourth target is tracked optically but presumably the course corrections are still sent via command signal.