Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Pantsir-S1 News Thread:

    Share
    avatar
    miketheterrible

    Posts : 1505
    Points : 1505
    Join date : 2016-11-06

    Re: Pantsir-S1 News Thread:

    Post  miketheterrible on Thu Aug 31, 2017 6:04 am

    AESA radar with quite an antenna on it. Interesting.
    avatar
    hoom

    Posts : 630
    Points : 628
    Join date : 2016-05-06

    Re: Pantsir-S1 News Thread:

    Post  hoom on Thu Aug 31, 2017 11:13 pm

    Can't be an AESA if its got that horn out the front.
    avatar
    miketheterrible

    Posts : 1505
    Points : 1505
    Join date : 2016-11-06

    Re: Pantsir-S1 News Thread:

    Post  miketheterrible on Sat Sep 02, 2017 7:35 am

    But it is. Pantsir S2 has AESA radar 2 faced AESA radar. This has already been proven.
    avatar
    hoom

    Posts : 630
    Points : 628
    Join date : 2016-05-06

    Re: Pantsir-S1 News Thread:

    Post  hoom on Sat Sep 02, 2017 11:35 am

    Look more carefully at the pic with the cover in Robognus post, it's the fire control/director radar not the search radar.
    Whatever it is if it has a separate horn its not AESA.

    If I recall this version of Pantsir is supposed to engage out to 40km so with the missiles being command guided the extra range is going to require a much stronger fire control.
    avatar
    miketheterrible

    Posts : 1505
    Points : 1505
    Join date : 2016-11-06

    Re: Pantsir-S1 News Thread:

    Post  miketheterrible on Sat Sep 02, 2017 8:12 pm

    hoom wrote:Look more carefully at the pic with the cover in Robognus post, it's the fire control/director radar not the search radar.
    Whatever it is if it has a separate horn its not AESA.

    If I recall this version of Pantsir is supposed to engage out to 40km so with the missiles being command guided the extra range is going to require a much stronger fire control.

    As well, take a look at all other Pantsir systems.  Even S1.  Do you see an Antenna like that?  Although I was never sure if the fire control radar was ESA or what.  All I know is that its search/tracking one is and I assumed they made the fire control radar into AESA too but I guess they didn't.

    Edit: Now I think about it, the search/tracking radar being AESA and the fire control radar being ESA is probably ideal.  Although, the Pantsir has another fire control function through its EO system as well, secondary of course and shorter range. Was always curious how the automation process worked that made the two work in tandem.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16741
    Points : 17349
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Pantsir-S1 News Thread:

    Post  GarryB on Sun Sep 03, 2017 11:11 am

    AFAIK the target tracking radar tracked the target and the outgoing missiles and sent flight commands to the outgoing missile to make it manouver to hit the target.

    Having optically guidance means an auto target tracker, like the latest model Kornet... they have no way of tracking the target in terms of range but manouver the missile using a laser beam to control it and make it fly into the target.

    The late model Pantsir does not have laser beam riding guidance it uses a simple command guidance, so instead of directing a laser beam to send course corrections the radar of the Pantsir must be able to track up to three actual air targets and also guide four missiles... the fourth target is tracked optically but presumably the course corrections are still sent via command signal.


    _________________
    “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
    AmbiOpinion

    Posts : 9
    Points : 9
    Join date : 2017-08-24

    Re: Pantsir-S1 News Thread:

    Post  AmbiOpinion on Mon Sep 04, 2017 1:56 am

    Does anybody know of the Pantsir's ability to hit targets off boresight? Given the high acceleration I feel as though targets that are 60 degrees off boresight would be difficult to hit at relatively close range.
    avatar
    Cheetah

    Posts : 33
    Points : 35
    Join date : 2016-11-26
    Location : Australia

    Re: Pantsir-S1 News Thread:

    Post  Cheetah on Mon Sep 04, 2017 2:52 pm

    AmbiOpinion wrote:Does anybody know of the Pantsir's ability to hit targets off boresight? Given the high acceleration I feel as though targets that are 60 degrees off boresight would be difficult to hit at relatively close range.

    "knowing" the ability is a bit of a stretch, though we can speculate all we want.
    With the case of the Pantsir, the launch platform has to relay targeting information to the missile for the duration of the flight, which means the launch platform has to see the target before anything else. This begs the question, why would the system ever need to fire off bore-sight?

    To that end, we can also analyse the mechanical properties of the system. As well all know, the missiles on the pantsir can pivot vertically, which suggests that they system was designed to fire in the general direction of the target give or take a few degrees. This all suggests that it was not designed to fire very far off bore-sight.

    but

    Assume we do away with what we already know, then there are very physical limits of missile performance that are quite straight forward. Namely, the more a missile has to manoeuvre immediately after launch, the less accurate and capable it is. Nothing much can be said about the specifics of the pantsir, though.
    avatar
    AmbiOpinion

    Posts : 9
    Points : 9
    Join date : 2017-08-24

    Re: Pantsir-S1 News Thread:

    Post  AmbiOpinion on Mon Sep 04, 2017 8:40 pm

    Cheetah wrote:
    AmbiOpinion wrote:Does anybody know of the Pantsir's ability to hit targets off boresight? Given the high acceleration I feel as though targets that are 60 degrees off boresight would be difficult to hit at relatively close range.

    "knowing" the ability is a bit of a stretch, though we can speculate all we want.
    With the case of the Pantsir, the launch platform has to relay targeting information to the missile for the duration of the flight, which means the launch platform has to see the target before anything else. This begs the question, why would the system ever need to fire off bore-sight?

    To that end, we can also analyse the mechanical properties of the system. As well all know, the missiles on the pantsir can pivot vertically, which suggests that they system was designed to fire in the general direction of the target give or take a few degrees. This all suggests that it was not designed to fire very far off bore-sight.

    but

    Assume we do away with what we already know, then there are very physical limits of missile performance that are quite straight forward. Namely, the more a missile has to manoeuvre immediately after launch, the less accurate and capable it is. Nothing much can be said about the specifics of the pantsir, though.

    Well one of the methods for defeating any PDS would be to strike from multiple directions close to simultaneously. Say if you had a 3x AGM-88 approaching 25 degrees from each other relative to the Pantsir, would it be able to slew the launcher to each one in time or fire off boresight. Hope that makes sense. I realize they wouldn't be able to be fired completely to the side or behind the launcher given the nature of CLOS.

    Maneuvering of any kind is of course going to bleed energy as you said but that isn't a huge issue when dealing with close in threats. I suppose Tor offers something of an off boresight ability compared to Pantsir, the difference between the two systems always seemed negligible to me, anybody want to explain the difference in the platforms since apparently they're unique enough to both be in service?
    avatar
    medo

    Posts : 3231
    Points : 3317
    Join date : 2010-10-24
    Location : Slovenia

    Re: Pantsir-S1 News Thread:

    Post  medo on Mon Sep 04, 2017 10:53 pm

    AmbiOpinion wrote:
    Cheetah wrote:
    AmbiOpinion wrote:Does anybody know of the Pantsir's ability to hit targets off boresight? Given the high acceleration I feel as though targets that are 60 degrees off boresight would be difficult to hit at relatively close range.

    "knowing" the ability is a bit of a stretch, though we can speculate all we want.
    With the case of the Pantsir, the launch platform has to relay targeting information to the missile for the duration of the flight, which means the launch platform has to see the target before anything else. This begs the question, why would the system ever need to fire off bore-sight?

    To that end, we can also analyse the mechanical properties of the system. As well all know, the missiles on the pantsir can pivot vertically, which suggests that they system was designed to fire in the general direction of the target give or take a few degrees. This all suggests that it was not designed to fire very far off bore-sight.

    but

    Assume we do away with what we already know, then there are very physical limits of missile performance that are quite straight forward. Namely, the more a missile has to manoeuvre immediately after launch, the less accurate and capable it is. Nothing much can be said about the specifics of the pantsir, though.

    Well one of the methods for defeating any PDS would be to strike from multiple directions close to simultaneously. Say if you had a 3x AGM-88 approaching 25 degrees from each other relative to the Pantsir, would it be able to slew the launcher to each one in time or fire off boresight. Hope that makes sense. I realize they wouldn't be able to be fired completely to the side or behind the launcher given the nature of CLOS.

    Maneuvering of any kind is of course going to bleed energy as you said but that isn't a huge issue when dealing with close in threats. I suppose Tor offers something of an off boresight ability compared to Pantsir, the difference between the two systems always seemed negligible to me, anybody want to explain the difference in the platforms since apparently they're unique enough to both be in service?

    First of all, the main fundamental unit in air defence is battery and not a single SAM TELAR. You have to count 6 Pantsir TELARs in battery to cover whole 360* and this mean one Pantsir TELAR cover only a given sector. 3 AGM-88 attacking from different directions will be engaged by 3 Pantsir TELARs which cover directions of those HARMs.
    avatar
    Isos

    Posts : 927
    Points : 925
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Re: Pantsir-S1 News Thread:

    Post  Isos on Tue Sep 05, 2017 4:24 pm


    First of all, the main fundamental unit in air defence is battery and not a single SAM TELAR. You have to count 6 Pantsir TELARs in battery to cover whole 360* and this mean one Pantsir TELAR cover only a given sector. 3 AGM-88 attacking from different directions will be engaged by 3 Pantsir TELARs which cover directions of those HARMs

    While the fighters would be in the same time, if not before the lucnh, engaged by S-300/400 or friendly aviation ...
    avatar
    Cheetah

    Posts : 33
    Points : 35
    Join date : 2016-11-26
    Location : Australia

    Re: Pantsir-S1 News Thread:

    Post  Cheetah on Wed Sep 06, 2017 6:08 am

    Now, now. Let us not digress too far. The man asked a question. We ought not deny him an answer due to reasons of practicality. After all, it is not practicality that drives such questions, but pure curiosity.

    Yes, in the real world, a scenario involving 3 AGM-88s targeting a Pantsir from various angles seems unlikely, but that is the whole point of posing a hypothetical question. What would happen if such an unlikely scenario occurred?

    Now, AmbiOpinion's question is actually quite interesting. Wikipedia states that the coverage cone of the Pantsir's targeting/tracking radar is +- 45 degrees.

    Note that the following are just some speculative thoughts, so take them with a grain of salt.
    There is no physical reason that comes to mind why the missile couldn't be fired at the very limit (45 degrees). After all, the system will track both the target and missile and will make the necessary calculations to line the two up, as in CLOS fashion. But this does bring other questions to the table.

    for instance, does the 57E6 missile track during its booster period? I dare say it does not, since this is the case with some other missiles that feature detachable boosters.
    Now imagine for a moment, the missiles spends the majority of its energy flying 45 degrees from the target, and immediately after the booster is spent, the missile is forced to use a substantial amount of that energy panning to the target. For all we know, this could reduce its effective range to something negligible since it is not the job of the missile's second stage to actually propel the missile, but rather to manoeuver and sustain its current speed. I'd rather not go on a rant about missile performance at unideal speeds, so lets cut a long story short and say it would be abysmal.

    Having said that, we could further speculate that a 'launch authorized' cone would be programmed into the system to ensure that the missiles could be fired off bore sight to a certain degree, while still maintaining enough energy to manoeuver properly. To what degree that is exactly would require some missile specifications and an insane amount of mathematics. So, in spite of what you were hoping, AmbiOpinion, the best I can guess is that the off bore sight capability of the pantsir would be < 45 degrees.

    If anyone else has their two cents to add, go nuts. And, as I said, my reply is purely speculative, make any corrections or criticisms you like.
    avatar
    miketheterrible

    Posts : 1505
    Points : 1505
    Join date : 2016-11-06

    Re: Pantsir-S1 News Thread:

    Post  miketheterrible on Wed Sep 06, 2017 7:19 am

    While Pantsir has the concept of a anti-PGM system, it is first and foremost a SHORAD in the sense of being able to do things rather cheaply and engage various targets (jack of all trades) at once. As Medo pointed out, they would be operating in tandem and not a single unit. If it was a single unit, then the system would be overwhelmed in trying to engage such 3 targets and various angles. Technically, the roll of the Tor system was indeed an anti-pgm system. That has full coverage as it is a VLS, while Pantsir is not. I would say in such situations, more than 1 pantsir is needed. But I could be wrong entirely as pantsir is rather automatic in is methods of targeting and tracking, even in the system how it rotates.

    I wouldn't put much emphasis on what Wikipedia says. The degree it mentions is rather small, and the cone of tracking/engaging isn't nearly as low as stated.
    avatar
    hoom

    Posts : 630
    Points : 628
    Join date : 2016-05-06

    Re: Pantsir-S1 News Thread:

    Post  hoom on Wed Sep 06, 2017 9:03 am

    Wikipedia states that the coverage cone of the Pantsir's targeting/tracking radar is +- 45 degrees.
    Was going to say recent Pantsir-M coverage from IMDS said it has 90deg engagement cone (ie 45 each side). Possibly the older land versions have narrower cones though.
    Seems likely there would be some limits at very short range, though early in the flight would be the best place to make a sharp turn & less side movement is required to reach the 45deg off bore.
    avatar
    robognus

    Posts : 32
    Points : 34
    Join date : 2016-07-29

    Re: Pantsir-S1 News Thread:

    Post  robognus on Wed Sep 06, 2017 12:23 pm

    avatar
    AmbiOpinion

    Posts : 9
    Points : 9
    Join date : 2017-08-24

    Re: Pantsir-S1 News Thread:

    Post  AmbiOpinion on Thu Sep 07, 2017 1:24 am

    Cheetah wrote:Now, now. Let us not digress too far. The man asked a question. We ought not deny him an answer due to reasons of practicality. After all, it is not practicality that drives such questions, but pure curiosity.

    Yes, in the real world, a scenario involving 3 AGM-88s targeting a Pantsir from various angles seems unlikely, but that is the whole point of posing a hypothetical question. What would happen if such an unlikely scenario occurred?

    Now, AmbiOpinion's question is actually quite interesting. Wikipedia states that the coverage cone of the Pantsir's targeting/tracking radar is +- 45 degrees.

    Note that the following are just some speculative thoughts, so take them with a grain of salt.
    There is no physical reason that comes to mind why the missile couldn't be fired at the very limit (45 degrees). After all, the system will track both the target and missile and will make the necessary calculations to line the two up, as in CLOS fashion. But this does bring other questions to the table.

    for instance, does the 57E6 missile track during its booster period? I dare say it does not, since this is the case with some other missiles that feature detachable boosters.
    Now imagine for a moment, the missiles spends the majority of its energy flying 45 degrees from the target, and immediately after the booster is spent, the missile is forced to use a substantial amount of that energy panning to the target. For all we know, this could reduce its effective range to something negligible since it is not the job of the missile's second stage to actually propel the missile, but rather to manoeuver and sustain its current speed. I'd rather not go on a rant about missile performance at unideal speeds, so lets cut a long story short and say it would be abysmal.

    Having said that, we could further speculate that a 'launch authorized' cone would be programmed into the system to ensure that the missiles could be fired off bore sight to a certain degree, while still maintaining enough energy to manoeuver properly. To what degree that is exactly would require some missile specifications and an insane amount of mathematics. So, in spite of what you were hoping, AmbiOpinion, the best I can guess is that the off bore sight capability of the pantsir would be < 45 degrees.

    If anyone else has their two cents to add, go nuts. And, as I said, my reply is purely speculative, make any corrections or criticisms you like.

    Well at least somebody enjoys discussion. Though first off the earlier point of there being an entire battery of Pantsirs can be addressed by giving that same treatment to, say an F/A-18 carrying HARMs, which rarely if ever operates alone. So if you want to push in that direction we can just say 6 Pantsirs have to deal with 18 HARMs and now we're back where we started.

    Given how the missile moves immediately after launching I'd expect it does track fairly soon after the launch. Despite that you're right turning would bleed a tremendous amount of energy but given it's 40km range I think it would still be left with a useful reach even if it shed a huge amount of energy.
    avatar
    hoom

    Posts : 630
    Points : 628
    Join date : 2016-05-06

    Re: Pantsir-S1 News Thread:

    Post  hoom on Thu Sep 07, 2017 2:45 am

    Can we get some translation on that article? Something about 45km & something 70.

    we can just say 6 Pantsirs have to deal with 18 HARMs and now we're back where we started.
    Nopes.
    6* Pantsirs can focus on one direction, split across 360deg or whatever between depending on the distribution of targets.

    With that many Pantsirs we can assume they are linked to a command vehicle (if not the rest of a S-400) -> will have targets automatically distributed between them.
    avatar
    AmbiOpinion

    Posts : 9
    Points : 9
    Join date : 2017-08-24

    Re: Pantsir-S1 News Thread:

    Post  AmbiOpinion on Thu Sep 07, 2017 4:03 am

    hoom wrote:Can we get some translation on that article? Something about 45km & something 70.

    we can just say 6 Pantsirs have to deal with 18 HARMs and now we're back where we started.
    Nopes.
    6* Pantsirs can focus on one direction, split across 360deg or whatever between depending on the distribution of targets.

    With that many Pantsirs we can assume they are linked to a command vehicle (if not the rest of a S-400) -> will have targets automatically distributed between them.

    Still doesn't answer the question of whether or not the Pantsir can engage multiple targets without slewing the turret.
    avatar
    Cheetah

    Posts : 33
    Points : 35
    Join date : 2016-11-26
    Location : Australia

    Re: Pantsir-S1 News Thread:

    Post  Cheetah on Thu Sep 07, 2017 4:43 am

    AmbiOpinion wrote:the earlier point of there being an entire battery of Pantsirs can be addressed
    I'd not worry too much about justifying a scenario if it is discussion you're after. Assume no scenario is off limits and ask away.

    given it's 40km range I think it would still be left with a useful reach
    Unless you are talking specifically about the Pantsir-SM (which is entirely possible), then the range would be closer to half of that, or 20km.

    Assuming you were talking about the SM, then yes, it should still have some range on it after an off bore sight launch. However, missiles, or specifically their aerodynamic designs, are made for a certain envelope of velocity and air resistance. Once the missile is out of that envelope, manoeuvering becomes extremely poor and along with that, accuracy is degraded substantially. Now, the max range they slapped onto the SM is 40km, true enough, but what needs to be considered is that the 40km range is more than likely a representation of the system shooting at a stationary, non-manoeuvering target. the moment a target changes course, even slightly, that range could easily be reduced to something on the order of 30km or even 25km. Now, off bore sight targeting can be looked at in much the same way. Being at a 45 degree offset from the target and having to pull 8-12Gs early into the launch is the equivalent of tracking a target with some serious manoeuvering abilities. It honestly wouldn't surprise me if we saw the max range drop to less than 15km.

    To that end, you can think of the max range zone as a parabola whose peak is in centre line with the turret. With a missile like the 57E6, which have an early rapid booster period which gives it a decent portion of its total energy, we can expect the parabola to be quite steep (as opposed to something like the TOR, which would have an equidistant circle, or an R-27ER which would have a much wider parabola due to the much longer booster period).

    With this in mind we can only assume that the Pantsir does have the ability to fire off bore sight, but that the range and accuracy would degrade proportionally, the closer the offset becomes to 45 degrees. Though, simply looking at the physical attributes of the system, it is clear that it was not designed to engage high offset targets while maintaining accuracy. The 2 second booster, rapid speed gain and highly agile second stage clearly indicate a system that was designed for rapid engagement of targets, minimising the time between launch and impact. Now the interesting part is that all of these traits begin to work against the system's performance when it is fired in off bore sight conditions.

    For example:
    rapid acceleration is good when you want to get to a target quickly, but bad if it spends that time traveling in another direction (45 degree offset)
    High agility is good to have when the missile is closing in on the target, but is a poor trait to have when there is a large closing distance remaining and high Gs to pull early in flight (45 degree offset).



    TL;DR
    The Pantsir was designed for rapid target engagement, and all of its missile's physical attributes suggest that the smaller the offset between the turret bearing and the bearing to the target, the better the performance.
    In the case of high off bore sight targeting, the rapid booster and high agility actually work against each other and would degrade performance substantially
    off bore sight targeting would be possible in a last ditch attempt to save your life, but in any other scenario, you'd want to leave it to a system with better performance for such things.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16741
    Points : 17349
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Pantsir-S1 News Thread:

    Post  GarryB on Thu Sep 07, 2017 8:09 am

    A single vehicle on its own would not be able to deal with three simultaneous incoming HARMs from different directions... what it could do however is turn off its own radar and optically tackle one of the incoming missiles while the other two missiles hit the ground where the Pantsir was when it was first detected and engaged. It could have driven a few kms away by that time.

    Usually however Pantsir is actually defending a larger target like an S-400 or S-300 battery in which case it would generally consist of at least 6 vehicles with a command vehicle and each vehicle will be given angles to defend with targets passed to them by the command vehicle without them using their own search radars at all.

    As such those three ARMs will be likely guiding to hit the command vehicle.

    The problem with this scenario is that the launch aircraft would probably have been engaged and shot down before they even got to HARM range in the first place to launch their attack but the large SAM system the Pantsir vehicles were tasked with protecting. The job of the Pantsir is to shoot down any weapons those aircraft launch at the S-400, while the S-400 shoots down the enemy aircraft and cruise missiles the Pantsir shoots down any munitions launched to defeat the S-400 system.


    _________________
    “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
    Isos

    Posts : 927
    Points : 925
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Re: Pantsir-S1 News Thread:

    Post  Isos on Thu Sep 07, 2017 9:22 am

    @ambiopinion what you discribe is overwhelming the system by firing salvos of missiles. This would work against any system. The thing is that no one would exepect to win a war just by using one system. If there are three f 18 out there it means there is a carrier so you try to destroy the carrier instead of just trying to defend.
    avatar
    AmbiOpinion

    Posts : 9
    Points : 9
    Join date : 2017-08-24

    Re: Pantsir-S1 News Thread:

    Post  AmbiOpinion on Thu Sep 14, 2017 12:38 am

    GarryB wrote:
    A single vehicle on its own would not be able to deal with three simultaneous incoming HARMs from different directions... what it could do however is turn off its own radar and optically tackle one of the incoming missiles while the other two missiles hit the ground where the Pantsir was when it was first detected and engaged. It could have driven a few kms away by that time.

    Precisely why the AGM-88E was created which has a MMW seeker on it. You also assume the Pantsir realizes it's been engage though to be honest I'm not sure what the detection range is against a HARM sized target.

    GarryB wrote:
    Usually however Pantsir is actually defending a larger target like an S-400 or S-300 battery in which case it would generally consist of at least 6 vehicles with a command vehicle and each vehicle will be given angles to defend with targets passed to them by the command vehicle without them using their own search radars at all.

    As such those three ARMs will be likely guiding to hit the command vehicle.

    My expectation would be that the search radar on the Pantsir would be on anyways to watch the horizon in the search radars blind spots (unless it's one of those mast mounted ones). Given the choice the HARM would probably home on the larger search radar since I think they have a list of prioritized targets. Really depends how the AGM-88E is programmed I suppose.

    GarryB wrote:
    The problem with this scenario is that the launch aircraft would probably have been engaged and shot down before they even got to HARM range in the first place to launch their attack but the large SAM system the Pantsir vehicles were tasked with protecting. The job of the Pantsir is to shoot down any weapons those aircraft launch at the S-400, while the S-400 shoots down the enemy aircraft and cruise missiles the Pantsir shoots down any munitions launched to defeat the S-400 system.

    Depends on a lot of factors, F-35s can dupe the S-400 fairly easy (in theory) at range, low level flights would avoid the S-400 but drift into Sosna/Verba/Mofrey turf, maybe US ECM prevents long range shots who knows. Too many variables to really say that's why I proposed a specific scenario.
    avatar
    miketheterrible

    Posts : 1505
    Points : 1505
    Join date : 2016-11-06

    Re: Pantsir-S1 News Thread:

    Post  miketheterrible on Thu Sep 14, 2017 7:40 am

    AmbiOpinion wrote:
    Precisely why the AGM-88E was created which has a MMW seeker on it. You also assume the Pantsir realizes it's been engage though to be honest I'm not sure what the detection range is against a HARM sized target.

    Would be about the same ranges as determined.  ~20km.  This was already posted regarding how it intercepted rockets.  Rockets are smaller.



    My expectation would be that the search radar on the Pantsir would be on anyways to watch the horizon in the search radars blind spots (unless it's one of those mast mounted ones). Given the choice the HARM would probably home on the larger search radar since I think they have a list of prioritized targets. Really depends how the AGM-88E is programmed I suppose.

    Doesn't matter if it homes on the radar or not.  The job of the pantsir's are also to protect the radar itself.  If the AGM-88E decides to attack the radar instead, then it becomes easier for the Pantsir's to engage it.  Especially since they all have their own radars as well.

    GarryB wrote:
    Depends on a lot of factors, F-35s can dupe the S-400 fairly easy (in theory) at range, low level flights would avoid the S-400 but drift into Sosna/Verba/Mofrey turf, maybe US ECM prevents long range shots who knows. Too many variables to really say that's why I proposed a specific scenario.

    Pray tell how the F-35 can dupe the S-400 easily?  Let me remind you, Growlers couldn't jam the S-300PMU1 tested in Slovakia or Greece during exercises and only known device could was an Il-76 that was fitted with heavy EW systems and even that jammed itself supposedly.  S-400 is a significantly different system.  Add to that, no one in the west had a chance to train against S-400.  So you are lying.
    avatar
    Big_Gazza

    Posts : 838
    Points : 856
    Join date : 2014-08-25
    Location : Melbourne, Australia

    Re: Pantsir-S1 News Thread:

    Post  Big_Gazza on Thu Sep 14, 2017 12:48 pm

    you misquoted the last statement - incorrectly attributed to GarryB. I had a WTF moment when I read it.... Very Happy
    avatar
    robognus

    Posts : 32
    Points : 34
    Join date : 2016-07-29

    Re: Pantsir-S1 News Thread:

    Post  robognus on Thu Sep 14, 2017 3:16 pm



    Sponsored content

    Re: Pantsir-S1 News Thread:

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Sat Nov 25, 2017 3:14 am