Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    V-SHORADS [Igla, Strela-10, Tunguska, Sosna-R]

    Share

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15468
    Points : 16175
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: V-SHORADS [Igla, Strela-10, Tunguska, Sosna-R]

    Post  GarryB on Fri Jun 17, 2011 5:52 am

    As I know ammo for 14,5 mm machine gun or 30 mm gun is inside turret and have more or less the same space for ammo for the main gun.

    I would think 500 rounds of 14.5mm ammo would take up less space than 500 rounds of 30mm ammo. Especially as the 14.5mm ammo would now be in a single continuous belt while the 30mm ammo will be in two separate belts for AP and HE.

    I have three 25mm rounds from a LAV III in a belt and I have a 50 cal browning machine gun round that easily fits inside the empty 25mm shell case. The 30 x 165mm round is significantly bigger than the 25mm round, so while the 14.5mm round is also bigger than the 50 cal browning I am pretty sure that the 14.5mm ammo will take up less space internally than the 30mm ammo.

    I suspect it would also be significantly lighter in terms of ammo weight and weapon weight.

    As I know, turret from BTR-82A doesn't have space for any missiles, so spare missiles will be places outside turret somewhere inside vehicle. Different gun in that case in my opinion doesn't have any influence on missiles placed on turret. Maybe only with FCS, which maybe will need more space for operating additional armament.

    Was thinking about 2-4 missiles on either side of the turret much like on the Phoenix or Strelets. Individual missiles are long and slim and could be stored in the hull behind the turret where the troops would normally sit in the troop carrying version.

    Should be able to stack at least one full reload.

    Talking about gun, I personally more prefer 30 mm gun, because it have longer effective range than 14,5 mm and is more effective against helicopters, specially armored ones.

    I agree, but for the extra weight and size I don't think it is worth it. Most of the BMD-4s should have high elevation 30mm cannons already so for such threats they should be able to deal with them themselves.
    My thinking is that the 14.5mm gun is a definite threat to most helos and light vehicles while not weighing too much or taking up too much room.

    With the 14.5mm gun and 30mm grenade launcher and PKT MG I think the vehicle is well armed while reloading SAM missiles.

    I don't want a vulnerable target, but I don't want to over burden it with the same weapons most of the vehicles it operates with will be carrying.

    Its primary role will be shooting down aircraft but preferably at extended ranges... if a Helo gets within 30mm cannon range then there is something wrong and rather than shooting it out it should be running.

    I could understand you wanting to keep the 30mm gun, but would suggest the removal of the 30mm grenade launcher to compensate.

    I rather suspect that the addition of a thermal sight like the Catherine system fitted to T-90s and BMPs will be the only add on required to make this vehicle all weather day night capable. The missiles are IR guided and fire and forget so MMW radar or some such stuff is pointless... if the Catherine can't see the target there is no way the IR seekers on the missiles will get a lock anyway.

    Another option of course... if we think about it... this is the VDV... best of the best, so perhaps the longer chassis troop carrier with vertical launch tubes on the rear and a very small turret on the front with thermal and TV optics to fire Morfei missiles.

    medo
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 3051
    Points : 3149
    Join date : 2010-10-24
    Location : Slovenia

    Re: V-SHORADS [Igla, Strela-10, Tunguska, Sosna-R]

    Post  medo on Fri Jun 17, 2011 9:24 pm

    I would think 500 rounds of 14.5mm ammo would take up less space than 500 rounds of 30mm ammo. Especially as the 14.5mm ammo would now be in a single continuous belt while the 30mm ammo will be in two separate belts for AP and HE.

    You are correct, 14,5 mm round is smaller than 30 mm round, and 500 14,5 mm rounds take less space than 500 30mm rounds. But if in both cases you have 500 rounds, than it is better to have 30 mm, which give you better firepower. I think difference in space they could get in two pylons, which hold a gun.


    Was thinking about 2-4 missiles on either side of the turret much like on the Phoenix or Strelets. Individual missiles are long and slim and could be stored in the hull behind the turret where the troops would normally sit in the troop carrying version.

    I think this is only logical placement for missiles. Active missiles on sides of turret and spare missiles inside vehicle. I was thinking you mean placing spare missiles inside turret, where gunner sit, but there is no room for them, one man turret doesn't have enough space.


    Its primary role will be shooting down aircraft but preferably at extended ranges... if a Helo gets within 30mm cannon range then there is something wrong and rather than shooting it out it should be running.

    I personally doubt, that jets will fly that low and near to get into range of 30 mm gun. If they will, that pilots are doing something wrong. Helicopters are other story, when they could come very close and pop up inside range of gun, specially in more forest terrain and with hills and mountains. They could be in cover behind the mask and come very close and radars could not see them. I think for quick reaction in that close range gun is better than missile, specially if there are also bushes and trees.


    Another option of course... if we think about it... this is the VDV... best of the best, so perhaps the longer chassis troop carrier with vertical launch tubes on the rear and a very small turret on the front with thermal and TV optics to fire Morfei missiles.

    The vehicle for Sprut-SD? Interesting option, for sure, but I don't know a lot about Morfei. When we know more about it, we could easier say if this is real option for that kind of vehicle.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15468
    Points : 16175
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: V-SHORADS [Igla, Strela-10, Tunguska, Sosna-R]

    Post  GarryB on Sat Jun 18, 2011 4:26 am

    You are correct, 14,5 mm round is smaller than 30 mm round, and 500 14,5 mm rounds take less space than 500 30mm rounds. But if in both cases you have 500 rounds, than it is better to have 30 mm, which give you better firepower. I think difference in space they could get in two pylons, which hold a gun.

    My thinking is that the 14.5mm turret version could possibly fit the 500 x 14.5mm rounds and the 2000 rounds of 7.62mm round with the PKT machine gun inside the turret area which will free up the area below the turret for the seat for the operator and perhaps a few missiles lying on the floor.
    So the difference will be 14.5mm gun and space for perhaps another two Igla missiles, or extra range of the 30mm gun but less space for Igla missiles.

    The 30mm round is clearly superior in performance against aircraft and armour, but this vehicle will be tasked with air defence and will be operating with vehicles carrying ATGMs and 30mm cannons and 100mm rifled guns and 120mm mortars and 125mm gun armed light tanks. I think the lighter gun for close in self defence makes more sense, and in actual terms I think the 2-2.5km range against aircraft and light ground targets for the 14.5mm gun is enough for defence while reloading missiles which will be the primary weapons.

    I think this is only logical placement for missiles. Active missiles on sides of turret and spare missiles inside vehicle. I was thinking you mean placing spare missiles inside turret, where gunner sit, but there is no room for them, one man turret doesn't have enough space.

    Yes...
    I also am thinking that by removing the 30mm grenade launcher and by using the 14.5mm gun instead of the 30mm cannon the ammo can be reduced to a level where it fills the turret area with just the single persons position below the turret ring. This would allow internal Iglas to take some of the room under the turret ring for more internal storage. In the 120mm NONA vehicle it stores something like 60 x 120mm mortar shells.

    These are very small compact vehicles which is why I think the extended chassis troop transport chassis could be used for more internal storage space for missiles.

    I personally doubt, that jets will fly that low and near to get into range of 30 mm gun. If they will, that pilots are doing something wrong. Helicopters are other story, when they could come very close and pop up inside range of gun, specially in more forest terrain and with hills and mountains. They could be in cover behind the mask and come very close and radars could not see them. I think for quick reaction in that close range gun is better than missile, specially if there are also bushes and trees.

    There are still some jets that fly low and fast like the Su-24 and F-15E on some strike missions and with advanced warning and cueing from the AD network this system should be quite effective.

    If the turret of the BTR-80A is too big or takes up too much internal space then the same turret used on the Strelets on the MTLB could easily be used too, though it has no gun armament.

    There will also likely be UAVs and CAS types that this system will be effective against too.

    The vehicle for Sprut-SD? Interesting option, for sure, but I don't know a lot about Morfei. When we know more about it, we could easier say if this is real option for that kind of vehicle.

    It is supposed to be a unified short range AAM/SAM with IIR guidance and lock on after launch capacity. In the naval and land based system (shared with Vityaz) it is going to perform a role similar to SEA RAM except with the lock on after launch capacity it can be vertically launched (or launched from a weapon bay on an aircraft) with inertial navigation directing it towards the incoming threat. When it faces the threat it will look at all the potential targets based on their IR signature and compare them with threats in a threat library. If it was launched at a Harpoon missile for example that is 10km away but as it flys out it detects an F-22 it might pass that info back to the launch platform and allow the operator to select a new higher priority target, or continue against the targeted threat.

    The threat library and the 3D thermal signatures in those libraries are already being used in auto trackers with thermal sighted systems. Older systems processed the video image to detect distinct objects like the night camera on a police helo following a suspect at night... often a box will appear around the target and that box can be locked so the operator can let the system automatically track the target rather than having to follow them themselves. The signature library is the next step and is for weapons to allow them to find their own targets.
    A modern example is Brimstone which uses MMW radar signatures to find potential targets in enemy territory.


    An older example was Granit which would be fired in large formations of 12 or more where one missile would climb to 300m or so and to a single radar scan of the target area. It would then drop down and analyse the radar return and determine which targets were visible and it would then assign priorities and determine which missile would engage which targets with the carriers getting more missiles targeting them. It would then transmit the target picture to the other missiles and pass on which missile was attacking which target. Later models also sent via satellite datalink the missiles radar scan of the target area, which would be useful for targeting follow up shots.

    The carrier group would detect one radar scan but then the missile would drop down below the radar horizon. A bit of datalink radio traffic for a few seconds and then the next thing the carrier group would see is a dozen or more enormous supersonic antiship missiles coming over the horizon at High speed not using their radars till they were very close as a final check they were on target.


    Last edited by GarryB on Mon Jun 20, 2011 10:36 am; edited 1 time in total

    medo
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 3051
    Points : 3149
    Join date : 2010-10-24
    Location : Slovenia

    Re: V-SHORADS [Igla, Strela-10, Tunguska, Sosna-R]

    Post  medo on Sat Jun 18, 2011 9:15 pm

    Thank you for more informations about Morfei. This will be for sure very capable system, the only weak point is enemy equipped with DIRCM, which could blind IIR homing head, but their main targets, incoming missiles don't have them. In combination with other type of missiles it will represent very strong last line of air defense.



    The 30mm round is clearly superior in performance against aircraft and armour, but this vehicle will be tasked with air defence and will be operating with vehicles carrying ATGMs and 30mm cannons and 100mm rifled guns and 120mm mortars and 125mm gun armed light tanks. I think the lighter gun for close in self defence makes more sense, and in actual terms I think the 2-2.5km range against aircraft and light ground targets for the 14.5mm gun is enough for defence while reloading missiles which will be the primary weapons.
    [quote]

    This is true, that BMD-2/3/4 have 30 mm gun and could also engage flying targets, but this is not a reason that AD vehicle is not armed with 30 mm gun. After all in armor units there are a lot of BMP-2s and BMP-3s with 30 mm gun and they still have ZSU-23-4 Shilka and Tunguska with 23 mm and 30 mm guns. In battle BMDs could be fully employed with enemy ground units and targets and could not work against air targets, so AD vehicles will in that case work alone against them. After all, VDV could operate behind enemy lines, so they are outside of their own AD cluster. When they fire all missiles from launchers, they still have 30 mm guns to fire, before they are able to reload missiles. In that case 30 mm gun keep longer distance to enemy than 14,5 mm gun.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15468
    Points : 16175
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: V-SHORADS [Igla, Strela-10, Tunguska, Sosna-R]

    Post  GarryB on Mon Jun 20, 2011 11:18 am

    Thank you for more informations about Morfei. This will be for sure very capable system, the only weak point is enemy equipped with DIRCM, which could blind IIR homing head, but their main targets, incoming missiles don't have them. In combination with other type of missiles it will represent very strong last line of air defense.

    Morfei for most units will be a load option on a Vityaz system with a range of 10-15km. The other two missiles on board will have a range of 40km and 120km and will likely be active radar homing.

    If a target uses DIRCM to defend themselves they have already gotten to within 10-15km of the vehicles.

    I rather suspect an enemy force equipped widely with DIRCM systems would lead to reduced payloads of Morfei and increased payloads of the larger radar guided missiles.

    Being a short ranged AAM it is perfectly possible that Morfei might even be given a combined ARH/IIR seeker to ensure lethality.

    I doubt the Russians will have a shortage of options to engage aerial targets... they tend to be very well equipped with air defence systems... on land and at sea.

    This is true, that BMD-2/3/4 have 30 mm gun and could also engage flying targets, but this is not a reason that AD vehicle is not armed with 30 mm gun. After all in armor units there are a lot of BMP-2s and BMP-3s with 30 mm gun and they still have ZSU-23-4 Shilka and Tunguska with 23 mm and 30 mm guns. In battle BMDs could be fully employed with enemy ground units and targets and could not work against air targets, so AD vehicles will in that case work alone against them. After all, VDV could operate behind enemy lines, so they are outside of their own AD cluster. When they fire all missiles from launchers, they still have 30 mm guns to fire, before they are able to reload missiles. In that case 30 mm gun keep longer distance to enemy than 14,5 mm gun.

    I appreciate what you are saying here, but a couple of points... first BMP-2s and BMP-3s in the past have not be fitted with autotrackers in their optics. To fire on a target they lase the range which gives a specific fixed range which based on the ammo loaded and a lot of other factors generates an aim point so the gunner can put the elipse on the target and fire with a good chance of a hit. With a moving target like an aircraft however unless the target is heading directly towards or away from the vehicle the aimpoint becomes obsolete in a few seconds. The autotracker allows the gunners sight and gun to follow the continuously updated aimpoint for the target so a squeese of the target should result in a good chance for hitting the target... with an autotracker and laser rangefinder and ballistic computer the chances of an upgraded BMP-2 hitting a target is actually much better than the chances of a ZSU-23-4 despite the fact that the Shilka will likely be pumping out far more projectiles.

    The obvious problem is that the BMP/BMD gunners will not be looking specifically for aircraft.

    Second point is that with the right optics the Igla and later Verba will be effective out to 5km and its kill probability will likely be much higher than 30mm cannon, so I think rather than adding one more 30mm cannon to the force that the extra space carrying extra missiles makes more sense. The 14.5mm gun gives it some defense capacity without reducing the capacity of the primary weapon... the Iglas.

    VDV will more often than not in a full conflict operate behind enemy lines which means the ground forces they fight will not likely be top of the line, but the threat becomes light air power and artillery. Light air power would include helos and some UAVs and perhaps UCAVs tasked with defending whatever the VDV are trying to take.

    In such a situation Iglas/Verba would be acceptable, but something like Pantsir-S1 would be much better.

    Having said this I remembered this picture/slide:



    As you can see it is quite a small slide and the vehicle seems to be a Tunguska on a BMD chassis and the system is called "Roman". Translation of the other details might lead to more clues about this system perhaps?

    I think in the longer term another system or group of systems might be developed too.

    SOSNA is a good candidate for a light cheap but capable system for very mobile units and Morfei is the inter service short range self defence missile. With QWIP sensors it could potentially become very cheap but accurate.

    medo
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 3051
    Points : 3149
    Join date : 2010-10-24
    Location : Slovenia

    Re: V-SHORADS [Igla, Strela-10, Tunguska, Sosna-R]

    Post  medo on Mon Jun 20, 2011 8:37 pm

    I appreciate what you are saying here, but a couple of points... first BMP-2s and BMP-3s in the past have not be fitted with autotrackers in their optics. To fire on a target they lase the range which gives a specific fixed range which based on the ammo loaded and a lot of other factors generates an aim point so the gunner can put the elipse on the target and fire with a good chance of a hit. With a moving target like an aircraft however unless the target is heading directly towards or away from the vehicle the aimpoint becomes obsolete in a few seconds. The autotracker allows the gunners sight and gun to follow the continuously updated aimpoint for the target so a squeese of the target should result in a good chance for hitting the target... with an autotracker and laser rangefinder and ballistic computer the chances of an upgraded BMP-2 hitting a target is actually much better than the chances of a ZSU-23-4 despite the fact that the Shilka will likely be pumping out far more projectiles.
    [quote]

    I agree with you here and would like to add, that today AD systems also have better FCS than Shilka.


    Second point is that with the right optics the Igla and later Verba will be effective out to 5km and its kill probability will likely be much higher than 30mm cannon, so I think rather than adding one more 30mm cannon to the force that the extra space carrying extra missiles makes more sense. The 14.5mm gun gives it some defense capacity without reducing the capacity of the primary weapon... the Iglas.

    VDV will more often than not in a full conflict operate behind enemy lines which means the ground forces they fight will not likely be top of the line, but the threat becomes light air power and artillery. Light air power would include helos and some UAVs and perhaps UCAVs tasked with defending whatever the VDV are trying to take.

    I agree with you here, but would like to add, that for VSHORAD system, like the one, about which we discuss here for VDV, future targets will also be bombs and missiles from helicopters and planes and top attack ATGMs, which fly high and slow. Of course, missiles are the main armament, so VDV could decide to have missiles only AD system. If VDV decide to have missile/gun AD system, than they will have also to decide, which gun to place in it. I think it is easier to develop AHEAD gun rounds for 30 mm gun than for 14,5 mm gun, which in combination with modern FCS could be more effective against those small targets. They could also go for 57 mm AA gun only, but this is something, about what VDV command have to decide. Maybe they have a decision, but we don't know yet.

    medo
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 3051
    Points : 3149
    Join date : 2010-10-24
    Location : Slovenia

    Russian army evaluating Zipkin PMADS?

    Post  medo on Sat Oct 22, 2011 6:09 pm

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/At%C4%B1lgan_PMADS

    In Wikipedia site I find between operators of Turkish Aselsan pedestal mounted air defense systems (PMADS) also Russia, which evaluated Zipkin variant, the same as Netherland use on their Fenneks. They wrote not in service yet, evaluated only. How many Russian MoD (or maybe it is FSB) buy for evaluations? Are they placed on original Land Rovers or on Russian Tiger or Vystrel vehicles? Are they planing to buy them, when they have similar Strelets system placed on MT-LB and could be placed on similar vehicles? Anyone have any more informations about Zipkin in Russian army? It's strange that Russian would buy foreign air defense system, although it will use their own Igla missiles instead of Stingers.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15468
    Points : 16175
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: V-SHORADS [Igla, Strela-10, Tunguska, Sosna-R]

    Post  GarryB on Sun Oct 23, 2011 12:26 am

    The Russians are buying small batches of all sorts of systems for testing, and I rather suspect that is as far as most will go.

    The Russian Navy already has Gibka, and for land based systems they have Phoenix with 8 missiles and two 50 cal HMGs and 360 degree IR sensors that we know of.

    medo
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 3051
    Points : 3149
    Join date : 2010-10-24
    Location : Slovenia

    Re: V-SHORADS [Igla, Strela-10, Tunguska, Sosna-R]

    Post  medo on Sun Oct 23, 2011 8:03 pm

    True, but usually those buyings of foreign equipment for evaluations are more known in medias, like buying from France, Italy, Germany and Israel. Buying of air defense equipment from Turkey is quite unknown and also strange. There is no mentioning of it in other NATO members nor in Russian medias. If they actually have Zipkin, they could show its testings as they show Israeli UAVs and Iveco LMVs. Or maybe it is FSB who evaluate it and not MoD, that it is in such secret.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15468
    Points : 16175
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: V-SHORADS [Igla, Strela-10, Tunguska, Sosna-R]

    Post  GarryB on Mon Oct 24, 2011 1:43 am

    Well the fact that the system is offered with the SA-18 Igla as an option perhaps suggests the Russians might want to get a piece of the action for exports that will require SA-18 missiles to be supplied?

    This is simply a stabilised MANPAD launcher with TV and Thermal Imager with a laser range finder and 12.7mm HMG backup... it is hardly something Russia would need to import.

    Unless it is linked to oil or gas agreements I rather doubt they will do more than buy a few evaluation systems.


    medo
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 3051
    Points : 3149
    Join date : 2010-10-24
    Location : Slovenia

    Re: V-SHORADS [Igla, Strela-10, Tunguska, Sosna-R]

    Post  medo on Mon Oct 24, 2011 8:45 pm

    Installing SA-18 Igla on Zipkin doesn't need Russian evaluations, the same as Germans don't need Russians to install Iglas on their Ozelot system.

    This is very strange. For evaluations and comparing to similar Russian systems, I personally think, that German Ozelot or French Aspic would be better choice, because they are for sure better quality than Turkish one and would be better standard for comparing. In my opinion, maybe Russians could use Zipkin for easier breaking into Georgian C4I, because Georgia buy a lot of Turkish equipment. In that case customer could be FSB and not MoD.

    However we do not know, what is the case behind, but Russia for sure doesn't need foreign air defense systems, their own are in the World standard.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15468
    Points : 16175
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: V-SHORADS [Igla, Strela-10, Tunguska, Sosna-R]

    Post  GarryB on Tue Oct 25, 2011 12:58 am

    I would suspect that they probably identified as many systems in that category and approached all the manufacturers for test batches.

    I highly doubt there will be any foreign purchases, these systems will start as comparison test systems and once the evaluation is finished they might be used to test defensive systems, or used as OpFor equipment in exercises.

    medo
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 3051
    Points : 3149
    Join date : 2010-10-24
    Location : Slovenia

    Re: V-SHORADS [Igla, Strela-10, Tunguska, Sosna-R]

    Post  medo on Tue Oct 25, 2011 8:33 pm

    I agree with you, but I still have a feeling, something is unusual here. It was never mentioned Russians tested or evaluated Ozelot, Aspic, Avenger, RBS-70 or similar, but they evaluated Zipkin. More strange is a sentence "not in service yet". This could be understood as they decide to buy them and to operate them in units, although there is no need for them. And still, there is no any other information or picture about it.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15468
    Points : 16175
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: V-SHORADS [Igla, Strela-10, Tunguska, Sosna-R]

    Post  GarryB on Wed Oct 26, 2011 6:43 am

    They used the SA-13 to replace the ZU-23 in VDV service as an interim system till the final system is ready.

    They have plenty of systems that use MANPADs or similar missiles like the naval Gibka, the land based Phoenix, plus they have other short range missile options including SOSNA and Morfei, while regarding "systems" rather than missiles I hear they have accepted that Barnaul-M system into service.

    We know they are developing a new system for the VDV, and that the Morfei system will likely replace short range IR systems like SA-9 and SA-13, and we also know they have alternatives in the SOSNA gun/missile system and the Phoenix MANPADS system, and that they also have the Digit twin launcher for Igla too.

    I suspect this is just an evaluation and that "not yet in service" is pure speculation that is pretty unsubstantiated.

    Lets face it, this is about a stabilised mount with a HMG and a thermal camera that can be fitted on a range of vehicles.
    That also describes the Phoenix and the various systems we have seen mounted on MTLB vehicles too.

    No disrespect meant to Turkey, but I can't see their system being sufficiently better than any Russian equivalent to warrant interest.

    medo
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 3051
    Points : 3149
    Join date : 2010-10-24
    Location : Slovenia

    Re: V-SHORADS [Igla, Strela-10, Tunguska, Sosna-R]

    Post  medo on Wed Oct 26, 2011 4:01 pm

    Exactly as you said. Russians don't need any foreign SAM system, because their own are on the world level. If they want comparing foreign system to their own, I still think it would be better to compare with German Ozelot or French Aspic, because their level of quality is very high and that kind of comparing could be only in quality of production and of tolerances in components, all other is nothing that Russians could not put together.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15468
    Points : 16175
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: V-SHORADS [Igla, Strela-10, Tunguska, Sosna-R]

    Post  GarryB on Thu Oct 27, 2011 1:32 am

    I would expect they probably did look at the German and French systems, and I rather suspect there was an ulterior motive for looking at the Turkish system... perhaps related to Turkish consideration of S-400 systems?

    medo
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 3051
    Points : 3149
    Join date : 2010-10-24
    Location : Slovenia

    Re: V-SHORADS [Igla, Strela-10, Tunguska, Sosna-R]

    Post  medo on Thu Oct 27, 2011 4:47 pm

    Could be, it is a part of business agreement. Instead of paying with money, part of payment could be done with other systems and selling Zipkin could not be so problematic inside NATO.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15468
    Points : 16175
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: V-SHORADS [Igla, Strela-10, Tunguska, Sosna-R]

    Post  GarryB on Fri Oct 28, 2011 12:48 am

    The thing is that I don't see Russia actually selling S-400 to Turkey any time soon.
    First of all the production rate seems too low to produce for non domestic orders in the next 5 years or so anyway, despite two new production facilities being built I can't see them selling an all S-400 system to Turkey or any NATO country except Greece and I don't think that would go down well... half of Europe bailing out Greece and Greece buying S-400 from Russia...

    I think a more likely case is that Russia has offered S-400, which Turkey is looking at to put pressure on the US for them to sweeten the deal and perhaps as a protest against Israel because Israel can't pull strings on Russian SAMs.

    If Turkey did select the Russian system I think we will find that it is actually mostly S-300, but with a few S-400 bits to make it more effective but without giving away too much.

    In return the Russians have said if you buy our stuff we will buy some of your stuff... most military deals these days include offset clauses where the buying has to invest an equivalent amount in local products. This is a small batch for testing, no doubt they are looking at other products as well, but as we agreed the Russians are not really short of equipment and technology options for their SAMs so most likely it will be a case of 10 systems for testing that might end up with a border patrol unit in the far east that is used till it wears out and is retired.

    If the sale goes through Russia will likely pick a national product and buy some of it.

    medo
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 3051
    Points : 3149
    Join date : 2010-10-24
    Location : Slovenia

    Re: V-SHORADS [Igla, Strela-10, Tunguska, Sosna-R]

    Post  medo on Sun Oct 30, 2011 12:44 pm

    Russia isn't selling to Turkey only S-300 or S-400, they sell them other stuff also, like Kornet ATGMs. I agree, that Zipkin could be only stuff, Russians could be interested to buy. Maybe they will only test them, maybe they could also use them with foreign operations under UN, where Zipkin could be easier integrated with NATO and other systems inside operations, where is also air force involved. But even in that case they don't need much of them. Maybe 20 to 30 for units rotations.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15468
    Points : 16175
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: V-SHORADS [Igla, Strela-10, Tunguska, Sosna-R]

    Post  GarryB on Mon Oct 31, 2011 3:23 am

    If a Russian system can be integrated into the Russian AD network I don't think they would care if it is compatible with a NATO network... and even with Turkish hardware I doubt NATO would allow them access to a NATO system.

    Look at the ABM systems as an example... they wont want a shared system, they will want two separate systems that share info.

    I suspect these systems were just for testing and I rather doubt there will be purchases in the future.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15468
    Points : 16175
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: V-SHORADS [Igla, Strela-10, Tunguska, Sosna-R]

    Post  GarryB on Tue Nov 22, 2011 12:50 am



    Russia will not stock up on foreign-made arms - Medvedev


    President Dmitry Medvedev said on Monday that Russia would only buy small amounts of foreign-made weapons.

    Speaking during a meeting with army servicemen in Vladikavkaz in southern Russia, Medvedev said Russia may buy only some foreign-made arms “so that we have an idea of how foreign armies are equipped and that our producers can make the best arms.”

    “Make no doubt about it, we will continue equipping the army,” he said. “We have significant, unprecedented, large amounts of money to that end.”

    The Russian government has pledged 22 trillion rubles ($730 billion) for its state arms procurement program through 2020.

    Source: http://en.rian.ru/mlitary_news/20111121/168897773.html

    medo
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 3051
    Points : 3149
    Join date : 2010-10-24
    Location : Slovenia

    Re: V-SHORADS [Igla, Strela-10, Tunguska, Sosna-R]

    Post  medo on Thu Nov 24, 2011 5:34 pm

    So, by those words from Medvedev, Russia could actually buy few examples of Zipkin like one battery of 6 vehicles for evaluations and for air force training, where it could simulate Avanger, Aspic, Ozelot, Zipkin and other similar western SAMs.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15468
    Points : 16175
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: V-SHORADS [Igla, Strela-10, Tunguska, Sosna-R]

    Post  GarryB on Thu Nov 24, 2011 11:02 pm

    I suspect the suggestion on wiki that Russia will buy the system and put it into service is based on the fact that they have already bought a small batch for testing.

    I rather expect the further acquisition of such systems would be very unlikely and when testing is complete because these are not armoured vehicles that could be used for weapons testing I would expect some backwater unit will get them equipped with Igla missiles of course, and they will use them till they are worn out at which time they will not upgrade them, they will simply discard them and upgrade to the contemporary Russian system... likely strelets... which will likely have been given an upgrade based on the new ideas taken from testing and operational experience and of course their own ideas and expertise.

    George1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 9432
    Points : 9924
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: V-SHORADS [Igla, Strela-10, Tunguska, Sosna-R]

    Post  George1 on Tue Apr 24, 2012 12:39 am

    Why not SA-18 mounted on "Vodnik" or on "Tigr" ?


    flamming_python
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 3182
    Points : 3310
    Join date : 2012-01-30

    Re: V-SHORADS [Igla, Strela-10, Tunguska, Sosna-R]

    Post  flamming_python on Tue Apr 24, 2012 12:43 am

    Isn't this the same stuff as the Russian Dzhigit system? WTF why does Russia even need to evaluate something like this? It sounds like quite basic technology.

    Sponsored content

    Re: V-SHORADS [Igla, Strela-10, Tunguska, Sosna-R]

    Post  Sponsored content Today at 3:06 pm


      Current date/time is Tue Dec 06, 2016 3:06 pm