Pantsir-S1 News Thread:

@mindstorm - do you suggest it was somebody else wanting disgrace his name?

GunshipDemocracy wrote:do you suggest it was somebody else wanting disgrace his name?

I do not believe in anything, please simply read the link i have provided and you also will not need to believe

I repeat one more time the UNIQUE THING Виктор Мураховский has done is to host this post from "voenzhur" on its Facebook page ,probably without even controling its content, and has also readily removed it.

As the thing has been spreaded on Internet it appeared as the poor Виктор Мураховский had personally posted this non-sense on its Facebook page and subsequently had canceled its post, under the pressure from some hidden military power that want to prevent free journalists to criticize domestic products

Mindstorm wrote:As the thing has been spreaded on Internet it appeared as the poor Виктор Мураховский had personally posted this non-sense on its Facebook page and subsequently had canceled its post, under the pressure from some hidden military power that want to prevent free journalists to criticize domestic products  

got it

Gur-Khan has the text http://gurkhan.blogspot.com/2018/11/blog-post_5.html

Very bad if true.

But there are aspects that seem doubtful eg as previously mentioned Pantsir are supposed to be operating as part of IAD & there are not just Pantsir radars in the area.

Also no mention of Pantsir-S2 which have definitely been seen there, pretty sure mostly S2 even.

Here is that combat approved of Pantsir

The sort of drones they are talking about are almost all plastic, with perhaps some minor metal parts in the motor (that could be electric) and any batteries.

This is the total nightmare situation for any air defence force and the fact that they are even detecting them and shooting them down is to their credit... they have shot down over 50 in the last month or so...

The fact that they are also detecting birds suggests they are also using optic systems which in the case of the low radar signature would be their best method of detecting such objects...

There is a recent episodes of Combat approved with Pantsir and TOR where the systems are tested against drone targets and it is mentioned how difficult they are for most air defence systems... in fact the most recent episode shows NEBO being used to detect drone targets too...

GarryB wrote:The sort of drones they are talking about are almost all plastic, with perhaps some minor metal parts in the motor (that could be electric) and any batteries.

This is the total nightmare situation for any air defence force and the fact that they are even detecting them and shooting them down is to their credit... they have shot down over 50 in the last month or so...

The fact that they are also detecting birds suggests they are also using optic systems which in the case of the low radar signature would be their best method of detecting such objects...

There is a recent episodes of Combat approved with Pantsir and TOR where the systems are tested against drone targets and it is mentioned how difficult they are for most air defence systems... in fact the most recent episode shows NEBO being used to detect drone targets too...

Polystyrene foam mostly actually with some plastic.

That would be me next to the one of drones captured in Syria, i just cut myself off.

The air defense of the Crimea will strengthen the division of the Pantsir-S complex

Until the end of 2018, a new division of air defense complexes of short-range Pantsir-S will be deployed in Crimea. This was reported on November 29 by the head of the press service of the Southern Military District (SKR), Colonel Vadim Astafyev.

https://iz.ru/818343/2018-11-30/pvo-kryma-usiliat-divizionom-kompleksov-pantcir-s

Flight tests of the rocket for the new version of the "Shell" are planning to complete before the end of the year

Pantsir-SMoscow. December 2nd. INTERFAX-AVN - Flight tests of the rocket for the new version of the Pantsir anti-aircraft missile and cannon complex, designed to combat drones, are scheduled to be completed by January, follows from materials posted on the public procurement website.
The portal has a tender for “conducting flight tests of the 57E6M-E anti-aircraft missile of the Pantsir-S1M complex. The work must be completed before the end of 2018.
Earlier, the deputy general director of the NPO High-precision Complex for foreign economic activity told Interfax that the company they are developing a new version of the Pantsir complex, designed to combat drones. According to him, the new modification of the complex will be called Pantsir-S1M,
The materials on the state procurement website state that the acceptance tests of the prototype of the Pantsir-S1M complex are planned to be completed by December 2019.
Acceptance tests of products, according to state standards, are carried out to assess certain technical requirements for product characteristics, to check and confirm the compliance of a prototype with the requirements of a technical task under conditions as close as possible to the conditions of actual operation.
During the year, the Russian Ministry of Defense reported 10 attacks on Russian military facilities in Syria using UAVs. According to the military department, all of them were successfully reflected, including with the help of the Pantsir-S complex.
The Pantsir anti-aircraft missile and cannon complex is intended for short-range protection of civilian and military facilities from all modern and promising means of air attack in any climatic and radio-electronic environment day and night. The complex can protect the defended object from ground and surface threats. The range of the complex is 20 km.

http://militarynews.ru/story.asp?rid=0&nid=496737



and here from RG:

https://rg.ru/2018/12/03/kompleks-pancir-s-smozhet-effektivnee-sbivat-bespilotniki.html

Rocket vs drones
Complex "Pantsir-S" will be able to more effectively shoot down drones

The Ministry of Defense has announced a tender to conduct flight tests of the 57E6M-E anti-aircraft guided missile of the Pantsir-S1M air defense system. Work on this project is scheduled to be completed in the near future, and the military will be given another year to test and transfer the new ammunition to the customer.
“Pantsiri” have already managed to establish themselves as a fairly effective means of fighting air targets. The short-range air defense complex is armed with 12 57E6M-E missiles and 1,400 projectiles to these installations. In addition, it is worth a pair of double-barreled rapid-fire guns of 30 mm caliber. Such a serious anti-aircraft arsenal makes it possible, in any weather, day and night, to destroy all modern and prospective means of air attack, which are at a distance of up to 20 kilometers and altitudes up to 15 km.

“Pantsir” managed to confirm its excellent fighting qualities in Syria, where the complexes cover our Khmeimim airbase and the positions of the S-400 anti-aircraft missile systems. It is known that, including with the help of rocket-cannon “Pantsirey”, the Russian military this year successfully repulsed ten attacks of reconnaissance and strike drones of terrorists. It is enough to recall how, on the night of January 5, the militants sent 13 hand-made aircraft-type drone to our airbase at once. Six of them were destroyed using electronic warfare, the remaining seven - with the Pantsir-S complex. There were reports that the calculations of this complex have repeatedly hit in Syria and various missiles. It is characteristic that this fact is confirmed even by American experts. And in the United States, National Interest magazine called

According to the publication, there is no such effective short-range air defense system as in Russia in the United States. The magazine wrote that the Russian "Armor" serves as the final line of defense, meets low-flying aircraft and helicopters, missiles, drones, and even rocket artillery. The following conclusion followed: this capability of the Pantsyri is of decisive importance today, at the time of the wide spread of rocket weapons.

Now this modern Russian self-propelled anti-aircraft gun will also receive a special missile against drones. Earlier, Deputy Director General of NPO High-Precision Complexes, Sergei Mikhailov, told Interfax-AVN that with its adoption, the range of the Armor will increase from 20 to 30 km.

But the most important thing is that this anti-aircraft missile system, equipped with powerful phased antenna arrays, will not only be able to quickly detect and shoot down large air targets, such as airplanes and helicopters, but to hit even very small objects — like a quadcopter or a homemade drone.

There will be also a new version called Pantsir-SM-SV (for Ground Forces).

Hole wrote:There will be also a new version called Pantsir-SM-SV (for Ground Forces).

You supposed it's a tracked model, a proper Tunguska replacement?

Hole wrote:There will be also a new version called Pantsir-SM-SV (for Ground Forces).

along tor?  BTW Pantsir 2 seems to go to higher category now since range is supposed to increase from 20-40 km. Not sure about ceiling but I am sure this one gets increase too.

magnumcromagnon wrote:

Hole wrote:There will be also a new version called Pantsir-SM-SV (for Ground Forces).

You supposed it's a tracked model, a proper Tunguska replacement?

like that?



BTW 57mm guns of specialized AAD vehicles will do better job than Pantsirs previous 4x30mm ones

GunshipDemocracy wrote:

Hole wrote:There will be also a new version called Pantsir-SM-SV (for Ground Forces).

along tor?  BTW Pantsir 2 seems to go to higher category now since range is supposed to increase from 20-40 km. Not sure about ceiling but I am sure this one gets increase too.

The designation would probably be Pantsir-S3, and the CG models shows that it will be double the missiles and no guns. There saying the new missiles could be 45-60km range, which isn't suprising as the new Buk systems are sliding in the range/sphere of the old S-300PS systems and probably replacing it. There might be a separate vehicle with Derivation 57mm included in the batteries/formations.

You supposed it's a tracked model, a proper Tunguska replacement?

It will be in tracked and wheeled models.... in an Armata brigade it will be heavy tracked, kurganets will be medium tracked, and Boomerang will be medium wheeled, and light wheeled in the Typhoon brigades... though the latter might use SOSNA-R instead as a lighter alternative.

along tor?

I suspect the ground forces will keep their TOR/TUNGUSKA combination of Missile/Gun_Missile systems.

like that?

Yes, except eventually on the new vehicle family platforms... so they are the same vehicle as the other vehicles in the div.

BTW 57mm guns of specialized AAD vehicles will do better job than Pantsirs previous 4x30mm ones

I don't think they could fit a 57mm gun and missiles on a vehicle so they will likely split the guns and missiles, with the gun vehicle carrying optical systems and only basic radar for tracking their shells, while the missile vehicle will have all the radars and optronics but a datalink would allow automated control and data sharing.

The designation would probably be Pantsir-S3, and the CG models shows that it will be double the missiles and no guns. There saying the new missiles could be 45-60km range, which isn't suprising as the new Buk systems are sliding in the range/sphere of the old S-300PS systems and probably replacing it. There might be a separate vehicle with Derivation 57mm included in the batteries/formations.

The one with extra missiles seems to be optronic only, while the other one seems to be a Pantsir system with 12 ready to launch missiles and guns and radar...

Military News Agency @ Interfax reporting the state trials of surface-to-air missile & artillery system 'Pantsir-SM-SV' will begin in 2019, citing publication on the state procurement portal.

According to the source, the plan is to complete the preliminary trials in 2019 and proceed with the state trials. The source claims that the system is supposed to receive AESA radar.

As it was previously stated by Lt. Gen. Alexander P. Leonov, Chief of Air Defense of the Ground Forces, 'Pantsir-SM-SV' is a cross-service anti-air weapon system, intended for the Land Troops(Army), Airborne and Shore Troops of the Navy.

From the same source as the news about testing of the new smaller missile for anti-drone use.

Tunguska is being modernised, so they army will keep it for a while as point defence system.

This new Pantsir version could be used either als bodyguard for the S-300V4 systems or stand alone air defence system in areas where only small numbers of air defence systems are around, like somewhere in the arctic.

GarryB wrote:

BTW 57mm guns of specialized AAD vehicles will do better job than Pantsirs previous 4x30mm ones

I don't think they could fit a 57mm gun and missiles on a vehicle so they will likely split the guns and missiles, with the gun vehicle carrying optical systems and only basic radar for tracking their shells, while the missile vehicle will have all the radars and optronics but a datalink would allow automated control and data sharing.

well, they already did split with Derivatsya PVO 57mm. It has electroptical 360 deg surveillance so can remain undetected or use external radars. Of course thsi doesnt have be on this chasis, though such a gun on Typhoon with high placed gravity center doenst seem to be a good idea in rough terrain.


https://bmpd.livejournal.com/3307975.html

hole wrote:The designation would probably be Pantsir-S3, and the CG models shows that it will be double the missiles and no guns. There saying the new missiles could be 45-60km range, which isn't suprising as the new Buk systems are sliding in the range/sphere of the old S-300PS systems and probably replacing it. There might be a separate vehicle with Derivation 57mm included in the batteries/formations.

Hmm frankly speaking I've never bumper against Pantsir S3 n'ame. Pantsir SM in turn - the talk has been last 5 years...
http://bastion-opk.ru/pantsir-sm/





SPECIFICATIONS
Range  -  40  km

Altitude 35 km    - phuque !!! is this against ballistic missiles?! Altitude to 35 kilometers?!!!!!!        

FIGHTING MACHINE WITH DETECTION STATION
Control system radar and electro-optical tracking systems
Number missile defense systems on a combat vehicle 12


Combat vehicles ECO (electro-optical tracking systems) module
The number of missiles on combat vehicle 24

Источник: http://bastion-opk.ru/pantsir-sm/ ОВТ «ОРУЖИЕ ОТЕЧЕСТВА» A.V.Karpenko

Tunguska is being modernised, so they army will keep it for a while as point defence system.

Of course they will keep and modernise it... they still have some Shilkas in service, so any new systems will replace Tunguskas and the Tunguskas will get an overhaul and upgrade and replace the Shilkas...

This new Pantsir version could be used either als bodyguard for the S-300V4 systems or stand alone air defence system in areas where only small numbers of air defence systems are around, like somewhere in the arctic.

I suspect the improved radar is for engaging small hard to spot drones, so they would be ideal for use in a lot of roles for all the branches of the Russian armed forces.

well, they already did split with Derivatsya PVO 57mm. It has electroptical 360 deg surveillance so can remain undetected or use external radars. Of course thsi doesnt have be on this chasis, though such a gun on Typhoon with high placed gravity center doenst seem to be a good idea in rough terrain.

Well the point is that if this is just a turret, you could mount it on any of the new vehicle platforms... they are supposed to share target information, so previously in the Soviet armoured force where a BMP-2 regiment might get a MANPAD missile gripstock per BMP-2 vehicle plus a couple of missiles to improve air defence capability, having the local air defence unit using their radar and sensors to detect targets could hand those targets off to nearby IFVs armed with 57mm guns equipped with airburst ammo and engage targets too.

Altitude 35 km    - phuque !!! is this against ballistic missiles?! Altitude to 35 kilometers?!!!!!!

NATO kept above MANPADS altitude in Kosovo... not so above any ground protected by the new Pantsir...

FIGHTING MACHINE WITH DETECTION STATION
Control system radar and electro-optical tracking systems
Number missile defense systems on a combat vehicle 12


Combat vehicles ECO (electro-optical tracking systems) module
The number of missiles on combat vehicle 24

The original Tunguska was expensive because it had a search and a tracking radar, but it made sense because it was still cheaper than the vehicles it replaced because it replaced the Shilka and the SA-13.

In terms of sensors, the Shilka had a search and tracking radar, while the SA-9 had pretty much nothing, while the SA-13 had a ranging radar so that missiles were not wasted firing at targets outside effective flight range of the missiles (only became an issue for SA-9 in the later models where the IR sensor could lock onto targets further than the max flight range of the missile). The SA-13 also had a variety of boxes with sensors for detecting low flying missiles and aircraft using terrain avoidance radar and radio height finding systems.

In comparison the search and tracking systems on Tunguska were vastly superior than either system on the vehicles it replaced.

In terms of guns, the two twin barrel 30mm cannon had better range and rate of fire, while in terms of missiles having initially 4 and then 8 ready to launch missiles with a range of 8km was better than 4-6 ready to launch missiles with a range of 5km for SA-9 and SA-13.

Critically the SA-19 missiles out ranged most helicopter launched anti armour weapons commonly carried at the time, and over time it increased range to 12km and now 20km is normal so they are keeping pace with the threat.

The problem now is of course that the new radars are AESAs and likely rather expensive, so a return to the old central radar that a group of weapon platforms used it for target information is returning.

Of course optical systems have ballooned enormously in performance without being excessively expensive, so for many targets they will be enough and missile performance and price make these attractive systems once they are bought because low cost missiles means using them it not too expensive. (compared with something like Javelin where the missiles are expensive).

We see the missile TEL with 24 missiles... imagine that loaded with the mini missiles... 24 x 4 missiles... 96 missiles per vehicle for small targets... we also see the TELAR with 12 missiles and guns and radar... and we can mentally add the gun platform with the 57mm gun that has already been shown with a small ranging radar and possibly fuse setter, but primarily with optical systems like the missile TEL.

Tunguska didn´t replace Strela-10, it complemented it. Each brigade has an air defence batallion with 6 Tunguskas and 6 Strela-10´s (will be replaced mid-term by Sona) and 27 Igla/Verba MANPADS.

The new Pantsir-SM-SV could become part of a new formation of brigades or divisons, on the latter it would compelment the Buk-M2/3 systems.

Tunguska was meant to replace both ZSU-23-4 Shilka and Strela-10 in mixed batteries. True, Russian army still use modernized Strela-10, but as separate batteries, not in mixed batteires with Tunguska. Strela-10 will be replaced by Sosna-R complex. This is last line SHORAD, VSHORAD defense.

When we look at Tunguska-M1, it have new search radar, thermovision camera connected with optical sight, SATNAV and data link communication to connect with new battery command post. Point here is radar picture sharing inside battery, with higher level IADS and with other users. Strela-10, Sosna-R, Derivacija, BMPT, BMPs, etc don't have search radars, but could got all needed target data through data link network. New Tunguska-M1 will still be very usefull in IADS because of search radar and data link communications and they will be closer to front line than higher level SAMs like Tor-M2, Buk-M3 and S-300V4 and will fill radar shadows. Barnaul-T with MANPADs will do this job as well.

medo wrote:Tunguska was meant to replace both ZSU-23-4 Shilka and Strela-10 in mixed batteries. True, Russian army still use modernized Strela-10, but as separate batteries, not in mixed batteires with Tunguska. Strela-10 will be replaced by Sosna-R complex. This is last line SHORAD, VSHORAD defense.

When we look at Tunguska-M1, it have new search radar, thermovision camera connected with optical sight, SATNAV and data link communication to connect with new battery command post. Point here is radar picture sharing inside battery, with higher level IADS and with other users. Strela-10, Sosna-R, Derivacija, BMPT, BMPs, etc don't have search radars, but could got all needed target data through data link network. New Tunguska-M1 will still be very usefull in IADS because of search radar and data link communications and they will be closer to front line than higher level SAMs like Tor-M2, Buk-M3 and S-300V4 and will fill radar shadows. Barnaul-T with MANPADs will do this job as well.

Don't forget that the Baikal-M command post allows ATGM's like Vikhr and Kornet-M to engage cruise missiles. Also I foresee all the ZSU-23-4's in storage being converted in to unmanned BMPT's, with it's antiquated radars being replace with simple cheap electro-optical sights, small ground radars, as well as packs of flamethrower rockets to add additional firepower.

magnumcromagnon wrote: Don't forget that the Baikal-M command post allows ATGM's like Vikhr and Kornet-M to engage cruise missiles.

helicopters hoovering low and slow but 700-900km/h small target? are you serious?

GarryB wrote:

well, they already did split with Derivatsya PVO 57mm. It has electroptical 360 deg surveillance so can remain undetected or use external radars. Of course this doesnt have be on this chassis, though such a gun on Typhoon with high placed gravity center doenst seem to be a good idea in rough terrain.

Well the point is that if this is just a turret, you could mount it on any of the new vehicle platforms... they are supposed to share target information, so previously in the Soviet armoured force where a BMP-2 regiment might get a MANPAD missile gripstock per BMP-2 vehicle plus a couple of missiles to improve air defence capability, having the local air defence unit using their radar and sensors to detect targets could hand those targets off to nearby IFVs armed with 57mm guns equipped with airburst ammo and engage targets too.

Derivatsye of course can but soesnt have to use external radar. It has all passive suite of electrooptical sensors. In case of sudden helo, drone or A-10 attack ic can react immediately.

GB wrote:

Altitude 35 km    - phuque !!! is this against ballistic missiles?! Altitude to 35 kilometers?!!!!!!

NATO kept above MANPADS altitude in Kosovo... not so above any ground protected by the new Pantsir...

True but DAT is 35km more than Patriot PAC-2 or S-300V

... no bomber/fighter in NATO (and Russia) actually flies over 22km, ok U-2 or SR-71, MiG-31 (30 as dynamic one only). If numbers are true then it is gonna be used not only against aircraft. More likely aerobalistic hypersonic missiles or IRBM warheads...

long years ago I've read that new Pantris missiles will have 5+ Ma max speed. So 1,8km /S +

GB wrote:

FIGHTING MACHINE WITH DETECTION STATION
Control system radar and electro-optical tracking systems
Number missile defense systems on a combat vehicle 12


Combat vehicles ECO (electro-optical tracking systems) module
The number of missiles on combat vehicle 24

{}

Of course optical systems have ballooned enormously in performance without being excessively expensive, so for many targets they will be enough and missile performance and price make these attractive systems once they are bought because low cost missiles means using them it not too expensive. (compared with something like Javelin where the missiles are expensive).

We see the missile TEL with 24 missiles... imagine that loaded with the mini missiles... 24 x 4 missiles... 96 missiles per vehicle for small targets... we also see the TELAR with 12 missiles and guns and radar... and we can mentally add the gun platform with the 57mm gun that has already been shown with a small ranging radar and possibly fuse setter, but primarily with optical systems like the missile TEL.

standard config AFAIK is 3 pantsirs to protect one S-300. 3x12 = 36. Now we have 1 AESA with likely 360 wiev + 24 missiles on tel. + ew one more 57mm for close protection.

GunshipDemocracy wrote:

magnumcromagnon wrote: Don't forget that the Baikal-M command post allows ATGM's like Vikhr and Kornet-M to engage cruise missiles.

helicopters hoovering low and slow but 700-900km/h small target? are you serious?

From KBP Tula themselves, at the 4:12 mark.

Tunguska didn´t replace Strela-10, it complemented it. Each brigade has an air defence batallion with 6 Tunguskas and 6 Strela-10´s (will be replaced mid-

Tunguska didn't even completely replace Shilka... TOR didn't even come close to replacing OSA... though OSA replaced the S-60 57mm guns.

The new Pantsir-SM-SV could become part of a new formation of brigades or divisons, on the latter it would compelment the Buk-M2/3 systems.

Which is possible... they might use it as a numbers weapon to counter an enemy using swarm attacks or large numbers of drones... in which case the Pantsir would occupy the medium range large volume missile the S-350 would occupy in the aerospace defence forces... though it might be that the S-350 is too expensive to be the numbers missile and perhaps the Pantsir might expand into that role too...

long years ago I've read that new Pantris missiles will have 5+ Ma max speed. So 1,8km /S +

In the 1990s there was a german magazine called Military Technology that I used to read... in one issue they had an advert for sounding rockets... it showed a range of different configurations with about three different sized booster rockets that could be used in different combinations.... either with one booster or two boosters together. The three different sized boosters offer different performance so you could use any combination from one of the smallest boosters, to two tandem of the biggest rockets and everything in between.

All the boosters were standardised and the smallest look identical to the booster rockets used on the SA-19.

I rather suspect the SA-22 has a bigger booster and in almost 30 years I am sure they have improved the performance of the boosters too.

standard config AFAIK is 3 pantsirs to protect one S-300. 3x12 = 36. Now we have 1 AESA with likely 360 wiev + 24 missiles on tel. + ew one more 57mm for close protection.

Those mini quad missiles are supposed to be for blunting a mass attack, but while I doubt they would replace all tubes with these quad launchers they might replace 1/4 to 1/3rd of them to boost the number of available missiles.

Osa is still in use in some brigades but not side by side with Tor.

The 9K35 Strela 10 / SA-13 Gopher was developed as a replacement for the 9K31 Strela 1 / SA-9 Gaskin, and was intended to provide a system with better mobility and a longer ranging and more lethal missile design. Development was initiated in 1969, in parallel with the 2K22 Tunguska / SA-19 Grison, the intent being to provide a complementary system with a btter capability in heavily jammed environments, where the radar directed SPAAG might be at a disadvantage. Design requirements included the ability to engage closing targets with speeds of up to 415 m/s and receding targets at 310 m/s, at altitudes between 25 m and 3,500 m, at ranges between 800 and 5,000 m. A single shot Pk between 0.5 and 0.6 for targets with load factors between 3 and 5G was envisaged. The system was to be relatively autonomous capable of providing point defence for maneuvre formations. The system was to be air transportable by An-12 Cub and Mi-6 helicopter, and able to cross bodies of water.

Now Sosna will replace Strela-10 in the long run and work side by side with Tunguska and/or 2S38.