Russia Defence Forum

Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


+68
limb
ALAMO
TMA1
thegopnik
Podlodka77
Krepost
lyle6
LMFS
The-thing-next-door
Isos
Slevin
dino00
Hole
miketheterrible
ZoA
Benya
kvs
storm333
kopyo-21
Skandalwitwe
hoom
d_taddei2
jhelb
coolieno99
max steel
JohninMK
PapaDragon
franco
Rmf
Akula971
Book.
calripson
GunshipDemocracy
Cyberspec
Anas Ali
Kyo
Mindstorm
RTN
Mike E
Werewolf
Sujoy
Regular
fragmachine
magnumcromagnon
collegeboy16
zino
NickM
SOC
sepheronx
Rpg type 7v
Morpheus Eberhardt
mack8
xeno
Viktor
medo
Zivo
GarryB
TheArmenian
Austin
flamming_python
George1
Andy_Wiz
Lycz3
IronsightSniper
TR1
Stealthflanker
SerbNationalist
Robert.V
72 posters

    BUK SAM system Thread

    TR1
    TR1


    Posts : 5435
    Points : 5433
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    BUK SAM system Thread - Page 2 Empty Buk/Buk-M2 General thread:

    Post  TR1 Thu Jan 19, 2012 7:38 am

    Lots of photos of the first Buk-M2 unit in Russia.

    https://picasaweb.google.com/117990383296131038585/BUKM2
    avatar
    Austin


    Posts : 7617
    Points : 8014
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Location : India

    BUK SAM system Thread - Page 2 Empty Re: BUK SAM system Thread

    Post  Austin Thu Jan 19, 2012 7:52 am

    Nice , I am keen to see BUK-3 now its been a long time we heard about it.

    Though I am a bit worried when AW&ST says that Israel new generation Jammer then Jam these SAM ...... I just wonder how capable BUK-2 and its radar will operate under intense jamming.

    BUK-2ME is also in competition for Indian Army medium range SAM requirement
    GarryB
    GarryB


    Posts : 40649
    Points : 41151
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    BUK SAM system Thread - Page 2 Empty Re: BUK SAM system Thread

    Post  GarryB Thu Jan 19, 2012 11:16 am

    What else would Israel say?

    And for every system there are countermeasures... the question is will they work?

    An over confident Israel saw SA-6 SAMs deployed and assumed they were just some more missiles like SA-2 and SA-3 that they thought they could deal with.

    In real combat they found they had no effective counter to continuous wave illumination SAMs even though they had plenty of experience of using such systems (like HAWK).

    A clever enemy will always find ways to reduce or eliminate the effectiveness of an enemies weapons, but that goes both ways.

    Modern Russian SAMs are not designed to be operated without a challenge, and ECCM is part of the design... including passive optical guidance modes.

    Nice pics BTW.
    medo
    medo


    Posts : 4343
    Points : 4423
    Join date : 2010-10-24
    Location : Slovenia

    BUK SAM system Thread - Page 2 Empty Re: BUK SAM system Thread

    Post  medo Thu Jan 19, 2012 3:10 pm

    Nice pictures. Interesting is this sector radar on elevating telescoping arm. How many of them are in battalion or brigade?
    TheArmenian
    TheArmenian


    Posts : 1880
    Points : 2025
    Join date : 2011-09-14

    BUK SAM system Thread - Page 2 Empty Re: BUK SAM system Thread

    Post  TheArmenian Fri Jan 20, 2012 8:08 am

    TR1 wrote:Lots of photos of the first Buk-M2 unit in Russia.

    https://picasaweb.google.com/117990383296131038585/BUKM2


    First BUK-M2 unit????? Is that the only one they got?
    I thought it was in service for a number of years now. After all we saw it paraded in Moscow a few years ago.
    Do they mean: the first (of many) that was equipped with BUK-M2
    TR1
    TR1


    Posts : 5435
    Points : 5433
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    BUK SAM system Thread - Page 2 Empty Re: BUK SAM system Thread

    Post  TR1 Fri Jan 20, 2012 8:54 am

    Nope, only 1 so far.

    The mutli-channel engagement of a Buk-m2 unit is pretty crazy though.
    avatar
    Austin


    Posts : 7617
    Points : 8014
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Location : India

    BUK SAM system Thread - Page 2 Empty Re: BUK SAM system Thread

    Post  Austin Fri Jan 20, 2012 8:58 am

    TR1 wrote:The mutli-channel engagement of a Buk-m2 unit is pretty crazy though.

    Care to elaborate ?
    IronsightSniper
    IronsightSniper


    Posts : 414
    Points : 418
    Join date : 2010-09-25
    Location : California, USA

    BUK SAM system Thread - Page 2 Empty Re: BUK SAM system Thread

    Post  IronsightSniper Fri Jan 20, 2012 9:07 am

    Austin wrote:
    TR1 wrote:The mutli-channel engagement of a Buk-m2 unit is pretty crazy though.

    Care to elaborate ?

    It could engage 6 targets simultaneously. However, it has a relatively slow reaction time compared to the other modern SAMs that Russia has.
    TR1
    TR1


    Posts : 5435
    Points : 5433
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    BUK SAM system Thread - Page 2 Empty Re: BUK SAM system Thread

    Post  TR1 Fri Jan 20, 2012 9:24 am

    Each launcher has 6 channels, many launchers per unit, you get the idea.

    Reaction time may not be that of Pantsir, but it is still fine, and well, its a longer ranged system.
    avatar
    Austin


    Posts : 7617
    Points : 8014
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Location : India

    BUK SAM system Thread - Page 2 Empty Re: BUK SAM system Thread

    Post  Austin Fri Jan 20, 2012 11:48 am

    BUK-2ME reaction time is comparable to any medium range sam , its not a quick reaction Pantsyr system.

    So each TEL with its battery and radar can engage six targets ? Since each TEL carries its own Phased Array Radar making them independent.

    A SARH means the TEL radar has to keep the target at constant LOS , A TEL radar would itself have poor low level capability since the radar are placed in such a way its designed to look forward and up. But thats the last ditch measure since there are other radars that can guide the SA-17

    I just wonder why Iranians didnt opt for SA-17 and deployed it widely instead of waiting for the moon like S-300 and never getting it.
    avatar
    Lycz3


    Posts : 8
    Points : 10
    Join date : 2012-01-08

    BUK SAM system Thread - Page 2 Empty Re: BUK SAM system Thread

    Post  Lycz3 Fri Jan 20, 2012 7:33 pm

    What's wrong with reaction time ? It is not an issue, especially if you cannot compare Buk with any other, because there is nothing similar to it in capability. Also, they developed for it missile variants with an active homing seeker, which allows a lock on before launch capability. That would improve it's performance (and reaction time I suppose) at closer ranges.
    GarryB
    GarryB


    Posts : 40649
    Points : 41151
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    BUK SAM system Thread - Page 2 Empty Re: BUK SAM system Thread

    Post  GarryB Fri Jan 20, 2012 9:38 pm

    Having 6 guidance channels is rather more important than most people give it credit for.

    With each TEL having 6 guidance channels it means that one vehicle can control and guide all the missiles it carries and two missiles from another launcher all at once.

    As shown in Libya a single heavy SAM battery from the 1960s can be easily overwhelmed because with one or perhaps two guidance channels it can only engage one or two targets at once, so if 4 cruise missiles are coming in from detection to intercept it can only deal with one or two of them and during that engagement the other missiles are getting closer and closer.

    The more guidance channels you have the more effort is needed to overwhelm a system.

    Needless to say a single Flanker could probably carry 4-6 cruise missiles each, so while one aircraft could overwhelm a SAM battery, a BUK battery with 6 TELs would require at least 6 aircraft with heavy payloads... and that is assuming those missiles don't cross any Pantsir-S1 or Tunguska or TOR batteries on their way to the target.
    medo
    medo


    Posts : 4343
    Points : 4423
    Join date : 2010-10-24
    Location : Slovenia

    BUK SAM system Thread - Page 2 Empty Re: BUK SAM system Thread

    Post  medo Sat Jan 21, 2012 11:27 am

    Lots of photos of the first Buk-M2 unit in Russia.

    Are you sure this is the first Buk-M2 unit?

    http://www.tvzvezda.ru/news/forces/content/201111241831-aehz.htm

    In 2011 they receive first Buk-M2 unit in Ural region around Ufa. But there are Buk-M2 units around Moscow, which were shown on parades. I read, that Buk-M2 is in production since 2007.

    http://pvo.guns.ru/expo/maks2007_said.htm

    Will ground forces also receive Buk-M2 on wheeled chassis or strictly tracked ones?
    TR1
    TR1


    Posts : 5435
    Points : 5433
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    BUK SAM system Thread - Page 2 Empty Re: BUK SAM system Thread

    Post  TR1 Sun Jan 22, 2012 9:25 pm

    Apparently this is the 1st and last Buk-M2 unit. From now on Buk-M3 will be delivered, at what pace, don't know.
    medo
    medo


    Posts : 4343
    Points : 4423
    Join date : 2010-10-24
    Location : Slovenia

    BUK SAM system Thread - Page 2 Empty Re: BUK SAM system Thread

    Post  medo Mon Jan 23, 2012 4:30 pm

    There is still a question, what were those Buk-M2s on parades in past years. On parade are vehicles, which are in operational units and not prototype vehicles, which are property of producers. Maybe they are relocated to the mentioned brigade.
    TR1
    TR1


    Posts : 5435
    Points : 5433
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    BUK SAM system Thread - Page 2 Empty Re: BUK SAM system Thread

    Post  TR1 Mon Jan 23, 2012 7:20 pm

    Found explanation:

    http://bmpd.livejournal.com/149793.html

    297th AD brigade was formed from 4 batteries. If we go by Buk battery figures, thats 9 TELs and reload vehicles (they can fire as well but don't have the onboard radar) per battery. Assuming this, thats 36 launcher vehicles in the AD brigade.
    Andy_Wiz
    Andy_Wiz


    Posts : 25
    Points : 35
    Join date : 2010-10-12
    Location : South-West Fringe of the Empire

    BUK SAM system Thread - Page 2 Empty Re: BUK SAM system Thread

    Post  Andy_Wiz Mon Jan 23, 2012 10:20 pm

    medo wrote:There is still a question, what were those Buk-M2s on parades in past years. On parade are vehicles, which are in operational units and not prototype vehicles, which are property of producers. Maybe they are relocated to the mentioned brigade.

    Hi, There is such thing as BUK M1-2 it is modernisation of M1 getting it pretty close to M2. Maybe when journalist talk of "modernised/new BUK's" they didn't hear of Buk-M1-2 and mistaken it for M2.

    There must be a lot of these M1-2 already.

    M2 itself was developed in mid-80's (85-86) and accepted into service in 1990 or 1991 so it was definately needed to be further upgraded. The recent ones are, i am sure, improved over the 1985 model but still it has its limitations.
    medo
    medo


    Posts : 4343
    Points : 4423
    Join date : 2010-10-24
    Location : Slovenia

    BUK SAM system Thread - Page 2 Empty Re: BUK SAM system Thread

    Post  medo Tue Jan 24, 2012 3:32 pm

    Journalist could make mistakes, but I know, that on parades was Buk-M2, because TELARs have Buk-M2 PESA tracking radar, while Buk-M1-2 have the same mechanical radar as Buk-M1, only it could use missiles from Buk-M2, which give them longer range.
    George1
    George1


    Posts : 18538
    Points : 19043
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    BUK SAM system Thread - Page 2 Empty Re: BUK SAM system Thread

    Post  George1 Wed Feb 01, 2012 5:32 pm

    So russian army will base in S-300V, Buk-M2 in AD brigades, and Tor-M2 in the AD regiments?

    Motorised brigades will consist of Tor-m2, Strela-10, Tunguska?
    TR1
    TR1


    Posts : 5435
    Points : 5433
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    BUK SAM system Thread - Page 2 Empty Re: BUK SAM system Thread

    Post  TR1 Wed Feb 01, 2012 6:10 pm

    Not sure if any more Buk-M2 is due for delivery. Maybe Buk-M3 though.
    GarryB
    GarryB


    Posts : 40649
    Points : 41151
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    BUK SAM system Thread - Page 2 Empty Re: BUK SAM system Thread

    Post  GarryB Wed Feb 01, 2012 11:28 pm

    So russian army will base in S-300V, Buk-M2 in AD brigades, and Tor-M2 in the AD regiments?

    Motorised brigades will consist of Tor-m2, Strela-10, Tunguska?

    Yes, though for the future there will be S-300V4, and Buk-M3, an TOR-M3.

    And of course TOR-M3, Morfei and a new laser beam riding missile called Baikanuk or something, and Pantsir-S1.

    Also Igla-S is supplimented with the new Verba MANPADs.
    TR1
    TR1


    Posts : 5435
    Points : 5433
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    BUK SAM system Thread - Page 2 Empty Re: BUK SAM system Thread

    Post  TR1 Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:50 pm

    Had a question about the utility of BUk-M3- from what I understand now there will be a potent battery engagement radar, individual TEL phased arrays AND active seekers on each missile?

    Is such redundancy really necessary, for a system that does not have that much range by Russian standards, and would that not make each battery very expensive?
    Why are active seekers not being sought for S-300V and S-400?
    flamming_python
    flamming_python


    Posts : 9620
    Points : 9678
    Join date : 2012-01-30

    BUK SAM system Thread - Page 2 Empty Re: BUK SAM system Thread

    Post  flamming_python Wed Jul 25, 2012 9:21 pm

    TR1 wrote:Had a question about the utility of BUk-M3- from what I understand now there will be a potent battery engagement radar, individual TEL phased arrays AND active seekers on each missile?

    Is such redundancy really necessary, for a system that does not have that much range by Russian standards, and would that not make each battery very expensive?
    Why are active seekers not being sought for S-300V and S-400?

    Well I think the point is, is that these things are designed to be very hard to all track down and kill. Even if all of the S-300s batteries and Radar stations get taken out by the enemy, these BUKs (each one of them completely independent if need be) can still run around, hitting and hiding again and playing hell with the enemy, almost like vehicle guerilla warfare. Just look to the Georgia conflict for confirmation. No way anything else will be able to pull that off.

    Of course while the air defense umbrella holds and Russian forces have the long-range, short-range, etc... SAMs to back-up the medium-range ones like the BUK; a Pechora-2M will be able to do much of the same job and much cheaper. However, if the Russian air defense is really pressed, assaulted and is hit by everything a powerful adversary has; the Pechoras would be in great trouble. The BUKs however would not be; and this is what makes them a valuable asset; they have less range than the S-300 but are more survivable and harder to find.
    TR1
    TR1


    Posts : 5435
    Points : 5433
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    BUK SAM system Thread - Page 2 Empty Re: BUK SAM system Thread

    Post  TR1 Wed Jul 25, 2012 9:37 pm

    I just don't see the point of Active Seekers on the missiles if each TEL has more channels than it actually has deployed missiles.

    Buk TELs never operate on their own in any case, and even if the battery level radars are attacked, there is still redundancy with the on board + on missile tracking.
    GarryB
    GarryB


    Posts : 40649
    Points : 41151
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    BUK SAM system Thread - Page 2 Empty Re: BUK SAM system Thread

    Post  GarryB Thu Jul 26, 2012 6:27 am

    The whole design focus behind the BUK was experience with KUB in the Middle East.

    It was found that if the battery radar of the KUB system was taken out using UAVs and HARM or something similar then the entire battery became sitting ducks that could be taken out by F-16s with dumb bombs because the TELs had no search or track capability so the missiles on them were useless.

    Newer ARH seekers are not as expensive as they used to be, and actually high frequency Ka band (MMW) transmitter/receiver seekers, or ARH seekers are not very expensive at all.

    For a system like BUK having active radar homing seekers has many of the same advantages for the SAM system as it would for an aircraft using ARH R-77s instead of SARH R-27s. Remember the performance of radar drops off at the square of distance, so flying the radar seeker right up close to the enemy target means a better lock, and of course for low flying threats an active radar homing missile can be directed by off platform sensors to targets out of the line of sight of the SAM site yet the missile can still be directed to the targets vicinity and it can be engaged by that missile.

    An example of that would be the first test of the R-37 where the Mig-31M that was used to launch the missile still had an old model radar with a lock on range of about 120km for fighters and about 200km for bombers, but with an Su-30M flying within 100km of the target passing target data to the Mig-31M it was able to launch its missile and direct it to the vicinity of the target without actually detecting and tracking the target itself. The result was a kill with a missile flight distance of 300km... which is pretty impressive.

    For BUK with low flying threats, they won't be hitting targets 300km away, but missiles could be directed to places where targets have been detected and tracked by other nodes on the network and missiles can be fired to intercept targets on the other side of mountains or hills that would otherwise be safe from that battery if it has SARH missiles.

    ARH missiles also often have much better terminal phase accuracy because the radar is in the nose of the missile instead of 60-70km away on a vehicle, so often the warhead weight can be reduced to allow an increase in flight performance. The BUK carries a 70kg HE warhead which makes it a big missile.

    It will be interesting to see if they go to vertical launch tubes in the later models like they do with the naval Shtil-1.

    Another advantage of vertical launch is engagement time... though with a vehicle like TOR you need to use the datalinking capacity of the 6 TELs because although they can each control multiple missiles at a time the tracking radar that controls the engagement is on the front of the turret so vertical launch in any direction means the vehicles must coordinate the directions their turrets face so they cover all potential threat directions... if all turrets are facing in one direction then their vertical launch capacity to engage from any direction becomes moot.

    With ARH missiles there is less need to continue tracking though performance is certainly improved if the target is tracked and flight command updates are datalinked to the outgoing SAM to make sure that when it gets to its intercept point the target is nicely centred in its view so it can have maximum terminal manouver performance... if it reaches the intercept point it was given at launch with no updates because the target wasn't tracked after launch then you might find the target is not directly in front of your missile so your missile might have to turn hard just to acquire the target... if the target manouvers in the correct direction at the correct time even a very manouverable missile might not be able to turn fast enough before it blows past the target and loses lock.

    Sponsored content


    BUK SAM system Thread - Page 2 Empty Re: BUK SAM system Thread

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Tue Dec 03, 2024 3:22 pm