Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Russian SAMs: Views-Comparisons-Questions

    LMFS
    LMFS

    Posts : 1398
    Points : 1392
    Join date : 2018-03-03

    Russian SAMs: Views-Comparisons-Questions - Page 9 Empty Re: Russian SAMs: Views-Comparisons-Questions

    Post  LMFS on Sat Apr 13, 2019 1:10 am

    bolshevik345 wrote:Does the PVO have any strategies to deal with mass MALD deployment and SDB launches? I am not an electrical or software engineer, but AFAIK the smaller the guidance system, the more easily its jammed, and the SDB is small. Or am I wrong?
    First strategy I can think of is controlling the airspace of the whole Eurasia with their EW radars. This allows to see for instance the F-35s leaving the runway so to prepare the interceptors to stop them or discern the point when a MALD separates from the carrier. This allows to reduce the numbers of targets to deal with. Also a main factor is that US could not build up forces around Russia in massive amounts before they give an ultimatum. SDBs and MALD are not so disruptive technologies or hard targets to shoot down, they can be hard only if you allow the opponent to use them in massive amounts, at least from what I know.

    SDBs are indeed small, frail and slow weapons. There are a number of ways of fighting them in Russian military, from EW to AAA. And of course, given the use of a small warhead the effects of degrading the guidance can be quite big for the final lethality of the weapon. SDBII includes multimode seeker to address this issue, but the price is notably more expensive than the more simple original model. And the release ranges of these weapons are relatively small, so the carrier should launch them high altitude at max 100 km from the target, which does not seem a great idea if you consider the amount of high speed, long range means available to intercept them (i.e. MiG-31BM + R37M or S-400) way before they can position themselves for the attack. This is not the best weapon to confront Russia if their AD is working IMHO.
    avatar
    Austin

    Posts : 7316
    Points : 7713
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Location : India

    Russian SAMs: Views-Comparisons-Questions - Page 9 Empty Re: Russian SAMs: Views-Comparisons-Questions

    Post  Austin on Sat Apr 13, 2019 6:35 am

    They need to make something like Tor-M2 or similar system to deal with MALD and GBU/SDB type weapons.

    May be a Tor missile with cheap terminal seeker or even command guidance system but that can guide like 30 targets at a time towards a target.

    One option is to use dual command guidance with seeker of Manpads which would be cheaper so that hit probability is high.


    This is the tactics used by Israel against Syrian AD in recent strike where even Pantisir was present but they simply overwhelm the targets and since PGM used IIR seeker it was not possible to jam it.
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 21492
    Points : 22042
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Russian SAMs: Views-Comparisons-Questions - Page 9 Empty Re: Russian SAMs: Views-Comparisons-Questions

    Post  GarryB on Sat Apr 13, 2019 11:11 am

    The best tactic is to shoot down the launch platforms before they launch their attack.

    Also destroy airfields launch aircraft operate from and of course any tanker aircraft or AWACS platforms coordinating the attack.

    As it is now they have TOR and Pantsir systems, but they also have long range SAMs like S-400 and are introducing S-350 to replace old S-300 systems with twelve missiles per vehicle replacing four per vehicle with a longer ranged missile... (old S-300 had 90km range and S-350 has 60km and 150km range missiles).

    There are also active optical jamming systems to defeat laser guided weapons and IIR guided weapons, and of course it seems they can disrupt GPS at will too...

    Add to that the fact that now they can have land based hypersonic land attack missiles that could be used against targets over the entire European continent I think it is really NATO that needs to be worried rather than Russia.

    In a few years time they could have a Boomerang based vehicle with a 57mm gun with guided shells that might have the entire rear troop compartment filled with ammo... so we would be talking about 500 rounds out to 10-12km range firing at over 200 rpm if needed...

    Not to mention upgraded laser systems, and jamming systems and false targets... but mostly the nuclear retaliation that is triggered by a mass attack from NATO.

    S-500 can hit ground targets ?

    Probably could... many heavy Russian SAMs can, but would be a bit of a waste as they already have surface to surface missiles like Iskander etc... and will shortly have land attack Zircon missiles and upgraded Onyx missiles too.
    marcellogo
    marcellogo

    Posts : 201
    Points : 207
    Join date : 2012-08-02

    Russian SAMs: Views-Comparisons-Questions - Page 9 Empty Re: Russian SAMs: Views-Comparisons-Questions

    Post  marcellogo on Sat Apr 13, 2019 1:33 pm

    bolshevik345 wrote:Does the PVO have any strategies to deal with mass MALD deployment and SDB launches? I am not an electrical or software engineer, but AFAIK the smaller the guidance system, the more easily its jammed, and the SDB is small. Or am I wrong?

    They surely have one of such, just look at the system they are developing or even introducing in service right now.

    As an example they not just beefed up the S-300 to the S-400 but will introduce another brand new system like the S-350E (good news there: State trials for it are over and serial production is just started).


    Such system is somewhat underlooked compared to S-400/S-500 but IMHO is fundamental as it doesn't just cover the gap between Pantsir and S-400 allowing to cover large areas against massive waves of long range systems like the one launched by US, France and UK against Damascus but also to engage planes launching SDB and other glide bombs i.e. allowing to "shoot at the Archer, not at the Arrows".

    Newest version of Pantsir, also them close to completion sport new missiles and radars both specifically developed to engage prospective swarm mode attacks made using small glide weapons and drones.

    Under it there will be introduced Morfey that will further enhance such capability through a larger dotation of VSHORAD missiles coupled with a radar able to cover instantaneously a 360° FoW.

    And for the smallest threats like mini or micro drones 57mm shells, guided or not from Derivatsyia.

    Hole
    Hole

    Posts : 2193
    Points : 2191
    Join date : 2018-03-24
    Age : 43
    Location : Merkelland

    Russian SAMs: Views-Comparisons-Questions - Page 9 Empty Re: Russian SAMs: Views-Comparisons-Questions

    Post  Hole on Sat Apr 13, 2019 3:54 pm

    Plus S-300V4, Buk-M3, Tor-M2 and Sosna.
    marcellogo
    marcellogo

    Posts : 201
    Points : 207
    Join date : 2012-08-02

    Russian SAMs: Views-Comparisons-Questions - Page 9 Empty MALD Sdb threats

    Post  marcellogo on Sat Apr 13, 2019 4:23 pm

    Hole wrote:Plus S-300V4, Buk-M3, Tor-M2 and Sosna.

    Yes, they are however the correspondent system used by Army to protect their mobile column.
    Trend is however the same: in both cases they are moving toward systems carrying more missiles and radars able to deal with different targets in the same moment.
    Most of above mentioned weapons are almost all ready while most the weapons and drones they are designed to deal with are instead at the very initial point of their own development if not just mere proposals from industry.
    magnumcromagnon
    magnumcromagnon

    Posts : 5091
    Points : 5244
    Join date : 2013-12-05
    Location : Pindos ave., Pindosville, Pindosylvania, Pindostan

    Russian SAMs: Views-Comparisons-Questions - Page 9 Empty Re: Russian SAMs: Views-Comparisons-Questions

    Post  magnumcromagnon on Sun Apr 14, 2019 4:00 am

    GarryB wrote:The best tactic is to shoot down the launch platforms before they launch their attack.

    Also destroy airfields launch aircraft operate from and of course any tanker aircraft or AWACS platforms coordinating the attack.

    As it is now they have TOR and Pantsir systems, but they also have long range SAMs like S-400 and are introducing S-350 to replace old S-300 systems with twelve missiles per vehicle replacing four per vehicle with a longer ranged missile... (old S-300 had 90km range and S-350 has 60km and 150km range missiles).

    There are also active optical jamming systems to defeat laser guided weapons and IIR guided weapons, and of course it seems they can disrupt GPS at will too...

    Add to that the fact that now they can have land based hypersonic land attack missiles that could be used against targets over the entire European continent I think it is really NATO that needs to be worried rather than Russia.

    In a few years time they could have a Boomerang based vehicle with a 57mm gun with guided shells that might have the entire rear troop compartment filled with ammo... so we would be talking about 500 rounds out to 10-12km range firing at over 200 rpm if needed...

    Not to mention upgraded laser systems, and jamming systems and false targets... but mostly the nuclear retaliation that is triggered by a mass attack from NATO.

    S-500 can hit ground targets ?

    Probably could... many heavy Russian SAMs can, but would be a bit of a waste as they already have surface to surface missiles like Iskander etc... and will shortly have land attack Zircon missiles and upgraded Onyx missiles too.

    Honestly I believe the future of IADs is the integration of IRBM's, such as Zircon as a deterrence ultimatum. Integrating Zircon, which means if S-400's detects (with the help of Early Warning radars) mass attack coming it's direction, Zircons could immediately respond and launch in the direction of the airfields/missile farms, and any attempt to target Zircon launches would be nullified by the IAD. This is the ultimate consequential response of combining SAM/ABM with IRBM (Mk. 41).
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 21492
    Points : 22042
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Russian SAMs: Views-Comparisons-Questions - Page 9 Empty Re: Russian SAMs: Views-Comparisons-Questions

    Post  GarryB on Sun Apr 14, 2019 9:05 am

    There are also a range of EM weapons that could defeat AWACS and comms systems including satellite based and between UCAVs and aircraft platforms.
    avatar
    nero

    Posts : 41
    Points : 41
    Join date : 2019-03-26

    Russian SAMs: Views-Comparisons-Questions - Page 9 Empty Re: Russian SAMs: Views-Comparisons-Questions

    Post  nero on Sun Apr 14, 2019 5:16 pm

    magnumcromagnon wrote:Honestly I believe the future of IADs is the integration of IRBM's, such as Zircon as a deterrence ultimatum. Integrating Zircon, which means if S-400's detects (with the help of Early Warning radars) mass attack coming it's direction, Zircons could immediately respond and launch in the direction of the airfields/missile farms, and any attempt to target Zircon launches would be nullified by the IAD. This is the ultimate consequential response of combining SAM/ABM with IRBM (Mk. 41).

    As my friend used to say.

    The moment the last cruise missile hits Kaliningrad is when the first ICBM is going to hit Washington.

    Sponsored content

    Russian SAMs: Views-Comparisons-Questions - Page 9 Empty Re: Russian SAMs: Views-Comparisons-Questions

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Fri Aug 23, 2019 2:07 pm