Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Buk SAM system General Thread

    Share
    avatar
    George1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 9991
    Points : 10481
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: Buk SAM system General Thread

    Post  George1 on Thu Aug 13, 2015 1:08 am

    Russia develops new antiaircraft system to replace Buk air defense missile complex


    _________________
    "There's no smoke without fire.", Georgy Zhukov

    avatar
    GunshipDemocracy
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1501
    Points : 1539
    Join date : 2015-05-17
    Location : fishin on Stalin´s Strait between Mexico and Canada

    Re: Buk SAM system General Thread

    Post  GunshipDemocracy on Thu Aug 13, 2015 8:34 pm

    George1 wrote:Russia develops new antiaircraft system to replace Buk air defense missile complex


    So Vitiaz is no good anymore? affraid Or Russia has too much money and needs more systems to make logistics life even more funny
    avatar
    PapaDragon
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 4372
    Points : 4480
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    Re: Buk SAM system General Thread

    Post  PapaDragon on Thu Aug 13, 2015 9:05 pm

    GunshipDemocracy wrote:
    George1 wrote:Russia develops new antiaircraft system to replace Buk air defense missile complex


    So Vitiaz is no good anymore? affraid  Or Russia has too much money and needs more systems to make logistics life even more funny

    More likely some journalist hack dropped the ball again...
    avatar
    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 16007
    Points : 16662
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Buk SAM system General Thread

    Post  GarryB on Fri Aug 14, 2015 11:48 am

    S-350 is an Air Force system... what they might be talking about is the S-350 being adapted to be used in the Army as well as a replacement for the medium range BUK.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order
    avatar
    Viktor
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5673
    Points : 6324
    Join date : 2009-08-25
    Age : 36
    Location : Croatia

    Re: Buk SAM system General Thread

    Post  Viktor on Sat Aug 15, 2015 10:30 am

    GunshipDemocracy wrote:So Vitiaz is no good anymore? affraid  Or Russia has too much money and needs more systems to make logistics life even more funny

    They are talking about BUK-M3 which in regard to a completely new missile can be called (and obviously is) a new air defense system.

    Russia’s New Buk-M3 ‘Kill-All’ Missile to Enter Service in 2016

    The Buk-M3 medium-range surface-to-air missile system, a modernized version of the Buk-M2 system, features advanced electronic components and a deadly new missile and could be regarded as a completely new system.

    and the intereting part ...

    The Buk-M3 system boasts a new digital computer, high-speed data exchange system and a telethermal imaging target designator instead of the teleoptical trackers used in previous models.
    The Buk-3M’s target-destruction probability has reached 0.9999 and its maximum destruction range has been increased by 25 kilometers and now stands at 70 kilometers.
    avatar
    GunshipDemocracy
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1501
    Points : 1539
    Join date : 2015-05-17
    Location : fishin on Stalin´s Strait between Mexico and Canada

    Re: Buk SAM system General Thread

    Post  GunshipDemocracy on Sat Aug 15, 2015 11:16 am

    Viktor wrote:
    GunshipDemocracy wrote:So Vitiaz is no good anymore? affraid  Or Russia has too much money and needs more systems to make logistics life even more funny

    They are talking about BUK-M3 which in regard to a completely new missile can be called (and obviously is) a new air defense system.


    Thank you for links and info but somehow I understood that new system is to be replacing whole Buk family i.e. - Bum - M3 as well. BTW why Buk and S-350 cannot be unified? OK different branches but still both can do similar job or I am wrong?

    JohninMK
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 3957
    Points : 4014
    Join date : 2015-06-16
    Location : England

    Re: Buk SAM system General Thread

    Post  JohninMK on Sat Aug 15, 2015 11:27 am

    GunshipDemocracy wrote:
    Viktor wrote:
    GunshipDemocracy wrote:So Vitiaz is no good anymore? affraid  Or Russia has too much money and needs more systems to make logistics life even more funny

    They are talking about BUK-M3 which in regard to a completely new missile can be called (and obviously is) a new air defense system.


    Thank you for links and info but somehow I understood that new system is to be replacing whole Buk family i.e. - Bum - M3 as well. BTW why Buk and S-350 cannot be unified? OK different branches but still both can do similar job or I am wrong?
    From the other end of Europe, it looks as if operationally it could be useful having two different systems since it complicates the task of overcoming them by the enemy. Also two R&D teams competing is good, whilst there may not be much economies of scale in manufacturing and there would not be much saving in training due to them being in two the branches.
    avatar
    Viktor
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5673
    Points : 6324
    Join date : 2009-08-25
    Age : 36
    Location : Croatia

    Re: Buk SAM system General Thread

    Post  Viktor on Sat Aug 15, 2015 3:46 pm

    GunshipDemocracy wrote:Thank you for links and info but somehow I understood that new system is to be replacing whole Buk family i.e. - Bum - M3 as well. BTW why Buk and S-350 cannot be unified? OK different branches but still both can do similar job or I am wrong?

    Up to only recently (with the emergance of Baikal-1M command post) it was not possible to unite PVO and A-PVO under a single command chain on the operational level.

    Now situation is rapidly changing and all new command post are able to support whatever SAM given respect to its hierarchy. Still Army pVO will have different set of requirements

    than territorial PVO as those systems needs to be highly mobile, robust and have more capability to resist strong ECM and SEAD/DEAD attacks.

    Because of that we can see unification (single missile for BUK and S-350 and unified command posts) but that can go only that far. Army PVO will always have a different set of demands.

    avatar
    flamming_python
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 3196
    Points : 3312
    Join date : 2012-01-30

    Re: Buk SAM system General Thread

    Post  flamming_python on Sat Aug 15, 2015 7:21 pm

    The Buk-M3 is more capable than the S-350. The S-350 is really an economic medium-range SAM for the Air Force, with similar ranges to the original S-300P system (but more missiles, modern electronics, better radar, etc...).

    The Buk-M3 on the other hand is the best medium-range SAM money can buy. Compared to the S-350 it has:

    • Faster set-up/tear-down times. I wouldn't be surprised if these things can even fire on the move, honestly.
    • Faster reaction times to incoming threats; the Buk TEL vehicles can simultaneously have part of their missiles in vertical mode and the other half pointing towards the probable direction of a threat.
    • Smaller, all-terrain (in its more prevalent tracked form), more nimbler vehicles; can hide more easily and won't be detected as easily on the move.
    • Greater variety of target tracking methods and amount of engagement channels; it's more jam-proof and can target more enemy aircraft/missiles at once (greater defence against swarm attacks). The Buk-M3 tracks by both Radar and Thermal means, with a backup optical system; while the S-350 is Radar-only. The Buk-M3 has 36 engagement channels, the S-350 has 16 - albeit this might just be the figure for the S-350E; the domestic S-350 could perhaps have as many as 40 channels.
    • Greater survivability of the battery as a result of greater autonomy of individual battery vehicles; a Buk battery has a mixture of TELs and TELARs whereas S-350 batteries only have TELs, the Buk TELAR's can potentially operate indepedently from the rest of the battery, albeit considerably worse.
    • A measure of ABM capability; the Buk-M3 is capable of engaging targets at Mach 9 over its whole range and altitude envelope; the S-350 might achieve half or 2/3rds of that at most. This gives the Buk-M3 the ability to engage future hypersonic missiles and many types of SRBMs.


    The S-350, compared to the Buk-M3, only has advantages over it in 2 areas (not counting cost):

    • Greater range of its main missile; the 9M96 series (+120km vs the Buk-M3's 70km).
    • Compatibility with the 9M100 short-range IR-guided missile; 4 of which can fit into a standard container - enabling the S-350 TEL to be armed with considerably more missiles ready to launch than the Buk-M3 TEL can be armed with; at the cost of these extra missiles all being very short-range. They will however allow the S-350 to handle point-defence economically, not wasting the more expensive active-radar missiles, which is something the Buk-M3 can't offer.


    I also don't know where some of you fellas have got the idea from that the S-350 is replacing the Buk. You guys must know something us mere mortals don't.
    Last time I checked, the S-350 is entering service with the AF (or the Aerospace Defence Forces, or whatever it is now). There are some Buks in the AF, along with older S-300Ps - those are the systems the S-350 will replace.
    However the Buks in the Army aren't being replaced by the S-350 as the Army isn't acquiring these systems.
    avatar
    GunshipDemocracy
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1501
    Points : 1539
    Join date : 2015-05-17
    Location : fishin on Stalin´s Strait between Mexico and Canada

    Re: Buk SAM system General Thread

    Post  GunshipDemocracy on Sun Aug 16, 2015 10:15 am

    @flaming and @Viktor

    Thanks again so requirements for Army and ASF are so different that one set of missiles cannot do?


    @JohninMK
    Yup this woudl make sense but I am afraid is not the reason why Smile
    avatar
    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 16007
    Points : 16662
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Buk SAM system General Thread

    Post  GarryB on Sun Aug 16, 2015 12:30 pm

    Would add that S-350 is likely cheaper... the missiles are smaller and are weight customised, so when targets are detected in close the smaller missile can be used, while targets detected further out can be engaged with the larger missiles.

    the S-350 will probably have more ready to fire missiles on each TEL, but like S-300P it wont have the mobility of the tracked army systems or response times because the airforce systems are optimised as shelterised systems for use on large airfields and other fixed locations, while the army systems are intended to defend forces moving cross country and either firing on the move or from a short halt.

    The Navy will likely introduce the S-350, but will also have the Shtil-1 for export and some domestic gap filler vessels (ie Russian talwars might have Shtil (BUK) or S-350).

    All three branches will be ordering and having in service enormous numbers of SAM missiles so the economies of large production batches applies even if they all have different missiles.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order
    avatar
    TheArmenian
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1648
    Points : 1809
    Join date : 2011-09-14

    Re: Buk SAM system General Thread

    Post  TheArmenian on Sun Aug 16, 2015 1:46 pm

    GarryB wrote:Would add that S-350 is likely cheaper... the missiles are smaller and are weight customised, so when targets are detected in close the smaller missile can be used, while targets detected further out can be engaged with the larger missiles.

    the S-350 will probably have more ready to fire missiles on each TEL, but like S-300P it wont have the mobility of the tracked army systems or response times because the airforce systems are optimised as shelterised systems for use on large airfields and other fixed locations, while the army systems are intended to defend forces moving cross country and either firing on the move or from a short halt.

    The Navy will likely introduce the S-350, but will also have the Shtil-1 for export and some domestic gap filler vessels (ie Russian talwars might have Shtil (BUK) or S-350).

    All three branches will be ordering and having in service enormous numbers of SAM missiles so the economies of large production batches applies even if they all have different missiles.

    Garry,
    The S350 is actually more expensive because of the active homing. Buk is command guided.

    Also, S350 is already in use in the navy on the Steregushy class ships while Buk M3 (as Shtil-1) is on the Grigorovich frigate.
    avatar
    flamming_python
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 3196
    Points : 3312
    Join date : 2012-01-30

    Re: Buk SAM system General Thread

    Post  flamming_python on Sun Aug 16, 2015 4:47 pm

    The S-350 is not anything really unique as such, so it makes no sense to talk about it being installed on naval ships.
    What the S-350 is, is basically the 9M96 missile familly, and the 9M100 missile.

    The Naval Redut systems are already compatible with the 9M96 series and several ships are armed with them; and I'd imagine the Reduts are compatible with the 9M100 too - albeit whether the Navy will actually equip its Reduts with 9M100s is a different question.
    avatar
    flamming_python
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 3196
    Points : 3312
    Join date : 2012-01-30

    Re: Buk SAM system General Thread

    Post  flamming_python on Sun Aug 16, 2015 5:00 pm

    TheArmenian wrote:
    Garry,
    The S350 is actually more expensive because of the active homing. Buk is command guided.

    You mean the S-350's missiles (9M96) are more expensive than the Buk's, right?
    Because I'd be surprised if the complex itself is more expensive; by all logic the Buk battery should be the more expensive one.

    As for the missiles though, well whatever the price of the 9M96 variants, the 9M100 short-range IR missiles that the S-350 can be armed with are certainly cheaper than the Buk's missiles, and will be able to deal with certain targets a lot more economically than the Buk can.

    About the 9M96 missiles - well, I'm sure that they are more expensive than the Buk-M2's (9M317) and earlier missiles, which were all semi-active radar homing in nature.

    The Buk-M3 however uses never missiles (9M31M and/or 9M317A); which are active-radar homing much like the 9M96, can engage faster targets and probably have better manuevering/agility. The only thing the 9M96 series has got up on them is range.
    All in all I doubt that the 9M96s are more expensive than the Buk-M3s missiles.
    avatar
    flamming_python
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 3196
    Points : 3312
    Join date : 2012-01-30

    Re: Buk SAM system General Thread

    Post  flamming_python on Sun Aug 16, 2015 5:09 pm

    GunshipDemocracy wrote:@flaming and @Viktor

    Thanks again  so requirements for Army and ASF are so different that one set of missiles cannot do?

    They probably can but why should they?

    They already have 2 different families of systems; the Buk/Kub familly and the S-300 familly; the former going back to the 60s and the later to the 80s.
    Since their inception these families have grown and evolved and been forked off, and as of 2015 both represent a wide range of different systems with different capabilities optimized for different roles.

    The role for Army mobile air defence is best fulfilled by the Buk-M2/Buk-M3
    The role for Army mobile ABM defence is best fulfilled by the S-300VM (S-300V4)
    The role for Air Force mobile medium-range air defence is best fulfilled by the S-350

    Why should they kill off one of these families after all the investment put into them? As GarryB mentions, both have enough orders/demand (inc. export demand) to make them economical. So if they can both be supported, they should.
    Otherwise you'd end up trying to fulfil the long-range defence role with a Buk-type vehicle, while having S-300 type chassis's trying to keep up with armour formations in the field, firing at threats on the move - and it's clear that it just won't work very well.

    You really do need both families; and since you do - then you might as well take advantage of that and pick and match the variants from either of the 2 familiies that you feel are optimal in a particular role.
    avatar
    Viktor
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5673
    Points : 6324
    Join date : 2009-08-25
    Age : 36
    Location : Croatia

    Re: Buk SAM system General Thread

    Post  Viktor on Sun Aug 16, 2015 5:14 pm

    BUK-M3 and S-350 will use same type of missiles = 9M96xx

    Austin
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5997
    Points : 6399
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Location : India

    Re: Buk SAM system General Thread

    Post  Austin on Sun Sep 20, 2015 1:41 pm

    "Buk-M3" goes to series

    Preparation for mass production of a new anti-aircraft missile system of medium-range "Buk-M3" has begun in Russia.
    "The design documentation developed by now complex is already in preparation for mass production", - said Tass.

    "Buk-M3" maintains a radar-fire and the architecture of previous versions (M1 / M1-2 / m2), but uses a completely new anti-aircraft missile interceptors 9M317M, which by design is unified with the Marine version 9M317ME complex "Calm-1." The only difference is that the naval version of SAM uses SPMs and land - transport and inclined launchers, each of which can take 6-12 SAM 9M317ME thus only 6 PU SDA can take the amount of ammunition and 72 rockets (in the same complex) .

    These missiles are more perfect, equipped ARGSN, and therefore able to act according to the method of "fire and forget", their much greater flexibility is achieved by using not only the aerodynamic control surfaces, but also the gas-dynamic "zone" control (DPU), which, in all probability, will be able to ensure a rocket hit "hit-to-kil" (kinetic interception of a direct hit), 9M317M missiles can hit targets at a distance of 70 km altitude - around 40,000 meters and at speeds of up to 3000 m / s, the speed of the rocket is very close to that of C 300PMU-2 "Favorit" and is 1550 m / s.

    Complex "Buk-M3" has become "smarter" S-300PS. Considering that the surveillance radar "Dome" is working in the SM-range and can provide target designation homing missiles 9M317M, the number of target channels of the complex increased from 24 to 36 and a set way to handle the most complex list of IOS enemy and protect the ground forces of the merciless blows of tactical aviation enemy attacks missile systems of small and medium-range type ATACMSi others.

    According to fire tests of May 2015 it reported that a promising anti-aircraft missile systems "Buk-M3" is the probability of hitting the aerodynamic purposes of the order of 0.99. The new system will start to be delivered to the military air defense in late November 2015 and will be a system whose parameters are comparable with a new and expensive set of "Hero" in the long term development of the version of "Buk-M4", which is expected to reach the space frontier.
    avatar
    GunshipDemocracy
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1501
    Points : 1539
    Join date : 2015-05-17
    Location : fishin on Stalin´s Strait between Mexico and Canada

    Re: Buk SAM system General Thread

    Post  GunshipDemocracy on Sun Sep 20, 2015 8:46 pm

    Austin wrote: "Buk-M3" goes to series


    According to fire tests of May 2015 it reported that a promising anti-aircraft missile systems "Buk-M3" is the probability of hitting the aerodynamic purposes of the order of 0.99. The new system will start to be delivered to the military air defense in late November 2015 and will be a system whose parameters are comparable with a new and expensive set of "Hero" in the long term development of the version of "Buk-M4", which is expected to reach the space frontier.

    Buk-M4 ? woow so Buks M4 can hamper democracy expansion even more than M2? In Syria no Turkish or Israeli democracy introduced so far.

    Just wondering if new system will update Sea based Buk version...
    avatar
    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 16007
    Points : 16662
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Buk SAM system General Thread

    Post  GarryB on Mon Sep 21, 2015 11:39 am

    The new system will start to be delivered to the military air defense in late November 2015 and will be a system whose parameters are comparable with a new and expensive set of "Hero" in the long term development of the version of "Buk-M4", which is expected to reach the space frontier.

    Hero being S-350... so the new BUK whose parameters are comparable with the new and expensive S-350... the BUK-M4 will reach space...

    BUK-M3 and S-350 will use same type of missiles = 9M96xx

    No... BUK uses 9M317M missiles, not 9M96xx missiles.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order
    avatar
    sepheronx
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 7263
    Points : 7563
    Join date : 2009-08-06
    Age : 27
    Location : Canada

    Re: Buk SAM system General Thread

    Post  sepheronx on Mon Sep 21, 2015 1:37 pm

    Whats the point working on both systems then if the new Buks are going to have similar performance (overlapping) in terms of the S-300 series?
    avatar
    GunshipDemocracy
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1501
    Points : 1539
    Join date : 2015-05-17
    Location : fishin on Stalin´s Strait between Mexico and Canada

    Re: Buk SAM system General Thread

    Post  GunshipDemocracy on Mon Sep 21, 2015 3:10 pm

    sepheronx wrote:Whats the point working on both systems then if the new Buks are going to have similar performance (overlapping) in terms of the S-300 series?

    had same concerns pls check my earlier discussion with Flaming Smile I am still puzzled though Smile

    BTW yes Shtil with Buk-M3 missiles is nice add on for navy



    GarryB wrote:
    The new system will start to be delivered to the military air defense in late November 2015 and will be a system whose parameters are comparable with a new and expensive set of "Hero" in the long term development of the version of "Buk-M4", which is expected to reach the space frontier.

    Hero being S-350... so the new BUK whose parameters are comparable with the new and expensive S-350... the BUK-M4 will reach space...
    accidentally PGS hypersonic vehicles are gonnd fly on 50-70km ceiling...
    avatar
    sepheronx
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 7263
    Points : 7563
    Join date : 2009-08-06
    Age : 27
    Location : Canada

    Re: Buk SAM system General Thread

    Post  sepheronx on Mon Sep 21, 2015 4:17 pm

    Shtil defense system with these newer missiles would be leaps and bounds better than anything else is fielded. But not many ships in Rus navy are fielded with Shtil. Most are still using the arm launch systems of iglas or something else.
    avatar
    GunshipDemocracy
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1501
    Points : 1539
    Join date : 2015-05-17
    Location : fishin on Stalin´s Strait between Mexico and Canada

    Re: Buk SAM system General Thread

    Post  GunshipDemocracy on Mon Sep 21, 2015 6:38 pm

    sepheronx wrote:Shtil defense system with these newer missiles would be leaps and bounds better than anything else is fielded. But not many ships in Rus navy are fielded with Shtil. Most are still using the arm launch systems of iglas or something else.


    Shtil is using so far   Admiral Grigorovich class (6) and was to be installed on corvettes 22160 (12?) but nobody says this must be restricted only to those 2 classes.
    avatar
    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 16007
    Points : 16662
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Buk SAM system General Thread

    Post  GarryB on Tue Sep 22, 2015 11:23 am

    Whats the point working on both systems then if the new Buks are going to have similar performance (overlapping) in terms of the S-300 series?

    Different branches with different requirements... why is the F-22 not carrier capable?

    BUK needs to be able to move with a land based army over fairly rough terrain... the track based systems are designed to enable that, and they will be designed to operate with tanks and armoured vehicles.

    In comparison the S-300 comes on a truck and has enormous radars that need to be set up... it simply can't operate from a short stop like the BUK can and does.

    accidentally PGS hypersonic vehicles are gonnd fly on 50-70km ceiling...

    Space is considered rather higher than 100km... most comments I read suggest 180km.

    But PGS wont be an enormous problem for tank units... more likely S-300VMV4 or later, plus S-500.



    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order
    avatar
    George1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 9991
    Points : 10481
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: Buk SAM system General Thread

    Post  George1 on Thu Dec 03, 2015 11:01 am

    Here says that 3 Buk-M2 were delivered this year

    http://bmpd.livejournal.com/1606666.html


    _________________
    "There's no smoke without fire.", Georgy Zhukov


    Sponsored content

    Re: Buk SAM system General Thread

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Fri May 26, 2017 11:26 am