S-350 "Vityaz" SAM System

It's been stated as AESA in literature and on number of Russian sources as well.

Though honestly there is far more to radar than just AESA or PESA, not to mention myriad of hybrid types.

They helped develop AESA for KM-SAM, so no reason not to use that experience (and others).

I hope what you say is true , Also they are not only working on Ga/A based 1st Gen AESA but also on Ga/N based 2nd Gen One.

Austin wrote:I hope what you say is true , Also they are not only working on Ga/A based 1st Gen AESA but also on Ga/N based 2nd Gen One.

poore russians they lag behind sooo much...
http://www.timetoast.com/timelines/northrop-grumman-aesa-radar-history

and that viutaz radar seems to be pesa.
there is a bulge behind antenna on the roof of the cabin.

WoW .. first time we see missile by the Vityaz complex Very Happy

Somebody should do measuring - but by the looks of it, it seems like a 9M96 with smaller range

Just looking at the length to width ratio and comparing it with the longer of the two 9M96 missiles I come up with roughly the same length... a 1:14 ratio of width to length.

Why would it have smaller range?

It would make no sense at all to redesign the 9M96 into a slimmer missile... there is no practical value in such a change.

It was much worse before, but in that case we are talking about total nuclear war. This was most probably said to speed some thing up or with some other purpose.

Clearly this is intended to highlight the fact that the west... mainly NATO has conventional forces that are capable of performing attacks that previously would only be possible with nuclear weapons using conventional weapons.

Likely purposes of saying such things are to prevent a reduction in nuclear weapons for Russia (strategic and Theatre), to justify the introduction of IRBMs and therefore withdraw from the INF treaty, and to justify further spending on the new VKO as much of its role will be to defend Russian airspace.

That looks like 9M96 more slimmer or just my eyes. Looks like a 2 stage missile , I think this missile would be highly manouverable so they dont want to carry the dead body along of booster.

White paint is very slimming...    I very much doubt it is a two stage missile... ignore the line of paint on it... there are generally control surfaces at stage breaks to assure control after separation...

Its very hard to see the radar in the background and figure out if its AESA or a PESA.

Not sure how you could tell either way just by looking at it.

If it is PESA I would be wondering why it is taking so long.

I hope what you say is true , Also they are not only working on Ga/A based 1st Gen AESA but also on Ga/N based 2nd Gen One.

The new VS-121 is not a matchlock. If they are investing a lot of money into AESA I doubt they will want second best.

poore russians they lag behind sooo much...

Yeah... how can they be the aggressor bad guys and also be behind?

Except if it is actually the west that is the brutal imperial bad guys creating the arms race and Russia is just trying to keep up...

lol, RPG does not even hide his idiotic trolling anymore.

Poor poor eastern European troll Russians dominated his country and left him hurt ;(

Austin wrote:Can you link Mindstorm post may be i missed it.

I took some time to find it but here you go LINK

Austin wrote:I hope what you say is true , Also they are not only working on Ga/A based 1st Gen AESA but also on Ga/N based 2nd Gen One.

Who particularly is working on Ga/N based modules? Do you know which company?

It is most likely AESA radar. If it wasn't then GarryB is right, why would it take long? And don't listen to RPG, Buldge on the top? That doesn't even make sense.

Austin wrote:Can you link Mindstorm post may be i missed it.

That looks like 9M96 more slimmer or just my eyes. Looks like a 2 stage missile , I think this missile would be highly manouverable so they dont want to carry the dead body along of booster.

Looking at it the 2nd stage Missile is controlled by small wings and TVC , The second stage also does not look cylindrical but has a broader lower end and tapering out to top some what cylindrical and conical.

Its very hard to see the radar in the background and figure out if its AESA or a PESA.

nope ,its just positon of camera ,zoom , and no markings on missile.

that blue stripe centerbody is thrust vectoring exaust ports , it gives missile more g-pull in low altitude for better accuracy and is more effective then aerodynamic surfaces in high altitude so missile engagement ceiling is higher.

sepheronx wrote:

Austin wrote:I hope what you say is true , Also they are not only working on Ga/A based 1st Gen AESA but also on Ga/N based 2nd Gen One.

Who particularly is working on Ga/N based modules?  Do you know which company?

It is most likely AESA radar.  If it wasn't then GarryB is right, why would it take long?  And don't listen to RPG, Buldge on the top?  That doesn't even make sense.

because its obvious example of reinventing the wheel (very little in performance increase ), corruption at work ,waste of money, and a money pit...
lol you have no idea how pesa works ,where is the twt transmiter , its positioning to phase shifters etc....  
hint- antenna is just phase shifters and beem-steering , the power-producing radiating element is behind it that bulge on the cabin roof.
jesus , so many cocky amateurs...

http://www.armyrecognition.com/images/stories/east_europe/russia/missile_vehicle/flap_lid_b/30N6E_5N63S_Flap_Lid_B_tracking_and_missile_guidance_radar_S-300PMU1_SA-10_Grumble_Russia_Russian_640.jpg

Rpg type 7v wrote:

sepheronx wrote:

Austin wrote:I hope what you say is true , Also they are not only working on Ga/A based 1st Gen AESA but also on Ga/N based 2nd Gen One.

Who particularly is working on Ga/N based modules?  Do you know which company?

It is most likely AESA radar.  If it wasn't then GarryB is right, why would it take long?  And don't listen to RPG, Buldge on the top?  That doesn't even make sense.

because its obvious example of reinventing the wheel (very little in performance increase ), corruption at work ,waste of money, and a money pit...
lol you have no idea how pesa works ,where is the twt transmiter , its positioning to phase shifters etc....  
hint- antenna is just phase shifters and beem-steering , the power-producing radiating element is behind it that bulge on the cabin roof.
jesus , so many cocky amateurs...

http://www.armyrecognition.com/images/stories/east_europe/russia/missile_vehicle/flap_lid_b/30N6E_5N63S_Flap_Lid_B_tracking_and_missile_guidance_radar_S-300PMU1_SA-10_Grumble_Russia_Russian_640.jpg

I will laugh so hard when it turns out to be AESA. Then it would make you look stupid.

sepheronx wrote:I will laugh so hard when it turns out to be AESA.  Then it would make you look stupid.

Actually, he's right in saying it's a PESA. The bulge being referred to is the same basic thing found on the 5N63 and 30N6 radars for the S-300P series, it's the space feed for the radar array. The engagement radars for the HQ-9 (HT-233), HQ-12 (H-200), S-300V (9S32), S-400 (92N6), and Patriot (AN/MPQ-53/65) are all the same type of space-fed PESA. If it was an AESA, you would not see a space-fed array. In this PESA arrangement the radar array itself is basically a focusing lens for the energy sent from the feed element, which is why you'll sometimes see it referred to as an optical feed as well as a space feed.

SOC wrote:

sepheronx wrote:I will laugh so hard when it turns out to be AESA.  Then it would make you look stupid.

Actually, he's right in saying it's a PESA.  The bulge being referred to is the same basic thing found on the 5N63 and 30N6 radars for the S-300P series, it's the space feed for the radar array.  The engagement radars for the HQ-9 (HT-233), HQ-12 (H-200), S-300V (9S32), S-400 (92N6), and Patriot (AN/MPQ-53/65) are all the same type of space-fed PESA.  If it was an AESA, you would not see a space-fed array.  In this PESA arrangement the radar array itself is basically a focusing lens for the energy sent from the feed element, which is why you'll sometimes see it referred to as an optical feed as well as a space feed.

SOC- why would A-A make an AESA for Korea, and stick with PESA for Vityaz?

Could be combined. This is engagement radar, which have to work with higher power. In ECM free environment missiles with ARH don't need much engagement radar, in that case it could work as AESA with it's small R/T modules. But in Heavy ECM, when you need to drive Missile in SARH or any other mode, than you need higher power to overcome ECM and drive missile to the target, so additional high power transmitter could be very welcome in that case.

The only reason why they would use PESA is because 9M96 has been tested with S-400 system using PESA so its faster to develop it.

AA from what i know didnt develop AESA but the missile , Radar was developed by SK

TR1 wrote:

SOC wrote:

sepheronx wrote:I will laugh so hard when it turns out to be AESA.  Then it would make you look stupid.

Actually, he's right in saying it's a PESA.  The bulge being referred to is the same basic thing found on the 5N63 and 30N6 radars for the S-300P series, it's the space feed for the radar array.  The engagement radars for the HQ-9 (HT-233), HQ-12 (H-200), S-300V (9S32), S-400 (92N6), and Patriot (AN/MPQ-53/65) are all the same type of space-fed PESA.  If it was an AESA, you would not see a space-fed array.  In this PESA arrangement the radar array itself is basically a focusing lens for the energy sent from the feed element, which is why you'll sometimes see it referred to as an optical feed as well as a space feed.

SOC- why would A-A make an AESA for Korea, and stick with PESA for Vityaz?

because  its made by koreans, thats their input into km-sam.
dont tell me all this time you guys didnt know elements of and how s-300 radars work?      ????
  


-well you can all thank me latter !@

medo wrote:Could be combined. This is engagement radar, which have to work with higher power. In ECM free environment missiles with ARH don't need much engagement radar, in that case it could work as AESA with it's small R/T modules. But in Heavy ECM, when you need to drive Missile in SARH or any other mode, than you need higher power to overcome ECM and drive missile to the target, so additional high power transmitter could be very welcome in that case.

omg medo, i cant belive it , even you? ,
active missile does home in on its radiation or has a home on jam mode.
why would you develop expensive ARH and then go to SARH mode in the end????
is this guy for REAL?      
you should all go to elektro-technical school. 6 years minimum.
     

Austin wrote:The only reason why they would use PESA is because 9M96 has been tested with S-400 system using PESA so its faster to develop it.

AA from what i know didnt develop AESA but the missile , Radar was developed by SK

South Korean KM-SAM use only smaller 40 km range 9M96 missile, so it's like Redut on Soobrazatelny corvette, which also use only main search radar, same as KM-SAM. Vityaz have longer 150 km range missiles, like Gorshkov fregate and for that range it need engagement radar like Gorshkov will have 4 engagement radars + 1 main search radar. Search radar could be AESA, but engagement radar need higher power, so it could be PESA type, that it could bring 150 km range missile to the target in heavy ECM environment.

Notice nobody respected your opinion RPG?

Then SOC said what you said (but not how you said it) and no one questioned whether he was right or not?

It is about attitude and respect.

Your comments when you are right are as bad if not worse than when you are wrong and for that reason I suspect you will be largely ignored.

It doesn't have to be that way of course... you could man up and apologise for the way you have been behaving... but I suspect that is not going to happen and I am wasting my time.

yea right i said power producing radiating element, behind beam-steering antenna ,he said feed element , in space feed pesa.
now lets get technical, im sure usa uses its own wording.
yeah right ,whatever..... 
youre wrong as usual -some people ,and whoila ones without technical knowledge ,dont respect me ,which is perfectly fine by me actually...
i had plenty of positive votes too  
loser  

I found some info dating back from 2009.

The radar has the industrial designation Izd. 50N6A - multifunction radar. And it's a PESA (described as FAR in Russian). It can track 48 targets, engage 8 and guide 2 missiles per target simultaneously and has significantly more channels compared to S-300's it's meant to replace, according to that info.  

The Vitjaz is for the Airforce/PVO while the BUK-M3 (similar class/performance) is for the Army.

The Vitjaz is apparently going to be presented publicly during MAKS 2013, so we should get more info then.

Rpg type 7v wrote:

medo wrote:Could be combined. This is engagement radar, which have to work with higher power. In ECM free environment missiles with ARH don't need much engagement radar, in that case it could work as AESA with it's small R/T modules. But in Heavy ECM, when you need to drive Missile in SARH or any other mode, than you need higher power to overcome ECM and drive missile to the target, so additional high power transmitter could be very welcome in that case.

omg medo, i cant belive it , even you? ,
active missile does home in on its radiation or has a home on jam mode.
why would you develop expensive ARH and then go to SARH mode in the end????
is this guy for REAL?      
you should all go to elektro-technical school. 6 years minimum.
     

I wrote SARH or any other mode. It depend on missile's homing head, which mode will chose and on jamming signal. Strong escort jammer means, missile need SARH mode, that engagement radar paint the target for missile to see it. If target itself jam missile, than passive lock on jam source is enough. ARH homing head itself could see target in last few kilometers, so you still need to bring missile close enough and in flying time for 150 km, target could well change it's position comparing to predicted one for inertial flight. Any ARH homing head could go down to SARH mode if needed, but SARH could not work in ARH.

AMRAAM with ARH was very effective up to now, because it was never used in ECM environment. Will it be same effective in heavy ECM environment with many escort jammers and ground based jammers?

http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/showthread.php?206005-South-Korea-Unveils-Own-Interceptor-Missile/page5

Some good info about KM-SAM here.

Russia definitely had a role in the radar and system past just missiles.

I'd expect Vityaz radar to be superior in performance, at the very least. It does afterall have higher goals than conservative KM-SAM ranges.

A few points:

- The existence of feedhorns for a space-fed array is indicative of the fact that the radar shown for this variant of Vityaz' is not an AESA (AFAR, АФАР), but it is not an indication that this radar is a PESA;  not all ESAs are either AESAs or PESAs. The apparent existence of a lower subarray (subarrays) can be an indication that the radar is actually a PESA, if that subarray was, for example, for purposes like generating nulls in the antenna pattern. The upper array is probably an L-band array which has IFF as one of its roles.

- The Russian term "FAR" ("ФАР") stands for "ESA" not for PESA.

- The KM-SAM radar is a space-fed PESA.

I had included a little bit on a related issue in a post on Irbis-Eh.

Cyberspec wrote:I found some info dating back from 2009.

The radar has the industrial designation Izd. 50N6A - multifunction radar. And it's a PESA (described as FAR in Russian). It can track 48 targets, engage 8 and guide 2 missiles per target simultaneously and has significantly more channels compared to S-300's it's meant to replace, according to that info.  

The Vitjaz is for the Airforce/PVO while the BUK-M3 (similar class/performance) is for the Army.

The Vitjaz is apparently going to be presented publicly during MAKS 2013, so we should get more info then.

I would bet the radar would be upgraded to guide 12-24 targets for Vityaz , even though it would be a PESA but its not bad , S-400 being what it is , is still a PESA.

( NOTE: EMPAR is a PESA on Western Ships and it can guide 24 ASTER missile , no one every claims EMPAR is bad
http://www.selex-systemsintegration.de/fileadmin/media/pdf/EMPAR.pdf )

BUK-M3 would be a PESA too but with ARH and a range of 70 km while Vityaz would be in a range of 120-125 km knowing what we know from opensource info on 9M96.

I think the first major use of AESA for SAM would come with S-500 RADAR called MARS.

Ofcourse as we know now 20385 would have a Zhuk AESA radar and 22350 would have an AESA too.

I think the main advantage of PESA is its cost effective and Russians being Russians they would build something they know well and incrementally upgrade it to make it better , keeping cost in mind too.

Morpheus Eberhardt wrote:A few points:

- The existence of feedhorns for a space-fed array is indicative of the fact that the radar shown for this variant of Vityaz' is not an AESA (AFAR, АФАР), but it is not an indication that this radar is a PESA;  not all ESAs are either AESAs or PESAs.

? AESA or PESA is basically referring to whether or not the T/R modules in the array face are either generating (AESA) or receiving from somewhere else (PESA) RF energy to transmit. What sort of ESA wouldn't fall under one of those two categories?

Morpheus Eberhardt wrote:The apparent existence of a lower subarray (subarrays) can be an indication that the radar is actually a PESA, if that subarray was, for example, for purposes like generating nulls in the antenna pattern. The upper array is probably an L-band array which has IFF as one of its roles.

It looks like there are possibly two subarrays above the main array face, stacked one atop the other. To get a better impression of what's going on we need an image showing the back of the array face.

Morpheus Eberhardt wrote:- The KM-SAM radar is a space-fed PESA.

I've seen it mentioned in advertising materials as a "plain array active phase radar", possibly implying AESA. However, the rotating antenna cabin does seem large enough to house a space-feed system behind the antenna, so who knows.