TOR Air Defence system

The Tunguska is not that well armoured either, let alone the original Shilka and SA-13 vehicles.

A wheeled TOR shouldn't be too out of place on the front lines... remember none of the vehicles in the Medium and light brigades will stand and fight an Abrams force head on.

The Tunguska is not that well armoured either, let alone the original Shilka and SA-13 vehicles.

A wheeled TOR shouldn't be too out of place on the front lines... remember none of the vehicles in the Medium and light brigades will stand and fight an Abrams force head on.

[quote]

Of course Tor, Tunguska, Osa, Shilka, ... are not armored enough to drive in same line as tanks. That is why they go behind tanks at least 1 km and that they have enough range to protect tanks. Tanks, ICVs and infantry protect SAMs against ground enemies. BMPT is actually a system, that could do air defense job and is armored enough, that it could go in the same line as tanks.

Of course the role of heavy brigades with tanks is not the same as the role of light brigade with wheeled APCs.

BMPT lacks the gun power to do a decent job let alone the obvious lack of AD sensors.

The 30mm guns it uses have too low a rate of fire to be a dedicated air defence vehicle... even replacing the two single barrel guns with a twin barrel 2A38M gun would be a better solution as its 2,500 rpm rate of fire would be 2.5 times higher than the two single guns combined rate.

The BMP-3M has better armament than the BMPT and its high elevation guns would make it probably better overall except for the armour protection issues of course.

Personally I think that the weapons in the BMP-3M but fitted in a low profile turret with external guns and a rear turret bustle autoloader to keep the HE rounds separate from the crew compartment should free up some space near the front where the existing hull mounted forward gun mounts (for 30mm grenade launchers or 7.62mm MGs) could be replaced with mini turrets able to fire over much wider fields of view... a return to the infantry support vehicle by the looks of it, yet oddly it is the replacement of infantry to support the tanks that we are really talking about.

Of course the role of heavy brigades with tanks is not the same as the role of light brigade with wheeled APCs.

Quite true, and the real problem is that we can probably guess that the light brigades will likely be all wheeled, but are we talking about BTR-90 and replacement or are we talking about M65 Iveco for troops and the BTR-90 and replacement is the medium brigade with the BMP-4M as the heavy brigade grunt mover.
Is the light brigade heli mobile for instance?
Or is the heavy brigade really going to be heavy with BTRT tank based IFVs, the medium BMPs, and the light wheeled BTRs?

The T-95 was criticised as too heavy at about 55 ton so perhaps the heavy brigades will have T-90s and perhaps the medium brigades might get the Sprut and the light brigades get a wheeled vehicle... maybe with a 125mm gun or perhaps a reduced power 125mm gun?

I guess this should be discussed in a different thread.

BMPT is not an AD system as such, so it doesn't need AD sensors. What it need is data link to get external source of target info from air defense systems like Tor, Tunguska, Buk,... or their command posts. After receiving target data, BMPT could engage it optically day and night with guns and Attaka missiles. Talking about guns rate of fire with 1100 rounds/min for two 2A42 guns is the same rate as Gepard AD system have. It's not that bad, specially because BMPT will not engage bomb and missiles as AD systems will, but only bigger planes and helicopters and for that role, it is enough. For engaging ground targets too high rate of fire means you will be too quick out of ammo. This is actually good compromise for BMPT. Only what BMPT need to improve is higher elevation of guns. With BMPTs in first line together with tanks and other IFVs, Tors, Tunguskas, Buks,... could have even longer distance behind tanks and still effectively defend them and be less expose to enemy fire, because they have weak armor.

Well the main threat will certainly be from helos and even the 30mm on the BMP-2 is reportedly effective against such targets, so I guess two would be better.


I still think the BMPT needs better HE firepower like the 100mm rifled gun of the BMP-3. This would replace the ATAKA missiles more effectively in my opinion as if you need accuracy at 6km then fire tube launched missiles with HE Frag warheads.
The 100mm gun can elevate to 70 degrees in the BMP-3 so an external mounted gun raised a bit should manage that or even better, plus improved depression as a bonus.

For engaging ground targets too high rate of fire means you will be too quick out of ammo.

That is a good point... apparantly several Su-25 pilots complained there was no lower rate of fire option for the twin barrel 30mm cannon the aircraft uses because targets like trucks needed very short bursts to take out and they felt many rounds were being wasted. Perhaps a burst option and single shot option might be a solution. Note however that the GSh-30 twin barrel gun fitted to the Frogfoot fires at 3,000 rpm or 50 shells per second, while the 2A38M gun used on the Tunguska that is based on the GSh-30 fires at a lower rate of 2,000-2,500rpm. It would still be hard to fire a 5-10 round burst with both weapons I guess.

Actually probably the best solution might be the GSh-301 cannon fitted to most modern Russian fighter aircraft. It has a firing rate of about 1,800 rpm, or about 30 shells a second, but in the Mig-29 the gun is computer controlled. It is linked to several computer systems and the laser range finder and IRST. Basically the pilot locks the target with his helmet mounted sight and either uses the IRST or radar to track the target. If he uses the IRST the laser is periodically used to determine distance.
Then the pilot pulls the trigger and manouvers the aiming mark over the enemy aircraft. When the computer calculates a hit it fires the gun. The Mig Officials stated that after 5-7 rounds had been fired the gun kept getting shut off by the computer but the targets were still being destroyed. They stated if they knew the system was going to be that effective they would have halved the number of shells carried by the aircraft.

To put such a gun in the BMPT requires solving a few problems. First the shell it fires is the same as the army uses but it uses electrical ignition rather than percussion like the army weapons so it will need modification. Weight was an issue for an aircraft gun so it was made as light as possible so its operational lifetime is actually very short... in the BMPT its weight doesn't matter but being able to fire more than 1,000 rounds is very important so it needs beefing up a lot. Some sort of burst control system would be useful too. As it is externally mounted there is no issue with fume evacuation or any such problem though barrel length could be increased to improve muzzle velocity.

Another option might be the twin 23mm cannon fitted to the last model Hinds.

Any more news about Tor-M2? I hope army could get them in the beginning of 2011 and show them in May 9th parade the same as Pantsir this year.

Boeing Tested Microwave Rocket shows Tor-M2 as potential target.

http://lenta.ru/news/2011/09/26/champ/

The original article in English
http://boeing.mediaroom.com/index.php?s=43&item=1933

http://gurkhan.blogspot.com/2011/10/blog-post_3553.html

Article in Gur Khan blog about modernization program for ground forces air defense, looks like Tor-M2 will be quite important part of it. I hope industry will be able to fulfill this program and that there will be enough new young people, who will decide for carrier in air defense.

http://www.lenta.ru/news/2011/12/15/torm2/

Russia deliver first Tor-M2s to Belarus. I hope Russian MoD also receive some at least for PVO schools to train crews.

http://redstar.ru/2011/12/24_12/1_01.html

In this interview commander of ground forces air defense general-major Aleksandr Leonov said, that army units in this year received first Tor-M2U. I hope there will soon be pictures of them or maybe not, as they still didn't show any picture of Krizanthema-S in army units.

I have been reading a bit about the structure of these new brigades, and have read that there is a significant amount of obsolete equipment still in service... the OSA is still widely deployed as an example, though it might be a case of using those because they are cheap and need to be used up.

I think Osa-AKM will be in use for some time, because they don't have enough Tors to replace them ( have to buy few hundreds Tors to replace them). On the other hand Osa is still effective and with modernization they could get data link to integrate them with command centers like Polyana-D4M1 or Barnaul-T or other and to replace older TV camera with more modern EO system with thermal imager. With those modifications Osa will still be on the level of Crotale-NG and able to do the job in modern air defense.

With enough Tor-M2U in the units, Osa will slowly be phased out.

http://www.sdelanounas.ru/blogs/11914/

In South military district army get first Tor-M2U systems in Volgograd oblast. They plan that in 2012 Tor-M2U will replace all old Osas in South military district.

That is very interesting.

Do you think that might be a reaction to Georgias attempts at joining NATO?

The Chechen terrorists certainly do not present an air threat that would warrant such a move, and in the past it has been mentioned that they want to build up the Far East forces, so what is so special about the South... other than Georgia and the ongoing animosity over SO and Abkhazia?

Will be interesting to see if the OSAs are scrapped or cascaded to lower readiness units, or made available to existing users for export.

The Caucasus is indeed getting very much attention lately. Also noteworthy are the re-equipment of the Caspian and Black Sea Fleets and the deployment of the first squadron of Su-34s in Baltimore-Voronezh (within striking distance of the Caucasus/turkey/Iran).
It is not only Georgia/Abkhazia/S.Ossetia. You have the Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict, the potential Western/Israeli attack on Iran. Take it from there to the hotspots in Iraq and Afghanistan.
A powder keg situation, I am afraid.

New anti-aircraft missile systems Tor-M2U supplied to Southern Military District

MOSCOW, December 27 (Itar-Tass) —— The Southern Military District is receiving newest anti-aircraft missile systems Tor-M2U, district spokesman Oleg Kochetkov told Itar-Tass on Tuesday.

“The delivery of Tor-M2U anti-aircraft missile systems has begun to air defense units in the Volgograd region. The systems will replace outdated Osa. The replacement will be complete in 2012,” Kochetkov said.

Modern automated control systems, Kasatelnaya, Polyana-D4 and Barnaul-T, were supplied in 2011. “At present our district is equipped with modern anti-aircraft missile systems and automated control systems at over 40%,” he said.

Tor-M2U is designed to deter air attacks, including those of high-precision weapons. It carries twelve guided missiles capable of intercepting targets, which fly at up to 700 meters per second on the range of up to twelve kilometers and the altitude of up to 6,000 meters. The system is capable of detecting and identifying of up to 48 targets and simultaneous locking of four targets.

I think modernization in South military region have much to do with non stability around Syria and Iran, which could any time expect attack from West and with conflicts in Caucasus region. Strong Russian army in South military district is important barrier, that this caos from South could not spreed into Europe through Caucasus. But Europe have still two strategically weak spots, Greece and Spain, which are bankrupt states.

I think those Osas, which will be replaced with new Tors, will go in weaker regions or into reserve for the moment.

The Osa is not a bad system and would still be useful in several roles today... like dealing with cruise missiles and UAVs.

They are quite mobile too, and they likely have a large stock of them available.

I know they sell them as target drones for newer systems too so they must have a few...

I agree that bolstering the black sea area will be useful... no point locking the front door when the back door is wide open so to speak.

They have moved enough weapons and equipment into Abkhazia and South Ossetia so that any attempt by Saakashvili will do more than give him a bloody nose this time... they will likely take his head off.

Photos of TOR-M2 recently delivered to Belarus.

Excellent picture of Belarus Tor-M2. I hope there will soon be pictures of Russian Tor-M2U that we could see if Russian Tors are wheeled or tracked ones.

Do they still have only old TV camera?

Do they still have only old TV camera?

Even their BMPs are getting thermal sights, so I would be very disappointed if their SAMs didn't get thermals too.

They have invested a lot of money on thermal sights from lots of different places around the world, including France and Sweden and South Korea. I they want their infantry to fight 24 hours then they will also want to defend those forces 24 hours a day too.

I would think they are better of upgrading their SA-13 , SA-6 ,SA-3 , Tor-M1 or older SAM they have with some decent digital upgrade to radars and getting a backup passive guidance , if required keeping their missile same.

There are so many threats out there like Cruise Missile ,UAV ,PGM that are used so extensively in todays war that these old but effective SAM with upgrades would be able to deal with them.

No point in throwing these good SAM , Serbs did a marvelous job with the same very SAM , I am sure with decent upgrade the Russian AD can do a equally good job.

It is all about what the cost brings to the capabilities of the system.
Optical guidance means you need an optical guidance channel, but giving it a simple TV optics system means it is only good for day operation in good weather.

Now the OSA is an all weather system with radar guidance, but if that radar guidance is jammed or the crew don't want to give their position away till the very last minute or not at all, then a TV system will allow that on clear days. To get something like the all weather day night capability of radar then they need to spend the extra cash and get thermal sights for the optical channel.

With SA-9 or SA-13, on paper you could say the same, though being IR guided missiles putting a thermal imager makes even more sense because any conditions the thermal imager isn't any good, then there would be no point in firing as the missiles will operate in the same frequency so they likely wont get a lock anyway.

The thing is that before when most armour had at best Image intensification systems with limited range then having thermal sights in a SAM system is extravagant.

With Armour having state of the art thermals then it make sense to apply thermal sights to every vehicle possible and even to give it to the infantry too.

AFAIK there is a new system to replace the SA-9 and SA-13... now it might be morfei, or it might be Baigaluk (spelling) which is supposed to be a 10km range laser beam riding missile.

Those on the picture are from Belarus and all we could see is cover over optical system. Maybe export version have only TV camera or it could have larger optical system like those on new Buk-M2, where thermal imager is inside it and not attached at side. After all, with Pantsir-S1 thermal imager is standard equipment in its optical system.