Home
Latest images
Register
Log in
Well its quite easy -actually f-35s can stay around 30km away from the pantcir where the can use stealth so to stay undetected (and even if spotted from time to time it cant touch them anyway) , and lob off cruise missiles in a well coordinated attack.
How does the F-35 know it is 30km away from Pantsir?
How does it know whether there is a Pantsir-S1 directly below it for example? How does it know when it is or is not detected?
The fact of the matter is that the F-35 is not even in service yet and it doesn't even know if it is safe or not...
In a one on one engagement how many guided weapons can a single F-35 fire at a single Pantsir to try to destroy it?
Fact is it is limited and overpriced system with no fire and forget ability and lots of blind spots.
We will see how the morfei very short range system will turn out to be.
Fire and forget is over rated. It is expensive and generally not very fool proof. Modern DIRCMs can dazzle even the most expensive IIR seeker, but a beam rider, or command guided missile is a much more difficult threat to defend yourself from.
Also few more things , pantcir missiles drop in speed on average 70m/s/s , internal dead zone of the missiles at must be taken into account of 1,2 km ,and guns cant be used during march .
No they don't, the second stage has a small sustainer, so the speed loss is not constant. It is very unlikely that targets would be engaged while moving except in an extreme emergency.
it takes time accelerate and has a drop in speed of 70m/s , so for the average speed i cant take more than 0,9km/s although 1,2km/s is the max.
1.3km/s is the top speed and it reaches that speed after about 1.0 second, so for the first second it can be considered to have covered 1.3km to the target and the 70m/s/s is an average over 20km, which means it is probably much less inside the first 10km than it is for the second 10km of its 20km range, which makes your numbers wrong.
but the crew must be very well trained (fast) ,and cant afford a miss.
Even the Tunguska in the early 1980s had "modes" of engagement from an almost manual mode to fully automatic... in fully automatic the crew would just need to give the system permission to fire with the highest threat target automatically selected and engaged.
it would take just 2 sec for the cruise missiles to get inside pantcirs dead zone and 6 sec to destroy it.
I believe you have forgotten the two twin barrel 30mm cannon spitting out 5,000rpm of 30 x 165mm cannon shells that puts the dead in the 2km dead zone around the Pantsir.
yes its a problem if more then 4-5-6 cruise missiles 1 mill $ a piece can destroy pantcir-s1-s2 worth 15 mill $.
Those 4-5-6 cruise missiles can also destroy the hangar the F-35 sits in and take out the runway it operates from, or the carrier it operates from.
and you still claim it to be best in the world by itself
I can claim it is the best in the world... launch a million cruise missiles at the US and they will simply not be able to stop all of them or even half of them... does that define them as weak? Does that mean they do not have the best military in the world?
I claim Pantsir-S1 as being the best short range air defence vehicle in the world, your own estimates show it can defend itself from simultaneous attack from 4 cruise missiles from four different directions at once. You can easily prove me wrong simply by telling what the best short range air defence system really is and put it into that scenario and prove it can also survive or even do a better job.
If you are thinking a system like SEA RAM might do better I think you are drunk because SEA RAM costs an enormous amount of money and has nothing like the range or missile speed of Pantsir so you will find it probably could not defend itself in the exact same scenario you are offering. And what else is there?
but then you have to bring s-400 buk etc. 4-5 more pvo systems for it to be effective.
Using the same logic there are no effective SAMs because the big ones are too expensive and small in number to defend themselves from sneaky low flying weapons, while the smaller systems that can deal with low flying weapons lack the range to engage the platforms so they will eventually run out of missiles, which will leave them vulnerable.
i am talking about pantcir on the move with rest of the army. and yes its turret seems to be very well stabilised , but i still dont have proof it can use its gunns so its missiles only.
If we are talking about the Pantsir-S1 in the Army then we are talking about the tracked model, which can definitely fire guns and missiles on the move... though it would hardly ever do so... it will fire from short stops.
pantcir IS advertised against planes helicopters uavs precision munnitions ,cruise missiles ,They advertise like that it not Me. So it better work . nothing is fair in war.
Of course... buy one Pantsir-s1 vehicle and take on all of NATO... that is their claim... NOT.
Pantsir-S1 is designed to be cheap and effective against a range of targets. Its missiles have no guidance systems in them they are very cheap and simple... the rocket boosters they use are standard booster rockets used by sounding rockets for over 30 years.
its not even russian -its french LOL !!!
Licence produced in Russia. Just like the main gun and armour of the US Abrams tank is a licence produced West German 120mm smooth bore gun, and licence produced British Dorchester armour.
and its optical system is also very narrow and scanning limited it doesnt have 360 degree coverage.
Optical systems have a range of "zooms" with magnification levels variable allowing a quick search of a large area and zooming in on a target of interest. Low zoom for scanning for targets and high zoom for acquisition and ID and of course engagement.
Data from the IAD would allow the vehicles to look in the expected direction targets will appear, but software already exists that can scan a digital video image for "targets". The Shkval-M system of the Ka-50 and Su-25TM were doing that sort of thing in the early 1990s.
When I get back from work I will attempt a more detailed response, but someone really needs to understand what SHORAD means.
If you could get 100% defence perfection from any one vehicle you could name your price... 50 billion would not be expensive for such a vehicle that could defeat the west on its own.
so french short range systems in passive mode are better then the russian.
Which one? Passive mode is only used when necessary. Most of the time one vehicle in the battery will use its radars to detect threats and pass data to the other vehicles in the battery. The location of one vehicle revealled gives accurate precise target information to all the other vehicles in the group and the IADs network. Any attempt to attack that single vehicle means that the vehicle can defend itself and the other 5 vehicles in the battery can also defend it.
.