
The images helped thanks Hole

GarryB wrote:No, we are talking about two completely different things.
What you are describing here is a is an ESM system i.e. something that sense ENEMY own emissions and extract data from it.
I think we can agree that this new system is optimised for shooting down low flying cruise missiles and standoff munitions normally used to take out air defence systems.
I didn't bother with the translate function on that video but it is pretty clear the S-350 is basically a combination of the S-300 and the TOR missile... ie a medium to long range TOR system effectively but over distances where command guided is not good enough so ARH is needed for the missiles.
An ESM system would be something like Orion system offered a while back...
The S-350 shown in the video above has a large slow radar spinning around and a smaller but much faster antenna spinning... with two AESA radars looking for targets it would make sense to also have three passive systems listening in for signals... actively generated by the target, or reflected from the target from other active sources...
franco wrote:
S-400
Not sure why they don't take some of the old 300PS TEL's and put 4x4 of these missiles on them and attach to the 400 regiments for close in defense.
Not sure why they don't take some of the old 300PS TEL's and put 4x4 of these missiles on them and attach to the 400 regiments for close in defense.
I would say that the S-350 though being a s the S-400 a derivative of S-300 line and utilizing some common components is specialized to counter specific menaces that showed up during he S-300 service life as a tentative to counteract it.
So while the S-400 is focused about the increase of the range and efficacy of the existing AD defence in order to create "bubbles" in which enemy air forces cannot operate with impunity, Vytiaz concentrate itself into defence of smaller but strategically important areas from systems and tactics used to slip under or overload with the sheer numbers of stand-off weapons the previously used systems.
Differently from S-300 the Vytiaz uses 360° search and targeting radar in two different bands and active radar homing missiles so it can engage a great number of incoming long range cruise missiles all around the radar horizon at the same time, (S-300 with its TVM targeting radar can engage only the ones coming from a limited angle).
9m96 will be used to engage the first menace so to cover whole cities,airports and military bases.
Longer ranged 9M96E2 would be used to engage stealth planes before they would launch their glide bombs, if someone would however reach launching point it will possible however to engage them also (an overkill but better than nothing), 9M100 would be ideal for self protection.
For the rest Garry, I didn't see the practical convenience to offering free of charge targets to Growlers (and Tornado ECR) turning on active radars in order to give tp passive radar locators those radio emissions that they could eagerly get from normal civilians broadcasting stations, someone located even in neutral or even hostile nations.
Actual passive multistatic radars could eagerly use FM radio stations located at a distance of 120-150 km and DVB ones at a distance of 300km with the adversary being not able to notice anything.
Even more, it seems that the high definition DVB standard that most nation would introduce in the next few years would be absolutely ideal for the role.
If it was that easy they would have used all the older TEL and connected them to s-400 because they still have a huge amount of older missiles.
Isos wrote:franco wrote:
S-400
Not sure why they don't take some of the old 300PS TEL's and put 4x4 of these missiles on them and attach to the 400 regiments for close in defense.
IMO S-400 has a limit in numbers of missiles/TEL connected to 1 system. They would need to replace one of TEL by this one to use it or directly put the 4 tubes instead of 1 48N6 missile on one of the s400's TEL.
If it was that easy they would have used all the older TEL and connected them to s-400 because they still have a huge amount of older missiles.
dino00 wrote:Isos thanks for your help, but it doesn't answer my question, we don't know what type of 9M96E2 missile he uses in the export version...
There are different versions of 9m96E2 missiles with different types of diameter, the only way is if someone knows how to measure the length and width of the missiles in the launched...if someone can help...
Isos wrote:dino00 wrote:Isos thanks for your help, but it doesn't answer my question, we don't know what type of 9M96E2 missile he uses in the export version...
There are different versions of 9m96E2 missiles with different types of diameter, the only way is if someone knows how to measure the length and width of the missiles in the launched...if someone can help...
You mean what missile the s-350 uses ?
Well there was no info about that. I think in one article they said it has a range of 40km so it uses 9m96 but it's very unlikely.
1) s-350 is the land version of redut which uses both 9M96 and 9M96E2.
2) That would make it a less capabke system than buk-M3 and old S-300 that it is replacing and had more than 90km range.
3) 9m96E2 was designed because 9m96 range was too short.
So IMO they can use both missiles. Being a ground based system it is affected by radar horizon so they don't need 9m96E2 for intercepting cruise missile that will be detected at less than 40km.
But there is nothing official about that.
miketheterrible wrote:9M96D(M) would be close to 150km range. 9M96E2 is the 120km range one. I believe Redut when tested was tested at 150km range missile.
https://tass.com/defense/1032659
dino00 likes this post
LMFS likes this post
dino00 wrote: but didn't said in width, how fat is this missile, if you can say appreciate.
And you put the same questions I have to myself.
One thing is clear at least one of the missiles in the Russian version is the 9M96D( because we can read on the missiles caps)
This is precisely what didn't make sense to me.
Or the canister are very far from being full which doesn't make sense, and the missile is just an improvement from 9M96E from the 90's and God knows why they call it 9M96E2.
As you can see 2 different versions the same range, one of them precisely what you said in length, if it has the same width I think we have our Russian version.
Why would the Russians sell a missile with only 60km range? It could be a sells flop
dino00 likes this post
|
|