Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    TOR-M2 Air Defence system

    Share
    avatar
    Sujoy

    Posts : 903
    Points : 1069
    Join date : 2012-04-02
    Location : India

    Re: TOR-M2 Air Defence system

    Post  Sujoy on Tue Aug 27, 2013 8:11 am

    Viktor wrote:And here it is. TOR-M2 on TATA truck (perhaps India is interested)
    TOR-M2E is being offered for both the SL-QRM & QR-SAM reqmts of the IA & IAF. Mounting the weapon system on a TATA-built truck is part of Russia’s direct industrial offsets commitment in case the TOR-M2E is selected .

    However, for the Air Defense Gun RFI the Pantsyr S2 on a wheeled chassis will be offered though the requirement is only for a high-fire cannon & not a combined gun/missile AAA system . That coupled with the current economic mess , am not sure if India can afford the Pantsyr S 2 and will probably opt for cheaper alternatives from Serbia or Poland. Anyways , fingers crossed .
    avatar
    medo

    Posts : 3231
    Points : 3317
    Join date : 2010-10-24
    Location : Slovenia

    Re: TOR-M2 Air Defence system

    Post  medo on Tue Aug 27, 2013 5:00 pm

    Isn't Tor-M2KM already in production for Russian military?
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16741
    Points : 17349
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: TOR-M2 Air Defence system

    Post  GarryB on Wed Aug 28, 2013 4:26 am

    However, for the Air Defense Gun RFI the Pantsyr S2 on a wheeled chassis will be offered though the requirement is only for a high-fire cannon & not a combined gun/missile AAA system . That coupled with the current economic mess , am not sure if India can afford the Pantsyr S 2 and will probably opt for cheaper alternatives from Serbia or Poland. Anyways , fingers crossed .
    Guns on their own lack the range to be effective... even 30mm cannon are only effective out to 4-5km at most... unless you want to go to a much heavier calibre like 40mm or 57mm calibre then most aerial targets will be able to pick off your air defence vehicles at stand off distances.

    40mm and 57mm calibre weapons would lack the rate of fire to be effective against a manouvering aircraft or cruise missile like target and would only be effective in the AAG role with guided shells.

    The whole reason for the Tunguska and Pantsir is to combine the advantages of both guns and missiles so they compliment each other and reduce costs.

    Pantsir-S1 is not as cheap as a gun only system like Shilka, but it is not just replacing the SPAAG, it is also replacing the short range missile component, so rather than just replacing the ZSU-23-4 it also replaces both the SA-9 and the SA-13 and if you look at the specs you get a much more effective system. The guns on Pantsir-S1 have much greater range and hitting power than the 23mm cannon of the Shilka with its two twin barrel guns pumping out about 5,000rpm replacing four single barrel guns pumping out about 4,000rpm. The effective range is about 4,000m for the 30mm rounds compared with about 2,500m for the 23mm calibre rounds... in this case the 30mm are 30 x 165mm rounds and the 23mm are 23 x 152mm rounds.

    The missiles on the Pantsir-S1 are SA-22 Greyhound missiles with ranges of up to 20km and altitudes of up to 15km and can hit targets down to 5m, with 8-12 missiles ready to fire depending on the model.
    For SA-13 the heat seeking missiles have a range of about 5km with about a 4km ceiling and there are up to 6 missiles ready to fire.

    Very simply the Pantsir-S1 offers performance much better than Shilka and much better than most other similar short range SAMs in one package without the duplication of having to buy a gun system and a missile system with different vehicles.

    In other words it seems to cost more... but it actually doesn't if you want decent close in air defence capability.

    If they just want a gun vehicle then a cheap option would be a Shilka with its 4 x 23mm cannon removed and replaced with a single 30mm twin barrel 2A38M cannon and a couple of Igla launchers on the turret rear.

    8 MANPADS and 2,500rpm 30mm cannon fire capacity would be impressive... especially with the radar and electronics replaced with modern optics and compact radar system. (no need for long range radar when targets out to 4km for guns and 6km for missiles will be the standard mission).


    _________________
    “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 : 1727
    Points : 1884
    Join date : 2011-09-14

    Re: TOR-M2 Air Defence system

    Post  TheArmenian on Wed Aug 28, 2013 8:47 am



    Missile range is now 15km
    As per Technical Specs above:
    Destruction range:
    - From 1000m to 15000m

    A bit shorter than Pantsir-S1 (20 km), but the minimum engagement with missiles is better than Pantsir.

    Minimum height of target is 10m
    Maximum height is 10,000 m (same as Pantsir)
    So, just like Pantsir, targets flying at high altitude are in danger of being destroyed by these short range systems.
    avatar
    TR1

    Posts : 5680
    Points : 5708
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Re: TOR-M2 Air Defence system

    Post  TR1 on Wed Aug 28, 2013 10:25 am

    Depends on the target of course, anything non-cooperative and moving fast will have no problem evading these guys at the last ~25% of their envelope.

    Wish there was info on the new Pantsir round, 23Ya6. But I am not aware of an export variant, so little chance of seeing @ MAKS.
    avatar
    TheArmenian

    Posts : 1727
    Points : 1884
    Join date : 2011-09-14

    Re: TOR-M2 Air Defence system

    Post  TheArmenian on Wed Aug 28, 2013 11:24 am

    TR1 wrote:Wish there was info on the new Pantsir round, 23Ya6. But I am not aware of an export variant, so little chance of seeing @ MAKS.
    What do you know about the 23Ya6 round? Please share with us.
    avatar
    TheArmenian

    Posts : 1727
    Points : 1884
    Join date : 2011-09-14

    Re: TOR-M2 Air Defence system

    Post  TheArmenian on Wed Aug 28, 2013 11:28 am

    TR1 wrote:Depends on the target of course, anything non-cooperative and moving fast will have no problem evading these guys at the last ~25% of their envelope.
    I somewhat agree and somewhat disagree.
    At high altitude (where the air is thin) non-cooperative targets are less maneuverable. To evade, they will depend mostly on increasing their speed.
    avatar
    Sujoy

    Posts : 903
    Points : 1069
    Join date : 2012-04-02
    Location : India

    Re: TOR-M2 Air Defence system

    Post  Sujoy on Wed Aug 28, 2013 1:55 pm

    GarryB wrote:In other words it seems to cost more... but it actually doesn't if you want decent close in air defence capability.
    Yes, that makes sense .

    Currently efforts are under way to upgrade and enhance the firepower of the Army’s Corps of Air Defence Artillery by upgrading the fire-control system of 48 ZSU-23-4 Schilka self-propelled air-defence guns . Once this is achieved, the Schilkas will complement the thirty-six 2S6 Tunguska-M1 gun/missile-equipped self-propelled air-defence guns, 12 of which were acquired in 1993, followed by 24 more worth $400 million in 2006. The Tunguska can fire the same type of E-SHORADS missiles as the Pantsyr & can be used for battlefield CMD as well.

    Since the IA is already in possession of 2S2 Tunguska-Ms, it will make sense to order the latest version of the Tunguska-M1 with certain enhancements .
    avatar
    Viktor

    Posts : 5669
    Points : 6312
    Join date : 2009-08-25
    Age : 37
    Location : Croatia

    Re: TOR-M2 Air Defence system

    Post  Viktor on Wed Aug 28, 2013 2:10 pm

    TheArmenian wrote:

    Missile range is now 15km
    As per Technical Specs above:
    Destruction range:
    - From 1000m to 15000m

    A bit shorter than Pantsir-S1 (20 km), but the minimum engagement with missiles is better than Pantsir.

    Minimum height of target is 10m
    Maximum height is 10,000 m (same as Pantsir)
    So, just like Pantsir, targets flying at high altitude are in danger of being destroyed by these short range systems.

    Maximum altitude of Pancir-S1 is 15km not 10km. You can not overfly Pancir-S1 so easily as TOR-M2.


    Sujoy wrote:
    Currently efforts are under way to upgrade and enhance the firepower of the Army’s Corps of Air Defence Artillery by upgrading the fire-control system of 48 ZSU-23-4 Schilka self-propelled air-defence guns . Once this is achieved, the Schilkas will complement the thirty-six 2S6 Tunguska-M1 gun/missile-equipped self-propelled air-defence guns, 12 of which were acquired in 1993, followed by 24 more worth $400 million in 2006. The Tunguska can fire the same type of E-SHORADS missiles as the Pantsyr & can be used for battlefield CMD as well.

    Since the IA is already in possession of 2S2 Tunguska-Ms, it will make sense to order the latest version of the Tunguska-M1 with certain enhancements .
    You can not really compare Tunguska with Pancir.

    1. 4 time more guiding channels per targets
    2. Mutch more ECM resistance
    3. Problem of guiding longer range missiles with Tunguska radar system and many more.
    avatar
    Sujoy

    Posts : 903
    Points : 1069
    Join date : 2012-04-02
    Location : India

    Re: TOR-M2 Air Defence system

    Post  Sujoy on Wed Aug 28, 2013 3:21 pm

    Viktor wrote:You can not really compare Tunguska with Pancir.
    No , not really comparing the two except for the E - SHORADS missiles . Both TOR & Pantsyr-S1 are optimised for engaging low-flying combat aircraft, helicopters & cruise missiles.

    Viktor wrote:1. 4 time more guiding channels per targets
    2. Mutch more ECM resistance
    3. Problem of guiding longer range missiles with Tunguska radar system and many more.
    Like I said , certain enhancements will be required but this still is the most cost effective option from both procurement and MRO point of view .

    Pantsyr-S1-type AAA systems are reqd to engage only low-flying targets that in any case cannot engage in high-G manoeuvres when cruising at such altitudes. Using SHORADS to engage gliding PGMs or ARMs is a loss-making proposition & that’s why no one has tried to develop such hard-kill weapon systems, & have instead preferred to deploy soft-kill countermeasures. Instead, it will be more cost-effective to have a layered air-defence network in-depth that will dissuade the combat aircraft from contemplating the launch of such standoff PGMs.
    avatar
    medo

    Posts : 3231
    Points : 3317
    Join date : 2010-10-24
    Location : Slovenia

    Re: TOR-M2 Air Defence system

    Post  medo on Wed Aug 28, 2013 4:57 pm

    TheArmenian wrote:

    Missile range is now 15km
    As per Technical Specs above:
    Destruction range:
    - From 1000m to 15000m

    A bit shorter than Pantsir-S1 (20 km), but the minimum engagement with missiles is better than Pantsir.

    Minimum height of target is 10m
    Maximum height is 10,000 m (same as Pantsir)
    So, just like Pantsir, targets flying at high altitude are in danger of being destroyed by these short range systems.
    As I know original Tor-M2 have 15 km range missiles from the beginning, maybe export one have 12 km range missiles from Tor-M1.

    Minimum range for Pantsir is not a problem, because range closer than 3 km is covered by guns. I doubt, Pantsir crew will launch a missile on target, when closer than 4 km, but spray in with guns.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16741
    Points : 17349
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: TOR-M2 Air Defence system

    Post  GarryB on Thu Aug 29, 2013 3:32 am

    Depends on the target of course, anything non-cooperative and moving fast will have no problem evading these guys at the last ~25% of their envelope.
    Even in the last 25% of their flight envelop both these missiles will be moving very fast... faster than the eye can follow.

    This means that for even a small chance of "dodging" the aircraft would need to dump weight... which on modern aircraft generally means an instant mission kill.

    Dodging a real missile is like dodging a bullet, though it is not impossible I really don't think the pilot is going to have a good chance of seeing either missile approaching as they will not be trailing smoke or flame and will be moving very fast.

    Hard manouvering burns up speed and generally results in a loss of altitude and ordinance. For incoming weapons manouvers also reduce speed and increase stress on the target... stress that when the incoming missile explodes will increase structural damage inflicted by the warhead.

    Many targets will not even be aware they are under attack...


    _________________
    “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
    Morpheus Eberhardt

    Posts : 1942
    Points : 2059
    Join date : 2013-05-20

    Re: TOR-M2 Air Defence system

    Post  Morpheus Eberhardt on Thu Aug 29, 2013 7:49 am

    TheArmenian wrote:
    TR1 wrote:Wish there was info on the new Pantsir round, 23Ya6. But I am not aware of an export variant, so little chance of seeing @ MAKS.
    What do you know about the 23Ya6 round? Please share with us.
    I recently downloaded a picture (forgot from which site) that I believe shows one of the variants of Germes with the 210 mm booster.

    There is another picture at

    http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-CAyVg5RQdgQ/UQx5B_qi-eI/AAAAAAAAI2Y/iijpxqn_9o0/s1600/Pantsir-S1-SA-22-Greyhound-air-defense-system.jpg

    that possibly shows a variant of Pantsir' missile with another type of 210 mm booster.

    Both of these pictures are in need of pixel counting by someone. I can email the first one to you.
    avatar
    Morpheus Eberhardt

    Posts : 1942
    Points : 2059
    Join date : 2013-05-20

    Re: TOR-M2 Air Defence system

    Post  Morpheus Eberhardt on Sat Aug 31, 2013 8:23 am

    Morpheus Eberhardt wrote:
    TheArmenian wrote:
    TR1 wrote:Wish there was info on the new Pantsir round, 23Ya6. But I am not aware of an export variant, so little chance of seeing @ MAKS.
    What do you know about the 23Ya6 round? Please share with us.
    I recently downloaded a picture (forgot from which site) that I believe shows one of the variants of Germes with the 210 mm booster.

    There is another picture at

    http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-CAyVg5RQdgQ/UQx5B_qi-eI/AAAAAAAAI2Y/iijpxqn_9o0/s1600/Pantsir-S1-SA-22-Greyhound-air-defense-system.jpg

    that possibly shows a variant of Pantsir' missile with another type of 210 mm booster.

    Both of these pictures are in need of pixel counting by someone. I can email the first one to you.
    Found the Germes variant with what seems to be a 210 mm booster; it is at

    https://picasaweb.google.com/106445974310988101319/IMDS2013?authuser=0&feat=directlink#5915983041285010210
    avatar
    mack8

    Posts : 957
    Points : 1017
    Join date : 2013-08-02

    Re: TOR-M2 Air Defence system

    Post  mack8 on Sun Sep 01, 2013 11:23 pm

    Any sort of information/ rumour etc. whether Venezuela will indeed be getting Tors (presumably M2EK like Belarus?), and when to expect an eventual delivery? Thanks.
    avatar
    Viktor

    Posts : 5669
    Points : 6312
    Join date : 2009-08-25
    Age : 37
    Location : Croatia

    Re: TOR-M2 Air Defence system

    Post  Viktor on Sun Sep 01, 2013 11:57 pm

    mack8 wrote:Any sort of information/ rumour etc. whether Venezuela will indeed be getting Tors (presumably M2EK like Belarus?), and when to expect an eventual delivery? Thanks.
    There are rumors and and it makes sense when you see it. Venezuela acquired S-300VM, BUK-M2 and TOR-M2 is its natural continuation.
    avatar
    AlfaT8

    Posts : 1420
    Points : 1421
    Join date : 2013-02-02

    Re: TOR-M2 Air Defence system

    Post  AlfaT8 on Mon Sep 02, 2013 12:20 am

    Viktor wrote:
    mack8 wrote:Any sort of information/ rumour etc. whether Venezuela will indeed be getting Tors (presumably M2EK like Belarus?), and when to expect an eventual delivery? Thanks.
    There are rumors and and it makes sense when you see it. Venezuela acquired S-300VM, BUK-M2 and TOR-M2 is its natural continuation.
    What the difference between the Tor-M2 and 2EK??
    avatar
    mack8

    Posts : 957
    Points : 1017
    Join date : 2013-08-02

    Re: TOR-M2 Air Defence system

    Post  mack8 on Mon Sep 02, 2013 12:48 am

    Thanks Viktor.

    Well, Tor-M2EK i always thought it's the one on MZKT 6x6 chassis (like for Belarus), while the tracked chassis option would be Tor-M2E. Now if we have this new Tor-M2KM, does it mean the tracked chassis option would be Tor-M2M?! Corrections welcomed.
    avatar
    Viktor

    Posts : 5669
    Points : 6312
    Join date : 2009-08-25
    Age : 37
    Location : Croatia

    Re: TOR-M2 Air Defence system

    Post  Viktor on Mon Sep 02, 2013 1:02 am

    mack8 wrote:Thanks Viktor.

    Well, Tor-M2EK i always thought it's the one on MZKT 6x6 chassis (like for Belarus), while the tracked chassis option would be Tor-M2E.  Now if we have this new Tor-M2KM, does it mean the tracked chassis option would be Tor-M2M?! Corrections welcomed.  
    I think (but Im not sure) that in that case it would mean that new missile has been accepted in service.
    avatar
    medo

    Posts : 3231
    Points : 3317
    Join date : 2010-10-24
    Location : Slovenia

    Re: TOR-M2 Air Defence system

    Post  medo on Mon Sep 02, 2013 7:33 pm

    So, it seems Tor-M2EK is export wheeled version.
    avatar
    Morpheus Eberhardt

    Posts : 1942
    Points : 2059
    Join date : 2013-05-20

    Re: TOR-M2 Air Defence system

    Post  Morpheus Eberhardt on Wed Oct 16, 2013 11:31 am

    Morpheus Eberhardt wrote:
    Morpheus Eberhardt wrote:
    TheArmenian wrote:
    TR1 wrote:Wish there was info on the new Pantsir round, 23Ya6. But I am not aware of an export variant, so little chance of seeing @ MAKS.
    What do you know about the 23Ya6 round? Please share with us.
    I recently downloaded a picture (forgot from which site) that I believe shows one of the variants of Germes with the 210 mm booster.

    There is another picture at

    http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-CAyVg5RQdgQ/UQx5B_qi-eI/AAAAAAAAI2Y/iijpxqn_9o0/s1600/Pantsir-S1-SA-22-Greyhound-air-defense-system.jpg

    that possibly shows a variant of Pantsir' missile with another type of 210 mm booster.

    Both of these pictures are in need of pixel counting by someone. I can email the first one to you.
    Found the Germes variant with what seems to be a 210 mm booster; it is at

    https://picasaweb.google.com/106445974310988101319/IMDS2013?authuser=0&feat=directlink#5915983041285010210
    I actually did some measurements; the Germes shown in this picture seems to just have the 170 mm booster. Sorry for my misleading guesswork.
    avatar
    Viktor

    Posts : 5669
    Points : 6312
    Join date : 2009-08-25
    Age : 37
    Location : Croatia

    Re: TOR-M2 Air Defence system

    Post  Viktor on Wed Oct 23, 2013 12:51 am

    More TOR-M2 enters service

    LINK
    avatar
    George1

    Posts : 10661
    Points : 11140
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: TOR-M2 Air Defence system

    Post  George1 on Wed Oct 23, 2013 1:58 am

    Viktor wrote:More TOR-M2 enters service

    LINK
    do we know the total number in service?
    avatar
    Viktor

    Posts : 5669
    Points : 6312
    Join date : 2009-08-25
    Age : 37
    Location : Croatia

    Re: TOR-M2 Air Defence system

    Post  Viktor on Wed Oct 23, 2013 3:00 am

    George1 wrote:
    Viktor wrote:More TOR-M2 enters service

    LINK
    do we know the total number in service?
    Few batteries of Tor-M2 + few batteries of modernized TOR-MU. I dont know the exact number but I hope someone who will tell us does . Very Happy
    avatar
    medo

    Posts : 3231
    Points : 3317
    Join date : 2010-10-24
    Location : Slovenia

    Re: TOR-M2 Air Defence system

    Post  medo on Wed Oct 23, 2013 5:37 pm

    Who knows, but there must be some batteries of Tor-M2, because they were receive in far East, South military district and now in western district.

    Sponsored content

    Re: TOR-M2 Air Defence system

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Fri Nov 24, 2017 4:01 pm