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?
Yes it would make system expensive specially the cost of the missile will shoot up by atleast 50 % if they opt for Active Radar but it would also make the entire BUK-M3 more potent and flexible.
SARH missile like Command Guidance and limited to LOS targets once the target gets out of TEL Phased arrays the missile cannot track and target the aircraft , with ARH once the seeker goes active it is autonomous and in case the target gets out of TEL Radar they can rely on Missile radar to track the target.
An Active radar seeker would also allow more engagement of targets possible then what is limited by BUK-M2 and its TEL Phased Array radar.
I have read BUK-M3 is designed to engage BM corresponding to 1000 km range or capability like ERINT PAC-3
Why are active seekers not being sought for S-300V and S-400?
Ideally they should opt for Active or IIR Seeker on S-300V and S-400 that would make the system very very potent but then cost is a key factor and these missile are really fast making it possible to engage more targets.
But 9M96 missile in S-400 have active seekers and they are HTK type , we dont know about 40N6 and 48N6 of S-400 uses SAGG guidance