Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Iskander-E (SS-26 Stone):

    Share
    avatar
    flamming_python

    Posts : 3203
    Points : 3317
    Join date : 2012-01-30

    Re: Iskander-E (SS-26 Stone):

    Post  flamming_python on Mon Dec 10, 2012 10:48 pm

    TR1 wrote:Do they have any concrete argument supporting David's Sling and ISkander?

    THeir argument is basically "It was desighned with Iskander in mind" which proves absolutely nothing.
    What kind of targets are they using for testing? SCUD-mimicks are no Iskander.

    Yeah the fanboys are dug in pretty good on that thread, I'm trying to storm the trenches but I can't budge them know what I mean Sad


    Last edited by flamming_python on Mon Dec 10, 2012 10:52 pm; edited 2 times in total
    avatar
    flamming_python

    Posts : 3203
    Points : 3317
    Join date : 2012-01-30

    Re: Iskander-E (SS-26 Stone):

    Post  flamming_python on Mon Dec 10, 2012 10:52 pm

    As for testing, well the user 'Camera' there claims that the US and Israel used some sort of air-launched missiles that emulate its maneuvers and flight profile. Most likely a cruise missile, perhaps some sort of experimental scramjet or something along those lines that are able to attain the speeds neccessery. Which would be interesting, but ultimately they have no way of knowing the Iskanders behaviour, trajectory options, decoy release strategies, the sort of manuevers it will do and importantly - how multiple Iskanders will co-ordinate their strategies with each other. It would also be hard for them to account for the sturdiness and construction of the Iskander missile itself; after all Saddam's SCUDs took hits but kept flying.
    avatar
    Sujoy

    Posts : 904
    Points : 1070
    Join date : 2012-04-02
    Location : India

    Re: Iskander-E (SS-26 Stone):

    Post  Sujoy on Tue Dec 11, 2012 6:48 am

    flamming_python wrote:Sujoy can you give me some more concrete arguements plz.
    I mean it's pretty obvious that they're wrong but these non-people don't take no for an answer and are stubborn, I need something to shut them up.

    Flamming Python ,

    I can provide you with some arguments however I strongly doubt that people who survive on a daily dose of PR crack will buy your arguments in their hallucinated state.

    Anyways . The TAMIR interceptor missile of the Iron Dome is capable of intercepting rockets that are incapable of intelligent terminal manoeuvres. It is also an extremely costly system . To intercept a $2000 rocket you send out a $50K interceptor missile . Bear in mind that this missile does NOT guarantee one shot one kill . The standard operating procedure for Iron Dome is to fire two interceptors in each engagement, although it is unclear if that was the case in the first round of engagements. Each interceptor costs about $50,000. The success rate we are interested in is thus the fraction of rockets that that Iron Dome attempts to intercept that it actually destroys, not the success rate of a single interceptor. Agility is not required from the Tamir since the targets to be destroyed themselves are not agile & follow a predictable flight trajectory without any evasive terminal manoeuvring.

    Let's look at the figures that the IDF released pertaining to the rocket attacks :

    http://www.idf.il/1153-17717-EN/Dover.aspx

    Total number of rockets fired at Israel : 1506
    Iron Dome Interceptions : 421

    Now the word "Intercept" means ( in this case) an intercept attempt ( which may or may NOT be successful).It is quite possible that intercept attempts were made on rockets that fell on open areas as well.The official claim that 7% of the rockets hit populated areas is difficult to understand, since 7% of 1506 is about 105, far more than the 58 that actually hit urban areas.On the other hand if 7% means the percentage of rockets that would have hit urban areas
    in the nonexistence of Iron Dome, then the figure of 7% seems far too small (479/1506 = 32%) even allowing for the possibility that some of the intercepted rockets would have fallen outside of populated areas.

    In 2011 the success rate of the Iron Dome ( as reported in Jerusalem Post )was as follows :

    April - 8 out of 10 ( 80%)
    August - 22 out of 28 ( 79%)
    October - 3 out of 9 ( 33%)

    The average success rate is therefore 70%

    Sheera Frankel reporting in the Baltimore Sun wrote in March 2012

    Of the 250 or so rockets and mortars fired at Israel( in March 2012) from Gaza, 166 entered Israel’s airspace, officials said. Of those, 74 would have struck civilian areas or buildings. The Iron Dome system intercepted 56 before they could land, a success rate of 75 percent. Israeli official argue that the Iron Dome also identified rockets that were headed for open areas, such as fields, and let them land. Factoring those in, Israeli military officials argue that only 18 of the 166 landed anywhere on target, giving the system a success rate of nearly 90 percent

    The above statement makes clear that the often-cited figure of 90% applies to the March 2012 attacks and is NOT actually the effectiveness of Iron Dome. Rather it is simply the fraction of rockets that enter Israel’s airspace that either are successfully intercepted or fall outside Iron Dome’s defended areas.

    What emerges very clearly from my above arguments is that you will have a 70% - 75 % chance of intercepting obsolete Grad rockets with Iron Domes , however against TBMs/ cruise missile with manoeuvring capabilities Iron Dome will be a complete failure.

    One of the options that is being incorporated to intercept Iranian Ballistic missiles and cruise missiles is that the Iron Dome will be incorporated with a plug-n-play system that can easily accommodate elements like SpyDer-SR & even Barak-2 MR-SAM in the overall network. This development lays out bare the claim that Iron Dome can intercept TBS/ cruise missiles . For that matter Iron Dome cannot intercept 155mm artillery shells either coz 155mm rounds do not arrive sequentially above their targets. Up to five 155mm rounds can land at the same time due to MRSI capability, thereby complicating the interception process.

    Again , what I have explained above is for your eyes only if you feel you can explain these to some xenophobic nationalist , all the power to you Very Happy
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16281
    Points : 16912
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Iskander-E (SS-26 Stone):

    Post  GarryB on Tue Dec 11, 2012 8:22 am

    You are wasting your time... they have no interest in the truth... you might as well try and convert them to be buddist... you will have as much luck.


    _________________
    “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
    avatar
    Sujoy

    Posts : 904
    Points : 1070
    Join date : 2012-04-02
    Location : India

    Re: Iskander-E (SS-26 Stone):

    Post  Sujoy on Tue Dec 11, 2012 2:24 pm

    TR1 wrote:Let's switch it up a little- S-300V vs Tochka, and vs Iskander?

    The S 300V should not have any problem in destroying any hostile missile that follow a predictable flight trajectory without any evasive terminal manoeuvring. Ergo , Tochka can be intercepted but not the Iskander M .

    For that matter the S 400 too will not be able to destroy an incoming Iskander M .
    avatar
    flamming_python

    Posts : 3203
    Points : 3317
    Join date : 2012-01-30

    Re: Iskander-E (SS-26 Stone):

    Post  flamming_python on Tue Dec 11, 2012 3:11 pm

    Sujoy wrote:
    flamming_python wrote:Sujoy can you give me some more concrete arguements plz.
    I mean it's pretty obvious that they're wrong but these non-people don't take no for an answer and are stubborn, I need something to shut them up.

    Flamming Python ,

    I can provide you with some arguments however I strongly doubt that people who survive on a daily dose of PR crack will buy your arguments in their hallucinated state.

    Anyways . The TAMIR interceptor missile of the Iron Dome is capable of intercepting rockets that are incapable of intelligent terminal manoeuvres. It is also an extremely costly system . To intercept a $2000 rocket you send out a $50K interceptor missile . Bear in mind that this missile does NOT guarantee one shot one kill . The standard operating procedure for Iron Dome is to fire two interceptors in each engagement, although it is unclear if that was the case in the first round of engagements. Each interceptor costs about $50,000. The success rate we are interested in is thus the fraction of rockets that that Iron Dome attempts to intercept that it actually destroys, not the success rate of a single interceptor. Agility is not required from the Tamir since the targets to be destroyed themselves are not agile & follow a predictable flight trajectory without any evasive terminal manoeuvring.

    The discussion is not about Iron Dome but the 'David's Sling' air-defense/ABM system; or is not a seperate system?

    Sujoy wrote:
    TR1 wrote:Let's switch it up a little- S-300V vs Tochka, and vs Iskander?

    The S 300V should not have any problem in destroying any hostile missile that follow a predictable flight trajectory without any evasive terminal manoeuvring. Ergo , Tochka can be intercepted but not the Iskander M .

    For that matter the S 400 too will not be able to destroy an incoming Iskander M .

    I thought as much, but the S-300V missiles have a velocity of Mach 4.5 AFAIK. During the terminal phase, the Iskander in order to manuever, lowers its speed considerably lower than Mach 4.5 - is it not possible for a S-300V missile to check its manuevers and successfully intercept it at that stage?

    GarryB wrote:You are wasting your time... they have no interest in the truth... you might as well try and convert them to be buddist... you will have as much luck.

    I find that when I argue with people online about things like this - or in fact about anything; I end up myself coming away more knowledgeable and wiser at the end of it. Therefore, I never really consider such debates a waste of time, and rarely shy away from them Cool
    avatar
    Viktor

    Posts : 5672
    Points : 6321
    Join date : 2009-08-25
    Age : 36
    Location : Croatia

    Re: Iskander-E (SS-26 Stone):

    Post  Viktor on Tue Dec 11, 2012 3:51 pm

    It is interesting to mention that Israel airdefense system is said to pass on missiles which vector does not correspond with protected area. Well during Iskander manoeuvreing its flight vector will certainly change from defended area to area which is left unprotected. Another Iskander rapid change of flight trajectory will vector its focus on defended area. No airdefense can react so fast to pass and than retarget and than fire but than pass - system is not designed to deal with such madness - it is designed to deal with Grad missiles as Sujoy said.
    avatar
    Sujoy

    Posts : 904
    Points : 1070
    Join date : 2012-04-02
    Location : India

    Re: Iskander-E (SS-26 Stone):

    Post  Sujoy on Tue Dec 11, 2012 4:06 pm

    flamming_python wrote:The discussion is not about Iron Dome but the 'David's Sling' air-defense/ABM system; or is not a seperate system?

    David's Sling or Stunner ( as Raytheon calls it ) is still being tested and if all the tests are successful it will enter service in the middle of 2014 ( expected).David's Sling is not a new system ,it is simply an augumentation to the Iron Dome system. It is expected to be ( a)cheaper than the Tamir missiles of the Iron Dome and (b) is also expected to intercept longer range missiles fired from 190 miles. That's it . It cannot intercept the Iskander M because Iskander does NOT follow a predictable path .


    flamming_python wrote:I thought as much, but the S-300V missiles have a velocity of Mach 4.5 AFAIK. During the terminal phase, the Iskander in order to manuever, lowers its speed considerably lower than Mach 4.5 - is it not possible for a S-300V missile to check its manuevers and successfully intercept it at that stage?

    A missile that flies slowly greatly increase it's manoeuvrable capability . The S 300V or the S 400 is not designed to intercept a missile that manoeuvrs . The terminal phase of the Iskander M will last for less than 30 seconds . During the terminal phase too the Iskander will manoeuvr . Approximate targeting for each Iskander warhead is achieved ( among others)by bus maneuvering and release timing during cruise phase of the decent stage.
    Your best chance of intercepting an Iskander M is during the boost phase but that's incredibly difficult .



    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16281
    Points : 16912
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Iskander-E (SS-26 Stone):

    Post  GarryB on Tue Dec 11, 2012 11:14 pm

    I find that when I argue with people online about things like this - or in fact about anything; I end up myself coming away more knowledgeable and wiser at the end of it. Therefore, I never really consider such debates a waste of time, and rarely shy away from them

    When discussing things with an intelligent mature adult I would totally agree with you... even when I had to explain to some people why they were wrong often I would think rather more deeply about things than I would otherwise have done. Obviously other times I found new pieces of information and realised I was wrong, which is useful to me.

    A very good example was I was discussing sinking submarines that when they reach crush depth and the hull fails and the sub collapses like a drink can in the explosive compression that the air can ignite because air is heated when it compresses. I was discussing this with a person who was in the Navy and had many years experience at sea, and he believed it was a myth. I have never been in any armed forces, and so you can see in a one on one discussion most of the other contributers to that thread were against me. Thinking about it some more, I realised I had my proof from WWII Soviet HMG ammo... the Soviets had a 12.7 x 108mm round with a small HE charge, but it used an air column fuse. In other words the nose of the round collapsed on impact, which superheated and ignited the HE charge to detonate the round on impact.

    However when discussing things with a zealot who thinks US/Israel Strong! and will not accept any criticism of either then you are wasting your time... you will only know your point has gotten through and they realise you are right when they start calling you names... not as satisfying as it sounds.


    _________________
    “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
    avatar
    coolieno99

    Posts : 139
    Points : 162
    Join date : 2010-08-25

    Re: Iskander-E (SS-26 Stone):

    Post  coolieno99 on Tue Dec 18, 2012 5:40 am

    flamming_python wrote:
    .... I thought as much, but the S-300V missiles have a velocity of Mach 4.5 AFAIK. During the terminal phase, the Iskander in order to manuever, lowers its speed considerably lower than Mach 4.5 - is it not possible for a S-300V missile to check its manuevers and successfully intercept it at that stage? ....
    the Iskander does slow down to Mach 4 in its terminal phase. But it goes into a random spiraling motion pulling 20 to 30G turns. It's extremely difficult to intercept.

    Austin

    Posts : 6232
    Points : 6638
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Location : India

    Re: Iskander-E (SS-26 Stone):

    Post  Austin on Sat Jan 05, 2013 6:30 pm

    Iskander missiles to get precision technology

    According to the Russian military, Russian defence engineers are developing a super-accurate rocket for the Iskander-M land-based mobile short-range ballistic missile system.

    Equipped with a self-guided conventional or nuclear warhead, the new weapon should strike within 15 metres of its intended target.

    Modern cruise missiles strike within 3 metres.
    avatar
    TR1

    Posts : 5699
    Points : 5735
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Re: Iskander-E (SS-26 Stone):

    Post  TR1 on Sun Jan 06, 2013 5:04 am

    Iskander accuracy was already reported as ~3-5 meters with optical warhead....wut
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16281
    Points : 16912
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Iskander-E (SS-26 Stone):

    Post  GarryB on Sun Jan 06, 2013 8:22 am

    They are talking about self guiding warheads, so I suspect they mean the night and all weather capable radar homing seekers which had CEPs of 20m. The optical guidance seeker offered better accuracy, but was less all weather and night capable.


    _________________
    “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
    avatar
    AlfaT8

    Posts : 1334
    Points : 1341
    Join date : 2013-02-02

    Re: Iskander-E (SS-26 Stone):

    Post  AlfaT8 on Wed Feb 20, 2013 11:57 pm

    U.S Space-Based Sensors, A Ballistic Missile’s Worst Nightmare.

    Space-based sensors can expand the range and effectiveness of the U.S. Navy’s Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense System (BMDS) capabilities, a recent missile defense test has shown.

    Conducted Feb. 13 by the Navy and U.S. Missile Defense Agency (MDA), an Aegis “launch on remote” test used tracking data from the Space Tracking and Surveillance System-Demonstrators satellites to form a fire control solution for the missile interceptor.
    Link

    Has the 9K720 Iskander (SS-26 Stone) been beaten??? Shocked
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16281
    Points : 16912
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Iskander-E (SS-26 Stone):

    Post  GarryB on Thu Feb 21, 2013 1:41 am

    The A-60 airborne laser system is designed to deal with recon and optical satellites.

    Equally the threat of the Iskander is not that you don't know it is coming... the threat is that your interceptors can't anticipate an accurate interception point because it is continuously manouvering... satellite early warning does not change that.


    _________________
    “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

    Austin

    Posts : 6232
    Points : 6638
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Location : India

    Re: Iskander-E (SS-26 Stone):

    Post  Austin on Thu Feb 21, 2013 7:51 am

    Iskander travels mostly in the atmosphere at 40 - 50 Km Altitude , I doubt any space based sensors can track these kind of missiles for long , specially when its using slow burning solid fuel during cruise phase.
    avatar
    Viktor

    Posts : 5672
    Points : 6321
    Join date : 2009-08-25
    Age : 36
    Location : Croatia

    Re: Iskander-E (SS-26 Stone):

    Post  Viktor on Fri Jun 28, 2013 4:13 pm

    Brigade of ISKANDER-M delivered to Russian Army

    Russian Defense Minister Gen. Sergei Shoigu took part in the ritual transfer of brigade sets of operational-tactical missile complex "Iskander-M".

    http://sdelanounas.ru/blogs/35761/
    avatar
    Viktor

    Posts : 5672
    Points : 6321
    Join date : 2009-08-25
    Age : 36
    Location : Croatia

    Re: Iskander-E (SS-26 Stone):

    Post  Viktor on Sat Jun 29, 2013 2:26 am

    What is interesting is that ballistic and winged missiles where delivered together Very Happy 

    Powerful pictures









    and many other excellent pictures

    http://i-korotchenko.livejournal.com/680796.html
    avatar
    TR1

    Posts : 5699
    Points : 5735
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Re: Iskander-E (SS-26 Stone):

    Post  TR1 on Sat Jun 29, 2013 2:39 am

    Wow, Kortchenko delivering for once.

    Very interesting covers.
    avatar
    Viktor

    Posts : 5672
    Points : 6321
    Join date : 2009-08-25
    Age : 36
    Location : Croatia

    Re: Iskander-E (SS-26 Stone):

    Post  Viktor on Sat Jun 29, 2013 3:16 am

    TR1 wrote:Wow, Kortchenko delivering for once.

    Very interesting covers.

    Yes, mighty photos. Even highly limited but combined ballistic and winged missile strikes is something few nation on Earth can hope to survive and not one of them is

    in EU.

    Do you know the number of launchers per brigade?

    - launchers and reload vehicles (as I managed to find it is 12 launchers and 12 reload) but still I remember reading about up to 24 launchers

    (120 launchers in 5 brigades by 2015)

    - found it

    According to the plans, announced in early 2011, during the execution of the state armaments program for 2011-2020 gg (Adopted 31.12.2010) plans to supply the armed forces of 10 missile brigades complexes "Iskander-M". August 1, 2011 Deputy Minister of Defense of Russia D.Bulgakov said that all Russian aircraft into service is planned to take 120 complexes "Iskander". In 2011, between the Ministry of Defence of Russia and NPK "MSC" a contract for the supply of brigade sets of complexes "Iskander-M" ballistic and cruise missiles.

    LINK

    So its 12 launchers and 12 reloads per brigade.




    and from the same link we have

    2007 is planned to start arming complexes missile brigades: the composition - 3 missile battalion, each with three batteries - each 3 SPU and tools to ensure - total in the orbr 27 complexes and 100 missiles for them . Including planned to equip complexes 103rd ORBR SibVO and 107 th ORBR FEB (as of 2009 these teams do not re-started or not reported).

    Where we have much bigger composition.confused 
    avatar
    medo

    Posts : 3188
    Points : 3278
    Join date : 2010-10-24
    Location : Slovenia

    Re: Iskander-E (SS-26 Stone):

    Post  medo on Sun Jun 30, 2013 9:10 am

    Any info, which cruise missiles is Iskander-M using? Klub land attack cruise missile or any other type?
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16281
    Points : 16912
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Iskander-E (SS-26 Stone):

    Post  GarryB on Sun Jun 30, 2013 11:32 am

    The Iskander-K uses a '500km' range cruise missile most likely based on the 2,500km range Kalibr.

    BTW those vehicle covers appear to be the ballistic missile equivalent of Nakidka... nice.



    _________________
    “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
    avatar
    TheArmenian

    Posts : 1702
    Points : 1863
    Join date : 2011-09-14

    Re: Iskander-E (SS-26 Stone):

    Post  TheArmenian on Sun Jun 30, 2013 1:46 pm

    The Iskander-K vehicle that was shown at AMKS-2007 had a raised roof and two rows of missiles. The vehicle that was revealed a few days ago to the Defense Minister does not have the raised deck and has only one row of missiles. But, I am not sure the missiles are the same. The missile containers from the MAKS-2007 show look a bit smaller to me.
    Please have another look.

    The vehicle and missiles from MAKS-2007:





    The recently shown vehicle and missiles:

    avatar
    Russian Patriot

    Posts : 1169
    Points : 2063
    Join date : 2009-07-21
    Age : 26
    Location : USA- although I am Russian

    Re: Iskander-E (SS-26 Stone):

    Post  Russian Patriot on Sun Jun 30, 2013 7:35 pm


    All Russian Missile Brigades to Get Iskander Systems by 2018


    MOSCOW, June 28 (RIA Novosti) – Iskander-M ballistic missile systems, which can effectively engage two targets within a minute at a range of up to 280 kilometers, will be provided to all Russian Ground Forces missile brigades by 2018, the country’s defense minister said Friday.

    The missiles have a non-ballistic flight path that is difficult for the enemy to predict and are guided throughout their flight.

    On Friday, a missile brigade in southern Russia’s Astrakhan Region received an advanced Iskander-M missile complex, which “has no match in the world for its tactical specifications,” Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu said on a visit to the facility, Russian media reported.

    The complex was delivered in a complete set, rather than “piecemeal” as previously done, the minister said. He stressed the importance of ensuring high personnel-training standards and the construction of new infrastructure for the system to be operated effectively.

    In 2011, then-President Dmitry Medvedev announced plans to deploy Iskander missiles in Russia’s westernmost Kaliningrad Region, to counter the threat posed by US plans to deploy missile defense elements in Europe. NATO and the United States have insisted that the shield would defend NATO members against missiles from North Korea and Iran and would not be directed at Russia.

    Russia proposed a joint missile defense system, an idea that many experts both at home and abroad dismiss as unviable and unrealistic. Then it demanded “legally binding guarantees” that US/NATO missiles would not be aimed at Russia.

    Since Moscow’s proposal received a lukewarm response in the West, Russia has been warning of unspecified low-cost “asymmetric measures” to counter the future Western missile defense system.

    http://en.rian.ru/military_news/20130628/181939989/All-Russian-Missile-Brigades-to-Get-Iskander-Systems-by-2018.html
    avatar
    Cyberspec

    Posts : 1938
    Points : 2103
    Join date : 2011-08-08
    Location : Terra Australis

    Re: Iskander-E (SS-26 Stone):

    Post  Cyberspec on Mon Jul 01, 2013 3:13 am

    The missiles look the same to me, but you could be right about the arrangement...we'll see.

    Sponsored content

    Re: Iskander-E (SS-26 Stone):

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Thu Aug 17, 2017 7:08 pm