Also the specifics for Pantsyr-S1 are a clear example of what i have previously said; if you follow ,in fact, the "history" of Pantsyr-S1's specifics you will realize that KBP Instrument Design Bureau attempted, at first, to sell a version with slower time of reaction, higher time of transition from movement to fire, lower radar and EO tracking footprint, 10 Km of maximum altitude engagement range and capability to engage two targets (one with radar and the other with EO/IR channel ); also in this version Pantsyr-S1 would have been by far the best SHORAD system available on the international market , but UAE asked for more to continue to fund the program.
So in less than one year and half Pantsyr-S1, passed to : less than 2/3 of the time of reaction,half the previous time of transition from movement to fire,significantly increased radar and EO/IR tracking footprint, one time and half (15 Km) of maximum altitude limit , and double of targets enageable contemporaneously by any launcher(4 targets).
Magic ? Of course not !!! Simply Russian military authorities gived the permission to KBP Instrument Design Bureau for this important international purchaser, to downgrade .....the downgradation Laughing Laughing
And even this "incarnation" of Pantsyr is very likely still different from that with which Russian armed forces arm itself
I disagree with this.
What you seem to be trying to say is that the Pantsir system was given an upgrade which UAE paid for and they were offered a reduced performance export version of the system which they rejected and when they spent more money the company let them have the better system for domestic use.
What actually happened was the Russian military couldn't afford to pay for the system upgrade so when the UAE offered to pay for the new upgrade the system they offered the UAE was the only upgrade available... just like the Indian Talwar ships that the Russian Navy has decided to buy are basically the ships developed for the Indian Navy but with Russian systems substituted for the Indian and Israeli and other equipment fitted.
The difference is that the UAE didn't add foreign equipment so it was all Russian.
When the UAE rejected the upgrade and opted to spend more money they actually replaced the radars and some electronics and developed a more thorough upgrade that increased performance with new booster rockets and new radar etc etc extending range and simultaneous engagement capability.
If the UAE hadn't spent the extra money the Pantsir-S1 system for the Russians would not have been anywhere near as good as it is now.
I am not saying the system the UAE is getting is the same as the Russian system, but the differences will be very minor.
The performance figures released for the Navy version with an altitude ceiling of 2m suggests the proximity fuse activates at 2m as opposed to the previous 5m, which suggests an improvement in guidance accuracy, an ability to track very low flying targets.
Regarding a comparison with Klintok, or naval TOR, the new system has a huge range advantage, while the vertical launch capacity of the Klintok system is probably balanced by the fact that Pantsir will likely be deployed in several turrets on each ship, and the fact that each turret has its own guidance sensors, while the Klintok radar tower has rotation and acquisition speed issues too. An array of four fixed radar ESA arrays together with the advantage of vertical launch in terms of stealth and getting missiles on targets from different directions quickly would shift the benefit back to Klintok along with the new missiles with longer range (though I think it still only reaches 16kms).
I have seen the new auto loading naval Grad system with two pods of 20 x 122mm rockets and something similar could be useful for self defence if loaded with Pantsir-S1 missiles in large pods too.
or the immense differences in theirs FCS, obviously all of that in an highly mobile manoeuvring offensive and defensive operation,instead of MBT used litterally like pillboxs.
I agree, they also kept a defensive posture and let the Americans fight on their terms... ie at night, and they waited the 6 months it took to transport armour and equipment into the theatre when a quick attack would see them fighting US airborne forces in Sheridans...
For all the reasons and elements up exposed i think that the RVV-BV, now presented for the international market,show capabilities totally differentsfrom those of the long range missile which Russians adn Indians will mount in the internal bays of theirs PAKFA / FGFA
Now that Russian companies are getting funding and domestic orders I would expect the return to the practise of monkey model export items that are not joint venture developments.
If the RVV-BD has a range of 200km vs an 8g manouvering target, I would expect that would translate into a 300km range against a non manouvering target (ie 2-3g like a strategic bomber or AWACS aircraft or JSTARS or large troop transport).
The mid 1990s test had a missile flight range of 300km so 15 years of improvements in electronics and solid rocket motor design the Russian/Indian model might allow them to discard the two stage version of the rocket and attain the 400km goal without the complication. The R-37M was too long to fit 4 weapons on the belly of the Mig-31 so they were Pylon mounted only. I is the main reason they returned to four pylons on the Mig-31M so that potentially 6 R-37s could be mounted on the belly and 4 R-37Ms under the wings represented a very potent long range weapons payload.
BTW interesting post Kratos, looks like in that top poster that those boxes for the Russian equivelant of DAS has been ported from the Mig-35D to the Su-35.
Regarding the seeker heads poster the intriguing seeker is surely the middle seeker described as an active radar mmw radar homing seeker with a calibre of 150mm and a weight of 8kgs.
From a quick google search I have found that according to an official at AGAT that makes the seekers that this new seeker is designed to upgrade older short range IR guided missiles to allow all weather capability. It says SAM and AAM so lets look at what they might be referring to:
The R-3, AA-2 Atoll has a calibre of 127mm so it is clearly not for that.
The R-60 has a calibre of 120mm so it can't be used in this either.
The R-73 has a calibre of 170mm so it could be used in this missile as a mini R-77.
Regarding SAMs the main obsolete short range SAMs could be SA-9 and SA-13 IR guided SAMs plus perhaps SA-8 and perhaps even an upgrade for SA-15.
All weather fire and forget capability would be quite useful... if not cheap.
The SA-9 and SA-13 are too small in calibre, while the SA-8 and SA-15 are probably about just right as they have larger than 150mm calibre bodies, but their bodies taper significantly near their noses.
Interesting that the Hermes has a nose calibre of 130mm as such a mmw radar seeker head would be quite useful for it.