Naval Air Defence systems

BTW I was reading some more about the the naval Pantsir-S1 and the navy official said they were going to replace the OSA/Klintok class missiles in Navy service.

So the new system will replace SA-N-4 and SA-N-9 systems.

Makes sense to me as they offer a very low altitude intercept capability of 2m above the waves out to 20km.

Interestingly this also suggests improved accuracy because the older missiles have proximity fuses set to about 5m which clearly can't be the case if it can hit targets 2m above the water.

GarryB wrote:

BTW I was reading some more about the the naval Pantsir-S1 and the navy official said they were going to replace the OSA/Klintok class missiles in Navy service.

So the new system will replace SA-N-4 and SA-N-9 systems.

Makes sense to me as they offer a very low altitude intercept capability of 2m above the waves out to 20km.

Interestingly this also suggests improved accuracy because the older missiles have proximity fuses set to about 5m which clearly can't be the case if it can hit targets 2m above the water.

I'm sure they will not install any new OSA or Klinok SAM system in any new ship, but newer naval Pantsir and naval version of Morphei ans Vityaz systems. But I doubt they will replace Osa and Klinok on existing ships with Pantsirs. I think new Pantsir could replace old Kasthan, while Osa and Klinok have radar stations and missile launchers on different places and Klinok is also vertical launched missile (naval Tor). Osa is too old system and is now two generations behind and it is a waste of money to work with them, but Klinok could be modernized to Tor-M2 level, which is no worse than Pantsir with similar capabilities.

The ships they are looking at upgrading... is Kirov and Slava class vessels that have Klintok could have these systems replaced with Pantsir-S1.

Given an overhaul and upgrade it makes no sense to keep old systems in service as they will become expensive over time both to maintain and upgrade.

Makes rather more sense to replace them during overhauls with new systems.

The enormous pedestal radar system for Klinok could be directly replaced with either a Pantsir-S1 turret directly, or a 5P-10 artillery fire control radar system turret which could direct a number of systems.

It makes little sense to keep Klintok and Pantsir-S1 in service, the extra vertical launch space used by Klintok could be used for UKSK launchers or Redut launchers instead. The Klintok had a rotary launcher that allowed internal access and took up more internal space than needed.

The 5km range of Morphei is a little disappointing but that article mentions that it uses active and passive guidance... perhaps suggests a combined IIR and ARH seeker?
They have shown before seekers that combined passive radar homing sensors with active radar homing antennas... from memory the active radar homing range was 20-25km while the passive radar homing range was over 200km.

Just read in a Russian news site that they are going to show their first UCAV at MAKS2011.

I would think ATAKA, Kornet-M, and Krisantema-M would be the most likely and most useful armament for such a light platform (150-170kgs weapon payload).

I still think Pantsir is more suited to replace old AK-630 and Kashtan systems, than Klinok. After all, Klinok is naval Tor system and Tor-M2 is in equal level with Pantsir. It is cheaper to upgrade Klinok radar to Tor-M2 level and put Tor-M2 missiles in launchers, than redesign construction of ships to place Pantsir in place of Klinok. It is more wise to place UKSK and Redut systems on new ships than redesigning old ships, which doesn't have that long life time left. Udaloys with Klinok upgraded to Tor-M2 level will be still well armed ships.

It could replace both Klinok and AK-630.

Klinok... the system, was quite expensive and took a while to fully enter service.

For quite some time the ships with it operated without the radar tower which made it non operational.

For older ships that are not stealthy the Pantsir-S1 is a significant step up in that it can hit targets out to 20km in range, and up to 15km in altitude while being able to hit targets 2m above the waves. That is no longer a short range SAM... altitude wise that is BUK but with better low altitude performance.
The potential to use the unified Hermes missiles with radio command inertial guidance and some form of terminal homing like IIR or MMW radar the range could actually be greatly extended and include ground targets.

There is no reason why a Pantsir-S1 turret could not be made stealthy, though the launcher will never be as stealthy as the Klinok launcher the turret and radar and optics could be made more stealthy.

It is quite common for navy radar systems to be fitted ball covers to protect them from the environment (ie sea spray and wind etc)... it would not be a huge step to mount a phased array radar inside a ball fairing that could be filled with exotic gasses that could be ionised by running a powerful electrical current through it.  ...ie plasma stealth.

The thing is that Pantsir-S1 can be a short range SAM and CIWS and with guns is more flexible... you can't fire a warning shot with Klinok.

BTW here is a photo of the Palma system with 30mm gatlings and SOSNA-R laser beam riding missiles and as you can see it has a lot of optical ports:



The reason I post it is because it seems to have a similar number of optical ports as the system above and I also have a chart in Russian that describes the function of each optical port in the EO ball which is here:



And I was hoping that if someone could translate the names of the ports we could perhaps work out what the optical ports on the Sphere system are.

I am guessing that the larger two ports on the left is long range digital camera with high magnification on top and thermal sight below.
I am also guessing that perhaps the middle two ports on the right side are probably for lasers for beam riding missiles and laser spot seeking missiles (Semi active laser homing) as well as for laser ranging.
This leaves two ports... perhaps low light level television and a gionometer to track outgoing missiles?

(Of course the ports in the Palma system are dedicated to search and track targets and guide laser beam riding missiles to targets so obviously there is no guarantee they will have any relation to the ports on the Sphere system... but I think it is interesting.)

My attempt at translation...

Left

1. Receiving channel for LRF
2. Laser emitting channel for SAMs
3. Thermal ch. for (??)
4. Thermal channel for "bearing finder??" for SAMs

Right

1. Emitting channel for LRF
2. Main Thermal channel

Cyberspec wrote:My attempt at translation...

Left

1. Receiving channel for LRF
2. Laser emitting channel for SAMs
3. Thermal ch. for (??)
4. Thermal channel for "bearing finder??" for SAMs

Number 3 is television guidance system.

Thanks for that guys:
So we have... in no specific order, two ports for the optical laser range finder (LRF) for transmitting and receiving the laser, a laser emitting port for laser beam riding missiles (LTM or laser target marker), a television port... presumably for the operator to use in combination with a set of cross hairs and auto tracking software to find and lock targets, a thermal channel for "bearing finder" for SAMs is a goniometer port that tracks the actual position in the field of view of launched missiles so their deviation from the target can be calculated by the guidance system and the needed course corrections for the missile can be transmitted to the missile to get it on target.
(note the goniometer is for command guided missiles only as beam riding missiles work out where they are in the laser beam and manoeuvre themselves onto the point of aim.)
The main thermal channel would be used like the TV channel in adverse weather conditions, at night, or to see through some types of camouflage or some types of smoke or even light vegetation.

So
LRF = 2 ports
LTM = 1 port
DTV = 1 port
Goniometer = 1 port
Thermal Imager = 1 port

The goniometer and thermal imager ports don't need optically transparent lenses so they can look gold coloured or even white or black because not only do they not need to be transparent to visible light it is often better if they aren't as it prevents distractions.
The digital TV sight will often have a telescopic lens that is not that large, thermal imager often have a large surface area in comparison.

So taking all this and looking at the new EO system based on looking at the system for the Palma system the laser emitter is a small port while the laser receiver is larger. The biggest is the thermal port... so my guess would be this:



The main thing I am not totally sure of is whether the DTV and LTM are around the right way.

The larger port I have marked for the DTV could be a very large aperture laser that is used for target marking for semi active laser homing weapons (ie a laser spot is projected on to the target and weapons from the ship or other platforms can use that to guide on to) or a much less powerful beam for laser beam riders like SOSNA-R.

If we look at the advertisement photo on the site above for the EO system it is shown mounted on one side of the mast near the funnel suggesting there would be another positioned on the other side to give a complete field of view coverage. If both can mark targets and can be used to identify objects in the water or in the air then they greatly increase the ships potential to protect itself.

For instance on a ship with a 57mm gun mount and a Pantsir-S1 turret or two these optic turrets could mark incoming anti ship missile from a higher angle, seeing targets further out and clear of sea spray for guided 57mm cannon shells, so with the 57mm gun pumping out shells at 120 rounds per minute and with at least two optical EO systems on the mast together with the 4-5 targets per minute the Pantsir-S1 can engage with missiles and guns... plus with the accuracy of a laser range finder a small ship can have a formidible close in defence capacity even ignoring any medium SAMs it might have.

A Goniometer can measure deviation between the line of sight and an IR emitting object... which is normally a missile. It could easily be the cannon shells from a Duet turret with IR tracer elements in their tail, so it could assist in that engagement too.

I think DTV is marked correctly, because it is very similar to DTV used in Pantsir-S1.

It looks like Zhuk AESA radar is actually working design, that it will be used on the ship and in KA-52 helicopter. Interesting is, that in all platforms (Mig-35, Ka-52 and Steregushy slass corvettes) Zhuk radar works with EO/IR complex, what could mean that radar electronic itself could use data from EO complex and comparing pictures and than give picture on display and to central computer. That could make system faster and more immune on electronic warfare.

Good work

That would make its operation similar to the IRST/radar setup in the Soviet 4th gen fighters like the Mig-29 and Su-27 in the sense that they could work together against targets.

An optical system will always have better angular tracking accuracy than a radar because the radar centre of an object is not necessarily the actual centre of an object and from some angles some shapes have radar centres that are not even part of the aircraft.

In many ways the best compromise is to use and optical system to track close targets and use the radar for ranging. With the angular information from the the optical system the radar beam can be steered very accurately so no scan to find the target is needed, which limits the radars use to a ranging pulse of relatively low power... pretty much the same as a LPI mode but with any type of radar.

True, but I'm not sure if radar in Mig-29 and Su-27 could itself use IRST picture and compare it with its own, or they independently show their picture on the screen and pilot compare them. But of course Radar/IRST combination is not something totally new.

The IRSTs didn't create pictures, they detected and locked on discrete targets and could be used to direct the seeker of a missile (IR or SARH at the time and now ARH) to a target. It could also direct the radar to that target without the radar having to scan for the target.

For close range targets the ranging could be done in radar silence using a laser but in the early models that was only to about 8km.

For Mig-29M I believe the laser ranging extended to about 14-15km and with the Mig-35 it is 20km for air and 25km for ground target ranging and marking.

In naval use I would suspect the radar will be used for detection as it has full 360 degree all weather day and night coverage with electronic scanning it could scan the entire 360 degrees around the vessel in a millisecond... because nothing needs to move... it would just be radar elements turned on and off.

Any object of interest would result in the optical ball turning to view and a powerful zoom lense no doubt used to examine the threat and identify whether it is an incoming cruise missile or a cessna or UAV or whatever.

PALMA AIR DEFENSE MISSILE/GUN SYSTEM
Author: Oleg Korotkov, Anatoly Karpov, Vladimir Kopylov

Oleg Korotkov - general designer of special engineering, Doctor of Science, academician of RARAN
Anatoly Karpov - chief of a complex
Vladimir Kopylov - chief of external economic affairs department
Military Parade,  No. 6, 2011

Development of the highly effective naval air defense systems, capable to repel the swarm attacks of anti-ship missiles (ASM), has not reduced an urgency of development and manufacture of air defense small caliber artillery systems. Moreover the systems of this class have been advanced and fitted up by small-size short-range anti-aircraft missiles (SAM). It is determined by larger or smaller probability that cruise missiles will no be knocked down even by the most perfect missile systems.

The reliable defense of such expensive armament as the warship may be ensured only by "reshooting" the penetrated missiles on the last defense line. In some cases, when the air defense missile system cannot be placed on the ship because of limitations on permissible mass or due to its excessively high cost, the small caliber artillery system fitted up by SAM is the only and simultaneously very effective self-defense weapon. The role of the air defense systems containing in their structure the small caliber artillery system is important for both ship defense in straits, narrows, protected waters, and for repelling the piracy attacks. The concept and main principles of the reviewed Palma air defense system were elaborated by developers headed by Arkady Shipunov,Academician of the Russian Academy of Sciences, with the direct participation of many leading specialists of the Navy and industry. This system was developed by JSC Nudelman Precision Engineering Design Bureau (KBtochmash) being a part of JSC "RPC "High-precision complexes" holding company in close cooperation with FSUE KBP, JSC Tulamashzavod, JSC Amethyst Design Bureau and other leading enterprises.

The concept of "Palma" system structure foresaw the follows:

- use of combined armament that includes small caliber rapid-fire guns and small-size high-precision SAM;

- application of high-precision electro-optical control system (EOCS) in combination with shipborne radar station control unit (SRSCU) in backup mode in extremely adverse weather conditions;

- provision of complete automation of combat performance;

- ensuring all-round ship defense by including up to four firing modules (FM) in the system structure (Fig.1);

- provision of use this system on the mobilized ships and ashore by means of its own detection radar (DR) and gyrostabilization systems (GSS) incorporated into the base complete equipment and through the development of container-based design version;

- provision of integration with ship-borne DR, GSS and SRSCU in case of use on the Navy ships and boats;

- development of the system with provision for the creation of large modernization potential ensuring a capability of qualitative improvement by the subsequent upgrades.

The developed concept has reflected in the base principles of system construction:

1. As armaments of firing models are used two AO-18KD rapid-fire modernized cannons guns with link-less ammunition feed, increased projectile muzzle velocity and with essentially increased service life and also highly effective eight Sosna-R light hypersonic SAM.

Main technical characteristics of firing module:


Armament:

- artillery:

- missile:  

Control system :  

Distance of target defeat, km    

Altitude of the target defeat, km  

Time from target designation till engagement, sec

Weight with an ammunition load and secondary power sources, t  


2. Armament and surveillance and target designation radar are installed directly on artillery mount on "the same axis" to exclude the errors caused by ship strains.

3. For target acquisition according to target designation and for target tracking and armament aiming the system uses the specially designed high-precision ECM-pro-tected automatic electro-optical control system (EOCS) unified with EOCS of Sosna SAM.

4. The structure of EOCS contains a full set of the necessary information channels placed on gyrostabilized platform allowing use it round of clock and in adverse weather conditions. In extremely adverse weather conditions the system is controlled by 5P-10 ship-borne radar control system.

5. The EOCS has increased jamming immunity due to using information channels with narrow fields of sight and application of special signals processing algorithms in the automatic control unit of target acquisition and tracking, considering the target signatures. Besides, it is impossible to distort laser spot-beam rider guidance or to flash an optoelectronic sensor of a flying missile by the similar laser beam.

6. High performance of SAM is attained due to high accuracy of missile guidance, circle diagram of proximity fuse, overlapping of guidance errors by kill zone, and also due to short flight times to the target.

7. High accuracy of SAM guidance is ensured through small errors of target tracking, high accuracy of laser-guidance system, large available lateral g-load of missile and due to application of special control algorithms realized in the microcomputer onboard a missile.

8. High engagement effectiveness of artillery armament is realized due to high accuracy of laying

Main characteristics of EOCS:

Operating modes: Target acquisition:

Range of pointing angles, in azimuth/angle of sight, deg.:

Maximum angular rates and accelerations, deg/sec / deg/s2:

Field of view, deg:

- Thermal image channel  

Distance of a taking into target autotracking at (max.range of visibility =15 km, p=80 %), km:


- Airplanes / helicopters / cruise missiles


16 ... 30 / 10 ... 14 / 8 ... 12


- Armour installations  

Measured distance, km:  

Accuracy (MSE):

- stabilization, mrad  

- finding of coordinates and distances, mrad/m  

- laying of laser range finder

- Laying of information field of laser-beam control channel, mrad  



the cannons, small dispersion and a large density of fire.

9. Automatic, inertial and semiautomatic laying modes are realized in a system. High automation of combat performance processes is attained owing to application of modern algorithms, and also due to information processing and decision making system, allowing to exclude the necessity of permanent operator participation in the fast flowing combat performance processes. In the semiautomatic mode which is used mainly in difficult countermeasures environment the system is controlled by operator.

Structurally the firing module is comprised of an artillery mount with gear system and electro-optical control system.

Sosna-R SAM consists of main propulsion stage, separated engine and detachment point. The SAM placed and stored in the transport-launching container (TLC) and launched from it. The missile has small acceleration time and is characterized by high aeroballistic efficiency.

The combined control system is used for missile guidance - a radio command system and high-precision ECM-protected laser-beam guidance after engine detachment and missile injection into a sight line.

The electro-optical system control (EOCS) ensures the target detection, automatic acquisition, tracking, measuring of angular coordinate and distance, and also laying of an information field of laser-beam control channel to the target at any time in the conditions of jamming and natural noise, including against the background of clouds, terrain features and horizon line.

EOCS consists of following blocks (Fig.3):

- electro-optical tracking system,

- digital computing system

- operator panel,

- power panel.

The trials of Palma system in fullscale conditions on the ship of Project "Gepard 3.9" have confirmed very high accuracy of targeting and have allowed to defeat the shown targets by the first missile or by first string of burst (Fig.2). An insertion in an angle of photo shows the warhead blasting at the target.

FSUE Nudelman Precision Engineering Design Bureau actively expands the potential of Palma system and also makes efforts to ensure its leading positions in this class of weapons.


The main technical characteristics of missile:

Distance and altitude of impact zone, km  
Total weight of warhead, kg    
Contact-proximity fuse  
SAM weight, launching / in transport-launch container, kg
Caliber before and after SAM detachment, mm  
SAM length in flight / in transport-launch container, mm  

Yes, I am getting a little behind in my voting as there is so much new stuff that I like being posted...

I'll vote for the Palma system post first as the photo at the bottom is interesting...

Anybody know the status of the naval version of Pantsir-S1??

AlfaT8 wrote:Anybody know the status of the naval version of Pantsir-S1??

I believe its in the pipeline.

Pancir-S1 is for ADS is still in Ashuluk on a testing ground and a new version is about to enter service with new radar.

Together with Tor-M1-2.

Will this be the new Standard CIWS for Russian Navy replacing Kashtan ?

Plama

http://kbtochmash.com/articles-eng/articles-eng_82.html

There's no standard CIWS as we are seeing brand new ships enter service armed with anything from Ak-630, Duet, or Palma....and we could very well see navalized Pantsir in service this decade.

Thanks , That would be stupidity if they dont standardise on a single class of CIWS.

Just keep AK-630M/Duet for low end ships and Plama for high end.

Palma is the low cost low impact CIWS for light vessels and for export.

There is no deck penetration... Kashtan on the other hand has below deck missile handling equipment and 24 reserve missiles which together with the 8 on the mount meant 32 missiles per turret available, plus two 30mm gatling guns.

The Palma is cheaper because it doesn't have CM or MMW radar, and it has only 8 missiles ready to fire.

Those missiles are laser beam riding Sosna missiles.

The replacement for Kashtan-M is a Pantsir-S1 based system with 20km engagement range and a an engagement envelope from 2m above the wave tops to 15km altitude, with 8 missiles on the gun mount with a further 24 missiles below decks for a total of 32 missiles.

It will be used on larger vessels with plenty of room.

less room, or less money or both = Palma or Duet or combinations of the two.

Thanks , That would be stupidity if they dont standardise on a single class of CIWS.

They are different enough to be useful. The Palma is a cheaper simpler option for export or for vessels that are not designed for serious combat.

For Pantsir equipped vessels they should be able to defend themselves from a range of threats.

Part of the Kirov upgrades and Slava upgrades will likely include Pantsir because of their performance.

For smaller vessels where stealth is a concern then Duet and Palma offer cheaper more radar silent options.

The ultimate solution would be Duet and Morfei in vertical launch bins... as it would be stealthy and relatively very capable.

Naval Variant of Pantsir called Pantsir-M developed

http://sdelanounas.ru/blogs/52284/

Completed service testing of a marine ZRPK "Armour" delivery set to begin in the Navy in 2016. This was at the "Oboronekspo 2014" the CEO of the holding company " Precision complexes " Alexander Denisov .

"Armour-M" is a naval variant ZRPK "Armour-S" and to replace the complex " Dirk . " Contract for the supply of a marine ZRPK "Armour" was signed with the Ministry of Defense.
Previously Managing Director of Instrument Design Bureau, part of the holding "Precision complexes", Dmitry Kanaplyou reported That under the sea "Armour" will modernize a number of destroyers and other large ships. Such works are already underway.


There is a version that the two versions of the ship's combat module anti-aircraft missile and gun systems "Armour-M" will be included in the arms of the Russian destroyer perspective of the "Leader", the creation of which is under development work. Study of image multi-purpose ship oceanic zone is present in the state defense order for 2014. According to the portal "modern army", armament of destroyers of the "Leader" will be comparable with a complete set of American destroyer Arleigh Burke.


Anti-aircraft missile and gun system "Armour" - the card Tula KBP. The system is designed to destroy cruise missiles, unmanned aerial vehicles, aircraft and ground targets within a radius of 20 km and at an altitude of 15 km.


"Instrument Design Bureau" - one of the leading design organizations Russian defense complex. Since 2008, the PCU is a member Rosteha, being one of the major holding companies "High-complexes." PCU forces developed and mastered serial production of more than 150 models of weapons and military equipment. Currently, the company is a powerful research and production center, a system of modern precision weapons. Technical solutions embodied in the KBP developments, contain more than 6000 inventions.

Great! I can't wait to see it equipped on some new ships, it will easily be the best CIWS in the world!

Not totally clear but it seems from the article that there will be two versions... one for upgrading existing ships and one for new designs.

I would expect the model for new designs is a more stealthy design perhaps?