S-300/400/500 News [Russian Strategic Air Defense] #1

You could be correct, that giant missile from S-300VM could be a base for new S-500 missile with placing additional stage and maybe different and lighter guidance system with ARM and warhead. I think more interesting will be radar complexes, which will enable that very long ranges of missiles (600 km is very long range). This complex will be large and it seems still mobile. This is something, every enemy air force would worry about.

GarryB wrote:

Stealthflanker, keep in mind that the S-300V was never really intended as a long range SAM, it was an Army weapon that was intended to deal with steep diving ballistic weapons aimed at army formations and bases.
There is no reason why the lofted trajectory of the S-400 could not be applied to the S-300V series, and in fact being a two stage weapon the S-300V should offer much better performance because of very high speed and lower drag.

So ?

i never think S-300V didn't or can't use loft glide trajectory vs aircraft target

Couldn´t a 2nd stage with TV + forward side-thrusters do much of the 3rd stage job with less complexity? (the ASTER approach)

Having three stages adds height.

Each stage makes the payload lighter and gives the next stage a better power to weight ratio and lower drag.

By using three stages instead of 2 it makes the final interceptor stage much much lighter, and considering this system will either be up to 600km from its launcher diving at very high speed on its target, or outside the atmosphere above 100km altitude then making it lighter means the side thruster rockets that will manouver the payload will be more effective and allow much greater trajectory changes to hit the target.

It also means that the system can be more easily improved during its operational lifespan.

If you look at the two stage SA-19 SAM as used in the Pantsir, the Tunguska, and the Kashtan, the original solid fuelled booster rocket motor accelerated the missile to 1,000m/s and then fell away. The improved larger rocket booster in the Pantsir-S1 accelerates an improved missile to 1,300m/s and has enabled the effective range of the system to go from 12km to 20km for aerial targets.

Very simply as thrust increases drag increases too. By breaking the thrust into separate stages you can burn fuel much more efficiently. Having a single booster is very much like making the payload an air launched missile in that it extends range and increases speed, but a long range missile is still a big heavy thing.

Making it a three stage missile takes that a step further, allows higher performance and improves terminal options because the payload that intercepts the target is much smaller and lighter than it would be in a two stage system.

Needless to say manoeuvring a 1 ton payload with sensors, side thrusters, and warhead to hit a very high speed target is more efficient than manoeuvring a 3 ton missile that was 7 tons with fuel that is now burnt and with a 3 ton booster rocket that was jettisoned. It makes more sense to jettison that extra 2 tons because it is just drag.

Another problem is that that 3 ton missile is long and now nose heavy because all the fuel weight in the rear is gone so the side thrusters that are manoeuvring the weapon onto target have to cope with centre of gravity issues... which will be different diving down through the atmosphere at long range aircraft targets, or in a vacuum hitting a target 200km up outside the atmosphere.

i never think S-300V didn't or can't use loft glide trajectory vs aircraft target

You didn't, but your estimation of "but i think missile apogee of some 70km and potential flight range of 250km should be achievable " seemed to show you think the S-300V is rather shorter ranged than the S-400. The Standard large missile in the S-400 series is supposed to be able to reach 250km aerial targets, the 400km range lofted model might not be in service but shows the range increase of a lofted trajectory. The S-300V being a two stage system has far more potential with regard to range using a lofted trajectory than S-400, but as I stated air control is not a concern of the Russian Army... they were only interested in steep diving incoming BMs and have not explored the max range potential of the S-300V system AFAIK.

I've been thinking about the need for a exo-atmospheric interceptor in the PVO (or space forces,
or whatever...) in the context of the threats that Russia faces, and I realy don't think there
is much of a case for it.


The main threat that Russia faces is a 1st strike by the West, that incapacitates its nuclear
deterrent to such an extent, that the remaining missiles that it can use to retaliate will
be easily dealt with by the West's ABM systems.


So, how what systems would the West use in such 1st strike?

1. It would never use ICBMs or SLBMs. These come with the sender's adress attached
and before their warheads touched russian soil, their targets would have left
their silos/subs/trucks.

2. Some rocketplane FOBS bomber is a far fetched prospect.

3. A realistic 1st strike would be a coordinated attack by SSNs against russian SSBNs
and non-ballistic stealth vehicles (bombers, UCAVs, cruise missiles) against ICBM silos/trucks,
strategic bomber bases, and C3 infrastructure. Such vehicles could be subsonic, supersonic
or hypersonic, but well within the endo-atmospheric domain.


Taking that into account, I reach the following conclusions about the PVO needs:

1. The build up of the Early Warning network is absolutely vital, especialy in what concerns
counter stealth measures.

2. The deployement of S-400 in numbers should be a priority.

3. The S-500 system development should focus first in endo-atmospheric interceptors, only later,
when affordable, should exo-atmospheric capabilities be considered (unless there is an urgent
need for ASAT capability).

In short, IMHO there is not much use for an exo-atmospheric interceptor in PVO's arsenal for the foreseeable future.

Well the point is that the job of intercepting... ie manouvering in space is rather different than intercepting within the atmosphere.

It makes sense to start with a system designed to intercept inside and outside the atmosphere from the start as this makes it cheaper and simpler to upgrade later on.

Second the S-500 is part of military weapons planning for the next 10-20 years so it is not current in service threats it needs to be able to deal with... it needs to be able to deal with potential future threats too.

So, how what systems would the West use in such 1st strike?

1. It would never use ICBMs or SLBMs. These come with the sender's adress attached
and before their warheads touched russian soil, their targets would have left
their silos/subs/trucks.

2. Some rocketplane FOBS bomber is a far fetched prospect.

3. A realistic 1st strike would be a coordinated attack by SSNs against russian SSBNs
and non-ballistic stealth vehicles (bombers, UCAVs, cruise missiles) against ICBM silos/trucks,
strategic bomber bases, and C3 infrastructure. Such vehicles could be subsonic, supersonic
or hypersonic, but well within the endo-atmospheric domain.

The best first strike by western forces can be worked out... but you need to be aware of a few details.
The TOPOL and TOPOL-M and RS-24 missiles are silo and truck mounted systems and while the silos are fixed the truck mounted systems are required by the START treaty to have operational areas where they are kept in peacetime. In times of tension they can be deployed but that creates a risk where someone might try to steal a nuke so most of the time they stay within a certain area.
With serious lack of funding the Russian Navy had very few SSBNs out on patrol so the vast majority were at their base.

A combined low level attack with B-2s firing long range stealthy cruise missiles along with several Ohio class SSBNs firing from the Med and the Baltic and the Sea of Japan could easily launch hundreds of very accurate weapons on depressed trajectories and high flight speeds to hit sub bases, strategic missile truck bases and land based silos... in fact the B-2s could use conventional weapons to hit silos... they don't even need to penetrate the silo and destroy the missile inside... they could simply destroy the mechanism to open the silos.

Combined with the ABM missiles in Alaska, and however many they will eventually put in Europe and when they finish talks with Japan over a system there the number of nukes the Russians have left to reply with starts to look small.

Add to this new plans of high speed high flying bombers potentially based on replacement ideas for the Space Shuttle and of course very high flying UAVs and UCAVs and even ICBMs with conventional warheads and right now the S-500 might not be the most useful tool in the shed, but in the near future it will become more and more necessary.

3. The S-500 system development should focus first in endo-atmospheric interceptors, only later,
when affordable, should exo-atmospheric capabilities be considered (unless there is an urgent
need for ASAT capability).

S-400 already pretty much handles anything within the atmosphere, the S-500 is supposed to extend its reach... not just duplicate it.

In short, IMHO there is not much use for an exo-atmospheric interceptor in PVO's arsenal for the foreseeable future.

I agree with your areas to focus on but not this. Exo Atmospheric interception takes a lot of high tech to achieve and will not be achievable overnight. They need to start work on it now so it will be ready when it is needed.

Well made points, Garry, I just disagree a little bit with this one:

GarryB wrote:
S-400 already pretty much handles anything within the atmosphere, the S-500 is supposed to extend its reach... not just duplicate it.

I don´t think there is a duplication of capability because S-400 already pretty much handles anything within the atmosphere... up to 30 Km...

Hypersonic cruise vehicles are in the limit/somewhat above of S-400 envelope, and an endo-atmospheric S-500 interceptor
with a ceiling of at least 60km would definetly help there, since that is "low hanging fruit" that Almaz-Antey can
reap already with a modest investment.

The S-500 is needed to fill that gap.

I don´t think there is a duplication of capability because S-400 already pretty much handles anything within the atmosphere... up to 30 Km...

Hypersonic cruise vehicles are in the limit/somewhat above of S-400 envelope, and an endo-atmospheric S-500 interceptor
with a ceiling of at least 60km would definetly help there, since that is "low hanging fruit" that Almaz-Antey can
reap already with a modest investment.

The S-500 is needed to fill that gap.

Sorry I wasn't clear.

What I meant is that building a missile interceptor that operates within the atmosphere is what the S-400 could be.

If you want S-500 to only work inside the atmosphere... say to 60-70km altitude then it would make more sense to simply modify an S-400 missile.

The S-500 is supposed to fill the gap to 200km altitude with the first models and perhaps add anti satellite capability in later models like the GBI (ie 2,000km altitude).

Operationally the advantage is that against countries with ICBMs they can include S-500 vehicles and missiles in S-400 batteries... just in case. For use against countries that lack strategic weapons then the S-500 can be kept at home... but if things change the extra vehicles can be deployed.

All I am saying is that an "in" Atmosphere S-500 could be performed by an S-400 with work. An out of Atmosphere S-500 will bring new and useful capabilities.

In plane terms by suggesting a in atmosphere only S-500 you are suggesting a non-stealthy PAK FA... which is taking away what the S-500/PAK FA actually brings to the party.

The whole purpose of the S-500 is not the potential 600km range, it is the potential 200km height.

The design difference between something that operates inside the atmosphere and one that operates outside the atmosphere is huge... otherwise there is little point in S-500... it would be much simpler to merely modify the S-300 again (like the did to make the S-400 (large missiles).
To manouver in space requires a fundmental change in the final stage manouvering design.
The need for multiple stages is greatly increased... at least two stages and preferably three for best terminal performance.

Looks like there's an Exercise this month where Russia's trying to stop incoming Cruise Missiles:

http://caspionet.kz/eng/general/Shygys2011_tactical_exercises_staged_in_Eastern_Kazakhstan_1308800067.html

Looks like those boys eat better than poor Americans. Some big bellies there. Keep your tanks a little further apart. Munitions bursting overhead raining down would have wiped them all out.

Move soldiers out in smaller teams separated...don't go moving thru a field like that all-together in today's battlefield.


Any other pictures of this Air Defense Exercise out there?

Moscow’s air defense is long ruined – military specialist

A leading military expert has caused a furor by saying that Moscow is incapable of defending itself against a serious air attack.

Missiles that used to be key to Moscow’s defense, the S-300 long-range surface-to-air missiles, are so outdated that they will not be able to protect the Russian capital, declared the co-chairman of Russia’s Expert Air and Space Defense Council, Igor Ashurbeili.

The S-300 missiles are now being removed from production and will be replaced with new S-500 missiles. The substitution, however, will not be completed until 2050, which, Ashurbeili claimed, could leave Moscow without any way to defend itself in case of war.

The claim caused wide outrage among Russia’s military and officials, who say Ashurbeili’s remark in itself poses a danger to Moscow, revealing classified information and thus threatening the capital’s safety.

No one, however, said that the information released is incorrect. Other military specialists say that the facts were widely available long before the fuss and do not expose anything new or threatening.

This is not the first time such information on Russia’s defense has made headlines. In May 2010, a former chief of Russia’s air force, Anatoly Kornukov, claimed that Russia is lagging 25-30 years behind the US in terms of air and space defense and would not be able to repel a potential threat.

The root of the problem, Kornukov said, is in the meltdown of the defense industries in Russia, which have lost qualified personnel and key technologies, leaving the industrial plants in “pitiful condition.”

In Soviet times, the expert added, it was widely known that Russian air defense systems were capable of shooting down 98 percent of intruding enemy planes. Now the figure has shrunk to 20 percent. Therefore, if North Korea or Iran launched an attack on Russia with short-range missiles, Russia would not be capable of shooting them down.

Another former top official in the country’s military, Anatoly Sitnov, who used to be in charge of military equipment for the Defense Ministry, said that Russia’s army has lost 300 key technologies in air and space defense – for example, aircraft plants as well as factories for missile defense systems.

Political analyst Viktor Mizin from the Moscow University of International Relations told RT that there is no reason to be concerned with the state of Russia’s military forces.

“I don’t see any reasons for this kind of panic,” he said. “We are not in a state of Cold War. Of course, the concept of protecting the country differs from that of the Soviet Union. Now we are protecting the major industrial centers, and the S-400 are doing their job well.”

http://rt.com/news/prime-time/moscow-defense-air-attack/

The S-300s in service are still able to do their job.

Production of S-300 is ending so that production of the Vityaz system can be begun and ramped up.

They are building a new factory to make S-400 to increase its production rate, which has so far been a little slow.

There will be a gap where S-300 is not in production and Vityaz is not ready for production either, but that can't really be helped, and it should be kept in mind that there are now two S-400 regiments in Moscow, plus a few remaining S-300 regiments too.

This is rather more defence than most other capitals of the world enjoy.

BTW the idea that North Korea or Iran would launch a missile attack on Moscow is just plain silly... I could understand why they would attack US interests, but they are hardly going to risk retaliation attacking Russia.

This is not the first time such information on Russia’s defense has made headlines. In May 2010, a former chief of Russia’s air force, Anatoly Kornukov, claimed that Russia is lagging 25-30 years behind the US in terms of air and space defense and would not be able to repel a potential threat.

25-30 years ?!!!!!

Translation:

We need to spend much more money on air and space defence because the US has superiority.

This guy is claiming the sky is falling because air and space defence is underfunded compared with what the US is spending.

Considering the US has been spending more on "defence"... well lets be honest it has been spending more on imperialism per year than the rest of the world has spent combined.

More than three quarters of the countries on this planet would be happy for the US defence budget to be their national budget... or their GDP.

The reality is that production of new missiles is slow for the big stuff and that is combined with the problem that they can't produce it fast enough for export and domestic production.

Just looking on paper they have too many in service designed that are all upgraded, but that is also a bit of a blessing.

The new systems are inter service systems and will likely be used by the Navy, the Army, the Air Force, and the Space and Air Defence forces.

From short range to long range they will consist of Morfei, a short range CIWS type missile that will also be an AAM(5km), then Pantsir-S1(20km), then Vityaz(40km,120km), then S-400 (400km), and finally S-500(600km). With the addition of Verba MANPADS these are the Air Forces and Navies and Armies and Space and Air Defence missiles of the future.

Comparable US systems would be Chapparal/Sea Ram, ESSM, Patriot, THAAD, and SM-3. Their main ABM missiles are not really comparable as they are enormous and designed for mid flight interception of missiles, for which Russia would have no where to base.

Other Russian SAMs in service include SA-8, SA-9, SA-10, SA-12, SA-13, SA-14, SA-15, SA-16, SA-11/17, SA-18, SA-19, and SA-22, plus new versions of SA-12 and SA-15, and SA-18, and SA-22. (AFAIK SA-22 was Pantsir, so Pantsir-S1 is a serious upgrade).

I think time of stopping production of S-300 is well planed to retool and prepare production line for Vityaz and Morphei SAMs. It doesn't mean that Almaz-Antey in that time will not produce anything, they still produce S-400, Buk-M2, Tor-M1/M2, S-300V4, etc. If they want to start production of new systems in 2013, 2014, than it is time to start preparing production line and replace old machinery with new ones to have proper quality of new systems and that production line could produce them without problems for few decades.

I don't think air defense of Moscow have any problems. They got two regiments (one brigade) of S-400 and as I know, they will get the third regiment in this year and maybe the fourth next year. They already send one regiment (brigade?) of S-300PM to St Petersburg, which was replaced with S-400. If Moscow air defense is that weak, they will for sure keep those S-300 there. Moscow regiment also get Pantsirs, which also increase capabilities.

Russian air defense will buy quite a lot of S-400 and replacement for S-300 is Vityaz, not S-400.

SOC is a good source of info... and a nice guy too.

Have read that the S-500 will be trailer mounted and will not be a totally mobile system.

Whether that means it is silo based and will be put in existing Moscow ABM silos or whether it can be launched from its container tube after being erected by a separate vehicle is hard to say.

When considered against the number of ICBMs in American service the 68 missiles seems inadequate to offer complete defence, but rather defence against a ‘rogue’ launch.

I would quibble with this comment in that the ABM system around Moscow was never intended as a national defence system to stop everything the US could launch at the entire Warsaw Pact.

Its purpose was to keep Moscow operating long enough to get the launch commands out to the necessary forces to make sure they launch immediately.
As such it only needs to prevent missile impacts for a period of perhaps 10-20 minutes or so, and while the US and NATO and China combined have a lot of missiles the idea that more than 68 warheads would be headed for Moscow is probably an over estimation... the most likely threat would be the dozen or so SLBMs that will be arriving within 5-10 minutes of a conflict... after 30 minutes when the ICBMs arrive from the mainland US the forces will likely have been notified and all the important people will be in their bunkers.

Russian air defense will buy quite a lot of S-400 and replacement for S-300 is Vityaz, not S-400.

And the important point there is that an S-300 TEL has 4 missiles ready to engage targets from any direction, while the Vityaz has 16 missiles at least using the same TEL.

So rather than immediately replacing the S-300s they could make missile packs compatible with existing S-300 launchers to update the really old systems first and get the system into service quickly as they had missile ranges of 70-90km so the 120km long range Vityaz should just drop in.

A new Vityaz system will have a different design TEL with as many as 32 missiles potentially. But could operate with S-300 assets like mast mounted radar and other assets to improve its performance.

Development of S-500 air defense systems behind schedule - paper

RIA Novosti

07:11 05/10/2011

MOSCOW, October 5 (RIA Novosti) - The development of Russia's formidable S-500 air defense system is lagging behind schedule by at least two years, the Izvestia daily said on Wednesday citing a defense industry source.

According to the source, the first prototypes will be ready and tested by 2015, while the deliveries to the Russian army could start in 2017 at the earliest.

"The production cycle of this system is about two years. Therefore, even if the prototypes are ready by 2015, the military will not receive production models earlier than in 2017," the source said.

A source in the Russian Defense Ministry confirmed that the earlier announced schedule of S-500 deliveries in 2015 was "too optimistic," as the prototypes should have already been undergoing field tests to meet the deadlines.

The S-500, a long-range air defense missile system, is expected to become the backbone of a unified aerospace defense system being formed in Russia.

The system is expected to have an extended range of up to 600 km (over 370 miles) and simultaneously engage up to 10 targets.

The Russian military has demanded that the system must be capable of intercepting ballistic missiles and hypersonic cruise missiles and plans to order at least ten S-500 battalions for the future Russian Aerospace Defense.


http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/news/russia/2011/russia-111005-rianovosti01.htm

The S-500, a long-range air defense missile system, is expected to become the backbone of a unified aerospace defense system being formed in Russia.

The important thing to keep in mind is that they are going from air defence being handled by the PVO as part of the Air Force, and Space Forces handling threats in space, to a new Space and Air Defence force that handles threats from 1m above the ground to outer space vehicles/weapons.

There are a lot of changes need to be made and new forces rebuilt and developed.

I rather doubt all that will be ready before 2020 because these forces operate above the 4 military districts but have to cooperate with those districts, and they will need a lot of space based assets to be added before they are effective and they need to look at their ground and air based forces they just acquired and make sense of it.

They need to make choices like will the PAK FA be a good interceptor for Russia, or do they need a new replacement for the Mig-31... perhaps with 5th gen engines and AESA radar, or do they want something more conceptually like the Tu-128 Fiddler which will be a larger aircraft with long range with large missiles, perhaps with super cruise flight performance to extend range etc etc.

[quote="GarryB"]

They need to make choices like will the PAK FA be a good interceptor for Russia, or do they need a new replacement for the Mig-31... perhaps with 5th gen engines and AESA radar, or do they want something more conceptually like the Tu-128 Fiddler which will be a larger aircraft with long range with large missiles, perhaps with super cruise flight performance to extend range etc etc.

hmm reminds me of the Izdelye 7.01 ..

Scaling the required flight speed back from 2.83 of the Mig-31 back to a super cruise performance of maybe 1.6-1.8 should make the design orders of magnitude cheaper and allow much more fuel and weapons to be carried and a much larger AESA array.






With an air launched S-400 like missile that in its ground based version has a range of 400km when launched from above 15,000 metres and at mach 1.5 would likely extend the range greatly... 600km or more... in fact an S-500 might allow putting satellites in low earth orbit...

Russia's Security Service (FSB) has detained a Chinese national they say was trying to gain access to secret information about the S-300 air defense system

13:20 05/10/2011
MOSCOW, October 5 (RIA Novosti)
Tags: S-300, State Security Ministry, FSB, Russia, Moscow

Russia's Federal Security Service (FSB) has detained a Chinese national they say was trying to gain access to secret information about the S-300 air defense system, the FSB said in a statement on Wednesday.

Tun Shenjun was arrested on October 28, 2010. News of his arrest has only just been made public.

"It was established that the Chinese citizen was working for the State Security Ministry, the security agency of the People's Republic of China, as a translator for official delegations and was gathering secret information from Russian citizens about technical and repair documentation for the S-300 missile system," the FSB said.

Russia's General Prosecutor's office filed a criminal case at a Moscow court on October 4.

Russia has supplied the S300 system to China, and Beijing is also licensed to manufacture it.

The S300 has been replaced in Russia with the S400.

The Chinese authorities have yet to comment.

http://www.en.ria.ru/mlitary_news/20111005/167402993.html

Glad to hear the FSB are on the ball.


I have also been thinking...

If the PAK DA is going to use the same 5th gen 18 ton thrust engines of the PAK FA, and is going to be in the 120 ton class... ie fairly similar to the Tu-22M3 bomber, with 4 engines fitted that gives it a thrust of about 72 tons... which is significantly more than the Tu-22M3... though of course using 4 engines where the backfire has only 2 x 25 ton thrust class engines.

The point I am trying to make is that the new production PAK DA will be a fairly large aircraft with the ability to carry lots of fuel on strategic missions and lots of weapons on theatre missions, and aerodynamically will likely be very efficient... perhaps some sort of flying wing, but with that thrust to weight ratio I would suspect a super cruise capability to cover strategic distances in shorter periods of time than aircraft capable of short bursts of high speed that fly most of the way sub sonically.

What I am getting at, and you might have twigged too, this aircraft would be the ideal base for a long range interceptor replacement for the Mig-31... of course it would be much more sense to develop a 5th gen version of one of the 25 ton thrust engines currently used in Russian long range bombers so that the PAK DA design could use three engines instead of 4 to generate 75 tons of thrust instead of 72.
They could probably upgrade the NK-32 to 36 tons of thrust and they could simply use two engines in the PAK DA... and while the Tu-22M3s and Tu-160s are still operational they could retrofit them to these aircraft too.

In fact the four faced AESA radar design could be topped by a 360 degree IR detector similar to the IR sensors used on aircraft to offer full hemisphere detection of rocket plumes or heated nose cones for the purpose of detecting incoming threats like SAMs and AAMs.

Something like this:



(note the ball on the top of the fuselage above the crewman to the right side of the picture)... looks like a soccer ball but with smaller facets.

The advantage of such a ball on top of the AESA array would be that it is also 360 degree continuous coverage, but it is also passive, and considering the missile homes in using an IR view of the world that an IR detection sensor could be used to give an idea of what the target looks like in the IR band to aide the missile in acquiring the target after launch.

GarryB wrote:In fact the four faced AESA radar design could be topped by a 360 degree IR detector similar to the IR sensors used on aircraft to offer full hemisphere detection of rocket plumes or heated nose cones for the purpose of detecting incoming threats like SAMs and AAMs.

You're almost better off using LADAR or a MMW radar sensor, an IR system is not your best bet for an unpowered PGM like a JDAM.

GarryB wrote:(note the ball on the top of the fuselage above the crewman to the right side of the picture)... looks like a soccer ball but with smaller facets.

I actually wrote once about how you could tell Tu-22M sub-variants apart by looking at the additional sensors like the IRCM dome.

GarryB wrote:The advantage of such a ball on top of the AESA array would be that it is also 360 degree continuous coverage, but it is also passive, and considering the missile homes in using an IR view of the world that an IR detection sensor could be used to give an idea of what the target looks like in the IR band to aide the missile in acquiring the target after launch.

Plus, your first drawing seems to take the old MRADS radar set and use it, the one turned into the radar for KM-SAM. They've likely progressed beyond that at this point.

You're almost better off using LADAR or a MMW radar sensor, an IR system is not your best bet for an unpowered PGM like a JDAM.

Morfei is IIR guided so if there is a problem detecting a target in IR then there would be a problem locking the target in IR too.

Of course modern IIR seekers don't need hot targets to get locks.

Plus, your first drawing seems to take the old MRADS radar set and use it, the one turned into the radar for KM-SAM. They've likely progressed beyond that at this point.

Yes, the old radar will be 4 times cheaper as it has one antenna array instead of 4, but the simplicity of a 4 faced array with no need for mechanical rotation/stabilisation systems and of course the fact that it can electronically scan 360 degrees rather than a narrower FOV with a mechanical rotation to cover the skies will mean faster performance.

Russia has many shortrange missile with better range but i think there is something unique about Morfei , to have such a short range for a point defence missile and then to claim it unique they must have something up their sleeve.

I would guess it has a short range because it is designed to be carried in numbers by the PAK FA so by making it ground launched would dramatically reduce its effective range.

As a comparison I remember a ground launched version of the R-77 that was supposed to have a range of 12km in the ground launched model...

A reduction in range by a factor of 5-6, so if Morfei in the ground launched model has a range of 5kms its air launched equivalent should manage about 25-30km...

5km will be enough for the naval version to replace MANPADS and potentially offer a CIWS capability comparable to SEA RAM.

This truck based chassis for the system will be the Air Force and perhaps Space and Air Defence Force model. Any Army model will likely use a more appropriate chassis.
(it light brigade would use a Typhoon chassis, while medium brigade will use Boomerang and Kuranets-25, while likely a front engined armata will be used in heavy brigades.)

This news is worth putting in this thread I think as it has serious implications regarding the S-400 and S-500.

Team VKO Taking Shape
by Russian Defense Policy
Team VKO is taking shape according to Kommersant. Last fall, President Medvedev, of course, ordered the establishment of a unified VKO. Since then, it’s become clear that Space Troops (KV) Commander, General-Lieutenant Oleg Ostapenko would head it.

And KV will be the base for the new service [vid or вид]. According to the Genshtab plan, VKO will unite all PVO and PRO systems. And it will control the current KV, Moscow-based OSK VKO, and PVO units from the Air Forces.

The paper’s Defense Ministry source says VKO’s top officers have been identified, and paperwork was sent for Medvedev’s signature last month. So expect a decree soon.

General-Lieutenant Valeriy Ivanov will be in charge of PVO and PRO for VKO. He’s a 50-year-old career SAM officer, who commanded PVO divisions or corps in the Far East, Volga, and Moscow MDs. From 2007-10, he commanded the Far East’s 11th AVVSPVO. He became commander of the OSK VKO about this time last year.

General-Major Oleg Maydanovich is a 47-year-old KV missile engineer who will head VKO’s space monitoring. He has long service at Plesetsk and Baykonur, and has been chief of both. He’s now chief of Russia’s space systems testing and control center.

Colonel Andrey Ilin will be chief of the VKO’s command and control post at Krasnoznamensk. He served many years at the space tracking post in Shchelkovo. He’s been chief of staff at Plesetsk since last year.

So the VKO is the new Space and Air Defence Forces that combines the old Space defence forces (KV) and the Air Defence Forces (PVO... part of the Air Force) under the control of one guy over the 4 military districts.

This new organisation will be responsible for air and space surveillance and defence from threats of any kind in or above the atmosphere and will be the primary operator of the S-500 and also a major operator of the S-400 as well.

It will operate satellites using optics and radar, aircraft, and land based radar and missiles and optronic sensors.