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

Good news. Far East will get some new SAMs this year, S-400, Pantsir and Tor-M2. I think S-400 will work with Pantsir, while Tor-M2 will be for ground units or maybe for naval infantry.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xHSVM3f8bcE&feature=player_embedded#!

Interesting one of the Russian titles says range of 48N6 missile is 250 km and altitude of 60 Km

I think it was 48N6DM missile. They didn't shoot the 40N6?

TO be more accurate, the title is killer of Soviet PVO, not modern Russian .

Russia has much smaller air defense system than Soviet Union.

Arrow wrote:

TO be more accurate, the title is killer of Soviet PVO, not modern Russian .

Russia has much smaller air defense system than Soviet Union.

But, by the end of the decade, a much more modern one.

Russia has much smaller air defense system than Soviet Union.

But it also will have a greatly improved digital network with sophisticated modern systems on the ground, in the air and in space.

The modernisation of all the branches will greatly enhance performance and readiness, and new management and cooperation will lead to a much more efficient and effective tool.

Lets face it... the Soviet IADS was vulnerable to all but short range BMs, and cruise missiles represented a real threat too.

Huge improvements in C4IR will radically change the VKKO into something even more formidible.

Arrow wrote:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xHSVM3f8bcE&feature=player_embedded#!

By the way in the video subtitles I have seen something like 60 Km and 250 Km , I assumed the former is the altitude and latter in range.

But do they actually say in that video in the interview with the AD folks that 48N6DM missile has an altitude of 60 Km ?

I think if they do then it is the first time we would have seen specs of 48N6DM in non-export version

"By the way in the video subtitles I have seen something like 60 Km and 250 Km , I assumed the former is the altitude and latter in range."

Not Austin, it is engagement range against ballistic rockets .

Austin i repeat don't lose your mental sanity over those figures.....do you know my last Ferrari (one that nobody on this planet own except me) has a maximum speed of 190 km/h in straight stretch and 135 km /h in curve , i am sure that when the prize will be high enough you will happily accept a race against me and develop a good contest's startegy on the data you own

Mindstorm an engagement altitude of 60 Km for Ballistic Targets would mean much higher for Air Breathing slower targets or targets like Mach 5-6 Hypersonic air breathing platforms like Waverider or Zircon-S. Although these platforms wont travel above 15-20 km.

Any way augurs well for S-400 48N6DM interceptor as they are advartised for intercepting targets travelling at 4.5 km per sec

Arrow wrote:

TO be more accurate, the title is killer of Soviet PVO, not modern Russian .

Russia has much smaller air defense system than Soviet Union.

True, But 1 Pantsir-S1 have same capabilities as 1 Kub (SAM-6) battery and Tor-M2 is equal to one S-125 (SAM-3) battery, so 100 Pantsir-S1 and 100 Tor-M2 could replace 400 SAM-6 and 400 SAM-3. Same goes for Buk-M2/M3, Vityaz and S-400, which could replace larger number of older complexes.

Mindstorm an engagement altitude of 60 Km for Ballistic Targets would mean much higher for Air Breathing slower targets or targets like Mach 5-6 Hypersonic air breathing platforms like Waverider or Zircon-S. Although these platforms wont travel above 15-20 km.

Performance parameters of export weapons are reduced over their domestic equivalents, but as Mindstorm points out the 60km is the range for the engagement of ballistic targets... not the altitude.

The steep flight path of ballistic targets is often a factor in effective engagement ranges for them.

You give examples of Mach 5-6 hypersonic platforms that you estimate will fly at 15-20km altitude... mach 6 is about 1,920m/s and well within the engagement performance of the S-300PMU1, which can engage targets in the 0-2,800m/s flight speed range. Even a mach 12 speed object travels at 3,840m/s, which is of course very fast but still within the capabilities of the S-400s 4.8km/s.

True, But 1 Pantsir-S1 have same capabilities as 1 Kub (SAM-6) battery and Tor-M2 is equal to one S-125 (SAM-3) battery, so 100 Pantsir-S1 and 100 Tor-M2 could replace 400 SAM-6 and 400 SAM-3. Same goes for Buk-M2/M3, Vityaz and S-400, which could replace larger number of older complexes.

Excellent point. Equally in the 70s and 80s the air defence interceptor was the Mig-31 with 120km range AA-9 (R-33) missiles. Today it is the Mig-31BM with likely 280km range domestic R-37M missiles and new model RVV-MD and RVV-SD digital missiles, plus potentially numbers of PAK FAs as well as Su-35s, Su-30s, Mig-29SMTs and either Mig-29M2s or Mig-35s with all new missiles as well, supported by A-100s and satellite based sensors and mobile ground based sensors including optic, thermal, and radar.

The unification of the space defence forces and the PVO into the Aerospace Defence forces will pool together a wide range of resources and systems to make Russian airspace and space the safest it has ever been.

Mindstorm an engagement altitude of 60 Km for Ballistic Targets would mean much higher for Air Breathing slower targets or targets like Mach 5-6 Hypersonic air breathing platforms like Waverider or Zircon-S. Although these platforms wont travel above 15-20 km.

Not Austin, 60 km represent the ....claimed ....."horizontal" range of engagement of 48N6E3 missile (virtual export version of 48N6DM) against balistic targets.

Practically an S-400 launcher with 48N6E3 missiles...following those figures.....can defend from ballistic missile attacks a circle of 120 km of diameter ,the reason is that parameters of interceptions and the related Pk against aerodynamic target - by far the easier to engage and destroy- and balistic targets are substantially differents and this reduce considerably the range of engagements of the latter targets, clear now ?

Oh ok now I get it do remember now of reading this 60 km BM interception some where.

Excellent point. Equally in the 70s and 80s the air defence interceptor was the Mig-31 with 120km range AA-9 (R-33) missiles. Today it is the Mig-31BM with likely 280km range domestic R-37M missiles and new model RVV-MD and RVV-SD digital missiles,

Yes but opponents has a more deadly fighters like F-22 in future F-35. Stealth and supercruise. New Su-35S and MiG-31BM mayby can detect F-22 with a range about only 30-40 km.

In Russian air defense the modern SAM system is S-300PM about only 30 battalions and 5 battalions S-400. They are still based on old S-300PS. Only Moscow defense area is strong. Another city are not well protect.


The SA-15 Tor system Russia has only 126 launcher.
Buk Sa-11 about 300 launcher.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IjZEaf0E41w&feature=player_embedded

Austin wrote:

Arrow wrote:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xHSVM3f8bcE&feature=player_embedded#!

By the way in the video subtitles I have seen something like 60 Km and 250 Km , I assumed the former is the altitude and latter in range.

But do they actually say in that video in the interview with the AD folks that 48N6DM missile has an altitude of 60 Km ?

I think if they do then it is the first time we would have seen specs of 48N6DM in non-export version

You have numerous reports about S-400 having attitude range against BM of 60km and that one report of 40N6 having 185km attitude range.

LINK

Mindstorm wrote:
Not Austin, 60 km represent the ....claimed ....."horizontal" range of engagement of 48N6E3 missile (virtual export version of 48N6DM) against balistic targets.

Practically an S-400 launcher with 48N6E3 missiles...following those figures.....can defend from ballistic missile attacks a circle of 120 km of diameter ,the reason is that parameters of interceptions and the related Pk against aerodynamic target - by far the easier to engage and destroy- and balistic targets are substantially differents and this reduce considerably the range of engagements of the latter targets, clear now ?

True but still Russian comand posts are not like they where in SSSR, they are much more digitalised able to handle much more threats at the same time and integrate different radar systems and missile systems. Cant figure it out why would 60km attitude range be beyond Russia reach.

Yes but opponents has a more deadly fighters like F-22 in future F-35. Stealth and supercruise. New Su-35S and MiG-31BM mayby can detect F-22 with a range about only 30-40 km

Oh sure, sure ...this ,i image, should descend from the fairy tales of figures in the order of 0,0001 Sq meters sold as the average frontal RCS measure of F-22 , true ?



I think that the day that the real average all around RCS figures for this type of aircraft (more than an order of magnitude greater than those of product such as F-117 and B2 at theirs own time very far from Hollywood-like numbers circulating on them on media) will be revealed we will see a long series of mass suicides .

Is important to notice that ,while you cannot find even only a single assertion ,by part of any leading American scientist in the radioelectronic field, that the figures often circulating on public media represent any more than RCS measures ,purely academic, refered to hyper-narrow reradiating cones in head on aspect totally unrepresentatives of the tactically useful average RCS figure for a particular aspect ,on the russian sides leading scientists of the field ,who naturally employ the same Physics Laws of any other scientist in this planet , haven't had any problem (obviously) at cite openly what are the average RCS of aircraft such as F-22

This is by part of Professor Yuriy White General Director and Chief Scientist at Federal State Unitary Enterprise "Scientific-Research Institute of Instrument named Vladimir Tikhomirov" NIIP.

" Обнаруживать «сверхмалозаметные» цели (с ЭПР в 0,01 м2) РЛСУ должна на дальностях до 90 км (это практически соответствует максимальной дальности обнаружения цели класса «истребитель» станциями 4-го поколения на истребителях Су-27 и F-15C). Разрешающая способность при распознавании плотной групповой цели (на расстоянии 50 км) должна составлять 50-100 м по дальности, 5 м/с по скорости и 2,5° по угловым координатам.

Интересно сравнить «дуэльные» возможности авиационных комплексов Су-27СМ2 (Су-35) и F-22A «Сухой», оснащенный «Ирбисом», может обнаружить цель с ЭПР 0.1-0.5 м2 (приблизительно в этом интервале лежит величина эффективной радиолокационной поверхности рассеяния малозаметного самолета Локхид Мартин F/A-22A) на дистанции 165-240 км. В то же время, американский истребитель «видит» своего противника с ЭПР 1 м2 на дистанции лишь 200 км (Jane's All the World's Aircraft 2005-2006). Таким образом, малозаметный «Рэптор» со своей АФАР по части бортового радиолокационного комплекса не имеет никаких реальных преимуществ перед модернизированным «Сухим» в ракетном воздушном бою на «вневизуальной» дальности."



Russians are a very pragmatic people and have very little interests in the childish as absurd "Mission Impossible-like" situations or Wrestling matchs with dense, screaming crowds of decerebrated persons and fans very happy to let this type of garbage warp theirs perception or the world.

Reality, Physical Reality, is much less phantasmagoric and spectacular ,but infinitely more complex and ,for this reason, much more interesting.

Cant figure it out why would 60km attitude range be beyond Russia reach.

Beyond Russia reach ?

Let put it in this way : a 48N6E3 missile can intercept ballistic missiles with maximum range equal or better than those engageable by THAAD, but can intercept also ballistic missiles in this class with depressed trajectories , lower apogee ,widely superior RV's manoeuvring characteristics and pseudo random cycles of speed's variations.

The same export missile can protect an area superior to 250 km of range from :

- AWACS.
- Strategic and tactical Bombers
- Helicopters
- Guided gliding bombs
- Stand-off/in airborne jammers
- Subsonic up to very high supersonic PGM
- Low flying stealthy cruise missiles
- UAV/UCAV
- Some type of perspective hypersonic weapons



We can say that under a pure technical point of view the difference if the same intercurring between a Mercedes-Benz W124 and a Mercedes-Benz W212.


The requirements are dictated by Russian Ministery of Defense ,if you want to see what Russia can produce in the exoatmospheric interceptor department stay tuned for 40N6 and S-500

Mindstorm wrote:Let put it in this way : a 48N6E3 missile can intercept ballistic missiles with maximum range equal or better than those engageable by THAAD, but can intercept also ballistic missiles in this class with depressed trajectories , lower apogee ,widely superior RV's manoeuvring characteristics and pseudo random cycles of speed's variations.

Mindstorm what makes you say that ?

THAAD for all its advertised performance figure falls in 40N6 category and highly specialised HTK system for ABM role though its range is half that of 40N6 which is 200 km and altitude around ~ 150 Km.

Most certainly THAAD in every performance parameter is superior to 48N6E3 and very specialised sytem.

Evolution of AESA Radar Technology

Yes but opponents has a more deadly fighters like F-22 in future F-35. Stealth and supercruise. New Su-35S and MiG-31BM mayby can detect F-22 with a range about only 30-40 km.

I disagree.

The US isn't making any more F-22s and I rather suspect they will never be deployed outside the US.

They simply don't have the range to escort strategic bombers to Russia.

Regarding F-35s they have even shorter range and modest performance, I rather suspect that if the program doesn't collapse with most of the customers blaming the economy to not buy what they promised to buy leading to enormous increases in cost per aircraft that even if they get them most European countries will treat the aircraft like a strike aircraft and use Typhoons and Rafales as their main fighters.

280km range AAM will pretty much ensure tankers are not usable.

There is no reason to think that ground and space based radars cannot detect stealth aircraft at extended ranges using long wave radar and even just optical sensors.

During its first test launch the Mig-31 that launched the R-37 had not detected its target, but received target data from an Su-30 that was closer to the target.

The point is that even passive ground stations could pass target data to interceptors that could then intercept targets they can't see.

In Russian air defense the modern SAM system is S-300PM about only 30 battalions and 5 battalions S-400. They are still based on old S-300PS. Only Moscow defense area is strong. Another city are not well protect.

I think you are ignoring a rather large network of radar stations... starting from strategic over the horizon radars and systems, and of course the national air force.

Old systems will be replaced as new systems become available, that is quite normal.

The SA-15 Tor system Russia has only 126 launcher.
Buk Sa-11 about 300 launcher.

And is making new models of both with even better performance.

Cant figure it out why would 60km attitude range be beyond Russia reach.

It wouldn't be, but no AIRcraft currently operate at that altitude, or are likely to in the foreseeable future.

The only targets that might appear there are ballistic targets and the dedicated ABM SAM S-500 IS going to be able to intercept targets well above 60km.

Most certainly THAAD in every performance parameter is superior to 48N6E3 and very specialised sytem.

THAAD is a one trick pony... like PAC-3 Patriot.

Optimised for one specific role.

In real combat you would need THAAD AND a PAC-2 Patriot or other long range SAM.

S-400 effectively performs both roles, what it lacks in vertical reach it makes up for in the variety of air targets it can engage and in horizontal range.

New Su-35S and MiG-31BM mayby can detect F-22 with a range about only 30-40 km.

Both aircraft will be carrying advance IR detection systems that will likely detect a super cruising F-22 from greatly extended ranges due to operation altitude and friction induced structural heating.

More to the point the F-22 is armed with AMRAAM and is no fantastic dog fighter, so pretty much all the Russian fighters have to do is defeat AMRAAM and it becomes a dogfight which puts the Su-35S and PAK FA in the commanding seat considering they will likely outnumber the US aircraft of which there are only 188, and which don't even have helmet mounted sights and high off boresight AAMs like the Su-27 did in the 1980s.

I would bet my entire savings account that from most angles, Irbis-E can detect F-22 WELL past 50km.
If we are talking about Su-35 being used defensively, then the F-22 will have to utilize its radar to employ its BVR advantage (which in terms of missiles, may actually be a disadvantage given that AMRAAM is neither ramjet nor particularly long ranged), which LPI or not will increase its chance of detection due to radiating elements. And ofc, so far at least, in warfare BVR missiles are far from magic weapons, the F-22s AMRAAM will not be a 100% kill weapon against a modern, maneuvering and well equipped target at long range (same is true for say R-77, just look at engagement charts, in most scenarios "ideal" range isn't even close to realistic range).

So not all is hopeless .

Not even going to bring up ground based platforms, many of which operate in wavelengths that "stealth" provides no help against.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IjZEaf0E41w&feature=player_embedded#!

Speaking of which, nice video.

Austin wrote:SOC had a question on S-300/400 missiles.

What is so sacrosanct on missiles of S-300P/V and 400 series having an upper limit of 30 Km as intercepting altitude atleast thats what is advertised.

Is this the limitation of the missile where rear control surface becomes ineffective due to thin air ?

Easy. The control surfaces don't lock. Above 30 km or so non-locking control surfaces oscillated in flight (very little atmosphere for them to stabilize in) and that affected the trajectory and therefore the overall performance. When they modified the 48N6 for the 70km altitude / 400km range test, they used locking control surfaces to counter this problem.

TR1 wrote:I would bet my entire savings account that from most angles, Irbis-E can detect F-22 WELL past 50km.

Nice, but irrelevant once they get the Nebo-M radar systems operational!

GarryB wrote:The US isn't making any more F-22s and I rather suspect they will never be deployed outside the US.

They simply don't have the range to escort strategic bombers to Russia.

They've already deployed outside the US. Plans to actually permanently base them outside the US went up in smoke when production was capped, but there were plans to do so.

And escorting strategic bombers to Russia has never been an actual mission. The only "escort" they got was IFR platforms.