S-300P/400 News [Russian Strategic Air Defense] #3

GarryB wrote:Well first of all you need to make your signals unique and identifiable...

How can signals be made unique and identifiable ?

GarryB wrote:so the missiles can tell what is a command signal, what is a real radar return from their on board ARH seeker, but also what is enemy generated and to ignore enemy generated signals.

EW/Jamming searches the RF spectrum for emissions and analyze the results to exploit the missiles sensors involved. Exploitation includes tactical early warning, identification for counter weapon selection and recording to support countermeasures development. This provides a means of determining the signal modulation, sidebands, pulse width, and PRF. From this information the signal can be identified and associated with a specific threat or platform. This is mot efficiently performed by a digital computer, but can be done by manual analysis and consulting publications.

So I don't see how the missiles of the S-400 or any other similar system can be made resistant to jamming.

How can signals be made unique and identifiable ?

Code them. When you speak on the telephone the microphone in the telephone can pick up an enormous range of sounds and frequencies... many your ear can't even hear and sounds you mouth is not able to make... in the space of one telephone or radio conversation you could burst transmit a billion bits of coded communications in the background of the actual conversation. Those billion bits could be encrypted. 99.999% of the transmission could just be bollocks... useless information put there to waste the time of the enemy, but they wont know until they can decode it all.

This can all be software driven so any hardware that is captured doesn't get to updates, or gets updates for special compromised hardware and seems to function normally but does not reveal anything of value.

They are not new to the game. IFF is something aircraft use to identify themselves to allies and friends or neutral parties when moving through international airspace... at one time if you send a signal to a plane it then squawked a reply... obviously that was abused... Israel had a system that squawked everyone and by setting up listening posts around the place all the replies were plotted to locate all enemy aircraft nearby... they didn't need to track them on radar, just sending the challenge code on their IFF system... even if it was wrong would result in them signaling back and revealing their presence and general location... obviously now you need to send the correct code to get any response... it is a game of measure and countermeasure... not easy but doable.

So I don't see how the missiles of the S-400 or any other similar system can be made resistant to jamming.

Well how do laser homing weapons hit their targets?

I mean if I shine a laser at a tank a few kms away the laser light will reflect off the target and the laser homing missile or bomb will detect the reflections and home in on that laser light, but sunlight is white and contains all the colours of light and light above and below visible light that laser target markers used to illuminate ther targets.
The guided weapon is not just looking for a particular colour of light, it is looking for a coded modulated laser signal... the target can be painted in colours that do not reflect frequency ranges used for laser target markers, in fact they might set up smoke grenades nearby to be launched in front of the tank if a laser has been detected, so the reflected laser energy will be reflected off the smoke 100m in front of the tank target.

The point is that any method you try to jam a missile can be defeated or targeted... if the US send a drone to transmit noise on the communications channels used to direct missiles then shooting down the drone becomes the obvious solution... a missile with home on jam capability being the obvious immediate solution... the missile is already designed to receive signals in a frequency at a certain modulation, so a jamming signal should be relatively easy to detect and locate and home in on.

At best all they actually need to do is have the missile able to orient itself... where was it launched from and where is it going... command signals coming from where it is going should be ignored and command signals from where it came from should be followed... if command signals coming from where you are going become overpowering then use onboard radar to find source and destroy it... now of course the enemy might use this to their advantage and set up lots of jammers so missiles fired at say a strike package of aircraft could release small 100kg gliding bombs whose payload is a jammer rather than a HE warhead, and each missile fired at the group is distracted by these bombs which are destroyed but allows the aircraft to continue on their mission.

Obviously the SAM system can detect such jamming platforms as its radar and antenna are much much bigger and much more powerful than anything fitted to a missile, so they might try to overrule the missiles and use their own power to burn through the jamming and target the sources of the problem...

https://twitter.com/krakek1/status/1171682544150093824?s=09

What is 1 battalion composed of ?



Rob Lee
@RALee85
·
10h
Almaz-Antei announced that they have delivered the first S-400 regimental set to the Russian military this year, presumably to the 1536th Anti-Aircraft Missile Regiment in Rostov-on-Don. This means the Russian Military has received 57 S-400 battalions.

Anti-aircraft missile battalions of S-400 consists of:
- management;
- Radio Technical battery (Department of command and control, separation of receiving and transmitting devices, separation of radar reconnaissance, where 1 unit 92N6E multifunction control radars, mobile tower 1 unit 40V6M for antenna post 92N6E, 1 unit 96L6E all-altitude radar...);
- 2 Fire battery (with 4 units 5P85TE2 launchers each);
- Electromechanical maintenance unit;
- Automotive platoon;
- Communications platoon;
- survey unit;                                                                  
- logistics unit;


This is typical 8 TEL battalion. There are some 4 and 6 TEL units out there presently.

The original Plan was for 56 battalions by the end of 2020 but suspect with production of S-500 and S-350 taking longer to commence then funds and efforts were put into the S-400.

George1 wrote:Demonstration to Serbian military personnel in Russia (during Russian-Serbian air defense exercise “Slavic Shield - 2019”) of a transport launcher (TPU) 5P85S2 of S-400 SAM system with the placement on it simultaneously of a transport and launch container of 48N6 anti-aircraft missiles and a package of four transport and launch containers of 9M96 anti-aircraft missiles.

Well this shows the S-350 is technically already operational as it is clearly deployed with S-400 batteries...



At one minute and four seconds in this video you can clearly see an S-400 TEL with only two tube locations filled... ie with the tubes lying down horizontal only the two bottom tubes attached with the top two tubes missing, where one is a standard full sized missile tube with presumably a 250km range S-400 missile, while in place of the other tube a quad pack for 9M96 missiles of unknown types.. probably 150km range models.

So if Israel can cross Syrian airspace with impunity... why are they not doing that?

Why are all their attacks based from the mountains of neighbouring countries with stand off weapons, or launched from the US controlled regions of Syrian airspace pretending to be American aircraft?

These people clearly don't understand what an IADS is, and the relevance of being connected to one that includes better equipment than what you have on your own.

The fact that the Syrians used to have old SAMs in their air defence system limited their ability to track targets to the level of radar they were equipped with.

Add S-300 systems and the radar picture improves radically... but only for the S-300 batteries using it.

Add the entire Syrian AD network to the Russian IADS network and all of a sudden, not only do S-125 and other Syrian batteries get an air picture of much better quality from their own S-300 batteries, but they also get information from all the Russian radar sites as well as their S-400 and S-300V4 batteries there too... so the suggestion that the Russians can see but the Syrians can't is just silly.

It is more likely that the Israelis are lying... like they did regarding the Il-20 shootdown.

S-400s in Eastern Military District hit targets of new type at proving ground in Buryatiya

"During the live firing phase the most complex situation was created at the proving ground to simulate an enemy air attack. New types of targets were added. S-400 crews carried out ten launches of guided air defense missiles to hit all targets, including high-speed and maneuverable ones flying at extremely low altitudes," the news release runs.

https://tass.com/defense/1079410

S-350 missiles would be much better suited to low flying threats of all types.

In addition to being smaller and lighter and able to be carried in greater numbers of course.

Contents wouldn't be too different than brand new S-400 missiles of greater range so they might even be cheaper.

Will be interesting... because US and Saudi Arabian claims the missiles and drones came from Iran... all those ships and aircraft and ground and air based radar... how could such an attack be missed... and how will this make europe feel... Iranian drones and missiles are not nothing, but Russia has rather more missiles of a much greater variety that are better, and european defences are probably not as good on paper as Saudi defences...

I'm sceptical about these reports that the missiles/drones came from Iranian territory...it's probably just a media smokescreen.

As for a hypothetical conflict in Europe, we can only speculate. Most European countries don't really have large Air-Defence forces. But I guess there would be more things like AWACS and other types of Recon planes flying around

S-350 missiles would be much better suited to low flying threats of all types.

S-400 is better. It can use the same missiles but it also has more radars and better ones of all sort when deployed.

S-350 seems to be much simplier and with only 1 engagement radar and 1 surveillance radar. But I'm not sure about that. To be verified.

Buk M2 should also be cheaper but more limited.

I'm sceptical about these reports that the missiles/drones came from Iranian territory...it's probably just a media smokescreen.

For all we know these missiles and drones could have been launched from inside Saudi territory... I mean the Houthis are claiming they did it and they share a border with Saudi Arabia... it is not their first attack on targets inside Saudi Arabia that were not intercepted and therefore likely not detected either.

If they came from Iran it is actually much worse than if the houthis launched the attack from Yemen because on paper Iran is a rather more serious threat to SA than Yemen is and if they didn't see it coming that suggests some really serious gaps in their air defences... which they have literally spent billions on...

As for a hypothetical conflict in Europe, we can only speculate. Most European countries don't really have large Air-Defence forces. But I guess there would be more things like AWACS and other types of Recon planes flying around

Probably the best western IADS are on their ships and Saudi Arabia has a large stretch of flat open water between them and Iran where you really can't hide a missile or drone... europe doesn't even have that advantage...

Saudi Arabia is western oriented when it comes to air defence... it is air attack with the air component doing double duty as air defence but most of the time... NOT.

Most of their air power will be being used for attacks and wont be available to defend anything but themselves... they need to buy more planes... 200 F-35s would end the regime just on cost of operations.

S-400 is better. It can use the same missiles but it also has more radars and better ones of all sort when deployed.

S-350 seems to be much simplier and with only 1 engagement radar and 1 surveillance radar. But I'm not sure about that. To be verified.

But the point is that both S-400 and S-350 batteries can have S-350 missiles... and being able to have four times more S-350s than S-400s means if they do have S-350s they can be equipped with rather more missiles.

For low flying targets a battery on its own likely wont be detecting drones and cruise missiles at much more than 20-30km at best... but with an AWACS platform and other radars it could engage low flying targets out to the max missile range of 150km or so... which is plenty if the battery is located near the targets.

With air power supporting a fighter like an Su-35 with 14 weapon hard points... assuming 2 pylons are taken up with ESM pods then it can carry 12 air to air missiles to take down drones and cruise missiles.

Some sort of air launched Pantsir-SM missile... the small quad missiles in each tube would be ideal for fighter aircraft to take on cruise missiles and drones... perhaps a cluster of four tubes per main wing pylon... say six pylons with four missile tubes on each pylon and four missiles in each tube would equate to 24 tubes with four slim missiles in each tube... so guided 96 missiles... with an air launch they would probably be 25-30km range command guided missiles... which would be pretty useful to deal with a swarm attack.

Being non stealthy, carrying these tubes wont ruin their performance... they would probably be rather light weight... a light aircraft like a Yak-130 could carry two tubes per pylon on four wing pylons, for 8 tubes with 32 missiles per aircraft and space for a centreline targeting pod and wing tip R-74s... or perhaps twin pack Igla-S or Verba missiles.

The thing is that you can't afford to have these aircraft flying around all the time in case there is an attack... it is called a surprise attack for a reason... and if you leave any gaps then you are just asking to be surprised by an attack from that direction... you could put cruise missiles and drones on a cargo ship and launch from any direction you like...

I would suspect the S-350 comes with some pretty sophisticated radars and air defence sensors... likely including IIR sensors because the 9M100 will be IIR guided.

BUK is used by the Russian Army (and Navy) so it would be defending operational units but not used for general air defence of the country.

I seem to remember a US programme from the late 1980s and early 1990s with a small guided missile called a wasp or something that was supposed to be carried in huge numbers... something like 7 missiles to a weapon pylon, and these were guided weapons to take out armour in enormous numbers... something like that would be interesting.

The Pantsir is a two stage missile with a large solid rocket booster, but for air launched models they probably wouldn't need anything like the size of booster and could be made smaller and lighter like the four missile to a tube variant for the ground based missile for use at close range against drones.

Even something like TOR might be a little too big... a slimmed down TOR carried in bundles... but then you say... well why not go the other way and look at 80mm unguided rocket pods with a laser homing seeker with 20 rockets per pod and already standard across the air force and other armed services... and for extra range there is always the 122mm 5 shot rocket pods for the heavy air to ground rockets intended to take out hardened aircraft shelters and bunkers and fortified positions.

A small ramjet motor and your 80mm rockets could have a rather significant powered range...

Hole wrote:S-350 has no engagement radar. Each missile has an actice radar seeker.


The 50N6 is a surveillance/early warning radar.

If it's intermixed with S-400 regiments it'll probably utilize one of theirs.

Hole wrote:S-350 has no engagement radar. Each missile has an actice radar seeker.


The 50N6 is a surveillance/early warning radar.

It's multi function radar working in X band that is used for tracking and surveillance.

Contrary to what US tried to make everyone believe, ARH missiles still need another radar to track the target for most of the flight. Their radars start working only few seconds before hiting the target. Generally 15-20km away.

Surveillance radar takes time to refresh targets coordinates but for the engagement you need to know what the target is doing in real time, specially if it's doing evasive manoeuvre and your missile has still not turned on its own radar.

So "the fire and forget aim 120, launch it and turn away" they love to talk about is total bullshit.  

They are also much more expensive than semi active radar missiles or radio commanded ones.

X-band allso means it is affected by stealth. Russia will use it in its IADS with other low frequency radars but the system itself is well affected by stealth of new jets and missiles do good luck exporting this.

The other issue is that the radar is very low which is not good against cruise missiles. Naval variant is much better for that role.

It's a very simplified s-400 which alone isn't that good. The overall system should be cheap but ARH missiles are expensive. They should add a L band radar, for exemple the small nebo they presented at army2019. And mke a mast mounted 50N6.


More about it:

https://www.armyrecognition.com/vityaz_50r6_air_defense_missile_systems_vehicles_u/50n6a_multi-function_mobile_tracking_radar_vityaz_50r6_missile_system_technical_data_sheet_pictures.html

So it can track 40 and engage 8 with 2 missiles each. Which means it has a track whike scan mode like fighter's radars.

The target location can be acquired by a range of sources... including aircraft... the S-350 is part of a network and any node on that network can provide target data to allow an engagement to take place.

The first test of the R-37 AAM for the MiG-31M took place before the MiG-31Ms radar was ready so an Su-30 flying closer to the target tracked the target and passed target data back to the launch aircraft. The R-37 missile flew 300km to the target on that intercept, a target the aircraft it was launched from never detected with its radar.

The whole point of ARH for the S-350 is to allow the battery to engage targets behind direct line of site of the battery that launches the missile like a cruise missile.

Air borne radar or other ground based radar can be used to detect targets and provide intercept information.

The Standard TEL for the S-400 can carry 4 rather big missiles of 250km or 400km range, or it can carry up to 16 S-350 missiles with much less range.

The TEL for the S-350 is smaller and lighter and only carries 12 missiles of the 9M96 type, or four times more 9M100 short range missiles.

In many ways the S-350 is intended to replace the old S-300 missiles, and enhance the ability of the S-400 to handle large numbers of targets at once.

For the Russians I would expect they might prefer to fire off older model systems like the S-125 at incoming drones and cruise missiles... in fact using very old SAMs as rocket boosters to ground launch cruise missiles would be a useful way of dealing with all the SAMs they likely have in storage.

A fundamentally new generation: the Almaz-Antey Concern was named the main features of the S-500

https://tvzvezda.ru/news/opk/content/2019618812-4DPaZ.html

To replace the S-500: the developer revealed details about the Russian air defense systems of the future

https://tvzvezda.ru/news/opk/content/201808211302-47nh.htm

"Prometheus" ask for fire: S-500 systems tested in Syria

Testing the latest weapons was considered successful



October 2, 2019 00:01
Alexey Ramm Alexey Kozachenko Bogdan Stepova

In Syria, the most important elements of the Russian S-500 “Prometheus” air defense system have been tested. During testing, certain problems were identified in the operation of the equipment, but they were able to be quickly eliminated. The tests have already been completed and recognized successful, sources in the Ministry of Defense and the military-industrial complex told Izvestia. The effectiveness of the entire system depends on the uptime of the combat control point and the new all-high-altitude S-500 radar-detector, military experts say.

Wear work
During the tests that precede deliveries to the armed forces, special attention is always paid to the uninterrupted operation of all their components, said the former deputy commander-in-chief of the Russian Air Force on issues of the CIS integrated air defense system, Lieutenant General Aitech Bizhev.

“All equipment before running into the series must be run in,” he explained to Izvestia. - It is tested in harsh technical and climatic conditions and literally works for wear. Only such a mode of operation can identify deficiencies. After that, all breakdowns and problems are summarized, activated and carried out to eliminate them. Syria is well suited for such trials - it is always hot there, a lot of dust. In addition, the radar has to work around the clock - the situation in the republic is turbulent and anti-aircraft gunners must constantly maintain a radar field.

During the tests, great attention is also paid to the ergonomics of workplaces for crew members, the expert added.

Modeled after Hmeimim
The S-500 “Prometheus” system will also include a combat control point (PBU) with an automatic control system (ACS), explained Dmitry Kornev, editor-in-chief of the Military Russia portal. PBU is the brain of Prometheus. Its equipment provides the operation of a whole anti-aircraft connection. All information from the radars of not only the S-500 regiment, but also third-party radars, anti-aircraft systems and higher air defense command posts flocks here. Electronics of modern PBUs are able to determine goals and issue commands to defeat in automatic mode.

In addition, the kit includes a radar detection system (RLC), which is responsible for the long-distance search and identification of ballistic and aerodynamic targets. The S-500 also needs a multi-functional "backlight" radar - its main task is to capture the target and bring anti-aircraft missiles to it.

For the "five hundred", as well as for the S-400, a long-range high-altitude radar detector has been developed. It allows you to most accurately set the coordinates and flight path of ballistic and aerodynamic targets. This radar is capable of finding rockets, planes, helicopters and small drones at any altitude.

The tense situation in the Syrian Arab Republic provides a good opportunity to check the PBU and radar detectors, said Dmitry Kornev.

“The high-altitude radar and the PBU allow building reliable air defense without external sources of information,” the expert noted. - A high-altitude detector helps you track targets in time. PBU - to correctly distribute them between the air defense systems of a particular area. In particular, they can involve other complexes in repelling attacks. For example, entrust the “Bukam” or “Shell” the destruction of individual targets. According to a similar principle, the defense of the Khmeimim military base in Syria is being built.

An oil refinery in Saudi Arabia that was recently attacked by drones did not have such a defense system, Dmitry Kornev emphasized. Otherwise, the blow could be repelled, he is sure.

Full Article
https://iz.ru/927353/aleksei-ramm-aleksei-kozachenko-bogdan-stepovoi/prometei-prosiat-ognia-sistemy-s-500-ispytali-v-sirii

@Syrian_MC
@Syrian_MC
·
18m
Reportedly:
About two months ago #Russia tested the S-500 in #Syria against a target (likely unmanned Mig-25)
The missile was launched from the coastal line towards the south east.

Isos wrote:@Syrian_MC
@Syrian_MC
·
18m
Reportedly:
About two months ago #Russia tested the S-500 in #Syria against a target (likely unmanned Mig-25)
The missile was launched from the coastal line towards the south east.

Unmanned Mig-25??