S-300/400/500 News [Russian Strategic Air Defense] #1

That NATO comment was by Khramchinkhin- he has made very stupid "expert" analyses before about Russian Air Defense.
In fact, he has very little credibility in Russia....about the same level as Felgenhaur, Kravchyk, etc...

Considering economical situation in the West and that majority of older cold war era planes will be soon worn out or selled,in 10 years NATO will hardly be able to defend itself, not to attack anyone.

As the saying goes - Opinions are like A-holes...

But you don't need to be a genius to deduce that late model S-300's and the S-400 have an edge over the PAC-3

Liked the pics, but need to be fair.

I just looked in this thread for the 1st time in ages.
How the hell did a discussion about the S-400/S-500 turn into a tirade on Putin and the Russian gov.?

Then again I shouldn't be surprised; we've all seen far worse off-topic drift on forums I'm sure.

TR1 wrote:When it comes to military I would not even be that complimentary.
He sounds very rudimentary in any military subject.
On a related subject, I can't stand how the guy speaks at all. His Russian is....not intelligent and his speech patters give me a headache.

Russia gov are pretty intelligent at stealing money, not much else though

He has an honest way of speaking - he rarely minces words when he gives his opinion on something, and he usually gives good reasons when explaining his decisions. Which is a valuable quality I think.

I agree with you about the adoption ban though. That was one sorry ass move.

Mods requested to remove or transfer the Putin discussion to seperate thread and keeep this thread for S-400/500 discussion. Thanks

Because of the nature of the posts I have decided to delete the non-S400/s500 related putin posts to tidy up this thread. I don't think the fragments I will be removing will result in a coherent new thread so I will not bother creating one.

If a member wants to create a new discussion thread then they are welcome to and will not get into trouble for defying a mod or anything.

Please don not restart and offtopic discussion in this thread.
GarryB

Well very interesting link.

Summary of Almaz-Antej work in 2012

According to harsh google translator we can conclude some of the 2012 work Almaz-Antej did.

1. S-400 improvements
2. Development of S-400 modernization
3. Development of BUK-M3
4. Development of Polyment-Redut system
5. Something about laser protection
6. 3K96 system (Redut)
7. 97L6 long range radar
8. Modernization of Moscow ABM capability


In continuation of the article each of these points are explained in detail but that`s where google translator ground to a halt.

Someone with native Russian could spare few minutes of its time to explain to us what does it say.

Nice find Viktor , Thanks , My Vote

I will try to see if google is kind to me

http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/showthread.php?99988-Russian-Photos-%28updated-on-regular-basis%29&p=6571965&viewfull=1#post6571965

Sexy photos of S-400 and Pantsir in the Far East.

The pinnacle of AD

[quote="GarryB"]

(note the bottom photo is the Klub/Kalibr and it was sitting in front of a Mig-29SMT or Su-30 and was not associated with the 31 in the background of the photo.)

And what have we here @GarryB , finally managed to find some evidence about MIG-31 anti-ship capability I have been telling

you about but did not have evidence.

Other suspension arms - reportedly with the installation of container APK-9 can be used missile air-to-surface Kh-59. Also in the late 1990s to show up airshows udarnmaya model MiG-31 Kh-58. In the early 2000s there was a proposal to equip the shock version of the MiG-31 anti-ship missiles "Yakhont" - probably had a view of the export version of the aircraft.

LINK

The Kh-58 on the starting unit APU-58 under the wing stroke version of the MiG-31. One of the MAKS, the end of 1990 - beginning of the 2000s ( http://militaryphotos.net ). Sketch of the proposed project location RCC "Yakhont" / BrahMos on the MiG-31, the beginning of the 2000s ( http://lib . ec ).

So, anyone have an updated launcher number for S-400?

We had 64 launchers mid 2012.
There have been deliveries since, though it is uncertain of some of the S-400 units are operating S-300PM launchers.
I guess this is still a big upgrade over PM battery.

TR1 wrote:So, anyone have an updated launcher number for S-400?

We had 64 launchers mid 2012.

I think the most modest number would be 80.

We had 5 regiments delivered ending 2012.

5 regiments with each having minimum 2 batteries/divisions and each of them having 8 launchers.

5 regiments x 2 divisions/batteries x 8 launchers = 80 launchers

Of course, we don`t know if some regiments where delivered with more than two divisions (what was the practice in the beginning)

If more S-400 divisions are being delivered with each S-400 regiment, we could be speaking on perhaps 100+ launchers.

TR1 wrote:
There have been deliveries since, though it is uncertain of some of the S-400 units are operating S-300PM launchers.
I guess this is still a big upgrade over PM battery.

Yes, as one S-400 regiment can contain max 8 S-400/S-300xx divisions my guess would be that Russians are mixing older S-300 with S-400

to increase overall efficiency of older S-300 systems because of newer and more powerful S-400 radar and command post systems that will

guide them and provide information in comparison with their own.

On the other hand some 30 divisions of S-300PS/PT is being phased out as S-400 enters service and maybe faster, but at the same time some

70 S-300PS/PM/PM1 divisions is being modernized to Favorit-S level and those divisions will stay in service well after 2020.

Than there is S-300V4 system that has received massive improvements since first S-300V appeared and Almaz-Antej got the contract for

3 S-400V4 brigades by 2016 and 9 brigades by 2020 overall. We are talking here about 650 TELAR + 450 TEL (for 4 battalions per

regiment) by 2020 with 9M82M missiles now with 350km range upgraded radar system, completely new command post etc.

And here is last report about the S-300V4 - now this is the last one only, I had read one before, for until 2012 for another 40 tracked

chassis for modernized S-300 i.e. S-300V4

02/13/13 SUN GET TO THE END OF 2014, 40 SELF-PROPELLED TRACKED CHASSIS FOR C-300
February 13 2013.

RIA Novosti . Almost fifty propelled tracked chassis for modernized air defense missiles (SAM) C-300 will be the Russian Armed Forces by the end of 2014, told RIA Novosti on Wednesday, a representative of the Press and Information at the Ministry of Defense of the Army (NE) Major Anton Goncharov.

"In total, the public contract before the end of 2014 in the military units to be delivered 40 self-propelled tracked chassis" - said Goncharov.

He noted that the Commander NE Col. Gen. Vladimir Chirkin to conclude a working trip to St. Petersburg visited a subsidiary of JSC "Kirov Plant" - plant "Universalmash", which just follow the progress of the company commitment to making mobile tracked chassis retrofit SAM C-300.

Previously reported that the commander NE during this trip also inspected military Mikhailovsky Artillery Academy, which trains professionals to work on missile complexes "Iskander".
http://ria.ru/

I rather suspect that if India do go for the Antei-2500 that they might switch the chassis to the standard T-90 chassis instead of the T-80 simply to make logistics simpler.

By the same token I rather suspect the Russians might actually do the same, though they might use T-72 chassis with T-90 components because they have more to hand.

Eventually I suspect new build Russian S-300VM4 equivalents will be armata based by 2020, though by then they should be up to S-300V8 or so.

2. Development of air-defense system which is mix of S-400/Redut/BUK-M3. That could be Vityaz system armed with 9M96 class as S-400 and
Redut uses it (even BUK-M3 might use it as no other missile can in such numbers (10-12 + missiles) fit those BUK-M3 tubes as showed on
those new pictures.) Being mix of S-400 and BUK means it could enter PVO and V-PVO.

The Redut-Poliment system seems to be the Vityaz/Redut missile for the Army and the Navy that will likely replace the shorter range S-300 on land and the Rif-M at sea. AFAIK it was based on the two smaller 9M96 missiles of the S-400 series, though performance will be increased from the systems revealed previously (ie 40km for the smaller missile and 120km for the larger of the two missiles).

The thing is that the original small missiles were designed to be launched from modified tubes adapted to the older S-300 system, so I expect their design was limited/affected by artificial design constraints. I suspect this new system will be a clean sheet design with its own launchers and systems of much better performance. For instance the old smaller missiles could fit four missiles to an old missile tube, but the missile tubes themselves were not shorter, so the longer missile with the 120km range fit in the same space as the smaller and lighter 40km range missile tube so really apart from cost and weight there was no advantage to using the smaller lighter missiles. I rather suspect that a redesign that either makes them shorter so that two lots of four missiles can be loaded for the same performance or the extra length can be used for an extra booster stage to enhance their range and speed could be applied.

This would have the biggest impact for the Navy which has limited space on board, whereas a land based battery can simply have another couple of launcher vehicles attached to it, of a Pantsir-S1 unit attached to help against a swarm attack.

For the Navy with the older Rif-M missiles it can have one large missile per tube, but with the S-400 9M96 missiles it could have four smaller missiles of 40km range or 120km range in each large tube. They can mix up those new missiles, but apart from weight and presumably cost they might as well carry 4 120km range missiles than 4 40km range missiles as the longer range weapons offer better range with the same numbers advantage of four to a tube.

Perhaps the newer Redut system will either shorten the missile and allow stacking... perhaps the 40km range missiles can be stacked so 8 missiles to a Rif-M tube or the larger missile which is too long to stack could have an extra booster stage added to use the full length of the tube and extend its range to 150-180km perhaps... that way you get the choice of a single S-400 400km range missile, or 4 180km range new missiles, or 8 40km range missiles per original main missile tube. The alternative is a single S-400 400km range missile, or 4 120km range new missiles, or 4 40km range missiles per original main missile tube... unless weight is an issue then why go for 40km range missiles when you can have 120km range missiles?

I guess we will find out eventually.

The new BUK missile will not be related to the 9M96, and will most likely be a land based Shtil-1 missile designed for vertical launch tube launch. Having the same missile on land and at sea will greatly reduce costs and improve commonality and allow more missiles to be made without the extra costs of custom designed missiles for each service.

The tube launched design means no pesky external control surfaces that limit the number of missiles you can carry without the issue of damage during launch.

U.S. Navy uses eyes in space to take out a ballistic missile threat target.

A Raytheon Company (NYSE: RTN) Standard Missile-3 Block IA fired from the USS Lake Erie destroyed a medium-range ballistic missile (MRBM) target using tracking data from a remote Raytheon sensor payload on the Space Tracking and Surveillance System-Demonstrator (STSS-D) satellites.

“This test further expands our confidence in the SM-3′s ability to engage targets using remote, netted sensor targeting,” said Wes Kremer, Raytheon Missile Systems’ vice president of Air and Missile Defense Systems. “Launching on remote is important because it extends the engagement range of the missile, allowing ships with the SM-3 to expand the battlespace and eliminate threats sooner.”

The MRBM target was launched from the Pacific Missile Range Facility. As it rose above the horizon, the target was acquired and tracked by STSS-D. Threat data was then relayed through the Command, Control, Battle Management and Communications (C2BMC) system to the ship. The ship’s crew fired the SM-3 based on STSS track data and before the ship’s radar acquired the target.

“STSS-D’s unique vantage point in space allows the sensor payload to see the threat early in its trajectory and provide launch quality data sooner than nearly any other option,” said Bill Hart, vice president of Space Systems for Raytheon’s Space and Airborne Systems business. “We can give our naval warfighters extra time to analyze and respond, by providing target data before the ship can track the threat. That’s a tremendous advantage.”

The test proves the “launch on remote” concept, which was first demonstrated during testing in April 2011 when a U.S. Navy destroyer used track data provided by a Raytheon-made AN/TPY-2 radar deployed on Wake Island to engage and destroy an intermediate-range ballistic missile target using an SM-3 Block IA.

About the Standard Missile-3
The SM-3 guided missile is designed to destroy incoming short-, medium-, and intermediate-range ballistic missile threats by colliding with them in space, a concept sometimes described as “hitting a bullet with a bullet.” The missile does not contain an explosive warhead, but instead destroys the threats using sheer impact, equivalent to a 10-ton truck traveling at 600 mph.

More than 135 SM-3s have been delivered to U.S. and Japanese navies ahead of schedule and under cost.
Raytheon is on track to deliver the next-generation SM-3 Block IB guided missile in 2014.
SM-3 Block IB guided missile will be deployed in both afloat and ashore weapons systems.
The test marks the 22nd successful intercept for the SM-3 program.

About the Space Tracking and Surveillance System-Demonstrator Satellites
STSS-D is a research and development capability for the Ballistic Missile Defense System that can detect and track ballistic missiles and other cold objects in space. Raytheon sensors used on the payloads were developed under contract to Northrop Grumman, prime contractor for the STSS-D program.

STSS-D consists of two satellites carrying sensor payloads in a low-Earth orbit.
The satellites demonstrate the value of space-based sensors to missile defense.
The STSS-D payloads are able to detect infrared and visible light.

Link

Any thoughts, anyone.

AlfaT8 wrote:Any thoughts, anyone.

This thread is about S-400/500 for SM-3 you should start a new one, not mix them.

I rather expect the VKO will have satellite based detection and mobile S-500 systems to perform the same mission for Russia on land and likely the navy will be able to use a naval S-500 and satellite based sensors to the same end at sea...

BTW:

Gerasimov recently said:

Strategic nuclear forces are, of course, Russia’s priority. He mentioned acquiring Topol-M, Yars, and SSBNs, modernizing Tu-160 and Tu-95MS bombers, and getting satellite systems for VVKO, according to Krasnaya zvezda’s recap of his remarks.

For conventional forces, among other things, Gerasimov said VTA will get 200 new transports, and the Ground Troops and VDV new heavy, medium, and light armor using the Armata, Kurganets, and Bumerang platforms, respectively.

The VKO system for protecting important state and industrial facilities will be formed in 2016-2020. Mobile S-500 brigades will have this mission. Troop air defense will be the responsibility of SAM brigades equipped with the S-300V and Buk-M3.

All Ground Troops missile brigades will have the Iskander.

So for troop air defence they will use S-300V4 and Buk-M3... the S-400 and S-500 and Vityaz will be air force systems and VKO systems.

Viktor wrote:

AlfaT8 wrote:Any thoughts, anyone.

This thread is about S-400/500 for SM-3 you should start a new one, not mix them.

Was wondering if i should, i'll do it next time, sorry.

GarryB wrote:the navy will be able to use a naval S-500 and satellite based sensors to the same end at sea.

Anatoly Shlemov, head of the state defense contracts department at the United Shipbuilding Corporation said last August that Russia is set to develop a sea-based missile defense program similar to the U.S. Aegis system

http://en.rian.ru/military_news/20120831/175538466.html

The Sigma system they are installing on all their ships from Corvette to carrier is already an equivalent to AEGIS in its original form. What they are talking about however is to expand the systems capabilities to include BM and space based threats which of course would have been illegal under the 1972 ABM treaty for most of the existence of AEGIS.