Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    S-300/400/500 News [Russian Strategic Air Defense] #3

    Share

    Mike E
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2789
    Points : 2853
    Join date : 2014-06-19
    Location : Bay Area, CA

    Re: S-300/400/500 News [Russian Strategic Air Defense] #3

    Post  Mike E on Thu Jul 31, 2014 8:06 pm

    GarryB wrote:
    I think we can all agree that Russia won't be using Pantsir's for ABM purposes any time soon!

    No, but the S-350, S-400, or S-500 fired upon might have  Pantsir supporting them.


    That being said, I've heard that it won't be focusing on typical anti-aircraft roles, much like the SM-3, is this true?

    Unlike SM-3 S-500 will be fully land mobile and there will be a naval model likely fitted to vessels of Destroyer Size and up.

    The land based systems will likely be based at strategic targets including cities, major airfields, ports, etc etc.

    When operating they will be tied in to the IADS, but when operating on its own away from S-400 or S-350 systems it will no doubt have to deal with all sorts of threats itself.

    If it can cover the hypersonic and high-altitude threats, and the S-400 can stick to doing its job at medium to low altitudes, then Russia will have a "sealed shut" airspace.

    Indeed... with the Air Force and the VKKO Aerospace Defence Forces buying them too there should be quite a few around the place.

    In fact put them on an Antonov and fly them where you want...

    Does anyone know how the 9M96 family of missiles will perform vs. 48N6-like-missiles? {I know the speed and range differences etc. However, in my head I just "feel" like the 48N6 is a superior missile (When it comes to kill-probability and such.)}

    The larger missiles will be much faster and of course also longer ranged and with a rather heavier warhead, however the smaller missiles will be rather more compact and rather cheaper and carry warheads powerful enough for the targets they are designed for... and likely more effective as they will manouver close

    True, but that isn't relevant for obvious reasons.

    Also true, but I asked "That being said, I've heard that it won't be focusing on typical anti-aircraft roles, much like the SM-3, is this true?". My question was if the S-500 is really going to be used in AA situations, or is it going to be left to both the S-350 and S-400 among other systems. I'm sorry if I didn't make that clear...


    That is great to hear, now enemies aircraft will be flying into a iron curtain....


    That's what I figured. The 9M96 family will maneuver superior to the 48N6 family. However, the shear speed of the 48N6 and larger "kill radius" (warhead) means that the plane won't have enough time to react.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15440
    Points : 16147
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: S-300/400/500 News [Russian Strategic Air Defense] #3

    Post  GarryB on Fri Aug 01, 2014 10:42 am

    Also true, but I asked "That being said, I've heard that it won't be focusing on typical anti-aircraft roles, much like the SM-3, is this true?". My question was if the S-500 is really going to be used in AA situations, or is it going to be left to both the S-350 and S-400 among other systems. I'm sorry if I didn't make that clear...

    Rather depends on how it is deployed... it is fully land mobile and will also be naval based too.

    It will primarily be used to stop ballistic targets because that was what it was designed for and will likely be sent to capital cities and airfields... ports will likely have a few destroyers with naval S-500 missiles to protect them including foreign ports potentially.

    As a land based system I would suspect it might operate with either S-400 or S-350 depending on the situation, with a self defence unit of Pantsir or Pantsir like SAMs defending it from swarm attack. As such it likely wont be used against air breathing targets.

    Having said that its extreme range and the approach of NATO means an S-500 system in Leningrad could potentially be used against NATO AWACS aircraft operating over Latvia 600km away. If it was detected would they take a shot at such a valuable target? Of course they would...

    That's what I figured. The 9M96 family will maneuver superior to the 48N6 family. However, the shear speed of the 48N6 and larger "kill radius" (warhead) means that the plane won't have enough time to react.

    Both would be effective... the larger missiles are know to use their large warheads to direct a stream of fragments and material at the target on detonation. The smaller missiles probably use better manouverability and more accurate guidance to get much closer to the target.

    From memory the large missiles have warheads of 150kg, while the smaller missiles have similar warheads to medium sized AAMs like R-27 and R-77, so about 40kgs.


    _________________
    “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

    Mike E
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2789
    Points : 2853
    Join date : 2014-06-19
    Location : Bay Area, CA

    Re: S-300/400/500 News [Russian Strategic Air Defense] #3

    Post  Mike E on Fri Aug 01, 2014 7:03 pm

    GarryB wrote:
    Also true, but I asked "That being said, I've heard that it won't be focusing on typical anti-aircraft roles, much like the SM-3, is this true?". My question was if the S-500 is really going to be used in AA situations, or is it going to be left to both the S-350 and S-400 among other systems. I'm sorry if I didn't make that clear...

    Rather depends on how it is deployed... it is fully land mobile and will also be naval based too.

    It will primarily be used to stop ballistic targets because that was what it was designed for and will likely be sent to capital cities and airfields... ports will likely have a few destroyers with naval S-500 missiles to protect them including foreign ports potentially.

    As a land based system I would suspect it might operate with either S-400 or S-350 depending on the situation, with a self defence unit of Pantsir or Pantsir like SAMs defending it from swarm attack. As such it likely wont be used against air breathing targets.

    Having said that its extreme range and the approach of NATO means an S-500 system in Leningrad could potentially be used against NATO AWACS aircraft operating over Latvia 600km away. If it was detected would they take a shot at such a valuable target?  Of course they would...

    That's what I figured. The 9M96 family will maneuver superior to the 48N6 family. However, the shear speed of the 48N6 and larger "kill radius" (warhead) means that the plane won't have enough time to react.

    Both would be effective... the larger missiles are know to use their large warheads to direct a stream of fragments and material at the target on detonation. The smaller missiles probably use better manouverability and more accurate guidance to get much closer to the target.

    From memory the large missiles have warheads of 150kg, while the smaller missiles have similar warheads to medium sized AAMs like R-27 and R-77, so about 40kgs.
    Thank you for clearing that up for me!

    My guess is that RU would try and use the 48N6 missile of the S-400 as much as they can (I'm talking about long range targets) for cost reasons. That would leave the S-500 doing the dirty work, while still "covering the skies" (of course they will still use the S-500 for AA, just that it might be overkill in some situations.).

    Viktor
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5627
    Points : 6280
    Join date : 2009-08-25
    Age : 36
    Location : Croatia

    Re: S-300/400/500 News [Russian Strategic Air Defense] #3

    Post  Viktor on Sat Aug 02, 2014 2:09 am

    Mike E wrote:My guess is that RU would try and use the 48N6 missile of the S-400 as much as they can (I'm talking about long range targets) for cost reasons. That would leave the S-500 doing the dirty work, while still "covering the skies" (of course they will still use the S-500 for AA, just that it might be overkill in some situations.).

    Powerfull mobile command post run the calculations and provide firing solutions/target distribution etc to each and every brigade/regiment/battery/tel/telar in regard to

    target type/prioritization/numbers/economy EVERYTHING. Its a 100% automated system that in the end requires no troops.

    And here is a LINK where you can observe Russian AD design

    Mike E
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2789
    Points : 2853
    Join date : 2014-06-19
    Location : Bay Area, CA

    Re: S-300/400/500 News [Russian Strategic Air Defense] #3

    Post  Mike E on Sat Aug 02, 2014 3:23 am

    So what you're saying is that air-defense software systems decide what missiles targets what aircraft? If so, that sounds like a great idea.

    Vann7
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 3221
    Points : 3345
    Join date : 2012-05-16

    Re: S-300/400/500 News [Russian Strategic Air Defense] #3

    Post  Vann7 on Sat Aug 02, 2014 6:36 am

    Mike E wrote:So what you're saying is that air-defense software systems decide what missiles targets what aircraft? If so, that sounds like a great idea.

    Thats the way it should be..
    In my mind Larger missiles means Larger booster = Faster but also = less maneuverable and more expensive.
    And smaller missiles means = less faster than the larger ones ,but more maneuverable and less expensive.
    This should be generally speaking a rule for all modern anti Air missiles..  Larger = heavier and more expensive..
    and smaller = more lighter and more cheaper.


    In a major war scenario..that you will be fired hundreds if not thousands of missiles by the enemies to your land, is not very practical that you waste lets say a $US $10 millions to $50 million dollar missile like S-500 should cost..
    against a $1,000 dollar spy drone or even a $20 million combat jet if you can do it with a much cheaper S-400. It will also far ..far more cheaper if you deploy a Pantsir-S1 defense  400km away of the S-400.. and shot the targets with just cannon fire.  This is one of the reasons Artillery is still important today..  Because even though a ballistic missile can do the same.. if you use expensive missiles all the time.. you will lose the war for going bankrupt the first day. Economy of scale  is an important part also in planning wars. Same like avoid using a Kornet missile to kill aa lonely enemy soldier, if your sniper rifle can do it.

    S-500s will be ideal for space targets.. for its price ,range and speed.  But contrary to the Sm-3.. the S-500 will also be capable of operating at any altitude.. S-500 is a real surface to air missile. (for what i can understand).. and Sm-3 is more like a space carrier of mines ,that its warhead can only operate in zero gravity environment .. with some  auto propulsion capabilities integrated in the mines that is dropped ahead of the flight path of any ICBM.  Sm-3 for is lack of Rockets propulsion in the last phase.. don't think have a chance to change targets and chase ICBM or not much opportunity to chase an ICBM.. that change its flight path dramatically to avoid the Sm-3 mine.

    So i think the smaller Pantsirs and Tor missiles are more ideal to target small maneuverable missiles ,because can do turns more faster. and because of the larger air resistance , larger missiles will be less maneuverable in doing tight turns than smaller ones.

    Sm-3 and S-500 , i dont think can be compared directly since they appear to be different things but that the goal is the same. S-500 appears to be much more ideal interceptor against Intercontinental missiles that can change flight path dramatically to avoid an interception.. And SM-3 seems to be and elegant cheaper solution against traditional Intercontinental missiles who maintain a predictable flight path on its mid course.  So they just park in space ahead of its course and explode when the missile is near.

    I don't know prices but an SM-3 should be significantly more cheaper than an S-500. since the first one is a space mine with an advanced IR warhead transported to space by a 3 stage Booster . And the S-400 on steroids ,with significant larger range and more advanced warhead seekers.

    .

    Mike E
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2789
    Points : 2853
    Join date : 2014-06-19
    Location : Bay Area, CA

    Re: S-300/400/500 News [Russian Strategic Air Defense] #3

    Post  Mike E on Sat Aug 02, 2014 7:26 am

    Vann7 wrote:
    Mike E wrote:So what you're saying is that air-defense software systems decide what missiles targets what aircraft? If so, that sounds like a great idea.

    Thats the way it should be..
    In my mind Larger missiles means Larger booster = Faster but also = less maneuverable and more expensive.
    And smaller missiles means = less faster than the larger ones ,but more maneuverable and less expensive.
    This should be generally speaking a rule for all modern anti Air missiles..  Larger = heavier and more expensive..
    and smaller = more lighter and more cheaper.


    In a major war scenario..that you will be fired hundreds if not thousands of missiles by the enemies to your land, is not very practical that you waste lets say a $US $10 millions to $50 million dollar missile like S-500 should cost..
    against a $1,000 dollar spy drone or even a $20 million combat jet if you can do it with a much cheaper S-400. It will also far ..far more cheaper if you deploy a Pantsir-S1 defense  400km away of the S-400.. and shot the targets with just cannon fire.  This is one of the reasons Artillery is still important today..  Because even though a ballistic missile can do the same.. if you use expensive missiles all the time.. you will lose the war for going bankrupt the first day. Economy of scale  is an important part also in planning wars. Same like avoid using a Kornet missile to kill aa lonely enemy soldier, if your sniper rifle can do it.

    S-500s will be ideal for space targets.. for its price ,range and speed.  But contrary to the Sm-3.. the S-500 will also be capable of operating at any altitude.. S-500 is a real surface to air missile. (for what i can understand).. and Sm-3 is more like a space carrier of mines ,that its warhead can only operate in zero gravity environment .. with some  auto propulsion capabilities integrated in the mines that is dropped ahead of the flight path of any ICBM.  Sm-3 for is lack of Rockets propulsion in the last phase.. don't think have a chance to change targets and chase ICBM or not much opportunity to chase an ICBM.. that change its flight path dramatically to avoid the Sm-3 mine.

    So i think the smaller Pantsirs and Tor missiles are more ideal to target small maneuverable missiles ,because can do turns more faster. and because of the larger air resistance , larger missiles will be less maneuverable in doing tight turns than smaller ones.

    Sm-3 and S-500 , i dont think can be compared directly since they appear to be different things but that the goal is the same. S-500 appears to be much more ideal interceptor against Intercontinental missiles that can change flight path dramatically to avoid an interception.. And SM-3 seems to be and elegant cheaper solution against traditional Intercontinental missiles who maintain a predictable flight path on its mid course.  So they just park in space ahead of its course and explode when the missile is near.

    I don't know prices but an SM-3 should be significantly more cheaper than an S-500. since the first one is a space mine with an advanced IR warhead transported to space by a 3 stage Booster . And the S-400 on steroids ,with significant larger range and more advanced warhead seekers.

    .

    I completely agree.

    That is also true, and I expect that Russia will make sure and be "penny smart" when it comes to that.

    While you are right when it comes to the SM-3 being ABM and ASAT capable only, you are slightly off when it comes to the "mine" thing. SM-3 uses four stages in total. The fourth stage is the "mine stage", and while it doesn't have a real "rocket engine", it can change trajectory and altitude etc. That being said, the Topol among other Russian ICBM's could avoid it with ease. (SM-3 is only effective within the atmosphere.) As you said, the S-500 is a "real" SAM because it can destroy targets within the atmosphere (and outside of it, of course). Just to let you know, the SM-3 is based off the idea that it "meet" the target in space, and then change course directly towards it. As such, it can't "chase" an ICBM, and it is much easier to avoid.

    While both those are good missiles, I feel like the 9M96 missile family is the best of both worlds. It is relatively fast, has good range, somewhat large warhead, and it can maneuver well. Tor is still a great piece of equipment, though I feel like the Pantsir's missiles need to be upgraded.

    Well, you have sort of already covered the Sm-3... I'd like to fix something you said, the SM-3 sure as heck isn't cheap! The new variants of the SM-3 are expected to cost over 20 million dollars!!! That is the cost of just a single missile, older variants still cost over 10 million dollars a piece. The S-500 should not only be more capable, but be cheaper as well.

    Viktor
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5627
    Points : 6280
    Join date : 2009-08-25
    Age : 36
    Location : Croatia

    Re: S-300/400/500 News [Russian Strategic Air Defense] #3

    Post  Viktor on Sat Aug 02, 2014 12:13 pm

    Mike E wrote:So what you're saying is that air-defense software systems decide what missiles targets what aircraft? If so, that sounds like a great idea.

    Yes and has been doing so since Vietnam war when Soviets introduced ASURK-1 as a command post to S-75 missile systems.


    Here I started to describe the situation around Russian command post but it takes a lot of time so its going slowly.

    LINK


    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15440
    Points : 16147
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: S-300/400/500 News [Russian Strategic Air Defense] #3

    Post  GarryB on Sat Aug 02, 2014 12:18 pm

    The idea behind the integrated air defence network is to share data and have a layered missile defence arrangement that also includes interceptor aircraft too.
    If you have an object detected on radar entering your airspace most of the time you will send aircraft to investigate.

    If you detect a target with a RCS of a small fly at 10,000m altitude at 800km/h in X band radar, but appears the size of a small fighter on VHF band radars then having a missile that can reach the target is just part of the puzzle... you also need a missile that can be guided to hit a target with a small RCS like the S-300V series or conversely a missile that is optically guided for the terminal phase.


    _________________
    “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

    Viktor
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5627
    Points : 6280
    Join date : 2009-08-25
    Age : 36
    Location : Croatia

    S-300/400/500 News [Russian Strategic Air Defense] #3

    Post  Viktor on Mon Aug 04, 2014 6:19 pm

    200 air defense units of equipment and 800 PVO troopers are going to do some shootings at Ashuluk training ground with S-300Favorite, S-400 and Pancir-S1

    EKR Russia in August 2014 will be air defense exercises




    medo wrote:Integration of first SAMs like S-75, S-125 and S-200 in IADS with higher level command posts were quite soon possible as those systems were stationary and  their coordinates were fixed for longer time and positions were connected by cables.They could put another working console with a scope in battery command post or in additional van to coordinate work with higher level command and to give radar picture to them and to receive radar picture from other sources and target delivery from higher command


    Yup, first version able to integrate S-200/125/75 was ASURK-1MA from 1967 able to command 8 mix batteries. ASURK-1MA was able to integrate also with Desna,Neva,P-80, and altimeter radar PVR-11, P-12,P-14, P-15 etc. Such composition lasted somewhere until the end of 70ies when new more modern sets begin to emerge.




    medo wrote: I don't know, if such export old SAMs have such capabilities to integrate in higher level of command chain. Iran made their own modifications in their S-200 complexes with additional working consoles to integrate their S-200 batteries in their IADS.

    From what I have read and see you are right. Iran has made lots of modification on existing S-200 systems and integrated  ELINT/ECM as well as modernized command and control of those batteries but the problem with Iran is that in regard to the size of their country SAM and fighter numbers are too low.

    Viktor
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5627
    Points : 6280
    Join date : 2009-08-25
    Age : 36
    Location : Croatia

    S-300/400/500 News [Russian Strategic Air Defense] #2

    Post  Viktor on Wed Aug 06, 2014 8:11 pm

    This thing is fricking huge .....  Very Happy 

    More than five thousand servicemen and around two thousand units of military hardware will be involved in military exercises


    Air Defense Troops in the Central Military District will hold large-scale fire drills by air defense missile systems S-300, Buk, Tor, Osa at firing range Kapustin Yar in Russia’s southern Astrakhan region from August 18 to 23

    Air defence troops to hold S-300 fire drills in southern Russia

    Viktor
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5627
    Points : 6280
    Join date : 2009-08-25
    Age : 36
    Location : Croatia

    S-400/500 News

    Post  Viktor on Sun Aug 10, 2014 3:52 am

    Another confirmation that S-500 will enter mass production in 2016  thumbsup 

    S-500 will enter the army in 2016

    Mike E
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2789
    Points : 2853
    Join date : 2014-06-19
    Location : Bay Area, CA

    S-400/500 News

    Post  Mike E on Sun Aug 10, 2014 5:47 am

    Viktor wrote:Another confirmation that S-500 will enter mass production in 2016  thumbsup 

    S-500 will enter the army in 2016

    That is great news! Hopefully nothing slows that down!

    Viktor
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5627
    Points : 6280
    Join date : 2009-08-25
    Age : 36
    Location : Croatia

    Re: S-300/400/500 News [Russian Strategic Air Defense] #3

    Post  Viktor on Sun Aug 10, 2014 10:01 am

    Mike E wrote:
    Viktor wrote:Another confirmation that S-500 will enter mass production in 2016  thumbsup 

    S-500 will enter the army in 2016

    That is great news! Hopefully nothing slows that down!

    You asked once and from the link above

    Prospective AAMS is capable of hitting not only ballistic missiles, but also aerodynamic targets (aircraft, helicopters and other air targets), as well as cruise missiles.

    I have no idea in what way should this system be able to shoot down aerodynamic and ballistic targets at the same time considering that the altitude of interception of ballistic missiles should

    be well in the space. US/Israel strictly separated the two while Russia within the atmosphere uses the same missiles for the different roles. Now it seems that the same story is being

    written in space.  thumbsup

    eridan
    Junior Sergeant
    Junior Sergeant

    Posts : 127
    Points : 133
    Join date : 2012-12-13

    Re: S-300/400/500 News [Russian Strategic Air Defense] #3

    Post  eridan on Sun Aug 10, 2014 12:52 pm

    is it possible that s-500 is in fact s-300v replacement? A long range sam system for the Army?

    Because if it is more of a thaad equivalent for interception of large ballistic missiles then i don't see how that meshes with intercepting cruise missiles which are usually flying very low.

    Viktor
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5627
    Points : 6280
    Join date : 2009-08-25
    Age : 36
    Location : Croatia

    Re: S-300/400/500 News [Russian Strategic Air Defense] #3

    Post  Viktor on Sun Aug 10, 2014 2:38 pm

    eridan wrote:is it possible that s-500 is in fact s-300v replacement?

    I think not. Its missiles might be based on S-300V missiles but until 2020 Russia intends to have 9 brigades of S-300V4 half of which will be newly produced so I dont think its a replacement from that and many others points of view.


    eridan wrote:i A long range sam system for the Army?

    Army has 350km range S-300V4 along with many others wonderful things and that makes them happy. It has been already said that S-500 will have anti ICBM capability and I dont think

    that anyone intends to fire ICBM on tanks  Very Happy 

    It has been said that S-500 will serve as a mobile anti-ABM (satellite, high flying hypersonic weapons) system within Russian forces and that inclines system towards territorial PVO.




    eridan wrote:Because if it is more of a thaad equivalent for interception of large ballistic missiles then i don't see how that meshes with intercepting cruise missiles which are usually flying very low.


    The thing that Russian generals keep repeating those words, puzzles me because I dont have a slightest clue about what it may look like or how they intend to solve problems associated

    with it. It will be interesting but as time passes it seems that Russia is in the process of constructing jet another anti-EVERYTHING system (more "everything" than the one before) but this

    one if proven to be true really surpasses all boundaries.

    Mike E
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2789
    Points : 2853
    Join date : 2014-06-19
    Location : Bay Area, CA

    Re: S-300/400/500 News [Russian Strategic Air Defense] #3

    Post  Mike E on Sun Aug 10, 2014 6:18 pm

    It's not that, just that delays CAN happen. While I doubt they will, it is possible.

    eridan
    Junior Sergeant
    Junior Sergeant

    Posts : 127
    Points : 133
    Join date : 2012-12-13

    Re: S-300/400/500 News [Russian Strategic Air Defense] #3

    Post  eridan on Sun Aug 10, 2014 9:39 pm

    But what if s500 is a designation for the next version of s300v? or, hell, maybe it's designation for next version of s400? I mean, it makes little sense, granted, since s400 is itself new. But also claims for s500 are just too wild. i mean, one system against both icbm and cruise missiles? that's just silly.

    if it is a magical system against everything, it'd render s400, s350, s400v4, bukm3 and morfei obsolete. No need for all of them, why not have just one standardized system?

    Or what if s500 is a designation for a detection/command/control/guidance unitary system and not a SAM with its own missiles? So a system which then uses whichever missile subsystem is at hand?

    Or what if s500 is simply a next gen anti-irbm/icbm system like most normal sources indicate and all the additional claims of its additional capability are just uninformed hogwash?

    Of course, if true that vehicles planned for the battery are similar to s400 and if true there will be a modified big bird radar among them, then i guess it's also possible to somehow just merge bits and pieces of s500 and s400 into one system. Several different radars and several different missiles would certainly be able to cover both ballistic missile and cruise missile defence. But then one would really talk about s500 as expanded s400.

    sepheronx
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 7302
    Points : 7612
    Join date : 2009-08-06
    Age : 27
    Location : Canada

    Re: S-300/400/500 News [Russian Strategic Air Defense] #3

    Post  sepheronx on Sun Aug 10, 2014 9:48 pm

    I highly doubt S-500 will be a multipurpose one like S-300 or 400 is. S-500 was specifically for dealing with Anti-ICBM style systems and other major high flying targets (sats as example). S-400 is to compliment S-500 in dealing with jets, cruise missiles, IRBM's and the like. S-300V(4) is the Army equivelent meant to deal against IRBM's and MRBM's. Cruise missiles can be dealt with by various systems from Tor, Buk, Pantsir, S-300 and S-400, Osa, etc. The thing is, I doubt any of these systems can do a real good job besides Tor and Pantsir, as they are designed to deal more with short range aircrafts or PGM's to be specific.

    This is just my guess/observation though.

    Mike E
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2789
    Points : 2853
    Join date : 2014-06-19
    Location : Bay Area, CA

    Re: S-300/400/500 News [Russian Strategic Air Defense] #3

    Post  Mike E on Sun Aug 10, 2014 11:13 pm

    sepheronx wrote:I highly doubt S-500 will be a multipurpose one like S-300 or 400 is.  S-500 was specifically for dealing with Anti-ICBM style systems and other major high flying targets (sats as example).  S-400 is to compliment S-500 in dealing with jets, cruise missiles, IRBM's and the like. S-300V(4) is the Army equivelent meant to deal against IRBM's and MRBM's.  Cruise missiles can be dealt with by various systems from Tor, Buk, Pantsir, S-300 and S-400, Osa, etc.  The thing is, I doubt any of these systems can do a real good job besides Tor and Pantsir, as they are designed to deal more with short range aircrafts or PGM's to be specific.

    This is just my guess/observation though.
     - I have similar thoughts.... That being said, I believe that the S-500 can perform most of those tasks even though it will most likely stick to the ASAT/ICBM ABM role. Obviously, the S-500 won't be performing the tasks of the      Tor and pantsir etc. Though it should be able to compliment the S-300, S-350, and S-400 perfectly. 

     - Tor, Buk, Pantsir, Tunguska, Osa, Kub etc can focus on the low altitude and shorter ranged threats. Both the Pantsir and Tunguska will "focus" on the cruise missiles and smaller targets (as you know).

     - S-300 and S-350 will be used for the medium to long range targets that are beyond the range of the Tor etc.

     - S-400 will go for targets beyond the S-300 and S-350.

     - S-300V4 will focus on the smaller ballistic missiles up to the IRBM's.

     - S-500 will most likely be used for ballistic missiles all the way up to ICBM's, but can also supplement the S-400.

    I know you know all of this information, but I wanted to put it out there for others.

    magnumcromagnon
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 4468
    Points : 4659
    Join date : 2013-12-05
    Location : Pindos ave., Pindosville, Pindosylvania, Pindostan

    Re: S-300/400/500 News [Russian Strategic Air Defense] #3

    Post  magnumcromagnon on Sun Aug 10, 2014 11:24 pm

    sepheronx wrote:I highly doubt S-500 will be a multipurpose one like S-300 or 400 is.  S-500 was specifically for dealing with Anti-ICBM style systems and other major high flying targets (sats as example).  S-400 is to compliment S-500 in dealing with jets, cruise missiles, IRBM's and the like. S-300V(4) is the Army equivelent meant to deal against IRBM's and MRBM's.  Cruise missiles can be dealt with by various systems from Tor, Buk, Pantsir, S-300 and S-400, Osa, etc.  The thing is, I doubt any of these systems can do a real good job besides Tor and Pantsir, as they are designed to deal more with short range aircrafts or PGM's to be specific.

    This is just my guess/observation though.

    I mostly agree, but in all likeliness S-500 will have several different types of missiles. The main S-500 missile will likely be a 2 stage missile, but another missile could be designed with 3 or perhaps 4 stages mostly to be a ASAT weapon that's capable of destroying any satellite LEO or above, the same missile could be programmed to do the opposite and launch new generations of compact satellites in to LEO. We could quite possibly see another S-500 missile with (which could be made compatible with S-400 system) that's designed not to defeat ICBM's, but strategic bombers and cruise missile saturation attacks from 4000-6000 km's (guided by radar from naval assets such as Russia's next generation of destroyers) away from Russia's borders. The missile could be tipped with tactical nuclear warheads, and as a 4 stage missile it might be capable of getting a range of 4000 -6000 km's but it might be capable of increasing the range and speed by being able to fly high enough in initial stages to make it to the upper atmosphere so it could utilize orbital speed to rapidly and greatly increase speed and range.

    Mike E
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2789
    Points : 2853
    Join date : 2014-06-19
    Location : Bay Area, CA

    Re: S-300/400/500 News [Russian Strategic Air Defense] #3

    Post  Mike E on Mon Aug 11, 2014 12:04 am

    magnumcromagnon wrote:
    sepheronx wrote:I highly doubt S-500 will be a multipurpose one like S-300 or 400 is.  S-500 was specifically for dealing with Anti-ICBM style systems and other major high flying targets (sats as example).  S-400 is to compliment S-500 in dealing with jets, cruise missiles, IRBM's and the like. S-300V(4) is the Army equivelent meant to deal against IRBM's and MRBM's.  Cruise missiles can be dealt with by various systems from Tor, Buk, Pantsir, S-300 and S-400, Osa, etc.  The thing is, I doubt any of these systems can do a real good job besides Tor and Pantsir, as they are designed to deal more with short range aircrafts or PGM's to be specific.

    This is just my guess/observation though.

    I mostly agree, but in all likeliness S-500 will have several different types of missiles. The main S-500 missile will likely be a 2 stage missile, but another missile could be designed with 3 or perhaps 4 stages mostly to be a ASAT weapon that's capable of destroying any satellite LEO or above, the same missile could be programmed to do the opposite and launch new generations of compact satellites in to LEO. We could quite possibly see another S-500 missile with (which could be made compatible with S-400 system) that's designed not to defeat ICBM's, but strategic bombers and cruise missile saturation attacks from 4000-6000 km's (guided by radar from naval assets such as Russia's next generation of destroyers) away from Russia's borders. The missile could be tipped with tactical nuclear warheads, and as a 4 stage missile it might be capable of getting a range of 4000 -6000 km's but it might be capable of increasing the range and speed by being able to fly high enough in initial stages to make it to the upper atmosphere so it could utilize orbital speed to rapidly and greatly increase speed and range.

    That too... Russia will probably turn the S-500 "into a S-300" (as in have a whole family of missiles and variants).

    Viktor
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5627
    Points : 6280
    Join date : 2009-08-25
    Age : 36
    Location : Croatia

    Re: S-300/400/500 News [Russian Strategic Air Defense] #3

    Post  Viktor on Mon Aug 11, 2014 1:16 am

    Mike E wrote: - I have similar thoughts.... That being said, I believe that the S-500 can perform most of those tasks even though it will most likely stick to the ASAT/ICBM ABM role. Obviously, the S-500 won't be performing the tasks of the      Tor and pantsir etc. Though it should be able to compliment the S-300, S-350, and S-400 perfectly. 

     - Tor, Buk, Pantsir, Tunguska, Osa, Kub etc can focus on the low altitude and shorter ranged threats. Both the Pantsir and Tunguska will "focus" on the cruise missiles and smaller targets (as you know).

     - S-300 and S-350 will be used for the medium to long range targets that are beyond the range of the Tor etc.

     - S-400 will go for targets beyond the S-300 and S-350.

     - S-300V4 will focus on the smaller ballistic missiles up to the IRBM's.

     - S-500 will most likely be used for ballistic missiles all the way up to ICBM's, but can also supplement the S-400.

    I know you know all of this information, but I wanted to put it out there for others.

    Keep in mind several things.

    1. All those systems are devided in the territorial PVO (S-500, S-400, S-350, S-300, Pancir-S1) and Army PVO (S-300V4, BUK-M2, Tor-M2) in general

    2. All those things can shoot at just about anything meaning S-300 can effectively deal with low flying cruise missiles, ballistic missile, fighters, AWACS and guided weapons

       meaning layers are established but there is overlapping too involved (Pancir-S1 can shoot at planes, cruise missiles, guided weapons but soon at small range ballistic missiles too)

    3. Until 40N6 enters S-400, S-300V4 is the longest range Russian SAM system and just as same as S-400 and S-300Favorit is able to shoot down ICBM (with some difference more or less)

    4. The wording "focus" of BUK/TOR/Pancir on this or that etc is wrong here as all of them are controled by automated command post which calculate firing solutions and distribute

      targets for each firing unit. Those things are optimized according to algorithms calculated by Russian scientist.

    5. About the layers

    territorial PVO                                

    - S-500                                      
    - S-400                                      
    - S-300 Favorit                            
    - S-350                                      
    - Pancir-SM/S1                            
    - Morfei                                      
    - Verba/Igla/ZSU-23    


    Army PVO

    - S-300V4
    - BUK-M3/M2/M1  
    - Pancir-SM/S1 (likely)
    - Tor-M1/M2/M2U
    - Morfei (could be - Im counting on it Very Happy )
    - Pine (replacement for Strela-10M3)
    - Tunguska/Igla/ZSU-23

    so you see you have 5-6 layers, target will have to pass to successfully struck the goal. Territorial and Army PVO have they own AND separate radar/elint/ecm/eccm units which

    accompany them. Each of them was designed sparately taking into account their unique problems and conditions. Lately, work is underway to unite the two but each of the subsystems

    and them in general have their own command posts which have strict hierarchy, redudancy and ability to replace each other in case of destruction at the same time. In case of destruction

    of any of its part the whole structure automatically adjust itself according to optimal next solution.


    To ilustrate organizational structure of Russian Radio Troops  Very Happy  (and take not that this picture shows only 10 % of what should be in here to be complete)

    This picture ilustrates organizational structure of Russian Radio Troops for territorial PVO  (its a whole different story with Radio Troops of Army PVO)



    Last edited by Viktor on Mon Aug 11, 2014 1:37 am; edited 1 time in total

    Mike E
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2789
    Points : 2853
    Join date : 2014-06-19
    Location : Bay Area, CA

    Re: S-300/400/500 News [Russian Strategic Air Defense] #3

    Post  Mike E on Mon Aug 11, 2014 1:36 am

    I meant that as an "in general" kind of thing. Of course it can be broken down further, but that is the basic "idea".

     - Thanks for that info!

    Vann7
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 3221
    Points : 3345
    Join date : 2012-05-16

    Re: S-300/400/500 News [Russian Strategic Air Defense] #3

    Post  Vann7 on Mon Aug 11, 2014 3:55 am



    Anyone who use an S-500 to shoot down a $500k tomahack cruise missile should be fired from his job. Because
    the S-500 missile ,is like a space rocket and its cost should not be cheap. My estimate compared with how much brahmos cost 1.5 millions is from $10 -$20 millions per missile.

    That said Expensive missiles are for expensive targets.. not for drones drones or regular combat planes. or helicopters or cheap targets that any other weapon can do.. So the ideal target for an S-500 should be ICBM..like minutemans 2. Or perhaps B-2 bombers or F-22 or F-35 , if there is a war and you cannot wait for airforce and do not have an S-400/s-300 around. Or a Satellite.

    And no the S-500 is not like THAAD or SM-3.. Those systems are limited in their capabilities can only target ballistic missiles that its flight path is near the position of them. S-500 is like and any air or space altitude interceptor ,probably a hit to kill S-400 with significant larger range and more advanced detection and sensors in the warhead.
    is not limited like THAAD or SM-3 to be positioned in the right line of flight of the enemy targets . THAAD is ideal for defenses of bases when a missile is going directly to it. Because the S-500 is a real Sam it can operate anywhere at any direction and chase targets that its flight path is far away of the missile location.

    IF for example an SM-3 +THAAD is placed in Crimea .it will fail to hit any ballistic missile targeting Sochi that avoid Crimea airspace. The US anti ballistic Missiles defenses do not chase far from its zone ,they simply fly upwards and step in the middle of a ballistic missile flight path, while S-500 can chase targets any low or high altitude over long ranges up 600km . So S-500 is a complete defense System ,while SM-3 and Thaad are limited its operation of where they are positioned. That said in case of a nuclear war.. lets say that SM-3 and Thaad works 100% of the time and never fails and the same for S-500. Then US will be doomed because will not be able to defend all its territory.. with a defense that do not chase ballistic missiles away of its zone.

    Sponsored content

    Re: S-300/400/500 News [Russian Strategic Air Defense] #3

    Post  Sponsored content Today at 7:46 am


      Current date/time is Sat Dec 03, 2016 7:46 am