S-300V Army SAM System

S-300V systems have been in service for decades. I would suspect that many systems will need replacing rather than upgrading.

I have yet to see any accurate detailed information about the S-300V4 system so it is pretty hard to speculate if it can be applied as an upgrade to previous models... especially the very early models.

Certainly it would probably not be worth adopting it as an upgrade for the early model S-300V like the pre VM models.

GarryB wrote:S-300V systems have been in service for decades. I would suspect that many systems will need replacing rather than upgrading.

That depends. Remember that there's a ton of kit that they keep stored in-garrison. It's possible that a lot of garrisoned S-300V units don't have a lot of time on their chassis. At any rate if the S-300VM was an upgrade, then the V4 should be doable as an upgrade. The VM introduced a new radar array to replace the old GRILL PAN array, so if they went that far for the VM than going further to the V4 doesn't sound like that much more effort given that they don't appear to be replacing the arrays going from VM to V4.

So if the VM has a new radar system to replace an older model radar system then wouldn't it therefore be logical to want to know what new radar or sensor or other systems might have been developed for the S-300V4 system before we can make comments about the viability of upgrading existing systems to the new standard?

I rather suspect that they will likely decide that the newer S-300Vs might be worth upgrading, and the older systems need to be scrapped and replaced with new models... especially if those old platforms are from Belarus or the Ukraine, or are now obsolete.

I haven't seen anything to suggest they're looking at a complete radar array replacement for the V4 as was done for the VM.

Are Belarus and the Ukraine going to get the V4 upgrade? Because they both retain S-300V batteries. The ATBMs returned to Russia if they were ever deployed there, but both currently operate the SAM variant.

Are Belarus and the Ukraine going to get the V4 upgrade? Because they both retain S-300V batteries.

I don't think you understand my point...

The vehicle chassis used for the in service S-300V were Soviet. The System entered service in something like 1984 or so, so the vehicle chassis comes from that period too and I am asking was that chassis made in Russia or perhaps Belarus or the Ukraine. If it was made in one of those countries then you would think that this upgrade might be taken as an opportunity to make the system Russian by using a new Russian chassis/vehicle platform.

As you well know the S-300V was a tracked system, and will remain so for mobility reasons.

Lets say the chassis are made in Belarus (like the GM-xxxx chassis of the Tunguska), they might take this opportunity to use a new Russian chassis as the basis for the new S-300V4 system... which would mean an upgrade of existing vehicles and systems would be rather extensive... replacing the vehicles and the electronics and the missiles etc etc.... it is like my dads favourite hammer that has lasted him 60 years... it has only had 4 new heads and 3 new handles... if you know what I mean.

Further the chassis might actually be Russian but also obsolete and expensive to operate and maintain and a newer more widely used tracked platform might be better... again this would mean replacing everything and creating a practically new system that might as well be produced as a new system.

The old systems can be given a moderate upgrade and sent to Iran

GarryB wrote:I don't think you understand my point...

Because that's never happened before

GarryB wrote:The vehicle chassis used for the in service S-300V were Soviet. The System entered service in something like 1984 or so, so the vehicle chassis comes from that period too and I am asking was that chassis made in Russia or perhaps Belarus or the Ukraine. If it was made in one of those countries then you would think that this upgrade might be taken as an opportunity to make the system Russian by using a new Russian chassis/vehicle platform.

Chassis is manufactured by the Kalinin Mechanical Engineering Plant, in Russia.

GarryB wrote:The old systems can be given a moderate upgrade and sent to Iran

Sure, if Medvedev wakes up and realizes that non-MANPADS SAM systems aren't on the UN arms register

Chassis is manufactured by the Kalinin Mechanical Engineering Plant, in Russia.

And they don't need orders for new vehicles?

They want to keep making parts for old vehicles rather than concentrate on new stuff?

Remember this is the Armys S-400... it is not like the S-300V4 are filling a short term gap till S-400 is in full production and can replace it.

Sure, if Medvedev wakes up and realizes that non-MANPADS SAM systems aren't on the UN arms register

medvedev will wake up later this year and realise that he is no longer president of Russia. Putin will wake up one morning and he will have that job.

Medvedev was the carrot and Putin is the stick... do you think Putin will not be aware of what is on the UN arms register?

Great photo and review of S-300V unit by Vitaly Kuzmin.

http://vitalykuzmin.net/?q=node/438

Kuzminski is a great photographer i must admit

TheArmenian wrote:Great photo and review of S-300V unit by Vitaly Kuzmin.

http://vitalykuzmin.net/?q=node/438

Excellent photos from Kuzmin.

http://www.en.ria.ru/mlitary_news/20120312/172109752.html

Does this mean S-300 is back in production and upgraded to defend itself from BAE Suter type attacks.  Very much hope so!    



"""""""""""Russia's Defense Ministry has signed a three-year deal with air-defense missile systems manufacturer Almaz-Antei for delivery of S-300V4 (SA-12 Giant/Gladiator) air defense missile systems, the ministry said on Monday."""""""""

This are good news for ground forces air defense, which will get S-300V4 divisions. But be careful not to mix S-300P series with S-300V. They have the same name S-300, but are totally different systems and have nothing in common.

That's fine, S-300s are too good a system to shut the production on. Atleast 100 more should be sold around globally. Just like Mig-21s, 40 years after introductions, mere upgrades have pitted it as good as F-16s and Mig-29s for fraction of a cost.

Mig-21 Bis and Mig-21-98s are HOT again!

Answers another question we have discussed earlier on a different thread... it sounds like these are new build systems rather than upgraded, which I think is good news.

As pointed out the S-300V is known in the west as SA-12 and has two different missile TELs with a smaller four tube launcher and a larger two tube launcher with both missiles being two stage weapons.

The S-300P is largely designed for the Air Force and all of its vehicles are wheeled truck chassis. The S-300V are for the Army and need to be able to operate across rough country and all of its vehicles are tracked.

BTW Suter is like a virus and effects the entire air defence network. If Israeli experience in Syria is anything to go by it allows them to manipulate the radars so they look in sectors where there are no threats.

The point is that if there are any SAMs of air defence systems that are not connected to the AD network then they can present a serious threat to a force using Suter to hide an attack.

As shown with computers and computer networks, connecting computers and other hardware like printers and scanners and an internet connection can make an individual computer a very powerful and useful thing, and it is the same for SAMs because the shared information gives each component or node of the network a much better picture of what is happening around them than if they had to rely on their own sensors alone.

The S-300V might benefit from ADN information from all over the country, but it has the radars and passive sensors as well as the jammers and decoys to do its job on its own, which makes it rather less vulnerable to an ADN (Air Defence Network) Virus like Suter.

Against a small fry like Syria it worked very well, but there is no reason to believe it would catch the Russians by surprise, and indeed the connection created by the Virus could be exploited by the Russians to infect an attackers systems with their own virus, so they might find it doesn't work out the way they expect...

Against a small fry like Syria it worked very well, but there is no reason to believe it would catch the Russians by surprise, and indeed the connection created by the Virus could be exploited by the Russians to infect an attackers systems with their own virus, so they might find it doesn't work out the way they expect...

That is true. However, what are the chances of Russia fighting the US/NATO.....very very slim. What are the chances of US/NATO fighting Syria or Iran......like 50%+ which is beyond dangerous limits.

If I were a third world country, then to be able to defeat or insulate from Suter and cousins, would be my among top 3 requirements before buying a SAM system. I bet Russians can offer additional training to the client states on how to get around this problem. The real battle is in the ability to sell high profit margin weapons all round the globe.

Btw, at what distance can FA-18 Growler type planes start to successfully jam the radars of SAM and IADs.

That is true. However, what are the chances of Russia fighting the US/NATO.....very very slim. What are the chances of US/NATO fighting Syria or Iran......like 50%+ which is beyond dangerous limits.

And do you think that is an accident of nature?

Or the fact that the Russians have a strong air defence network plus nuclear weapons is the main reason that the likelyhood of a NATO strike on Russia is very low to non existent.

The NATO attack system designed to operate around the world against little weak countries does what they have paid for, but I rather think a fight against Syria and Iran is a serious step up from most of there previous adventures except Vietnam and Korea... Of course in Korea it was pure numbers of Chinese that caused the stalemate, and in Vietnam it was basically the willingness of the people to endure hell to get foreign powers out of their country... first France, then for a short period during WWII Japan and then France again and then the US... and then even the Chinese took on the Vietnamese and lost.

If I were a third world country, then to be able to defeat or insulate from Suter and cousins, would be my among top 3 requirements before buying a SAM system. I bet Russians can offer additional training to the client states on how to get around this problem. The real battle is in the ability to sell high profit margin weapons all round the globe.

Any network manager will be interested in keeping out trojan horses and viruses and worms, and they will know that one fix is not enough, you need to use local network experts and security experts trying full time to hack your system, because they will eventually find weaknesses that you can close and make your system more secure.

Just as no air defence system is 100% perfect and it needs continual work to keep up to date and effective and air defence network is the same.

Encryption and protocols to ensure keys are secure is critical, but measures to deal with successful hacks are also necessary so you can deal with it when it happens to minimise the damage.

Regarding your Growler question, it is hard to say and will be different for different target radar types.

Most ESA type radars are resistant to jamming and support systems including decoys and ground based jammers have a part to play as well.

For instance you might have two S-400 batteries located close together with one batteries radars operating looking for threats while the radars of the other battery are listening but not transmitting.
A jammer that is not a dumb noise jammer will try to mimic the signal it receives with a delay and a boosted signal so the delay will make the return signal appear to have been from a target further away than the Growler actually is and the boosted return signal in addition to the extra range to the target will make the radar think there is a very big radar return from a greater distance than the Growler actually is.

From the other radar silent site however it will detect the signal from the growler as coming from a slightly different angle so when the data from both batteries is sent up the ADN chain they each wont see the target the other sees except the actual growler... the information from both systems will cancel out and only the Growler will be plotted. The false targets will be checked based on the other listening radars in the region will will all show the large false target but all in different locations so the false targets will be flagged as false targets and ignored.

Vehicles closer to the location of the Growler could be directed to confirm, so a Pantsir-S1 operating directly below the Growler with its radar turned off could use its EOs to find the Growler and also look for the huge false target. It will of course find the Growler but come up empty with the false targets, but if it is listening with its radar then it might detect the false signal too, which will further confirm it is a false signal.

Seems like they have upgraded the capability of Antey-2500 compared to what was displayed in 90's

http://ria.ru/interview/20120327/606430368.html

Досягаемость же знаменитого комплекса "Антей-2500" составляет 350 км по дальности и до 37 км – по высоте. Время развертывания с марша и подготовки "Антей-2500" к стрельбе не превышает 5 минут.

However, reach of the famous complex of " Antaeus -2500" it is 350 km on the distance and to 37 km - on the height. Time of development from march and preparation of " Antaeus -2500" to the shooting do not exceed 5 minutes.

http://milparade.udm.ru/25/030.htm

The same system was quoted to have a range of 200 km and altitude of 30 km before

Austin wrote:Seems like they have upgraded the capability of Antey-2500 compared to what was displayed in 90's

The same system was quoted to have a range of 200 km and altitude of 30 km before

This is likely actually the improved Antey-2500D variant, which at this point is probably the only "Antey-2500" offered.

The range of missile options isn't really attractive to a new customer,...

I think the different missile options would be very attractive to a customer as long as they were different prices.

For instance the choice between a newer 250km missile with better performance but that costs 5 times more than the 200km range older model means that the customer could buy 5 time more of the cheaper older missiles if their performance meets their needs, while for another customer they might prefer the higher performing missile, but also buy the cheaper missile to make up numbers and to engage targets closer to the battery... perhaps for a second volley of missiles to stop an attack where the targets have moved even closer so the shorter range is not important anymore, or even for batteries positioned where the full engagement range of the more expensive missiles can't be exploited.

SOC wrote:This is likely actually the improved Antey-2500D variant, which at this point is probably the only "Antey-2500" offered.

SOC , Does the longer range variant means they lower the average velocity of missile to achieve long range ? Which means use slow burning motor with lower velocity and use trajectory to achieve the range.

The S-300V had a peak velocity of 7 km/sec and average of 3.5 km/sec , so will be see a lower average velocity with longer range

Depends on whether the top speed is drag related or fuel top thrust related.

Also the trajectory will also effect velocity... average height will allow higher speed because it is not trading speed for height and it is not operating at low level where the air is thickest.

4 billion Rubles order placed with Kirov Plant "Universalmash" for 40 tracked vehicles (12 in 2012, 21 in 2013 and 7 in 2014)to be used for S-300V4.

http://kzgroup.ru/rus/m/1441/kirowskiy_zawod_poluchil_4-milliardnyy_oboronnyy_zakaz.html

TheArmenian wrote:4 billion Rubles order placed with Kirov Plant "Universalmash" for 40 tracked vehicles (12 in 2012, 21 in 2013 and 7 in 2014)to be used for S-300V4.

http://kzgroup.ru/rus/m/1441/kirowskiy_zawod_poluchil_4-milliardnyy_oboronnyy_zakaz.html

This could be S-300V4 brigade with 24 missile launchers, radars and command posts. maybe they will need to buy additional vehicles for reloading vehicles. I hope they will order more brigades in coming months and years.