Intercepting Iskander

Well, then mentioning PATRIOT, my information was pretty vague anyway   
After a quick search, I came to this:
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/war_stories/2003/03/patriot_games.html
"In "development tests," which are designed to see if the technology works on the most basic level, the new Patriot did very well, hitting 10 out of 11 targets. However, in "operational tests," which are supposed to simulate real combat, the missile did much less well, slamming into the target in fewer than half the engagements, due mainly to computer glitches."


Also:
http://www.globalsecurity.org/org/news/2003/030321-patriot03.htm


"The Army did not respond to repeated requests to comment on the PAC-3's record in trials. But an official at Raytheon said Coyle and others didn't understand what the tests were designed to do.
"What we were testing was the entire system, not just whether we could kill a target at the end," the official added. "The end game may not be to intercept the missile.""

Well, if I were Polish, I wouldn't feel very safe after reading this   

The Scud turned out to be a largely political weapon and Patriot was its political answer.

Ask any civilian with no military interests and they will tell you Patriot saved the day and shot down all those Scuds...

I'll just add in that there has been numerous tests recently of the newer SM-3, THAAD and Arrow showing it engaging BM's. Now mind you, nothing is said about type of missile besides Israel that mentioned it was a launch from an aircraft (the time that Russia detected the missile with their radar).

Besides all of this, majority of the talk about ABM systems, majority of the performance characteristics falls under the same as S-300VM and newer. The US and Israel are pushing for KKV's and thus are aiming for high accuracy, which IMO may not be best solution when dealing with a weapon like Iskander who has decoys and maneuvering. Instead, it should be high explosive like S-300V's missiles are like, where even if it does not hit right on, the explosion from the warhead would guarantee it will hit it (well, more or less).

Is Iskander impossible to take down? Probably not. I bet that if they launch more than one missile from air defense systems, that they will more than likely hit Iskander. Is an Iskander a Scud? Yes and No. Yes in the sense it is a IRBM. No in the sense that it flies a different trajectory and it has subsystems making it significantly more accurate and able to survive if engaged.

Most tests for ABM systems, like Pantsir's against Cruise missiles, SM-3 and THAAD against BM targets and Arrow are all pre-planned and pre-determined. In other words, they know where it is flying from, they know where it is going to strike, thus they can concentrate on its tracking. If a missile is launched from an area that is a surprise to you? Then things may be different.

As of recently, systems like Iron Dome have proven itself to be quite accurate and effective of a system. Dumb bombs are not easy to intercept either, especially if they are launched without warning. Russia really needs to work on its sensor development as the west is really improving theirs and eventually, they may very well be able to counter Iskander without much effort.

sepheronx wrote:Besides all of this, majority of the talk about ABM systems, majority of the performance characteristics falls under the same as S-300VM and newer.  The US and Israel are pushing for KKV's and thus are aiming for high accuracy, which IMO may not be best solution when dealing with a weapon like Iskander who has decoys and maneuvering.  Instead, it should be high explosive like S-300V's missiles are like, where even if it does not hit right on, the explosion from the warhead would guarantee it will hit it (well, more or less).

There is one big difference. Arrow/THAAD/SM-3 are all anti-ballistic missile systems ONLY while S-300V is first mobile anti-ALL missile system.

That means that if you defend some area against potential threats in form of ballistic and winged threats you can not place just THAAD or just Arrow or just SM-3. You need a Patriot too. On

the other hand S-300V handles all threats at the same time. Than we have issue of mobility and many others   

Instead, it should be high explosive like S-300V's missiles are like, where even if it does not hit right on, the explosion from the warhead would guarantee it will hit it (well, more or less).

The S-300V moves at between mach 5 and mach 7 depending on which missile we are talking about, and the incoming threat will be moving very fast too.

It is all fine and dandy having all the best sensors, but if the target starts a turn at the last fraction of a second it just has to move a metre or less for a hit to kill interceptor to miss.

The outgoing interceptor with an adaptive warhead has multiple fuses throughout the HE payload and an onboard computer can choose which fuse or fuses to set off to direct the blast into the path of the incoming target.

HE detonates at about 5-6km/s depending upon the type, so considering the closing speeds it is not the HE that will be important... a tiny row of charges that blows the main payload of 130kgs of small metal cubes into the path of the incoming target would actually be more effective than 130kgs of HE as high altitude interceptions mean very thin air which makes blast explosive warheads useless. For high altitude use the explosive is most useful accelerating fragments which in the thinner air travel much faster and further and are much more effective than at lower altitudes.

Having a light payload means the missile can be smaller and lighter... which generally means cheaper, but at the end of the day a light payload is less useful against quite a few different target types... especially aircraft, so heavy payloads remain in Russian SAMs designed for multi purposes like S-400 and S-300V. S-500 might have a hit to kill payload to reduce weight and size... smaller lighter missiles require less energy to travel the same distance... the 9M96 missiles are a case in point where lighter payloads results in smaller lighter missiles that still have decent ranges/performance.

The only curiosity i have is on SM-3 operation.. and its limits..
If its need to be placed at about the same flight path of a ballistic missile to intercept it(just like have been said thaad works)
in a way that the Iskander fly right above it , then SM-3 will be next to useless for defending a mobile Army from modern ballistic attacks.
Iskander and others BM Russia have are very mobile and could easily be used in a way to bypass any Thaad static defense
flying away of it .

Vann7 wrote:

The only curiosity i have is on SM-3 operation.. and its limits..
If its need to be placed at about the same flight path of a ballistic missile to intercept it(just like have been said thaad works)
in a way that the Iskander fly  right above it , then SM-3 will be next to useless for defending a mobile Army from modern ballistic attacks.
Iskander and others BM Russia have are very mobile and could easily be used in a way to bypass any Thaad static defense
flying away of it .

SM-3 is not design to protect mobile Army, S-300V is.

SM-3 will be placed on prepared ground launch systems and this is a system that can not engage aerodynamic targets.

Viktor wrote:

Vann7 wrote:

The only curiosity i have is on SM-3 operation.. and its limits..
If its need to be placed at about the same flight path of a ballistic missile to intercept it(just like have been said thaad works)
in a way that the Iskander fly  right above it , then SM-3 will be next to useless for defending a mobile Army from modern ballistic attacks.
Iskander and others BM Russia have are very mobile and could easily be used in a way to bypass any Thaad static defense
flying away of it .

SM-3 is not design to protect mobile Army, S-300V is.

SM-3 will be placed on prepared ground launch systems and this is a system that can not engage aerodynamic targets.

But can SM-3 intercept Ballistic missiles,even if the launcher is not positioned in the same trajectory of the missile ?
it was claimed Thaad have that limitation.

Extremely interesting video about Russian Iskander ECM capabilities.

Take note that this is a video produced by The Institute for National Security Studies (Israelies) and that they look at things throw they eyes with high propaganda spam etc

but still facts are fact and here you have some very interesting points.

about the institute LINK

about the man speaking LINK



enjoy

Few points I want to make regarding this video.

1. Excellent review of Iskander massive ECM potential in comparison with similar western one and much more advanced

2. Notice fear that cause low flying winged missiles (with the introduction of 3M-14 missile to Iskander system)

3. I did not know that 3M-14 missile incorporated in Iskander-K is longer (with longer range) than already 2500km 3M-14 missile of Club-S system

4. Range of the 3M-14 can easily be much longer than 2500 according to this guy.

5. Range of Iskander - up to 900km but huge potential (room) for more payload of any kind

6. Russia has 7 S-300V brigades (I though 3-4 up to 5 at max)

7. Modernized seeker of Yakhont missile makes it capable to strike ground targets (speed Mach 4.5)

8. Interesting systems of ICBM silo defense, Russia developed

Viktor wrote:Extremely interesting video about Russian Iskander ECM capabilities.

Take note that this is a video produced by The Institute for National Security Studies (Israelies) and that they look at things throw they eyes with high propaganda spam etc

but still facts are fact and here you have some very interesting points.

about the institute LINK

about the man speaking LINK



enjoy

Few points I want to make regarding this video.

1. Excellent review of Iskander massive ECM potential in comparison with similar western one and much more advanced

2. Notice fear that cause low flying winged missiles (with the introduction of 3M-14 missile to Iskander system)

3. I did not know that 3M-14 missile incorporated in Iskander-K is longer (with longer range) than already 2500km 3M-14 missile of Club-S system

4. Range of the 3M-14 can easily be much longer than 2500 according to this guy.

5. Range of Iskander - up to 900km but huge potential (room) for more payload of any kind

6. Russia has 7 S-300V brigades (I though 3-4 up to 5 at max)

7. Modernized seeker of Yakhont missile makes it capable to strike ground targets (speed Mach 4.5)

8. Interesting systems of ICBM silo defense, Russia developed

Isn't that treason? and punishable with Jail ?
That A Russian citizen supply detailed information to Israel about how their Iskanders or cruise missles operate?

a little of topic... that might or not apply to Iskander..here is an interesting video that shows
how can Ballistic missiles can evade system of defenses..with cheap technology..

www.youtube.com/watch?v=gNSR7dXHdCY

Vann7 wrote:[Isn't that treason? and punishable with Jail ?
That A Russian citizen supply information to Israel about how their Iskanders or cruise missles operate?

He made may mistakes and knows very little about the problems but nevertheless for our lvl of discussion he has some interesting points.

Viktor wrote:Extremely interesting video about Russian Iskander ECM capabilities.

Take note that this is a video produced by The Institute for National Security Studies (Israelies) and that they look at things throw they eyes with high propaganda spam etc

but still facts are fact and here you have some very interesting points.

about the institute LINK

about the man speaking LINK

Nice video there . He is a Research Fellow at the Royal United Services Institute for Defence and Security Studies in London .


1) Can you tell me more viktor whether the info he released to Israelis were conidential or non-confidential ? and surprisingly israelis didn't work in designing counter measures against such russian missiles . don't know how AEGIS sm-6 OR Thaad can intercept IKSANDER . Looks improbable .



2) I'm sure usa isn't lagging behingd with Russia on missiles tech . Can you tell me what russian equivalent of brahmos , yakhont , onyx , mokshit etc USA use with their military ?? They use upgraded Harpoon as anti-ship missile etc ?

max steel wrote:Nice video there . He  is a Research Fellow at the Royal United Services Institute for Defence and Security Studies in London .


1) Can you tell me more viktor whether the info he released to Israelis were conidential or non-confidential ? and surprisingly israelis didn't work in designing counter measures against such russian missiles . don't know how AEGIS sm-6 OR Thaad can intercept IKSANDER . Looks improbable .

Nothing confidential there. Just a traitor trying to suck in. Knows a bit more than general internet population and thats about it.

Can Iskander maneuver mid-course ? Can sm-6 or thaad intercept it in Europe ?

max steel wrote:Can Iskander maneuver mid-course ? Can sm-6 or thaad intercept it in Europe ?

No one knows.. But at least it can be said that Russia designed Iskanders to counter
NATO ABM system is Europe.. So it have to be a well though missile. Also is worth to remember
there are Iskander cruise missiles too.. so they both can be used at same time.. to maximize the success . Thaad or SM-3 cannot target things flying low.. only ballistic missile flying high..
SM-6 ,appears to be a light version of S-300 with extended range. SM-6 ,on paper Doesn't appear that it can target Iskander ,because Iskanders are hypersonic and fly at mach 6.17 or 2100 m/s, while the Sm-6 is a supersonic missiles mach 3.5.. So if the missile comes from behind will fail to chase it ,fly at half the speed.. I think only Patriots or perhaps the israeli ones in the video ,will have a better chance to try ,if launched in numbers. Sm-6 appears to be more ideal against combat planes. Because is a Big Missile.. and have a big booster.. its maneuverability against fast moving targets will be not the best. All missiles usually are vulnerable on its mid course.. but i dont know if Iskander also was made with mid course maneuverability too.. Knowing how Russia understand the mid course interceptors that NATO ABM system is.. it will not be surprising if can evade at any time missiles.

Viktor wrote:

max steel wrote:Nice video there . He  is a Research Fellow at the Royal United Services Institute for Defence and Security Studies in London .


1) Can you tell me more viktor whether the info he released to Israelis were conidential or non-confidential ? and surprisingly israelis didn't work in designing counter measures against such russian missiles . don't know how AEGIS sm-6 OR Thaad can intercept IKSANDER . Looks improbable .

Nothing confidential there. Just a traitor trying to suck in. Knows a bit more than general internet population and thats about it.

Nice, long, important-sounding title for a traitor

You mean Israel's Barak or Arrow system and Patriot PAC-# ( whatever number their modern patriot is , 6 maybe ) have good chance against Iksander . How ,

max steel wrote:

Viktor wrote:Extremely interesting video about Russian Iskander ECM capabilities.

Take note that this is a video produced by The Institute for National Security Studies (Israelies) and that they look at things throw they eyes with high propaganda spam etc

but still facts are fact and here you have some very interesting points.

about the institute LINK

about the man speaking LINK

Nice video there . He  is a Research Fellow at the Royal United Services Institute for Defence and Security Studies in London .


1) Can you tell me more viktor whether the info he released to Israelis were conidential or non-confidential ? and surprisingly israelis didn't work in designing counter measures against such russian missiles . don't know how AEGIS sm-6 OR Thaad can intercept IKSANDER . Looks improbable .



2) I'm sure usa isn't lagging behingd with Russia on missiles tech . Can you tell me what russian equivalent of brahmos , yakhont , onyx , mokshit etc USA use with their military ?? They use upgraded Harpoon as anti-ship missile etc ?

Funny propaganda about the russian deployment of Radars and TBM's they are not against Iran but against Israel which is the most unstable country that has nuclear capability and has several times threatend to use nuclear weapons against all european countries when Israel should be turned down by UN and NATO.

Actually, what do you think of the avoiding ability of 9M723? Do you really think that it can't be intercepted by any air defence at all?

Ironically if an air defence system could intercept it it would probably be a Russian system.

I would not have enormous faith in western SAMs to bring down such missiles simply because it was never a priority before and only moderate interest and funding has gone into intercepting targets but the focus was on speed... with increased size Scuds being the focus... ie basically Scud missiles of longer range and therefore higher terminal speed was the focus of PAC-3 and THAAD, so while they might be able to deal with slightly longer ranged Scud missiles I think they will be out of their depth with Iskander which is designed to evade interception during its terminal attack.

Well, after such news:
https://topwar.ru/164483-neozvuchennye-detali-ispytanij-s-400-na-poligone-kapustin-jar-chto-imitirovali-rakety-misheni-favorit-rm.html

It feels like the invulnerability of Iskander is kind of exaggerated. After all, if it was so perfect, Kinzhal won't be made, imho.

GarryB wrote:Ironically if an air defence system could intercept it it would probably be a Russian system.

I would not have enormous faith in western SAMs to bring down such missiles simply because it was never a priority before and only moderate interest and funding has gone into intercepting targets but the focus was on speed... with increased size Scuds being the focus... ie basically Scud missiles of longer range and therefore higher terminal speed was the focus of PAC-3 and THAAD, so while they might be able to deal with slightly longer ranged Scud missiles I think they will be out of their depth with Iskander which is designed to evade interception during its terminal attack.

I remember i checked some Yankees recently , alot of trolls there ,they easly confirming that PAC-3 can intercept Isaknder and identify it's decoys at terminal path .

PAC in gulf war failed to intercept Iraqi cruise missiles and versus scud they had to launch 30 missiles against 3 SCUDs .

Actually since that , PATRIOT didn't face any real strong targets , all these Yemini should be easy to intercept , they have unique ballistic path that easy to be mapped and intercept by any recent ABM systems , and also PAC-3 failed to intercept some of them +some UAVs .

So what about intercepting a high speed target with no ballistic flight path ,low RCS ,maneuvering in the whole flight journey ,releasing decoys with the same radar signature of the target ??

Ives wrote:Well, after such news:
https://topwar.ru/164483-neozvuchennye-detali-ispytanij-s-400-na-poligone-kapustin-jar-chto-imitirovali-rakety-misheni-favorit-rm.html

It feels like the invulnerability of Iskander is kind of exaggerated. After all, if it was so perfect, Kinzhal won't be made, imho.

To be more precise: invulnerable to all existing western air/missile defence systems.

Well, I won't underrate western SAMs to be honest.

Ives wrote:Well, I won't underrate western SAMs to be honest.

Anyone got any comments on European SAMs as opposed to US?