Pantsir missile/gun AD system: #2

Pantsir on last leg of journey to Serbia having arrived on an AN-124 a couple of days ago.

Picture posted, at suggestion of Isos, as Serbia optimised camouflage.

JohninMK wrote:Pantsir on last leg of journey to Serbia having arrived on an AN-124 a couple of days ago.

Picture posted, at suggestion of Isos, as Serbia optimised camouflage.

This is very strange...we don't have that camouflage pattern.

littlerabbit wrote:....This is very strange...we don't have that camouflage pattern.

I'm pretty sure that's the only camouflage pattern we got...

Although base green seems a bit too bright, could be that some Russian Picasso was getting creative... or maybe he couldn't be arsed into painting the whole thing and said ''Ah screw it, it's close enough''  

Arrow wrote:https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=dITiQ8cnSC4&time_continue=4&feature=emb_title

Next Pantsir destroyed. Turkish drones fly as they want and correct the Turkish artillery that massacres SAA.
If Turkey introduced aviation, it would have massacred Syrian anti-aircraft defense. Soon there will be videos about the destruction of Buk systems, etc.

I's UAE Pantsir in Libya destroyed some time ago. it's on MAN truck, SAA use Kamaz trucks. On the other hand LNA in Libya shot down today 4 Turkish Bayraktar TB2 UCAVs and 2 recce UAVs for an hour.
It seems for now SAA AD didn't have an order to fire on Turkish drones. But this could change. they already shot down an Anka UCAV few days ago.

medo wrote:

Arrow wrote:https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=dITiQ8cnSC4&time_continue=4&feature=emb_title

Next Pantsir destroyed. Turkish drones fly as they want and correct the Turkish artillery that massacres SAA.
If Turkey introduced aviation, it would have massacred Syrian anti-aircraft defense. Soon there will be videos about the destruction of Buk systems, etc.

I's UAE Pantsir in Libya destroyed some time ago. it's on MAN truck, SAA use Kamaz trucks. On the other hand LNA in Libya shot down today 4 Turkish Bayraktar TB2 UCAVs and 2 recce UAVs for an hour.
It seems for now SAA AD didn't have an order to fire on Turkish drones. But this could change. they already shot down an Anka UCAV few days ago.

Nicely debunked There really is no limit to the stupid BS that this Arrow troll will resort to....

Any more analysis about the destroyed pantsir ? why the SAA or LNA didn't engage the UAV in that video , the Radar was working already .

ahmedfire wrote:Any more analysis about the destroyed pantsir ? why the SAA or LNA didn't engage the UAV in that video , the Radar was working already .

LNA doesn't have early warning radars and the pantsir is probably working as a single system. Drones have a small rcs and shouldn't be tracked at max range and who knows at what distance was the drone.

Syrian pantsir was jammed.

Isos wrote:

ahmedfire wrote:Any more analysis about the destroyed pantsir ? why the SAA or LNA didn't engage the UAV in that video , the Radar was working already .

LNA doesn't have early warning radars and the pantsir is probably working as a single system. Drones have a small rcs and shouldn't be tracked at max range and who knows at what distance was the drone.

AFAIK Pantsir was designed to hunt small objects like drones and direct ammunations plus aircrafts for sure , even if the system didn't detect the drone from long distance and the drone took the chance to fire her bomb so the system should detect that bomb and intercept it , somthing missed here because Pantsir already intercepts alot of drones over libya and syria ,

Syrian pantsir was jammed.

I heared that Turkey used it's Koral jamming system with a range of 124 miles .

I read before the below source talking about the Russian test to jam Pantsir using a Korean-made TACAN electronic jamming system inside Khmeimim base but i'm not fully sure about that

Senior Syrian officers from the air-defense forces and air force intelligence attended the test, along with Russian specialists who operated the Pantsir S1 system, and Radar specialists from the CERS institute. Officers from the Syrian electronic warfare administration operated a Korean-made TACAN electronic jamming system fitted on board a Mi-17 helicopter from the 59th Air Brigade.

The Syrians conducted the test at the Syrian Air Force base in Khmeimim (which currently accommodates the Russian aerial force operating in Syria) and operated the Korean jamming system from the Mi-17 helicopter, under the supervision of a representative of Syrian Air Force Intelligence. When the Russian teams that operated the Pantsir S1 systems attempted to cope with the jamming aimed at their systems, they failed in their attempts to evade the jamming, despite the fact that those systems contain 30 special purpose electronic circuits intended to deal with jamming, as specified in the technical and operational system manuals. According to the same source, the Russian specialists ordered the team on board the helicopter to deactivate the electronic jamming system immediately. These specialists were unable to explain the failure of the systems they operated in this test.

https://www.israeldefense.co.il/en/node/35119

The whole thing comes into question because the Pantsir has an optical channel that can't be electronically jammed. Can be spoofed I guess.  But purpose of the optical channel is to deal with heavy EW environment.

Problem is optical tracking requires the operators to rely on keeping the drone in visual range.  Then in brings into the idea of "lock on jam". The radar could/should be able to at least look for the jamming source and then use the visual aid to lock on.

So what is validity of the article?

Edit: it's from 2018. 2019 S-1M was introduced in order to fix radar issues.

ahmedfire wrote:

Isos wrote:

ahmedfire wrote:Any more analysis about the destroyed pantsir ? why the SAA or LNA didn't engage the UAV in that video , the Radar was working already .

LNA doesn't have early warning radars and the pantsir is probably working as a single system. Drones have a small rcs and shouldn't be tracked at max range and who knows at what distance was the drone.

AFAIK Pantsir was designed to hunt small objects like drones and direct ammunations plus aircrafts for sure , even if the system didn't detect the drone from long distance and the drone took the chance to fire her bomb so the system should detect that bomb and intercept it , somthing missed here because Pantsir already intercepts alot of drones over libya and syria ,

Syrian pantsir was jammed.

I heared that Turkey used it's Koral jamming system with a range of 124 miles .

I read before the below source talking about the Russian test to jam Pantsir using a Korean-made TACAN electronic jamming system inside Khmeimim base but i'm not fully sure about that

Senior Syrian officers from the air-defense forces and air force intelligence attended the test, along with Russian specialists who operated the Pantsir S1 system, and Radar specialists from the CERS institute. Officers from the Syrian electronic warfare administration operated a Korean-made TACAN electronic jamming system fitted on board a Mi-17 helicopter from the 59th Air Brigade.

The Syrians conducted the test at the Syrian Air Force base in Khmeimim (which currently accommodates the Russian aerial force operating in Syria) and operated the Korean jamming system from the Mi-17 helicopter, under the supervision of a representative of Syrian Air Force Intelligence. When the Russian teams that operated the Pantsir S1 systems attempted to cope with the jamming aimed at their systems, they failed in their attempts to evade the jamming, despite the fact that those systems contain 30 special purpose electronic circuits intended to deal with jamming, as specified in the technical and operational system manuals. According to the same source, the Russian specialists ordered the team on board the helicopter to deactivate the electronic jamming system immediately. These specialists were unable to explain the failure of the systems they operated in this test.

https://www.israeldefense.co.il/en/node/35119

He said, she said. Considering how Israel is a rabid enemy of Syria and Iran, it is not surprising it would engage in trash talk.
The real test here is how limited Israeli bombing if Syria has been since 2015. Without Russian help, Syria would be bombed
every day by the Israelis and as in 2013 they would bring out their attack dog yanquis to help. But as in 2013, they have been
frustrated by Russia. So they talk trash.

The funny thing is that it is ex-Soviet and ex-Russia Jews in Israel that contribute to its technological capacity. The above
drivel is aimed at the typical MSM consumer sheep who is utterly clueless about the context and the reality of Russian tech. The
west, including Israel, masturbates itself silly how inferior Russians are. This projection is pathological and reflects their
own inferiority. The story of the US frigate in the Black Sea that was run off by Russian EW attacks leading to PTSD among its
crew says it all. Reality is so different from what they have been led to believe through decades of inane brainwashing that
their brains cannot handle the cognitive dissonance and they poop their pants. If you believe you are invincible and then realize
that your "mud hut" enemy can rub you out, then that is a serious mental crisis.

So articles such as the above are utter dick stroking self-pacification attempts.

On a related note, people routinely forget that systems like the Pantsir require qualified operators and not amateurs. It is sad,
but a fact, that there are few SAA that an properly operate such systems.

miketheterrible wrote:The whole thing comes into question because the Pantsir has an optical channel that can't be electronically jammed. Can be spoofed I guess.  But purpose of the optical channel is to deal with heavy EW environment.

Problem is optical tracking requires the operators to rely on keeping the drone in visual range.  Then in brings into the idea of "lock on jam". The radar could/should be able to at least look for the jamming source and then use the visual aid to lock on.

So what is validity of the article?

Edit: it's from 2018. 2019 S-1M was introduced in order to fix radar issues.

You can tell the article is utter BS since it is claiming total failure on the part of the Pantsir. If Russian tech was such
garbage, then Israel and its pals would not have drastically changed their behaviour after Russia intervened. The mere fact
that Assad is restoring control over Syria even in the face of a Turkish invasion proves that this article is total garbage.

miketheterrible wrote:The whole thing comes into question because the Pantsir has an optical channel that can't be electronically jammed. Can be spoofed I guess.  But purpose of the optical channel is to deal with heavy EW environment.

Problem is optical tracking requires the operators to rely on keeping the drone in visual range.  Then in brings into the idea of "lock on jam". The radar could/should be able to at least look for the jamming source and then use the visual aid to lock on.

So what is validity of the article?

Edit: it's from 2018. 2019 S-1M was introduced in order to fix radar issues.

The article has zero value, it's from Israel. The propaganda coming from that country is amusing, especially when you consider the Israeli analog to Pantsir (Iron Dome) has poor mobility, struggles against unguided (and inaccurate) Qassam rockets, derives parts from a defunct toy store (Toy's R us, I'm not kidding) and costs $100k per missile.

I doubt israeli journalists would have that much information. And I never heard of syrians having south korean jammers.

But contrary to the common idea, pantsir is not a strategical weapon ... it's shorad with a small and not powerfull radar that is much easier to jamm than an s-400.

Koral is a big system with a big output power and it was in idlib not far away from the pantsir. No matter of the anti jamming systems inside pantsir, if the jamming is too much powerfull it will succeed in jamming the pantsir.

With early warning radars working in L band, you can have your pantsir in passive mode waiting for order to turn on its radars and shoot. But when using its own radar it gives away its position and the enemy can prepare the attack.

Russians seems to be aware of that because they changed the rdar on pantsir everytime they made a new version S1, s2n SA, SM.

The mistake is to think that is a strategic weapon. Something pro Israel and pro turkey trolls say to make them think they achieved something big. That's just a very good shorad.

The russian pantsirs are manned by well trained crews and with a bunch of early warning radars and even s-400 around them and sukhois in the air. This koral system would have been bombed long time ago if it was facing russia and the drones would have been destroyed by fighters hundreds km away.

Take a look at SouthFront. The video of the "destroyed" Pantsir system is fake.

Hole wrote:Take a look at SouthFront. The video of the "destroyed" Pantsir system is fake.

Fake or not, it brings into light of the ability of defending against EW systems. As Isos said, the Turkish system is pumping out a ton of energy thus very hard to prevent against. But that said, there are ways around it. Yes, rely on the ground based air defense radar systems to be the eyes for the Pantsir systems.

Other could be possibly try and create a EW/ECM/ECCM system that goes with Air defense systems to somehow help surpress the EW systems.

miketheterrible wrote:

Hole wrote:Take a look at SouthFront. The video of the "destroyed" Pantsir system is fake.

Fake or not, it brings into light of the ability of defending against EW systems.  As Isos said, the Turkish system is pumping out a ton of energy thus very hard to prevent against.  But that said, there are ways around it.  Yes, rely on the ground based air defense radar systems to be the eyes for the Pantsir systems.

Other could be possibly try and create a EW/ECM/ECCM system that goes with Air defense systems to somehow help surpress the EW systems.

Do you seriously believe that the Pantsir design did not take into account the wattage used by enemy EW systems? That is the first item on the
list of any engineering project. The simplest EW noise approach is flooding.

Here we see how easy it is to hoodwink people with plausible sounding tripe.

miketheterrible wrote:

Hole wrote:Take a look at SouthFront. The video of the "destroyed" Pantsir system is fake.

Fake or not, it brings into light of the ability of defending against EW systems.  As Isos said, the Turkish system is pumping out a ton of energy thus very hard to prevent against.  But that said, there are ways around it.  Yes, rely on the ground based air defense radar systems to be the eyes for the Pantsir systems.

Other could be possibly try and create a EW/ECM/ECCM system that goes with Air defense systems to somehow help surpress the EW systems.

Kh31 or even artillery could have destroy the turkish system. It was less than 30km from the battlefield.

Do you seriously believe that the Pantsir design did not take into account the wattage used by enemy EW systems? That is the first item on the
list of any engineering project. The simplest EW noise approach is flooding.

It was taken into account but you can't make such small system and small radar immune to jamming. Specially not against a jammer mounted on a big truck delivering more raw power than your radar.

They needed at least this radar to use the pantsir correctly. Alone it's not safe and LNA/SAA don't have 6 pantsir protecting each other like russia.

https://i.servimg.com/u/f71/19/35/56/92/30639011.jpg

I agree with @Isos that it could be jammed ,actually jamming is a science concept that we can't totally neglect , emitting high power with same frequency of your target could jam it , US did it on the Iraqi french radars in 2003 .

The point is you should have multiple detectors active and passive ,early warning radars working in multiple layers and serving IADS not just putting a medium range AD alone in the middle of the compat and expect it will never be damaged .

Actually in real war the jammer will not be 30km away from your AD systems because your missile launchers and airforce will destroy it , may be the Russians didn't allow SAA to do that so that they can reach to a deal .

Isos wrote:They needed at least this radar to use the pantsir correctly. Alone it's not safe and LNA/SAA don't have 6 pantsir protecting each other like russia.

https://i.servimg.com/u/f71/19/35/56/92/30639011.jpg

This is an 1L122 radar used with the Barnaul-T system, mostly with MANPADS.


This is one of the radars used with Pantsir units.

Syria doesn't have the money for such radars. The 1L122has a range of 40km and the modernized version has 80km range both in L band. That's enough to cover Idlib and the turkish border to spot any drone. And it shouldn't be expensive since it's very small and basic.

Better buy 10 smaller radars than just 1 big that could be destroyed in an Israeli attack very fast.

The more software they have the better they will do.

Btw what's the name of that radar ?

Isos wrote:

Btw what's the name of that radar ?

1RL-123E Radar .

kvs wrote:

miketheterrible wrote:

Hole wrote:Take a look at SouthFront. The video of the "destroyed" Pantsir system is fake.

Fake or not, it brings into light of the ability of defending against EW systems.  As Isos said, the Turkish system is pumping out a ton of energy thus very hard to prevent against.  But that said, there are ways around it.  Yes, rely on the ground based air defense radar systems to be the eyes for the Pantsir systems.

Other could be possibly try and create a EW/ECM/ECCM system that goes with Air defense systems to somehow help surpress the EW systems.

Do you seriously believe that the Pantsir design did not take into account the wattage used by enemy EW systems?  That is the first item on the
list of any engineering project.   The simplest EW noise approach is flooding.

Here we see how easy it is to hoodwink people with plausible sounding tripe.  

Settle your kettle there cowboy. Not saying that they didn't take EW into account. That is why Pantsir systems in Russia and Russian bases are layered with various radar stations and subsystems to help each other out - IADS. This is to deal with EW and other stuff.

I am talking about providing a mobile system that may be able to assist with Pantsir for those nations like Syria where they are greatly limited on an IADS.

As mentioned above even the predecessor of Pantsir... Tunguska has an optical only engagement mode when enemy ECM and ESM is intense.

They would also have Tochka and Iskander to deal with any jamming system fairly quickly...

The Israeli source also makes it questionable... haven't they been saying they could take out any S-300 or S-400 system deployed in Syria... and is it equally fair to say that over the last few years when both systems have been present in Syria the Israeli Air Force has gone no where near such systems let alone taken them out...

Now that they have F-35s... an aircraft designed from the outset to defeat S-400 systems they wont even fly in Syrian air space let alone attack anything... pretty clear who is full of number twos here... even if what they were saying is true why is it that after all these years of effort less than four Pantsir systems have been destroyed in combat... makes them sound rather useful and effective to me to be honest...