S-300V Army SAM System

INFANTRY'S SKY SHIELD
Military Parade, No. 4, 2010,
Author: Mikhail Krush, Andrei Bochanovsky

Mikhail Krush - chief of Land Forces' Air Defense troops, major general Andrei Bochanovsky - chief of armament service, colonel

An analysis of the armed conflicts of recent decades, which involved the use of modern weapon systems, suggests that their most distinctive feature is the transition from contact warfare, where the major role is assigned to attacks by ground combined-arms groups, to so-called non-contact forms of warfare, where air strikes by aircraft, first of all unmanned vehicles, and precision-guided weapons of various kinds dominate.

Air cover to Land Forces (LF) and inflicting maximum damage to enemy aerospace weapons is provided by army air defense troops. Therefore the additional requirements imposed on the performance of army air defense SAM systems -high mobility, short emplacement time on an unprepared position after a march (less than 3-5 min for theater-level systems and less than 1 min for tactical ones) and short displacement time (3 to 10 sec for operational and tactical systems), unrestricted use of means of mobility of the same type as those employed by the covered troops in any weather and physiographic conditions, protecting the crews and equipment against small arms fire -radically distinguish them from similar SAM systems intended for local (point) air defense. In addition, the combat and technical support assets can operate independently at the level of both large and small units.

Studying and analyzing the problems, the Office of the Chief of Land Forces' army air defense takes purposeful measures to comprehensively enhance the capabilities of the combat, reconnaissance and command & control assets. Together with the LF Major Command, in close coordination with the RF MoD's Aerospace Defense Development and Procurement Department and Main Missile and Artillery Directorate, it has been pursuing a common technical re-equipment policy and has identified the specific ways to retrofit army air defense units.

Over the past sixteen years, new armaments have been scarcely supplied to troops, so the backbone of the LF AD fleet of weapons is made up of models designed and
manufactured in the 1980s - early 1990s. But the weapon development was going on. The existing fleet of armaments offers a significant growth potential, which, if realized, will ensure matching to modern threats and challenges. Efforts to upgrade in-service weapons and develop new advanced models have been undertaken and are under way. They are focused on providing maximum covertness of operations, reducing the direct fire preparation time, improving ECM immunity, increasing the firing capabilities, expanding the scope of targets and the engagement zone, increasing the covered areas while reducing or retaining the existing organization and establishment. As to service characteristics, much emphasis is placed on improving reliability, maintainability, extending service life, reducing the number of settings and adjustments, automating all processes, maximizing the use of common systems and devices, as well as on reducing the crew size and participation in operations and improving crew habitability conditions.

For instance, the S-300V SAM system has been in service with air defense missile (ADM) brigades performing operational-strategic missions since 1988. The main types of targets (intermediate-range ballistic missiles, theater ballistic missiles, theater missiles and tactical missiles) as well as AWACS-type and strategic aircraft are engaged by hypersonic SAM equipped with a powerful directional HE warhead and flying at maximum (6-8M) and medium (5-6M) cruising speeds. The chassis of the system's combat assets uses the major units and components of T-80 and T-72 MBTs.

Upgrading the SAM system to the S-300V3 configuration:

• doubles the engagement range for aerodynamic air targets (up to 150 km for the 9M83 SAM and up to 200 km for 9M82 SAM;

• halves the of SAM launch preparation time;

• increases the area covered against attacks by theater and tactical missiles 2 to 3 times;

• provides engagement of theater missiles and IRBM with a launch range of up to 1100 km;

• offers higher reliability (2.5-fold longer MTBF).

This year will see the completion of the next upgrade phase, which will further improve these parameters 1.5 to 2.3 times.

The Buk-M1 SAM system has been operational with ADM brigades performing operational missions since 1983. Its feature is that a self-propelled launch vehicle encompasses target detection, missile guidance, launch preparation and launch equipment. Such a layout is unrivalled in the world among medium-range SAM systems and provides maximum covertness, survivability and minimum emplacement (displacement) time during use as part of an ADM battalion, and also enables a single self-propelled launch vehicle to independently perform a mission. The latest version, the Buk-M2, is entering the field, which, with the same number of combat assets:

• increases the number of air targets engaged by a ADM bn at once 4 times (from 6 to 24); covered area 2.5 times, and the number of ready-to-launch SAMs 1.5 times;

• can engage tactical missiles with a launch range of 150 to 200 km.

The Tor-M1 SAM system has been in service with ADM battalions of motor rifle (armored) brigades since 1991. Its launch vehicle provides all-aspect engagement of air targets flying at up to 700 m/s through the use of surveillance and guidance radars and vertical launch SAMs. Such a layout makes it possible to conduct target reconnaissance (receive external target designation) when moving on any terrain and engage air targets from an unprepared position within 3 to 5 seconds after stop. In addition, the onboard computer system fully automates the target interception process and allows simultaneous engagement of up to two targets in a given sector.

A new version, the Tor M2U, will begin to enter the filed next year. This is the sole system in its class in the world, which can simultaneously fire on up to four air targets. Moreover, compared to its predecessor, it has 1.2-1.4 times larger engagement zones in altitude, speed and course parameter. To further improve short-range SAM system capabilities, work on doubling the number of missiles carried on the launch vehicle (from 8 to 16) as well as target engagement range and speed is in the final phase.

I'd like to dwell particularly upon man-portable air defense systems (MANPADS), because Russia is among the few countries in the world that can independently develop and manufacture such weapons. In our opinion, since this is the most popular and most effective air defense weapon on the battlefield, it offers much promise. Its maximum covertness of use, short reaction time, high accuracy, ease of training and use pose a serious problem to air threats.



At present, the Igla MANPADS and its modern version, the Igla-S, handle their assigned missions. However, the air weapons and jammers continue to improve, both in numbers and performance. With this in mind, the following areas for MANPADS improvement are being developed: use of passive multi-band seekers, reduction in the weight-dimensional characteristics, increase in warhead performance and ECM immunity, increase in launch readiness time, capability of engaging UAV, increase in the engagement zone in range and altitude.

Practice has shown that MANPADS' capabilities are 90% dependent on the level of gunner training. To exclude such dependence as much as possible, these systems need to be automated. To this end, they are installed on all-terrain vehicles (like the Tigr armored cars and similar vehicles) and the technical solutions enabling automatic guidance and remote launch of MANPADS, found during the development of Gibka and Strelets autonomous self-defense modules for ships, are used. Preliminary calculations suggest that such solutions increase the expected number of destroyed targets, reduce the ADM battery strength and cut the unit training and team building time.

The experience of wars and armed conflicts shows that no matter how effective was the weapon, the realization of all its capabilities, covertness and surprise of employment, battlefield survivability are impossible without integration with reconnaissance and command & control systems. Therefore, in parallel with weapons, a work package on improving the air target reconnaissance system and automated command & control equipment is under way.

For LF AD troops, assimilation of modern reconnaissance and command & control assets is the most serious challenge in this area. In the near future the Polyana-D4M1 automated command & control system and its modifications will successfully cope with it at the operational-strategic and operational levels.

Today, given the dense battle dispositions of motor rifle (armored) brigades and changes in their tactics, as well as the availability of various weapons (from MANPADS and artillery systems to SAM systems), it is most difficult to organize automated control of air defense units at the tactical level - covertness of engagement operations, proper distribution of efforts, efficient target assignment and designation. Because of this, different-type automation devices tools are being routinely replaced at the tactical level with brigade command & control kits, which are part of the Barnaul-T automation equipment set (AES). In terms of its basic characteristics - the number of handled air targets, number and type of superior, subordinate and interacting objects, communication range, scope of tactical and calculation tasks - the Barnaul-T is comparable to its foreign counterparts, while surpassing them in maneuverability, protection, interoperability of control assets, and task setting time.

The single-type Barnaul-T armored command vehicles - from a motor rifle brigade AD officer to a ADM battery commander - share common software/hardware, communications and data transfer equipment, built-in radar and radio air target reconnaissance facilities. Such a structure allows continuous reconnaissance of enemy air targets and control of weapons and AD units of the motor rifle brigade in all kinds of operations (including during the march). In addition, complete automated interaction with the covered troops and senior army commanders drastically reduces the time to plan, prepare operations and recover battle readiness. In terms of its characteristics, the Barnaul-T is suitable for use by the Marine AD and Airborne units.

In conclusion, it may be said that the role and importance of Land Forces' AD troops is steadily growing as the Armed Forces are being reformed. That is why the state armament program, which is being prepared, provides for measures to develop their armaments system. As RF First Deputy Defense Minister V.A. Popovkin noted, the Armed Forces in general, and Land Forces' Air Defense troops in particular, will be radically re-equipped in the coming years, both quantitatively and qualitatively.

GarryB wrote:The article also explains what S-300V4 is too.

GarryB wrote:Didn't you read the article you posted?

The S-300V is the SA-12 system and entered Russian service in 1988. In the 1990s the Russians sold some components of the S-300V to the US and used the money to totally upgrade the system to S-300VM. I don't know if they upgraded their own systems... but I would guess they replaced most of the compromised components as quickly as they could.

S-300 is an airforce/PVO system... the S-300V is the army system though there was some speculation that S-400 would merge the two it seems they like the S-300V series for the Army.

Which one ?

just because you export/sell stuff does not mean you compromise it else
no one would be selling , you sell downgrades stuff and incase of radars
you hide some ECM features and frequencies and reduce performance of
exported system.

I dont think VM was ever operational , it was the same V with some
incremental backend improvements , infact S-300VM suffered the most in
S-300 series due to lack of export potential.

yes but S-300V missile have better performance then S-300 basic missile and has ATBM capability from scratch in case of S-300V

Are MANPADs also part of air force air defense (PVO VVS) or just in
ground forces units (PVO SV). With Barnaul, they could be integrated in
IADS and cover tho holes and shadows of larger SAMs.

In those two pictures is interesting optical device/station. Maybe it is
for testing measurements, but something similar could be used for
visual observation posts in air defense for searching and tracking air
targets and sending data of them to IADS centers, which compare their
data with radar pictures and than deliver targets to SAM units.

The V series remained in operation and likely a few bits of the VM system might have entered service as replacement bits, and the improved missiles and systems were there if the Russian Army bought anything that is what they would have bought.
The VM was designed at a time when the Army wasn't buying very much at all and the fact that it wasn't bought in numbers doesn't matter much because S-300V3 is actually VM2 and the S-300VM4 they will start producing is actually S-300VM3 so the effort and time and money was not wasted because it was just part of the development chain.

More and more assets in the Russian military will have all weather day night optics and they will all be able to contribute information on the air situation, though most information will come from radar... radar that are turned on and radar that are turned of but just listening. A radar reflection from an object in the sky that is captured by a radar on the ground can give a precise direction and if several other radars get similar reflections you can line up the reflections and get a source even if the target is a stealth target and is redirecting its radar emissions away from the radar emitting the signal the radars that are just listening can detect the target... an optical system can confirm as the dark target covers stars as it flys past them.

I don't think S-300V, S-300VM or S-300V4 will be very different in their
outside, but very much inside, specially radar electronics, missile
guidance electronics, missile homing heads, etc.

Will S-300V4 get missiles with ARH, or they will use older way of
missile guidance? Any new units of S-300V4 will be great improvement for
ground forces air defense.

True. But is a big difference if you have good working network of visual
observation posts and if you don't have it. If you have that network,
than you could turn off all your radars and you will still have a clear
control of your air space. If you don't have it, turn off all radars and
air defense is blind.

I think you are missing the point. Russia doesn't need a network of radars. What they need is an air defence network that sensors of all types including both passive and active sensors that can plug in to the network to share data with all other assets connected to the network. The network will be built like the internet which has lots of hubs all over the place with multiple connections both wired and wireless so that if a hub is brought down everything has multiple connections and data can be rerouted so the system continues to communicate despite the damage.
In such a setup you would never just turn off all your radars it makes more sense to keep many of your radars on but also a few will be listening rather than emitting. There are all sorts of things the Russians have developed to defend their radars and they include S-300 and Pantsir and SA-3 and TOR, but they also have decoy systems that transmit on the same frequencies as the main radar and take power from the main radar but are situated 400m or more away, so any ARMs detected can be distracted by stopping emissions from the main radar and emitting from the decoys, or a pantsir could simply shoot down the HARM and the radar being protected can continue to broadcast. If the ARM hits the antenna will likely be damaged or destroyed so the unit will move everything that survived and a replacement components brought in to replace the lost parts and it can start up a few hours later.
Of course the airforce will not be sitting idly by watching an opponent flying in and launching ARMs either...

medo wrote:Will S-300V4 be new build systems or just modernized existing S-300V?

The S-300V4 specs still remains classified and they arnt telling yet ,my bet would be its similar to Anetey-2500.

Austin wrote:[Never heard of S-1000 project what it is ?

GarryB wrote:S-300V was the base system and S-300V2 is therefore S-300VM, which is also known as Antei-2500.

S-300V4 likely represents further enhanced systems produced by incorporating Antey-2500 and other improvements.

So even if S-300V4 reaches what Antey 2500 was suppose to be it wont be a small achievement.

Austin wrote:No Antey 2500 was an improved variant of S-300VM , it had the ability to intercept a IRBM class missile with a range of 2,500 km.

It is not certain yet if an actual prototype was built but it was certainly dangled for export but it didnt meet much success yet.

I read though Venezeula is buying the Antey 2500 system and its currently being built.

Its a lot of speculation on S-300V4 unless they come up with concrete details.

GarryB wrote:But wasn't the Antei-2500 just an upgrade of both the existing S-300V missiles

What. Antey-2500 is the export model of the S-300VM. Antey-2500D is the improved model.

Not just missiles, the GRILL PAN radar also received a new array modeled after the HIGH SCREEN array to significantly boost performance in azimuth and altitude. S-300VM/Antey-2500 was a relatively serious upgrade, making it all the more interesting that the S-300V4 will likely enjoy further enhanced performance.

For close range engagement T-50 may use K-74M2 short range AAM , the missile has a matrix IR seeker head capable of discerning real targets from decoy and having twice the lock on range of R-73 AAM.

Several advanced air to air missile is under development for PAK-FA, at ranges up to 250 km medium range AAM designated 180-PD and powered by Ramjet engine may be used.