Home
Latest images
Register
Log in
As I know Tunguska is no more in production. Maybe they are modernized Tunguskas or maybe tracked Pantsir keep the name Tunguska. 
+37
TMA1
Mindstorm
zepia
RTN
KoTeMoRe
lyle6
jhelb
marcellogo
Regular
kvs
PapaDragon
Hole
dino00
miketheterrible
LMFS
Benya
Isos
franco
d_taddei2
George1
Book.
GunshipDemocracy
magnumcromagnon
Asf
Morpheus Eberhardt
GarryB
medo
xeno
TR1
Viktor
Cyberspec
TheArmenian
Zivo
flamming_python
Admin
Austin
nightcrawler
41 posters
Russian VSHORADS Thread
medo- Posts : 4343
Points : 4423
Join date : 2010-10-24
Location : Slovenia
Viktor- Posts : 5796
Points : 6429
Join date : 2009-08-25
Age : 43
Location : Croatia
More likely they are modernized radars with new battle algorithms for missiles and radar system coupled with
new electronics and ability to network in with new generation of radar systems as well as other Tunguska systems making whole
system more flexible and resistant.
Same here ...
new electronics and ability to network in with new generation of radar systems as well as other Tunguska systems making whole
system more flexible and resistant.
Same here ...
Southern Military District received the first batch of SAM "Tor-M1-2U"
Southern Military District received the first batch of anti-aircraft missiles "Tor-M1-2U." On this, as reported by RIA Novosti , the deputy chief of the press service of the SOUTH Colonel Oleg Kochetkov. According to him, by the end of 2012 will be fully staffed with such complexes defense units, placed in the Volgograd region.
Delivery systems "Tor-M1-2U" is part of the state defense order for 2012. The troops of the new systems will replace aging short-range "Wasp", "Thor" and "Tor-M1". What is the number of new air defense system came in troops, and how many of these systems to be supplied to the end of 2012, Kochetkov not elaborate.
"Tor-M1-2U", a modernization of the "Tor-M1", is intended to cover the anti-aircraft units and infrastructure of aircraft, helicopters, unmanned aerial vehicles and guided missiles. Complex is able to detect and track targets at ranges up to 30 kilometers and to simultaneously attack four of them, at an altitude of ten thousand feet.
TR1- Posts : 5435
Points : 5433
Join date : 2011-12-06
Sosna.
http://www.vesti.ru/only_video.html?vid=513235&path2=http%3A%2F%2Fsmolensk.rfn.ru%2Fv%2F33709.flv&extFlv=1
The video. Poor man's Pantsir?
xeno- Posts : 253
Points : 256
Join date : 2013-02-04
First time to see a real Sosna instead of a model or a Photoshop.
medo- Posts : 4343
Points : 4423
Join date : 2010-10-24
Location : Slovenia
TR1 wrote:
Sosna.
http://www.vesti.ru/only_video.html?vid=513235&path2=http%3A%2F%2Fsmolensk.rfn.ru%2Fv%2F33709.flv&extFlv=1
The video. Poor man's Pantsir?
Excellent Strela-10 replacement. I wonder if they will also place naval Gibka modul on Tiger or similar vehicle armed with Igla-S missiles.
GarryB- Posts : 39671
Points : 40167
Join date : 2010-03-30
Location : New Zealand
Excellent Strela-10 replacement. I wonder if they will also place naval Gibka modul on Tiger or similar vehicle armed with Igla-S missiles.
If anything it is a super Kornet-EM in the sense that it uses simple and cheap laser beam riding guidance and a rocket clearly optimised for high speed and low drag...
Viktor- Posts : 5796
Points : 6429
Join date : 2009-08-25
Age : 43
Location : Croatia
Great this will be great SA-13 replacement. Excellent find TR1.
Cyberspec- Posts : 2904
Points : 3057
Join date : 2011-08-08
Location : Terra Australis
Zivo wrote:What's their reasoning behind developing both Boomerang, and the Kamaz 63969?
They seem very similar. I doubt the Kamaz is amphibious, but what advantage does it have over Boomerang that warrants its service?
The Kamaz should be a MRAP type vehicle
Viktor wrote:Great this will be great SA-13 replacement. Excellent find TR1.
Should be popular with Strela-10 (SA-13) users assuming it's reasonably priced. I wonder if the Rus. Army would be interested considering they use large number of Strela-10's
Viktor- Posts : 5796
Points : 6429
Join date : 2009-08-25
Age : 43
Location : Croatia
Cyberspec wrote:Should be popular with Strela-10 (SA-13) users assuming it's reasonably priced. I wonder if the Rus. Army would be interested considering they use large number of Strela-10's
This system is good for winged missiles, helicopters, attack planes and protection of command posts and radar.
Fighter planes on the other hand can easily overfly it.
It has its purpose and should be rather cheap in comparison. Many armies all over the world will find it useful and in need of such
system. System is highly mobile and can be connected to AD network so it can receive info about the targets well in advance and
command post like PPRU-M1-2 will distribute the targets between the SAMs.
GarryB- Posts : 39671
Points : 40167
Join date : 2010-03-30
Location : New Zealand
Should be popular with Strela-10 (SA-13) users assuming it's reasonably priced. I wonder if the Rus. Army would be interested considering they use large number of Strela-10's
In many ways the Sosna-R is the land based version of Palma and is designed as the low cost version of Kashtan-M or Pantsir-S1.
In the Army it would operate in the SAM missile platoons to compliment the gun/SAM platoons armed currently with Tunguska-M1.
I believe Sosna-R is the export name for the system and the domestic name is Baikanuk or something similar and it is intended as a very low cost replacement for SA-13 that will operate with Pantsir-S1.
In those roles both systems would be very capable with the Baikanuk being cheap to buy and operate while the Pantsir-S1 is cheap to operate but also very capable.. Pantsir-S1 can engage the high flyers but the very high flying targets would be dealt with at a higher level by BUK and Vityaz.
Ceramic applique armor obviously not yet installed, but good photo showing hull.
New ceramic tigr?
medo- Posts : 4343
Points : 4423
Join date : 2010-10-24
Location : Slovenia
I find this picture interesting. It seems there is special thermal imager created to be installed in Tunguska complex. Considering, that army units receive modernized Tunguskas, maybe they also have those TI installed inside their optical sight, what will enable their missile and gun work in optical mode day and night and in all weather. I wonder, if they also modify tracking radar to guide missile in radar mode. Krizanthema could track target and guide missile all in one radar antenna, so maybe Tunguska could use the same princip.
GarryB- Posts : 39671
Points : 40167
Join date : 2010-03-30
Location : New Zealand
AFAIK both the Tunguska and the Krisantema use command guided missiles with the command guidance coming from the tracking radar that tracks both the target and the outgoing missile and sends course corrections to the outgoing missile to ensure a hit.
If that is the case then the addition of a thermal imager should allow the vehicle to engage targets without the use of either the search or tracking function with the thermal sight with autotracker following the target and the outgoing missile with course guidance commands being transmitted by the tracking radar that is not tracking either the missile or the target and therefore not making itself much of an ARM target.
Note the Krisantema also has a back up laser beam riding guidance option.
If that is the case then the addition of a thermal imager should allow the vehicle to engage targets without the use of either the search or tracking function with the thermal sight with autotracker following the target and the outgoing missile with course guidance commands being transmitted by the tracking radar that is not tracking either the missile or the target and therefore not making itself much of an ARM target.
Note the Krisantema also has a back up laser beam riding guidance option.
medo- Posts : 4343
Points : 4423
Join date : 2010-10-24
Location : Slovenia
Original Tunguska could use missiles only in optical mode using its tracking radar for radio missile guidance, while target was tracked with optical sight. Radar mode was used only for guns. Usual systems of that times use two antennas, one for tracking radar and second for radio missile guidance. Krizanthema was first to have one antenna for both operation to ensure ACLOS in radar mode. Of course, Krizanthema also have optical mode with laser guidance, but it is independent and could ensure the guidance of second missile simultaneously. I think same capabilities have Arbalet radar in Ka-52.
Installing TI in Tunguska's optical sight will give to missile capabilities 24 hours operational capabilities and to guns full capabilities in both modes. Modernization of radar to ACLOS mode for missiles will give Tunguska full capabilities with both missiles and guns.
Installing TI in Tunguska's optical sight will give to missile capabilities 24 hours operational capabilities and to guns full capabilities in both modes. Modernization of radar to ACLOS mode for missiles will give Tunguska full capabilities with both missiles and guns.
GarryB- Posts : 39671
Points : 40167
Join date : 2010-03-30
Location : New Zealand
Early model (8km range missiles) Tunguska used optical guidance for missiles, but the naval Kashtan version was changed to allow radar guidance with tracking of both missiles and target using the tracking radar with the tracking radar sending course commands to the outgoing missile.
This change was applied to both Pantsir (which didn't enter service) with 12km range missiles and the Tunguska-M1 which entered service in 2004 with 10km range missiles AFAIK.
Current Pantsir-S1 uses tracking radar to track missiles and targets and send guidance commands.
This change was applied to both Pantsir (which didn't enter service) with 12km range missiles and the Tunguska-M1 which entered service in 2004 with 10km range missiles AFAIK.
Current Pantsir-S1 uses tracking radar to track missiles and targets and send guidance commands.
medo- Posts : 4343
Points : 4423
Join date : 2010-10-24
Location : Slovenia
Tunguska and Krizanthema don't have PESA radars, but mechanical ones. Pantsir also have additional guidance channel antenna on its tracking radar.
GarryB- Posts : 39671
Points : 40167
Join date : 2010-03-30
Location : New Zealand
Tunguska and Krizanthema don't have PESA radars, but mechanical ones.
They don't need PESA or AESA radars to track targets... especially two targets they are trying to merge by controlling the flightpath of one.
Pantsir also have additional guidance channel antenna on its tracking radar.
Indeed they do and that is how they use their tracking radar to communicate with the missile...
medo- Posts : 4343
Points : 4423
Join date : 2010-10-24
Location : Slovenia
Indeed they do and that is how they use their tracking radar to communicate with the missile... Smile
Tunguskas tracking radar track target when it use its guns or send guiding signals to missile. In usual SAM complex tracking radar does three functions, track target, track missile and sent guiding commands to missile. Usually they have additional antenny for missile guiding channel. Krizanthema use only one radar antenna for all three functions in ACLOS mode. Krizanthema radar is the way for Tunguska tracking radar modernization.
GarryB- Posts : 39671
Points : 40167
Join date : 2010-03-30
Location : New Zealand
Krizanthema radar is the way for Tunguska tracking radar modernization.
Pantsir-S1 is the way for Tunguska modernisation...
medo- Posts : 4343
Points : 4423
Join date : 2010-10-24
Location : Slovenia
GarryB wrote:Krizanthema radar is the way for Tunguska tracking radar modernization.
Pantsir-S1 is the way for Tunguska modernisation...
Of course it is. But to keep modernization cheap and keep its original radar, they could just modernize its computers in the way of Krizanthema radar. It's better to build new Pantsirs than place Pantsir's radars on used Tunguskas.
GarryB- Posts : 39671
Points : 40167
Join date : 2010-03-30
Location : New Zealand
Tunguskas tracking radar track target when it use its guns or send guiding signals to missile. In usual SAM complex tracking radar does three functions, track target, track missile and sent guiding commands to missile.
[quote] Usually they have additional antenny for missile guiding channel.[quote]
They usually use a different antenna for sending missile guidance commands because of the frequencies involved and the requirements of the signal.
The current radars associated with Tunguska and Pantsir-S1 are optimised for very specific goals... high accuracy, good range in a range of weather conditions, and capability against very small targets at extended ranges. You can see the size of the antenna on the vehicles for good resolution returns. the simple cheap datalink antenna are in comparison direct links optimised for high speed.
Krizanthema use only one radar antenna for all three functions in ACLOS mode. Krizanthema radar is the way for Tunguska tracking radar modernization.
Krisantema is more like a fighter aircrafts radar that will scan specific areas looking for targets and then engage them... often in groups at a time. It will likely move from cover to cover and generally try to move to positions where it can see targets from max range... in many ways it is more of a long range anti tank gun platform than an air defence system... of course if they can upgrade its performance the way the Kornet-EM has been upgraded then it might become quite a formidible anti armour and anti aircraft system with cheap command guided/laser beam riding missiles.
medo- Posts : 4343
Points : 4423
Join date : 2010-10-24
Location : Slovenia
http://www.sdelanounas.ru/blogs/50560/
In September - October this year, tests of new Sosna-M will be finished. Considering, that Palash-Palma is already operational, I don't see much problems for Russian MoD to accept Sosna-M as replacement for Strela-10.
In September - October this year, tests of new Sosna-M will be finished. Considering, that Palash-Palma is already operational, I don't see much problems for Russian MoD to accept Sosna-M as replacement for Strela-10.
Morpheus Eberhardt- Posts : 1925
Points : 2032
Join date : 2013-05-20
medo wrote:http://www.sdelanounas.ru/blogs/50560/
In September - October this year, tests of new Sosna-M will be finished. Considering, that Palash-Palma is already operational, I don't see much problems for Russian MoD to accept Sosna-M as replacement for Strela-10.
The fact that some versions of Sosna can be mounted on an MT-LB based chasis doesn't mean that it is a Strela-10 follow-on. There are other systems developed as Strela-10 follow-ons.
I think Sosna is primarily a ZU-23-2 follow-on.
Actually, the picture in the article most probably shows an export version of Sosna. There are two reasons for that conclusion: the MT-LB based chassis and the radio control for the first stage of the missile. It seems that the non-export versions of Sosna don't need the radio control for the first stage control.
Asf- Posts : 471
Points : 488
Join date : 2014-03-27
It has similar tactical purposeThe fact that some versions of Sosna can be mounted on an MT-LB based chasis doesn't mean that it is a Strela-10 follow-on.
What do you mean? ZU-23-2 is a towed AA autocannonI think Sosna is primarily a ZU-23-2 follow-on.
I always thought Sosna is laser-guidedthe radio control for the first stage of the missile
GarryB- Posts : 39671
Points : 40167
Join date : 2010-03-30
Location : New Zealand
The fact that some versions of Sosna can be mounted on an MT-LB based chasis doesn't mean that it is a Strela-10 follow-on. There are other systems developed as Strela-10 follow-ons.
I think Sosna is primarily a ZU-23-2 follow-on.
The VDV announced the Strela-10 was a temporary replacement for the ZU-23-2, but that a new system was going to replace it in the near future. I suspect the SOSNA-R is that replacement because figures given match SOSNA-R better than Morfei or other systems known to be in development. 10km range and laser beam riding guidance were two parameters that seem to rule out the IIR guided Morfei.
There are two reasons for that conclusion: the MT-LB based chassis and the radio control for the first stage of the missile. It seems that the non-export versions of Sosna don't need the radio control for the first stage control.
I would suggest all versions of SOSNA-R would require radio command guidance for the initial portion of flight to get it heading in the right direction... the laser beam riding guidance wont be able to see through the booster stage in the first second or two of flight, while radio command would allow a slightly lofted trajectory to ensure the missile flys clear of ground obstructions like trees but as the main booster burns out the radio command link would allow the launcher to command the missile to climb or descend so the laser beam is not seen by the missile through the smoke trail the main booster has just left.
It has similar tactical purpose
And cheaper and light weight without all those CM and MMW radar systems of Pantsir-S1.
I always thought Sosna is laser-guided
Yes... laser beam riding, but for the first part of its flight it has a solid rocket booster and a large rocket plume between it and the launcher, so for that part of flight it uses radio command guidance to fly to the optimum point to engage the target.
Morpheus Eberhardt- Posts : 1925
Points : 2032
Join date : 2013-05-20
Asf wrote:It has similar tactical purposeThe fact that some versions of Sosna can be mounted on an MT-LB based chasis doesn't mean that it is a Strela-10 follow-on.
What do you mean? ZU-23-2 is a towed AA autocannonI think Sosna is primarily a ZU-23-2 follow-on.
I always thought Sosna is laser-guidedthe radio control for the first stage of the missile
GarryB wrote:The fact that some versions of Sosna can be mounted on an MT-LB based chasis doesn't mean that it is a Strela-10 follow-on. There are other systems developed as Strela-10 follow-ons.
I think Sosna is primarily a ZU-23-2 follow-on.
The VDV announced the Strela-10 was a temporary replacement for the ZU-23-2, but that a new system was going to replace it in the near future. I suspect the SOSNA-R is that replacement because figures given match SOSNA-R better than Morfei or other systems known to be in development. 10km range and laser beam riding guidance were two parameters that seem to rule out the IIR guided Morfei.
There are two reasons for that conclusion: the MT-LB based chassis and the radio control for the first stage of the missile. It seems that the non-export versions of Sosna don't need the radio control for the first stage control.
I would suggest all versions of SOSNA-R would require radio command guidance for the initial portion of flight to get it heading in the right direction... the laser beam riding guidance wont be able to see through the booster stage in the first second or two of flight, while radio command would allow a slightly lofted trajectory to ensure the missile flys clear of ground obstructions like trees but as the main booster burns out the radio command link would allow the launcher to command the missile to climb or descend so the laser beam is not seen by the missile through the smoke trail the main booster has just left.
It has similar tactical purpose
And cheaper and light weight without all those CM and MMW radar systems of Pantsir-S1.
I always thought Sosna is laser-guided
Yes... laser beam riding, but for the first part of its flight it has a solid rocket booster and a large rocket plume between it and the launcher, so for that part of flight it uses radio command guidance to fly to the optimum point to engage the target.
GarryB wrote:There are two reasons for that conclusion: the MT-LB based chassis and the radio control for the first stage of the missile. It seems that the non-export versions of Sosna don't need the radio control for the first stage control.
I would suggest all versions of SOSNA-R would require radio command guidance for the initial portion of flight to get it heading in the right direction... the laser beam riding guidance wont be able to see through the booster stage in the first second or two of flight, while radio command would allow a slightly lofted trajectory to ensure the missile flys clear of ground obstructions like trees but as the main booster burns out the radio command link would allow the launcher to command the missile to climb or descend so the laser beam is not seen by the missile through the smoke trail the main booster has just left.
I will try to do a "proper" post on the technical and tactical aspects of Sosna, but for the time being, let me expediently clarify something here before it gets too late:
When I mentioned that the first stage of the nonexportable versions of the "laser navigational guided" versions of Sosna-R don't use radio command guidance, I wasn't implying that their first stage guidance used laser beam-riding guidance or were unguided.
The first stage of the nonexportable versions of the "laser navigational guided" versions of Sosna-R are, of course, guided. I'll talk about this more when I attempt to write a "proper" post on this subject.
Also, even the second stages of the laser guided Sosna-R variants most probably don't use laser beam-riding but use the more complicated "laser navigational guidance".
|
|
|